References
- Aaltonen, M. (2007): Chronotope space: Managing time and properties of strategic landscape. Foresight, 9 (4), pp. 58–62. doi: https://doi.org/10.1108/14636680710773830
- Bishop, P.; Williams, L. (2012): The Temporary City. New York: Routledge.
- Boelens, L.; De Roo, G. (2016): Planning of undefined becoming: First encounters of planners beyond the plan. Planning Theory, 15 (1), pp. 42–67. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095214542631
- Boonstra, B. (2015): Planning Strategies in an Age of Active Citizenship: A Post-Structuralist Agenda for Self-Organizations in Spatial Planning. Groningen: InPlanning.
- Boonstra, B. (2016): Mapping trajectories of becoming: four forms of behaviour in co-housing initiatives. The Town Planning Review, 87 (39), pp. 275–296. doi: https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2016.20
- Boonstra, B.; Boelens, L. (2011): Self-organization in urban development: towards a new perspective on spatial planning. Urban Research & Practice, 4 (2), pp. 99–122. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2011.579767
- Bromley, D. B. (1986): The case study method in psychology and related disciplines. Chichester: John Wiley.
- Deleuze, G.; Guattari, F. (1981): Mille Plateaux. Capitalisme et Schizophrénie. Paris: Editions de Minuit.
- De Roo, G. (2018): Ordering principles in a dynamic world of change – On social complexity, transformation and the conditions for balancing purposeful interventions and spontaneous change. Progress in Planning, 125, pp.1–32. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2017.04.002
- De Roo, G.; Zhang, S. (2019): Understanding selforganization and formal institutions in peri-urban transformations: A case study from Beijing. EPB: Urban Analytics and City Science, 47 (2), DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2399808319888223, pp.287–303.
- Endsley, M. R. (2008): Theoretical Underpinnings of Situation Awareness: a Critical View. In Endsley, M. R.; Garland, D. J. (eds.), Situation Awareness Analysis and Measurement. New York: CRC Press, pp. 3–32.
- Ertiö, T. (2015): Participatory Apps for Urban Planning—Space for Improvement. Planning Practice & Research, 30 (3), pp. 303–321. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2015.1052942
- Eräranta, S.; Staffans, A. (2015): From Situation Awareness to Smart City Planning and Decision Making. Proceedings of CUPUM conference, at MIT, July 8–10, 2015.
- Gilroy, R.; Booth, C. (1999): Building an infrastructure for everyday lives. European Planning Studies, 7 (3), pp. 307–324. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09654319908720520.
- Hendriks, C. M. (2015): Coupling citizens and elites in deliberative systems: The role of institutional design. European Journal of Political Research, 55 (1), pp. 43–60. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6765.12123
- Hillier, J. (2011): Strategic navigation across multiple planes: Towards a Deleuzean-inspired methodology for strategic spatial planning. Town Planning Review, 82 (5), pp. 503–527. doi: https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2011.30
- Horelli, L. (2002): A Methodology of participatory planning. In Bechtel, R.; Churchman, A. (eds.), Handbook of Environmental Psychology. New York: John Wiley, pp. 607–628.
- Horelli, L. (ed.) (2013a): New Approaches to Urban Planning, Insights from Participatory Communities. Helsinki: Aalto University. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-60-5191-8, pp. 65–88.
- Horelli, L. (2013b): The Contributions of Time Planning in the Finnish Context. In Horelli, L. (ed.), New Approaches to Urban Planning, Insights from Participatory Communities. Helsinki: Aalto University. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-60-5191-8, pp. 65–88.
- Horelli, L.; Damyanovic, D. (2019): Evaluation of spatial development from the gender+ perspective. In Zibell, B.; Damyanovic, D.; Sturm, U. (eds.), Gendered Approaches to Spatial Development in Europe – Perspectives, Similarities, Differences. London: Routledge, pp.157–180.
- Horelli, L.; Wallin, S. (2010): The Future-Making Assessment Approach as a Tool for E-Planning and Community Development – the Case of Ubiquitous Helsinki. In Silva, C. N. (ed.), Handbook of Research on E-Planning: ICTs for Urban Development and Monitoring. Hershey, PA: IGI Global, pp. 58–79.
- Jarenko, K. (2013): Local Co-Governance in Herttoniemi: A Deliberative System. In Horelli, L. (ed.), New approaches to urban planning. Insights from participatory communities. Helsinki: Aalto yliopiston julkaisusarja. Unigrafia. http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-60-5191-8, pp. 45–64.
- Jepsen, M. R.; Busck, A. G. (2019): Hvad skaber rurale succeser og hvor langt rækker brandet? (What creates rural successes?) Eksemplificeret ved Torup landsby i Halsnæs kommune. Frederiksberg: Institut for Geovidenskab og Naturforvaltning, Köbenhavn: Københavns Universitet.
- Lydon, M.; Garcia, A. (2015): A Tactical Urbanism How-To. In Lydon, M.; Garcia, A. (eds.), Tactical Urbanism. Washington: Island Press/Center for Resource Economics, pp.171–208.
- Mäenpää, P.; Faehnle, M. (2017): Civic activism as a resource for cities. Kvartti: Helsingin kaupungin tietokeskuksen neljännesvuosijulkaisu, (1/2017), https://researchportal.helsinki.fi/en/publications/civic-activism-as-a-resource-forcities, pp. 68–81.
- Niiniluoto, I. (2002): Critical scientific realism. Oxford University Press: Oxford.
- Poikola, A.; Kola, P.; K. A. Hintikka (2011): Public Data: an introduction to opening information resources. Finnish Ministry of Transport and Communications, 2011. Retrieved 4 June 2020, available at: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/198191501.pdf.
- Rauws W. (2016): Civic initiatives in urban development: Self-governance versus self-organisation in planning practice. Town Planning Review, 87 (3), pp. 339–361. doi: https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2016.23
- Rauws, W.; de Roo, G.; Zhang, S. (2016): Self-organisation and spatial planning: an editorial introduction. The Town Planning Review, 87 (3), DOI: https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2016.18, pp. 241–251.
- Saad-Sulonen, J. (2014): Combining participations. Expanding the Locus of Participatory E-Planning by Combining Participatory Approaches in the Design of Digital Technology and in Urban Planning. Aalto University publication series Doctoral Dissertations, 11/2014. Retrieved 4 June 2020. Available at: https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/handle/123456789/13352.
- Saad-Sulonen, J.; Horelli, L. (2017): Urban selforganising groups as users of digital artefacts – Nordic experiences. Journal of Finnish Urban Studies, 57 (3). Available at: http://www.yss.fi/?post_type=journal&p=4179318.
- Sandercock, L. (2003): Out of the Closet: The Importance of Stories and Storytelling in Planning Practice. Planning Theory & Practice, 4 (1), pp. 11–28. doi: https://doi.org/10.1080/1464935032000057209
- Springett, S. (2015): Going deeper or flatter: connecting deep mapping, flat ontologies and the democratizing of knowledge. Humanities, 4 (4), pp. 623–636. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/h4040623
- Staffans, A.; Horelli, L. (2014): Expanded Urban Planning as a Vehicle for Understanding and Shaping Smart, Liveable Cities. Journal of Community Informatics, 10 (3). http://ci-journal.net/index.php/ciej/article/view/1171. doi: https://doi.org/10.15353/joci.v10i3.3439
- Strauss, A.; Corbin, J. (1990): Basics of Qualitative Research. Grounded Theory Procedures and Techniques. London: Sage.
- Timulak, L. (2009): Meta-analysis of qualitative studies: A tool for reviewing qualitative research findings in psychotherapy. Psychotherapy Research, 19 (4–5), pp. 591–600 DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10503300802477989.
- Wallin, S. (2019): Managing urban complexity – Participatory planning, self-organization and coproduction of urban space. Aalto University publication series, No. 159/2019. https://aaltodoc.aalto.fi/handle/123456789/40200.
- Wallin, S.; Horelli, L.; Saad-Sulonen, J. (eds.) (2010): Digital tools in participatory planning. Espoo: Aalto University, Centre for Urban and Regional Studies. Series C27. http://lib.tkk.fi/Reports/2010/isbn9789526032603.pdf.
- Wallin, S.; Staffans, A. (2015): From Statutory Urban Planning to Living Labs. In Lappalainen, P.; Markkula, M.; Kuhne, H. (eds.) Espoo Innovation Garden book: Orchestrating Regional Innovation Ecosystems. Helsinki: Otava, pp. 269–280.