**5. Conclusions**

Despite a broad recognition in the literature that "implementation is critical" [22], contemporary evaluations of growth managemen<sup>t</sup> strategies still mostly take the shape of quantified measurements of effects such as land values and housing prices, where it is often implicitly assumed that policy was implemented as it was intended. In this paper, we argue that understanding the formulation and implementation phases of these spatial policy instruments is of key importance to gain insight into the conditions of success and failure of growth managemen<sup>t</sup> strategies.

This argumen<sup>t</sup> is illustrated by the analysis of the formulation and implementation of an urban growth managemen<sup>t</sup> strategy in Flanders, Belgium. Using the Policy Arrangement Approach, it was shown how the institutional dimensions of actors, rules, resources and discourses in the demarcation of the Antwerp Metropolitan Area interrelate to produce an outcome almost diametrically opposed to the original planning vision of reducing urban sprawl. This vision collapsed during implementation where the new structure planning framework was mostly recontextualized in terms of its still active land use predecessor. The orientation towards the protection of private property characteristic of the Belgian spatial governance and planning system, as noted in the ESPON COMPASS classification, can be seen here. This is illustrated by the discursive presentation of land as a resource for new developments and a concomitant focus on the legal aspects of land use planning. In the Antwerp Metropolitan Area, the intent to create a sensitivity to spatial problems on a city–regional scale was eclipsed by antagonistic relations between public actors, resulting in turf battles. Other stakeholders mainly showed disinterest in the process and measures to restrain development outside of the urban growth boundaries were never implemented. Weak community input and the fact that citizens' self-interest did not

coincide with the strategic spatial vision led to objections and disillusion, captured by local politics. The dissolution of the original vision is reflected in the discursive metamorphosis of the meaning of the phrase "safeguarding the future" from counteracting urban sprawl into safeguarding it by guaranteeing further development opportunities.

In the Antwerp case, the demarcation of the urban area never solidified into a stable policy arrangemen<sup>t</sup> for creating a metropolitan area and combatting urban sprawl on a city–regional scale. Instead, the substantive delineation of the problem, as reflected in the discourse of the Minister, shifted throughout the process from combatting sprawl to creating future development opportunities and solving a number of problematic spatial dossiers. The give-and-take between policy actors and interest groups was profoundly disturbed by strategic behaviour intended to safeguard individual interests. This left a focus on the 'rules of the game' according to which the demarcation process ought to take place. The foregrounding of these rules can be seen from the second stage of the process onward with a "procedural process" taking the place of strategic cooperation, a focus on meeting the quantitative targets for rezoning, the self-perception of the Committee of Spatial Planning as a "technical committee", and finally, in the lawsuits following the demarcation's approval. These findings show that the results of UGM instruments should not only be evaluated from the perspective of their measurable effectiveness, but as part of a project of institutional, discursive, and therefore, sociocultural change. Since a successor to the structure planning framework is currently in development [61], we can ask how a repetition of history may be prevented. The findings in this paper strongly sugges<sup>t</sup> that future planning initiatives aimed at counteracting urban sprawl in Flanders need to take into account three elements. First, Flanders needs to free itself from the historical legacy of the Belgian land use planning system in order for new planning frameworks to have a chance at being successful. The legalistic focus on extensive land use rights established in a growth-centred era hamper any ambitious sustainable spatial development perspective for the region.<sup>16</sup> Secondly, the historical animosity between cities and suburban fringe municipalities will not disappear if planning processes are merely centred on achieving quantitative targets and rely too much on the voluntary participation of these parties. Withdrawing the means for consultation or co-creative processes is a sure way of undermining any local support for city regional cooperation that might exist at the outset of a new planning initiative. Therefore, a strong planning vision and policy implementation on the Flemish regional level is needed to give direction to new initiatives for city–regional planning cooperation. The new Flemish "policy planning" framework is characterised by more elements of smart-growth strategies, including the active involvement of market parties and transferable development rights (TDR). Yet, it is our contention that these strategies will not work if the Flemish governmen<sup>t</sup> does not adopt a directing role. In addition, political interlinkages between the local and the Flemish regional level need to be regarded with caution. They may aid to promote local support, but also carry the danger of too strong a representation of local interests on the regional level. Finally, public inquiry processes should not solely be treated as "technical coordination" of objections. Spatial planning in urban areas like these revolves around the distribution of scarce spatial resources, which implies that not every actor can be satisfied. However, more constructive ways of handling objections and creating public support need to be found if a new planning framework is to be successful.

**Author Contributions:** Conceptualization, C.d.O. and S.O.; methodology, C.d.O. and S.O.; formal analysis, C.d.O.; investigation, C.d.O.; data curation, C.d.O.; writing—original draft preparation, C.d.O.; writing—review and editing, C.d.O. and S.O.; visualization, C.d.O.; supervision, S.O.; project administration, C.d.O. Both authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

**Funding:** This research received no external funding.

<sup>16</sup> We are not alone in reaching this conclusion. Various Flemish planning experts argue for and propose ways of abolishing the national zoning plans [62,63].

**Institutional Review Board Statement:** Ethical review and approval were waived for this study as it did not meet the criteria of the risk analysis table provided by the Ethics Committee for the Social Sciences and Humanities of the University of Antwerp. The identities and contact details of the respondents are only known to the researchers and are not shared with other parties, no vulnerable parties were interviewed and no sensitive information was asked.

**Informed Consent Statement:** Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.

**Data Availability Statement:** The data presented in this study are not publicly available due to the requirement to protect the participant identities. The data are available from the corresponding author only after the participants' consent.

**Acknowledgments:** The authors wish to thank all participants in the study for their insights, contributions and time.

**Conflicts of Interest:** The authors declare no conflict of interest.
