Perceptions of the common good in planning

There has been plenty of debate in the academic literature about the nature of the common good or public interest in planning. There is a recognition that the idea is one that is extremely difficult to isolate in practical terms; nevertheless, scholars insist that the idea ‘…remains the pivot around which debates about the nature of planning and its purposes turn’ (Campbell & Marshall, 2002, 163–64). At the point of first principles, these debates have broached political theories of the state and even philosophies of science that inform critiques of rationality, social justice and power. In the planning arena specifically, much of the scholarship has tended to focus on theorising the move from a rational comprehensive planning system in the 1960s and 1970s, to one that is now dominated by deliberative democracy in the form of collaborative planning. In theoretical terms, this debate has been framed by a movement from what are perceived as objective and elitist notions of planning practice and decision-making to ones that are considered (by some) to be ‘inter-subjective’ and non-elitist. Yet despite significant conceptual debate, only a small number of empirical studies have tackled the issue by investigating notions of the common good from the perspective of planning practitioners. What do practitioners understand by the idea of the common good in planning? Do they actively consider it when making planning decisions? Do governance/institutional barriers exist to pursuing the common good in planning? In this paper, these sorts of questions are addressed using the case of Ireland. 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. The findings show that the most frequently cited definition of the common good is balancing different competing interests and avoiding/minimising the negative effects of development. The results show that practitioner views of the common good are far removed from the lofty ideals of planning theory and reflect the ideological shift of planners within an institution that has been heavily neoliberalised since the 1970s.

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.

Planning for the Unseen and Unheard: the child with ASD

“Children are a kind of indicator species.
If we can build a successful city for children,
we will have a successful city for all people.”

Enrique Peñalosa (former mayor of Bogotá)

Should society be judged by how they treat their weakest members, the concept of the Child Friendly City offers more than ample scope for critiquing the genuine health and inclusivity of our urban environments. If we accept childhood as a crucial human development phase that demands inclusive and welcoming places for play, exploration and growth, many cities today are becoming increasingly barren habitats, arguably full of nothing but empty childhoods. (Raven-Ellison 2015) With children today less able to roam and explore our streets than those of yesteryear, (Bird 2007) the situation is now developing where our young are becoming increasingly socially and spatially excluded from our supposedly shared Built Environment. That progressively restrictive urban realm is particularly pronounced for those with Autism Spectrum Disorder, for whom our cities can be disorientating, difficult and even frightening places.

As a profession we have a responsibility to provide inclusive built environments that do not preclude the presence of the most vulnerable in society, among them those with ASD. Accordingly this paper seeks to introduce emerging research into the current challenges facing these young urban stakeholders before discussing how planning processes and design interventions might make our cities more accessible to those with ASD.

References:

Bird, W. (2007) Natural Thinking, Sandy, Bedfordshire: RSPB.

Raven-Ellison, D. (2015) “London’s Empty Childhoods” in London Essays – Green Spaces, Issue 3 – found at: http://essays.centreforlondon.org/issues/green/londons-empty-childhoods/ accessed 9th May 2016.

Recomposing the City: New Directions in Urban Sound Art

This special edition, which we were invited by the journal editors to edit, highlights the proceedings of our International Symposium on sound art and urban architecture. We selected these and other authors from multiple disciplines and practices, including sound art, planning, architecture, and anthropology to analyze how sound might be better understood in urban environments.