Methods of engagement: On civic participation formats as composition devices in urban planning

References

• Adkins, L. (2014). Luc Boltanski and the problem of time: Notes towards a pragmatic sociology of the future. In S. Susen & B. S. Turner (Eds.), The spirit of Luc Boltanski (pp. 517–538). London: Anthem Press.
   Google Scholar
• Albertsen, N., & Diken, B. (2001). Mobility, justification, and the city. Nordic Journal of Architectural Research, 14(1), 13–24.
   Google Scholar
• Ascher, F. (2000). L'Urbanisme face à la nouvelle révolution urbaine. In Y. Michaud (Ed.), Qu'est-ce que la Société (pp. 169–180). Paris: Odile Jacob.
   Google Scholar
• Blok, A. (2015). Attachments to the common-place: Pragmatic sociology and the aesthetic cosmopolitics of eco-house design in Kyoto, Japan. European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, 2(2), 122–145. doi: 10.1080/23254823.2015.1108212
   Google Scholar
• Blok, A., & Meilvang, M. L. (2015). Picturing urban green attachments: Civic activists moving between familiar and public engagements in the city. Sociology, 49(1), 19–37. doi: 10.1177/0038038514532038
   Google Scholar
• Boltanski, L., & Chiapello, É. (2005 [1999]). The new spirit of capitalism. London: Verso.
   Google Scholar
• Boltanski, L., & Thévenot, L. (2006 [1991]). On justification. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Brenner, N., & Theodore, N. (2002). Cities and the geographies of ‘actually existing neoliberalism. Antipode, 34, 349–379. doi: 10.1111/1467-8330.00246
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Breviglieri, M. (2013). Une brèche critique dans la ville garantie? Espaces intercalaires et architectures d’usage. In E. Cogato Lanza, L. Pattaroni, M. Piraud, & B. Tironi (Eds.), De La Différence Urbaine (pp. 213–236). Genève: MétisPresses.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, H., & Marshall, R. (2000). Public involvement and planning: Looking beyond the one to the many. International Planning Studies, 5(3), 321–344. doi: 10.1080/713672862
   Google Scholar
• Castells, M. (1983). The city and the grassroots. Berkeley: University of California Press.
   Google Scholar
• Cheyns, E. (2014). Making ‘minority voices’ heard in transnational roundtables: The role of local NGOs in reintroducing justice and attachments. Agriculture and Human Values, 31, 439–453. doi: 10.1007/s10460-014-9505-7
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Diaz-Bone, R. (2011). The methodological standpoint of the ‘économie des conventions’. Historical Social Research / Historische Sozialforschung, 36(4 (138)), 43–63.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Forester, J. (2006). Making participation work when interests conflict: Moving from facilitating dialogue and moderating debate to mediating negotiations. Journal of the American Planning Association, 72(4), 447–456. doi: 10.1080/01944360608976765
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fuller, C. (2012). ‘Worlds of justification’ in the politics and practices of urban regeneration. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 30(5), 913–929. doi: 10.1068/d19710
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Harvey, D. (1989). From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: The transformation in urban governance in late capitalism. Geografiska Annaler. Series B, Human Geography, 71(1), 3–17. doi: 10.1080/04353684.1989.11879583
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Healey, P. (1996). The communicative turn in planning theory and its implications for spatial strategy formations. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 23(2), 217–234. doi: 10.1068/b230217
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernández-Medina, E. (2010). Social inclusion through participation: The case of the participatory budget in São Paulo. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 34(3), 512–532. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00966.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holden, M. (2010). Public participation and local sustainability: Questioning a common agenda in urban governance. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 35(2), 312–329. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00957.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holden, M., & Scerri, A. (2014). Justification, compromise and test: Developing a pragmatic theory of critique to understand the outcomes of urban redevelopment. Planning Theory. doi: 10.1177/1473095214530701
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lane, M. B. (2005). Public participation in planning: An intellectual history. Australian Geographer, 36(3), 283–299. doi: 10.1080/00049180500325694
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leerberg, T., & Busk, L. (2012). Urbane ressourcer. Et forsøgsprojekt til udvikling af nye metoder, der kan fremme offentlig-privat samfinansiering i områdefornyelsen. Copenhagen: The Department of Cities, Hausing and Rural Areas, The Danish Government.
