Flat Ontology and Evolving Governance: Consequences for Planning Theory and Practice

References

• Aberbach, J. D.; Christensen, T. (2014): Why reforms so often disappoint. The American Review of Public Administration, 44 (1), pp. 3–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Acemoglu, D.; Robinson, J. (2012): Why nations fail. The origins of power, prosperity and poverty. New York: Crown Business.
   Google Scholar
• Alfasi, N.; Migdalovich, E. (2020): Losing faith in planning. Land Use Policy, 97, 104790.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Allmendinger, P. (2017): Planning theory. Macmillan International Higher Education.
   Google Scholar
• Allmendinger, P.; Haugton, G. (2010): Spatial planning, devolution, and new planning spaces. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 28 (5), pp. 803–818.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Armitage, D. R. (2010): Adaptive capacity and environmental governance. London: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Ash, J. (2020): Flat ontology and geography. Dialogues in Human Geography, 2043820620940052.
   Google Scholar
• Bergthaller, H. (2014): Limits of agency: Notes on the material turn from a systems-theoretical perspective. Material ecocriticism, pp. 37–50.
   Google Scholar
• Beunen, R.; Patterson, J.; Van Assche, K. (2017): Governing for resilience: the role of institutional work. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability, 28, pp.10–16.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Beunen, R.; Van Assche, K.; Duineveld, M. (2015): Evolutionary Governance Theory: Theory and Applications. Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Bishwapriya, S. (ed.) (2012): Comparative Planning Cultures. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Boelens, L. (2021): A Flat Ontology in Spatial Planning. Opening up a new landscape or just a dead end? disP – The Planning Review, this volume, pp. 4–15.
   Google Scholar
• Booth, P. (2007): The control of Discretion: Planning and the Common-Law tradition. Planning Theory, 6 (2), pp. 127–145. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095207077585.
   Google Scholar
• Brunner, R. D. (2005): Adaptive governance: integrating science, policy, and decision making. New York: Columbia University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Calhoun, C. (2015): Democratizing inequalities: Dilemmas of the new public participation: NYU Press.
   Google Scholar
• DeLanda, M. (2006): Deleuzian social ontology and assemblage theory. In Fuglsang, M.; Sørensen B. (eds.), Deleuze and the Social. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press pp. 250–266.
   Google Scholar
• DeLanda, M. (2016): Assemblage theory. Edinburgh University Press.
   Google Scholar
• DeLanda, M. (2019): A new philosophy of society: Assemblage theory and social complexity. Bloomsbury Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• Deleuze, G.; Guattari, F. (1987): A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Dryzek, J. S.; Bächtiger, A.; Chambers, S.; Cohen, J.; Druckman, J. N.; Felicetti, A. et al. (2019): The crisis of democracy and the science of deliberation. Science, 363 (6432), pp.1144–1146.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Duineveld, M.; Van Assche, K.; Beunen, R. (2017): Re-conceptualising political landscapes after the material turn: a typology of material events. Landscape Research, 42 (4), pp. 375–384.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feindt, P. H.; Oels, A. (2005): Does discourse matter? Discourse analysis in environmental policy making. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 7 (3), pp.161–173.
   Google Scholar
• Ferguson, J. (1994): The Anti-politics Machine: “development”, Depolicization, and Bureaucratic Power in Lesotho. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
   Google Scholar
• Ferm, J.; Clifford, B.; Canelas, P.; Livingstone, N. (2020): Emerging problematics of deregulating the urban: The case of permitted development in England. Urban Studies, online: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098020936966.
   Google Scholar
• Fischer, F. (1990): Technocracy and the politics of expertise. Newbury Park: Sage Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. (1998): Rationality and Power: Democracy in Practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B. (2002): Bringing power to planning research. One researcher’s praxis story. Journal of planning education and research, 21, pp. 353–366.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Flyvbjerg, B.; Richardson, T. (2002): Planning and Foucault: In Search of the Dark Side of Planning Theory. In Allmendinger, P.; Tewdwr-Jones, M. (eds.), Planning Futures: New Directions for Planning Theory. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 44–62.
