| 1. |
- Calderon, Camilo, et al.
(författare)
-
Navigating swift and slow planning: planners' balancing act in the design of participatory processes
- 2024
-
Ingår i: European Planning Studies. - : Informa UK Limited. - 0965-4313 .- 1469-5944. ; 32, s. 390-409
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Pressing sustainability challenges and increased influence of neoliberal ideas in planning have resulted in strong demands to 'speed up', and increase efficiency in, planning processes. Meanwhile, the reported risks that such emphasis on speed have for participatory decision-making and continuous calls for increased deliberation in planning, following the ideas of communicative planning theory, suggest that planning processes ought to 'slow down'. These dual pressures for swift and slow planning have been discussed within Nordic planning studies as an 'either-or' tension by which decision-making processes are either swift yet exclusive and technical-based and/or market-driven or participatory and deliberative but time-consuming. This paper provides insights into how deliberative planners navigate the double pressure for swift and slow planning in the design of participatory planning processes. It is based on a case study in Uppsala, Sweden where demands for swift decision-making and for participation following deliberative ideals were noticeable. The case study shows planners striving in different ways to balance the contradicting demands for swift and slow planning through their process design choices. These findings provide inspiration to reimagine the deliberative turn in planning as a 'balancing act' between equally important demands for participation and deliberation, and for faster and more efficient planning.
|
|
| 2. |
- Joosse, Sofie, et al.
(författare)
-
Storytelling to save the planet: who gets to say what is sustainable, who tells the stories, and who should listen and change?
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Journal of Environmental Planning and Management. - 0964-0568 .- 1360-0559. ; 67, s. 1909-1927
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In the last decade, storytelling has been popularised as a method for societal sustainability transformations. With this growing popularity, there has also been a rapid increase in those identifying as storytellers. Perhaps because storytelling for sustainability has an innocent ring to it, it has not yet been studied from a power perspective. However, as it is fast-spreading and has explicit change purposes, it is important to clarify assumptions about knowledge, power and change. This article offers a first step towards understanding and evaluating the wide variety of applications behind the label of storytelling for sustainability. We perform a frame analysis of how storytellers describe their storytelling for sustainability. Our findings demonstrate that the label of storytelling for sustainability encompasses fundamentally different ideas about whose knowledge counts. The article raises critical questions that can help assess the legitimacy and appropriateness of different applications of storytelling for sustainability.
|
|
| 3. |
- Westin, Martin, et al.
(författare)
-
Between authority and argumentation: facilitators’ use of power in collaborative governance
- 2024
-
Ingår i: Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1523-908X .- 1522-7200. ; 67, s. 2055-2074
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Facilitators of collaborative governance structure communication between stakeholders. They influence the process and, in some instances, also the outcome of collaborative governance. Even so, facilitators are, in the literature and in practice, most often reduced to being neutral or seen merely as power sharers. This reductive understanding obscures facilititators' use of power. The purpose of this paper is to outline a nuanced understanding of authority in facilitation practice. We analyse a Swedish collaborative governance process where a governmental agency facilitates collaboration between actors with conflicting interests. We combine the work of Hannah Arendt and Mark Warren to study authority as relationally performed. We find that facilitators' use of power takes the form of a pendulum movement between authority and argumentation. Hence, authority and argumentation are linked, rather than incompatible, in facilitation practice. This paper sheds new light on the unrecognised, and yet influential, leadership role that facilitators play.
|
|
| 4. |
|
|
| 5. |
- Westin, Martin
(författare)
-
The framing of power in communicative planning theory: Analysing the work of John Forester, Patsy Healey and Judith Innes
- 2022
-
Ingår i: Planning Theory. - : SAGE Publications. - 1473-0952 .- 1741-3052. ; 21, s. 132-154
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- In this paper, I analyse the framing of power in streams of communicative planning influenced by American pragmatism, sociological institutionalism and alternative dispute resolution. While scholars have heavily debated Habermasian communicative planning theory, the broader conception of power across these linked, but distinct, streams of the theory remains to be explicated. Through analysis of 40 years' of publishing by John Forester, Patsy Healey and Judith Innes - widely cited representatives of these three streams - a broader account of the treatment of power in communicative planning is established. The analysis shows that the streams of communicative planning provide distinct approaches to power with a joint focus on criticising conflictual illegitimate power over and developing ideas for how consensual power with might arise through agency in the micro practices of planning. Even if communicative planning thereby offers more for reflections on power than critics have acknowledged, the theory still leaves conceptual voids regarding constitutive power to and legitimate power over.
|
|
| 6. |
- Calderon, Camilo, et al.
(författare)
-
Understanding context and its influence on collaborative planning processes : a contribution to communicative planning theory
- 2021
-
Ingår i: International Planning Studies. - : Taylor & Francis. - 1356-3475 .- 1469-9265. ; 26:1, s. 14-27
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- Communicative Planning Theory (CPT) has been heavily criticized for neglecting context and for not paying sufficient attention to how it influences collaborative planning. While some CPT scholars have attempted to address this critique, there are still limited insights into how context hinders or facilitates the realization of collaborative qualities in planning. The paper contributes to attempts to make CPT more attuned to context by focusing on how context influences specific collaborative processes. It develops an approach that sees collaborative processes as embedded in and shaped by the immediate interplay between institutions and agency. The approach is demonstrated in the analysis of two collaborative planning processes in Ahmedabad, India and Bloemfontein, South Africa. The paper argues for the need to look at the interplay between institutional and agential factors when analysing context. It also highlights the important role that agency plays in mediating the influence of context in specific planning processes.
|
|
| 7. |
- Westin, Martin, 1974-, et al.
(författare)
-
"Let us be led by the residents": Swedish dialogue experts' stories about power, justification and ambivalence
- 2021
-
Ingår i: Nordic Journal of Urban Studies. - : Scandinavian University Press / Universitetsforlaget AS. - 2703-8866. ; 1, s. 113-130
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- This paper focuses on the practices of an emerging group of practitioners in Swedish urban governance: dialogue experts. As dialogical ideals have been mainstreamed in planning policies, civil servants and governance consultants have been increasingly commissioned to engage in dialogue with citizens within public deliberation, planning consultations or citizens budgeting. Even though these practitioners influence the whys, whats and hows of urban development, their practices remain curiously under-explored in Nordic urban studies. Dialogue experts experience the practical dilemma of being experts in a practice that has developed as a reaction to expert-rule and top-down power. We inquire into this dilemma together with a group of dialogue experts who work within an urban development scheme in the district of Gottsunda in Uppsala, Sweden. We ask: how do dialogue experts make sense of their use of power in dialogues with citizens? We explore whether analysing dialogue practice through the concepts of power and justification might explain the practical dilemmas confronted by dialogue experts. By engaging in joint inquiry with the practitioners in a series of focus groups, we learn that the practitioners are inclined to critique power relations that exclude marginalised voices from urban planning but find it more difficult to justify their own use of power in pursuit of a more inclusive governance system. The dialogue experts employ two types of justification for their use of power: an advocative justification, which revolves around aspirations to change the planning system to include marginalised voices, and a more conventional bureaucratic justification, by which they merely execute the will of elected politicians and follow established planning procedures. Even so, the practitioners remain ambivalent about their use of power. Hence, we demonstrate how power theory and joint inquiry between practitioners and researchers can shed new light on the practical dilemmas in dialogue practice.
|
|
| 8. |
- Hellquist, Alexander, 1980-, et al.
(författare)
-
Att utvärdera samverkan : Varför, vem, vad, hur?
- 2020
-
Rapport (populärvet., debatt m.m.)abstract
- Denna text utgör en del av avrapporteringen av uppdrag inom Naturvårdsverkets ramavtal för Konsultstöd för stärkt samverkansförmåga (avropsnummer NV-08990-19).Syftet med rapporten är:I) att presentera en modell för utvärdering av samverkan baserad på a) medvetna val av vem som designar, genomför och deltar i utvärdering, b) relevanta utvärderingskriterier och c) exempel på användbara utvärderingsmetoder, samtII) att presentera principer som kan användas för att avgöra när samverkan är en lämplig arbetsform.Rapporten inleds med definitioner och en reflektion kring vilken roll vi ser att utvärdering har i samverkan. De följande avsnitten är uppdelade utifrån tre grundfrågor avseende utvärdering av samverkan: vem, vad och hur. Frågorna behandlar vilka som utvärderar och deltar i utvärderingen (vem), möjliga utvärderingskriterier (vad) samt exempel på metoder (hur).Därefter presenteras vi två konceptuella verktyg som kan stödja beslut om när samverkan är en lämplig arbetsform. Verktygen är tänkta att i) klargöra möjliga syften med samverkan och i vilken utsträckning dessa syften kan uppnås med andra arbetsformer, och ii) möjliggöra en analys av om förutsättningarna för samverkan är tillräckliga.Rapporten baseras på tidigare forskning; rapporter från utvärderingar av samverkan i svensk offentlig sektor; två fokusgruppsamtal med personal vid Naturvårdsverket samt rapportförfattarnas erfarenheter av att leda och utvärdera samverkansprocesser.
|
|
| 9. |
|
|
| 10. |
- Joosse, Sofie, et al.
(författare)
-
Critical, Engaged and Change-oriented Scholarship in Environmental Communication. Six Methodological Dilemmas to Think with
- 2020
-
Ingår i: Environmental Communication. - : Informa UK Limited. - 1752-4032 .- 1752-4040. ; 14, s. 758-771
-
Tidskriftsartikel (refereegranskat)abstract
- While calls for critical, engaged and change-oriented scholarship in environmental communication (EC) abound, few articles discuss what this may practically entail. With this article, we aim to contribute to a discussion in EC about the methodological implications of such scholarship. Based on our combined experience in EC research and drawing from a variety of academic fields, we describe six methodological dilemmas that we encounter in our research practice and that we believe are inherent to such scholarship. These dilemmas are (1) grasping communication; (2) representing others; (3) involving people in research; (4) co-producing knowledge; (5) engaging critically; and (6) relating to conflict. This article does not offer solutions to these complex dilemmas. Rather, our dilemma descriptions are meant to help researchers think through methodological issues in critical, engaged and change-oriented EC research. The article also helps to translate the dilemmas to the reality of research projects through a set of questions, aimed to support a sensitivity to, and understanding of, the dilemmas in context.
|
|
