THREE CITIES = ONE EUROPEAN CAPITAL, SAYS CITIES PROFESSOR

Half a century of debate among member states failed to bring consensus about the site and form of a capital for a unified Europe — but that may be a good thing, says Assistant Professor of Growth and Structure of Cities Carola Hein.

Hein's latest book, The Capital of Europe: Architecture and Urban Planning for the European Union, traces the history of the modern movement for European unity through its representations in architecture and urban design, from visions of a monumental capital that never found a home to the evolving, functional reality on the ground. As the players argued about the location and design of the capital, temporary compromises divided various functions among three European cities: Luxembourg, Strasbourg and Brussels. In 1992, the EU gave up the quest for a single capital and decided to make its temporary compromise permanent. The EU now has a polycentric capital with three "headquarters" cities.

This, Hein says, is appropriate to the nature of the EU, which is an entirely new kind of political entity. "Rather than being a superstate," she argues, "the EU is emerging as a new political form without a strong polity, for which examples of unmonumental and decentralized capitals may be a better paradigm" than the grand urban centers that have traditionally functioned as symbols of national identity.

"Representing 'Europe' — a location without clear geographic boundaries or centers, and without physical structures or landscapes that are not already identified with a specific nation," is more than any one city can do, Hein says.

But acceptance of the polycentric model was a long time in coming and is hardly universal. Arguments about the form of the capital, Hein notes, mirror disputes about the nature of the union. Visions of a superstate with a centralized government tended to be paired with proposals for monumental, highly symbolic architecture in a single capital, while those who favored a federalist or confederalist approach tended to favor more modest, decentralized structures to house European government.

Hein's research for the book uncovered a number of early, visionary proposals for architecture and urban planning of the putative European capital that have never before been published. The Capital of Europe also offers the first overall analysis of the polycentric capital; while the effects of hosting European institutions on the individual cities have been partially explored, Hein says, her study is the first to consider the relationships among the three cities, which have adopted different strategies for hosting European institutions with differing degrees of success. Hein's book also considers the growing participation of numerous other European cities in hosting European institutions and promoting European cultural identity while simultaneously celebrating national identity. This sort of integrated understanding of the totality of urban Europe, Hein maintains, is necessary to develop good planning strategies that will help host cities balance the needs of European government with the interests of local communities.

The Capital of Europe was published by Greenwood-Praeger Press.

<<Back to Bryn Mawr Now 3/31/2005

Next story>>