A discussion on reflexivity as a planning principle and the format of real-world laboratories
Downloads
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24306/plnxt/52Keywords:
Reflexive planning, new mobility technologies, learning processes, entrepreneurial actionAbstract
The fundamental uncertainty that accompanies innovation and transformation processes has influenced a growing body of literature on adaptive, explorative and reflexive planning. Such notions take stock of the complex interdependence in technological, social and spatial development. The article explores notions of reflexivity in urban planning and expands three dimensions with respect to the ongoing mobility transition: Openness and flexibility; learning and exploration; and embedding of initiatives. In this context, the article further reviews real-world laboratories as a format to structure learning processes and transdisciplinary collaboration for alternative mobility futures. In the wake of a rapidly growing new mobility sector in cities, aspirations of problem-solving through technology prevail. Yet urban planners and policy makers are challenged to evaluate opportunities and risks in relation to existing urban development goals. Reflexive strategies encourage long-term thinking, anticipation of unintended consequences and short-term explorations. A systematic integration of reflexivity can enable urban planners to intentionally guide change processes, while also facilitating the agency of others.
Published
Issue
Section
References
Abbott, J. (2005). Understanding and Managing the Unknown: The Nature of Uncertainty in Planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 24(3): 237-251. https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X04267710
Alcántara, S., Arnold, A., Dietz, R., Friedrich, M., & Lindner, D. (2018). Zukünfte Partizipativ Entwickeln. In Reallabor für nachhaltige Mobilitätskultur (Ed.), Stuttgart in Bewegung: Berichte von unterwegs (p. 109-115). Berlin: JOVIS.
Balducci, A., Boelens, L., Hillier, H., Nyseth, T., & Wilkinson, C. (2011). Strategic spatial planning in uncertainty: theory and exploratory practice. Town Planning Review. 82(5): 481 – 501. https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2011.29
Beecroft, R., Trenks, H., Rhodius, R., Benighaus, C., & Parodi, O. (2018). Reallabore als Rahmen transformativer und transdisziplinärer Forschung: Ziele und Designprinzipien. In A. Di Giulio & R. Defila (Ed.), Transdisziplinär und transformativ forschen. Eine Methodensammlung (p. 75–100). Wiesbaden: Springer.
Beck, U. (1994). The Reinvention of Politics: Towards a Theory of Reflexive Modernization. In U. Beck, A. Giddens and S. Lash (Ed.) Reflexive Modernization: Politics, Tradition and Aesthetics in the Modern Social Order (p. 1–55). Cambridge: Stanford University Press.
Bertolini, L. (2007). Evolutionary urban transportation planning: an exploration. Environment and Planning A. 39(8): 1998-2019. https://doi.org/10.1068/a38350
Bertolini, L. (2017). Planning the mobile metropolis. Transport for People, Places and the Planet. London: Palgrave.
Chesbrough, H. (2003). Open Innovation. The New Imperative for Creating and Profiting from Technology. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
Defila, R., & Di Guilio, A. (2018). Transdisziplinarität und Rallabore. In Reallabor für nachhaltige Mobilitätskultur (Ed.), Stuttgart in Bewegung: Berichte von unterwegs (p. 30-37). Berlin: JOVIS.
Dietz, R., Gantert, M., Hartmann, J., Heydkamp, C., Pfau, N., Puttrowait, E., Sonnberger, M., Uhl, E. (2015). EXPERIMENTIERRAUM STUTTGART. Dokumentation Stakeholderworkshop. Stuttgart, Baden-Württemberg: Universität Stuttgart, Institut für Landschaftsplanung und Ökologie.
Erhardt, G. D., Roy, S., Cooper, D., Sana, B., Chen, M., & Castiglione, J. (2019). Do transportation network companies decrease or increase congestion? Science Advances, 5(5), eaau2670. Retrieved May 18, 2019, from https://advances.sciencemag.org/content/advances/5/5/eaau2670.full.pdf
Finkenberger, I. M. (2018). Schwellenreiten. Riding the Threshold. In M. Buchert (Ed.), Prozesse Reflexiven Entwerfens. Processes of Reflexive Design (p. 208-225). Berlin: Jovis.
