Planning Theory最新文献

{"title":"Planning out abjection? The role of the planning profession in post-apartheid South Africa","authors":"Phil I. Jones, Lauren Andres, S. Denoon-Stevens, Lorena Melgaco Silva Marques","doi":"10.1177/14730952211012429","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952211012429","url":null,"abstract":"For Kristeva (1982) the abject not only caused visceral disgust but posed a threat to the established order of society. The abject is a product of particular times and places but limited attention has been given to understanding the process of transitioning away from abject status. We address this gap here through an examination of the planning profession in post-apartheid South Africa. The paper examines how the abject is fluid and resilient, evolving to fit a changing planning system and broader political economy where a discourse of abjection by race has been replaced by a focus on poverty.","PeriodicalId":47713,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2021-04-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14730952211012429","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43705278","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Race, Faith and Planning in Britain","authors":"M. Qadeer","doi":"10.1177/14730952211003536","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952211003536","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":47713,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2021-04-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14730952211003536","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45159162","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"‘Landscape of exception’: Power inequalities and ethical planning challenges in the landscape transformation of south-eastern Sicily","authors":"Francesco Lo Piccolo, Vincenzo Todaro","doi":"10.1177/14730952211000400","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952211000400","url":null,"abstract":"In some marginal contexts of Southern Italy, in light of specific economic, political and social conditions, certain relationships between ‘strong powers’ and ‘weak powers’ produce a suspension of norms/rights that is, paradoxically, ‘normalised’. This creates a particular spatial variation of Agamben’s (2005) state of exception concept: the ‘landscape of exception’. With respect to the possible conditions of ‘exception’, this article describes the ‘landscape of exception’ of the greenhouse system in South-Eastern Sicily. This ‘landscape of exception’ is generated by the greenhouses, in particular those dedicated to vegetable production, through an effective mechanism of spatial manipulation of the landscape and social control of migrant workers. In relation to these considerations, this work reflects on the ethical challenges and responsibilities of planning, highlighting (explicit and latent) conflicts and power inequalities in the ‘landscapes of exception’, where issues of environmental sustainability, social justice and the suspension of norms are closely intertwined.","PeriodicalId":47713,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2021-04-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14730952211000400","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43285890","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Rationality revisited: Politicisation through planning rationality against the rationality of power","authors":"Esin Özdemir","doi":"10.1177/14730952211001103","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952211001103","url":null,"abstract":"In this article, I readdress the issue of rationality, which has been so far considered in western liberal democracies and in planning theory as procedural, and more recently as post-political in the post-foundational approach, aiming to show how it can gain a substantive and politicising character. I first discuss the problems and limits of the treatment of rational thinking as well as rational consensus-seeking as merely procedural and post-political. Secondly, utilising the notion of Realrationalität of Flyvbjerg, I discuss how rationality attains a politicising role due to its strong relationship with power. Using the concept of planning rationality aiming at public interest, I present the general position and actions of professional organisations in Turkey, focusing on the Chamber of City Planners, as an example illustrative of my argument. I finally argue that rationality becomes a substantive issue that politicizes planning, when it is put forward as an alternative to authoritarian market logic. In doing so, I adopt the Rancièrian definition of the political, defined as disclosure of a wrong and staging of equality. In conclusion, I first emphasize the importance of avoiding quick rejections of the concepts of rationality and consensus in the framework of planning activity and planning theory and secondly, call for a broader definition of the political; the political that is not confined to conflict but is open to rational thinking and rational consensus.","PeriodicalId":47713,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2021-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14730952211001103","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"42471576","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Pluriversal planning scholarship: Embracing multiplicity and situated knowledges in community-based approaches","authors":"R. Vasudevan, Magdalena Novoa E.","doi":"10.1177/14730952211000384","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952211000384","url":null,"abstract":"In recent years, emerging work from the “southern” and “south/eastern” contexts has widened the theoretical discussion and the geographical focus of the contemporary planning debate. Inspired by Arturo Escobar’s notion of the “Pluriverse,” this article