Spatial planning samenvatting tentamen
Hoofdstuk 1
1.1
There is not one generally accepted definition of spatial planning. But its not the same as
land-use planning or zoning. There are 4 types of planning traditions: regional-economic,
urbanism, comprehensive/integrated and land-use planning. In every tradition planning
can be considered as an intervention by a public authority to influence the future
allocation and distribution of activities in space. It differs per place but 3 elements are
crucial for an understanding of planning: public activity, future and space.
1.1.1
Planning is a long-term and open-ended exercise. Acting in the present influences the
future, therefore its important to have an idea of the desired future. The further away the
planning horizon, the greater the uncertainty. There is the tension between inevitable
uncertainties and necessary certainty. Certainty (zoning for residential development) is
necessary for social and economic stability, without certainty many societal processes are
hampered or are impossible. This contrasts with strategic ambiguity in planning. Strategic
ambiguity encourages flexibility in allowing different and contrasting interpretations to
coexist, so that change and adaptation is possible to develop over time. So there is a
tension between certainty and flexibility in planning. To deal with this tension, spatial
planning needs to reduce uncertainties and make them manageable (scenario
approaches, planning-support systems).
Common method in planning is scenarios;
Projective scenarios; forecasting. Scenarios are based on past and present. Planning takes
place in the ‘facts of yesterday’. Near future can hardly be influenced. Often more
conservative and realistic than prospective.
Prospective scenarios; backcasting. Drawn up with a completely different goal. Start with
vision based on desirability of a certain long-term spatial outcome and derive the steps to
reach this vision. Place desirable future of current action in a future perspective and
attempt to steer spatial developments in the shorter term. Look far in the future (30-50
years).
Both scenarios are normative. Which direction is preferable is increasingly influenced by
growing pluralism in society in which other stakeholders have their voice heard.
Systematic thinking of future is part of spatial planning. Planning current interventions
based on a future perspective is essential feature of planning as a public activity. One of
the ways to put current action into a future perspective is to draw up a spatial plan.
Public interest is important factor in deciding on the desired future outcome, public
interest is dynamic and constantly changing. Priorities set for spatial policy are thus also
exposed to these dynamics.
Planning is never finished, society and its interests are constantly changing. Adaptation to
changing society is constantly needed planning needs to continuously re-evaluate and
adjust plans. Balancing in planning is difficult. In planning for future you also need
understanding of history to avoid repeating mistakes.
1.1.2
Space matters in spatial planning. Its planning a territory in a comprehensive way.
Sectoral planning involves implementation of specific policy of a branch. spatial planning
considers space as comprehensively and integrally. It must take all sectoral planning
activities into consideration and coordinate them. Distinction is partly historical and partly
analytic distinction.
Sectoral planning is changing; sectoral planning becomes more integral and
comprehensive, spatial policies are increasingly intertwined and integrated.
1.1.3
,Planning is a public activity but other sectors and private stakeholders also influence
spatial development.
Pursuit of maintaining or improving spatial quality is a normative goal. Improvement for 1
doesn’t mean improvement for all. Often issues in which opposing interest must be
weighed against each other. Valuation of the result of that assessment becomes
dependent on ones perspective. Judgement about spatial quality differs over time.
Spatial planning according to writers: systematic preparation of policy-making and
executive actions that are aimed at consciously intervening in spatial order and at
organizing these interventions.
Spatial planning belongs to the executive branch of the state (trias politica). Planning
implements law by using regulations.
1.2
Spatial planning emerged out of recognition that different sectoral policies influence
spatial development. But comprehensive institution that brings together different sectoral
ideas was lacking. Planning is related to and overlaps with many other disciplines.
Planning is analytic. It uses public power, money and trust. This bears responsibility.
Planners need to be familiar with methods and theories from geography or related
disciplines in the social sciences. Planning also intervenes; aims at intervening in such
situations with a future-oriented perspective. Spatial planning as a discipline does not
only analyse what is happening but also suggests what should be done in certain spatial
situations. Planning is also theoretical; theory must provide a scientific foundation for
planning as a discipline. Theory is not a confined body of theories but it is a constantly
evolving assembly and application of theories derived from other fields. Planning theory
should ‘help to guide practice’.
