IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rptpxx/v19y2018i5p734-750.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Rise of the Private Sector in Fragmentary Planning in England

Author

Listed:
  • Gavin Parker
  • Emma Street
  • Matthew Wargent

Abstract

English planning system reforms can be understood as part of a broader reorganisation of public services involving private sector providers supplying new markets and taking on functions previously delivered by public servants. While planning activity has long featured a number of different actors, there has been limited discussion of the role that private sector actors play in an increasingly fragmented, and task-oriented system which requires knowledge and skills-sets which local planning authorities (LPAs) typically do not possess. Thus the paper discusses how a ‘fragmentary planning’ has emerged in England, and the implications for governance and research in this area.

Suggested Citation

  • Gavin Parker & Emma Street & Matthew Wargent, 2018. "The Rise of the Private Sector in Fragmentary Planning in England," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(5), pages 734-750, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:taf:rptpxx:v:19:y:2018:i:5:p:734-750
    DOI: 10.1080/14649357.2018.1532529
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/14649357.2018.1532529
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/14649357.2018.1532529?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
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Dickinson, Daniella & Shahab, Sina, 2021. "Post planning-decision process: Ensuring the delivery of high-quality developments in Cardiff," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(C).
    2. Jason Slade & Malcolm Tait & Andy Inch, 2022. "‘We need to put what we do in my dad’s language, in pounds, shillings and pence’: Commercialisation and the reshaping of public-sector planning in England," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 59(2), pages 397-413, February.
    3. Raco, Mike & Ward, Callum & Brill, Frances & Sanderson, Danielle & Freire-Trigo, Sonia & Ferm, Jess & Hamiduddin, Iqbal & Livingstone, Nicola, 2022. "Towards a virtual statecraft: housing targets and the governance of urban housing markets," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 114315, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    4. Surajit Chakravarty & Mohammed S Bin Mansoor & Bibek Kumar & Priya Seetharaman, 2023. "Challenges of consultant-led planning in India’s smart cities mission," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 50(5), pages 1375-1393, June.
    5. 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.
    6. Johannes Herburger & Nicola Hilti & Eva Lingg, 2022. "Negotiating Vertical Urbanization at the Public–Private Nexus: On the Institutional Embeddedness of Planning Committees," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 7(4), pages 253-266.
    7. Ramon Marrades & Philippa Collin & Michelle Catanzaro & Eveline Mussi, 2021. "Planning from Failure: Transforming a Waterfront through Experimentation in a Placemaking Living Lab," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 6(1), pages 221-234.
    8. James Charlton & Ian Babelon & Richard Watson & Caitlin Hafferty, 2023. "Phygitally Smarter? A Critically Pragmatic Agenda for Smarter Engagement in British Planning and Beyond," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 17-31.
    9. Yongcheng Wang & Yiik Diew Wong & Kelvin Goh, 2021. "Perceived importance of inclusive street dimensions: a public questionnaire survey from a vision(ing) perspective," Transportation, Springer, vol. 48(2), pages 699-721, April.

    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:taf:rptpxx:v:19:y:2018:i:5:p:734-750. 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: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/rptp20 .

    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.