Suchergebnisse

Claims that neoliberalism has been shaping planning practice and the production of space abound in planning literature. In this article, neoliberalism is treated not only as a set of policies but also as an ideology that organizes a particular way of seeing and orients action accordingly. The article explores how a particular socially shared belief system (ideology) that is taken as common sense (naturalized) provides the basis for particular ways of talking (discourses) about planning and urban development that legitimize and justify certain actions while making alternative possibilities unthinkable. In this sense, the article focuses on ideology in action and provides an empirically grounded discussion that renders ideology visible. Thus, ideology emerges from the empirical case as an explanatory mechanism to make sense of the dominant discourse that legitimizes the proliferation of suburban gated communities in the Metropolitan Region of Curitiba, in Brazil. The deconstruction of the discourse reveals content and structural properties that combine environmental concerns and neoliberal principles to turn potentially controversial practices into desirable outcomes. The ideological nature of the discourse is revealed when alternative ways of seeing and acting challenge its commonsensical and taken for granted claims. While simplifying complex relationships and rendering important elements invisible, the discourse appeals to a wide range of actors who hold different individual and professional values. Ultimately, this article offers insights into the mechanisms through which ideologies are manifested, reproduced, and materialized in planning practice.

AbstractThe current degree of social fracture that has attended the growing prevalence of populist movements calls into question the viability of democratic practices grounded in collective deliberation. Urban practitioners committed to democratic inclusion must confront the practical question of how to deal with a divided public. Any such effort must address longstanding and mutually reinforcing trends that have both aggravated social fragmentation and enabled the rise of populist regimes whose policies exacerbate divisiveness and inequity. These trends include economic restructuring and rising inequality, cultural division, and a post‐truth trap resulting from disagreement over epistemological and ontological assumptions. We argue that, while local governments can play a role in addressing these dynamics, a more fundamental renewal of a meaningfully democratic polity depends on a capacity to help cultivate solidarity across difference. We then recast the city as a site of political encounter and experimentation that might enable both a re‐examination of prevailing modes of public engagement and the emergence of solidarities and infrastructures through which populism might be challenged. Finally, we consider how a progressive urban politics of place might use populism as a point of departure for transforming urban futures.

Recent political developments in many parts of the world seem likely to exacerbate rather than ameliorate the planetary-scale challenges of social polarization, inequality and environmental change societies face. In this unconventional multi-authored essay, we therefore seek to explore some of the ways in which planning theory might respond to the deeply unsettling times we live in. Taking the multiple, suggestive possibilities of the theme of unsettlement as a starting point, we aim to create space for reflection and debate about the state of the discipline and practice of planning theory, questioning what it means to produce knowledge capable of acting on the world today. Drawing on exchanges at a workshop attended by a group of emerging scholars in Portland, Oregon in late 2016, the essay begins with an introduction section exploring the contemporary resonances of 'unsettling' in, of and for planning theory. This is followed by four, individually authored responses which each connect the idea of unsettlement to key challenges and possible future directions. We end by calling for a reflective practice of theorizing that accepts unsettlement but seeks to act knowingly and compassionately on the uneven terrain that it creates. ; info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion

Recent political developments in many parts of the world seem likely to exacerbate rather than ameliorate the planetary-scale challenges of social polarization, inequality and environmental change societies face. In this unconventional multi-authored essay, we therefore seek to explore some of the ways in which planning theory might respond to the deeply unsettling times we live in. Taking the multiple, suggestive possibilities of the theme of unsettlement as a starting point, we aim to create space for reflection and debate about the state of the discipline and practice of planning theory, questioning what it means to produce knowledge capable of acting on the world today. Drawing on exchanges at a workshop attended by a group of emerging scholars in Portland, Oregon in late 2016, the essay begins with an introduction section exploring the contemporary resonances of 'unsettling' in, of and for planning theory. This is followed by four, individually authored responses which each connect the idea of unsettlement to key challenges and possible future directions. We end by calling for a reflective practice of theorizing that accepts unsettlement but seeks to act knowingly and compassionately on the uneven terrain that it creates.