Context and location matter in planning, therefore planning is also practical.
Planning is thus analytic and intervenes in space, and it is also theoretical and practical.
1.3
Spatial planning deals with the allocation and distribution of land and other spatial
resources. Activity of planning raises many questions and dilemmas. Spatial planning
problems can be approached from 3 different but interrelated angles: object; content of
planning issue / process; interaction between actors and resources / context; institutional
and societal conditions. These 3 dimensions can be found in varying degrees in all
planning activities.
1.3.1 object
Object relates to the content of respective planning issue. It represents the way spatial
resources are used, namely the land-use. Its about the question; what is planned?
Dilemmas on the object of planning unfold around conflicts of land-use. Planners are often
confronted with deciding for the one and against other land-uses. Theories concerning
planning object; christallers central place theory.
1.3.2 process
Question; how is it planned? Formal side refers to the rules set out in planning law (e.g.
participation). Pragmatic side goes beyond formal process and entails open and informal
planning processes with early-stage drafts, scenario-thinking methods or the
implementation of planning with other stakeholders besides the government.
Planning as a public activity needs to balance different interests. Open process can
influence efficiency of its progress, closing can have severe effects for the
implementation. Determining whom to involve and, how and when requires a well-
designed planning process.
Procedural planning theories can provide the necessary analytical and conceptual
framework to design better planning processes (theories entail theories on collaboration
and communication, governance and formal planning processes).
1.3.3 context
, Spatial planning is locationally specific. What works in location A doesn’t necessarily work
in location B. Context dimension of planning thus refers to the preconditions of the setting
in which planning is realized. Context can have a major impact on the success or failure of
planning. Spatial planning can be seen as mirror of societal developments. Societal
changes influence planning and trigger new spatial developments, it’s a child of its time.
1.4
Planning theory and practice are entangled and can be better understood in relation to
each other.
1.4.1 blueprint, until 1970
In post war period, spatial planning was dominated by reconstruction. Planning had to
resolve urgent and rather technical issues; spatial problems appeared to be relatively
easy. These tasks needed planners capable of realizing such tasks with great
effectiveness and efficiency. It was an exercise in physical planning and design. It were
general plans made to realize them in effective and efficient ways; blueprint planning:
informed decisions based on theories that helped to find the best land-uses for respective
locations. Steps in processes were chronological. Planners considered themselves
engineers of space. Focus on object.
1.4.2 collaborative planning, 1990
Soon learned that linear, step-by-step scheme doesn’t work. Because there is constant
feedback on the previous phases. Around 1970 there was a major paradigm shift in
spatial planning. It turned into something that was much more focused on planning
processes rather than on the object of planning. Common idea of using post-isms was the
rejection of object-oriented objects. Solutions now need to be sought in a complex
network of stakeholders and actors process planning made its appearance. Emphasize
on the role of communication in problem solving. Now communicative planning and
participatory planning were born collaborative planning. One form of process-oriented
planning was the strategic choice approach. Process element can no longer be ignored.
1.4.3 context matters, 21st century
Strong process-orientation in planning has been criticized since the turn of the 21 st
century; planning and planning processes do not take place in a vacuum. Such processes
are influenced by the contexts in which they take place. Planning theorists were starting
to search for a more general theory of planning. Such a theory helps to make better plans
and also help spatial planning to address the grand issues. The broader context of
planning becomes increasingly important.
1.5
Different emphasis on parts of the panning triangle is visible in materialized space over
the course of time.
1.5.1
In making predictions and creating scenarios for the future, its crucial to also understand
the ‘past and present elements of the future’.
In time of the industrial revolution planning law was virtually absent or very minimalistic
until it was organized in a more formal and systematic way in the residential act of 1901.
This act required formulation of city extension plans, led to period of garden city
developments (Howard). Besides that, spatial intervention mainly targeted water
management, urban development and the development of waterways and rural areas.
Lasted until 1940 and was followed by period of rebuilding NL. 1945-1965; rapid
population growth and housing shortage. Planning was further upscaled and
professionalized. Internationally NL became known for the delta works. Distinguished
itself because of social involvement, extensive professionalization, government
intervention. In one century it changed from very minimalistic guidance on the local level
to widespread national planning objectives.
