Theories of urban democracy that are relevant, critical and take sufficient account of the pervasiveness of power continue to pose challenges. Two theoretical frameworks dominate in relation to planning and democracy – Habermasian-inspired communicative planning theory and Mouffe’s agonistic pluralism. Both theoretical frames are typically held to be incommensurable because of fundamental ontological and epistemological differences and the debate between proponents of each tends to be polemic. Both theories have complementary strengths and weaknesses in terms of the insights they are capable of providing. Moreover, the realities of urban governance situations often display characteristics that can be explained in terms of both theoretical framings. This article negotiates a path beyond the polemic debate. It problematizes both theoretical frameworks and negotiates a way forward for planning theory that co-opts the principles of one into a theoretical framework that assumes the ontological position of the other. In so doing the article proposes a two-pronged approach that provides a critical, adaptive and reflexive approach to inquiring into spaces of urban democracy.
AlexanderE (1997) A mile or a millimetre? Measuring the planning theory–practice gap. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design24(1): 3–6.
3.
AllmendingerPTewdwr-JonesM (2002) The communicative turn in urban planning: unravelling paradigmatic, imperialistic, and moralistic dimensions. Space and Polity6(1): 5–24.
4.
BarnettC (2004) Deconstructing radical democracy: articulation, representation, and being-with-others. Political Geography23(5): 503–528.
5.
BarnettCLowM (eds) (2004) Spaces of Democracy. Geographical Perspectives on Citizenship, Participation and Representation. London: Sage.
6.
BeaumontJLoopmansM (2008) towards radicalized communicative rationality: resident involvement and urban democracy in Rotterdam and Antwerp. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research32(1): 95–113.
7.
BenhabibS (1992) Situating the Self. Gender, Community and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
8.
BenhabibS (ed.) (1996) Democracy and Difference. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
9.
BondSThompson-FawcettM (2007) Public participation and new urbanism: a conflicting agenda?Planning Theory and Practice8(4): 449–472.
10.
BrandRGaffikinF (2007) collaborative planning in an uncollaborative world. Planning Theory6(3): 282–313.
11.
BridgeG (2000) Rationality, ethics, and space: on situated universalism and the self-interested acknowledgement of difference. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space18(4): 519–535.
12.
ConnollyW (ed.) (1993) The Terms of Political Discourse. 3rd edn.Oxford: Blackwell.
13.
ConnollyW (1998) Beyond good and evil: the ethical sensibility of Michel Foucault. In: MossJ (ed.) The Later Foucault. Politics and Philosophy. London: Sage, 108–128.
14.
CritchleyS (2004) Is there a normative deficit in the theory of hegemony? In: CritchleySMarchartO (eds) Laclau: A Critical Reader. Abingdon: Routledge, 113–122.
15.
DavoudiSHealeyP (1995) City challenge: sustainable process or temporary gesture?Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy13(1): 79–95.
16.
DryzekJS (1990) Discursive Democracy. Politics, Policy, and Political Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
17.
DryzekJS (2001) Legitimacy and economy in deliberative democracy. Political Theory29(5): 651–669.
18.
DyrbergTB (2004) The political and politics in discourse analysis. In: CritchleySMarchartO (eds), Laclau: A Critical Reader. Abingdon: Routledge, 241–255.
19.
EagletonD (1991) Ideology. An Introduction. London: Verso.
20.
FeatherstoneD (2008) Resistance, Space and Political Identities: the Making of Counter-Global Networks. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
21.
FlyvbjergB (1998) Rationality and Power. Democracy in Practice. London: University of Chicago Press.
22.
FlyvbjergBRichardsonT (2002) Planning and Foucault. In search of the dark side of planning theory. In: AllmendingerP (ed.) Planning Futures: New Directions for Planning Theory. London: Routledge, 44–62.
23.
ForesterJ (1989) Planning in the Face of Power. Los Angeles, CA: University of California Press.
24.
ForesterJ (1999) The Deliberative Practitioner. Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes. London: MIT Press.
25.
FoucaultM (1980) Power/Knowledge. Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972–1977. New York: Pantheon.
26.
FoucaultM (1983) The Subject and Power. In: DreyfusHLRabinowP (eds) Michel Foucault. Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 208–226.
27.
FoucaultM (1984) Space, knowledge and power. In: RabinowP (ed.) The Foucault Reader. An Introduction to Foucault’s Thought. New York: Pantheon, 239–256.
28.
FoucaultM (2000) Polemics, politics and problematisations: An interview with Michel Foucault. In: RabinowP (ed.) Michel Foucault: Ethics. Essential works of Foucault 1954–1984 (Vol. 1). London: Penguin, 111–119.
29.
FoucaultM (2002) The Archaeology of Knowledge. Abingdon: Routledge Classics.
30.
FriedmannJ (2003) Why do planning theory?Planning Theory2(1): 7–10.
31.
GerasN (1987) Post-Marxism?New Left ReviewI(163): 40–82.
32.
GlynosJStavrakakisY (2004) Encounters of the real kind. Sussing out the limits of Laclaus embrace of Lacan. In: CritchleySMarchartO (eds) Laclau: A Critical Reader. Abingdon: Routledge, 201–216.
33.
GunderM (2003) Passionate planning for the others desire: An agonistic response to the dark side of planning. Progress in Planning60(3): 235–319.
34.
HabermasJ (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. 1. Reason and the Rationalization of Society. Trans. McCarthyT, Boston, CA: Beacon Press.
