Fatalism in Co-evolutionary Urban Planning: Experiences from Infill Planning in Finland

References

• Albrechts, L. (2011) Transformative practices: Where strategic spatial planning meets social innovation, in: S. Oosterlynck (Ed) Strategic Spatial Projects: Catalysts for Change, pp. 17–25 (New York, NY: Routledge).
   Google Scholar
• Bertolini, L. (2007) Evolutionary urban transportation planning: An exploration, Environment and Planning A, 39(8), pp. 1998–2019. doi:10.1068/a38350.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bertolini, L. (2010) Coping with the irreducible uncertainties of planning: An evolutionary approach, in: P. Healey & J. Hillier (Eds) The Ashgate Research Companion to Planning Theory: Conceptual Challenges for Spatial Planning, pp. 413–424 (Farnham: Ashgate).
   Google Scholar
• Beunen, R., Duineveld, M., & Van Assche, K. (2016) Evolutionary governance theory and the adaptive capacity of the Dutch planning system, in: G. De Roo & L. Boelens (Eds) Spatial Planning in a Complex Unpredictable World of Change: Towards a Proactive Co-evolutionary Type of Planning within the Eurodelta, pp. 98–117 (Groningen: InPlanning).
   Google Scholar
• Boelens, L., & Coppens, T. (2015) Actor-relational planning in deprived areas: Challenges and opportunities in Luchtbal Antwerpen, Belgium, Planning Practice & Research, 30(4), pp. 410–423. doi:10.1080/02697459.2015.1060051.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• 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:10.1177/1473095214542631.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coffey, A., & Atkinson, P. (1996). Making Sense of Qualitative Data, (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage).
   Google Scholar
• Davoudi, S. (2012) Resilience: A bridging concept or a dead end?, Planning Theory & Practice, 13(2), pp. 299–307. doi:10.1080/14649357.2012.677124.
   Google Scholar
• Davoudi, S., Brooks, E., & Mehmood, A. (2013) Evolutionary resilience and strategies for climate adaptation, Planning Practice & Research, 28(3), pp. 307–322. doi:10.1080/02697459.2013.787695.
   Google Scholar
• Davy, B. (2008) Plan it without a condom!, Planning Theory, 7(3), pp. 301–317. doi:10.1177/1473095208096885.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davy, B. (2012). Land Policy: Planning and the Spatial Consequences of Property, (London & New York, NY: Routledge).
   Google Scholar
• De Roo, G., & Boelens, L. (2016) Setting the scene–About planning and a world in change, in: G. De Roo & L. Boelens (Eds) Spatial Planning in a Complex Unpredictable World of Change: Towards a Proactive Co-evolutionary Type of Planning within the Eurodelta, pp. 14–27 (Groningen: InPlanning).
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, M. (1973). Natural Symbols: Explorations in Cosmology, 2nd ed. (London: Barrie & Jenkins).
   Google Scholar
• Douglas, M. (1978). Cultural Bias, (London: Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland).
   Google Scholar
• Eilstein, H. (1997). Life Contemplated, Life Practical: An Essay on Fatalism, (Amsterdam & Atlanta, GA: Rodopi).
   Google Scholar
• Etzioni, A. (1967) Mixed-scanning: A “third” approach to decision-making, Public Administration Review, 27(5), pp. 385–392. doi:10.2307/973394.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Giezen, M., Bertolini, L., & Salet, W. (2014) Adaptive capacity within a mega project: A case study on planning and decision-making in the face of complexity, European Planning Studies, 27(5), pp. 999–1018.
   Google Scholar
• Grint, K. (2010) Wicked problems and clumsy solutions: The role of leadership, in: S. Brookes & K. Grint (Eds) The New Public Leadership Challenge, pp. 169–186 (London: Palgrave Macmillan).
   Google Scholar
• Hartmann, T. (2011). Clumsy Floodplains: Responsive Land Policy for Extreme Floods, (Farnham: Ashgate).
   Google Scholar
• Hartmann, T. (2012) Wicked problems and clumsy solutions: Planning as expectation management, Planning Theory, 11(3), pp. 242–256. doi:10.1177/1473095212440427.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartmann, T., & Hengstermann, A. (2014) Territorial cohesion through spatial policies: An analysis with cultural theory and clumsy solutions, Central European Journal of Public Policy, 8(1), pp. 30–49.
