Suchergebnisse

Phil Allmendinger takes a critical approach to the role of 'smart' in future cities and the relationship with city development. Considering how technology can support active citizenship, he challenges the commercial drivers of big tech and warns that these, not developments for 'social good', may dominate.

First published in 1997, this volume explores how, seventeen years after the election of the first Thatcher government, it is clear that despite the attacks, land use planning has survived. Talk during the 1980s of the death of planning and a bonfire of controls seem in hindsight distant and alarmist. Planning now has a new lease of life and is once again firmly on the government's agenda. So what happened during the 1980s? How did planning come to experience such a radical change in fortune? Philip Allmendinger explores the impact and influence of the New Right's intentions for planning through arguably the most Thatcherite approach of all: Simplified Planning Zones (SPZs). In doing so he identifies the contradictions and confusion at the heart of Thatcherism that led to vague legislation and objectives allowing localities to interpret Thatcherism for themselves often using policies such as SPZs for reasons very different than those intended.

1. Change and planning -- 2. The rise and fall of the consensus on planning -- 3. New understandings : a reinvigorated and fragmented left -- 4. New understandings : a reinvigorated and unified right -- 5. From new right to neoliberal spatial governance -- 6. A new ethos -- 7. A new politics for planning -- 8. New spaces and scales -- 9. Localism, the big society and austerity planning -- 10. Conclusions.

Allmendinger presents a thorough analysis of the planning system throughout the years of the Labour government, and what this means for the future of UK planning policy.

The post-positivist domination of planning theory in recent years has rightly highlighted the social and political context of theories. Its impact through various guises including collaborative, postmodern and neo-pragmatic approaches has been significant. However, one area that has been immune to these broad changes and interpretations is typologies of planning. Typologies provide heuristics for academics and practitioners that help map the landscape of ideas that influence a particular field. As such they are crucial to any understanding of a diverse theoretical area such as planning. This article seeks to develop a post-positivist typology for planning theory. My typology is based upon the broad themes of post-positivism including the belief that all theory is to greater or lesser degrees normative, a non-linear conception of time and progress and the introduction of spatial and temporal variance in any understanding of the formulation, interpretation and application of theory. The result is an approach that does away with two traditional planning theory dualisms - the procedural-substantive distinction and the theory-practice gap. It also provides a locally diverse and unique interpretation of planning theory at the national and sub-national scale that rejects the idea that local interpretation of theories and their application can be assumed to be consistent with ideas operating at a higher (often supra-national) scale.

AbstractThis article looks at successive attempts to create new spatial imaginaries around three estuary‐based city regions in England: the London–Thames Gateway, the Atlantic Gateway/Mersey Belt (Manchester and Liverpool), and Hull and the Humber ports. We develop a framework of analysis for new planning and regeneration spaces that takes forward debates on relational and territorial geographies, spatial imaginaries and the creation of new regional identities as governance objects. Specifically, we adopt a long‐term and comparative perspective that allows an examination of how successive efforts at regional building are both path‐dependent and context‐specific, as new approaches reflect emerging ideas about how best to construct successful regions in a changing global economy.

In the Unted Kingdom New Labour has claimed to be pursuing a 'third way', with policy implications intended to break away from and/or move beyond established debates and policy alternatives. In this paper we explore, identify, and discuss what New Labour's third way means with regard to neighbourhood regeneration in England. The paper has two main aims: first, to review developments in neighbourhood regeneration policy and, second, to assess New Labour's third way in respect of neighbourhood regeneration. The paper is in four main parts. The first provides a broad-brush review of the New Right approach to neighbourhood regeneration in the form of the Thatcher and Major governments. This provides the point of departure for the second part, which discusses the Blair government's neighbourhood regeneration policies in terms of policy change or continuity in four substantive areas: welfare policy, housing policy, regeneration, and the institutional context for regeneration. The third part identifies some of the key themes in New Labour's approach and the final part draws some overarching conclusions.