Freudendal-Pedersen, M., & Kesselring, S. (2016). Mobilities, Futures & the City: repositioning discourses – changing perspectives – rethinking policies. Mobilities. 11(4): 575-586. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2016.1211825
Gantert, M., & Stokman, A. (2018). Stadtraum. Stauraum. Lebensraum. Stuttgart als Experiemntierraum für eine nachhaltige Mobilitätskultur. In Reallabor für nachhaltige Mobilitätskultur (Ed.), Stuttgart in Bewegung: Berichte von unterwegs (p. 15-19). Berlin: JOVIS.
Giddens, A. (1984). The constitution of society: Outline of the theory of structuration. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
Goulden, M., Ryley, T., & Dingwall, R. (2014). Beyond ‘predict and provide’: UK transport, the growth paradigm and climate change. Transport Policy. 32: 139–147. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tranpol.2014.01.006
Heinrichs, D., Rupprecht, D., & Smith, D. (2019). Making Automation Work for Cities: Impacts and Policy Responses. In G. Meyer & S. Beiker (Ed.): Road Vehicle Automation 5. Lecture Notes in Mobility. Berlin: Springer.
Howell, A., Larco, N., Lewis, R., & Steckler, B. (2019). Policy Brief: AVs in the Pacific Northwest: Reducing Greenhous Gas Emissions in a Time of Automation. Portland, Oregon: University of Oregon, Urbanism Next.
Heyen, D. A., Brohman, B., Libbe, J., Riechel, R., & Trapp J. H. (2018). Stand der Transformationsforschung unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der kommunalen Ebene. Papier im Rahmen des Projekts „Vom Stadtumbau zur städtischen Transformationsstragie“. Berlin: Deutsches Institut für Urbanistik (Difu) and Öko-Institut.
Hillier, J. (2017). Strategic spatial planning in uncertainty or planning indeterminate futures? A critical review. In L. Albrechts, A. Balducci, & J. Hillier (Ed.), Situated Practices of Strategic Planning: An international perspective (p. 298-316). London: Routledge.
Hoadley, S. (Ed.) (2018). Road Vehicle Automation: And Cities And Regions. Polis Traffic Efficiency & Mobility Working Group, January 2018. Retrieved May 18, 2019, from https://www.polisnetwork.eu/uploads/Modules/PublicDocuments/polis_discussion_paper _automated_vehicles.pdf
Hopkins, D., & Schwanen, T. (2018). Automated Mobility Transitions: Governing Processes in the UK. Sustainability. 10(4): 956. https://doi.org/10.3390/su10040956
Hulgård, L. (2010). Social Entrepreneurship. In K. Hart, J.-L. Laville, & A. D. Cattani (Ed.), The Human Economy (p. 293-300). Cambridge: Polity Press.
Huxley, M. (2002). Governmentality, Gender, Planning: A Foucauldian Perspective. In P. Allmendinger, & M. Tewdwr-Jones (Ed.), Planning Futures. New Directions for Planning Theory (p. 136-155). London: Routledge.
Ionescu, A. I., Munoz Sanz, V., & Dijkstra, R. (2019). Robocar and Urban Space Evolution. City changes in the age of autonomous cars. Delft, Netherlands: TU Delft, Urban Design Section at the Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment.
Jack, S. L., & Anderson, A. R. (2002). The effects of embeddedness on the entrepreneurial process. Journal of Business Venturing. 17(5): 467–487. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(01)00076-3
Jahn, T., & Keil, F. (2016). Reallabore im Kontext transdisziplinärer Forschung. GAIA. 25(4): 247–252. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.25.4.6
Jessen, J., Meyer, U. M., & Schneider, J. (2008). stadtmachen.eu Urbanität und Planungskultur in Europa ; Barcelona, Amsterdam, Almere, Manchester, Kopenhagen, Leipzig, Sarajevo, Zürich. Stuttgart/Zürich: Karl Krämer Verlag.
Kummitha, R. K. R. (2017). Social Entrepreneurship, Community Participation, and Embeddedness. In R. K. R. Kummitha (Ed.), Social Entrepreneurship and Social Inclusion. Processes, Practices, and Prospects (p. 33-52). Singapore: Palgrave.