   Google Scholar
• Hendriks, F. (1999) Post-industrialising city: Political and cultural biases, GeoJournal, 47(3), pp. 425–432. doi:10.1023/A:1007034010709.
   Google Scholar
• Holling, C. S. (2001) Understanding the complexity of economic, ecological, and social systems, Ecosystems, 4(5), pp. 390–405. doi:10.1007/s10021-001-0101-5.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hood, C. (2002). The Art of the State: Culture, Rhetoric, and Public Management, (Oxford: Clarendon Press).
   Google Scholar
• Kuusisto-Arponen, A.-K., Laine, M., & Rauhala, M. (2014) Osallistumisen odotusten kurimus: Narratiivinen analyysi paikallisesta maankäytön konfliktista [A maelstrom of expectations: Narrative analysis of participation in local land use conflict], Finnish Journal of Urban Studies, 52(4), pp. 11–33.
   Google Scholar
• Kvale, S., & Brinkmann, S. (2009). InterViews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing, (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage).
   Google Scholar
• Majoor, S. (2015) Resilient practices: A paradox-oriented approach for large-scale development projects, Town Planning Review, 86(3), pp. 257–277. doi:10.3828/tpr.2015.17.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mamadouh, V. (1999) Grid-group cultural theory: An introduction, GeoJournal, 47(3), pp. 395–409. doi:10.1023/A:1007024008646.
   Google Scholar
• March, J. (1991) Exploration and exploitation in organizational learning, Organization Science, 2(1), pp. 71–87. doi:10.1287/orsc.2.1.71.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ministry of the Environment (2014) Arviointi maankäyttö- ja rakennuslain toimivuudesta 2013 [Assessment of the effectiveness of the Land Use and Building Act in 2013] Finnish environment 1/2014, Helsinki: Ministry of the Environment.
   Google Scholar
• Oosterlynck, S. (Ed) (2011) Strategic Spatial Projects: Catalysts for Change, (London: Routledge).
   Google Scholar
• Porter, L., & Davoudi, S. (2012) The politics of resilience for planning: A cautionary note, Planning Theory & Practice, 13(2), pp. 329–333.
   Google Scholar
• Savini, F., & Salet, W. (Eds) (2017) Planning Projects in Transition. Interventions, Regulations and Investments, (Berlin: Jovis).
   Google Scholar
• Savini, F., Salet, W., & Majoor, S. (2015) Dilemmas of planning: Intervention, regulation, and investment, Planning Theory, 14(3), pp. 296–315. doi:10.1177/1473095214531430.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schmitt, S.-M., & Hartmann, T. (2016) Clumsy city by design—A theory for Jane Jacobs’ imperfect cities? Urban Planning, 1(4), pp. 42–50. doi:10.17645/up.v1i4.732.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schön, D. (1983). The Reflective Practitioner, (New York; NY: Basic Books).
   Google Scholar
• Solomon, R. C. (2003) On fate and fatalism, Philosophy East and West, 53(4), pp. 435–454. doi:10.1353/pew.2003.0047.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, M., & Beck, M. B. (2015) Coping with change: Urban resilience, sustainability, adaptability and path dependence, Future of cities: Working paper, UK Government’s Foresight Future of Cities Project.
   Google Scholar
• Thompson, M., Ellis, R., & Wildavsky, A. (1990). Cultural Theory, (Boulder, CO: Westview Press).
   Google Scholar
• Van Assche, K., Beunen, R., & Duineveld, M. (2017) Co-evolutionary planning theory: Evolutionary governance theory and its relatives, in: M. Gunder, A. Madanipour, & V. Watson (Eds) The Routledge Handbook of Planning Theory, pp. 221–234 (New York, NY: Routledge).
   Google Scholar
• Verweij, M., Douglas, M., Ellis, R., Engel, C., Hendriks, F., Lohmann, S., Ney, S., Rayner, S., & Thompson, M. (2006) The case for clumsiness, in: M. Verweij & M. Thompson (Eds) Clumsy Solutions for a Complex World: Governance, Politics and Plural Perceptions, pp. 1–27 (Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan).
   Google Scholar
• Yin, R. K. (2014). Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 5th ed. (Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage).
   Google Scholar