对话:在噪音和沉默之间…在15 分钟城与大学

IF 3.4 2区 经济学 Q1 REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING
H. Campbell
{"title":"对话:在噪音和沉默之间…在15 分钟城与大学","authors":"H. Campbell","doi":"10.1080/14649357.2023.2200109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It often feels as if we live in a world of noise or silence. There are certainly times when it is appropriate to be quiet and times when voice is needed, but if there is only silence and noise then our humanity is diminished and planning as a shared endeavour of working towards a better future becomes very difficult, if not impossible. However, maybe we need to focus less on extremes and more on moments, spaces and happenings which do not grab attention, where conversations are or could be on-going and action moving along. A focus away from extremes may seem to be boring or ordinary, but on the basis of what currently attracts media attention, and, notably too, research grant funding, such consideration is rather out-of-the-ordinary. I have been thinking of centring an editorial on the theme of conversations for some time. I am intuitively drawn to the word ‘conversation,’ as opposed to other words concerned with human spoken interactions, such as dialogue, debate, discourse, argument, discussion and so forth. A conversation is suggestive of something more mutual, open, spontaneous and, yes, ordinary. Not something for which a case is prepared in advance, evidence presented or re-presented; an arena about winning and losing, however achieved, and at whatever cost. This is not to suggest that conversations should be completely harmonious. The most rewarding conversations usually have some edge, in which all participants find aspects of surprise, pause for thought and re-evaluation. So why now has the moment come to write about conversations? One stimulus will be obvious, the other not. I imagine there are few within the planning field, at least in the global North and West, that were not struck by the ferocity of the language and international attention that was unleashed at the various local authority plans to implement the concept of the ‘15minute city’ and associated traffic management policies. That the epicentres of this metaphorical planning earthquake were in my current and former backyards of Edmonton in Canada, and Oxford in the United Kingdom, probably also accounts for my somewhat piqued interest. The notion of neighbourhoods in which there is easy access to the basic services of daily life is probably as old as the building of human settlements. Yet in the middle of February 2023, such an outwardly sensible, if relatively rare part of our urban form, became the flash point of the latest conspiracy theory, fuelled by the instant global reach of social media. There are undoubtedly questions to be asked of the ‘15minute city’ concept, most especially, how far market forces will allow everyone to get the opportunity to live in a community offering access to a full range of amenities, while also offering home to the people providing those services. However, these were not the issues exercising global attention, rather a dystopian world was constructed of a state-imposed urban form that would curtail individual liberties, through confining residents to prescribed areas and the issuing of travel permits. While the dialogue certainly exemplifies edge, it was not conversational in tone, and for the moment there seem few prospects of a meeting of minds. Academics have a tendency to perceive that, in contrast to examples such as the noise engulfing the implementation of policies associated with the ‘15minute city’ concept, our world epitomises civility, learning and active listening. However, my second stimulus comes from a reflection on how difficult it is and how rarely we converse beyond the siloes within our own context, especially across disciplinary boundaries. By disciplinary boundaries, I am not only thinking of those admittedly","PeriodicalId":47693,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory & Practice","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Conversations: Between Noise and Silence… in the 15 Minute City and the University\",\"authors\":\"H. Campbell\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14649357.2023.2200109\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"It often feels as if we live in a world of noise or silence. There are certainly times when it is appropriate to be quiet and times when voice is needed, but if there is only silence and noise then our humanity is diminished and planning as a shared endeavour of working towards a better future becomes very difficult, if not impossible. However, maybe we need to focus less on extremes and more on