Suchergebnisse

Cover -- Contents -- List of Illustrative Material -- Preface -- Acknowledgements -- 1 Introducing Environmental Planning -- The importance of environmental planning -- The complexity of environmental planning -- Ascertaining environmental 'priorities' -- Conclusion -- 2 The Intellectual Legacies -- The history of environmental planning -- The Age of Discovery -- Towards modernity -- The history of environmental planning thought -- A sense of hierarchy -- The authority of empiricism -- The rise of human exemptionalism -- The power of economic systems -- Conclusion -- 3 Governance and Power -- From government to governance -- Evolving influences and relationships -- Changing modes and scales -- Power and legitimacy -- Conclusion -- 4 Politics and the Media -- Introducing environmental politics -- Environmental political ideologies -- The market and the private sector -- The media -- Conclusion -- 5 Framing Concepts -- The spectrum of environmental concern -- Sustainability -- Risk -- Resilience -- Conclusion -- 6 The Role of Science -- Accumulation and revolution -- Objective and subjective -- Certainty and doubt -- Experts and knowledge -- The science-policy interface -- Conclusion -- 7 Policy and Regulation -- Designation, protection and control -- Regulation -- Evidence-based planning -- The precautionary principle -- Policy 'transfer' -- Conclusion -- 8 Decision Support Tools -- Cost-benefit analysis and environmental economics -- Indicators -- Futures and scenarios -- Geographical Information Systems (GIS) -- Impact assessment -- Conclusion -- 9 Engaging with Stakeholders -- The rise of engagement -- The theoretical foundation -- The promise and the reality -- Engagement in practice -- Conclusion -- 10 The Question of Justice -- Conceptions of justice -- Justice and the environment -- Environmental racism -- Environmental justice.

As a vital human need, water has been absolutely critical to decisions as to where cities originate, how much they grow and the standard of living of the inhabitants. The relationship is complex however; we need both continual availability and protection from its potential impacts. Over recent decades flooding and scarcity episodes have become commonplace in even the most advanced countries - and these events cannot be disassociated from the socio-economic context within which they occur; being directly related to how we live, where we live and how we govern. This book draws together information on a host of connected subjects from population growth to water scarcity to the relationship between humanity and nature, then demonstrates how utilizing notions of risk and resilience could help improve the relationship between the city and its most precious resource. Combining discussions of risk, water and spatial planning it provides an invaluable text for planning, geography and urban studies students on how to address urban water problems within a rapidly changing world. -- Book Description.

A defining feature of planning is that it is informed by sound evidence. An ever more diverse range of decision support tools is available to help achieve this, a trend that is set to accelerate along with the rise of Big Data and Smart Cities. At the same time, planning is frequently requested to improve the urban and environmental outcomes it helps deliver. This research draws upon intellectual resources from Science and Technology Studies, and empirical data from actors across the science–policy–practice interface, to analyse critically issues connected to the design, application and wider effects of calculative practices within planning. It finds that these practices selectively open up or foreclose discourses and play important political roles relating to ordering complexity and mitigating professional risk. They are also revealed as underpinning a stability and certainty within decision making that not only maintains the power of established calculative agencies but also serves to replicate an ideology of urban form that is in tension with more normative calls for change. More broadly, the findings help unsettle the planner and planning policy as the key agent able to change planning outcomes, which is instead revealed as more contingent on the political, institutional and professional culture, and the ways human and non-human objects align and combine to create internal stability when there are external calls for change. ; 规划的一个决定性特征是它应当是依据可靠的证据进行的。有越来越多样的决策支持工具可以帮助实现这一目标,这一趋势将随着大数据和智慧城市的崛起而加速。与此同时,人们经常要求规划改善城市和环境成果。本项研究利用了来自科学技术研究 (Science and Technology Studies) 领域的智力资源,以及来自科学-政策-做法界面的参与者的经验数据,以批判性地分析与规划中计算实践的设计、应用和更广泛影响相关的问题。研究发现,这些做法有选择地打开或取消话语,并在整理复杂性和降低专业风险方面发挥重要的政策作用。它们还被揭示为决策过程中的稳定性和确定性的基础,这不仅保持了既定计算机构的力量,而且还复制了一种城市形态的意识形态,这种意识形态与更规范性的变革要求相矛盾。更广泛地说,这些发现挑战了规划者和规划政策作为能够改变规划结果的关键因素的地位,并揭示了规划结果更依赖于政治、制度和专业文化,以及当有外部变革呼声时,人和非人的目标如何协调和结合以创造内部稳定。

