Planning Reform, Rescaling, and the Construction of the Post-Political: The Case of the Planning Act 2008 and Nuclear Power Consultation in the UK.

P. Johnstone
{"title":"Planning Reform, Rescaling, and the Construction of the Post-Political: The Case of the Planning Act 2008 and Nuclear Power Consultation in the UK.","authors":"P. Johnstone","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2736832","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper explores the relationship between ‘post-politics’ and processes of rescaling enacted through planning reform. It centres empirically on the policy shift which has occurred in planning since the inception of the Planning Act 2008 – the new framework which will oversee the development of new nuclear power and other large-scale infrastructural developments in the UK. This act has radically altered the ways in which publics can engage with Government policy. Using interview data gathered from participants in recent nuclear power consultations, as well as participants in the old inquiry-based system of the 1980’s, it is argued that processes of rescaling through the Planning Act have diminished the ‘political opportunities’ available for certain non-governmental actors to intervene in the policy process. This has contributed to the post-politicisation of the planning framework in certain arenas, which raises significant questions concerning public engagement and democratic accountability within the wider context of the modernisation of planning. The potential consequences of these developments are discussed.","PeriodicalId":135506,"journal":{"name":"SRPN: Urban Design & Planning (Topic)","volume":"25 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2013-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SRPN: Urban Design & Planning (Topic)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2736832","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

This paper explores the relationship between ‘post-politics’ and processes of rescaling enacted through planning reform. It centres empirically on the policy shift which has occurred in planning since the inception of the Planning Act 2008 – the new framework which will oversee the development of new nuclear power and other large-scale infrastructural developments in the UK. This act has radically altered the ways in which publics can engage with Government policy. Using interview data gathered from participants in recent nuclear power consultations, as well as participants in the old inquiry-based system of the 1980’s, it is argued that processes of rescaling through the Planning Act have diminished the ‘political opportunities’ available for certain non-governmental actors to intervene in the policy process. This has contributed to the post-politicisation of the planning framework in certain arenas, which raises significant questions concerning public engagement and democratic accountability within the wider context of the modernisation of planning. The potential consequences of these developments are discussed.
规划改革、调整规模与后政治的建构:以2008年《规划法》和英国核电咨询为例。
本文探讨了“后政治”与通过规划改革实施的规模调整过程之间的关系。它以经验为中心,从2008年《规划法》开始实施以来,在规划中发生的政策转变——新框架将监督英国新核电和其他大规模基础设施发展的发展。这一法案从根本上改变了公众参与政府政策的方式。利用从最近的核能协商的参与者以及1980年代旧的以调查为基础的系统的参与者那里收集的访谈数据,作者认为,通过《规划法》重新调整规模的过程减少了某些非政府行动者干预政策过程的“政治机会”。这在某些领域促成了规划框架的后政治化,这在规划现代化的更广泛背景下提出了有关公众参与和民主问责制的重大问题。讨论了这些发展的潜在后果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信