Planning the post-political city: exploring public participation in the contemporary Australian city

This special section examines the possibility of meaningful debate and contestation over urban decisions and futures in politically constrained contexts. In doing so, it moves with the post-political times: critically examining the proliferation of deliber- ative mechanisms; identifying the informal assemblages of diverse actors taking on new roles in urban socio-spatial justice; and illuminating the spaces where informal and formal planning processes meet. These questions are particularly pertinent for understanding the processes shaping Australian cities and public participation today

Unsettling planning theory

Recent political developments in many parts of the world seem likely to exacerbate rather than ameliorate the planetary-scale challenges of social polarization, inequality and environmental change societies face. In this unconventional multi-authored essay, we therefore seek to explore some of the ways in which planning theory might respond to the deeply unsettling times we live in. Taking the multiple, suggestive possibilities of the theme of unsettlement as a starting point, we aim to create space for reflection and debate about the state of the discipline and practice of planning theory, questioning what it means to produce knowledge capable of acting on the world today. Drawing on exchanges at a workshop attended by a group of emerging scholars in Portland, Oregon in late 2016, the essay begins with an introduction section exploring the contemporary resonances of ‘unsettling’ in, of and for planning theory. This is followed by four, individually authored responses which each connect the idea of unsettlement to key challenges and possible future directions. We end by calling for a reflective practice of theorizing that accepts unsettlement but seeks to act knowingly and compassionately on the uneven terrain that it creates

Is there a crisis of participatory planning?

The critical literature on participation warns that a focus on ‘consensus’ evades the political in planning, preventing citizens from confronting and challenging discourse and prevailing orthodoxy about the way the urban ought to be constituted. These critiques raise important questions about the efficacy of participatory planning and its political formation. Moreover, the extent to which citizen’s participation can ever challenge dominant trajectories has reached a point of conceptual ‘crisis’. In this article, I explore the different ways in which participation manifests from the politicising participatory moments in planning. Examining a single case study in Melbourne, Australia, I draw upon 15 key informant interviews with community campaigners who mounted a successful campaign to defeat the controversial East West Link road project. By examining the formal and informal political manifestations of participation over a period of 2 years, this article challenges the sentiment that there is a crisis of participatory planning. It shows how decisions to engage the citizenry in prescribed ways induce other manifestations and formations of citizen’s participation through politics and how these manifestations garner a pervasive and influential trajectory to reshape participatory planning.</jats:p

De-politicising and re-politicising transport infrastructure futures

The planning for future transport and its infrastructure is deeply political. Yet, how we understand re-politicisation, and what those efforts tell us about what is political in the planning for future cities, remains under explored. One lens through which to explore these acts is to consider the role of urban coalitions in drawing attention to the dominant politics of planning and setting the ground for the re-politicisation of transport infrastructure futures. Drawing on the work of post-foundational scholars Mouffe and Rancière, this paper examines the interplay between de-politicisation and re-politicisation and how two urban coalitions negotiated this landscape in the Greater Toronto and Hamilton Area during a sustained period of contestation surrounding the proposal of new transport infrastructure. Through this analysis, this paper draws on in-depth interviews with coalition members, transport planners, politicians and engaged citizens to illustrate how these urban coalitions produced a ‘collective will’ and a struggle towards a ‘consensus cure’ in their re-politicising actions. This paper reveals how coalition-led re-politicisation establishes the grounds for the politics to shift on contested future transport proposals and offers insight into the incremental and oftentimes incomplete ways re-politicisation nurtures transformational change.</jats:p

Book review: 'Regional planning for open space', edited by Arnold van der Valk and Terry van Dijk

Review of the book: 'Regional planning for open space', edited by Arnold van der Valk and Terry van Dijk, published by Routledge, 2009