Producing and Contesting Meanings of Participation in Planning: The Case of Singapore (1985–2020)

IF 2.4 3区 社会学 Q2 URBAN STUDIES Urban Affairs Review Pub Date : 2022-10-09 DOI:10.1177/10780874221130530
January Lim, Angeliki Paidakaki, H. Verschure, P. van den Broeck
{"title":"Producing and Contesting Meanings of Participation in Planning: The Case of Singapore (1985–2020)","authors":"January Lim, Angeliki Paidakaki, H. Verschure, P. van den Broeck","doi":"10.1177/10780874221130530","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This paper examines how the concept of participation in planning has been constructed by state and nonstate actors in the politico-institutional context of Singapore. Our objective is to gain a deeper understanding of the political dynamics shaping ideas about participation, and the impact of these contested constructions on the perpetuation of the ruling party's political control. Drawing on strategic-relational institutionalist planning and cultural political economy theories, we analyze 312 documents including government and civil society periodicals, parliamentary debates, and academic publications, focusing on the planning and participatory practices of Singapore's national planning agency from the mid-1980s to 2020. The findings reveal that state-led coalitions continuously reframed participation as an instrument of economic growth, nation-building, and activism-management, while nonstate-led coalitions emerged to transform state-civil society relations through promoting and materializing alternative meanings of participation. These dynamics demonstrate the potentialities and limitations of democratizing urban planning and governance in Singapore's hybrid regime.","PeriodicalId":51427,"journal":{"name":"Urban Affairs Review","volume":"59 1","pages":"1775 - 1808"},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Urban Affairs Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10780874221130530","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"URBAN STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This paper examines how the concept of participation in planning has been constructed by state and nonstate actors in the politico-institutional context of Singapore. Our objective is to gain a deeper understanding of the political dynamics shaping ideas about participation, and the impact of these contested constructions on the perpetuation of the ruling party's political control. Drawing on strategic-relational institutionalist planning and cultural political economy theories, we analyze 312 documents including government and civil society periodicals, parliamentary debates, and academic publications, focusing on the planning and participatory practices of Singapore's national planning agency from the mid-1980s to 2020. The findings reveal that state-led coalitions continuously reframed participation as an instrument of economic growth, nation-building, and activism-management, while nonstate-led coalitions emerged to transform state-civil society relations through promoting and materializing alternative meanings of participation. These dynamics demonstrate the potentialities and limitations of democratizing urban planning and governance in Singapore's hybrid regime.
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
参与规划意义的产生与质疑——以新加坡为例(1985-2020)
本文考察了在新加坡的政治制度背景下,国家和非国家行为者是如何构建参与规划的概念的。我们的目标是更深入地了解塑造参与理念的政治动态,以及这些有争议的结构对执政党政治控制权永久化的影响。借鉴战略关系制度主义规划和文化政治经济学理论,我们分析了312份文件,包括政府和民间社会期刊、议会辩论和学术出版物,重点关注新加坡国家规划机构从20世纪80年代中期到2020年的规划和参与实践。研究结果表明,国家领导的联盟不断将参与重新定义为经济增长、国家建设和行动主义管理的工具,而非国家领导的联合则通过促进和具体化参与的替代意义来改变国家与民间社会的关系。这些动态表明,在新加坡的混合制度中,城市规划和治理民主化的潜力和局限性。
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
Urban Affairs Review
Urban Affairs Review URBAN STUDIES-
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
14.30%
发文量
48
期刊介绍: Urban Affairs Reveiw (UAR) is a leading scholarly journal on urban issues and themes. For almost five decades scholars, researchers, policymakers, planners, and administrators have turned to UAR for the latest international research and empirical analysis on the programs and policies that shape our cities. UAR covers: urban policy; urban economic development; residential and community development; governance and service delivery; comparative/international urban research; and social, spatial, and cultural dynamics.
期刊最新文献
Creating Local “Citizen's Governance Spaces” in Austerity Contexts : Food Recuperation and Urban Gardening in Montréal (Canada) as Ways to Pragmatically Invent Alternatives Explaining Value Capture Implementation in New York, London, and Copenhagen: Negotiating Distributional Effects Examining the Smart City Generational Model: Conceptualizations, Implementations, and Infrastructure Canada's Smart City Challenge Celebrating Sixty Years of Urban Affairs Review with a Look at the 1970s and Street-Level Bureaucracy Whose Neighborhood Needs? Assessing the Spatial Distribution of Federal Community Development Funds
×
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