Lindner, D., Alcántara, S., Arnold, A., Busch, S., Dietz, R., Friedrich, M., Ritz, C., Sonnberger, M. (2017). MOBILITÄTSVISIONEN FÜR STUTTGART. Ein transdisziplinärer Workshop in Kooperation mit der VHS Stuttgart. Stuttgart, Baden-Württemberg: Universität Stuttgart.
Lissandrello, E., & Grin, J. (2011). Reflexive Planning as Design and Work: Lessens from the Port of Amsterdam. Planning Theory & Practice. 12(2): 223-248. https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2011.580156
Loorbach, D. A. (2010). Transition Management for Sustainable Development: A Prescriptive, Complexity-Based Governance Framework. Governance, An International Journal of Policy, Administration, and Institutions. 23(1): 161–183. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0491.2009.01471.x
Martin, C. J., & Upham, P. (2016). Grassroots social innovation and the mobilisation of values in collaborative consumption: A conceptual model. Journal of Cleaner Production. 134: 204-213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.04.062
Mitteregger, M., Bruck, E. M., Soteropoulos, A., Stickler, A., Berger, M., Dangschat, J.S.,
Scheuvens, R., Banerjee, I. (2019). AVENUE21. Automatisierter und vernetzter Verkehr – Entwicklungen des urbanen Europa. Wien: TU Wien Academic Press. Forthcoming.
OECD - International Transport Forum. (2015). Urban Mobility System Upgrade: How shared self-driving cars could change city traffic. Corporate Partnership Board Report. Retrieved May 18, 2019, from https://www.itf-oecd.org/sites/default/files/docs/15cpb_self-drivingcars.pdf
Parodi, O., Ley, A., Fokdal, J., & Seebacher, A. (2018). Recommendations for the Promotion and Development of Real-World Laboratories. Lessons Learned from BaWü-Labs. GAIA. 27(1): 178 –179. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.27.S1.12
Peer, C. (2016). Stadtalltag als Labor. Forschungsperspektiven zur Koexistenz internationaler Verflechtungen und lokaler Wissenskulturen im Rahmen von Living Labs. In H. Staubmann (Ed.), Soziologie in Österreich – Internationale Verflechtungen (p. 315-329). Innsbruck: University Press.
Pflieger, G., Kaufmann, V., Pattaroni, L., & Jemelin, C. (2009). How Does Urban Public Transport Change Cities? Correlations between Past and Present Transport and Urban Planning Policies. Urban Studies. 46(7): 1421-1437. https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098009104572
Portugali, J. (2012). Complexity Theories of Cities: Implications to Urban Planning. In J. Portugali, H. Meyer, E. Stolk, & E. Tan (Ed.), Complexity Theories of Cities Have Come of Age. An Overview with Implications to Urban Planning and Design (p. 221-244). Berlin Dordrecht London New York: Springer.
Puttrowait, E., Dietz, R., Gantert, M., & Heynold, J. (2018). Der Weg zum Realexperiment – Schlüsselakteure identifizieren, Kooperationsstrukturen aufbauen, Projektideen auswählen. In A. Di Giulio & R. Defila, R. (Ed.), Transdisziplinär und transformative forschen. Eine Methodensammlung. (p. 195-232). Wiesbaden: Springer.
Rauws, W. (2017). Embracing Uncertainty without Abandoning Planning. disP - The Planning Review. 53(1): 32-45. https://doi.org/10.1080/02513625.2017.1316539
Reallabor für nachhaltige Mobilitätskultur (Ed.) (2018). Stuttgart in Bewegung: Berichte von unterwegs. Berlin: JOVIS.
Redman, C. L. (2014). Should sustainability and resilience be combined or remain distinct pursuits? Ecology and Society. 19(2): 37. http://dx.doi.org/10.5751/ES-06390-190237 Schaller, B. (2017). Unsustainable? The Growth of App-Based Ride Services and Traffic, Travel and the Future of New York City. Schaller Consulting, 2017. Retrieved May 18, 2019, from http://www.schallerconsult.com/rideservices/unsustainable.pdf
Schäpke, N., Stelzer, F., Bergmann, M., Singer-Brodowski, M., Wanner, M., Caniglia, G. & Lang, D. J. (2017). Reallabore Im Kontext transformativer Forschung: Ansatzpunkte zur Konzeption und Einbettung in den internationalen Forschungsstand. Lüneburg: Leuphana Universität.
