Navigating the Multiplicity of Planning
Downloads
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24306/plnxt/82Keywords:
assemblage, Deleuze, Luhmann, roles of planners, social systems, uncertaintyAbstract
Planning scholars use complexity perspectives to account for unpredictable societal circumstances in an uncertain and changing world. Questions emerge not only about how planning communication and action can transform but more so about the planner’s ability to navigate the complex relational dynamics of planning. To move forward, we use Gilles Deleuze’s concept of assemblage thinking to frame spatial planning as a continually changing multiplicity of diverse entities and emerging dynamic relations among them. Niklas Luhmann’s social systems theory then helps to promote a perspective on planners as a multiplicity of roles grounded in continuously evolving self-descriptions and self-developed meanings. Planners achieve the organisation (navigation) in an uncertain and complex environment through the reproduction of roles. This paper positions planning as a self-reflexive process that uses a multiplicity of role configurations that ultimately defines and transforms the meaning of planning itself.
Published
Issue
Section
References
Abbott, J. (2000). Planning as managing uncertainty. In J. Abbott and J. Minnery (Eds.), New ideas of planning: Linking theory and practice (pp. 81-90). Brisbane, Australia: Royal Australian Planning Institute.
Abbott, J. (2005). Understanding and managing the unknown: The nature of uncertainty in planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 24(3): 237-251. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X04267710
Alexander, E. R. (2016). There is no planning—Only planning practices: Notes for spatial planning theories. Planning Theory. 15(1): 91-103. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095215594617
Baecker, D. (1999). Organisation als system. Frankfurt am Main, Germany: Suhrkamp.
Brown, S. D., & Lunt, P. (2002). A genealogy of the social identity tradition: Deleuze and Guattari and social psychology. British Journal of Social Psychology. 41(1): 1-23. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1348/014466602165018
Balducci, A., Boelens, L., Hillier, J., Nyseth, T., & Wilkinson, C. (2011). Introduction: Strategic spatial planning in uncertainty: theory and exploratory practice. The Town Planning Review. 82(5): 481-501. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2011.29
de Roo, G. (2020). Introduction to the Handbook on Planning and Complexity. In G. de Roo, C. Yamu, and C. Zuidema, (Eds.), Handbook on Planning and Complexity (pp. 1-18). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439185.00006
de Roo, G., & Hillier, J. (2012). Complexity and planning: Systems, assemblages and simulations. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315573199
de Roo, G., Rauws, W., & Zuidema, C. (2020b). Rationalities for adaptive planning to address uncertainties. In G. de Roo, C. Yamu, and C. Zuidema, (Eds.), Handbook on Planning and Complexity (pp. 110-150). Edward Elgar Publishing. https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439185
de Roo, G., Yamu, C., & Zuidema, C. (Eds.). (2020a). Handbook on Planning and Complexity. Edward Elgar Publishing. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4337/9781786439185
Deleuze, G. (1956). Bergson’s Conception of Difference. In J. Mullarkey (1999), The New Bergson. Manchester, UK: Manchester University Press.
Deleuze, G. (1966). Bergsonism. Trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Barbara Habberjam (1991). New York, US: Zone Books.
Deleuze, G. (1994). Difference and repetition. New York, US: Columbia University Press.
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Duineveld, M., Van Assche, K., & Beunen, R. (2017). Re-conceptualising political landscapes after the material turn: A typology of material events. Landscape Research. 42(4): 375-384. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/01426397.2017.1290791
Gunder, M., & Hillier, J. (2004). Confirming to the Expectations of the Profession: A Lacanian Perspective on Planning Practice, Norms and Values. Planning Theory & Practice. 5(2): 217-235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14649350410001691763
Gunder, M., & Hillier, J. (2009). Planning in ten words or less: A Lacanian entanglement with spatial planning. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315246697
Hillier, J. (2008). Plan (e) speaking: A multiplanar theory of spatial planning. Planning Theory. 7(1): 24-50. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095207085664
Hillier, J. (2017 [2007]). Stretching beyond the horizon: a multiplanar theory of spatial planning and governance. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315242255
Hillier, J., & Cao, K. (2013). Deleuzian dragons: Thinking Chinese strategic spatial planning with Gilles Deleuze. Deleuze Studies. 7(3): 390-405. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3366/dls.2013.0119
Hillier, J. (2005). Straddling the Post-Structuralist Abyss: Between Transcendence and Immanence?. Planning Theory. 4(3): 271-299. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095205058497
Hillier, J. (2011). Strategic navigation across multiple planes: Towards a Deleuzean-inspired methodology for strategic spatial planning. Town Planning Review. 82(5): 503-527. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2011.30
Hillier, J., & Abrahams, G. (2013). Deleuze and Guattari: Jean Hillier in conversation with Gareth Abrahams. AESOP Young Academics Network.
