Hear the Rime of the Fellow Mariner? A Letter to the Next Generation of Emphatic Co-Creators in Planning

References

• Abram, S., & Cowell, R. (2004). Dilemmas of implementation: ‘integration’ and ‘participation’ in Norwegian and Scottish local government. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 22(5), 701–719.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Adams, S. L., & Anantatmula, V. (2010). Social and behavioral influences on team process. Project Management Journal, 41(4), 89–98.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Albrechts, L., Barbanente, A., & Monno, V. (2019). From stage-managed planning towards a more imaginative and inclusive strategic spatial planning. Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space, 37(8), 1489–1506.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ansell, C., & Trondal, J. (2018). Governing turbulence: An organizational-institutional agenda. Perspectives on Public Management and Governance, 1(1), 43–57.
   Google Scholar
• Balducci, A., & Bertolini, L. (2007). Reflecting on practice or reflecting with practice? Planning Theory & Practice, 8(4), 532–555.
   Google Scholar
• Barry, J., Horst, M., Inch, A., Legacy, C., Rishi, S., Rivero, J. J., … Zitcer, A. (2018). Unsettling planning theory. Planning Theory, 17(3), 418–438.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baum, H. (1987). The invisible bureaucracy: The unconscious in organizational problem solving. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Baum, H. (1997). Social science, social work, and surgery: Teaching what students need to practice planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 63(2), 179–188.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baum, H. (1999). Forgetting to plan. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 19(1), 2–14.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baum, H. (2011). Planning and the problem of evil. Planning Theory, 10(2), 103–123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baum, H. (2015a). Planning with half a mind: Why planners resist emotion. Planning Theory & Practice, 16(4), 498–516.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baum, H. (2015b). Discovering and working with irrationality in planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 81(1), 67–74.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Birch, E. L. (2001). Practitioners and the art of planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 20(4), 407–422.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brief, A. P., & Weiss, H. M. (2002). Organizational behavior: Affect in the workplace. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 279–307.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Byrne, D. (2003). Complexity theory and planning theory: A necessary encounter. Planning Theory, 2(3), 171–178.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, H. (2012). Lots of words … but do any of them matter? The challenge of engaged scholarship. Planning Theory & Practice, 13, 349–353.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, H. (2014). The academy and the planning profession: Planning to make the future together? Planning Theory & Practice, 15(1), 119–122.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, H., & Marshall, R. (1998). Acting on principle: Dilemmas in planning practice. Planning Practice & Research, 13(2), 117–128.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, H., & Marshall, R. (2002). Values and professional identities in planning practice. In P. Allmendinger and M. Tewdwr-Jones (Eds.), Planning futures: New directions for planning theory (pp. 93–109). London: Routlege.
   Google Scholar
• Chen, C. J., & Huang, J. W. (2007). How organizational climate and structure affect knowledge management - The social interaction perspective. International Journal of Information Management, 27(2), 104–118.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chettiparamb, A. (2006). Metaphors in complexity theory and planning. Planning Theory, 5(1), 71–91.
   Google Scholar
• Clinch, J. P. (2006). Do planners need to be psychologically profiled? Planning Theory & Practice, 7(4), 361–364.
   Google Scholar
• Clinch, J. P. (2007). Academia, applied research and the planning profession. Planning Theory & Practice, 8(4), 423–426.
   Google Scholar
• Dalton, L. C. (1990). Planners in conflict: Experience and perceptions in California. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 7(4), 284–302.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalton, L. C. (2007). Preparing planners for the breadth of practice: What we need to know depends on whom we ask. Journal of the American Planning Association, 73(1), 35–48.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalton, L. C. (2015). Theory and practice, practice and theory: Reflections on a planner’s career. Journal of the American Planning Association, 81(4), 303–309.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davoudi, S. (2015). Planning as practice of knowing. Planning Theory, 14(3), 316–331.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Leo, D., & Forester, J. (2017). Reimagining planning: Moving from reflective practice to deliberative practice-a first exploration in the Italian context. Planning Theory & Practice, 18(2), 202–216.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Roo, G., & Silva, E. A. (Eds.). (2010). A planner’s encounter with complexity. Aldershot: Ashgate.
   Google Scholar
• Dempwolf, C. S., & Lyles, L. W. (2012). The uses of social network analysis in planning: A review of the literature. Journal of Planning Literature, 27(1), 3–21.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eräranta, S. (2019). Memorize the dance in the shadows? Unriddling the networked dynamics of planning processes through social network analysis (Doctoral dissertation). Aalto University, Espoo.
   Google Scholar
• Eräranta, S., & Mladenović, M. N. (in review). The impact of actor-relational dynamics on integrated planning practice. Transactions of the Association of European Schools of Planning.
