‘Neoliberalism is dead’: Traversing neoliberal planning education is an exigency

IF 1.3 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Ellham Bahmanteymouri, Mohsen Mohammadzadeh
{"title":"‘Neoliberalism is dead’: Traversing neoliberal planning education is an exigency","authors":"Ellham Bahmanteymouri, Mohsen Mohammadzadeh","doi":"10.1177/14782103231181241","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Neoliberalism has been the hegemonic ideology that has fundamentally transformed planning over the last four decades. Neoliberalism has significantly restructured pre-existing organisations, such as universities that were initially expanded during the period of industrial capitalism. From Foucault’s perspective, universities work as components of the dominant control apparatus to subjectively normalise people to docile bodies in the capitalist society. In planning schools, new planning students are introduced to the discipline and its values, norms, knowledge, and practices. This article explores how neoliberalism has changed planning education and subsequently practice in favour of the market operation by detaching planning from its intellectual and theoretical context, and used planning as its scapegoat to conceal its failures. Following the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) in 2008 and the global pandemic of COVID-19, several thinkers, economists and politicians have declared that ‘neoliberalism is dead’ and pointed to the necessity of a new doctrine to address the adverse side effects of neoliberalism that include social inequality and climate change. Planning was initially developed to address the environmental issues and social inequality that resulted from industrial capitalism. This article suggests that planning education should traverse neoliberalism by retrieving its critical and theoretical knowledge to redefine its role in the post-neoliberal era.","PeriodicalId":46984,"journal":{"name":"Policy Futures in Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Policy Futures in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14782103231181241","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Neoliberalism has been the hegemonic ideology that has fundamentally transformed planning over the last four decades. Neoliberalism has significantly restructured pre-existing organisations, such as universities that were initially expanded during the period of industrial capitalism. From Foucault’s perspective, universities work as components of the dominant control apparatus to subjectively normalise people to docile bodies in the capitalist society. In planning schools, new planning students are introduced to the discipline and its values, norms, knowledge, and practices. This article explores how neoliberalism has changed planning education and subsequently practice in favour of the market operation by detaching planning from its intellectual and theoretical context, and used planning as its scapegoat to conceal its failures. Following the Global Financial Crisis (GFC) in 2008 and the global pandemic of COVID-19, several thinkers, economists and politicians have declared that ‘neoliberalism is dead’ and pointed to the necessity of a new doctrine to address the adverse side effects of neoliberalism that include social inequality and climate change. Planning was initially developed to address the environmental issues and social inequality that resulted from industrial capitalism. This article suggests that planning education should traverse neoliberalism by retrieving its critical and theoretical knowledge to redefine its role in the post-neoliberal era.
“新自由主义已死”:跨越新自由主义规划教育是当务之急
新自由主义是过去四十年来从根本上改变计划的霸权意识形态。新自由主义对原有的组织进行了重大重组,比如最初在工业资本主义时期扩张的大学。从福柯的角度来看,大学是资本主义社会中占主导地位的控制机构的组成部分,主观上将人们正常化为顺从的身体。在规划学校,向新的规划学生介绍该学科及其价值观、规范、知识和实践。本文探讨了新自由主义如何通过将计划从其知识和理论背景中剥离出来,并将计划作为替罪羊来掩盖其失败,从而改变了计划教育和随后的实践,有利于市场运作。在2008年全球金融危机(GFC)和新冠肺炎全球大流行之后,几位思想家、经济学家和政治家宣布“新自由主义已经消亡”,并指出有必要制定一种新的学说来解决新自由主义的不利副作用,包括社会不平等和气候变化。规划最初是为了解决工业资本主义造成的环境问题和社会不平等而制定的。本文建议,规划教育应该通过检索其批判和理论知识来重新定义其在后新自由主义时代的作用,从而跨越新自由主义。
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
Policy Futures in Education
Policy Futures in Education EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH-
CiteScore
3.10
自引率
13.30%
发文量
76
×
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