Download C. Grasland, Univ. Paris Diderot / M2 SDT GEOPRISME / Villes et

C. Grasland, Univ. Paris Diderot / M2 SDT GEOPRISME / Villes et territoires d’Europe
Villes et Territoires d’Europe – Frontières et maillages (M2)
Chapitre 1
Intégration spatiale et intégration territoriale
Claude GRASLAND – Professeur de Géographie - Université Paris Diderot
Objectifs
1 – Rappeler les origines du concept d’intégration en géographie et sociologie.
2- Proposer une table des processus élémentaires d’intégration
3- Montrer comment les processus élémentaires se combinent au cours du temps
Plan de cours
1. Le concept d’intégration
1.1)
1.2)
1.3)
1.4)
Etymologie - Dictionnaire
Ratzel
Durkheim
Simmel
2. Les processus élémentaires d’intégration « géographique »
2.1)
2.2)
2.3)
2.4)
2.5)
2.6)
Concentration
Accessibilité
Hiérarchie
Préférences et barrières
Homogénéité, gradients et discontinuités
Maillage, contrôle, appropriation
3. Les problématiques d’intégration spatiale et territoriale
3.1) Intégration spatiale : Homogénéité Vs Intégration
3.2) Intégration territoriale : territoire politique / espace fonctionnel / carte mentale
Bibliographie




de Boe P., Grasland C., Healy A., 1999, Spatial Integration, Report of working
group 1.4 of the Study Program on European Spatial Planning, DG Regio
Durkheim E., 1894, Les règles de la méthode sociologique, Paris
Grasland C., 1997, Contribution à l’analyse géographique des maillages territoriaux,
HDR, Université Paris 1, dir. V. Rey, 4 volumes.
Simmel G., 1999 (1903), Sociologie, PUF, Paris
Document 1: Le concept d’intégration
(a) Mechanical" integration and "organical" integration
Even if it is decided to limit the investigations on spatial integration to an "objective approach" based
on existing information, the problem remains very difficult because the structure of flows between
territories is not independent from other spatial dimensions of social life. Spatial integration may be
regarded as a "vicious" concept because, as it was established one century ago at the same time by
geographers and sociologists, it has two very different meanings.
In Durkheim's Suicide as well as in Ratzel's Politische Geographie (both published in 1897), a clear
distinction is made between two distinct forms of integration which may be called "mechanical" and
"organical" integration.
112
C. Grasland, Univ. Paris Diderot / M2 SDT GEOPRISME / Villes et territoires d’Europe
(a) The "mechanical integration" refers to the structure of a system (social or spatial) and is a measure
of its internal homogeneity (i.e. the level of similarity of peoples or places involved in the system). For
example, we can consider that a society has a high level of mechanic integration if all individuals
speak the same language, believe in the same religion, agree with the same norms, etc. In the spatial
case, we could consider that the level of mechanical integration is high if all regions have more or less
the same level of GNP per inhabitant, unemployment, access to infrastructure, etc. The Structural
Funds, the Objectives and other policies developed by the EU in order to reduce the inequalities
between regions are typically an attempt to improve the level of mechanical integration of the
European territory in the sense proposed by Durkheim and Ratzel.
(b) The "organical integration" refers to the flows between members of a system (social or spatial) and
is a measure of the intensity of relations between the sub-systems which can be defined as existing at a
given time. This definition is much more complicated than the previous one because it implies the
existence of 3 levels of analysis: (1) the individuals between which relations can be defined; (2) the
sub-systems which realise a partition of individuals in different groups; (3) the whole system which is
the sum of all the subsystems (and of all individuals involved in those subsystems). In sociological
case, Durkheim considers for example (1) the case of individuals (individus) which are member of (2)
different social groups (segments sociaux) and which are involved in (3) a society (société).
