IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v24y2006i3p403-421.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Governing Space: Planning Reform and the Politics of Sustainability

Author

Listed:
  • Richard Cowell

    (School of City and Regional Planning, Cardiff University, Glamorgan Building, King Edward VII Avenue, Cardiff, CF10 3WA, Wales)

  • Susan Owens

    (Department of Geography, University of Cambridge, Downing Place, Cambridge CB2 3EN, England)

Abstract

The authors explore the relationship between land-use, or spatial, planning and the environmental sustainability of major areas of public policy. First, the planning–public policy relationship is conceptualised within a framework that challenges narrowly instrumental accounts of the role of planning in the promotion of environmental sustainability, emphasising instead how the exploitation of opportunity structures in planning has impinged over time on dominant sectoral objectives. This framework is then used to analyse reformist pressures on planning, with particular reference to England's ‘modernising planning’ agenda. The argument is developed through a critical analysis of how, in the light of key components of this agenda—rescaling, streamlining, and the introduction of a statutory purpose—planning, public policy, and environmental sustainability might be expected to interact in future. Early signs suggest that the initial reform proposals—to accelerate the delivery of development by restructuring opportunities for participation—were diluted (but not displaced) by strong opposition. Tracing the long-term impacts of the reforms will require research into the relations between the reconstituted tiers of planning and the ability of interest groups to use the new opportunity structures effectively—tasks that should interest analysts of the greening of the state as much as planning researchers.

