Linda Fox-Rogers

Informal strategies of power in the local planning system

Existing studies that question the role of planning as a state institution, whose interests it serves together with those disputing the merits of collaborative planning are all essentially concerned with the broader issue of power in society. Although there have been various attempts to highlight the distorting effects of power, the research emphasis to date has been focused on the operation of power within the formal structures that constitute the planning system. As a result, relatively little attention has been attributed to the informal strategies or tactics that can be utilised by powerful actors to further their own interests. This article seeks to address this gap by identifying the informal strategies used by the holders of power to bypass the formal structures of the planning system and highlight how these procedures are to a large extent systematic and (almost) institutionalised in a shadow planning system. The methodology consists of a series of semi-structured qualitative interviews with 20 urban planners working across four planning authorities within the Greater Dublin Area, Ireland. Empirical findings are offered that highlight the importance of economic power in the emergence of what essentially constitutes a shadow planning system. More broadly, the findings suggest that much more cognisance of the structural relations that govern how power is distributed in society is required and that ‘light touch’ approaches that focus exclusively on participation and deliberation need to be replaced with more radical solutions that look towards the redistribution of economic power between stakeholders.

The Political Economy of Legislative Change: Neoliberalising Planning Legislation

The ideas associated with neoliberalism have become deeply entrenched within state institutions in a large part of the world, and these ideas have a specific political economy. Accompanying them is the notion that the market should discipline the political system (Sager, 2011) and therefore the general population, if we accept the mainstream assumption that the political system is a representation of the will of the people. The recent explosion of literature on neoliberalism (see Peck, 2010) has demonstrated that the concept is a powerful lens through which to examine regulatory and institutional transformation at a range of spatial scales and different socio-political contexts. Of particular import here is the work which emphasises that neoliberalism is not a static concept but a dynamic process. Here, neoliberalism can be seen as a form of regulatory reorganisation to impose, extend and consolidate marketised commodified forms of social life (Brenner et al., 2010). It is, as Peck (2010, p. 9) notes, about the capture and reuse of the state in the interests of shaping a ‘pro-corporate, free-trading “market order” ‘. However, the process by which this happens (neoliberalisation) is rarely identical from one place to the next, at different scales, or indeed, across different socio-political contexts. In other words, processes of neoliberalisation are dynamic, slippery and highly adaptable, and this is precisely what contributes to the persistence of neoliberal ideas.

Morality, power and the planning subject

Ethical issues are at the heart of planning. Thus, planning theory has long displayed an interest in debating both the ethical justification for planning and how the activity of planning can be rendered more ethically sensitive. However, comparatively little attention has been shown to how the very constitution of the planner as a ‘moral subject’ may be ethically problematic for planning practice. This article addresses this lacuna through an engagement with the philosophy of Michel Foucault. In contrast to how his work is normally applied, this article accords with Foucault’s own direction that his later examination of ethics be used as a lens through which to read his earlier analysis of power and knowledge. Accordingly, the article first outlines Foucault’s innovative reinterpretation of how power and knowledge operate in society before setting this within his novel reconception of ethics. This theoretical exposition is then employed to interpret the material drawn from in-depth qualitative interviews with 20 planning officers working in a range of different contexts. The article subsequently employs Foucault’s ethically informed reading of power and knowledge to identify ethical issues arising from the approaches used by practitioners to justify their planning activities. The article concludes by suggesting how such issues can be resolved.

Illegal Geographies and Spatial Planning: Developing a Dialogue on Drugs

ABSTRACT Recent debates in this, and other, journals have focused ‘illegal geographies’, ‘geographies of the illicit’ and ‘planning and criminal powers’. This paper fuses these debates in geography and planning through an interrogation of the interface between illegal drugs and spatial planning. In unpacking and problematizing the drugs–planning nexus and developing a dialogue on drugs, it sets the context for a new research agenda concerning contemporary deliberations on the territoriality, governance and planning of the contemporary city. It is argued that such a paper is necessary as there is a noticeable absence of a debate on planning for drugs; in fact, academic and professional planners largely ignore this hugely important and challenging issue facing cities, regions and countries around the world. The paper fills this void by exposing and interrogating the links between drugs and planning, and it demonstrate that planners can, and indeed should, contribute positively towards understanding and dealing with the ‘drugs problem’. Ultimately, the aim is to stimulate a new debate on this fascinating but under-researched topic of drugs and planning. The insights from this study are relevant to an international academic audience; more professionally, the policy and practice implications are transferrable across geographical space to planners around the world.