DOCSLIB.ORG

The Case of Dutch Urban Planning Özdemir, E.; Tasan-Kok, T

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Case of Dutch Urban Planning Özdemir, E.; Tasan-Kok, T UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Planners’ role in accommodating citizen disagreement The case of Dutch urban planning Özdemir, E.; Tasan-Kok, T. DOI 10.1177/0042098017726738 Publication date 2019 Document Version Final published version Published in Urban Studies License CC BY-NC Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Özdemir, E., & Tasan-Kok, T. (2019). Planners’ role in accommodating citizen disagreement: The case of Dutch urban planning. Urban Studies, 56(4), 741-759. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017726738 General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:28 Sep 2021 Article Urban Studies 2019, Vol. 56(4) 741–759 Planners’ role in accommodating Ó Urban Studies Journal Limited 2017 Article reuse guidelines: citizen disagreement: The case of sagepub.com/journals-permissions DOI: 10.1177/0042098017726738 Dutch urban planning journals.sagepub.com/home/usj Esin O¨ zdemir Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands Tuna Tasan-Kok Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Delft University of Technology, Netherlands; and Department of Human Geography, Planning and International Development, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands Abstract Citizen disagreement on urban policies and planning decisions is both ubiquitous and fundamental to democracy. Post-political debates debunk the ‘consensus approach’, which is grounded in Habermasian communication theory, for circumventing disagreement. This article presents a counter argument. Our analysis of the highly institutionalised and consensus-oriented Dutch plan- ning framework shows that this system does not necessarily prevent effective voicing of disagree- ment. The empirical material demonstrates that consensus is not a pre-defined and static outcome but a dynamic and sensitive process in which urban planning is an instrument. We con- clude that planners could facilitate consensus through accommodative roles that address dis- agreement by taking an adaptive, proactive and more human stance. Keywords citizen disagreement, consensus, Dutch urban planning, post-politics, urban planners ᪈㾱 ൘≁ѫ⽮Պѝˈޜ≁ሩ෾ᐲ᭯ㆆ઼㿴ࡂߣㆆⲴᔲ㿱Პ䙽ᆈ൘ˈҏᱟ≁ѫⲴṩᵜ⢩ᖱDŽสҾ ૸䍍傜ᯟ⋏䙊⨶䇪ⲴĀޡ䇶ѻ䚃ā᜿൘㿴䚯ᔲ㿱˗ਾ᭯⋫ᆖ䈤᨝クҶަ䶒㓡DŽᵜ᮷ᨀࠪҶ ањ৽䶒㿲⛩DŽᡁԜ࠶᷀Ҷ儈ᓖࡦᓖॆᒦԕޡ䇶ѪሬੁⲴ㦧ޠ㿴ࡂփ㌫ˈ㺘᰾Ҷ䘉аփ㌫ ᒦнᗵ❦䱫→ᔲ㿱Ⲵᴹ᭸ਁ༠DŽ㓿傼⹄ウ䇱᰾ˈޡ䇶ᒦнᱟа⿽亴ᇊⲴǃ䶉ᘱⲴ㔃ᶴˈ㘼 ᱟа⿽ࣘᘱⲴ᭿ᝏ䗷〻ˈ෾ᐲ㿴ࡂᱟ䗮ᡀޡ䇶Ⲵањ᡻⇥DŽᡁԜᗇࠪ㔃䇪˖㿴ࡂ㘵ਟ䙊䗷 䇶DŽޡ䘋׳䟷ਆ䈳䘲ǃѫࣘǃᴤӪᙗⲴုᘱᶕ༴⨶ᔲ㿱ˈӾ㘼ਁᥕॿ䈳Ⲵ֌⭘ˈԕ↔ᶕ ޣ䭞䇽 ޜ≁ᔲ㿱ǃޡ䇶ǃ㦧ޠ෾ᐲ㿴ࡂǃਾ᭯⋫ǃ෾ᐲ㿴ࡂ㘵 Corresponding author: Esin O¨ zdemir, Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Received January 2016; accepted July 2017 Architecture and the Built Environment, OTB – Research for the Built Environment, Julianalaan 134, Delft 2628 BL, Netherlands. Email: [email protected] 742 Urban Studies 56(4) Introduction 2009; Mayer, 2009; Nicholls and Vermeulen, 2012; Purcell, 2002, 2013); or through gov- Intellectuals, activists and progressive citi- ernance and participatory mechanisms (e.g. zens are increasingly concerned about how Beaumont and Nicholls, 2008; Pierre, 2005; ‘democracy’ is practised at different scales Uitermark and Duyvendak, 2008). Other and in different contexts. Their discontent is studies assess the roles of policy-makers, expressed as a crisis of representative democ- implementers and planners, particularly racy in its participatory/deliberative forms, managerial and technical tasks in adminis- the democratic deficit, the erosion of democ- tration, coordination, facilitation, negotia- racy, or something similar. It comes to a tion and conflict resolution (Albrechts, 1991; head in the city, a nexus of exclusionary Breheny and Low, 1995; Clifford and urban policies and practices leading to a Tewdwr-Jones, 2013; Forester, 1989, 2009, process that Harvey calls accumulation by 2013; Fox-Rogers and Murphy, 2015; Udy, dispossession, which mainly affects lower- 1994). Some authors call for political income groups. engagement to put structural issues on the This article enquires whether contempo- agenda (Albrechts, 1991, 2010) and to raise rary urban planning processes are deepening political awareness among planners the democratic deficit. The literature concep- (Grange, 2012). tualises the crisis of representative democracy While the scope of the discussion is as ‘post-politics’ and the various forms of widening, the post-political literature, not- depoliticisation and exclusion it entails as withstanding its insightfulness and critical ‘post-political’ (Mouffe, 1999, 2005; energy, remains theoretical and philosophi- ˇ Rancie` re, 2004a, 2004b, 2010; Zizˇek, 1999). cal. It has been insufficiently infused with The consensus approach has been disparaged empirical material detailing cases in which as a tool for taming people, accused of long and cumbersome planning processes strengthening established agendas and giving are deadlocked because of a lack of consen- them a pseudo-democratic look, whereby dis- sus. That literature often overlooks the agreements are neither heard nor accommo- potential of consensus-seeking and the dated but rather circumvented or ignored. agency of planners. Going against the grain, Consensus-building approaches in urban pol- an emergent literature calls for a rehabilita- icy and planning are criticised for excluding tion of the ‘political’ in urban policy and and marginalising contestation and conflict, planning and more room for agency but also for lending itself to neoliberal instru- (Gualini, 2015). This could invoke ‘politics mentalisation, which leads to exclusionary by other means’ such as direct action or civil practices (Bengs, 2005; Fainstein, 2000; disobedience and facilitating public dispute Flyvbjerg, 1998; Gunton et al., 2006; Harris, (Metzger, 2011). Although some studies 2002; Purcell, 2009; Swyngedouw, 2005). focus on planners’ roles, few have connected There is a large body of literature on how consensus-building to the ‘human’ aspects of citizens express disagreement: through urban their role performance. movements (e.g. Arampatzi and Nicholls, The article proposes a constructive 2012; Castells, 1977, 1983, 1996; Fainstein approach to consensus-building, based on and Fainstein, 1985; Mayer, 2000; Miller the precept of planning as an instrument for and Nicholls, 2013; O¨zdemir and Eraydin, actual democracy. The planner is perceived 2017; Pickvance, 1976, 2003; Pruijt, 2003; as a human being, is situated in a consensus- Uitermark, 2004); claiming their right to the building context and understood in terms of city (e.g. Harvey, 2003, 2008; Marcuse, how s/he responds to disagreement. The O¨ zdemir and Tasan-Kok 743 research questions expand upon that propo- exclusionary (Hillier, 2003; Hoekveld and sition: How can contemporary urban plan- Needham, 2013). In Swyngedouw’s (2014: ning practice accommodate citizen 181) words, intervention ‘enables the forma- disagreement? What are the roles and posi- tion of certain socio-ecological assemblages tions of urban planners vis-a` -vis disagree- and closes down others’. The literature fore- ment? From