{"title":"公共规划师-一个审议的权威","authors":"R. Mäntysalo, M. Westin, H. Mattila","doi":"10.1080/14649357.2023.2177713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Beyond merely mediating between particular interests, deliberative planners are in need of a firmer agency in shaping attention to common good concerns. However, locating such agency legitimately in the context of deliberative ideals is difficult, and not well supported by theory. A key problem is the weak conceptualization of legitimate forms of power-over, regarding the deliberative planners’ agency. To address this theoretical challenge, the article employs Haugaard’s rethinking of power-over, Salet’s dialectics of public norms and performative aspirations, the “systems” turn of deliberative democracy theory, and Warren’s related work on authority.","PeriodicalId":47693,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory & Practice","volume":"24 1","pages":"11 - 29"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Public Planner – A Deliberative Authority\",\"authors\":\"R. Mäntysalo, M. Westin, H. Mattila\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/14649357.2023.2177713\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Beyond merely mediating between particular interests, deliberative planners are in need of a firmer agency in shaping attention to common good concerns. However, locating such agency legitimately in the context of deliberative ideals is difficult, and not well supported by theory. A key problem is the weak conceptualization of legitimate forms of power-over, regarding the deliberative planners’ agency. To address this theoretical challenge, the article employs Haugaard’s rethinking of power-over, Salet’s dialectics of public norms and performative aspirations, the “systems” turn of deliberative democracy theory, and Warren’s related work on authority.\",\"PeriodicalId\":47693,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Planning Theory & Practice\",\"volume\":\"24 1\",\"pages\":\"11 - 29\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Planning Theory & Practice\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2023.2177713\",\"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/10.1080/14649357.2023.2177713","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}
Abstract Beyond merely mediating between particular interests, deliberative planners are in need of a firmer agency in shaping attention to common good concerns. However, locating such agency legitimately in the context of deliberative ideals is difficult, and not well supported by theory. A key problem is the weak conceptualization of legitimate forms of power-over, regarding the deliberative planners’ agency. To address this theoretical challenge, the article employs Haugaard’s rethinking of power-over, Salet’s dialectics of public norms and performative aspirations, the “systems” turn of deliberative democracy theory, and Warren’s related work on authority.
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.