Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Eine Plattform für die Wissenschaft: Bauingenieurwesen, Architektur und Urbanistik
Conceptualising urban contingencies in planning for urban sustainability
What considerations should urban planning, as a professional field of knowledge, policy and practice, bring to the fore in responding to unprecedented global sustainability problems and challenges afflicting twenty-first-century cities? The paradigm of the ‘sustainable city’ (Whitehead, 2003) and the policy discourse of ‘urban sustainability’ have become so deeply entrenched in contemporary urban planning that the idea of ‘cities as sustainability solutions already appears commonsensical and even inevitable’ (Angelo & Wachsmuth, 2020, p. 2216). However, this urban policy common sense poses critical questions to urban planning in the twenty-first century. We contend that, at best, urban planning is at risk of downplaying the histories, geographies and situated contingencies (doctrines, disciplines, cultures) that often shape complex planning processes and practices (Healey, 2013). At worst, it is highly susceptible to noncritically replicating and adapting ‘scaled-up’ urban policy models and ‘best practice’ solutions mobilised globally, at an ever-increasing speed, by intergovernmental organisations, philanthropy-sponsored think tanks, and transnational networks of global/local actors (Montero, 2020). Rooted in this awareness, we aim to advance the debate by contending that planning for urban sustainability is more about reassembling pre-established, place-based urban planning configurations and phenomena contingent upon situated structural development factors, institutions, agencies, and policy discourses and less about ‘downloading’, adapting, and implementing decontextualised, allegedly replicable, urban policies and ‘best practice’ solutions. To unpack our contention, we assemble a conceptual framework consisting of four place-specific contingencies—doctrines, disciplines, practices, and tools—underpinned by a logic of intervention shaped by historical, socio-cultural, and discursive context (Davoudi et al., 2020). The framework builds on the understanding that planning for urban sustainability needs to ...
Conceptualising urban contingencies in planning for urban sustainability
What considerations should urban planning, as a professional field of knowledge, policy and practice, bring to the fore in responding to unprecedented global sustainability problems and challenges afflicting twenty-first-century cities? The paradigm of the ‘sustainable city’ (Whitehead, 2003) and the policy discourse of ‘urban sustainability’ have become so deeply entrenched in contemporary urban planning that the idea of ‘cities as sustainability solutions already appears commonsensical and even inevitable’ (Angelo & Wachsmuth, 2020, p. 2216). However, this urban policy common sense poses critical questions to urban planning in the twenty-first century. We contend that, at best, urban planning is at risk of downplaying the histories, geographies and situated contingencies (doctrines, disciplines, cultures) that often shape complex planning processes and practices (Healey, 2013). At worst, it is highly susceptible to noncritically replicating and adapting ‘scaled-up’ urban policy models and ‘best practice’ solutions mobilised globally, at an ever-increasing speed, by intergovernmental organisations, philanthropy-sponsored think tanks, and transnational networks of global/local actors (Montero, 2020). Rooted in this awareness, we aim to advance the debate by contending that planning for urban sustainability is more about reassembling pre-established, place-based urban planning configurations and phenomena contingent upon situated structural development factors, institutions, agencies, and policy discourses and less about ‘downloading’, adapting, and implementing decontextualised, allegedly replicable, urban policies and ‘best practice’ solutions. To unpack our contention, we assemble a conceptual framework consisting of four place-specific contingencies—doctrines, disciplines, practices, and tools—underpinned by a logic of intervention shaped by historical, socio-cultural, and discursive context (Davoudi et al., 2020). The framework builds on the understanding that planning for urban sustainability needs to ...
Conceptualising urban contingencies in planning for urban sustainability
Galland, Daniel (Autor:in) / Iuel-Stissing, Jens (Autor:in) / Freudendal-Pedersen, Malene (Autor:in)
01.01.2023
Galland , D , Iuel-Stissing , J & Freudendal-Pedersen , M 2023 , Conceptualising urban contingencies in planning for urban sustainability . in 2023 RSA Winter Conference : Cities and Regions of Tomorrow - Towards Better Regional Futures . Regional Studies Association , 2023 Regional Studies Association Winter Conference , London , United Kingdom , 09/11/2023 . < https://events.rdmobile.com/Lists/Details/2104619 >
Aufsatz (Konferenz)
Elektronische Ressource
Englisch
Conceptualising Sustainability in UK Urban Regeneration: a Discursive Formation
| Online Contents | 2011
Conceptualising slum in an urban African context
| Online Contents | 2017
Conceptualising slum in an urban African context
| Elsevier | 2016
Multiple Transformations: Conceptualising the Post-communist Urban Transition
| Online Contents | 2012