moments, spaces and happenings which do not grab attention, where conversations are or could be on-going and action moving along. A focus away from extremes may seem to be boring or ordinary, but on the basis of what currently attracts media attention, and, notably too, research grant funding, such consideration is rather out-of-the-ordinary. I have been thinking of centring an editorial on the theme of conversations for some time. I am intuitively drawn to the word ‘conversation,’ as opposed to other words concerned with human spoken interactions, such as dialogue, debate, discourse, argument, discussion and so forth. A conversation is suggestive of something more mutual, open, spontaneous and, yes, ordinary. Not something for which a case is prepared in advance, evidence presented or re-presented; an arena about winning and losing, however achieved, and at whatever cost. This is not to suggest that conversations should be completely harmonious. The most rewarding conversations usually have some edge, in which all participants find aspects of surprise, pause for thought and re-evaluation. So why now has the moment come to write about conversations? One stimulus will be obvious, the other not. I imagine there are few within the planning field, at least in the global North and West, that were not struck by the ferocity of the language and international attention that was unleashed at the various local authority plans to implement the concept of the ‘15minute city’ and associated traffic management policies. That the epicentres of this metaphorical planning earthquake were in my current and former backyards of Edmonton in Canada, and Oxford in the United Kingdom, probably also accounts for my somewhat piqued interest. The notion of neighbourhoods in which there is easy access to the basic services of daily life is probably as old as the building of human settlements. Yet in the middle of February 2023, such an outwardly sensible, if relatively rare part of our urban form, became the flash point of the latest conspiracy theory, fuelled by the instant global reach of social media. There are undoubtedly questions to be asked of the ‘15minute city’ concept, most especially, how far market forces will allow everyone to get the opportunity to live in a community offering access to a full range of amenities, while also offering home to the people providing those services. However, these were not the issues exercising global attention, rather a dystopian world was constructed of a state-imposed urban form that would curtail individual liberties, through confining residents to prescribed areas and the issuing of travel permits. While the dialogue certainly exemplifies edge, it was not conversational in tone, and for the moment there seem few prospects of a meeting of minds. Academics have a tendency to perceive that, in contrast to examples such as the noise engulfing the implementation of policies associated with the ‘15minute city’ concept, our world epitomises civility, learning and active listening. However, my second stimulus comes from a reflection on how difficult it is and how rarely we converse beyond the siloes within our own context, especially across disciplinary boundaries. By disciplinary boundaries, I am not only thinking of those admittedly\",\"PeriodicalId\":47693,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Planning Theory & Practice\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Planning Theory & Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2023.2200109\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Planning Theory & Practice","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2023.2200109","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

我们常常感觉生活在一个嘈杂或寂静的世界里。当然,有时保持沉默是合适的,有时需要发出声音,但如果只有沉默和噪音,那么我们的人性就会被削弱,作为一项共同努力来规划一个更美好的未来即使不是不可能,也会变得非常困难。然而,也许我们需要少关注极端,而更多地关注那些没有引起注意的时刻、空间和事件,在那里,对话正在或可能正在进行,行动正在进行。远离极端的关注可能看起来很无聊或很普通,但基于目前吸引媒体关注的内容,尤其是研究拨款,这种考虑是不寻常的。一段时间以来,我一直在考虑以对话为主题撰写一篇社论。我直观地被“对话”这个词所吸引,而不是其他与人类口语互动有关的词,如对话、辩论、话语、争论、讨论等等。一次谈话暗示着一些更相互、更开放、更自发的东西,是的,更普通。不是事先准备好案件、出示或重新出示证据的;一个关于输赢的竞技场,无论取得了什么成就,无论付出什么代价。这并不是说对话应该完全和谐。最有收获的对话通常都有一些优势,所有参与者都会在其中找到惊喜、停顿思考和重新评估的方面。那么,为什么现在是写对话的时候了呢?一种刺激措施是显而易见的,另一种则不然。我想,在规划领域,至少在全球北部和西部,很少有人没有被各种地方当局实施“15分钟城市”概念和相关交通管理政策的计划所引发的激烈语言和国际关注所打动。这场隐喻性的规划地震的震中位于我现在和以前的后院,加拿大的埃德蒙顿和英国的牛津,这可能也引起了我的兴趣。可以方便地获得日常生活基本服务的社区的概念可能与建造人类住区一样古老。然而,在2023年2月中旬,这种表面上明智的,尽管在我们的城市形态中相对罕见的一部分,却成为了最新阴谋论的导火索,社交媒体的迅速全球传播推动了这一点。毫无疑问,“15分钟城市”的概念还有很多问题要问,尤其是市场力量将在多大程度上让每个人都有机会生活在一个提供全方位便利设施的社区,同时也为提供这些服务的人提供家。然而,这些并不是引起全球关注的问题,相反,一个反乌托邦的世界是由国家强加的城市形式构建的,通过将居民限制在规定的区域和发放旅行许可证来限制个人自由。虽然这场对话无疑体现了优势,但它的语气并不是对话式的,目前似乎没有达成共识的前景。学术界倾向于认为,与“15分钟城市”概念相关政策实施过程中的噪音等例子相比,我们的世界体现了文明、学习和积极倾听。然而,我的第二个刺激来自于对这是多么困难的反思,以及我们在自己的背景下,尤其是在学科边界之外,很少进行超越孤立的对话。就学科界限而言,我不仅想到了公认的
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Conversations: Between Noise and Silence… in the 15 Minute City and the University
It often feels as if we live in a world of noise or silence. There are certainly times when it is appropriate to be quiet and times when voice is needed, but if there is only silence and noise then our humanity is diminished and planning as a shared endeavour of working towards a better future becomes very difficult, if not impossible. However, maybe we need to focus less on extremes and more on moments, spaces and happenings which do not grab attention, where conversations are or could be on-going and action moving along. A focus away from extremes may seem to be boring or ordinary, but on the basis of what currently attracts media attention, and, notably too, research grant funding, such consideration is rather out-of-the-ordinary. I have been thinking of centring an editorial on the theme of conversations for some time. I am intuitively drawn to the word ‘conversation,’ as opposed to other words concerned with human spoken interactions, such as dialogue, debate, discourse, argument, discussion and so forth. A conversation is suggestive of something more mutual, open, spontaneous and, yes, ordinary. Not something for which a case is prepared in advance, evidence presented or re-presented; an arena about winning and losing, however achieved, and at whatever cost. This is not to suggest that conversations should be completely harmonious. The most rewarding conversations usually have some edge, in which all participants find aspects of surprise, pause for thought and re-evaluation. So why now has the moment come to write about conversations? One stimulus will be obvious, the other not. I imagine there are few within the planning field, at least in the global North and West, that were not struck by the ferocity of the language and international attention that was unleashed at the various local authority plans to implement the concept of the ‘15minute city’ and associated traffic management policies. That the epicentres of this metaphorical planning earthquake were in my current and former backyards of Edmonton in Canada, and Oxford in the United Kingdom, probably also accounts for my somewhat piqued interest. The notion of neighbourhoods in which there is easy access to the basic services of daily life is probably as old as the building of human settlements. Yet in the middle of February 2023, such an outwardly sensible, if relatively rare part of our urban form, became the flash point of the latest conspiracy theory, fuelled by the instant global reach of social media. There are undoubtedly questions to be asked of the ‘15minute city’ concept, most especially, how far market forces will allow everyone to get the opportunity to live in a community offering access to a full range of amenities, while also offering home to the people providing those services. However, these were not the issues exercising global attention, rather a dystopian world was constructed of a state-imposed urban form that would curtail individual liberties, through confining residents to prescribed areas and the issuing of travel permits. While the dialogue certainly exemplifies edge, it was not conversational in tone, and for the moment there seem few prospects of a meeting of minds. Academics have a tendency to perceive that, in contrast to examples such as the noise engulfing the implementation of policies associated with the ‘15minute city’ concept, our world epitomises civility, learning and active listening. However, my second stimulus comes from a reflection on how difficult it is and how rarely we converse beyond the siloes within our own context, especially across disciplinary boundaries. By disciplinary boundaries, I am not only thinking of those admittedly
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
5.10%
发文量
35
期刊介绍: Planning Theory & Practice provides an international focus for the development of theory and practice in spatial planning and a forum to promote the policy dimensions of space and place. Published four times a year in conjunction with the Royal Town Planning Institute, London, it publishes original articles and review papers from both academics and practitioners with the aim of encouraging more effective, two-way communication between theory and practice. The Editors invite robustly researched papers which raise issues at the leading edge of planning theory and practice, and welcome papers on controversial subjects. Contributors in the early stages of their academic careers are encouraged, as are rejoinders to items previously published.
×
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