proposes a “pluriversal planning scholarship,” to articulate the theoretical and community-based contributions of an evolving stream of planning research that embraces multiplicity, coexistence, and critical thinking. Through a review of over 300 publications in top planning journals, we suggest that pluriversal scholars engage in creative methodologies to do community-based work. They contribute to extending planning theory by drawing from other fields, such as Black feminism, decolonial thought, and Indigenous studies to highlight the everyday experiences and resistances of residents despite a state that is failing them. Additionally, they actively contribute to community-based work through reciprocal theory development with community members, capacity building, and visibilizing residents’ stories when appropriate.","PeriodicalId":47713,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2021-03-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/14730952211000384","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45125630","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"When vagueness is a strategic resource for planning actors","authors":"Thomas Buhler","doi":"10.1177/1473095221995861","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095221995861","url":null,"abstract":"This paper focuses on the use of vague discourse in planning. Early contributions identified vagueness as a ‘problem’ to be solved so as to avoid potential misunderstandings and conflicts. This paper adopts the complementary point of view whereby vagueness can also be a ‘resource’, that is, a strategy used by actors in adverse circumstances. A systematic analysis of the texts and illustrations of 36 urban transport plans shows that vagueness is an essential ingredient. It is used mainly as a way to hedge against unwanted public commitments in the context of major uncertainties and tension between actors.","PeriodicalId":47713,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1473095221995861","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"43071473","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Advanced Introduction to Planning Theory","authors":"E. Alexander","doi":"10.1177/1473095221997085","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095221997085","url":null,"abstract":"In fair disclosure I must reveal two special interests that motivated me to review Beauregard’s Advanced Introduction to Planning Theory. Besides approaching this book as a conscientious reviewer in the role of a potential reader, these interests give me some other roles. One is as a fellow author of a planning theory textbook (Alexander, 1992a), which makes comparison irresistible. The other is as a colleague who, like Beauregard, has critically engaged with planning theory and its relationship with planning practice (Alexander, 1992b, 2018; Beauregard, 1996, 2013). My review will conclude in this role, in a dialog about this book’s subject: planning theory itself. Beauregard has written an excellent book, one that serves its purpose well and fulfills its author’s intentions. Written as a textbook “for graduate students in urban and regional planning” and also for interested scholars, reflective practitioners, and curious outsiders (p. 2), he intends to offer a literature review that is as fair and unbiased an account as possible of the prevailing planning theory discourse (p. 19). In my judgment, he has succeeded. The book’s structure is interesting and effective. Its presentation of planning theory is structured around four core tasks involved in planning practice: knowing, engaging, prescribing, and executing, devoting a chapter to each. This is a novel approach: previous reviews have used schools of thought, for example, Friedmann’s (1987) magisterial review and my (Alexander, 2018: 10–13) imitation, and Allmendinger’s (2002) Planning Theory, or issues-topics, for example, Cooke (1983), Healey McDougall and Thomas (1991) and Yiftachel (1989). It works well for the reader, combining a logical division between themes and ideas with a narrative flow that connects them. The Introduction gives a condensed historical overview of urban and regional planning as a professional practice, and of planning practice from the 1950s to the 90s. These are useful summaries for the impatient student. “Knowing is. . .essential to planning,” as planning is the link between knowledge and action (Friedmann, 1987). The chapter begins with the rational comprehensive planning paradigm and ensuing epistemological critiques of technical-scientific knowledge, 997085 PLT0010.1177/1473095221997085Planning TheoryBook review review-article2021","PeriodicalId":47713,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2021-02-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1473095221997085","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45529877","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Ontological diversity in urban self-organization: Complexity, critical realism and post-structuralism","authors":"B. Boonstra, Ward Rauws","doi":"10.1177/1473095221992392","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095221992392","url":null,"abstract":"As urban self-organization grows into a key concept in spatial planning—explaining spontaneous spatial transformations—the understandings and applications of the concept divert. This article turns to the ontological dimension of urban self-organization and scrutinizes how a critical realist and a post-structuralist ontology inspire theoretical practices, analytical tendencies, empirical readings, and subsequent planning interventions in relation to urban self-organization. This is illustrated with an example of the self-organized regeneration of a deprived street in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. With this contribution, we aim to create