Suggested Citation

  • Richard Cowell & Susan Owens, 2006. "Governing Space: Planning Reform and the Politics of Sustainability," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 24(3), pages 403-421, June.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:24:y:2006:i:3:p:403-421
    DOI: 10.1068/c0416j
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/c0416j
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/c0416j?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stephen Connelly & Tim Richardson, 2004. "Exclusion: the necessary difference between ideal and practical consensus," Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 47(1), pages 3-17.
    2. Richard Cowell & Jonathan Murdoch, 1999. "Land Use and the Limits to (Regional) Governance: Some Lessons from Planning for Housing and Minerals in England," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 23(4), pages 654-669, December.
    3. Flyvbjerg,Bent & Bruzelius,Nils & Rothengatter,Werner, 2003. "Megaprojects and Risk," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521009461.
    4. Geoffrey Dudley & Jeremy Richardson, 1998. "Arenas without Rules and the Policy Change Process: Outsider Groups and British Roads Policy," Political Studies, Political Studies Association, vol. 46(4), pages 727-747, September.
    5. Susan Owens & Tim Rayner & Olivia Bina, 2004. "New Agendas for Appraisal: Reflections on Theory, Practice, and Research," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 36(11), pages 1943-1959, November.
    6. D. Gibbs, 1998. "Regional development agencies and sustainable development," Regional Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(4), pages 365-368.
    7. Kitschelt, Herbert P., 1986. "Political Opportunity Structures and Political Protest: Anti-Nuclear Movements in Four Democracies," British Journal of Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 57-85, January.
    8. Susan Owens, 2002. "‘A Collision of Adverse Opinions’? Major Projects, Planning Inquiries, and Policy Change," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 34(6), pages 949-953, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peter Newman, 2007. "Strategic Spatial Planning: Collective Action and Moments of Opportunity," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 16(10), pages 1371-1383, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Tim Marshall & Richard Cowell, 2016. "Infrastructure, planning and the command of time," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(8), pages 1843-1866, December.
    2. Elizabeth Rough, 2011. "Policy Learning through Public Inquiries? The Case of UK Nuclear Energy Policy 1955–61," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 29(1), pages 24-45, February.
    3. Edwards, David M. & Collins, Timothy M. & Goto, Reiko, 2016. "An arts-led dialogue to elicit shared, plural and cultural values of ecosystems," Ecosystem Services, Elsevier, vol. 21(PB), pages 319-328.
    4. Jung-In Jo & Hyun Jin Choi, 2019. "Enigmas of grievances about inequality: Effects of attitudes toward inequality and government redistribution on protest participation," International Area Studies Review, Center for International Area Studies, Hankuk University of Foreign Studies, vol. 22(4), pages 348-368, December.
    5. Schreiner, Lena & Madlener, Reinhard, 2022. "Investing in power grid infrastructure as a flexibility option: A DSGE assessment for Germany," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 107(C).
    6. Amanda P. Rehr & Mitchell J. Small & Paul S. Fischbeck & Patricia Bradley & William S. Fisher, 2014. "The role of scientific studies in building consensus in environmental decision making: a coral reef example," Environment Systems and Decisions, Springer, vol. 34(1), pages 60-87, March.
    7. Ahsan Nawaz & Xing Su & Qaiser Mohi Ud Din & Muhammad Irslan Khalid & Muhammad Bilal & Syyed Adnan Raheel Shah, 2020. "Identification of the H&S (Health and Safety Factors) Involved in Infrastructure Projects in Developing Countries-A Sequential Mixed Method Approach of OLMT-Project," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(2), pages 1-18, January.
    8. Hu, Jin-Li & Wang, Shih-Chuan & Yeh, Fang-Yu, 2006. "Total-factor water efficiency of regions in China," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 31(4), pages 217-230, December.
    9. Newton, Kenneth & Giebler, Heiko, 2008. "Patterns of participation: Political and social participation in 22 nations," Discussion Papers, Research Unit: Democracy and Democratization SP IV 2008-201, WZB Berlin Social Science Center.
    10. Cantarelli, C.C. & Flyvbjerg, B. & Buhl, S.L., 2012. "Geographical variation in project cost performance: the Netherlands versus worldwide," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 24(C), pages 324-331.
    11. Tornberg, Patrik & Odhage, John, 2018. "Making transport planning more collaborative? The case of Strategic Choice of Measures in Swedish transport planning," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 118(C), pages 416-429.
    12. Zhao, Na, 2019. "Managing interactive collaborative mega project supply chains under infectious risks," International Journal of Production Economics, Elsevier, vol. 218(C), pages 275-286.
    13. Michael Regan, 2013. "Public project procurement and the case for public–private partnerships," Chapters, in: John Farrar & David G. Mayes (ed.), Globalisation, the Global Financial Crisis and the State, chapter 8, pages 172-196, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Vargas, Andrés & Sarmiento Erazo, Juan Pablo & Diaz, David, 2020. "Has Cost Benefit Analysis Improved Decisions in Colombia? Evidence from the Environmental Licensing Process," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    15. Xue, Jin, 2014. "Is eco-village/urban village the future of a degrowth society? An urban planner's perspective," Ecological Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 130-138.
    16. Holz-Rau, Christian & Scheiner, Joachim, 2011. "Safety and travel time in cost-benefit analysis: A sensitivity analysis for North Rhine-Westphalia," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 336-346, March.
    17. Leheis, Stéphanie, 2012. "High-speed train planning in France: Lessons from the Mediterranean TGV-line," Transport Policy, Elsevier, vol. 21(C), pages 37-44.
    18. Sierra, Jazmin & Hochstetler, Kathryn, 2017. "Transnational activist networks and rising powers: transparency and environmental concerns in the Brazilian National Development Bank," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 79089, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Morgenroth, Edgar & FitzGerald, John & FitzGerald, John, 2006. "Summary and Conclusions," Book Chapters, in: Morgenroth, Edgar (ed.),Ex-Ante Evaluation of the Investment Priorities for the National Development Plan 2007-2013, chapter 24, pages 317-333, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
      • Baker, Terence J. & FitzGerald, John & Honohan, Patrick & FitzGerald, John & Honohan, Patrick, 1996. "Summary and Conclusions," Book Chapters, in: Baker, Terence J. (ed.),Economic Implications for Ireland of EMU, chapter 12, pages 339-352, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI).
    20. Litsiou, Konstantia & Polychronakis, Yiannis & Karami, Azhdar & Nikolopoulos, Konstantinos, 2022. "Relative performance of judgmental methods for forecasting the success of megaprojects," International Journal of Forecasting, Elsevier, vol. 38(3), pages 1185-1196.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:24:y:2006:i:3:p:403-421. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.