a post-political point of view, grounds instances when planners have been planners would be expected to adopt a disaccommodative (see Attuyer, 2015; technocratic-managerial stance in the pur- Martı´nez, 2011; Rannila and Loivaranta, suit of consensus, whereby the ‘powerful’ 2015). Our aim is to show that they can be would prevail in any dispute. But this is not accommodative in a consensus-based plan- necessarily so; ‘consensus-building’ is shown ning system. to be a dynamic, context-dependent process. Disagreement in the Netherlands is less The study presents empirical material from about material needs than lived experiences the Dutch planning experience to demon- (MacLeod and McFarlane, 2014). Among the strate that a consensus-building approach prevailing issues are sustainable production, can accommodate disagreements. The deci- clean air, growing your own food, local pro- sive factor is agency: urban planners would duction and communities. Since they reflect have to step outside the boundaries of their discontent rather than deprivation, disagree- technocratic role and create alternative ment rarely leads to serious conflict. Some channels for public involvement. Consensus might consider the experiences documented is then an ongoing pursuit: it is sought during our fieldwork trivial compared with through non-formal and non-regulated, planning disputes in Israel, Turkey, Brazil or often spontaneous and egalitarian interac- elsewhere, where disagreements can lead to tion among experts and citizens. serious social turmoil. However, in the Dutch Our qualitative research took place from context they are important. Furthermore, February to September 2015. We conducted once configured at a conceptual level,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Universidad Autónoma Del Estado De México
    Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México Facultad de Planeación Urbana y Regional SSEEGGUUNNDDOO IINNFFOORRMMEE DDEE AACCTTIIVVIIDDAADDEESS 22001133--22001144 MM... EENN EE...UU...RR... HHÉÉCCTTOORR CCAAMMPPOOSS AALLAANNÍÍÍSS Director Marzo, 2014 DIRECTORIO UNIVERSITARIO Dr. en D. Jorge Olvera García Rector Dr. en Ed. Alfredo Barrera Baca Secretario de Docencia Dra. en Est. Lat. Ángeles Ma. del Rosario Pérez Bernal Secretaria de Investigación y Estudios Avanzados M. en D. José Benjamín Bernal Suárez Secretario de Rectoría M. en E.P. y D. Ivett Tinoco García Secretaria de Difusión Cultural M. en C.I. Ricardo Joya Cepeda Secretaria de Extensión y Vinculación M. en E. Javier González Martínez Secretario de Administración Dr. en C. Pol. Manuel Hernández Luna Secretario de Planeación y Desarrollo Institucional M. en A. Ed. Yolanda E. Ballesteros Sentíes Secretaria de Cooperación Internacional Dr. en D. Hiram Raúl Piña Libien Abogado General L. en Com. Juan Portilla Estrada Director General de Comunicación Universitaria Lic. Jorge Bernáldez García Secretario Técnico de Rectoría M. en A. Emilio Tovar Pérez Director General de Centros Universitarios y Unidades Académicas Profesionales M. en A. Ignacio Gutiérrez Padilla Contralor Universitario DIRECTORIO DEL ORGANISMO ACADÉMICO Mtro. en E. U. y R. Héctor Campos Alanís Director Dr. en U. Juan Roberto Calderón Maya Subdirector Académico Mtra. en E. U. y R. Ana María Marmolejo Uribe Subdirectora Administrativa Mtra. en D. M. Hoyos Castillo Guadalupe Coordinadora de Investigación y del CEPLAT Dra. en G. María Estela Orozco Hernández Coordinadora de Estudios Avanzados Lic. en Pl. T. Francisco Ocaña Chávez Coordinador de Difusión Cultural, Extensión y Vinculación Universitaria Lic. en Pl.
    [Show full text]
  • The Flanders Structure Plan
    1 AESOP Young Academics Booklet Series C Exploring Place matters in Planning Practice Booklet 1 Kristian Olesen and Louis Albrechts @ July 2017 ISBN. Internal And Cover Design Shaimaa Refaat, Piece Of Art AESOP YA Booklet Series Editor-in-Chief Mona Abdelwahab Architecture Engineering and Environmental Design, AATMT, Cairo School of Architecture, Planning and Landscape, Newcastle University AESOP YA Booklet Series C Editors Lauren Ugur International School of Management, Frankfurt Germany and Giusy Pappalardo Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Catania Authors Louis Albrechts Department of Architecture, Urbanism and Planning University of Leuven – KU Leuven and Kristian Olesen Department of Planning Aalborg University AESOP YA Booklet Series Published by Association of European Schools of Planning (AESOP) 2 Introducing the YA booklet Series C Exploring Place Matters in Planning Practice We are pleased to present the very first booklet of series C: ‘Exploring Place Mat- ters in Planning Practice’ on the practice of Professor Emeritus Louis Albrechts, through ‘Changing Planning Discourses and Practices: Flanders Structure Plan’. The series aims to discuss urban planning projects and case studies through conversa- tions with researchers, planners and practitioners. In elaborating on their experiences, the focus is placed on the process of institutional design through which spatial interventions have taken place. It is interested in exploring the practicalities, as well as societal and physical im- pacts of the respective project(s).
    [Show full text]
  • Theories of Planning Why Do We Do What We Do?
    Planning Theory History and Theories of Planning Why do we do what we do? Michael Elliott, School of City and Regional Planning, Georgia Tech February 9, 2018 AICP EXAM PREP | HISTORY, THEORY AND LAW 1. Relationship between History and Theory in Planning AICP EXAM PREP | HISTORY, THEORY AND LAW 1. Role/Types of Theory Planning: Linking Goals/Knowledge to Action Planning is a process, procedure, or method for setting goals, identifying and assessing options, and developing strategies for achieving desired options. It is a pervasive human activity imbedded in future-oriented decision making. Goals Planning Action Knowledge 1. Role/Types of Theory Primary Functions of Planning Core Goal Action Functions Improve efficiency Optimize of outcomes 1. Assess; Enhance social Balance interests Analyze welfare Engage justice 2. Engage Widen the range of Create visions 3. Envision; choice Enhance options Design Enrich civic Expand opportunity and 4. Synthesize engagement and understanding in 5. Implement governance community 1. Role/Types of Theory Role of history and theory in understanding planning ▪ Planning is rooted in applied disciplines ▪ Primary interest in practical problem solving ▪ Planning codified as a professional activity ▪ Originally transmitted by practitioners via apprenticeships ▪ Early planning theories ▪ Little distinction between goals, knowledge and planning process ▪ Nascent theories imbedded in utopian visions ▪ Efforts to develop a coherent theory emerged in the 1950s and 60s ▪ Need to rationalize the interests and activities
    [Show full text]
  • Social Equity in Planning Elizabeth Deakin Planners Are Called Upon To
    Social Equity in Planning Elizabeth Deakin Planners are called upon to promote equity in their work, to assure fairness in their procedures and secure justice through their plans and programs. Equity, fairness,jus tice - what exactly do these terms mean in planning? In this essay I shall use them essentially as synonyms, although there are nuances. Like many of our most important words, justice has many meanings. One definition of justice is to have a basis in fact and fo llow established rules and procedures to produce an impartial result. Impartiality, or the absence of prejudice or favoritism, was Cardozo's definitionof fairnessand justice under the law. Yet long tradition supports the idea that justice does not always mean treating everyone the same. For example, the law considers context, evaluating the circumstances in interpreting the facts. In addition, in Anglo-American jurisprudence equity developed as a formal body of doctrines and rules of procedure designed to supplement, and if necessary override, common law and statutes, in order to protect substantive, fundamental rights of individuals. The law of equity addresses those circumstances where the "ordinary" rules, applied in a blind or narrowly rigid fashion, would produce a result that violates our sense ofju stice in another of its meanings - that a just result is a good one. Today both the law of equity and the rules of administrative procedure, directing how governmentshould operate, recognize that due process may require the varying of rules and procedures to reflect acknowledged differences. Justice requires attention to both process and outcome. Rawlsian conceptions of justice offer a still broader conception of equity.
