Informal strategies of power in the local planning system

Existing studies that question the role of planning as a state institution, whose interests it serves together with those disputing the merits of collaborative planning are all essentially concerned with the broader issue of power in society. Although there have been various attempts to highlight the distorting effects of power, the research emphasis to date has been focused on the operation of power within the formal structures that constitute the planning system. As a result, relatively little attention has been attributed to the informal strategies or tactics that can be utilised by powerful actors to further their own interests. This article seeks to address this gap by identifying the informal strategies used by the holders of power to bypass the formal structures of the planning system and highlight how these procedures are to a large extent systematic and (almost) institutionalised in a shadow planning system. The methodology consists of a series of semi-structured qualitative interviews with 20 urban planners working across four planning authorities within the Greater Dublin Area, Ireland. Empirical findings are offered that highlight the importance of economic power in the emergence of what essentially constitutes a shadow planning system. More broadly, the findings suggest that much more cognisance of the structural relations that govern how power is distributed in society is required and that ‘light touch’ approaches that focus exclusively on participation and deliberation need to be replaced with more radical solutions that look towards the redistribution of economic power between stakeholders.

From brown envelopes to community benefits: the co-option of planning gain agreements under deepening neoliberalism

The provision of physical and social infrastructure in the form of roads, green spaces and community facilities has traditionally been provided for by the state through the general taxation system. However, as the state has been transformed along more neoliberal lines, the private sector is increasingly relied upon to deliver public goods and services. Planning gain agreements have flourished within this context by offering another vehicle through which local facilities are privately funded. Whilst these agreements reflect the broader dynamics of neoliberalism, they are commonly viewed as a tool which can be employed to challenge these very dynamics by empowering local communities to secure more just planning outcomes. This paper counters such claims. Based on evidence gathered from 80 interviews with planners, councillors, developers and community groups in Ireland, the paper demonstrates how planning gain agreements have been strategically redeployed by the holders of political and economic power to serve their own ends. In seeking to understand why and how this has occurred, specific consideration is given to the changing power dynamics between the state and private capital under neoliberalism. The paper highlights how institutional arrangements have enabled developers to infiltrate the political sphere in more subtle and implicit ways than ever before. We conclude by arguing that planning gain must be understood as a mechanism which has been manipulated in ways which essentially work to preserve and enhance, rather than redress, existing power imbalances in the planning system by facilitating large scale transfers of wealth upwards in society.

Self-perceptions of the role of the planner

The role of the planning practitioner has received considerable attention in a diverse range of theoretical and empirical debates within the broad spectrum of planning scholarship from normative debates surrounding the planner's role in society, to more empirical investigations into the skills, attributes, and evolving nature of planning practitioners. Fundamental questions surrounding the role and purpose of planners have also entered into more mainstream discussions as the democratic nature of the planning system has been consistently undermined by allegations of misconduct, corruption, and incompetence. Despite the broad range of literature and debate which centres on the role of the planner, relatively few studies have explored the views of planning practitioners themselves, making it difficult to judge whether the ideas of planning academics are actually shared by those in the field. In this paper we seek to address this particular gap and argue that such insights are critical in determining the extent to which planning practitioners serve to challenge, maintain, or reinforce existing power imbalances in the planning system. The methodology consists of a series of qualitative interviews with twenty local authority planners working throughout the Greater Dublin Area, Ireland. The results suggest that planners' self-perceptions of their role tend to reflect traditional pluralist and managerialist perspectives. More broadly, the results suggest that the role orientations of contemporary planners are being shaped by dominant discourses in current planning ideology — namely, collaborative and participatory approaches

Northern Ireland Neighbourhood Watch: Participatory Mapping and Socio Demographic Uptake

Northern Ireland Neighbourhood Watch (NINW) was formally introduced to Northern Ireland in 2004 by the Police Service of Northern Ireland, Northern Ireland Policing Board and Northern Ireland Office. However, there has been little research to data as to participation in, or success of, the schemes. This research report provides one of the few empirical examinations of NINW. Using GIS mapping and socio-demographic data from the Northern Ireland Neighbourhood Information Service (NINIS), the research explores participation in NINW schemes set against religion, deprivation and crime levels at the Census Output Area (COA) level across Northern Ireland. While the research largely confirms the limited impact of neighbourhood schemes as noted in international literature, at a local level in Northern Ireland the findings evidence a distinct pattern of uptake, with the vast majority of participants in the schemes residing in affluent, low-crime, mainly Protestant areas of the country