冲突解决中的关键问题和观点

Ira Saletan
{"title":"冲突解决中的关键问题和观点","authors":"Ira Saletan","doi":"10.5070/bp31113215","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The equitable, rational resolution of conflict is unarguably a gen­ eric objective of planning-whether the conflict concerns the appropriate use of physical and social resources or the relative power of individuals in the decision-making process. Thus it is not surprising to find that alternative forms of conflict resolution which promise more optimal outcomes than traditional regulatory and legal mechanisms find their adherents among planning practitioners and educators. However, few question the assumptions on which these techniques are based or fully evaluate the implications of their implementation. This paper presents a critical framework for understanding the potential and limitations of evolving conflict­ resolution methods in planning contexts.","PeriodicalId":39937,"journal":{"name":"Berkeley Planning Journal","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2012-07-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5070/bp31113215","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Critical Issues and Perspectives in Conflict Resolution\",\"authors\":\"Ira Saletan\",\"doi\":\"10.5070/bp31113215\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The equitable, rational resolution of conflict is unarguably a gen­ eric objective of planning-whether the conflict concerns the appropriate use of physical and social resources or the relative power of individuals in the decision-making process. Thus it is not surprising to find that alternative forms of conflict resolution which promise more optimal outcomes than traditional regulatory and legal mechanisms find their adherents among planning practitioners and educators. However, few question the assumptions on which these techniques are based or fully evaluate the implications of their implementation. This paper presents a critical framework for understanding the potential and limitations of evolving conflict­ resolution methods in planning contexts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":39937,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Berkeley Planning Journal\",\"volume\":\"1 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2012-07-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.5070/bp31113215\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Berkeley Planning Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5070/bp31113215\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Berkeley Planning Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5070/bp31113215","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

毫无疑问,公平、合理地解决冲突是规划的一般目标——无论冲突涉及到物质和社会资源的适当使用,还是涉及到个人在决策过程中的相对权力。因此,与传统的监管和法律机制相比,解决冲突的其他形式有望带来更理想的结果,在规划从业者和教育工作者中找到他们的追随者,这并不奇怪。然而,很少有人质疑这些技术所依据的假设,或充分评价其实施的影响。本文提出了一个关键的框架来理解在规划环境中不断发展的冲突解决方法的潜力和局限性。
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
Critical Issues and Perspectives in Conflict Resolution
The equitable, rational resolution of conflict is unarguably a gen­ eric objective of planning-whether the conflict concerns the appropriate use of physical and social resources or the relative power of individuals in the decision-making process. Thus it is not surprising to find that alternative forms of conflict resolution which promise more optimal outcomes than traditional regulatory and legal mechanisms find their adherents among planning practitioners and educators. However, few question the assumptions on which these techniques are based or fully evaluate the implications of their implementation. This paper presents a critical framework for understanding the potential and limitations of evolving conflict­ resolution methods in planning contexts.
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
Berkeley Planning Journal
Berkeley Planning Journal Social Sciences-Geography, Planning and Development
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
5
期刊介绍: The Berkeley Planning Journal is an annual peer-reviewed journal, published by graduate students in the Department of City and Regional Planning (DCRP) at the University of California, Berkeley since 1985.
期刊最新文献
Learning to Share: Outdoor Commercial Spaces on San Francisco's Valencia Street Decolonising Myself: Navigating the Researcher-Activist Identity in the Urban South Pacific COVID-19 and the Future of Urban Life How to Save Chinatown: Preserving affordability and community service through ethnic retail Urban Bites and Agrarian Bytes: Digital Agriculture and Extended Urbanization
×
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