This article reviews the developments in the new institutionalism in social science and their relation to communicative planning theory, with emphasis on the relevance to the practcal task of responding to demands for a more place-conscious evolution in public policy. I trace the evolution of forms of governance that are more responsive to the multiple claims and social worlds of civil society and include discussion of the social-constructionist conception of institutions, the significance of actors and networks, the interrelation between structure and agency, and the cultural dimesions of social networks. The implications for developing governance capability or instittional capacity are also explored. In reviewing comnmunicative planning theory, I discuss how Habermas's approach to communicative ation may be reworked or positioned in an institutionalist perspective. Finally, I explore how these developments can be used to dvelop understanding and strategies for evoling more inclusionary approaches to intgrated, place-focused public policy.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Abers, R.1998. Learning democratic practice: Distributing government resources through popular participation in Porto Alegre, Brazil. In Ciiesfor Citizens, ed. M. Douglass and J. Friedmann, 39-66. London, U.K.: John Wiley.
2.
Amin, A., and N. Thrift, eds. 1994. Globalisation, Institutions and Regional Development. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
3.
Amin, A., and J. Hausner, eds. 1997. Beyond Market and Hierarchy: Inteactive Governance and Social Complexity. Cheltenham, U.K.: Edward Elgar.
4.
Asheim, B.1996. Industrial districts as 'learning regions': A condition for prosperity?European Planning Studies4(3):379-400.
5.
Bauman, Z.1997. Postmodernity and its Discontents. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
6.
Belussi, F.1996. Local systems, industrial districts and institutional neworks: Towards a new evolutionary paradigm of industrial economics?European Planning Studies4(3):5-26.
7.
Bishop, J.1998. Re-inventing planning 3: Collaboration and consensus. Town Planning Review67(3):111-113.
8.
Bourdieu, P.1977. Outline ofa Theory of Practice. Cambridge, U.K.: Cabridge University Press.
9.
Bourdieu, P.1990. In Other Words: Essays Towards a Reflexive Sociology. Oxford, U.K.: Polity Press.
10.
Castells, M.1996. The Rise of the Network Society. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
11.
Castells, M.1997. The Power of Identity. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
12.
Coleman, J.1988. Social capital and the creation of human capital. Amercan Journal of Sociologv94:S95-S120.
13.
Committee for Spatial Development of the European Union (CDS). 1997. European Spatial Development Perspective: Ist Official Draft: Noordwijk, Netherlands. CEC DGXVI. Brussels, Belgium.
14.
Dear, M.1995. Prolegomena to a post-modern urbanism. In Managing Cities, eds. P. Healey, S.J. Cameron, S. Davoudi, S. Graham, and A. Madanipour, 27-44. London, U.K.: John Wiley.
15.
Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions (DETR). 1998. The Future of Regional Planning Guidance: Consultation Paper. London, U.K.
16.
Douglas, M.1992. Risk and Blame: Essays in Cultural TheoryLondon, U.K.: Routledge.
17.
Douglass, M., and J. Friedmann, eds. 1998Citiesfor Citizens. London, U.K.: John Wiley.
18.
Dryzek, J.S.1990. Discursive Democracy: Politics, Policy and Political Scence. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
19.
Dyrberg, T.B.1997. The Circular Structure of Power: Politics, Identity, Community. London, U.K.:Verso.
20.
Fainstein, S., and C. Hirst. 1995. Urban social movements. In Theories of urban politics, eds. D. Judge, G. Stoker, and H. Wolman, 181-204. London, U.K.: Sage.
21.
Faludi, A.1996. Framing with images. Environment and Planning B: Planing and Design23:93-108.
22.
Flyvberg, B.1998. Rationality and Power. Chicago, Ill.: Chicago University Press.
23.
Forester, J.1989. Planning in the Face of Power. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California Press.
24.
Friedmann, J.1987. Planning in the Public Domain. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
25.
Friedmann, J.1992. Empowerment: The Politics of Alternative Development. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
26.
Friedmann, J.1993. Towards a non-Euclidean mode of planning. Journal ofthe American Planning Association59(3):482-484.
27.
Fukuyama, F.1995. Trust: The Social Virtues and the Creation of Prosperity. New York: Free Press.
28.
Geertz, C.1983. Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropoogv. New York: Basic Books.
29.
Giddens, A.1984. The Constitution of Society. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
30.
Gilroy, R.1996. Building the vision of a city for everyone: Planning in the context of multiculturalism in Vancouver. Department of Townand Country Planning Working Paper No. 54. Newcastle, U.K.: University of Newcastle.
31.
Graham, S., and P. Healey. 1999. Relational concepts of space and place: Issues in planning theory and practice. European Planning Studies7(5):623-646.
32.
Grove White, R.1991. Land, the law and environment. Journal of Law and Society18(1):32-47.
33.
Habermas, J.1984. The Theory of Communicative Action: Vol 1: Reason and the Rationalisation of Society. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
34.
Habermas, J.1993. Justification and Application: Remarks on Discourse Etics. Cambridge, U.K.: Polity Press.
35.
Hajer, M.1995. The Politics of Envi ronmental Discourse. Oxford, U.K.: Oxford University Press.
36.
Harding, A.1997. Urban regimes in European cities. European Urban and Regional Studies4(4):291-314.
37.
Harvey, D.1996. Justice, Nature and the Politics of Difference. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
Healey, P.1998a. Collaborative planning in a stakeholder society. Town Planning Review69(1):1-21.
40.
Healey, P.1998b. Building institutional capacity through collaborative approaches to urban planning. Environment and Planning A30:1531 - 1546.