1.5.2 (1965-1985)
Hoofdstuk 1
1.1
There is not one generally accepted definition of spatial planning. But its not the same as
land-use planning or zoning. There are 4 types of planning traditions: regional-economic,
urbanism, comprehensive/integrated and land-use planning. In every tradition planning
can be considered as an intervention by a public authority to influence the future
allocation and distribution of activities in space. It differs per place but 3 elements are
crucial for an understanding of planning: public activity, future and space.
1.1.1
Planning is a long-term and open-ended exercise. Acting in the present influences the
future, therefore its important to have an idea of the desired future. The further away the
planning horizon, the greater the uncertainty. There is the tension between inevitable
uncertainties and necessary certainty. Certainty (zoning for residential development) is
necessary for social and economic stability, without certainty many societal processes are
hampered or are impossible. This contrasts with strategic ambiguity in planning. Strategic
ambiguity encourages flexibility in allowing different and contrasting interpretations to
coexist, so that change and adaptation is possible to develop over time. So there is a
tension between certainty and flexibility in planning. To deal with this tension, spatial
planning needs to reduce uncertainties and make them manageable (scenario
approaches, planning-support systems).
Common method in planning is scenarios;
Projective scenarios; forecasting. Scenarios are based on past and present. Planning takes
place in the ‘facts of yesterday’. Near future can hardly be influenced. Often more
conservative and realistic than prospective.
Prospective scenarios; backcasting. Drawn up with a completely different goal. Start with
vision based on desirability of a certain long-term spatial outcome and derive the steps to
reach this vision. Place desirable future of current action in a future perspective and
attempt to steer spatial developments in the shorter term. Look far in the future (30-50
years).
Both scenarios are normative. Which direction is preferable is increasingly influenced by
growing pluralism in society in which other stakeholders have their voice heard.
Systematic thinking of future is part of spatial planning. Planning current interventions
based on a future perspective is essential feature of planning as a public activity. One of
the ways to put current action into a future perspective is to draw up a spatial plan.
Public interest is important factor in deciding on the desired future outcome, public
interest is dynamic and constantly changing. Priorities set for spatial policy are thus also
exposed to these dynamics.
Planning is never finished, society and its interests are constantly changing. Adaptation to
changing society is constantly needed planning needs to continuously re-evaluate and
adjust plans. Balancing in planning is difficult. In planning for future you also need
understanding of history to avoid repeating mistakes.
1.1.2
Space matters in spatial planning. Its planning a territory in a comprehensive way.
Sectoral planning involves implementation of specific policy of a branch. spatial planning
considers space as comprehensively and integrally. It must take all sectoral planning
activities into consideration and coordinate them. Distinction is partly historical and partly
analytic distinction.
Sectoral planning is changing; sectoral planning becomes more integral and
comprehensive, spatial policies are increasingly intertwined and integrated.
1.1.3
,Planning is a public activity but other sectors and private stakeholders also influence
spatial development.
Pursuit of maintaining or improving spatial quality is a normative goal. Improvement for 1
doesn’t mean improvement for all. Often issues in which opposing interest must be
weighed against each other. Valuation of the result of that assessment becomes
dependent on ones perspective. Judgement about spatial quality differs over time.
Spatial planning according to writers: systematic preparation of policy-making and
executive actions that are aimed at consciously intervening in spatial order and at
organizing these interventions.
Spatial planning belongs to the executive branch of the state (trias politica). Planning
implements law by using regulations.
1.2
Spatial planning emerged out of recognition that different sectoral policies influence
spatial development. But comprehensive institution that brings together different sectoral
ideas was lacking. Planning is related to and overlaps with many other disciplines.
Planning is analytic. It uses public power, money and trust. This bears responsibility.
Planners need to be familiar with methods and theories from geography or related
disciplines in the social sciences. Planning also intervenes; aims at intervening in such
situations with a future-oriented perspective. Spatial planning as a discipline does not
only analyse what is happening but also suggests what should be done in certain spatial
situations. Planning is also theoretical; theory must provide a scientific foundation for
planning as a discipline. Theory is not a confined body of theories but it is a constantly
evolving assembly and application of theories derived from other fields. Planning theory
should ‘help to guide practice’.
Context and location matter in planning, therefore planning is also practical.