   Google Scholar
• Ferreira, A. (2013). Emotions in planning practice: A critical review and a suggestion for future developments based on mindfulness. Town Planning Review, 84(6), 703–719.
   Google Scholar
• Fischler, R. (2000). Case studies of planners at work. Journal of Planning Literature, 15(2), 184–195.
   Google Scholar
• Forester, J. (1983). The geography of planning practice. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 1(2), 163–180.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forester, J. (Ed.). (1989). Understanding planning practice. In Planning in the face of power (pp. 137–62, 236–246). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Forester, J. (2012). Learning to improve practice: Lessons from practice stories and practitioners’ own discourse analyses (or why only the loons show up). Planning Theory & Practice, 13(1), 11–26.
   Google Scholar
• Fox-Rogers, L., & Murphy, E. (2016). Self-perceptions of the role of the planner. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 43(1), 74–92.
   Google Scholar
• Geels, F. W., Sovacool, B. K., Schwanen, T., & Sorrell, S. (2017). Sociotechnical transitions for deep decarbonization. Science, 357(6357), 1242–1244.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grange, K. (2017). Planners – A silenced profession? The politicisation of planning and the need for fearless speech. Planning Theory, 16(3), 275–295.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunder, M. (2003). Passionate planning for the others’ desire: An agonistic response to the dark side of planning. Progress in Planning, 60(3), 235–319.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gunder, M. (2010). Making planning theory matter: A Lacanian encounter with Phronesis. International Planning Studies, 15(1), 37–51.
   Google Scholar
• Gunder, M., & Hillier, J. (2016). Planning in ten words or less: A Lacanian entanglement with spatial planning. New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (1992). A planner’s day: Knowledge and action in communicative practice. Journal of the American Planning Association, 58(1), 9–20.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (2007). Re-thinking key dimensions of strategic spatial planning: Sustainability and complexity. In G. de Roo & G. Porter (Eds.), Fuzzy planning: The role of actors in a fuzzy governance environment (pp. 21–42). Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
   Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (2010). Making better places: The planning project in the twenty-first century. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Hoch, C. (1988). Conflict at large: A national survey of planners and political conflict. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 8(1), 25–34.
   Google Scholar
• Hoch, C. (1994). What planners do: Power, politics, and persuasion. Chicago, IL: American Planning Association.
   Google Scholar
• Hoch, C. (2006). Emotions and planning. Planning Theory & Practice, 7(4), 367–382.
   Google Scholar
• Hoch, C. (2017). Pragmatism and plan-making. In B. Haselsberger (Ed.), Encounters in planning thought: 16 autobiographical essays from key thinkers in strategic spatial planning (pp. 297–314). New York, NY: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Howe, E. (1980). Role choices of urban planners. Journal of the American Planning Association, 46(4), 398–409.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howe, E., & Kaufman, J. (1979). The ethics of contemporary American planners. Journal of the American Planning Association, 45(3), 243–255.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huy, Q. N. (1999). Emotional capability, emotional intelligence, and radical change. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 325–345.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Huy, Q. N. (2012). Emotions in strategic organization: Opportunities for impactful research. Strategic Organization, 10(3), 240–247.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Inch, A. (2010). Culture change as identity regulation: The micro-politics of producing spatial planners in England. Planning Theory & Practice, 11(3), 359–374.
   Google Scholar
• Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2010). Planning with complexity: An introduction to collaborative rationality for public policy. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• IPCC. (2019). Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty. [ Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, T. Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (Eds.)]. Retrieved from https://www.ipcc.ch/sr15/download/
   Google Scholar
• Jessop, B. (2001). Institutional re (turns) and the strategic–Relational approach. Environment and Planning A, 33(7), 1213–1235.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Johnson, B. J. (2010). City planners and public service motivation. Planning Practice & Research, 25(5), 563–586.
   Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. L. (1985). American and Israeli planners: A cross-cultural comparison. Journal of the American Planning Association, 51(3), 352–363.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaufman, J. L., & Escuin, M. (2000). Thinking alike: Similarities in attitudes of Dutch, Spanish, and American planners. Journal of the American Planning Association, 66(1), 34–45.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kenny, M., & Meadowcroft, J. (Eds.). (2002). Planning sustainability. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Kitchen, T. (1997). People, politics, policies and plans: The city planning process in contemporary Britain. London: SAGE.
   Google Scholar
• Kitchen, T. (2007). Skills for planning practice. New York, NY: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Krieger, M. H. (1975). What do planners do? Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 41(5), 347–349.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krumholz, N. (1986). From planning practice to academia. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 6(1), 60–65.
