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 Theory9(4): 333–350.
2.
ChadwickG (1978) A Systems View of Planning: Towards a Theory of the Urban and Regional Planning Process, 2nd ed.Oxford: Pergamon Press.
3.
FainsteinSS (2010) The Just City. New York, NY: Cornell University Press.
4.
GrantJ (1994) The Drama of Democracy: Contention and Dispute in Community Planning. Toronto, ON: University of Toronto Press.
5.
IsakhanBStockwellS (eds.) (2011) The Secret History of Democracy. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.
6.
LaclauE (1990) New Reflections on the Revolution of Our Time. London: Verso.
7.
LefortC (1986) The Political Forms of Modern Society: Bureaucracy, Democracy, Totalitarianism. Cambridge: Polity Press.
8.
MannheimK (1940) Man and Society in an Age of Reconstruction: Studies in Modern Social Structure. New York, NY: Routledge.
9.
MeyersonMBanfieldEC (1955) Planning, Politics, and the Public Interest: The Case of Public Housing in Chicago. New York, NY: The Free Press.
10.
MouffeC (2000) The Democratic Paradox. London: Verso.
11.
NancyJ (2011) Finite and infinite democracy. In: AllenA (ed.) Democracy in What State?New York, NY: Columbia University Press, pp.58–75.
12.
PurcellM (2016) For democracy: Planning and publics without the state. Planning Theory15(4): 386–401.
13.
RosanvallonP (2006) Democracy Past and Future. New York, NY: Columbia University Press.
14.
StrömgrenA (2007) Samordning, hyfs och reda: Stabilitet och förändring i svensk planpolitik 1945–2005. PhD Thesis, Uppsala University, Sweden.
15.
Van WymeerschEOosterlynckSVanoutriveT (2019) The political ambivalences of participatory planning initiatives. Planning Theory18(3): 359–381.
16.
ZakhourS (2020a) Democracy and planning: Contested meanings in theory and practice. PhD Thesis, KTH Royal Institute of Technology, Sweden.
17.
ZakhourS (2020b) The democratic legitimacy of public participation in planning: Contrasting optimistic, critical, and agnostic understandings. Planning Theory19(4): 349–370.