Comparing Spatial Planning Systems and Planning Cultures in Europe. The Need for a Multi-scalar Approach
Panagiotis Getimis
Abstract
Panagiotis Getimis
Abstract
The article argues that in order to understand changes in planning systems and planning cultures in Europe, there is need to adopt a multi-scalar approach with different entry points of analysis. This should give emphasis to the overlooked aspects of actor constellation, knowledge and policy styles. Without neglecting the importance of institutional and legal contexts of spatial planning the comparative analysis should focus on the changes emerging in actor arenas, at different scales of planning practices (project/local, city, regional, cross/border and the national level). Furthermore, the cultural features of planning, the different steering styles and the norms, values, belief systems, visions and frames of the actors involved in the planning process are significant. Adiachronic historical analysis is needed in order to compare changes of planning systems and cultures between different places.
OpenAlex reports 109 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
The article argues that in order to understand changes in planning systems and planning cultures in Europe, there is need to adopt a multi-scalar approach with different entry points of analysis. This should give emphasis to the overlooked aspects of actor constellation, knowledge and policy styles. Without neglecting the importance of institutional and legal contexts of spatial planning the comparative analysis should focus on the changes emerging in actor arenas, at different scales of planning practices (project/local, city, regional, cross/border and the national level). Furthermore, the cultural features of planning, the different steering styles and the norms, values, belief systems, visions and frames of the actors involved in the planning process are significant. Adiachronic historical analysis is needed in order to compare changes of planning systems and cultures between different places.
Key concepts: Spatial planning, Vision, Business system planning, Order (exchange), Land-use planning, Political science, Process management, Local planning