ontological self-awareness among planning scholars in studying urban self-organization and invite them to reflect on how their positions complement, deviate, and potentially challenge or inspire those of others. We argue that by clarifying ontological diversity in urban self-organization, theoretical practices and complexity-informed planning interventions can be further deepened and enriched.","PeriodicalId":47713,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2021-02-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1473095221992392","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45666998","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Why public participation isn’t a tool for democratizing planning. A comment","authors":"Nurit Alfasi","doi":"10.1177/1473095221991487","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095221991487","url":null,"abstract":"The trigger for this comment is Zakhour’s (2020) paper published in Planning Theory earlier this year. Zakhour searches for ways to grant democratic legitimacy through practicing public participation in planning. His subject, linking public participation in planning with democracy and particularly with the democratization of planning, is a central theme in planning discourse, one that is burdened with theorization and demonstration. My aim here is to challenge the common understanding, reflected in this paper and many others, that public participation in planning is a tool for democratization. Let me start by stating the suppressed truth: Planning is not a democratic action. In most countries, planning institutions and processes are modeled in a way that negates the basic principles of liberal democracy, forming a non-democratic system within the democratic state. Democratic governance ought to be based on publicly-articulated rules legislated by elected parliaments that lay substantive legal foundations, thus providing stability and impartiality. In the field of planning, however, the rules are mostly procedural; they delegate the authority to specify substantial principles and guidelines to nonelected professionals, often governmental officials. In this regard, Moroni (2007, 2010) and Slaev et al. (2019: 454) distinguish between a teleocratic governmental approach that is “organized, detailed and strict, focusing on specific ends (e.g. drawing up a detailed plan or project)” and nomocratic governance, which is based on universal rules and adherence to the rule of law. Defining planning as a form of teleocratic professionalism relates to land-use ordinances as the main planning tool, and to the detailed, resultoriented, local nature of this type of ruling. Even in places where stated principles are the basis for planning decision-making (i.e. NPPF in the UK; Upton, 2019), these principles are articulated—and importantly, authorized—by governmental officials. Planning thus violates at least two of the main pillars of democratic regimes: first, those who authorize","PeriodicalId":47713,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2021-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1473095221991487","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"45294387","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The democratization of planning would be helped by a democratization of theory","authors":"Sherif Zakhour","doi":"10.1177/1473095221991488","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095221991488","url":null,"abstract":"In her comment to my paper (Zakhour, 2020b), Nurit Alfasi takes issues with a tendency in planning discourse to view public participation in planning as a vehicle for democratization. Her concern proceeds from a twofold argument: first, that there are considerable obstacles towards achieving genuine and meaningful participation in planning. Second, one such obstacle—if not the foremost—is the fact that planning itself is an undemocratic activity. Alfasi thus urges planning scholars to explore more favorable avenues for democratizing planning than what can be expected from participation. Let me start by saying that I fully agree with Alfasi’s assertion that participation in planning is found wanting. I also welcome her call for new ways to understand the linkage between planning and democracy. I was therefore surprised that she read my paper as an example of the tendency to equate this relationship with public participation—a theme already, as Alfasi rightfully notes, “burdened with theorization and demonstration.” My intention was never to demonstrate (or discredit) the democratic merits of participation in planning, nor to add more theory to the equation. On the contrary, the paper proceeded from the reasoning that the effects of participation upon the democratization and legitimacy of planning are highly ambiguous and directly contingent on what meanings, standards and normative ideals one chooses to fit under the concept “democracy.” The aim of the paper was therefore to explore some of the meanings and expectations of democracy among those we vest with the task of actually conferring trust and legitimacy towards planning as part of participation—that is, the public. Interestingly, many of the citizen voices foregrounded in the paper also pointed to an understanding of planning and democracy that went well beyond participation. So, since I agree with Alfasi’s first argument and her broader sentiment, I want to take the opportunity to discuss some of the interesting implications raised by her second assertion: that planning itself does not constitute a democratic action. It is interesting","PeriodicalId":47713,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2021-02-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1177/1473095221991488","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"44919903","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}