Suchergebnisse

There is consensus in literature that urban areas have become increasingly vulnerable to the outcomes of economic restructuring under the neoliberal political economic ideology. The increased frequency and widening diversity of problems offer evidence that the socio-economic and spatial policies, planning and practices introduced under the neoliberal agenda can no longer be sustained. As this shortfall was becoming more evident among urban policymakers, planners, and researchers in different parts of the world, a group of discontent researchers began searching for new approaches to addressing the increasing vulnerabilities of urban systems in the wake of growing socio-economic and ecological problems. This book is the joint effort of those who have long felt that contemporary planning systems and policies are inadequate in preparing cities for the future in an increasingly neoliberalising world. It argues that resilience thinking can form the basis of an alternative approach to planning. Drawing upon case studies from five cities in Europe, namely Lisbon, Porto, Istanbul, Stockholm, and Rotterdam, the book makes an exploration of the resilience perspective, raising a number of theoretical debates, and suggesting a new methodological approach based on empirical evidence. This book provides insights for intellectuals exploring alternative perspectives and principles of a new planning approach

There is consensus in literature that urban areas have become increasingly vulnerable to the outcomes of economic restructuring under the neoliberal political economic ideology. The increased frequency and widening diversity of problems offer evidence that the socio-economic and spatial policies, planning and practices introduced under the neoliberal agenda can no longer be sustained. As this shortfall was becoming more evident among urban policymakers, planners, and researchers in different parts of the world, a group of discontent researchers began searching for new approaches to addressing the increasing vulnerabilities of urban systems in the wake of growing socio-economic and ecological problems. This book is the joint effort of those who have long felt that contemporary planning systems and policies are inadequate in preparing cities for the future in an increasingly neoliberalising world. It argues that resilience thinking can form the basis of an alternative approach to planning. Drawing upon case studies from five cities in Europe, namely Lisbon, Porto, Istanbul, Stockholm, and Rotterdam, the book makes an exploration of the resilience perspective, raising a number of theoretical debates, and suggesting a new methodological approach based on empirical evidence. This book provides insights for intellectuals exploring alternative perspectives and principles of a new planning approach.

In major cities across the world policy-makers are searching for new ways to represent and govern their increasingly diverse populations. In this paper we analyse the ways in which authorities in two global cities, London and Toronto, have drawn on corporate, public management, strategies as their principal mode of diversity governance. In both we see a shift in policy making as a conscious attempt to reframe and re-imagine cities as corporate-like structures that can be conceptualised, represented, and managed through the lens of diversity management. In both cities specific representations of the city and its populations are curated to fulfil wider policy objectives. City governments present both as iconic centres of diversity, super-diversity or hyper-diversity, that embody and represent an era of progressive globalisation and new forms of contemporary cosmopolitan living. The presence of diversity is celebrated and seen a key component of 'success agendas'. This paper is based on empirical evidence derived from a policy-oriented research project in both cities. Policy analysis and critical discourse analysis are conducted in both cities on the basis of review of policy documents at national, local and community scales, and interviews with policy makers. The paper first frames diversity as a technology of description, where we explain how diversity has become a curation strategy in public management within the framework of growing mobility of management frameworks and shifts in framing diversity in urban policies. We will then provide a comparative analysis of London and Toronto.

In major cities across the world policy-makers are searching for new ways to represent and govern their increasingly diverse populations. In this paper we analyse the ways in which authorities in two global cities, London and Toronto, have drawn on corporate, public management, strategies as their principal mode of diversity governance. In both we see a shift in policy making as a conscious attempt to reframe and re-imagine cities as corporate-like structures that can be conceptualised, represented, and managed through the lens of diversity management. In both cities specific representations of the city and its populations are curated to fulfil wider policy objectives. City governments present both as iconic centres of diversity, super-diversity or hyper-diversity, that embody and represent an era of progressive globalisation and new forms of contemporary cosmopolitan living. The presence of diversity is celebrated and seen a key component of 'success agendas'. This paper is based on empirical evidence derived from a policy-oriented research project in both cities. Policy analysis and critical discourse analysis are conducted in both cities on the basis of review of policy documents at national, local and community scales, and interviews with policy makers. The paper first frames diversity as a technology of description, where we explain how diversity has become a curation strategy in public management within the framework of growing mobility of management frameworks and shifts in framing diversity in urban policies. We will then provide a comparative analysis of London and Toronto.