    [Show full text]
  • New York City's High Line: Participatory Planning Or
    New York City’s High Line: Participatory Planning or Gentrification? Ariel B. Alvarez, McNair Scholar The Pennsylvania State University McNair Faculty Research Advisor: Melissa W. Wright, Ph. D Professor of Geography and Professor of Women Studies College of Earth and Mineral Sciences The Pennsylvania State University Abstract In the last fifty years, participatory planning methods have been utilized by practicing urban planners because they emphasize citizen involvement and equitable representation of disempowered community members. This paper analyzes the degree to which the nonprofit organization and self-proclaimed community group Friends of the High Line facilitated citizen input during remediation of an abandoned elevated freight-car railway, the High Line, into a public park in West Chelsea, New York City. Findings suggest that the High Line is an atypical example of a community driven urban revitalization project and that the participatory planning model may need to be redefined when applied to affluent communities. Introduction The innovative and sleekly designed public High Line park running from Ganesvoort St. to West 20th St. in Manhattan, New York was once considered to be nothing more than an unsightly relic of New York City’s industrial past. Property developers viewed the elevated idle freight car line as a hindrance to potential economic development for the neighborhood while most West Chelsea residents paid little attention to the massive metal structure that had simply morphed into the mundane, industrial urban landscape (High Line History 2010). However, once discussion about demolishing the High Line began amongst members of the Chelsea Property Owners, a group seeking to develop real-estate below the railway, and the former New York City Giuliani administration, two West Chelsea community residents Robert Hammond and Joshua David initiated a grassroots nonprofit organization known as Friends of the High Line.
    [Show full text]
  • Read Book Planning Theory Ebook Free Download
    PLANNING THEORY PDF, EPUB, EBOOK Philip Allmendinger | 280 pages | 15 Sep 2009 | Palgrave MacMillan | 9780230223653 | English | New York, NY, United Kingdom Planning Theory PDF Book By grounding these theories in the contemporary experiences of planners, students and practitioners can better grasp planning theory and understand its continued relevance. This article has multiple issues. Lane notes that it is most useful to think of these model as emerging from a social transformation planning tradition as opposed to a social guidance one, so the emphasis is more bottom-up in nature than it is top-down. Campus Research park Satellite campus Science park. October Learn how and when to remove this template message. Due to the high level of training required to grasp these methods, however, rational planning fails to provide an avenue for public participation. And finally, the project did not affect, positively or negatively, neighborhood crowding problems that residents were concerned about. The rational model is perhaps the most widely accepted model among planning practitioners and scholars and is considered by many to be the orthodox view of planning. Transactive planning focuses on interpersonal dialogue that develops ideas, which will be turned into action. Jobs Senior Planner. Namespaces Article Talk. While it may seem odd to look to the past for lessons in how to integrate lay knowledge and expertise into planning more environmentally-friendly cities, it seems unnecessary to underscore the continued relevance of Cleveland's Norman Krumholz' promotion of equity as a guiding frame. Beginning in the late s and early s, critiques of the rational paradigm began to emerge and formed into several different schools of planning thought.
    [Show full text]
  • Are We All Neoliberals Now? Urban Planning in a Neoliberal
    Are we all neoliberals now? Urban planning in a neoliberal era Ian WRIGHT, Partner | Planning Government Infrastructure and Environment | Herbert Geer, Australia ABSTRACT The modernist perspective of planning is concerned with making public and political decisions in respect of the planning of our places more rationally and consistent with an overarching public interest. However the modernist perspective of rational planning action has been challenged by a postmodernist perspective of pragmatic planning, and more recently, by a neoliberal perspective rooted in the economic and political conditions of Milton Friedman’s monetarism and Friedrick Hayek’s classical liberalism. This paper considers the ideology of neoliberalism in the context of the competing ideologies of postmodernism and modernism to identify the following: > an urban change model which identifies the relationships between urban change, ideology, planning theory and planning models; > the cultural, social, economic and political conditions of neoliberalism; > the broad policy setting of a neoliberal government; > the key features of the neoliberal strategic management planning model which is used by neoliberal governments; > the key features of planning practice arising from the use of the neoliberal strategic managerial planning model; > the role of urban planners in a neoliberal state. The paper concludes that the neoliberal project is contestable and suggests that the adoption of collaborative planning processes and evidence based strategic management planning offers the opportunity for planners to reassert their professional status, rebuild the trust of the public and politicians and lift the planning profession out of its current malaise. INTRODUCTION Neoliberalism = Classical liberalism + (Theory of growth + Keynesianism) “In one sense, we are all Keynesians now.