35.
HabermasJ (1987) The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol. 2. Lifeworld and System: A Critique of Functionalist Reason. Trans. McCarthyT, Boston CA: Beacon Press.
36.
HabermasJ (1998) What is universal pragmatics? (1976). In: CookeM (ed.) On the Pragmatics of Communication. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 21–103.
HealeyP (1998) Collaborative planning in a stakeholder society. Town Planning Review69(1): 1–20.
39.
HealeyP (2009) The pragmatic tradition in planning thought. Journal of Planning Education and Research28(3): 277–292.
40.
HillierJ (2002) Shadows of Power. An Allegory of Prudence in Land-Use Planning. London: Routledge.
41.
HillierJ (2003) Agonising over consensus: Why Habermasian ideals cannot be real. Planning Theory2(1): 37–59.
42.
HowarthD (2000) Discourse. Buckingham: Open University Press.
43.
HowarthDGlynosJ (2007) Logics of Critical Explanation in Social and Political Theory. London: Routledge.
44.
HowarthDStavrakakisY (eds) (2005) Discourse Theory in European Politics. Identity, Policy and Governance. Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 68–92.
45.
HowarthDNorvalAStavrakakisY (eds) (2000) Discourse Theory and Political Analysis. Identities, hegemonies and social change. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1–23.
46.
HuxleyM (2000) The limits to communicative planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research19(4): 369–77.
47.
HuxleyMYiftachelO (2000) New paradigm or old myopia? Unsettling the communicative turn in planning theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research19(4): 333–342.
48.
InnesJBooherD (1999) Consensus building as role playing and bricolage: Toward a theory of collaborative planning. Journal of the American Planning Association65(1): 9–26.
49.
InnesJBooherD (2004) Reframing public participation: Strategies for the 21st century. Planning Theory and Practice5(4): 419–436.
50.
IrazábalC (2009) Realising plannings emancipatory promise: Learning from regime theory to strengthen communicative action. Planning Theory8(2): 115–139.
51.
LaclauEMouffeC (2001) Hegemony and Socialist Strategy. Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. 2nd edn.London: Verso.
52.
MasseyD (1995) Thinking radical democracy spatially. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space13(3): 283–288.
53.
MasseyD (2005) For Space. London: Sage.
54.
MouffeC (1993) The Return of the Political. London: Verso.
55.
MouffeC (1995) Post-Marxism: democracy and identity. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space13(3): 259–65.
56.
MouffeC (1999) Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism. Social Research66(3): 745–758.
57.
MouffeC (2000) The Democratic Paradox. London: Verso.
58.
MouffeC (2005) On the Political. Abingdon: Routledge.
59.
MouzelisN (1988) Marxism or post-Marxism?New Left ReviewI(167): 107–125.
60.
NorrisA (2002) Against antagonism: On Ernesto Laclau’s political thought. Constellations9(4): 554–73.
61.
NorrisA (2006) Ernesto Laclau and the logic of the political. Philosophy and Social Criticism32(1): 111–34.
62.
NorvalA (2007) Aversive Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
63.
OlssonAR (2009) Relational rewards and communicative planning: Understanding actor motivation. Planning Theory8(3): 263–281.
64.
OlsonESayerA (2009) Radical geography and its critical standpoints: embracing the normative. Antipode41(1): 180–198.
65.
PattonP (2006) After the linguistic turn: Post-structuralist and liberal pragmatist political theory. In: DryzekJHonigBPhillipsA (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Political Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 125–141.
66.
PlogerJ (2004) Strife: Urban planning and agonism. Planning Theory3(1): 71–92.
67.
PughJ (2005) The disciplinary effects of communicative planning in Soufriere, St Lucia: Governmentality, hegemony and space-time-politics. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers30(3): 307–321.
SchaapA (2006) Agonism in divided societies. Philosophy and Social Criticism32(2): 255–277.
72.
SchwandtT (2000) Three epistemological stances for qualitative enquiry. In: DenzinNLincolnY (eds) The Handbook of Qualitative Research. Thousand Oaks CA: Sage.
Tewdwr-JonesMAllmendingerP (1998) Deconstructing communicative rationality: a critique of Habermasian collaberative planning. Environment and Planning A30(11): 1975–1989.
75.
Tewdwr-JonesMThomasH (1998) Collaborative action in local plan-making: Planners’ perceptions of planning through debate. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design25(1): 127–144.
76.
ThomassenL (2005) Reading radical democracy: A commentary on Clive Barnett. Political Geography24(5): 631–639.
77.
TorfingJ (1999) New Theories of Discourse. Laclau, Mouffe and Žižek. Oxford: Blackwell.
78.
TorfingJ (2005) Discourse theory: Achievements, arguments and challenges. In: HowarthDTorfingJ (eds) Discourse Theory in European Politics. Identity, Policy and Governance. Houndsmills: Palgrave Macmillan, 1–32.
79.
UmemotoKIgarashiH (2009) Deliberative planning in a multicultural milieu. Journal of Planning Education and Research29(1): 39–53.
80.
ValentineJ (2001) The hegemony of hegemony. History of the Human Sciences14(1): 88–104.
81.
YoungIM (1996) Communication and the Other: Beyond deliberative democracy. In: BenhabibS (ed.) Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton. NJ: Princeton University Press, 120–135.
82.
YoungIM (2000) Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
83.
ŽižekS (1989) The Sublime Object of Ideology. Verso: London.