Accordingly, he defines the "organical integration" (also called social concentration in his work) as
the "degree of interrelation of social segments" ("degré de coalescence des segments sociaux") and
demonstrates that the progress of the division of work in modern society is related to a progressive
decrease of mechanical integration and a parallel increase of organical integration. A very similar
approach is proposed by Ratzel in spatial case. Through an analysis of the political stability of the
great European empires and States of the XIXth century (Austria, Russia, Germany,…), Ratzel argues
that the importance of commercial flows between each region of a State is more important for modern
States than the homogeneity of social, political or economical conditions: "In order to transform the
mechanical juxtaposition of regions of very different size and population into an organical growth, the
task of the State is to favour the bringing together [of parts], the exchanges and the mixing of
populations […]. A central power which is really strong can endure, without prejudice for its unity,
the most diversified [social] life, as far as it benefits from developped and expanding commercial
relations". The development of European policies for the development of flows at European scale
between individuals (e.g. Erasmus) and between territories (e.g. Interreg) is clearly an attempt to
develop the organical social and spatial integration of E.U. in Durkheim's and Ratzel's sense. The
concept of spatial integration becomes clearer if we distinguish between a mechanical integration
(based on the homogeneity of the different parts of the territory) and an organical integration (based on
the intensity of flows between the different parts of the territory). But as it was suggested by Durkheim
and Ratzel one century ago, those two forms of integration do not have the same meaning and they
can, in certain cases, be contradictory
(b) Spatial integration and social integration
Despite the apparent parallelism of Durkheim's and Ratzel's reflections about mechanical and
organical integration, it is necessary to be very cautious when we apply their common framework to
social and spatial situations. Indeed, as it was observed by Durkheim (but also by other sociologists
like G. Simmel), spatial integration (mechanical or organical) is a necessary but not sufficient
condition of social integration. A good example of this point is provided by the question of what
Durkheim calls the "material density" but in fact points toward what we would actually call the spatial
accessibility.
According to the definition proposed by Durkheim in the Règles de la méthode sociologique (1895),
the material density which is "not only the number of inhabitants per square kilometres but also the
development of networks of communication and transmission" is generally related to what he calls the
"dynamic density" and which is in fact another term for the designation of organical social integration.
The dynamic density can be defined "not only as the purely material closeness of the [social]
212
C. Grasland, Univ. Paris Diderot / M2 SDT GEOPRISME / Villes et territoires d’Europe
aggregate, which has no effects if individuals or rather group of individuals remain separated by moral
emptiness, but the moral bringing together for which the previous one is only an auxiliary and more
generally a consequence. All things being equal to the size [of society], the moral density can be
defined as the number of individuals which are in relation, not only commercial but also spiritual [in
French: "moral"]; it is to say, which has exchanges of services and relationships of concurrency but
will share a common life. That is why the best definition of the dynamic density of a people is the
degree of interrelation of social segments".
In Durkheim's opinion, the spatial concentration is more a consequence than a cause of social
integration, even if he suspects the possibility of positive retroaction between both categories of
phenomena: "Material density […] is related to dynamic density and can, generally speaking, help to
measure it. Because if the different parts of the population tend to be closer [in a spiritual sense], they
will necessary build the ways which will favour this increasing closeness; and, on an other side,
[social] relationships can be established between different points of the social mass only if
[geographical] distance is not an obstacle, i.e is in fact suppressed.". But if Durkheim admits the
existence of correlations between social integration and spatial accessibility he has also pointed the
existence of many exceptions and, according to the conflict between social sciences at the end of the
XIXth century, he was very suspicious to the possible contribution of human geography (especially
the Anthropogeography of Ratzel) to the constitution of a global science of material condition of the
life in society that he called Social Morphology (Morphologie Sociale).
One sentence of Durkheim can be considered as very significant for the activity of the SPESP program
and more precisely for the researches engaged by the workgroups on spatial integration and on social
integration: "If we want to know the ways a society is politically divided, the way those divisions are
connected, the more or less important degree of fusion which exists between the parts of these society,
it can not be done through a material inspection and by geographical observations: because those
divisions are spiritual, even if they have some basis in physical nature".
Another reflection of Durkheim about commercial relationships can be considered as a very accurate
and modern contribution to the debate on the overestimation of the social and cultural effects of
economic integration and the insufficiency of Maastricht and Amsterdam treaty: "As purely economic
relationships let people separated to each other (en dehors les uns des autres), it is possible to have
very important [economic relationships] without participating for this reason to a common existence.
