IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v36y2018i4p689-707.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Planning as a barrier for growth: Analysing storylines on the reform of the Danish Planning Act

Author

Listed:
  • Kristian Olesen
  • Helen Carter

Abstract

In this paper, we investigate how the discourse ‘planning as a barrier for growth’ has been structured in the public debate in Denmark, and how this discourse has created a political pressure to reform the Planning Act. We identify three main storylines, which support the discourse that planning constitutes a barrier for growth in the most rural areas of Denmark, framed as ‘Outer Denmark’ in the public debate. We argue that the contemporary critique of planning in Denmark has a distinct spatial dimension, in which planning deregulation is rationalised as a means to boost development in the economic periphery and combat increasing socio-spatial inequalities. Whilst the ideology and rationality behind the storylines calling for deregulation of planning can be interpreted as rooted in social welfarism, we argue that the framing of Outer Denmark is merely being used in the public debate to legitimise the (neo)liberalisation of spatial planning in Denmark. Nevertheless, the case of planning deregulation in Denmark is illustrative of how spatialities are discursively (re)constructed and enacted in order to challenge and transform the role of planning in the context of neoliberalism.

Suggested Citation

  • Kristian Olesen & Helen Carter, 2018. "Planning as a barrier for growth: Analysing storylines on the reform of the Danish Planning Act," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 36(4), pages 689-707, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:36:y:2018:i:4:p:689-707
    DOI: 10.1177/2399654417719285
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2399654417719285
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2399654417719285?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. Raine Mäntysalo & Karoliina Jarenko & Kristina L. Nilsson & Inger-Lise Saglie, 2015. "Legitimacy of Informal Strategic Urban Planning-Observations from Finland, Sweden and Norway," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 23(2), pages 349-366, February.
    2. Bas Waterhout & Frank Othengrafen & Olivier Sykes, 2013. "Neo-liberalization Processes and Spatial Planning in France, Germany, and the Netherlands: An Exploration," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 141-159, February.
    3. Phil Allmendinger & Graham Haughton, 2013. "The Evolution and Trajectories of English Spatial Governance: 'Neoliberal' Episodes in Planning," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 6-26, February.
    4. Anders Lund Hansen & Hans Thor Andersen & Eric Clark, 2001. "Creative Copenhagen: Globalization, Urban Governance and Social Change," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(7), pages 851-869, October.
    5. Michael Gunder, 2016. "Planning's "Failure" to Ensure Efficient Market Delivery: A Lacanian Deconstruction of this Neoliberal Scapegoating Fantasy," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 24(1), pages 21-38, January.
    6. Susannah Gunn & Jean Hillier, 2014. "When Uncertainty is Interpreted as Risk: An Analysis of Tensions Relating to Spatial Planning Reform in England," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 29(1), pages 56-74, February.
    7. Alex Lord & Mark Tewdwr-Jones, 2014. "Is Planning "Under Attack"? Chronicling the Deregulation of Urban and Environmental Planning in England," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 345-361, February.
    8. John Andersen & John Pløger, 2007. "The Dualism of Urban Governance in Denmark," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(10), pages 1349-1367, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Andy Inch & Richard Dunning & Aidan While & Hannah Hickman & Sarah Payne, 2020. "‘The object is to change the heart and soul’: Financial incentives, planning and opposition to new housebuilding in England," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 38(4), pages 713-732, June.
    2. Bernardino Romano & Francesco Zullo & Lorena Fiorini & Cristina Montaldi, 2022. "Micromunicipality (MM) and Inner Areas in Italy: A Challenge for National Land Policy," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(22), pages 1-16, November.
    3. Andy Inch, 2018. "‘Opening for business’? Neoliberalism and the cultural politics of modernising planning in Scotland," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 55(5), pages 1076-1092, April.
    4. Jessica Ferm & Ben Clifford & Patricia Canelas & Nicola Livingstone, 2021. "Emerging problematics of deregulating the urban: The case of permitted development in England," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 58(10), pages 2040-2058, August.
    5. Nancy Holman & Alessandra Mossa & Erica Pani, 2018. "Planning, value(s) and the market: An analytic for “what comes next?â€," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 50(3), pages 608-626, May.
    6. Niedziałkowski, Krzysztof & Beunen, Raoul, 2019. "The risky business of planning reform – The evolution of local spatial planning in Poland," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 85(C), pages 11-20.
    7. Graham Haughton & Phil Allmendinger, 2016. "Think tanks and the pressures for planning reform in England," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 34(8), pages 1676-1692, December.
    8. Mell, Ian, 2020. "The impact of austerity on funding green infrastructure: A DPSIR evaluation of the Liverpool Green & Open Space Review (LG&OSR), UK," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 91(C).
    9. Talia Margalit & Nurit Alfasi, 2016. "The undercurrents of entrepreneurial development: Impressions from a globalizing city," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 48(10), pages 1967-1987, October.
    10. Feitelson, Eran & Horowitz-Harel, Anat & Levin, Noam & Mintz, Zvi & Steenekamp, Guy & Zaban, Shaul, 2021. "Haste makes waste: On the implications of rapid planning in Israel," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C).
    11. Kristian Olesen, 2020. "Infrastructure imaginaries: The politics of light rail projects in the age of neoliberalism," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(9), pages 1811-1826, July.
    12. Mace, Alan & Holman, Nancy & Paccoud, Antoine & Sundaresan, Jayaraj, 2015. "Coordinating density; working through conviction, suspicion and pragmatism," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 56768, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    13. Simin Yan & Anna Growe, 2022. "Regional Planning, Land-Use Management, and Governance in German Metropolitan Regions—The Case of Rhine–Neckar Metropolitan Region," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(11), pages 1-24, November.
    14. Van Assche, Kristof & Gruezmacher, Monica & Granzow, Michael, 2021. "From trauma to fantasy and policy. The past in the futures of mining communities; the case of Crowsnest Pass, Alberta," Resources Policy, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    15. Crystal Legacy & Ryan van den Nouwelant, 2015. "Negotiating Strategic Planning's Transitional Spaces: The Case of ‘Guerrilla Governance’ in Infrastructure Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(1), pages 209-226, January.
    16. Bernardino Romano & Francesco Zullo & Alessandro Marucci & Lorena Fiorini, 2018. "Vintage Urban Planning in Italy: Land Management with the Tools of the Mid-Twentieth Century," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(11), pages 1-12, November.
    17. Broitman, Dani & Ben-Haim, Yakov, 2022. "Forecasting residential sprawl under uncertainty: An info-gap analysis," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    18. Anders Lund Hansen & Henrik Gutzon Larsen & Adam Grydehoj & Eric Clark, 2015. "Financialisation of the built environment in Stockholm and Copenhagen," Working papers wpaper115, Financialisation, Economy, Society & Sustainable Development (FESSUD) Project.
    19. Petersen, Jens-Phillip & Heurkens, Erwin, 2018. "Implementing energy policies in urban development projects: The role of public planning authorities in Denmark, Germany and the Netherlands," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 76(C), pages 275-289.
    20. Jan Lilliendahl Larsen & Jens Brandt, 2018. "Critique, Creativity and the Co-Optation of the Urban: A Case of Blind Fields and Vague Spaces in Lefebvre, Copenhagen and Current Perceptions of the Urban," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 3(3), pages 52-69.

    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:36:y:2018:i:4:p:689-707. 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.