   Google Scholar
• Luhtakallio, E. (2012). Practicing democracy. Local activism and politics in France and Finland. Basingstoke: Palgrave-Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• McFarlane, C. (2011). Learning the city: Knowledge and translocal assemblage. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
   Google Scholar
• Melo, M. A., & Baiocchi, G. (2006). Deliberative democracy and local governance: Towards a New agenda. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 30(3), 587–600. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2006.00686.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Municipality of Brønderslev. (2013). Brønderslev skal være Brønderslev igen med et centrum. Brønderslev: The Municipality of Brønderslev.
   Google Scholar
• Municipality of Gladsaxe. (2010). Byens arena. Søborg: The Municipality of Gladsaxe.
   Google Scholar
• Paddison, Ronan. (2009). Some reflections on the limitations to public participation in the post-political city, L'Espace politique. Revue en ligne de géographie politique et de géopolitique, 8. Retrieved March 20, 2018, from http://journals.openedition.org/espacepolitique/1393
   Google Scholar
• Pattaroni, L., & Baitsch, T. (2015). Urbanization regimes of the ordinary city. In S. Vincent, Y. Pedrazzini, & V. Kaufmann (Eds.), Cities in translation: Urban research in transition (pp. 115–136). Lausanne: EPFL Press/Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Pløger, J. (2001). Public participation and the art of governance. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 28(2), 219–241. doi: 10.1068/b2669
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pløger, J. (2004). Strife: Urban planning and agonism. Planning Theory, 3(1), 71–92. doi: 10.1177/1473095204042318
   Google Scholar
• Purcell, M. (2009). Resisting neoliberalization: Communicative planning or counter-hegemonic movements? Planning Theory, 8(2), 140–165. doi: 10.1177/1473095209102232
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Riles, A. (2006). Introduction: In response. In A. Riles (Ed.), Documents (pp. 1–38). Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sehested, K. (2009). Urban planners as network managers and metagovenors. Planning Theory & Practice, 10(2), 245–263. doi: 10.1080/14649350902884516
   Google Scholar
• Silva-Castañeda, L. (2012). What kind of space? Multi-stakeholder initiatives and the protection of land rights. International Journal of Sociology of Agriculture and Food, 22(2), 67–83.
   Google Scholar
• Silver, H., Scott, A., & Kazepov, Y. (2010). Participation in urban contention and deliberation. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 34(3), 453–477. doi: 10.1111/j.1468-2427.2010.00963.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swyngedouw, E., Moulaert, F., & Rodriguez, A. (2002). Neoliberal urbanization in Europe: Large-scale urban development projects and the new urban policy. Antipode, 34(3), 542–577. doi: 10.1111/1467-8330.00254
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thévenot, L. (1984). Rules and implements: Investment in forms. Social Science Information, 23(1), 1–45. doi: 10.1177/053901884023001001
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thévenot, L. (2007). The plurality of cognitive formats and engagements: Moving between the familiar and the public. European Journal of Social Theory, 10(3), 409–423. doi: 10.1177/1368431007080703
   Google Scholar
• Thévenot, L. (2009). Governing life by standards: A view from engagement. Social Studies of Science, 39(5), 793–813. doi: 10.1177/0306312709338767
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thévenot, L. (2011a). Conventions for measuring and questioning policies: The case of 50 years of policy evaluations through a statistical survey. Historical Social Research, 36(4), 192–217.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Thévenot, L. (2011b). Power and oppression from the perspective of the sociology of engagements: A comparison with Bourdieu’s and Dewey’s critical approaches to practical activities. Irish Journal of Sociology, 19(1), 35–67. doi: 10.7227/IJS.19.1.3
   Google Scholar
• Thévenot, L. (2012). Law, economies and economics. New critical perspectives on normative and evaluative devices in action. Economic Sociology, 14(1), 4–10.
   Google Scholar
• Thévenot, L. (2014). Voicing concern and difference: From public spaces to commonplaces. European Journal of Cultural and Political Sociology, 1(1), 7–34. doi: 10.1080/23254823.2014.905749
   Google Scholar
• Thévenot, L. (2015). Certifying the world. Power infrastructures and practices in economies of conventional forms. In P. Aspers & N. Dodd (Eds.), Re-imagining economic sociology (pp. 195–223). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Think Thank The City 2025. (2014). Fællesskaber i forandring. Tænketanken Byen 2025. Copenhagen: The Department of Cities, Hausing and Rural Areas, The Danish Government.
   Google Scholar
• Venturini, T. (2012). Building on faults: How to represent controversies with digital methods. Public Understanding of Science, 21(7), 796–812. doi: 10.1177/0963662510387558
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar