Journal of Planning Education and Research

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Booher, D. E.
Right arrow Articles by Innes, J. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 21, No. 3, 221-236 (2002)
DOI: 10.1177/0739456X0202100301

Network Power in Collaborative Planning

David E. Booher

California Center for Public Dispute Resolution, California State University, Sacramento

Judith E. Innes

Institute of Urban and Regional Development at the University of California, Berkeley

This article makes a case that collaborative planning is becoming more important because it can result in network power. Collaborative policy processes are increasingly in use as ways of achieving results in an era distinguished by rapid change, social and political fragmentation, rapid high volume information flow, global interdependence, and conflicting values. Network power can be thought of as a flow of power in which participants all share. It comes into being most effectively when three conditions govern the relationship of agents in a collaborative network: diversity, interdependence, and authentic dialogue (DIAD). Like a complex adaptive system, the DIAD network as a whole is more capable of learning and adaptation in the face of fragmentation and rapid change than a set of disconnected agents. Planners have many roles in such networks, and planning education needs to incorporate new subject matter to better prepare planners for these roles.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
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]


Home page
Journal of Health Politics, Policy and LawHome page
J. Schilling and S. D. Keyes
The Promise of Wisconsin's 1999 Comprehensive Planning Law: Land-Use Policy Reforms to Support Active Living
Journal of Health Politics Policy and Law, January 1, 2008; 33(3): 455 - 496.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
J Public Adm Res TheoryHome page
C. Ansell and A. Gash
Collaborative Governance in Theory and Practice
J. Public Adm. Res. Theory., November 13, 2007; (2007) mum032v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
J. Hou and I. Kinoshita
Bridging Community Differences through Informal Processes: Reexamining Participatory Planning in Seattle and Matsudo
Journal of Planning Education and Research, March 1, 2007; 26(3): 301 - 314.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Qualitative ResearchHome page
P. J. Maginn
Towards more effective community participation in urban regeneration: the potential of collaborative planning and applied ethnography
Qualitative Research, February 1, 2007; 7(1): 25 - 43.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
A. Chettiparamb
Bottom-Up Planning and the Future of Planning Education in India
Journal of Planning Education and Research, December 1, 2006; 26(2): 185 - 194.
[Abstract] [PDF]


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


Home page
Journal of Planning LiteratureHome page
T. H. Morrison
Pursuing Rural Sustainability at the Regional Level: Key Lessons from the Literature on Institutions, Integration, and the Environment
Journal of Planning Literature, November 1, 2006; 21(2): 143 - 152.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Planning TheoryHome page
J. Hillier
Straddling the Post-Structuralist Abyss: Between Transcendence and Immanence?
Planning Theory, November 1, 2005; 4(3): 271 - 299.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
N. Verma and H. Shin
Communicative Action and the Network Society: A Pragmatic Marriage?
Journal of Planning Education and Research, December 1, 2004; 24(2): 131 - 140.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Urban StudHome page
M. Wolsink
Policy Beliefs in Spatial Decisions: Contrasting Core Beliefs Concerning Space-making for Waste Infrastructure
Urban Stud, December 1, 2004; 41(13): 2669 - 2690.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Planning TheoryHome page
J. E. Innes
Consensus Building: Clarifications for the Critics
Planning Theory, March 1, 2004; 3(1): 5 - 20.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
S. H. Ali
Environmental Planning and Cooperative Behavior: Catalyzing Sustainable Consensus
Journal of Planning Education and Research, December 1, 2003; 23(2): 165 - 176.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Planning TheoryHome page
J. Hillier and M. Gunder
Planning Fantasies? An Exploration of a Potential Lacanian Framework for Understanding Development Assessment Planning
Planning Theory, November 1, 2003; 2(3): 225 - 248.
[Abstract] [PDF]