We aim to find a way to produce knowledge of attractiveness of place that is representative of the variety and complexity of what attractiveness entails and the same time productive for place development and planning. On the basis of a study of an INTERREG IV A-project in Norway, we question how and by whom the discourse regarding what is attractive about places is constructed and how the implicit or explicit knowledge is treated in local planning. We find that planning must produce knowledge in which the different narratives about place confront each other, and highlight differences and mutual debate between adversaries. We conclude by arguing the case for applying a model of agonistic pluralism where the coproduction of discursive knowledge from ‘a logic of difference’ is at the heart of planning.
BäcklundPMäntysaloR, 2010, “Agonism and institutional ambiguity: Ideas on democracy and the role of participation in the development of planning theory and practice-the case of Finland”Planning Theory9333–350
3.
BanfieldC, 1973, “Ends and means in planning”, in A Reader in Planning Theory Ed. FaludiA, (Pergamon, Oxford) pp 139–149
4.
BaumanZ, 1992Intimations of Postmodernity (Routledge, London)
5.
BergNGLysgårdHK, 2004, “Ruralitet og urbanitet-bygd og by”, in Mennesker, steder og regionale endringer Eds BergNGDaleBLysgårdHKLøfgrenA, (Tapir akademisk, Trondheim) pp 61–76
6.
BondS, 2011, “Negotiating a ‘democratic ethos’: Moving beyond the agonostic–communicative divide”Planning Theory10161–186
7.
BrennerNTheodoreN, 2002, “Cities and the geographies of ‘actually existing neoliberalism’”Antipode34349–379
8.
BukveOAmdamR, 2004, “Regionalpolitisk regimeendring og regional utvikling” in Det regionalpolitiske regimeskiftet-tilfellet Norge Eds AmdamRBukveO, (Tapir, Trondheim) pp 11–19
9.
ByrkjelandMGroveK, 2005Perspektiv på bygdeutvikling (Rokkansenteret, Bergen)
10.
CresswellT, 2004Place: A Short Introduction (Blackwell, Oxford)
11.
CruickshankJ, 2006, “Protest against centralization in Norway: The evolvement of the goal for maintaining a dispersed settlement pattern”Norsk Geografisk Tidsskrift–Norwegian Journal of Geography60179–188
12.
CruickshankJLysgårdHKMagnussenML, 2009, “The logic of the construction of rural politics: Political discourses on rurality in Norway”Geografiska Annaler9173–89
13.
de SaussureF, 1960 [1916] Course in General Linguistics (Peter Owen, London)
14.
DryzekJS, 2000Deliberative Democracy and Beyond: Liberals, Critics, Contestations (Oxford University Press, Oxford)
15.
DryzekJS, 2006Deliberative Global Politics: Discourse and Democracy in a Divided World (Polity Press, Cambridge)
16.
EtzioniA, 1973, “Mixed-scanning: A ‘third’ approach to decision-making”, in A Reader in Planning Theory Ed. FaludiA, (Pergamon, Oxford) pp 217–229
17.
FaludiA, 1973A Reader in Planning Theory (Pergamon, Oxford)
18.
FloY, 2003, “Det lokale og det nasjonale: Statleg politikk overfor det lokale og regionale styringsverket frå 1900 til i dag”, Makt- og demokratiutredningen 1998–2003 Rapportserien 65, Unipub, Oslo
19.
FlyvbjergB, 1998, “Habermas and Foucault: Thinkers for civil society?”The British Journal of Sociology49210–233
20.
FløysandAJakobsenS-E, 2007, “Commodification of rural places: A narrative of social fields, rural development, and football”Journal of Rural Studies23206–221
21.
ForesterJ, 1989Planning in the Face of Power (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA)
HillierJ, 2003, “‘Agon'izing over consensus: Why Habermasian ideals cannot be ‘real’”Planning Theory237–59
32.
HillierJ, 2007Stretching Beyond the Horizon: A Multiplanar Theory of Spatial Planning and Governance (Ashgate, Aldershot, Hants)
33.
HillierJ, 2008, “Plan(e) speaking: A multiplanar theory of spatial planning”Planning Theory724–50
34.
InnesJEBooherDE, 2010Planning with Complexity: An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy (Routledge, London)
35.
LacanJ, 1977 [1966] écrits: A Selection (W W Norton, New York)
36.
LaclauE, 2005On Populist Reason (Verso, New York)
37.
LaclauEMoufleC, 2001Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics2nd edition (Verso, London)
38.
LindblomCE, 1973, “The science of ‘muddling through’”, in A Reader in Planning Theory Ed. FaludiA, (Pergamon, Oxford) pp 151–169
39.
MoufleC, 1999, “Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism?”Social Research66745–758
40.
MoufleC, 2002, “Politics and passions: Introduction”Philosophy and Social Criticism28615–616
41.
MoufleC, 2005On the Political (Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon)
42.
MurtaghBEllisG, 2011, “Skills, conflict and spatial planning in Northern Ireland”Planning Theory and Practice12349–365
43.
OECD, 2006The New Rural Paradigm: Policies and Governance (OECD, Paris)
44.
PløgerJ, 2004, “Strife: Urban planning and agonism”Planning Theory371–92
45.
RobinsonA, 2004, “The politics of Lack”British Journal of Politics and International Relations6259–269
46.
RummensS, 2009, “Democracy as a non-hegemonic struggle? Disambiguating Chantai Mouffe's agonistic model of politics”Constellations16377–391
47.
ShortallS, 2008, “Are rural development programmes socially inclusive? Social inclusion, civic engagement, participation, and social capital: Exploring the differences”Journal of Rural Studies24450–157
48.
ShuchsmithM, 2009, “Disintegrated rural development? Neo-endogenous rural development, planning and place-shaping in diffused contexts”Sociologia Ruralis50 (1) 1–14
49.
SørlieK, 2010, “Bosetting, flytting og regional utvikling”, in Det norske samfunn Eds FrønesLKjølsrudL, (Gyldendal, Oslo) pp 328–356
50.
StavrakakisY, 1999Lacan and the Political (Routledge, London)
51.
SwyngedouwEMoulaertF, 2002, “Neoliberal urbanization in Europe: Large-scale urban development projects and the new urban policy”Antipode34542–577
52.
Tewdwr-JonesMAllmendingerP, 1998, “Deconstructing communicative rationality: A critique of Habermasian collaborative planning”Environment and Planning A301975–1989
53.
TuanY-F, 1977Space and Place: The Perspective of Experience (University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis, MN)
54.
WintherMBSvendsenGLH, 2012, “‘The rotten banana’ fires back: The story of a Danish discourse of inclusive rurality in the making”Journal of Rural Studies doi: 10.1016/j.jrurstud.2012.05.003
