The communicative turn in planning? Examining community planner's role as a third actor in Beijing, China

被引:0
作者
Li, Zhen [1 ]
Lin, Yanliu [1 ]
Hooimeijer, Pieter [1 ]
Monstadt, Jochen [1 ]
He, Junyao [1 ]
机构
[1] Univ Utrecht, Human Geog & Spatial Planning, Geosci, Utrecht, Netherlands
基金
欧洲研究理事会;
关键词
Collaborative planning; Role of planner; Third actor; Institution; China; Mediation; URBAN; CITY; PARTICIPATION; ENGAGEMENT; GUANGZHOU; CONFLICT; POLITICS; SEARCH; POLICY; MODEL;
D O I
10.1016/j.cities.2025.105785
中图分类号
TU98 [区域规划、城乡规划];
学科分类号
0814 ; 082803 ; 0833 ;
摘要
The communicative turn in Chinese planning practices requires planning professionals to face diverse and conflictual interests and complex urban issues at the neighborhood level. Community planner policy emerges as an institutional innovation, where professionals from different backgrounds are recruited to mediate diverse stakeholder interests in the planning process. However, little research has been conducted on their role as thirdparty professionals in this context. This study develops a theoretical framework that integrates institutional and agential factors to analyze mechanisms underlying the complexity of third-party professional engagement. We argue that structure-agency interplay is essential for understanding the role of community planners. These planners act as agents with distinct values, knowledge, and skills, yet their actions are also shaped by formal and informal institutions. The findings show that community planners exhibit heterogeneity in performance. They primarily serve governmental interests, often being instrumentalized for the smooth implementation of upperlevel policies, while mitigating conflict. Their capacity to function as third parties is primarily motivated by rational considerations and shaped by the hierarchical planning system in which they operate. Only occasionally do community planners approximate the ideal roles posited in communicative or collaborative planning theory.
引用
收藏
页数:12
相关论文
共 84 条
[31]  
Innes J.E., 2010, Planning with complexity, DOI DOI 10.4324/9780203864302
[32]   A turning point for planning theory? Overcoming dividing discourses [J].
Innes, Judith E. ;
Booher, David E. .
PLANNING THEORY, 2015, 14 (02) :195-213
[33]   Institutional re(turns) and the strategic-relational approach [J].
Jessop, B .
ENVIRONMENT AND PLANNING A-ECONOMY AND SPACE, 2001, 33 (07) :1213-1235
[34]  
Jessop Bob., 2007, State Power
[35]   Implementing the UK Central Government's policy agenda for improved third sector engagement Reflecting on issues arising from third sector commissioning workshops [J].
Jones, Martin ;
Liddle, Joyce .
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF PUBLIC SECTOR MANAGEMENT, 2011, 24 (02) :157-+
[36]   Between the state and citizens: Changing governance of intermediary organisations for inclusive and sustainable urban regeneration in Seoul [J].
Kim, Kon ;
Kriznik, Blaz ;
Kamvasinou, Krystallia .
LAND USE POLICY, 2021, 105
[37]   The Prospects and Challenges of Socially Engaged Urban Planning and Architecture in Contemporary China [J].
Kochan, Dror .
JOURNAL OF PLANNING EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, 2021, 41 (04) :477-490
[38]  
Lam-Knott S., 2019, Post-Politics and Civil Society in Asian Cities: Spaces of Depoliticization
[39]  
Larner W, 2014, POST-POLITICAL AND ITS DISCONTENTS: SPACES OF DEPOLITICISATION, SPECTRES OF RADICAL POLITICS, P189
[40]  
Laws D., 2015, Conflict, improvisation, governance