This article considers the factors contributing to the recent international trend for a differentiation between planning and urban design. It considers these highly related fields from the perspective of neoliberalism, global competition, and the doxa of New Urbanism. The article argues that urban design needs to be retained as an important subset of planning practice, concerned with the physical design of cities, so that the core planning values of serving the public interest in the attainment of social equity, democratic civil society, and an ecologically sustainable future may be maintained in our city-building processes.
Baker, D., N. Sipe, and B. Gleeson.2006. Performance-based planning: Perspectives from the United States, Australia, and New Zealand. Journal of Planning Education and Research25 (4): 396-409.
2.
Banerjee, T.2009. Book review: Urban transformations. Journal of Planning Education and Research29 (1): 210-11.
3.
Bell, D.2005. The emergence of contemporary masterplans: Property markets and the value of urban design. Journal of Urban Design10 (1): 81-110.
4.
Bell, W.2005. Progressing process in urban design. Urban Policy and Research23 (3): 371-76.
5.
Ben-Joseph, E.2009. Designing codes: Trends in cities, planning and development . Urban Studies46 (12): 2691-2702.
6.
Bond, S., and M. Thompson-Fawcett .2007. Public participation and new urbanism: A conflicting agenda. Planning Theory and Practice8 (4): 449-72.
7.
Calthorpe, P., and W. Fulton.2001. The regional city: Planning for the end of sprawl. Washington, DC: Island Press.
8.
Campbell, H., and R. Marshall.2002. Utilitarianism’s bad breadth? A re-evaluation of the public interest justification for planning. Planning Theory1 (2): 163-87.
9.
Carmona, M.2009. Design coding and the creative, market and regulatory tyrannies of practice. Urban Studies46 (12): 2643-67.
10.
Childs, M.2010. Spectrum of urban design roles. Journal of Urban Design15 (1): 1-19.
11.
Condon, P.2008. Planning for climate change. Land Lines, January. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, Cambridge, MA.
12.
Cuthbert, A.2001. Going global: Reflexivity and contextualism in urban design education. Journal of Urban Design6 (3): 297-316.
13.
Cuthbert, A.2003. Introduction. In Designing cities, ed. A. Cuthbert, 1-20. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
14.
Cuthbert, A.2005. A debate from down-under: Spatial political economy and urban design. Urban Design International10 (3): 223-34.
15.
Cuthbert, A.2006. The form of cities. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
16.
Cuthbert, A.2007. Urban design: Requiem for an era-Review and critique of the last 50 years. Urban Design International12 (3): 77-223.
17.
Dagenhart, R., and D. Sawicki.1992. Architecture and planning: The divergence of two fields. Journal of Planning Education and Research12 (1): 1-16.
18.
Dagenhart, R., and D. Sawicki.1994. If (urban) design is everything, maybe it’s nothing. Journal of Planning Education and Research13 (2): 146-48.
19.
Davis, M.2006. Fear and money in Dubai. New Left Review41 (September-October): 47-68.
20.
Dawson, E., and H. Higgins.2009. How planning authorities can improve quality through the design review process: Lessons from Edinburgh. Journal of Urban Design14 (1): 101-14.
21.
Day, K.2003. New urbanism and the challenges of designing for diversity . Journal of Planning Education and Research23 (1): 83-95.
22.
Dovey, K., I. Woodcock, and S. Wood.2009. A test of character: Regulating place-identity in inner-city Melbourne. Urban Studies46 (12): 2595-2615.
23.
Duany, A., and E. Talen.2002. Making the good easy: The smartcode alternative. Fordham Urban Law Journal29 (4): 1445-68.
24.
Ellin, N.2001. Thresholds of fear: Embracing the urban shadow. Urban Studies38 (5-6): 869-83.
25.
Ellin, N.2008. Life support: Nacirema redux. Journal of Urbanism1 (1): 47-55.
26.
Ellis, C.2002. The new urbanism: Critiques and rebuttals. Journal of Urban Design7 (3): 261-91.
27.
Evans-Cowley, J., and M. Zimmerman Gough .2009. Evaluating new urbanist plans in post-Katrina Mississippi. Journal of Urban Design14 (4): 439-61.
28.
Fainstein, S.2000. New directions in planning theory. Urban Affairs Review35 (4): 451-78.
29.
Fainstein, S.2005. Planning theory and the city. Journal of Planning Education and Research25 (2): 121-30.
30.
Fainstein, S.2008. Mega-projects in New York, London and Amsterdam. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research32 (4): 768-785.
31.
Fainstein, S.2010. The just city. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
32.
Florida, R.2000. Competing in the age of talent. Pittsburgh, PA: Mellon Foundation.
33.
Florida, R.2002. The rise of the creative class. New York, NY: Basic Books.
34.
