IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v32y1995i1p49-67.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Naturalising Choices and Neutralising Voices? Discourse on Urban Development in Two Cities

Author

Listed:
  • Elisabeth ter Borg

    (Department of Human Geography, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Prinsengracht 130, 1018 VZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

  • Gertjan Dijkink

    (Department of Human Geography, University of Amsterdam, Nieuwe Prinsengracht 130, 1018 VZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands)

Abstract

Post-modern conceptions of social projects stress the closed nature of the communications involved (discourse). Philosophers in this tradition have presented discourse procedures and power relations as forces constraining the possibilities of expression and change. Two aspects have been selected in this article to examine the appropriateness of the discourse perspective with regard to urban development policy: discontinuity and compulsiveness. An analysis of shifting policy aims in two cities affirms the presence of several features assigned to discourses. Both cities represent different positions on a continuum between more and less disciplined (closed) discourse. Critical voices, however, are never completely absent; they only operate at different distances from the inner political circle.

Suggested Citation

  • Elisabeth ter Borg & Gertjan Dijkink, 1995. "Naturalising Choices and Neutralising Voices? Discourse on Urban Development in Two Cities," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 32(1), pages 49-67, February.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:32:y:1995:i:1:p:49-67
    DOI: 10.1080/00420989550013211
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1080/00420989550013211
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/00420989550013211?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
    ---><---

    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:urbstu:v:32:y:1995:i:1:p:49-67. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    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.