Abstract
Climate change challenges how policy agents imagine and manage risks in space and time. The impacts are dynamic, uncertain and contested. We use riskscapes as a lens to analyse how New Zealand has perceived and mediated natural hazard and climate risks over time. We identify five different national riskscapes using a historical timeline, which have changed as global risks cascade into national and sub-national governance. We find that while there has been a major effort to reflect the dynamic and systemic language of risk theory in national policy, a significant challenge remains to develop appropriate governance and implementation strategies and to shift from long-held ways of doing and knowing.

It is a truism that politicians from countries around the world claim to be in the midst of a 'housing crisis'. But how do they define it, who is affected, and what is the cause? This paper provides a critical evaluation of the emergence and scope of political discourse connected to the housing crisis in New Zealand under three National Party led governments (2008-2017), with a view to better understanding the ways in which the issue has been problematized in politics and operationalized in policy. It finds that although researchers draw upon multiple strands of evidence and recognize housing as a complex problem, the political framing of a housing crisis is simpler and shows a closer relationship to long standing ideological perspectives, notably an inefficient planning system and low supply of development land. This raises critical questions for how housing researchers can better influence politics and challenge both the lived experience of crisis and existing claims of normalcy.

Ten years after the Global Financial Crisis, this research examines how resilience theory and rhetoric relating to the economy and housing markets has been translated into policy and practice. The methodology involves a case study of a city (Auckland) with a nationally dominant housing market and high unaffordability. Via secondary literature and a series of interviews we analyse questions connected to resilience from what, how, by whom, and discuss the implications and limits of the approach. The research demonstrates that resilience policies have focused on providing institutional stability to shock, rather than adaptation or transformation to a state that is less exposed to the systemic risks associated with flows of global capital, debt, and speculative activity. This is related to how the whole concept is vaguely defined. In the absence of guidance, institutions reinterpret resilience in a way that underpins existing market and regulatory logics, such as by increasing capital reserves or lending ratios. As a consequence, the dominant political economy, selected institutions, and to an extent, existing homeowners and speculative investors are privileged in resilience policy. By bringing these selectivities and limits to light we argue for a shift in focus away from an institutional frame to one with a deeper understanding of both the balance of an economy and the wider forces that create and reproduce housing markets.

This paper examines the tensions involved in the production, presentation and revision of hazard maps, focusing on the controversies that have become increasingly common when they are used to change government policy. Our scope includes all the major environmental hazards currently being mapped in New Zealand, one of the world's most exposed and hazard‐aware countries. Selecting one country also allowed a multi‐hazard approach to be taken that helps provide messages for other countries. Drawing on interviews with 24 key informants, the paper identifies a range of reasons for explaining the recent growth in hazard mapping and why hazard maps sometimes resulted in high‐profile controversies. Two themes emerged out of this analysis: an inconsistency in modelling and mapping hazards that created opportunity for challenge and the selective mobilisation of scientific uncertainty to dispute the legitimacy of official maps, particularly on developed land. The findings highlight the multiple roles of mapping, positioning maps as potentially instruments of both depoliticisation and repoliticisation. We emphasise how conflicts are most likely when maps are used as technocratic instruments of depoliticisation, and that creating maps in a more open way can generate valuable opportunities to engage with communities in more creative policy‐making regarding the threats they face and how they can respond. Mapping processes that open up the space for critical debate can act as important debate‐support tools as well as decision‐support tools, particularly when used to give voice to those not normally heard or treated as equal.