规划系统中的网络、权力和知识:废物能源的案例研究

IF 5 1区 经济学 Q1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Progress in Planning Pub Date : 2017-04-01 DOI:10.1016/j.progress.2015.12.001
Nick Hacking , Andrew Flynn
{"title":"规划系统中的网络、权力和知识:废物能源的案例研究","authors":"Nick Hacking ,&nbsp;Andrew Flynn","doi":"10.1016/j.progress.2015.12.001","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Understanding the nature of power relations has been integral to debates in planning theory and planning practice since the 1960s. Current theoretical approaches to planning and power have evolved to a state of pluralism which impacts upon how planning is conceived of and practiced. We seek to examine power relations and knowledge via a multidisciplinary case study of an energy-from-waste (EfW) development based in South Wales. Centred on a highly contested technology, incineration, this case study incorporates in-depth, longitudinal interview data with social network analysis to build up a picture of competing framings of environmental health risk. In local environmental debates, planners are expected to be able to help resolve competition between conflicting interests and yet, in reality, such conflicts often appear intractable and have long been dubbed wicked problems. This is especially the case for waste management. In our in-depth case study, significant pre-existing power relations existed between the local planning authority (LPA), which was also the lead co-developer in the EfW project, and the local community. In terms of methods, we have been keen to unearth data that allows us to explore the nature of institutional and networked power as it plays out within a community over time. It is our contention that too often the dynamics of power have been underplayed because it is studied as a snapshot rather than over time. Here we have utilised a variety of methods – from key person interviews to social network analysis – to examine the application for development, the operation of the EfW and the closure of the plant – over a ten year time frame. By drawing upon a rich database we can better understand the ways in which, in the case of particularly contentious developments, power relations greatly hampered efforts at public participation. Our nuanced methodological approach reveals empirical evidence for tensions in theoretical approaches to power relations in the planning arena and we can identify how debates can move forward based on a more geographically informed perspective.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47399,"journal":{"name":"Progress in Planning","volume":"113 ","pages":"Pages 1-37"},"PeriodicalIF":5.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.progress.2015.12.001","citationCount":"13","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Networks, power and knowledge in the planning system: A case study of energy from waste\",\"authors\":\"Nick Hacking ,&nbsp;Andrew Flynn\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.progress.2015.12.001\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Understanding the nature of power relations has been integral to debates in planning theory and planning practice since the 1960s. Current theoretical approaches to planning and power have evolved to a state of pluralism which impacts upon how planning is conceived of and practiced. We seek to examine power relations and knowledge via a multidisciplinary case study of an energy-from-waste (EfW) development based in South Wales. Centred on a highly contested technology, incineration, this case study incorporates in-depth, longitudinal interview data with social network analysis to build up a picture of competing framings of environmental health risk. In local environmental debates, planners are expected to be able to help resolve competition between conflicting interests and yet, in reality, such conflicts often appear intractable and have long been dubbed wicked problems. This is especially the case for waste management. In our in-depth case study, significant pre-existing power relations existed between the local planning authority (LPA), which was also the lead co-developer in the EfW project, and the local community. In terms of methods, we have been keen to unearth data that allows us to explore the nature of institutional and networked power as it plays out within a community over time. It is our contention that too often the dynamics of power have been underplayed because it is studied as a snapshot rather than over time. Here we have utilised a variety of methods – from key person interviews to social network analysis – to examine the application for development, the operation of the EfW and the closure of the plant – over a ten year time frame. By drawing upon a rich database we can better understand the ways in which, in the case of particularly contentious developments, power relations greatly hampered efforts at public participation. Our nuanced methodological approach reveals empirical evidence for tensions in theoretical approaches to power relations in the planning arena and we can identify how debates can move forward based on a more geographically informed perspective.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47399,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Progress in Planning\",\"volume\":\"113 \",\"pages\":\"Pages 1-37\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.progress.2015.12.001\",\"citationCount\":\"13\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Progress in Planning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305900615300015\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Progress in Planning","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0305900615300015","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 13

