{"title":"权力动力学和自组织城市主义。一个评论","authors":"Maisa Totry","doi":"10.1177/14730952231196332","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the last two decades, there has been significant growth in the body of knowledge that views the urban environment as a complex system. In her article Patterns of Self-organization in the Context of Urban Planning: Reconsidering Venues of Participation, Eizenberg,s (2019) critically investigates the phenomenon of self-organization within urban planning. By examining participating venues through the lens of power structures in self-organization dynamics, the article presents crucial inquiries for future studies in urban complexity. This comment traces the fundamental assumptions underlying Eisenberg’s analytical approach and attempts to further investigate the interplay between formal planning, urban complexity, and social structure. In addition, this discussion suggests that the correlation between the two theoretical frameworks of power structure and self-organization presents new perspectives on both paradigms. Firstly, fundamental assumptions about formal planning, urban development, and social structure within the framework of complexity theory need to be identified. While a precise definition of a complex system remains elusive, the characteristics of such a system are in consensus. It typically comprises of numerous elements or agents operating across various scales with interdependencies that influence each other. The interconnectedness and interdependence of these elements pose challenges regarding predictability and control. The absence of centralized control in the constant exchange of information, goods, and other resources among various entities enables the emergence of spontaneous order. The mentioned order, which emerges at the local level, engages in interactions with other systems and, as a result of feedback loops, generates novel organizational patterns at higher levels forming a self-organization system (Portugali, 1999). When this theory is applied to the urban system, it holds basic assumptions that, different from rational long-term plan-based planning, such a system is too complex and cannot be controlled or predicted. Specifically, as a plan becomes more precise, its","PeriodicalId":47713,"journal":{"name":"Planning Theory","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Power dynamics and self-organizing urbanism. A comment\",\"authors\":\"Maisa Totry\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/14730952231196332\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the last two decades, there has been significant growth in the body of knowledge that views the urban environment as a complex system. In her article Patterns of Self-organization in the Context of Urban Planning: Reconsidering Venues of Participation, Eizenberg,s (2019) critically investigates the phenomenon of self-organization within urban planning. By examining participating venues through the lens of power structures in self-organization dynamics, the article presents crucial inquiries for future studies in urban complexity. This comment traces the fundamental assumptions underlying Eisenberg’s analytical approach and attempts to further investigate the interplay between formal planning, urban complexity, and social structure. In addition, this discussion suggests that the correlation between the two theoretical frameworks of power structure and self-organization presents new perspectives on both paradigms. Firstly, fundamental assumptions about formal planning, urban development, and social structure within the framework of complexity theory need to be identified. While a precise definition of a complex system remains elusive, the characteristics of such a system are in consensus. It typically comprises of numerous elements or agents operating across various scales with interdependencies that influence each other. The interconnectedness and interdependence of these elements pose challenges regarding predictability and control. The absence of centralized control in the constant exchange of information, goods, and other resources among various entities enables the emergence of spontaneous order. The mentioned order, which emerges at the local level, engages in interactions with other systems and, as a result of feedback loops, generates novel organizational patterns at higher levels forming a self-organization system (Portugali, 1999). When this theory is applied to the urban system, it holds basic assumptions that, different from rational long-term plan-based planning, such a system is too complex and cannot be controlled or predicted. Specifically, as a plan becomes more precise, its\",\"PeriodicalId\":47713,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Planning Theory\",\"volume\":\"21 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-10-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Planning Theory\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952231196332\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Planning Theory","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952231196332","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING","Score":null,"Total":0}
Power dynamics and self-organizing urbanism. A comment
In the last two decades, there has been significant growth in the body of knowledge that views the urban environment as a complex system. In her article Patterns of Self-organization in the Context of Urban Planning: Reconsidering Venues of Participation, Eizenberg,s (2019) critically investigates the phenomenon of self-organization within urban planning. By examining participating venues through the lens of power structures in self-organization dynamics, the article presents crucial inquiries for future studies in urban complexity. This comment traces the fundamental assumptions underlying Eisenberg’s analytical approach and attempts to further investigate the interplay between formal planning, urban complexity, and social structure. In addition, this discussion suggests that the correlation between the two theoretical frameworks of power structure and self-organization presents new perspectives on both paradigms. Firstly, fundamental assumptions about formal planning, urban development, and social structure within the framework of complexity theory need to be identified. While a precise definition of a complex system remains elusive, the characteristics of such a system are in consensus. It typically comprises of numerous elements or agents operating across various scales with interdependencies that influence each other. The interconnectedness and interdependence of these elements pose challenges regarding predictability and control. The absence of centralized control in the constant exchange of information, goods, and other resources among various entities enables the emergence of spontaneous order. The mentioned order, which emerges at the local level, engages in interactions with other systems and, as a result of feedback loops, generates novel organizational patterns at higher levels forming a self-organization system (Portugali, 1999). When this theory is applied to the urban system, it holds basic assumptions that, different from rational long-term plan-based planning, such a system is too complex and cannot be controlled or predicted. Specifically, as a plan becomes more precise, its
期刊介绍:
Planning Theory is an international peer-reviewed forum for the critical exploration of planning theory. The journal publishes the very best research covering the latest debates and developments within the field. A core publication for planning theorists, the journal will also be of considerable interest to scholars of human geography, public administration, administrative science, sociology and anthropology.