   Google Scholar
• Folke, C.; Hahn, T.; Olsson, P.; Norberg, J. (2005): Adaptive governance of social-ecological systems. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour., 30, pp. 441–473.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (1972): The Archaeology of Knowledge & The Discourse on Language. New York: Pan-theon Books.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (1979): Discipline and punish: the birth of the prison. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (1994): Power. Essential Works of Foucault 1954–1984. Vol. 3. New York: The New Press.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (2003): Society must be defended: lectures at the College de France, 1975–76. London: Allen Lane The Penguin Press.
   Google Scholar
• Foucault, M. (2007): Security, territory, population: lectures at the College de France, 1977–78. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Fuchs, S. (2001): Against essentialism: a theory of culture and society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gerrits, L.; Rauws, W.; de Roo, G. (2012): Dutch spatial planning policies in transition. Planning Theory & Practice, 13 (2), pp. 336–341. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2012.669992.
   Google Scholar
• Gunder, M. (2010): Planning as the ideology of (neo-liberal) space. Planning Theory, 9 (4), pp. 298–314.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunder, M.; Madanipour, A.; Watson, V. (2017): The Routledge handbook of planning theory. Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Hajer, M.; Versteeg, W. (2005): A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: Achievements, challenges, perspectives. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 7 (3), pp. 175–184.
   Google Scholar
• Hillier, J. (2003): ‘Agon’izing Over Consensus: Why Habermasian Ideals cannot be ‘Real’. Planning Theory, 2 (1), pp. 37–59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095203002001005.
   Google Scholar
• Hillier, J. (2008): Plan(e) Speaking: a Multiplanar Theory of Spatial Planning. Planning Theory, 7 (1), pp. 24–50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095207085664.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jager, N.W.; Newig, J.; Challies, E.; Kochskämper, E. (2019): Pathways to Implementation: Evidence on How Participation in Environmental Governance Impacts on Environmental Outcomes. Journal of public administration research and theory, 30 (3), pp. 383–399.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamers, M.; Van der Duim, R.; Spaargaren, G. (2017): The relevance of practice theories for tourism research. Annals of Tourism research, 62, pp. 54–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Latour, B. (1996): On interobjectivity. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 3 (4), pp. 228–245.
   Google Scholar
• Leipold, S.; Feindt, P. H.; Winkel, G.; Keller, R. (2019): Discourse analysis of environmental policy revisited: traditions, trends, perspectives. Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning, 21 (5), pp. 445–463.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lennon, M.; Waldron, R. (2019): De-democratising the Irish planning system. European Planning Studies, 27 (8), pp.1607–1625.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lord, A.; Tewdwr-Jones, M. (2014): Is planning “under attack”? Chronicling the deregulation of urban and environmental planning in England. European Planning Studies, 22 (2), pp. 345–361.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lord, A.; Tewdwr-Jones, M. (2018): Getting the planners off our backs: questioning the post-political nature of English planning policy. Planning Practice & Research, 33 (3), pp. 229–243.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Luhmann, N. (1989): Ecological Communication. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Luhmann, N. (1995): Social systems. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Maturana, H. R.; Varela, F. J. (1987): The Tree of Knowledge. The Biological Roots of Human Understanding. Boston: Shambhala Publications.
   Google Scholar
• Mazza, L.; Bianconi, M. (2014): Which aims and knowledge for spatial planning? Some notes on the current state of the discipline. Town Planning Review, 85 (4), pp. 513–531.
   Google Scholar
• Moore, A. (2017): Critical elitism: Deliberation, democracy, and the problem of expertise. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Niedziałkowski, K.; Beunen, R. (2019): The risky business of planning reform–The evolution of local spatial planning in Poland. Land Use Policy, 85, pp.11–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olesen, K.; Carter, H. (2018): Planning as a barrier for growth: Analysing storylines on the reform of the Danish Planning Act. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 36 (4), pp. 689–707.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pellizzoni, L. (2011): The politics of facts: local environmental conflicts and expertise. Environmental Politics, 20 (6), pp.765–785. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09644016.2011.617164.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pellizzoni, L. (2015): Bridging promises and (dis) illusions: Deliberative democracy in an evolutionary perspective. In Beunen, R.; Van Assche, K.; Duineveld, M. (eds.), Evolutionary governance theory. Springer, pp. 215–232.
   Google Scholar
• Pottage, A. (1998): Power as an art of contingency: Luhmann, Deleuze, Foucault. Economy and society, 27 (1), pp.1–27.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pressman, J. L.; Wildavsky, A. B. (1979): Implementation: how great expectations in Washington are dashed in Oakland (2nd ed.). Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Raco, M.; Savini, F. (2019): Planning and knowledge: How new forms of technocracy are shaping contemporary cities. Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Reed, M. S.; Vella, S.; Challies, E.; de Vente, J.; Frewer, L.; Hohenwallner-Ries, D. et al. (2018): A theory of participation: what makes stakeholder and public engagement in environmental management work? Restoration Ecology, 26 (S1), pp. S7–S17.
   Google Scholar
• Rydin, Y. (2010): Actor-network theory and planning theory: A response to Boelens. Planning Theory, 9 (3), pp. 265–268.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandercock, L. (2003): Out of the Closet: The Importance of Stories and Storytelling in Planning Practice. Planning Theory and Practice, 4, pp. 11–28.
   Google Scholar
• Sanyal, B. (2005): Comparative planning cultures. New York: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Schulte, C. M. (2018): Deleuze, concept formation, and the habit of shorthand inquiry. Qualitative inquiry, 24 (3), pp.194–202.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Scott, J. C. (1998): Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Have Failed. New Haven: Yale University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, A.; Stirling, A. (2010): The politics of social-ecological resilience and sustainable socio-technical transitions. Ecology and Society, 15 (1): 11.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stringer, L. C.; Dougill, A. J.; Fraser, E.; Hubacek, K.; Prell, C.; Reed, M. S. (2006): Unpacking “participation” in the adaptive management of social-ecological systems: A critical review. Ecology and Society, 11 (2): 39.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tait, M.; Inch, A. (2016): Putting localism in place: Conservative images of the good community and the contradictions of planning reform in England. Planning Practice & Research, 31 (2), pp. 174–194.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Assche, K.; Beunen, R.; Duineveld, M. (2012): Performing Success and Failure in Governance: Dutch Planning Experiences. Public Administration, 90 (3), pp. 567–581. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9299.2011.01972.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Assche, K.; Beunen, R.; Duineveld, M. (2014a): Evolutionary Governance Theory: An Introduction. Heidelberg: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Van Assche, K.; Beunen, R.; Duineveld, M.; de Jong, H. (2013): Co-evolutions of planning and design: Risks and benefits of design perspectives in planning systems. Planning Theory, 12 (2), pp. 177–198. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095212456771.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Assche, K.; Beunen, R.; Duineveld, M.; Gruzmacher, M. (2017): Power/knowledge and natural resource management: Foucaultian foundations in the analysis of adaptive governance. Journal of Environmental Planning and Policy, 19 (3), pp. 308–322.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Assche, K.; Beunen, R.; Oliveira, E. (2020): Spatial planning and place branding: Rethinking relations and synergies. European Planning Studies, 28 (7), pp.1274–1290.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Assche, K.; Duineveld, M.; Beunen, R. (2014b): Power and contingency in planning. Environment and Planning A, 46 (10), pp. 2385–2400.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Assche, K.; Duineveld, M.; Verschraegen, G.; During, R.; Beunen, R. (2011): Social systems and social engineering: Niklas Luhmann. In Vellema, S. (ed.), Transformation and sustainability in agriculture: connecting practice with social theory. Wageningen: Wageningen Academic Publishers, pp. 35–49.
   Google Scholar
• Van Assche, K.; Verschraegen, G. (2008): The Limits of Planning: Niklas Luhmann’s Systems Theory and the Analysis of Planning and Planning Ambitions. Planning Theory, 7 (3), pp. 263–283.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voss, J.-P.; Bornemann, B. (2011): The Politics of Reflexive Governance: Challenges for Designing Adaptive Management and Transition Management. Ecology and Society, 16 (2): 9.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Voss, J.-P.; Freeman, R. (2016): Knowing governance: the epistemic construction of political order. Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Wargent, M. (2020): Localism, governmentality and failing technologies: the case of Neighbourhood Planning in England. Territory, Politics, Governance, online: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21622671.2020.1737209, pp.1–21.
   Google Scholar
• Watson, V. (2009): Seeing from the South: Refocusing urban planning on the globe’s central urban issues. Urban Studies, 46 (11), pp. 2259–2275.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Žižek, S. (2012): Organs without bodies: On Deleuze and consequences. Routledge.
   Google Scholar