摘要

自20世纪60年代以来,理解权力关系的本质一直是规划理论和规划实践辩论中不可或缺的一部分。目前关于规划和权力的理论方法已经发展到一种多元化的状态,这影响了规划的构思和实践。我们试图检查权力关系和知识通过一个多学科的案例研究,能源从废物(EfW)的发展基于南威尔士。本案例研究以高度竞争的焚烧技术为中心,将深入的纵向访谈数据与社会网络分析相结合,以建立环境健康风险竞争框架的图景。在当地的环境辩论中,规划者被期望能够帮助解决利益冲突之间的竞争,然而,在现实中,这种冲突往往看起来难以解决,长期以来一直被称为邪恶的问题。在废物管理方面尤其如此。在我们深入的案例研究中,当地规划当局(LPA)与当地社区之间存在着重要的预先存在的权力关系,LPA也是EfW项目的主要共同开发商。在方法方面,我们一直热衷于挖掘数据,使我们能够探索机构和网络权力的本质,因为它在一个社区中随着时间的推移而发挥作用。我们的论点是,权力的动态常常被低估,因为它是作为一个快照而不是随着时间的推移来研究的。在这里,我们使用了各种方法-从关键人物访谈到社会网络分析-来审查申请发展,EfW的运作和工厂的关闭-超过十年的时间框架。通过利用丰富的数据库,我们可以更好地理解,在特别有争议的发展的情况下,权力关系如何极大地阻碍了公众参与的努力。我们细致入微的方法方法揭示了规划领域权力关系理论方法中的紧张关系的经验证据,我们可以确定辩论如何基于更地理信息的视角向前推进。
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
Networks, power and knowledge in the planning system: A case study of energy from waste

Understanding the nature of power relations has been integral to debates in planning theory and planning practice since the 1960s. Current theoretical approaches to planning and power have evolved to a state of pluralism which impacts upon how planning is conceived of and practiced. We seek to examine power relations and knowledge via a multidisciplinary case study of an energy-from-waste (EfW) development based in South Wales. Centred on a highly contested technology, incineration, this case study incorporates in-depth, longitudinal interview data with social network analysis to build up a picture of competing framings of environmental health risk. In local environmental debates, planners are expected to be able to help resolve competition between conflicting interests and yet, in reality, such conflicts often appear intractable and have long been dubbed wicked problems. This is especially the case for waste management. In our in-depth case study, significant pre-existing power relations existed between the local planning authority (LPA), which was also the lead co-developer in the EfW project, and the local community. In terms of methods, we have been keen to unearth data that allows us to explore the nature of institutional and networked power as it plays out within a community over time. It is our contention that too often the dynamics of power have been underplayed because it is studied as a snapshot rather than over time. Here we have utilised a variety of methods – from key person interviews to social network analysis – to examine the application for development, the operation of the EfW and the closure of the plant – over a ten year time frame. By drawing upon a rich database we can better understand the ways in which, in the case of particularly contentious developments, power relations greatly hampered efforts at public participation. Our nuanced methodological approach reveals empirical evidence for tensions in theoretical approaches to power relations in the planning arena and we can identify how debates can move forward based on a more geographically informed perspective.

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
CiteScore
10.70
自引率
1.60%
发文量
26
审稿时长
34 days
期刊介绍: Progress in Planning is a multidisciplinary journal of research monographs offering a convenient and rapid outlet for extended papers in the field of spatial and environmental planning. Each issue comprises a single monograph of between 25,000 and 35,000 words. The journal is fully peer reviewed, has a global readership, and has been in publication since 1972.
期刊最新文献
Editorial Board Editorial Board Editorial Board Immigrants, slums, and housing policy: The spatial dispersal of the Ethiopian population in Israel Editorial Board
×
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