This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Flyvbjerg, B. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Bringing Power to Planning Research

One Researcher’s Praxis Story

Department of Development and Planning at Aalborg University, Denmark

This article provides an answer to what has been called the biggest problem in theorizing and understanding planning: the ambivalence about power found among planning researchers, theorists, and students. The author narrates how he came to work with issues of power and gives an example of how the methodology he developed for power studies—phronetic planning research—may be employed in practice. Phronetic planning research follows the tradition of power studies running from Machiavelli and Nietzsche to Michel Foucault and Pierre Bourdieu. It focuses on four value-rational questions: (1) Where are we going with planning? (2) Who gains and who loses, and by which mechanisms of power? (3) Is this development desirable? (4) What should be done? These questions are exemplified for a specific instance of Scandinavian urban planning. The author finds that the questions, and their answers, make a difference to planning in practice. They make planning research matter.

Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 21, No. 4, 353-366 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/0739456X0202100401


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				J. M. Thomas The Minority-Race Planner in the Quest for a Just City Planning Theory, November 1, 2008; 7(3): 227 - 247. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. H. Baxamusa Empowering Communities through Deliberation The Model of Community Benefits Agreements Journal of Planning Education and Research, March 1, 2008; 27(3): 261 - 276. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. A. Throgmorton Inventing the Greatest: Crafting Louisville's Future Out of story and Clay Planning Theory, November 1, 2007; 6(3): 237 - 262. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C. J. Hoch Pragmatic Communicative Action Theory Journal of Planning Education and Research, March 1, 2007; 26(3): 272 - 283. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. Sager The Logic of Critical Communicative Planning: Transaction Cost Alteration Planning Theory, November 1, 2006; 5(3): 223 - 254. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Lauria and J. A. Wagner What Can We Learn from Empirical Studies of Planning Theory? A Comparative Case Analysis of Extant Literature Journal of Planning Education and Research, June 1, 2006; 25(4): 364 - 381. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. M. Stein and T. L. Harper Rawls's 'Justice as Fairness': A Moral Basis for Contemporary Planning Theory Planning Theory, July 1, 2005; 4(2): 147 - 172. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. M. Stein and T. L. Harper Power, Trust, and Planning Journal of Planning Education and Research, December 1, 2003; 23(2): 125 - 139. [Abstract] [PDF]