Content uploaded by Raoul Beunen
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Raoul Beunen on Jul 11, 2015
Content may be subject to copyright.
A preview of the PDF is not available
Power and Contingency in Planning
Abstract
In this paper we analyse the role and reception of poststructuralist perspectives on power in planning since the 1990s, and then ask whether a renewed encounter with the works of poststructuralist theorists Foucault, Deleuze, and Luhmann could add something to the points that were already made. We make a distinction between the power of planning (the impact in society), power in planning (relations between players active in planning), and power on planning (the influence of broader society on the planning system), to refine the analysis of planning/power. It is argued that an interpretation of Deleuze, Luhmann, and Foucault, as thinkers of power in a theoretical framework that is based on the idea of contingency, can help to refine the analysis of power in planning. Planning then can be regarded as a system in other systems, with roles, values, procedures, and materialities in constant transformation, with the results of each operation serving as input for the next one. The different power relations constitute the possibilities, the forms, and the potential impact of planning.
... Moreover, Foucault's ideas on power and knowledge as inextricably entwined in discourse and continuously evolving in an ongoing interplay with other power/knowledge configurations underpin EGT's proposal to analyse and explain the embedding of planning practices within a particular governance context and thus gauge the potential and limits of planning in that specific context. EGT took the intertwining between power and knowledge further by distinguishing between power in, on and of planning and speaking of power/knowledge configurations operating at every step of a policy-making process and affecting the continuous evolution of a planning system as well as its dynamic relations with the environment (Van Assche, K., Duineveld, M., & Beunen, R., 2014). ...
... Post-structuralist strands of thought also informed the EGT understanding of contingency as affecting elements, structures, relations and operations in the daily functioning of planning systems. Contingency, according to EGT, is a concept that holds the potential to become a pillar in the refinement of power-analyses in planning as it 'can give a sharper delineation of the positionality of planning in society and of the possibilities and limitations to influence that society from a certain position' (Van Assche, Duineveld & Beunen, 2014: 2389. Using and developing the concept of contingency, EGT provides insights to better understand how planning attempts build upon existing configurations of actor/institutions and 24 CHAPTER 1 power/knowledge and how the productive clashes between opposing views shape their coevolution and their environment. ...
... In this period, the discursive configuration that had for long portrayed planning as the perfect solution for the socio-spatial problems associated to industrialisation dynamics and urbanisation trends began to lose political support and explanatory power. Thus, while claims for a smaller State expanded from both extremes of the political spectrum, a strong 'neoconservative disdain for planning ' (Albretchs, 2006' (Albretchs, : 1149, dominant in the Europe of the 1980s (Van Assche, Duineveld & Beunen, 2014), also spread to Argentina. In view of the foregoing, planning policies, understood as a lawfully-begotten government instrument to intervene in the organisation of the national territory, would be virtually absent until the end of the 20 th Century. ...
... The ideas of Deleuze have witnessed a rising interest of planning scholars over the last decade, particularly coming to light in the work of Jean Hillier (Hillier, 2005;2007;2008;Hillier & Cao, 2013), who suggests applying them to planning as a pragmatic way to deal with rising uncertainties, or a rising perception thereof (Balducci et al., 2011). Besides some sporadic attempts to include his ideas into the planning debate (Van Assche & Verschraegen, 2008;Van Assche et al., 2014;Mäntysalo, 2016), Luhmann has remained largely absent from the work of planning scholars. However, we believe that bringing Deleuze's philosophical project and Luhmann's social theory closer together opens a novel direction in planning research, one that shows a greater appreciation for uncertainty and complexity as the essence of spatial planning. ...
... It also allows grounding abstract Deleuzean ideas into more tangible theoretical concepts and thus helps to address the problem of their inconsistent interpretation and application to the realm of planning (Purcell, 2013). For Luhmann and Deleuze, reality consists of a recursive repetition of events, and the notion of difference 1 by which they are reproduced is its basic generative principle (Van Assche et al., 2014). Moreover, they both 'acknowledge that discursive and material elements can coproduce reality' (Duineveld et al., 2017, p. 383). ...
... Planning scholars do not take up his work much, though significant parts are available in English translations. Notable exceptions are Mäntysalo (2016) on publicprivate-people partnerships and trading zones in planning, Van Assche and Verschraegen (2008) with an elaboration on planning ambitions and the limits of intentional steering, as well as Van Assche et al. (2014) focusing on power and contingency in governance and planning. While Luhmann's systems theory denies human agency as such and sees all systems (of which we potentially include planning) as operationally closed and self-referential, this does not deny the existence of a specific reality outside of a given system. ...
Planning scholars use complexity perspectives to account for unpredictable societal circumstances in an uncertain and changing world. Questions emerge not only about how planning communication and action can transform but more so about the planner's ability to navigate the complex relational dynamics of planning. To move forward, we use Gilles Deleuze's concept of assemblage thinking to frame spatial planning as a continually changing multiplicity of diverse entities and emerging dynamic relations among them. Niklas Luhmann's social systems theory then helps to promote a perspective on planners as a multiplicity of roles grounded in continuously evolving self-descriptions and self-developed meanings. Planners achieve the organisation (navigation) in an uncertain and complex environment through the reproduction of roles. This paper positions planning as a self-reflexive process that uses a multiplicity of role configurations that ultimately defines and transforms the meaning of planning itself.
... It plays a central role in plan implementation. Concretely, this form of power can be appraised "as the potential to get things done" (Van Assche et al., 2014: 2395. Enforcing planning regulations corresponds to the classical definition of power in planning and has prompted research on plan implementation and procedures (Faludi, 1973). ...
This article contributes to the debate on power in planning. It builds on recent developments linked with the so-called new institutional turn in planning. By bridging planning, new institutionalism, and power, the article ambitions to (1) develop a conceptual framework that captures the role of power in concrete spatial development projects, and (2) illustrate the potential of this framework with a real-life example of contested urban redevelopment in Zurich, Switzerland. The proposed framework provides a different picture of urban densification processes which are typically presented as eco-friendly and sustainable initiatives. Through its impact on the built environment and on existing rights and interests, redevelopment for urban densification creates not only winners, but also losers, especially among those inhabitants who cannot afford the higher rent following redevelopment in favor of density. Due to its conflictual nature, densification is therefore an ideal subject to study power in planning.
... In general, spatial imaginaries can have emotional and affective dimensions. Seemingly technical processes such as planning can be infused with desires and fantasies (Assche et al., 2014;Larkin, 2013). Individual behaviours are shaped by the emotional aspects of spatial imaginaries. ...
... In general, spatial imaginaries can have emotional and affective dimensions. Seemingly technical processes such as planning can be infused with desires and fantasies (Assche et al., 2014;Larkin, 2013). Individual behaviours are shaped by the emotional aspects of spatial imaginaries. ...
... Today, one of the common assumptions in scientific circles and rural management is that "rural development" in so-called "developing" countries is possible without "state" involvement (Kohli, 2004). In general, the rural development approach in developing countries, which is influenced by the classical theories of development management, is usually a development that is designed, managed and implemented with a broad role of state and with titles such as "state-centered development" or "top-bottom development" (Assche et al., 2014). The operating state in this type of development is also referred to as "developmental state" or "strong state" (Kumar, 2004). ...
Empowerment approach is considered as one of the efficient approaches in rural development activities in Iran through the rural planning system within the framework of five-year programs with government investment in order to achieve sustainable rural development. In this study, it was investigated the role of government investments in empowering villagers, How its effectiveness in the rural area of Kashan was studied. Descriptive-analytical research method and sample population were selected using three-dimensional matrix method of government investment, village location and rural population of 12 villages and 316 rural households. To explain the relationships between independent and dependent variables, Pearson correlation in appropriate statistical environments and for modeling effects, the structural equation model (SEM) in AMOS software was used. Findings indicate a strong, positive and direct relationship between the two variables of investment and rural empowerment (P = 0.000). As the amount of investment increases, the empowerment of the villagers increases. The structural equation model showed that government investment with a factor load of 0.072 has an effect on rural empowerment (RMSEA = 0.036). Following these results in achieving sustainable rural development, the empowerment approach should be considered as a goal and not as a tool. In the experience of government investment in the rural area of Kashan in Central Iran, the investment process was relatively effective and in the future the investment process and implementation of rural projects in general and in arid and semi-arid areas in particular, empowerment and institutionalization approach in Villages are essential.
Planning for the common good requires the exercise of phronesis and a fitting ontology of planning situations. This paper critically appraises Flyvbjerg’s Phronetic Planning Research approach through the lens of Aristotelian phronesis and Assemblage Thinking, showing that it inadequately addresses these interdependent issues. It proposes an Assemblage-based Phronetic Planning Approach (APPA) and a methodology to implement it. APPA conceptualizes planning situations as multiplicities comprising assemblages which best represent their complexity, materiality and spatiality and simultaneously enunciate the relationality and situatedness of individual and collective phronesis. APPA offers an immanent approach to study and support the making of public plans. It stresses the co-constitution of phronesis, phronimos, collective phronesis and the situated ‘common good’ within interacting assemblages and entangled planning multiplicities unfolding in a milieu over the planning process. Making good public plans under present and future uncertainty involves steering these multiplicities to foster the emergence of collective phronesis and the good plan that delivers the situated common good. Professional planners and other actors, desiring the ‘successful symbiosis’ of humans and the material world, may strive to become phronimos. Future research needs to engage with the Deleuzoguattarian and Aristotelian scholarship to elucidate critical theoretical issues, develop novel methodologies and analytical tools and empirically test APPA in diverse planning situations and geographical contexts.
p>This paper presents a framework for analysing the different ways in which materiality impacts environmental policy and governance. It draws on notions from the wider literature on materiality and integrates relevant insights into a theory on policy and governance. Building on a key distinction between the material and the discursive dimensions of governance, it develops the concepts of material events and material dependencies. Material events bring attention to the linkages between material changes and their observation and interpretation in governance. The concept of material dependencies is useful for analysing the different ways in which materiality structures the evolution of governance systems. The paper ends with some methodological considerations for mapping and analysing material dependencies and suggestions for further research.</p
We analyse the migration of academic and policy discourses that contributed to (de)legitimise the formation of planning policies in Argentina since the 1950s. We focus on the communicative/collaborative rationality discourses emanating from Anglo-American academic circles that played a role in the revival of the Argentine planning system between 2004 and 2015. We adopt an evolutionary approach to policy travel and policy learning, deploying the concepts of discursive migration and discursive configuration to better understand how ideas, people and goods/resources reinvent themselves when transnationally circulating policy knowledge takes root locally. The migration process in Argentina led to the reinforcement of prevalent coordination mechanisms, redirecting concerns and conflicts into governance structures already existing, involving players already present and forms of expertise already dominant. The migrating collaborative discourse (self) transformed in relation to the receiving governance environment, becoming an effective compliance-gaining technique, while national actors found ways to engage and discipline provinces they depended on more than before.
In this paper, we explore the consequences of a flat ontology for planning theory and practice through the lens of Evolutionary Governance Theory (EGT). We present a perspective in which the ontological hierarchies assumed in planning and beyond are left behind, but also one that allows for understanding how hierarchies and binaries can emerge from and within governance and specifically planning. From this perspective, planning is conceptualised as a web of interrelated social-material systems underpinning the coordination of policies and practices affecting spatial organisation. Within this web, different planning perspectives and planning practices co-exist and co-evolve, partly in relation to the wider governance contexts of which they are part. We explore and deepen our understanding of the consequences of flat ontology by focussing on the interrelations between power and knowledge and the varied effects of materiality on planning and governance, as materiality can play roles ranging from latent infrastructure to main triggers of change. We conclude our paper by assessing the consequences for the positionality of planning in society, stressing the need for more reflexive and adaptive forms of planning and governance, and reflecting on what such forms of planning could look like. We argue that despite the abstract nature of discussions on ontology in and of planning, the conceptual shifts that result from thinking in terms of flat ontologies can significantly affect planning practices as it can inspire new ways of observing and organising.
Taken together, the works of Jürgen Habermas and Michel Foucault highlight an essential tension in modernity. This is the tension between the normative and the real, between what should be done and what is actually done. Understanding this tension is crucial to understanding modern democracy, what it is and what it could be. It has been argued that an effective way of making democracy stronger is to strengthen civil society. This article contains a comparative analysis of the central ideas of Habermas and Foucault as they pertain to the question of democracy and civil society. More specifically, the discourse ethics of Habermas is contrasted with the power analytics and ethics of Foucault evaluating their usefulness for those interested in understanding, and bringing about, democratic social change.
