There's more than one way to be 'serious' about city-regions

Abstract

This short essay responds to Harding's own response to our recent debate on city regions in this journal. While we welcome Harding's contribution, we also take issue with aspects of his critique. First, we reiterate our claims that the emergence in recent years of a variety of city-region models cannot be traced back to neoliberalism alone. Second, we suggest that the introduction of more economics into the political economic study of city-regions is not as straightforward as Harding implies. We highlight the different ways in which economics and the economy are understood. Third, we consider what we see as a problematic distinction between 'abstract' theory and 'applied' policy work, and argue instead that a more fruitful way forward is to ensure all academics reflect on the variety of ways in which they may represent their research according to the intended publics. In light of this we make no apologies for adopting the approach we did in our debates forum. © 2007 The Authors. Journal Compilation © 2007 Joint Editors and Blackwell Publishing Ltd.