Forester, J.1989. Planning in the face of power. Berkeley : University of California Press.
35.
Forester, J.1999. The deliberative practitioner. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
36.
Forsyth, A.2007. Innovation in urban design: Does research help? Journal of Urban Design12 (3): 461-73.
37.
Forsyth, A., and K. Crewe.2009. New visions for suburbia: Reassessing aesthetics and place-making in modernism, imageability and new urbanism. Journal of Urban Design14 (4): 415-38.
38.
Frey, H.1999. Designing the city. London: Spon. Friedmann, J. 1987. Planning in the public domain. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
39.
Garde, A.2004. New urbanism as sustainable growth? A supply side story and its implications for public policy. Journal of Planning Education and Research24 (2): 154-70.
40.
Garde, A.2006. Designing and developing new urbanist projects in the United States: Insights and implications. Journal of Urban Design11 (1): 33-54.
41.
Gleeson, B., and A. Memon.1994. Reforming planning legislation: A New Zealand perspective. Urban Policy and Research12 (2): 82-90.
42.
González, E., and R. Lejano.2009. New urbanism and the barrio. Environment and Planning A41 (12): 2946-63.
43.
Gospodini, A.2002. European cities in competition and the new "uses" of urban design. Journal of Urban Design7 (1): 59-73.
44.
Grant, J.2009a. Experiential planning: A practitioner’s account of Vancouver’s success. Journal of the American Planning Association75 (3): 358-70.
45.
Grant, J.2009b. Theory and practice in planning the suburbs: Challenges to implementing new urbanism, smart growth, and sustainability principles . Planning Theory & Practice10 (1): 11-33.
46.
Gunder, M.2004. Shaping the planner’s ego-ideal: A Lacanian interpretation of planning education. Journal of Planning Education and Research23 (3): 299-311.
47.
Gunder, M.2006. Sustainability: Planning’s saving grace or road to perdition? Journal of Planning Education and Research26 (2): 208-21.
48.
Gunder, M.2010. Planning as the ideology of (neo-liberal) space. Planning Theory9 (4): 298-314.
49.
Gunder, M., and J. Hillier.2007. Planning as urban therapeutic. Environment and Planning: A39 (2): 467-86.
50.
Gunder, M., and J. Hillier.2009. Planning in ten words or less. Farnham, UK: Ashgate.
51.
Hackworth, J.2007. The neoliberal city. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
52.
Hari, J.2009. A morally bankrupt dictatorship built by slave labour . The Independent, November 27, p. 6.
53.
Harvey, D.1978. On planning the ideology of planning. In Planning theory in the 1980’s, ed. R. Burchell and G. Sternlieb, 213-33. New Brunswick, NJ: CUPR.
Hendler, S.2005. Towards a feminist code of planning ethics. Planning Theory & Practice6 (1): 53-69.
56.
Higgins, M.2010. Urban design and the planning system in Aotearos-New Zealand: Disjuncture or convergence?URBAN DESIGN International15 (1): 1-21.
57.
Hopkins, L.2001. Urban development. Washington, DC: Island Press.
58.
Hvidt, M.2009. The Dubai model: An outline of key development-process elements in Dubai. International Journal of Middle East Studies41 (3): 397-418.
59.
Imrie, R., and E. Street.2009. Regulating design: The practices of architecture, governance and control. Urban Studies46 (12): 2507-18.
60.
Kaplan, A.2009. Landscape architecture’s commitment to landscape concept: A missing link?Journal of Landscape Architecture1:56-65.
61.
Klosterman, R.1985. Arguments for and again planning. The Town Planning Review56 (1): 5-20.
62.
Kreditor, A. 1990. The neglect of urban design in the American academic succession. Journal of Planning Education and Research9 (3): 155-63.
63.
Krieger, A.2006. Territories of urban design. In Urban design futures, ed. M. Moor and J. Rowland, 18-29. London: Routledge.
64.
Lang, J.1994/2007. Urban design as a discipline and as a profession. In The urban design reader, ed. M. Larice and E. Macdonald , 461-78. London: Routledge.
65.
Larice, M., and E. Macdonald.2007. Editors’ introduction. In The Urban design reader, ed. M. Larice and E. Macdonald, 308-9. London : Routledge.
66.
Macdonald, E.2005. Street-facing dwelling units and liveability: The impacts of emerging building types in Vancouver’s new high-density residential neighborhoods. Journal of Urban Design10 (1): 13-38.
67.
Madanipour, A.2006. Roles and challenges of urban design. Journal of Urban Design11 (2): 173-93.
68.
McCann, E., and K. Ward.2010. Relationality/territoriality: Towards a conceptualization of cities in the world. Geoforum41 (2): 175-184.
69.
McGuirk, P., and R. Dowling.2009. Neoliberal privatisation? Remapping the public and the private in Sydney’s masterplanned residential estates . Political Geography28 (3): 174-85.
70.
McLoughlin, J.1994. Centre or periphery? Town planning and spatial political economy. Environment and Planning A26 (7): 1111-22.
71.
Memon, A.1993. Keeping New Zealand green. Dunedin , New Zealand: University of Otago Press.
72.
Ministry of the Environment (MfE).2005. New Zealand urban design protocol. Wellington, New Zealand: MfE.
73.
Ministry of the Environment (MfE).2009. Signatories to the urban design protocol. http://www.mfe.govt.nz/issues/urban/designprotocol/signatories.html (accessed January 28, 2010).
74.
Moor, M.2006. Introduction. In Urban design futures, ed. M. Moor and J. Rowland, 1-17. London: Routledge .
75.
Murphy, L.2008. Third-wave gentrification in New Zealand: The case of Auckland. Urban Studies45 (12): 2521-40.
76.
New Zealand Planning Association (NZPI).2009 . Annual report 2008: Planners shape the future. Auckland: NZPI.
77.
Palermo P., and D. Ponzini.2010. Spatial planning and urban development . Vol. 10. Amsterdam: Springer.
78.
Parolek, D., K. Parolek, and P. Crawford.2008. Form-based codes: A guide for planners, urban designers, municipalities, and developers. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
79.
Punter, J.2003. The Vancouver achievement: Urban planning and design. Vancouver, Canada: University of British Columbia Press .
80.
Punter, J.2006. The planning system and the delivery of design quality . In Urban design futures, ed. M. Moor and J. Rowland, 50-56. London : Routledge.
81.
Punter, J.2007. Developing urban design as public policy: Best practice principles for design review and development management. Journal of Urban Design12 (2): 167-202.
82.
Rios, M.2008. Envisioning citizenship: Towards a polity approach in urban design. Journal of Urban Design13 (2): 213-29.
83.
Rittel, H., and M. Webber.1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning . Policy Science4 (2): 155-69.
84.
Sager, T.1992. Why plan? A multi-rationality foundation for planning. Housing, Theory and Society9 (3): 129-47.
85.
Sandercock, L.1998. Towards Cosmopolis. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
86.
Sandercock, L.2004. Towards a planning imagination for the 21st century, Journal of the American Planning Association70 (2): 133-41.
87.
Schurch, T.1999. Reconsidering urban design: Thoughts on its definition and status as a field or profession. Journal of Urban Design4 (1): 5-28.
88.
Sklair, L.2009. From the consumerist/oppressive city to the functional/ emancipatory city. Urban Studies46 (12): 2703-11.
89.
Snow, M.2004. Towards an urban design agenda for Queensland. Australian Planner41 (2): 22-24.
90.
Solomon, D.2003. Global city blues. Washington, DC: Island Press.
91.
Sternberg, E.2000. An integrative theory of urban design. Journal of the American Planning Association66 (3): 265-78.
92.
Talen, E.1999. Sense of community and neighbourhood form: An assessment of the social doctrine of new urbanism. Urban Studies36 (8): 1361-79.
93.
Talen, E.2006. Design that enables diversity: The complications of a planning idea. Journal of Planning Literature20 (3): 233-49.
94.
Talen, E.2008. New urbanism, social equity, and the challenge of post-Katrina rebuilding in Mississippi. Journal of Planning Education and Research27 (3): 277-93.
95.
Talen, E.2009. Design by the rules: The historical underpinnings of form-based codes. Journal of the American Planning Association75 (2): 144-60.
96.
Taylor, N.1998. Urban planning theory since 1945. London: Sage.
97.
Taylor, N.2009. Legibility and aesthetics in urban design. Journal of Urban Design14 (2): 189-202.
98.
Thompson-Fawcett, M., and S. Bond.2003. Urbanist intentions for the built landscape: Examples of concept and practice in England, Canada and New Zealand. Progress in Planning60 (2): 147-234.
99.
Vernez Moudon, A.1992/2007. A Catholic approach to organizing what urban designers should know. In The urban design reader, ed. M. Larice and E. Macdonald, 438-60. London: Routledge .
100.
Waldheim, C.2006. The landscape urbanism reader. New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press.
101.
Weller, R.2008. Landscape (sub)urbanism in theory and practice. Landscape Journal27 (2): 247-67.
102.
Wheeler, S.2004. Planning for sustainability. London : Routledge.
103.
Zimmerman, M.2001. Is new urbanism growing old? An interview with Andres Duany. Planning67 (6): 10-13.
104.
Zukin, S.1988/2003. The postmodern debate over urban form . In Designing cities, ed. A. Cuthbert, 45-55. Oxford, UK: Blackwell .