Planning is thus analytic and intervenes in space, and it is also theoretical and practical.
1.3
Spatial planning deals with the allocation and distribution of land and other spatial
resources. Activity of planning raises many questions and dilemmas. Spatial planning
problems can be approached from 3 different but interrelated angles: object; content of
planning issue / process; interaction between actors and resources / context; institutional
and societal conditions. These 3 dimensions can be found in varying degrees in all
planning activities.
1.3.1 object
Object relates to the content of respective planning issue. It represents the way spatial
resources are used, namely the land-use. Its about the question; what is planned?
Dilemmas on the object of planning unfold around conflicts of land-use. Planners are often
confronted with deciding for the one and against other land-uses. Theories concerning
planning object; christallers central place theory.
1.3.2 process
Question; how is it planned? Formal side refers to the rules set out in planning law (e.g.
participation). Pragmatic side goes beyond formal process and entails open and informal
planning processes with early-stage drafts, scenario-thinking methods or the
implementation of planning with other stakeholders besides the government.
Planning as a public activity needs to balance different interests. Open process can
influence efficiency of its progress, closing can have severe effects for the
implementation. Determining whom to involve and, how and when requires a well-
designed planning process.
Procedural planning theories can provide the necessary analytical and conceptual
framework to design better planning processes (theories entail theories on collaboration
and communication, governance and formal planning processes).
1.3.3 context
, Spatial planning is locationally specific. What works in location A doesn’t necessarily work
in location B. Context dimension of planning thus refers to the preconditions of the setting
in which planning is realized. Context can have a major impact on the success or failure of
planning. Spatial planning can be seen as mirror of societal developments. Societal
changes influence planning and trigger new spatial developments, it’s a child of its time.
1.4
Planning theory and practice are entangled and can be better understood in relation to
each other.
1.4.1 blueprint, until 1970
In post war period, spatial planning was dominated by reconstruction. Planning had to
resolve urgent and rather technical issues; spatial problems appeared to be relatively
easy. These tasks needed planners capable of realizing such tasks with great
effectiveness and efficiency. It was an exercise in physical planning and design. It were
general plans made to realize them in effective and efficient ways; blueprint planning:
informed decisions based on theories that helped to find the best land-uses for respective
locations. Steps in processes were chronological. Planners considered themselves
engineers of space. Focus on object.
1.4.2 collaborative planning, 1990
Soon learned that linear, step-by-step scheme doesn’t work. Because there is constant
feedback on the previous phases. Around 1970 there was a major paradigm shift in
spatial planning. It turned into something that was much more focused on planning
processes rather than on the object of planning. Common idea of using post-isms was the
rejection of object-oriented objects. Solutions now need to be sought in a complex
network of stakeholders and actors process planning made its appearance. Emphasize
on the role of communication in problem solving. Now communicative planning and
participatory planning were born collaborative planning. One form of process-oriented
planning was the strategic choice approach. Process element can no longer be ignored.
1.4.3 context matters, 21st century
Strong process-orientation in planning has been criticized since the turn of the 21 st
century; planning and planning processes do not take place in a vacuum. Such processes
are influenced by the contexts in which they take place. Planning theorists were starting
to search for a more general theory of planning. Such a theory helps to make better plans
and also help spatial planning to address the grand issues. The broader context of
planning becomes increasingly important.
1.5
Different emphasis on parts of the panning triangle is visible in materialized space over
the course of time.
1.5.1
In making predictions and creating scenarios for the future, its crucial to also understand
the ‘past and present elements of the future’.
In time of the industrial revolution planning law was virtually absent or very minimalistic
until it was organized in a more formal and systematic way in the residential act of 1901.
This act required formulation of city extension plans, led to period of garden city
developments (Howard). Besides that, spatial intervention mainly targeted water
management, urban development and the development of waterways and rural areas.
Lasted until 1940 and was followed by period of rebuilding NL. 1945-1965; rapid
population growth and housing shortage. Planning was further upscaled and
professionalized. Internationally NL became known for the delta works. Distinguished
itself because of social involvement, extensive professionalization, government
intervention. In one century it changed from very minimalistic guidance on the local level
to widespread national planning objectives.
1.5.2 (1965-1985)
