打印

作者

来源

URBAN STUDIES,Vol.56,Issue4,P.741-759

语言

英文

关键字

citizen disagreement; consensus; Dutch urban planning; post-politics; urban planners; SOCIAL-MOVEMENTS; GOVERNANCE; PARTICIPATION; DEMOCRACY; NEOLIBERALIZATION; STRATEGY

作者单位

[Ozdemir, Esin; Tasan-Kok, Tuna] Delft Univ Technol, Fac Architecture & Built Environm, Delft, Netherlands. [Tasan-Kok, Tuna] Univ Amsterdam, Dept Human Geog Planning & Int Dev, Amsterdam, Netherlands. Ozdemir, E (reprint author), Delft Univ Technol, Fac Architecture & Built Environm, OTB Res Built Environm, Julianalaan 134, NL-2628 BL Delft, Netherlands. E-Mail: esoz1980@gmail.coml

摘要

Citizen disagreement on urban policies and planning decisions is both ubiquitous and fundamental to democracy. Post-political debates debunk the consensus approach', which is grounded in Habermasian communication theory, for circumventing disagreement. This article presents a counter argument. Our analysis of the highly institutionalised and consensus-oriented Dutch planning framework shows that this system does not necessarily prevent effective voicing of disagreement. The empirical material demonstrates that consensus is not a pre-defined and static outcome but a dynamic and sensitive process in which urban planning is an instrument. We conclude that planners could facilitate consensus through accommodative roles that address disagreement by taking an adaptive, proactive and more human stance.