新保守主义和对公平计划的批判

H. Mcgary
{"title":"新保守主义和对公平计划的批判","authors":"H. Mcgary","doi":"10.1080/1090377042000196038","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay examines neoconservative criticisms of equity planning, and the challenges against the right of government to regulate local development and land use. The specific concern of this essay is how, or if, local development administrators (equity planners), should use their discretionary powers to ensure that city officials and private developers promote and protect the interests of urban residents, particularly the poor and disadvantaged. The essay begins by discussing the alleged conflict said to exist between needy urban residents and the more secure urban taxpayers. The contrary views of equity planners are then reviewed, and the tensions within the neoconservative arguments are exposed and critiqued. Finally, the dispute between equity planners and neoconservatives is further explored by examining the dispute over the voucher system to address the problem of equal educational opportunity in urban communities.","PeriodicalId":431617,"journal":{"name":"Philosophy & Geography","volume":"29 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The new conservatism and the critique of equity planning\",\"authors\":\"H. Mcgary\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/1090377042000196038\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This essay examines neoconservative criticisms of equity planning, and the challenges against the right of government to regulate local development and land use. The specific concern of this essay is how, or if, local development administrators (equity planners), should use their discretionary powers to ensure that city officials and private developers promote and protect the interests of urban residents, particularly the poor and disadvantaged. The essay begins by discussing the alleged conflict said to exist between needy urban residents and the more secure urban taxpayers. The contrary views of equity planners are then reviewed, and the tensions within the neoconservative arguments are exposed and critiqued. Finally, the dispute between equity planners and neoconservatives is further explored by examining the dispute over the voucher system to address the problem of equal educational opportunity in urban communities.\",\"PeriodicalId\":431617,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Philosophy & Geography\",\"volume\":\"29 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2004-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Philosophy & Geography\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/1090377042000196038\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Philosophy & Geography","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/1090377042000196038","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

本文探讨了新保守主义对公平规划的批评,以及对政府监管地方发展和土地使用权利的挑战。本文特别关注的是,地方发展管理者(公平规划者)应该如何,或者是否应该使用他们的自由裁量权,以确保城市官员和私人开发商促进和保护城市居民的利益,特别是穷人和弱势群体的利益。这篇文章首先讨论了所谓的冲突,据说存在于贫困的城市居民和更安全的城市纳税人之间。然后回顾了公平计划者的相反观点,并暴露和批评了新保守主义论点中的紧张关系。最后,通过考察代金券制度在解决城市社区教育机会均等问题上的争议,进一步探讨了公平规划者与新保守主义者之间的争议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
The new conservatism and the critique of equity planning
This essay examines neoconservative criticisms of equity planning, and the challenges against the right of government to regulate local development and land use. The specific concern of this essay is how, or if, local development administrators (equity planners), should use their discretionary powers to ensure that city officials and private developers promote and protect the interests of urban residents, particularly the poor and disadvantaged. The essay begins by discussing the alleged conflict said to exist between needy urban residents and the more secure urban taxpayers. The contrary views of equity planners are then reviewed, and the tensions within the neoconservative arguments are exposed and critiqued. Finally, the dispute between equity planners and neoconservatives is further explored by examining the dispute over the voucher system to address the problem of equal educational opportunity in urban communities.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The ethics of metropolitan growth: A framework A vindication of the rights of brutes The self-fulfilling prophecies and global inequality Second thoughts on Gedachtes Wohnen In defense of homology and history: A response to Allen
×
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