A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
A platform for research: civil engineering, architecture and urbanism
The communicative model of planning, which has dominated international and national planning theories since the 1990s, is facing increasing criticism because the main discrepancies between theory and practice have become more and more apparent. Discrepancies exist primarily in the fact that the importance of communication, cooperation and participation in planning processes was overestimated, the ascribed role for planners as neutral mediators in negotiation processes has barely been fulfilled in practice and, in many cases, planning processes favour already powerful actors. Therefore, this paper outlines a theoretical framework for the analysis of power relations at the local level of planning policies. Planning and policy are not conceptualized as two separate spheres; rather planning is understood as a political process in all phases. In order to empirically examine issues of power in planning processes, the paper refers to the power concepts of the Community Power debate. In this debate, the understanding of power as social control over others (“Power over”) has shifted to an understanding of power as a capacity of actors to act (“Power to”). Based on a political-economic understanding of power, a practiceand action-oriented model of planning policy is developed, which distinguishes four different forms of power: political decisions, economic resources, democratic participation and communicative discourse. The paper concludes with an open empirical question regarding which position planners have within the local power field.
English title: Planning, Politics and Power in Cities
The communicative model of planning, which has dominated international and national planning theories since the 1990s, is facing increasing criticism because the main discrepancies between theory and practice have become more and more apparent. Discrepancies exist primarily in the fact that the importance of communication, cooperation and participation in planning processes was overestimated, the ascribed role for planners as neutral mediators in negotiation processes has barely been fulfilled in practice and, in many cases, planning processes favour already powerful actors. Therefore, this paper outlines a theoretical framework for the analysis of power relations at the local level of planning policies. Planning and policy are not conceptualized as two separate spheres; rather planning is understood as a political process in all phases. In order to empirically examine issues of power in planning processes, the paper refers to the power concepts of the Community Power debate. In this debate, the understanding of power as social control over others (“Power over”) has shifted to an understanding of power as a capacity of actors to act (“Power to”). Based on a political-economic understanding of power, a practiceand action-oriented model of planning policy is developed, which distinguishes four different forms of power: political decisions, economic resources, democratic participation and communicative discourse. The paper concludes with an open empirical question regarding which position planners have within the local power field.
English title: Planning, Politics and Power in Cities
Planung, Politik und Macht in Städten
Kühn, Manfred (author)
disP - The Planning Review ; 53 ; 109-119
2017-04-03
11 pages
Article (Journal)
Electronic Resource
English
Planung der Verkehrsinfrastruktur in den Städten
| UB Braunschweig | 1975
Politik in europäischen Städten : Fallstudien zur Bedeutung lokaler Politik
| UB Braunschweig | 1993
Wohnen in Städten : Planung und Gestaltung der Wohngebiete
| UB Braunschweig | 1973
Politik in europai͏̈schen Städten: Fallstudien zur Bedeutung localer politik
| Online Contents | 1995