Exchange between researchers and practitioners in urban planning: achievable objective or a bridge too far?/The use of academic research in planning practice: who, what, where, when and how?/Bridging research and practice through collaboration: lessons from a joint working group/Getting the relationship between researchers and practitioners working/Art and urban planning: stimulating researcher, practitioner and community engagement/Collaboration between researchers and practitioners: Political and bureaucratic issues/Investigating Research/Conclusion: Breaking down barriers through international practice?

References

• Balducci, A., & Bertolini, L. (2007). Reflecting on practice or reflecting with practice? Interface. Planning Theory & Practice, 8, 532–555. doi:10.1080/14649350701664770
   Google Scholar
• Caplan, N. (1979). The two-communities theory and knowledge utilization. American Behavioral Scientist, 22, 459–470. 10.1177/000276427902200308
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cavell, S. (1969). Must we mean what we say? A book of essays. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cherney, A., Head, B. W., Povey, J., Boreham, P., & Ferguson, M. (2015). The utilisation of social science research – the perspectives of academic researchers in Australia. Journal of Sociology, 51, 252–270. 10.1177/1440783313505008
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cherney, A., Head, B., Povey, J., Ferguson, M., & Boreham, P. (2015). Use of academic social research by public officials: Exploring preferences and constraints that impact on research use. Evidence & Policy: A Journal of Research, Debate and Practice, 11, 169–188.
   Google Scholar
• Davoudi, S. (2006). Evidence-based planning: Rhetoric and reality. The Planning Review, 42, 14–24. 10.1080/02513625.2006.10556951
   Google Scholar
• Durning, B. (2004). Planning academics and planning practitioners: Two tribes or a community of practice? Planning Practice & Research, 19, 435–446.
   Google Scholar
• Durning, B. (2004). Planning academics and planning practitioners: Two tribes or a community of practice? Planning Practice & Research, 19, 435–446.
   Google Scholar
• Durning, B. (2004). Planning academics and planning practitioners: Two tribes or a community of practice? Planning Practice & Research, 19, 435–446.
   Google Scholar
• Embrett, M. G., & Randall, G. E. (2014). Social determinants of health and health equity policy research: Exploring the use, misuse, and nonuse of policy analysis theory. Social Science & Medicine, 108, 147–155.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fögen, M. T. (1997). Die Enteignung der Wahrsager: Studien zum kaiserlichen Wissensmonopol in der Spätantike [The expropriation of the fortune-tellers: Studies on the imperial monopoly of knowledge in late antiquity]. In Suhrkamp-Taschenbuch Wissenschaft (Vol. 1316). Frankfurt am Main: suhrkamp.
   Google Scholar
• Forsyth, A. (2012). Alternative cultures in planning research – From extending scientific frontiers to exploring enduring questions: Commentary. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 32, 160–168. doi:10.1177/0739456X12442217
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forsyth, A., & Crewe, K. (2006). Research in environmental design: Definitions and limits. Journal of Architectural & Planning Research, 23, 160–175.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gurran, N., & Phibbs, P. (2015). Are governments really interested in fixing the housing problem? Policy capture and busy work in Australia. Housing Studies, 30, 711–729. 10.1080/02673037.2015.1044948
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Head, B. W. (2015). Relationships between policy academics and public servants: Learning at a distance? Australian Journal of Public Administration, 74, 5–12. doi:10.1111/1467-8500.12133
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Head, B. W. (2015). Relationships between policy academics and public servants: Learning at a distance? Australian Journal of Public Administration, 74, 5–12. 10.1111/aupa.2015.74.issue-1
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Head, B. W., Ferguson, M., Cherney, A., & Boreham, P. (2014). Are policy-makers interested in social research? Exploring the sources and uses of valued information among public servants in Australia. Policy & Society, 33, 89–101.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kay, A. (2011). Evidence-based policy-making: The elusive search for rational public administration. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 70, 236–245. 10.1111/aupa.2011.70.issue-3
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krizek, K., Forsyth, A., & Slotterback, C. S. (2009). Is there a role for evidence-based practice in urban planning and policy? Planning Theory & Practice, 10, 459–478. doi:10.1080/14649350903417241
   Google Scholar
• Krizek, K., Forsyth, A., & Slotterback, C. S. (2009). Is there a role for evidence-based practice in urban planning and policy? Planning Theory & Practice, 10, 459–478.