Trade flows over the boundaries which separate the nations do not imply that those boundaries no
more exist". According to Durkheim's reflection on the differences between social and spatial
integration we can feel that the task engaged by the workgroup on spatial integration can take its full
sense only if it takes into account the social and mental dimension of the concept, and we perceive that
there can be an interesting complementarity inside the theme 1 of the SPESP between the studies of
spatial integration and of social integration. It seems thus appropriate to focus one of the facets of the
study on an aspect that may be seen as providing a link between both, that is co-operation between
spatial entities
312
C. Grasland, Univ. Paris Diderot / M2 SDT GEOPRISME / Villes et territoires d’Europe
Document 2: Mécanismes élémentaires d’intégration
2.0) Essai de synthèse des mécanismes élémentaires d’intégration transfrontalière
Source : de Boe P., Grasland C., Healy A., 1999, Spatial Integration, Report of working group 1.4 of the Study
Program on European Spatial Planning, DG Regio
412
C. Grasland, Univ. Paris Diderot / M2 SDT GEOPRISME / Villes et territoires d’Europe
2.1) Intégration et concentration
a) Exemple de la théorie géopolitique des « core-areas
Source : Norman J. G. Pounds, Sue Simons Ball, 1964, « Core-Areas and the Development of the European
States System » , Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 54, No. 1, pp. 24-40
(b) Schéma théorique des relations maillage/concentration
Source : Grasland C., 1999, HDR
512
C. Grasland, Univ. Paris Diderot / M2 SDT GEOPRISME / Villes et territoires d’Europe
2.2) Intégration et accessibilité
a) L’exemple des trains à grande vitesse en Europe
(b) Schéma théorique des relations maillage/concentration
Source : Grasland C., 1999, HDR
612
C. Grasland, Univ. Paris Diderot / M2 SDT GEOPRISME / Villes et territoires d’Europe
2.3) Intégration et réseau urbain
a) Exemple des aires d’influence commerciale à la frontière USA-Canada
Losch, A., 1954, The Economics Location. New CT: Yale University Press.
Clark T., 1994, « National Boundaries, Border Zones, and Marketing Strategy: A Conceptual Framework and
Theoretical Model of Secondary Boundary Effects » , The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58, No. 3, pp. 67-80
(b) Schéma théorique des relations maillage/réseau urbain
In this theoretical example, the initial situation is characterised by a disequilibrium between the political
division and the location of central places of the settlement system. The main towns (big yellow circles) are all
located along a boundary and could potentially attract towns located on the other side of the boundary. In this
initial situation, a strong competition between towns will occur because the territorial division is not rational
and some potential gains or loses are expected.
In the final situation, a new equilibrium has been realised which is more rational (each big centres attracts the
towns located at the lowest distance) and has a higher level of stability. As competition is no more interesting
(only minor gain or loses are expected) it is possible to develop a relation of cooperation.
Source : Grasland C., 2003, project ESPON 3.1 Integrated Tools for European Spatial Planning
712
C. Grasland, Univ. Paris Diderot / M2 SDT GEOPRISME / Villes et territoires d’Europe
2.4) Intégration et effet de barrière
a) Barrières commerciales en Europe de l’Ouest 1971-1994
Source : de Boe P., Grasland C., Healy A., 1999, Spatial Integration, Report of working group 1.4 of the Study
Program on European Spatial Planning, DG Regio
812
C. Grasland, Univ. Paris Diderot / M2 SDT GEOPRISME / Villes et territoires d’Europe
(b) Schéma théorique des relations maillage/flux
Source : Grasland C., 1999, HDR
912
C. Grasland, Univ. Paris Diderot / M2 SDT GEOPRISME / Villes et territoires d’Europe
2.5) Intégration et homogénéité
a) Discontinuités spatiales de richesse en Europe de l’Ouest 1981-1996
Source : de Boe P., Grasland C., Healy A., 1999, Spatial Integration, Report of working group 1.4 of the Study
Program on European Spatial Planning, DG Regio
1012
C. Grasland, Univ. Paris Diderot / M2 SDT GEOPRISME / Villes et territoires d’Europe
(b) Schéma théorique des relations maillage/homogénéié
Source : Grasland C., 1999, HDR
1112
C. Grasland, Univ. Paris Diderot / M2 SDT GEOPRISME / Villes et territoires d’Europe
2.6) Intégration et maillage territorial
a) L’exemple de la variation de population 1980-1990 à la frontière franco-belge
Source : Grasland C., Madelin M., 2005, Modifiable Ara Unit Problem, ESPON Project 3.4.3
c) Gerrymandering et MAUP (Modifiable Area Unit Problem)
Source : Grasland C., 1999, HDR
1212