    [Show full text]
  • Universidad Autónoma Del Estado De México
    Universidad Autónoma del Estado de México Facultad de Planeación Urbana y Regional TERCER INFORME DE ACTIVIDADES 2014-2015 M. en E.U.R. Héctor Campos Alanís DIRECTOR ABRIL, 2015 DIRECTORIO UNIVERSITARIO Dr. en D. Jorge Olvera García Rector Dr. en Ed. Alfredo Barrera Baca Secretario de Docencia Dra. en Est. Lat. Ángeles Ma. del Rosario Pérez Bernal Secretaria de Investigación y Estudios Avanzados M. en D. José Benjamín Bernal Suárez Secretario de Rectoría M. en E.P. y D. Ivett Tinoco García Secretaria de Difusión Cultural M. en C.I. Ricardo Joya Cepeda Secretario de Extensión y Vinculación M. en E. Javier González Martínez Secretario de Administración Dr. en C. Pol. Manuel Hernández Luna Secretario de Planeación y Desarrollo Institucional M. en A. Ed. Yolanda E. Ballesteros Sentíes Secretaria de Cooperación Internacional Dr. en D. Hiram Raúl Piña Libien Abogado General L. en Com. Juan Portilla Estrada Director General de Comunicación Universitaria Lic. Jorge Bernáldez García Secretario Técnico de Rectoría M. en A. Emilio Tovar Pérez Director General de Centros Universitarios y Unidades Académicas Profesionales M. en A. Ignacio Gutiérrez Padilla Contralor Universitario DIRECTORIO DEL ORGANISMO ACADÉMICO Mtro. en E. U. y R. Héctor Campos Alanís Director Dr. en U. Juan Roberto Calderón Maya Subdirector Académico Mtra. en E. U. y R. Ana María Marmolejo Uribe Subdirectora Administrativa Mtro. en E. U y R. Isidro Rogel Fajardo Coordinador de la Licenciatura en Planeación Territorial Mtro. en C. A. Ricardo Farfán Escalera Coordinador de la Licenciatura en Ciencia Ambientales Mtra. en D. M. Hoyos Castillo Guadalupe Coordinadora de Investigación y del CEPLAT Dra.
    [Show full text]
  • Mobilizing Sustainable Urbanism:International
    MOBILIZING SUSTAINABLE URBANISM: INTERNATIONAL CONSULTANTS AND THE ASSEMBLING OF A PLANNING MODEL ELIZABETH RUTH RAPOPORT Thesis submitted to University College London for the degree of Engineering Doctorate Centre for Urban Sustainability and Resilience Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatic Engineering September 2014 DECLARATION OF AUTHORSHIP I, Elizabeth Ruth Rapoport confirm that the work presented in this thesis is my own. Where information has been derived from other sources, I confirm that this has been indicated in the thesis. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ABSTRACT Recent years have seen a growth in proposals around the globe to develop new urban areas incorporating ambitious sustainability objectives. These projects are often planned by a small, elite group of international architecture, engineering and planning consultants, the Global Intelligence Corps (GIC). This dissertation describes and conceptualizes how and why urban planning ideas travel internationally, using sustainable urbanism as a case study. The dissertation draws on qualitative research conducted between 2010 and 2012. The data is interpreted through a conceptual framework grounded in assemblage thinking, that provides a way of understanding how a model can crystallize in a particular form, but still remain dynamic and flexible. The research found that sustainable urbanism, as it is applied by the GIC, has three key objectives: the creation of “good”, high-performance and integrated urban places. The GIC have a substantial influence on international conceptions of sustainable urbanism, in part as a result of their close involvement in the development and application of some of the key devices for coordinating the model’s travels. Sustainable urbanism’s international success is linked to two factors in particular: its flexibility, which allows it to be expressed in ways that speak to the key drivers of individual urban development projects, and the ease with which the model can be deployed in an entrepreneurial climate.