Lamker, C. W. (2016). Unsicherheit und Komplexität in Planungsprozessen: Planungstheoretische Perspektiven auf Regionalplanung und Klimaanpassung [Uncertainty and Complexity in Planning Processes: Theoretical Perspectives on Regional Planning and Climate Adaptation]. Planungswissenschaftliche Studien zu Raumordnung und Regionalentwicklung: Vol. 6. Rohn. http://dx.doi.org/10.17877/DE290R-20157
Lamker, C. W. (2019a). Leadership Roles in Local Land-Use Planning for Noise Control. Town Planning Review. 90(3): 275-297. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2019.19
Lamker, C. W. (2019b). Planning in uncharted waters: spatial transformations, planning transitions and role-reflexive planning. Raumforschung Und Raumordnung | Spatial Research and Planning. 77(2): 199-211. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/rara-2019-0012
Luhmann, N. (1966). Reflexive Mechanismen. Soziale Welt. 17(1): 1-23.
Luhmann, N. (1970). Öffentliche Meinung. Politische Vierteljahreszeitschrift. 11(1): 2-28.
Luhmann, N. (1977). Differentiation of Society. Canadian Journal of Sociology / Cahiers Canadiens De Sociologie. 2(1): 29.
Luhmann, N. (1983). Legitimation durch Verfahren. Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft: Vol. 443. Suhrkamp.
Luhmann, N. (1987). Soziale Systeme: Grundriß einer allgemeinen Theorie. Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft: Vol. 666. Suhrkamp.
Luhmann, N. (1992). Organisation. In W. Kupper and G. Ortmann (Eds.), Rationalitat, Macht und Spiele in Organisationen (pp. 165-85). Opladen, Germany: Westdeutscher Verlag.
Luhmann, N. (1997). Die Gesellschaft der Gesellschaft 1/2. Suhrkamp Taschenbuch Wissenschaft: Vol. 1360. Suhrkamp.
Luhmann, N. (2004). Law as a social system. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108560672
Luhmann, N. (2018). Organisation and decision. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108560672
Mäntysalo, R. (2016). From Public-Private-People Partnerships to Trading Zones in Urban Planning. In G. Concilio and F. Rizzo (Eds.), Human Smart Cities (pp. 141-157). Springer International Publishing.
March, J. G., & Simon, H. A. (1958). Organizations. New York, US: Wiley.
Moeller, H.‑G. (2012). The radical Luhmann. New York, US: Columbia University Press.
Purcell, M. H. (2013). A new land: Deleuze and Guattari and planning. Planning Theory & Practice. 14(1): 20-38. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2012.761279
Rauws, W. (2017). Embracing uncertainty without abandoning planning: Exploring an adaptive planning approach for guiding urban transformations. disP-The Planning Review. 53(1): 32–45. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2017.1316539
Schoeneborn, D. (2011). Organization as communication: A Luhmannian perspective. Management Communication Quarterly. 25(4): 663-689. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0893318911405622
Seidl, D. (2005). The Basic Concepts of Luhmann’s Theory of Social Systems. In D. Seidl and K. H. Becker (Eds.), Niklas Luhmann and organization studies (pp. 21-53). Malmö, Sweden: Liber.
Seidl, D., & Becker, K. H. (2006). Organizations as distinction generating and processing systems: Niklas Luhmann’s contribution to organization studies. Organization. 13(1): 9-35. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1350508406059635
Seidl, D., & Schoeneborn, D. (2010). Niklas Luhmann’s autopoietic theory of organisations: Contributions, limitations, and future prospects (Working Paper No. 105). Zurich, Switzerland: University of Zurich, Institute of Organization and Administrative Science.
Skrimizea, E., Haniotou, H., & Parra, C. (2019). On the ‘complexity turn’in planning: An adaptive rationale to navigate spaces and times of uncertainty. Planning Theory. 18(1): 122-142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095218780515
Tampio, N. (2010). Multiplicity. In M. Bevir (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Political Theory (pp. 911-912). Sage.
Turner, R. H. (1990). Role change. Annual Review of Sociology. 16(1): 87-110.
Van Assche, K., Beunen, R., & Duineveld, M. (2013). Evolutionary governance theory: an introduction. Springer Science & Business Media. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-00984-1
Van Assche, K., & Verschraegen, G. (2008). The Limits of Planning: Niklas Luhmann’s Systems Theory and the Analysis of Planning and Planning Ambitions. Planning Theory. 7(3): 263-283. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1473095208094824
Van Assche, K., Duineveld, M., & Beunen, R. (2014). Power and contingency in planning. Environment and Planning A. 46(10): 2385-2400. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1068/a130080p
Wenk, R. (2012). Raumordnung und Raumplanung als soziales System. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, HafenCity Universität, Hamburg.