   Google Scholar
• Krumholz, N. (2007). Multi-tasking planners. Plan Canada, 47(2), 30.
   Google Scholar
• Krumholz, N., & Forester, J. (1990). Making equity planning work. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Lauria, M., & Long, M. (2017). Planning experience and planners’ ethics. Journal of the American Planning Association, 83(2), 202–220.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lyles, W., White, S. S., & Lavelle, B. D. (2017). The prospect of compassionate planning. Journal of Planning Literature, 33(3), 247–266.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Majoor, S. J. (2018). Coping with ambiguity: An urban megaproject ethnography. Progress in Planning, 120, 1–28.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mayo, J. M. (1982). Sources of job dissatisfaction ideals versus realities in planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 48(4), 481–495.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Olesen, K. (2014). The neoliberalisation of strategic spatial planning. Planning Theory, 13(3), 288–303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Osborne, N., & Grant-Smith, D. (2015). Supporting mindful planners in a mindless system: Limitations to the emotional turn in planning practice. Town Planning Review, 86(6), 677–698.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Porter, L., Sandercock, L., Umemoto, K., Umemoto, K., Bates, L. K., Zapata, M. A., … Sletto, B. (2012). What’s love got to do with it? Illuminations on loving attachment in planning. Planning Theory & Practice, 13(4), 593–627.
   Google Scholar
• Puustinen, S., Mäntysalo, R., Hytönen, J., & Jarenko, K. (2017). The “deliberative bureaucrat”: Deliberative democracy and institutional trust in the jurisdiction of the Finnish planner. Planning Theory & Practice, 18(1), 71–88.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Raworth, K. (2012). A safe and just space for humanity: Can we live within the doughnut. Oxfam Policy and Practice: Climate Change and Resilience, 8(1), 1–26.
   Google Scholar
• Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences, 4(2), 155–169.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez, A., & Brown, A. (2014). Cultural differences: A cross-cultural study of urban planners from Japan, Mexico, the US, Serbia-Montenegro, Russia, and South Korea. Public Organization Review, 14(1), 35–50.
   Google Scholar
• Russell, J. A. (1980). A circumplex model of affect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 39(6), 1161.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sager, T. (2009). Planners’ role: Torn between dialogical ideals and neo-liberal realities. European Planning Studies, 17(1), 65–84.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Saija, L. (2014). Writing about engaged scholarship: Misunderstandings and the meaning of “quality” in action research publications. Planning Theory & Practice, 15(2), 187–201.
   Google Scholar
• Salet, W. (2018). Institutions in action. In W. Salet (Ed.), The Routledge Handbook of institutions and planning in action (pp. 27–47). London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Sartre, J. P. (1956). Being and nothingness. ( H. E. Barnes, Trans.). New York, NY: Philosophical Library.
   Google Scholar
• Sehested, K. (2009). Urban planners as network managers and metagovernors. Planning Theory & Practice, 10(2), 245–263.
   Google Scholar
• Sengupta, U., Rauws, W. S., & de Roo, G. (2016). Planning and complexity: Engaging with temporal dynamics, uncertainty and complex adaptive systems. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 43(6).
   Google Scholar
• Sturzaker, J., & Lord, A. (2017). Fear: An underexplored motivation for planners’ behaviour? Planning Practice & Research, 33(4), 1–13.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Talvitie, A. (2009). Theoryless planning. Planning Theory, 8(2), 166–190.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tasan-Kok, T., Bertolini, L., Oliveira E Costa, S., Lothan, H., Carvalho, H., Desmet, M., … Ahmad, P. (2016). “Float like a butterfly, sting like a bee”: Giving voice to planning practitioners. Planning Theory & Practice, 17(4), 621–651.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thompson, R. (2000). Re-defining planning: The roles of theory and practice. Planning Theory & Practice, 1(1), 126–133.
   Google Scholar
• Udy, J. (1994). The planner: A comprehensive typology. Cities, 11(1), 25–34.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vogelij, J. (2015). Is planning theory really open for planning practice? Planning Theory & Practice, 16(1), 128–132.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watson, V. (2002). Do we learn from planning practice? The contribution of the practice movement to planning theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 22(2), 178–187.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Westin, S. (2011). Planning on the couch: Exploring Michael Balint’s concepts of ocnophilia and philobatism. Presented in Annual Conference of the Association of American Geographers 2011, Seattle, USA.
   Google Scholar
• Westin, S. (2016). The paradoxes of planning: A psycho-analytical perspective. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Zanotto, J. M. (2019). Detachment in planning practice. Planning Theory & Practice, 20(1), 37–52.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Žižek, S. (1997). The Abyss of freedom. Ann Arbour, MI: The University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar