scholarly journals Disintegrated development at the rural–urban fringe: Re-connecting spatial planning theory and practice

2013 ◽  
Vol 83 ◽  
pp. 1-52 ◽  
Author(s):  
A.J. Scott ◽  
C. Carter ◽  
M.R. Reed ◽  
P. Larkham ◽  
D. Adams ◽  
...  
2014 ◽  
Vol 71 (7) ◽  
pp. 1535-1541 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sue Kidd ◽  
Dave Shaw

Abstract This paper highlights the value for marine spatial planning (MSP) of engaging with terrestrial planning theory and practice. It argues that the traditions of reflection, critique, and debate that are a feature of land-based planning can inform the development of richer theoretical underpinnings of MSP as well as MSP practice. The case is illustrated by tempering the view that MSP can be a rational planning process that can follow universal principles and steps by presenting an alternative perspective that sees MSP as a social and political process that is highly differentiated and place-specific. This perspective is discussed with reference to four examples. First, the paper considers why history, culture, and administrative context lead to significant differences in how planning systems are organized. Second, it highlights that planning systems and processes tend to be in constant flux as they respond to changing social and political viewpoints. Third, it discusses why the integration ambitions which are central to “spatial” planning require detailed engagement with locally specific social and political circumstances. Fourth, it focuses on the political and social nature of plan implementation and how different implementation contexts need to inform the design of planning processes and the style of plans produced.


10.1068/b2633 ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barrie Needham

There is an implicit paradigm in the theory of spatial planning, which we call “spatial planning as a design discipline”. It is implicit in much of planning theory, and the exposition here is in many respects an ordering of ideas from planning theory which have been in circulation for many years. I will make them explicit and relate them to each other in order to lay bare the underlying assumptions, to help planning education, and to improve the relationship between theory and practice. Such an ordering of existing ideas inevitably looks backwards, so I will also investigate how the paradigm presented here relates to some recent innovations in planning theory. Because many of the ideas have been in good currency for a long time, it is probable that they have had a strong influence on planning practice in much of Western Europe: there is not just a paradigm shared by academics but also a discourse shared by academics and practitioners.


Author(s):  
Erwin Fahmi

Dominant spatial planning theory and practice in the last half a century in Indonesia has been the rational comprehensive. This could be seen, among other, in the formal spatial planning works of the government and private sectors, and their underlying spatial planning laws, i.e. law 24/1992 and law 26/2007. This theory is based on the assumptions that the role of the state is central in the process of plan formulation and implementation; and, at the technical level, the availability of two main conditions to enable plan to be made, i.e.: necessary maps and statistical data, and relevant experts who interprete those data to meet the need of analysis. These assumptions, unfortunately, were not fully met in the specific case of post-conflict and post-disaster reconstruction of Aceh, especially during the first two years, 2005-2006. New approach, therefore, needed to be formulated, accepted by all reconstruction players and implemented to satisfy the immediate needs of the disaster’ victims.     Keywords: planning theory, perencanaan partisipatif, rekonstruksi Aceh


1983 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 469-479 ◽  
Author(s):  
C Jensen-Butler

Analysis of the practice of planning is increasingly being used to develop planning theory, The papers by Roweis and Forester in the second issue of Environment and Planning D: Society and Space base analysis of planning practice on hermeneutic, linguistic, and phenomenological approaches, as an alternative to the technical -rational approach to planning theory, In the present paper, I argue that the approaches adopted by these two authors create more problems than they solve, and a critique of Roweis's and Forester's theoretical ideas is made, It is argued that these approaches rest upon idealist ontological assumptions, rendering explanation of qualitative change (development) impossible. Discussion of Giddens's concept of structuration and of the negative consequences for scientific explanation of Habermas's epistemological position is presented, as both approaches are used by Roweis and Forester. Criticism is also made of the separation of territorial relations from relations of substance. Finally, the serious consequences of their approaches for scientific and social practice are outlined. I conclude that this type of approach cannot provide a satisfactory basis for planning theory, and furthermore, that the approach is inherently conservative. Some ideas arc presented concerning planning theory based on materialist ontological foundations.


2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (4) ◽  
pp. 419-437 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roberto Rocco ◽  
Luciana Royer ◽  
Fábio Mariz Gonçalves

Zoo Biology ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 14 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael Hutchins ◽  
Kevin Willis ◽  
Robert J. Wiese

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document