The growth prerogative: how does an objective of economic growth influence local planning policy?

This research aimed to explore the privileging of growth and its influence on planning in England. The research examined two contrasting case studies: Middlesbrough Borough Council and Cambridge City Council. The analysis of growth privileging is rooted within a constructionist ontology which argues that planning is about the way in which people construct value relative to the function of land. This perspective enables the research to position growth privileging as a social construction; a particular mental frame for understanding and analyzing place based challenges and an approach which has been increasingly absorbed by the UK planning community. Through interviews with a range of planning actors, the first part of the research examined the state of planning in the current political and economic context and the influence that a privileging of growth has on planning. The second part of the research investigated the merits and feasibility of the capabilities approach as an alternative mental frame for planning, an approach developed through the work of Amartya Sen and Martha Nussbaum. The research results disaggregate the concept of economic growth, based on the responses of interviewees and conclude that it is characterized by homogeneity. Growth is valued, not only because of its economic role, for example, supporting jobs and income but its potential in creating diversity, enriching culture and precipitating transformative change. Pursuing growth as an objective has a range of influences upon planning. In particular, it supports a utilitarian framework for decision-making which values spatial decisions on their ability to support aggregate economic growth. The research demonstrates the feasibility and merits of the capabilities approach as a means with which to better understand the relationship between planning and human flourishing. Based on this analysis, the research proposes that the capabilities approach can provide an alternative ‘mental frame’ for planning which privileges human flourishing as the primary objective or ‘final end’ instead of economic growth.

The influence of neoconservatism on US foreign policy debates during the Obama administration

Neoconservatism reached its zenith as a school of thought when it became associated with the Iraq War. Although the war was largely considered a failure, it raised the profile of neoconservatism as a school of thought. Many studies were completed which pointed to the influence of prominent members of the George W. Bush administration who were considered to be ideologically neoconservative. When Obama won the presidency in 2008, it was assumed that the influence of neoconservatives, or neoconservatism more broadly, would be over. However, given neoconservatism’s historical foundations and the tenacity of its adherents it seemed important to consider whether this has been the case. Therefore, this thesis set out to answer the question: To what extent have neoconservatives, and neoconservatism more broadly, influenced foreign policy debates during the Obama administration? I argue that neoconservatism has remained not only salient within foreign policy debates, but prominent in these debates, during Obama’s two terms in office. An examination of US foreign policy towards the nuclear crisis in Iran and the Syrian civil war indicates that neoconservatism had a substantive influence on the policy debates and the options considered within them, particularly in Congress. In some instances, neoconservative policy entrepreneurs contributed to legislation. Furthermore, this thesis finds that neoconservatism has been the predominant approach to foreign policy within the Republican Party on the issues of Iran and Syria during the period under review.