    [Show full text]
  • Theorizing Planning Practice: Collaborative Planning for Smart Growth on Long Island, New York
    THEORIZING PLANNING PRACTICE: COLLABORATIVE PLANNING FOR SMART GROWTH ON LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of Architecture, Planning and Preservation COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Master of Science in Urban Planning by Maxwell L. Sokol May 2012 THEORIZING PLANNING PRACTICE: COLLABORATIVE PLANNING FOR SMART GROWTH ON LONG ISLAND, NEW YORK KEY WORDS Smart Growth; New Urbanism; Collaborative Planning; Communicative Planning; Visioning ABSTRACT This thesis explores how an ostensible tension between communicative and new urbanist planning theories is played out in practice. In collaborative planning processes that promote compact development, do professional planners facilitate public engagement, or do they advocate for smart growth, and are these roles mutually exclusive? The methodology for addressing this question is based on a qualitative research design that comprises semi-structured, open-ended interviews with public, private, and non-profit sector planners. Long Island, New York is a worthwhile laboratory for this investigation, as a number of progressive municipalities have undertaken collaborative processes – known as visioning initiatives – to engage community-driven, bottom-up planning for downtown redevelopment around Long Island Rail Road (LIRR) stations. This thesis demonstrates that planners effectively balance the roles of facilitation and advocacy in collaborative processes by engaging in shared learning with the local participants. Planners can ethically advocate for smart growth by educating local participants about the benefits of compact development, which, in turn, can facilitate an informed decision-making process among the local participants about the context-specific future of their community. In this way, planners merge their technical expertise with the intangible local knowledge of the participants in the planning process to advance compact development that is appropriately scaled and sensitive to the existing character of the community.
    [Show full text]
  • PLANNING for COMPLEX MODERNITY: the TURKISH CASE by CEVDET YILMAZ in Partial Fullfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Of
    PLANNING FOR COMPLEX MODERNITY: THE TURKISH CASE by CEVDET YILMAZ In Partial Fullfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN POLITICAL SCIENCE AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION in The Department of Political Science and Public Administration Bilkent University Ankara January, 2003 PLANNING FOR COMPLEX MODERNITY: THE TURKISH CASE The Institute of Economic and Social Sciences of Bilkent University by CEVDET YILMAZ In Partial Fullfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN POLITICAL SCIENCE AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION in THE DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE AND PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION BILKENT UNIVERSITY ANKARA January, 2003 I certify that I have read this thesis and in my opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science and Public Administration. .................................. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Emin Fuat Keyman Supervisor I certify that I have read this thesis and in my opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science and Public Administration. .................................. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ahmet İçduygu Examining Committee Member I certify that I have read this thesis and in my opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science and Public Administration. .................................. Assist. Prof. Dr. Ömer Faruk Gençkaya Examining Committee Member I certify that I have read this thesis and in my opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and in quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Political Science and Public Administration.
    [Show full text]
  • A Turning Point for Planning Theory?: Overcoming Dividing Discourses
    Working Paper 2013-04 A Turning Point for Planning Theory?: Overcoming Dividing Discourses Judith Innes December 2013 Note: This is a revised and updated version of WP 2013-02 of the same title. This version supercedes the earlier one. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Planning Theory For Peer Review A Turnin g Point for Planning Theory? Overcoming Dividing Discourses Journal: Planning Theory Manuscript ID: PT-13-0061.R1 Manuscript Type: Original Article communicative planning theory, communication power, collaborative Keywords: rationality, discourse, critique After communicative planning theory (CPT) emerged in the 1980’s, challenging assumptions and prevailing theories of planning, debates ensued among planning theorists that led to apparently opposing groups with little space for mutual learning. The most difficult obstacle is that critiques of CPT framed several dichotomies making different perspectives appear incompatible. This article seeks to advance the dialogue of planning theory perspectives by acknowledging the key tensions embedded in this Abstract: framing, but arguing that they can be viewed as reflecting contradictions to be embraced as an opportunity for a more robust planning theory. Drawing on Manuel Castells’ (2009) theory of communication power the article explores four of these contradictions and shows how in each case embracing the contradictions as aspects of our complex world can lead to insights and a richer planning theory. The article concludes with suggestions for improved dialogue among theorists and identifies research that can advance our understanding of communication power. http://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/planningtheory Page 1 of 40 Planning Theory 1 2 3 A TURNING POINT FOR PLANNING THEORY? OVERCOMING DIVIDING 4 5 6 DISCOURSES 7 8 9 10 11 “My only real way to challenge the powers that be is by unveiling their presence in the workings 12 13 of our minds .” (Castells 2009, p.
    [Show full text]