{"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}
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.
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