Planning in Turkey is dominated by powerful market interests and authoritarian state regulation, resulting in a conflictual socio-political environment. Caught in the crossfire between interventionist urban policies and a planning education system that is oriented towards the public good, planners have come to feel alienated from their work. This paper considers how young planners respond to these challenges, drawing upon questionnaires and semi-structured in-depth interviews with planners with fewer than 10 years of experience. Their confrontation with entrepreneurial and authoritarian state interventions in urban development alienates them from their ideals, leading them to explore new ways of dealing with increasing political authority and economic neoliberalism. The participants of the study came up with a number of diverse responses related to this process. Disappointed with the practice of their profession 'lost planners' begin searching for alternative pathways outside their practice towards a more meaningful society. In contrast, 'profiteer planners' focus on getting more business and play a conformist and opportunistic role in the existing planning practice; while 'struggling planners' develop alternative ways to pursue the public good by participating in urban movements. In short, they cope with alienation through politicization, solidarity and the identification of new means of engaging with society. ; TUBITAK (2219); TUDelft; Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment; Department OTB

AbstractRescaling state responsibilities and capacities not only triggers an uneven distribution of regulatory and fiscal powers across scales but also creates complex governance relationships that result in distortions in local processes of urban development. Within this framework, this article analyses how Single European Market regulations affect urban governance capacity through their impact on localized networks of governance. This analysis is based on case studies of public and private cooperation in land development in the Netherlands. The article focuses on two regulations (state aid and public procurement) that are part of European competition policy. It also analyzes the manner in which these regulations, aimed at creating a single market at the supranational scale, had local consequences. The article concludes that local interactions are contested and distorted by the interference of the Single European Market regulations at the supranational level, which impacts local governance relations and processes.RésuméRepositionner les échelons de responsabilités et de capacités déclenche entre ceux‐ci une répartition inégale des compétences réglementaires et fiscales, tout en créant des rapports de gouvernance complexes qui finissent par altérer les processus locaux d'aménagement urbain. Dans ce contexte, l'article analyse comment les réglementations du marché unique européen affectent la capacité de gouvernance urbaine par leur impact sur les réseaux de gouvernance implantés localement. Cette analyse exploite des études de cas sur la coopération public‐privé dans l'aménagement du territoire aux Pays‐Bas. L'article s'attache à deux réglementations (aide de l'État et marchés publics) intégrées dans la politique européenne relative à la concurrence. Il examine aussi de quelle façon ces règles ont eu des conséquences locales alors qu'elles participaient à la création d'un marché unique à l'échelon supranational. Les interactions locales sont contestées et dénaturées du fait que les réglementations supranationales du marché unique européen interfèrent dans les rapports et processus locaux de gouvernance.

AbstractEntrepreneurial and growth‐oriented urban development models see left‐behind areas as opportunities in need of redevelopment and upgrading, which can be subjected to speculation. We argue that pathbreaking trajectories emerge during this redevelopment process in distinct ways depending on the adaptive capacity of urban communities and flexibility in the planning practices. Focusing on the squatter areas in Istanbul, we map out pathbreaking trajectories in institutional and policy contexts and unravel societal responses. We conclude that the authoritarian entrepreneurial governance landscape operates in a dual context in which its impacts on re‐politicization of urban communities and their engagement with policy networks can vary.

In this article we explore the idea of public accountability in the contemporary entrepreneurial governance of cities, which are influenced by market dependency and private sector involvement. We specifically focus on the fragmentation of public accountability through hybrid contractual landscapes of governance, in which the public and private sector actors interactively produce a diversity of instruments to ensure performance in service. This is in sharp contrast to the traditional vague norms and values appealed to by urban planning institutions, to safeguard the public interest. We argue that within these complex contractual governance environments public accountability is produced by public and private sector actors, through highly diverse sets of contractual relations and diverse control instruments that define responsibilities of diverse actors who are involved in a project within a market-dependent planning and policy making environment, which contains context-specific characteristics set by the specific rules of public-private collaboration. These complexities mean public accountability has become fragmented and largely reduced to performance control. Moreover, our understanding of contractual urban governance remains vague and unclear due to very limited empirical studies focusing on the actual technologies of contractual urban development. By deciphering the complex hybrid landscapes of contractual governance, with comparative empirical evidence from The Netherlands, UK and Brazil, we demonstrate how public accountability is assuming a more 'contractual' and unpredictable meaning in policy and plan implementation process.

International audience EU member states are not permitted to provide aid which will distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods which may then undermine trading in the European market. This prohibition also affects government authorities that are willing to provide cheap land for social and affordable housing. This paper reviews the ways in which land is provided for social housing in the Netherlands and explores possibilities for re-shaping current practices to make them compatible with the regime of the Single European Market.

International audience ; EU member states are not permitted to provide aid which will distort competition by favouring certain undertakings or the production of certain goods which may then undermine trading in the European market. This prohibition also affects government authorities that are willing to provide cheap land for social and affordable housing. This paper reviews the ways in which land is provided for social housing in the Netherlands and explores possibilities for re-shaping current practices to make them compatible with the regime of the Single European Market.