Planning principles and particular places: planners’ and campaigners’ perspectives on motivations for popular support of the green belt

Charles Goode
{"title":"Planning principles and particular places: planners’ and campaigners’ perspectives on motivations for popular support of the green belt","authors":"Charles Goode","doi":"10.3828/tpr.2021.37","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nWith many countries around the world facing deepening housing crises and searching for ways of increasing the public acceptability of new house building, academics, planners, and policy makers have generally focused on the material, economic motivations of campaigners and the public in opposing development. This article, which focuses on the green belt planning policy in England, but with wider relevance for house building internationally, argues that whilst considerations of material ‘property’ are sometimes a poignant motivation for campaigners, planners identified more normative concerns surrounding the ‘fear of change’ as equally important. Alongside campaigners themselves, planners stressed the importance of general planning ‘principles’, especially protection of the countryside and green belt, as well as local, ‘place’ concerns about development ‘changing the character’ of an area and its effects on local facilities/services. The article reflects on the need for planners and policy makers to pay more attention to principles and place attachment in policy formulation regarding house building, whilst more effective integration of different aspects of the planning system is needed to address campaigners’ more materialistic concerns about the effects of development on local services.","PeriodicalId":266698,"journal":{"name":"Town Planning Review: Volume ahead-of-print","volume":"48 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Town Planning Review: Volume ahead-of-print","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2021.37","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

With many countries around the world facing deepening housing crises and searching for ways of increasing the public acceptability of new house building, academics, planners, and policy makers have generally focused on the material, economic motivations of campaigners and the public in opposing development. This article, which focuses on the green belt planning policy in England, but with wider relevance for house building internationally, argues that whilst considerations of material ‘property’ are sometimes a poignant motivation for campaigners, planners identified more normative concerns surrounding the ‘fear of change’ as equally important. Alongside campaigners themselves, planners stressed the importance of general planning ‘principles’, especially protection of the countryside and green belt, as well as local, ‘place’ concerns about development ‘changing the character’ of an area and its effects on local facilities/services. The article reflects on the need for planners and policy makers to pay more attention to principles and place attachment in policy formulation regarding house building, whilst more effective integration of different aspects of the planning system is needed to address campaigners’ more materialistic concerns about the effects of development on local services.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
规划原则和特定地点:规划者和活动家对公众支持绿化带动机的看法
随着世界上许多国家面临日益严重的住房危机,并寻求提高公众对新建住房的接受度的方法,学者、规划师和政策制定者普遍关注活动家和公众反对开发的物质、经济动机。这篇文章关注的是英格兰的绿带规划政策,但与国际上的房屋建设有更广泛的相关性,文章认为,虽然对物质“财产”的考虑有时是活动家的一个尖锐的动机,但规划者认为,围绕“对变化的恐惧”的规范性关注同样重要。除了活动人士,规划人员还强调了总体规划“原则”的重要性,特别是对农村和绿化带的保护,以及对发展“改变一个地区的特征”及其对当地设施/服务的影响的地方“地方”关注。这篇文章反映了规划者和政策制定者在房屋建设政策制定中需要更多地关注原则和地方依恋,同时需要更有效地整合规划系统的不同方面,以解决活动家对发展对当地服务的影响的更唯物主义的关注。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Evaluating the design of integral urban regeneration plans: combining policy evaluability and plan quality approaches to analyse complex urban policies Can the marooned flagship of local democracy in English planning be refloated? The case of neighbourhood planning Climate resilience and environmental justice: state of research and implementation in planning practice in Germany and beyond Land valuation and land policy: implications of normative bias From Calatrava to the ‘Concha Piquer’ effect: policy change, unintended impacts of the ‘creative city’, and factors leading to cultural management inertia in València
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1