"This paper analyzes the impact of different metropolitan institutional settings on the quality of political negotiation processes in decision making. The analysis focuses on the co-ordination of land use and transport policies to address increased mobility and need for space resulting from de-urbanization. It contrasts two opposing ideal types of metropolitan institutions: the neoprogressive model in which public services are directly delivered by centralized and professionalized administrations within consolidated municipalities; and the public choice model in which services are delivered by a decentralized, non-specialized, and politically dependent administration in fragmented urban areas. The results of a QCA of 17 decision cases in Western European urban areas confirm the advantages of the neoprogressive model of metropolitan government institutions over the public choice model."