   Google Scholar
• Krizek, K., Forsyth, A., & Slotterback, C. S. (2009). Is there a role for evidence-based practice in urban planning and policy? Planning Theory & Practice, 10, 459–478. doi:10.1080/14649350903417241.
   Google Scholar
• Landry, R., Amara, N., & Lamari, M. (2001). Climbing the ladder of research utilization: Evidence from social science research. Science Communication, 22, 396–422. 10.1177/1075547001022004003
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Landry, R., Lamari, M., & Amara, N. (2003). The extent and determinants of the utilization of university research in government agencies. Public Administration Review, 63, 192–205. 10.1111/puar.2003.63.issue-2
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• MacDonald, K., Sanyal, B., Silver, M., Ng, M. K., Head, P., Williams, K., & Campbell, H. (2014). Challenging theory: Changing practice: Critical perspectives on the past and potential of professional planning: Interface. Planning Theory & Practice, 15, 95–100. doi:10.1080/14649357.2014.886801
   Google Scholar
• Newman, J. (2014). Revisiting the “two communities” metaphor of research utilisation. International Journal of Public Sector Management, 27, 614–627. 10.1108/IJPSM-04-2014-0056
   Google Scholar
• Newman, J., Cherney, A., & Head, B. W. (2016). Do policy makers use academic research? Reexamining the “two communities” theory of research utilization. Public Administration Review, 76, 24–32.10.1111/puar.12464
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• NSW Department of Family and Community Services. (2016). Future directions for social housing in NSW. Sydney: NSW Government.
   Google Scholar
• Nutley, S., Walter, I., & Davies, H. (2007). Using evidence: How research can inform public services. Bristol: Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Nutley, S., Walter, I., & Davies, H. (2007). Using evidence: How research can inform public services. Bristol: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Phibbs, P., & Young, P. (2005). Housing assistance and non-shelter outcomes. Melbourne: AHURI Final Report.
   Google Scholar
• Pojani, D., & Stead, D. (2014). Dutch planning policy: The resurgence of TOD. Land Use Policy, 41, 357–367. 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.06.011
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, L. (2015). Unsettling comforting deceits: Planning scholarship, planning practice and the politics of research impact. Planning Theory & Practice, 16, 293–296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, L. (2015). Unsettling comforting deceits: Planning scholarship, planning practice and the politics of research impact. Planning Theory & Practice, 16, 293–296.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rittel, H. W. J., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169. doi:10.1007/BF01405730.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stead, D. (2013). Climate change, sustainability and urban policy: Examining the validity and function of best practices. In J. Knieling & W. Leal Filho (Eds.), Climate change governance (pp. 243–258). Heidelberg: Springer. 10.1007/978-3-642-29831-8
   Google Scholar
• Taylor, E. J., & Hurley, J. (2015). “Not a lot of people read the stuff”: Australian urban research in planning practice. Urban Policy and Research, 34(2), 1–16. doi:10.1080/08111146.2014.994741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, E. J., & Hurley, J. (2015). “Not a lot of people read the stuff”: Australian urban research in planning practice. Urban Policy and Research. (Online first), 1–16. doi:10.1080/08111146.2014.994741
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, E. J., & Hurley, J. (2015). “Not a lot of people read the stuff”: Australian urban research in planning practice. Urban Policy and Research, 34(2), 1–16, doi:10.1080/08111146.2014.994741.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Taylor, E. J., & Hurley, J. (2015). “Not a lot of people read the stuff”: Australian urban research in planning practice. Urban Policy and Research, 34(2), 1–16, doi:10.1080/08111146.2014.994741.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tingle, L. (2015). Political amnesia – How we forgot to govern. Quarterly Essay, 60, 1–86.
   Google Scholar
• Van de Ven, A. H., & Johnson, P. E. (2006). Knowledge for theory and practice. Academy of Management Review, 31, 802–821. doi:10.5465/AMR.2006.22527385
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolman, H., & Page, E. (2002). Policy transfer among local governments: An information-theory approach. Governance, 15, 477–501. 10.1111/gove.2002.15.issue-4
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woodcock, I. (2016). The design speculation and action research assemblage: ‘Transit for all’ and the transformation of Melbourne’s passenger rail system. Australian Planner, 53, 15–27. 10.1080/07293682.2015.1135818
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar