Planning, history … and the environment?

IF 0.8 3区 历史学 0 ARCHITECTURE Planning Perspectives Pub Date : 2023-08-30 DOI:10.1080/02665433.2023.2248729
J. R. Gold, Margaret M. Gold
{"title":"Planning, history … and the environment?","authors":"J. R. Gold, Margaret M. Gold","doi":"10.1080/02665433.2023.2248729","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"We occasionally remind ourselves that Planning Perspectives’ subtitle states that it is ‘an international journal of history, planning and the environment’. Most of that needs little clarification. The journal’s international character is shown, issue by issue, by its contents and editorial board. There is also no doubt about its commitment to planning and history, given that the planning process studied historically is a required feature in the articles that we publish. Where the reminder is perhaps necessary stems from inclusion of the words ‘the environment’. When preceded by the definite article, a focus on the environment would seem to imply something rather different from what is normally seen in this journal – at least with regard to that term’s contemporary meaning and emotive associations. It might well suggest planning historians pursuing a critical ecological agenda, taking their place alongside other scholars interested in issues such as climate change, disease control, deforestation, desertification, landscape conservation, urban environmental quality, and equitable resource distribution. These, it must be confessed, are not themes commonly articulated in the pages of Planning Perspectives. Yet planning interventions are inherently concerned with environmental matters even if the focus for many planning historians has more often been on the scale of the plan and the vision of the planning process rather than environment per se. The study of environmental regulations, for example, is demonstrably important for planning history, whether the subject concerned is nineteenth-century sanitary reform, interwar suburbanization and green belts, linearity and urban growth, colonial and neo-colonial exploitation of resources, sustainability and smart growth principles, resilience and environmental justice, or a host of other issues. Two questions perhaps worth asking therefore are, first, what was originally meant when the word ‘environment’ was included in the journal’s sub-title? and, secondly, what could or should it mean today? The first question, unlike the second, is relatively easy to answer. Environmental debate was very different when Planning Perspectives was launched in the mid-1980s. Understandings of environment from that time were primarily linked to alerting a sceptical public about the dangers of an imminent environmental crisis and the need for global ecological security. Prior to the publication of the Brundtland Report and the establishment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – two landmark events dating from 1987 and 1988 respectively – environmentalist thought generally lacked the direction, conceptual sophistication, and evidence-backed clarity that it has latterly achieved. Against that background, it was perhaps inevitable that there would be a degree of imprecision about what might appear in the journal under the environmental banner; a lack of clarity that, incidentally, had a useful permissiveness for a new journal seeking copy from potential contributors. The editorial in the journal’s first issue (March 1986) provides mention of environment in relatively brief and non-specific terms through a series of capsule statements. Planning historians, it was argued, were inherently curious about ‘the processes by which our various environments","PeriodicalId":46569,"journal":{"name":"Planning Perspectives","volume":"38 1","pages":"925 - 928"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Planning Perspectives","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02665433.2023.2248729","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHITECTURE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

We occasionally remind ourselves that Planning Perspectives’ subtitle states that it is ‘an international journal of history, planning and the environment’. Most of that needs little clarification. The journal’s international character is shown, issue by issue, by its contents and editorial board. There is also no doubt about its commitment to planning and history, given that the planning process studied historically is a required feature in the articles that we publish. Where the reminder is perhaps necessary stems from inclusion of the words ‘the environment’. When preceded by the definite article, a focus on the environment would seem to imply something rather different from what is normally seen in this journal – at least with regard to that term’s contemporary meaning and emotive associations. It might well suggest planning historians pursuing a critical ecological agenda, taking their place alongside other scholars interested in issues such as climate change, disease control, deforestation, desertification, landscape conservation, urban environmental quality, and equitable resource distribution. These, it must be confessed, are not themes commonly articulated in the pages of Planning Perspectives. Yet planning interventions are inherently concerned with environmental matters even if the focus for many planning historians has more often been on the scale of the plan and the vision of the planning process rather than environment per se. The study of environmental regulations, for example, is demonstrably important for planning history, whether the subject concerned is nineteenth-century sanitary reform, interwar suburbanization and green belts, linearity and urban growth, colonial and neo-colonial exploitation of resources, sustainability and smart growth principles, resilience and environmental justice, or a host of other issues. Two questions perhaps worth asking therefore are, first, what was originally meant when the word ‘environment’ was included in the journal’s sub-title? and, secondly, what could or should it mean today? The first question, unlike the second, is relatively easy to answer. Environmental debate was very different when Planning Perspectives was launched in the mid-1980s. Understandings of environment from that time were primarily linked to alerting a sceptical public about the dangers of an imminent environmental crisis and the need for global ecological security. Prior to the publication of the Brundtland Report and the establishment of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change – two landmark events dating from 1987 and 1988 respectively – environmentalist thought generally lacked the direction, conceptual sophistication, and evidence-backed clarity that it has latterly achieved. Against that background, it was perhaps inevitable that there would be a degree of imprecision about what might appear in the journal under the environmental banner; a lack of clarity that, incidentally, had a useful permissiveness for a new journal seeking copy from potential contributors. The editorial in the journal’s first issue (March 1986) provides mention of environment in relatively brief and non-specific terms through a series of capsule statements. Planning historians, it was argued, were inherently curious about ‘the processes by which our various environments
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,历史 … 以及环境?
我们偶尔会提醒自己,《规划展望》的副标题是“一本关于历史、规划和环境的国际期刊”。其中大部分内容几乎不需要澄清。这本杂志的国际性通过其内容和编委会一期一期地展现出来。毫无疑问,它对规划和历史的承诺,因为历史研究的规划过程是我们发表的文章中的一个必要特征。提醒可能是必要的,这源于包含了“环境”这几个词。在这篇明确的文章之前,对环境的关注似乎意味着与本杂志上通常看到的截然不同的东西——至少在该术语的当代含义和情感联想方面是这样。这很可能建议规划历史学家追求一个关键的生态议程,与其他对气候变化、疾病控制、森林砍伐、荒漠化、景观保护、城市环境质量和公平资源分配等问题感兴趣的学者一起。必须承认,这些并不是《规划展望》页面中常见的主题。然而,规划干预措施本质上与环境问题有关,即使许多规划历史学家更多地关注规划的规模和规划过程的愿景,而不是环境本身。例如,对环境法规的研究对规划史来说显然很重要,无论涉及的主题是19世纪的卫生改革、两次世界大战之间的郊区化和绿化带、线性和城市增长、殖民地和新殖民地对资源的开发、可持续性和智能增长原则、韧性和环境正义,还是一系列其他问题。因此,也许值得问的两个问题是,首先,当“环境”一词被包含在期刊的副标题中时,最初的意思是什么?其次,它在今天可能意味着什么,或者应该意味着什么?与第二个问题不同,第一个问题相对容易回答。20世纪80年代中期,当《规划展望》推出时,关于环境的辩论大不相同。当时对环境的理解主要与提醒持怀疑态度的公众注意迫在眉睫的环境危机的危险和全球生态安全的必要性有关。在《布伦特兰报告》发表和政府间气候变化专门委员会成立之前——这两个具有里程碑意义的事件分别发生在1987年和1988年——环保主义思想普遍缺乏方向性、概念复杂性和证据支持的清晰性,而这正是它最近取得的成就。在这种背景下,也许不可避免的是,在环保的旗帜下,期刊上可能出现的内容会有一定程度的不精确性;顺便说一句,缺乏清晰度对一本新杂志寻求潜在撰稿人的拷贝有着有益的宽容。该杂志第一期(1986年3月)的社论通过一系列胶囊声明,以相对简短和不具体的措辞提到了环境。有人认为,规划历史学家天生就对“我们各种环境的过程”感到好奇
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
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
12.50%
发文量
85
期刊介绍: Planning Perspectives is a peer-reviewed international journal of history, planning and the environment, publishing historical and prospective articles on many aspects of plan making and implementation. Subjects covered link the interest of those working in economic, social and political history, historical geography and historical sociology with those in the applied fields of public health, housing construction, architecture and town planning. The Journal has a substantial book review section, covering UK, North American and European literature.
期刊最新文献
Unplanned rapid urban growth in Birjand, Iran (1986–2022) Concrete city: material flows and urbanization in West Africa Concrete city: material flows and urbanization in West Africa , by Armelle Choplin, New York, Wiley, 2023, 240 pp., US$35 (paperback) ‘The first rearguard battle’: an analysis of the autarkic (re)planning for Spanish grain agriculture, 1937–1959 The urban planning transformation of Jaffa: pre and post-1948 perspectives Sultanahmet, Istanbul’s historic peninsula: musealization and urban conservationPinar Aykaç, Sultanahmet, Istanbul’s historic peninsula: musealization and urban conservation , London, Lexington Books, 274 pp., US$105(hardcover)
×
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