Suchergebnisse

Even though the turn to practice is widely accepted in the field of urban planning, the practices of planners are empirically largely unexplored. Looking at the daily routines and practices of urban planners thus allows a deeper insight into what planning is, and how planning practices are related to innovation and transformation. To do so, we start from the assumption that behaviour is a constellation of practices, including certain activities, a set of choices and actions, patterns of behaviour or forms of interaction that is organised in a certain space or context by common understandings and rules. By conducting an online survey among planners in medium-sized German cities, we first identified a wide range of planning practices and activities in general. In a second step, we conducted a statistical cluster analysis resulting in six types of planners: (1) the 'local-specific analysts,' (2) the 'experienced generalists,' (3) the 'reactive pragmatists,' (4) the 'project-oriented planners,' (5) the 'compensatory moderators,' and (6) the 'innovative designers.' Each cluster has specific practices and activities, linked to characteristic value-sets, role interpretations and self-perceptions that might help explain the differences with regard to innovation and transformation. From the identified six groups or clusters of planners, only two clusters more or less consequently aim at innovation, experimentation and new approaches. One cluster is dedicated to collaborative practices whereas traditional practices predominate in three clusters at least, mainly because of legal requirements. This is the result of an increasing 'formalisation' of land-use planning, making planners focus on technical and formal practices, and, at the same time, lead to the reduced 'attention' to and implementation of conceptual approaches or 'necessary' transformative practices, including proactive approaches and strategic coordination with regard to sustainable urban development, but also comprising experiments, real labs or social innovations.

DESPITE THE PRESENCE OF PROCEDURES TO NARROW THE GAP BETWEEN PLANNING AND OPERATIONS, THE INFLUENCE OF THE US STATE DEPARTMENT POLICY PLANNING STAFF ON OPERATIONS STILL SEEMS TO DEPEND LARGELY ON THEIR SKILL AS PERSUASION BUREAUCRATIC ADVOCATES. PLANNERS WOULD SEEM COMPELLED TO MAKE THE BEST OF THEIR PRESONAL CONTACTS WITH OPERATORS AND OF THEIR TALENTS AS BUREAUCRATIC POLITICIANS.

A problem which confronts those involved with planning in all settings is the choice of a methodology to guide the planning process so that it may be effective. There have been numerous attempts to identify those factors in planning situations which influence the style of the planning process and the behavior of planners. The resulting contingency theory is essentially descriptive and recently efforts have been made to build upon this foundation and provide a prescriptive contingency theory of planning. This work is extended here by providing a contingency framework which associates relevant distinctions in planning situations with significantly different levels of uncertainty in the mind of a planner. The framework is able to act as both a descriptive and a prescriptive tool for the analysis of planning situations and the determination of appropriate planning methodologies. An example is given to illustrate its use in each of these modes.

ARTICLE EXAMINES THE MAJOR STRATEGIC MODES ADOPTED BY LOCALITIES FACED WITH LONGTERM ECONOMIC DECLINE: THE STRUCTURAL MODE AND THE COMPETITIVE MODE. THE AUTHORS STRESS THE LIMITATIONS OF SUCH STRATEGIES, ARGUING THAT THEIR EFFECTIVENESS IS LIMITED BY THE NECESSITY OF PURSUING THEM ON A LOCAL BASIS WHILE MANY OF THE ACTUAL CONSTRAINTS ARE OPERATING ON A GLOBAL BASIS.