Urban planning and design as verbal and visual rhetoric

References

• Alexander, Ernest. 2000. “Rationality Revisited: Planning Paradigms in a Post-Postmodernist Perspective.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 19 (3): 242–256.10.1177/0739456X0001900303
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Anonymized Authors. 2014.
   Google Scholar
• Arnheim, Rudolf. 1974. Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bennett, Roger, and Sharmila Savani. 2003. “The Rebranding of City Places: An International Comparative Investigation.” International Public Management Review 4 (2): 70–87.
   Google Scholar
• Bonsiepe, Gui. 1965. “Visual/Verbal Rhetoric.” Ulm 14 (15–16): 37–42.
   Google Scholar
• Bulkens, Maartje, Claudio Minca, and Hamzah Muzaini. 2014. “Storytelling as Method in Spatial Planning.” European Planning Studies. doi:10.1080/09654313.2014.942600.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Carp, Jana. 2004. “Wit, Style, and Substance: How Planners Shape Public Participation.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 23: 242–254.10.1177/0739456X03261283
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Charney, Igal. 2007. “The Politics of Design: Architecture, Tall Buildings and the Skyline of Central London.” Area 39 (2): 195–205.10.1111/area.2007.39.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dickinson, Greg. 1997. “Memories for Sale: Nostalgia and the Construction of Identity in Old Pasadena.” The Quarterly Journal of Speech 83 (1): 1–27.10.1080/00335639709384169
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Erickson, Bill, and Marion Roberts. 1997. “Marketing Local Identity.” Journal of Urban Design 2 (1): 35–59.10.1080/13574809708724395
   Google Scholar
• Faludi, Andreas. 2005. “The Netherlands: A Culture with a Soft Spot for Planning.” In Comparative Planning Cultures, edited by B. Sanyal, 285–307. New York and London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Foss, Sonja. 2004. “Framing the Study of Visual Rhetoric: Toward a Transformation of Rhetorical Theory.” In Defining Visual Rhetorics, edited by C. Hills and M. Helmers, 303–313. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Friedman, Avi. 2002. Planning the New Suburbia. Vancouver: UBC Press.
   Google Scholar
• Gerrits, Lasse, Ward Rauws, and Gert de Roo. 2012. “Dutch Spatial Planning Policies in Transition.” Planning Theory and Practice 13 (2): 336–341.10.1080/14649357.2012.669992
   Google Scholar
• Gospodini, Aspa. 2002. “European Cities in Competition and the New ‘Uses’ of Urban Design.” Journal of Urban Design 7 (1): 59–73.10.1080/13574800220129231
   Google Scholar
• Hoch, Charles. 2006. “Emotions in Planning.” Planning Theory & Practice 7 (4): 367–382.
   Google Scholar
• Holden, Meg. 2008. “The Tough Minded and the Tender Minded: A Pragmatic Turn for Sustainable Development Planning and Policy.” Planning Theory & Practice 9 (4): 475–496.
   Google Scholar
• Inaba, Jeffrey. 2009. “Storytelling.” Volume 20: 2–7
   Google Scholar
• Jenkins, Barbara. 1999. “The Low Politics of High Art.” Alternatives 24: 193–217.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Messaris, Paul. 1997. Visual Persuasion: The Role of Images in Advertising. Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Nelessen, Anton. 1994. Views for a New American Dream: Processes, Principles, and an Ordinance to Plan and Design Small Communities. Chicago, IL: Planners Press.
   Google Scholar
• Neuman, Michael. 1996. “Images as Institution Builders: Metropolitan Planning in Madrid.” European Planning Studies 4 (3): 293–312.
   Google Scholar
• Ney, Steven. 2009. Resolving Messy Policy Problems: Handling Conflict in Environmental, Transport, Health and Ageing Policy. London: Earthscan.10.1080/09654319608720347
   Google Scholar
• Noonan, Douglas S. 2005. “Neighbours, Barriers and Urban Environments: Are Things ‘Different on the Other Side of the Tracks’?” Urban Studies 42: 1817–1835.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Oltmans-Ananat, Elizabeth. 2007. “The Wrong Side of the Tracks: Estimating the Causal Effects of Racial Segregation on City Outcomes.” National Bureau of Economic Research, Working Paper 13343.
   Google Scholar
• Pojani, D. and D. Stead. 2014a. “Ideas, Interests, and Institutions: Explaining Dutch Transit-oriented Development Challenges.” Environment and Planning A 46 (10): 2401–2418.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pojani, Dorina, and Dominic Stead. 2014b. “Dutch Planning Policy: The Resurgence of TOD.” Land Use Policy 41: 357–367.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodwin, Lloyd, and Robert Hollister, eds. 1984. Cities of the Mind: Images and Themes of the City in the Social Sciences. New York and London: Plenum Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sametz, Roger, and Andrew Maydoney. 2003. “Storytelling through Design.” Design Management Journal 14 (4): 18–34.
   Google Scholar
• Sandercock, Leonie. 2003. “Out of the Closet: The Importance of Stories and Storytelling in Planning Practice.” Planning Theory & Practice 4 (1): 11–28.
   Google Scholar
• Scott, Linda. 1994. “Images in Advertising: The Need for a Theory of Visual Rhetoric.” The Journal of Consumer Research 21 (2): 252–273.10.1086/jcr.1994.21.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simon, Herbert, ed. 1990. The Rhetorical Turn: Invention and Persuasion in the Conduct of Inquiry. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.
   Google Scholar
• Stone, Deborah. 2002. Policy Paradox: The Art of Political Decision-Making. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
   Google Scholar
• Tasan-Kok, Tuna. 2008. “Changing Interpretations of ‘Flexibility’ in the Planning Literature: From Opportunism to Creativity?” International Planning Studies 13 (3): 183–195.
   Google Scholar
• Throgmorton, James. 1996. Planning as Persuasive Storytelling: The Rhetorical Construction of Chicago’s Electric Future. Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.10.1080/13563470802521382
   Google Scholar
• Throgmorton, James. 2003. “Planning as Persuasive Storytelling in a Global-Scale Web of Relationships.” Planning Theory 2: 125–151.10.1177/14730952030022003
   Google Scholar
• Verma, Niraj. 1993. “Metaphor and Analogy as Elements of a Theory of Similarity for Planning.” Journal of Planning Education and Research 13: 13–25.10.1177/0739456X9301300104
   Google Scholar
• Verma, Niraj. 1998. Similarities, Connections, and Systems: The Search for a New Rationality for Planning and Management. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
   Google Scholar
• Wagner, Ina. 2000. “Persuasive Artefacts in Architectural Design & Planning.” In Collaborative Design, S. Scrivener, L. Ball, and A. Woodcock edited by, Ch. 36, pp. 379–389. London: Springer-Verlag.
   Google Scholar