41.
Healey, P., and S. Barrett. 1990. Structure and agency in land and property development processes. Urban Studies27(1):89-104.
42.
Healey, P, S. Cameron, S. Davoudi, S. Graham, and A. Madanipour, eds. 1995. Managing the City: The New Urban Context. London, U.K.: John Wiley.
43.
Healey, P., A. Khakee, A. Motte, and B. Needham. 1997. Making Strategic Spatial Plans: Innovation in Etwope. London, U.K.: UCL Press.
44.
Healey, P., C. Hoch, M. Lauria, and M. Feldman. 1997. Planning theory, political economy and the interpretive turn: The debate continues!Planning Theory17:10-85.
45.
Horkheimer, M., and T. Adorno. 1972. The Dialectics of Enlightenment. New York: Herder and Herder.
46.
Hwang, S.W.1996. The implications of the nonlinear paradigm for intgrated environmental design and management. Journal of Planning Literature11: 167-178.
47.
Innes, J.1995. Planning theory's emerging paradigm: Communicative action and interactive practice. Journal of Planning Education and Rsearch14(3):183-190.
48.
Innes, J., J. Gruber, R. Thompson, and M. Neuman. 1994. Coordinating Growth And Environmental Management Through Consensus-building: Report to the California Policy Seminar. Berkeley, Calif.: University of California.
49.
Innes, J., and D. Booher. 1998. Power and planning in the information age: Consensus-building as action strategy for the network society. Pper presented to the Congress of the Association of European Schools of Planning, Aveiro, July.
50.
Innes, J., and D. Booher. 1999. Consensus-building as role playing and bricolage: Toward a theory of collaborative planning. Journal onthe American Planning Association67(1):9-26.
51.
Krumholz, N., and J. Forester. 1990. Making Equity Planning Work. Phildelphia, Pa.: Temple University Press.
52.
Latour, B.1987. Science in Action. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
53.
Lauria, M., and R. Whelan. 1995. Planning theory and political economy: The need for reintegration. Planning Theory14:8-33.
54.
Lowe, P., J. Clark, S. Seymour, and N. Ward. 1998. Moralising the Coutryside. London, U.K.: UCL Press.
55.
LuLkes, S.1974. Power: A Radical View. London, U.K.: Macmillan.
56.
Mawson, J.1997. The English regional debate: Towards regional govenance or government. In British Regionalism and Devolution: The Chalenges of State Reform and European Integration, eds. J. Bradbury and J. Mawson, 180-211. London, U.K.: Jessica Kingsley.
57.
Neuman, M.1996. Images as institution builders: Metropolitan planning in Madrid. European Planning Studies4(3):293-312.
58.
North, D.1990. Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Perfomance. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
59.
Owens, S.1997. Giants in the path: Planning, sustainability and enviromental values. Town Planning Review68(3):293-304.
60.
Painter, J.1997. Regulation, regime and practice in urban politics. In Rconstructing Urban Re,gime Theory, ed. M. Lauria, 122-143. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
61.
Perry, D.1995. Making space: Planning as a mode of thought. In Spatial Practices, eds. H. Liggett and D. Perry, 209-242. Thousand Oaks, Clif.: Sage.
62.
Powell, W.W., and P.J. Dimaggio, eds. 1991. The New Institutionalism in Organisational Analysis. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.
63.
Putnam, R.1993. Making Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton, N.J.: University of Princeton Press.
64.
Rabinow, P., ed. 1984. The Foucault Reader. London, U.K.: Penguin.
65.
Rhodes, R.1995. The institutional approach. In Theory and Methods in Political Science, ed. D. Marsh and G. Stoker, 42-57. London, U.K.: Macmillan
Sandercock, L.1998. Cosmopolis. London, U.K.: John Wiley.
68.
Schneecloth, L., and S.R. Shibley. 1995. Place-Making: The Art and Pratice of Building Communities. New York: John Wiley.
69.
Schon, D., and M. Rein. 1994. Frame Reflection: Towards the Resolution of Intractable Policy Controversies. New York: Basic Books.
70.
Seidman, S.1998. Contested Knowledge: Social Theory in the Post-Modern Era. 2nd edition. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
71.
Selman, P.1998. Local agenda 21: Substance or spin?Journal of Enviromental Management and Planning41(5):533-554.
72.
Shotter, J.1993. Conversational Realities: Constructing Life Through Laguage. London, U.K.: Sage.
73.
Storper, M.1997. Regional economies as relational assets. In Geographies of Economies, eds. R. Lee and R. Wills, 248-258. London, U.K.: Arnold.
74.
Tarrow, S.1994. Power in Movement: Social Movements, Collective Action and Politics. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
75.
Tewdwr-Jones, M., and P. Allmendinger. 1998. Deconstructing communcative rationality: A critique of Habermasian collaborative planning. Environment and PlanningA30: 1979-1989.
76.
Throgmorton, J.1996. Planning as Persuasive Stor Telling. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.
77.
Vigar, G., P. Healey, A. Hull, and S. Davoudi. 2000. Planning, Governance and Spatial Strategy in Britain: An Institutionalist Approach. London, U.K.: Macmillan.
78.
Williams, R.1975. The Country and the City. Harmondsworth, U.K.: Penguin.
79.
Wilson, P.1997. Building social capital: A learning agenda for the twentfirst century. Urban Studies34:745-760.
80.
Yiftachel, O.1994. The dark side of modernism: Planning as control of an ethnic minority. In Postmodern Cities and Spaces, eds. S. Watson and K. Gibson, 216-242. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
81.
Young, I.M.1990. Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
