为谁而不是与谁在一起——目标受众如何在有争议的规划中帮助确定框架动态

IF 2 Q3 REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING Planning Practice and Research Pub Date : 2023-07-04 DOI:10.1080/02697459.2023.2238385
Kim Carlotta von Schönfeld
{"title":"为谁而不是与谁在一起——目标受众如何在有争议的规划中帮助确定框架动态","authors":"Kim Carlotta von Schönfeld","doi":"10.1080/02697459.2023.2238385","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT This article considers the contested case of the Minhocão, São Paulo, to be either removed or turned into a park. The case provides insights for framing and planning literature. It is analysed through interviews, and media and document analysis. The results show that the involved actors adopt different framing strategies: adaptive, coherent, or deliberative. Each strategy has particular intended and actual audiences that help explain the dynamics of participatory contestation. Each strategy reveals choices in dealing with adversaries, who are present, and with intended audiences, who are largely absent. And each strategy has specific repercussions for learning and planning outcomes.","PeriodicalId":54201,"journal":{"name":"Planning Practice and Research","volume":"38 1","pages":"541 - 563"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Who for rather than who with - how intended audiences help determine framing dynamics in contested planning\",\"authors\":\"Kim Carlotta von Schönfeld\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/02697459.2023.2238385\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"ABSTRACT This article considers the contested case of the Minhocão, São Paulo, to be either removed or turned into a park. The case provides insights for framing and planning literature. It is analysed through interviews, and media and document analysis. The results show that the involved actors adopt different framing strategies: adaptive, coherent, or deliberative. Each strategy has particular intended and actual audiences that help explain the dynamics of participatory contestation. Each strategy reveals choices in dealing with adversaries, who are present, and with intended audiences, who are largely absent. And each strategy has specific repercussions for learning and planning outcomes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":54201,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Planning Practice and Research\",\"volume\":\"38 1\",\"pages\":\"541 - 563\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-07-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Planning Practice and Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2023.2238385\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Planning Practice and Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2023.2238385","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要本文考虑了圣保罗Minhocão的争议案件,该案件要么被拆除,要么被改建为公园。该案例为框架和规划文献提供了见解。它通过访谈、媒体和文件分析进行分析。结果表明,参与者采用了不同的框架策略:适应性、连贯性或审慎性。每种策略都有特定的预期和实际受众,有助于解释参与式竞争的动态。每一种策略都揭示了在与在场的对手和基本上缺席的目标受众打交道时的选择。每种策略都会对学习和规划结果产生具体影响。
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
Who for rather than who with - how intended audiences help determine framing dynamics in contested planning
ABSTRACT This article considers the contested case of the Minhocão, São Paulo, to be either removed or turned into a park. The case provides insights for framing and planning literature. It is analysed through interviews, and media and document analysis. The results show that the involved actors adopt different framing strategies: adaptive, coherent, or deliberative. Each strategy has particular intended and actual audiences that help explain the dynamics of participatory contestation. Each strategy reveals choices in dealing with adversaries, who are present, and with intended audiences, who are largely absent. And each strategy has specific repercussions for learning and planning outcomes.
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
Planning Practice and Research
Planning Practice and Research REGIONAL & URBAN PLANNING-
CiteScore
3.60
自引率
18.80%
发文量
44
期刊介绍: Over the last decade, Planning Practice & Research (PPR) has established itself as the source for information on current research in planning practice. It is intended for reflective, critical academics, professionals and students who are concerned to keep abreast of and challenge current thinking. PPR is committed to: •bridging the gaps between planning research, practice and education, and between different planning systems •providing a forum for an international readership to discuss and review research on planning practice
期刊最新文献
Scenario planning and planning support systems tested in a graduate-level planning studio in Bogotá The (unprivileged) polluter pays: Conflict of Rights in Delhi’s stormwater drain-adjacent ‘informal’ settlements Civilizing practices and created spaces: resistance processes in the San Francisco (Paraguay) and Ismael Silva-Zé Keti (Brazil) housing projects Shifts in planning tradition amid an economic crisis and in light of a planning reform: the case of Greece ‘What planners don’t do is plan’: recovering the English strategic spatial planning imagination
×
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