Schneidewind, U. (2014). Urbane Reallabore – ein Blick in die aktuelle Forschungswerkstatt. pnd/online, Planung neu denken. 3: 1-7.
Schneidewind, U. (2015). Transformative Wissenschaft – Motor für gute Wissenschaft und lebendige Demokratie. GAIA. 24(2): 88–91. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.24.2.5 Schneidewind, U. (2018). Die Große Transformation: Eine Einführung in die Kunst gesellschaftlichen Wandels. Frankfurt am Main: Fischer Taschenbuch.
Schneidewind, U., Augenstein, K., Stelzer, F., & Wanner, M. (2018). Structure Matters: Real- World Laboratories as a New Type of Large-Scale Research Infrastructure. A Framework Inspired by Giddens’ Structuration Theory. GAIA. 27(1): 12-17. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.27.S1.5
Schneidewind, U., & Singer-Brodowski (2014). Transformative Wissenschaft: Klimawandel im deutschen Wissenschafts- und Hochschulsystem. Marburg: Metropolis.
Scholz, R.W. (2017). The normative dimension in transdisciplinarity, transition management, and transformation sciences: New roles of science and universities in sustainable transitioning. Sustainability. 9(6): 991. https://doi.org/10.3390/su9060991
Schwarz, U. (Ed.) (2002). Neue deutsche Architektur, Eine Reflexive Moderne. Ostfildern: Hatje Cantz.
Schwarz, U. (2014). Reflexive Moderne und Architektur Revisited. In M. Buchert (Ed.), Reflexives Entwerfen (p. 188-211). Berlin: Jovis.
Singer-Brodowski, M., Beecroft, R., & Parodi, O. (2018). Learning in Real-World Laboratories. A Systemic Impulse for Discussion. GAIA. 27(1): 23-27. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.27.S1.7
Smith, A. (2006). Niche-based approaches to sustainable development: radical activists versus strategic managers. In J.-P. Voß & R. Kemp (Ed.), Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development (p. 313-336). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Sonnberger, M., & Gross, M. (2018). Rebound Effects in Practice: An Invitation to Consider
Rebound From a Practice Theory Perspective. Ecological Economics. 154: 14-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2018.07.013
Stead, D. (2019). Automated Vehicles and Active Transport: Making the Connections. In A. I. Ionescu, V. Munoz Sanz & R. Dijkstra (Ed.), Robocar and Urban Space Evolution. City changes in the age of autonomous cars. Delft, Netherlands: TU Delft, Urban Design Section at the Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment.
Stirling, A. (2006). Precaution, Foresight and Sustainability: reflection and reflexivity in the governance of science and technology chapter. In J.-P. Voß & R. Kemp (Ed.), Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development (p. 225-272). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar. Strohschneider, P. (2014). Zur Politik der Transformativen Wissenschaft. In A. Brodocz, D. Herrmann, R. Schmidt, D. Schulz, & J. Schulze Wessel (Ed.), Die Verfassung des Politischen (p. 175-192). Wiesbaden: Springer VS.
Uhl, E. (2018). Lernen im Reallabor. In Reallabor für nachhaltige Mobilitätskultur (Ed.), Stuttgart in Bewegung: Berichte von unterwegs (p. 124-131). Berlin: JOVIS.
Urry, J. (2004). The ‘system’ of automobility. Theory, Culture & Society. 21(4–5): 25–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276404046059
Voß, J.-P., & Kemp, R. (2006). Sustainability and reflexive governance: introduction. In J.-P.
Voß & R. Kemp, R. (Ed.), Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development (p. 3-28). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Voß, J.-P., Kemp, R., & Bauknecht D. (2006). Reflexive Governance: a view on an emerging path. In J.-P. Voß & R. Kemp, R. (Ed.), Reflexive Governance for Sustainable Development (p. 419-437). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Wagner, F., & Grunwald A. (2015). Reallabore als Forschungs- und Transformationsinstrument. Die Quadratur des hermeneutischen Zirkels. GAIA. 24(1): 26–31. https://doi.org/10.14512/gaia.24.1.7
WBGU (Wissenschaftlicher Beirat der Bundesregierung Globale Umweltveränderungen) (2011). Welt im Wandel – Gesellschaftsvertrag für eine Große Transformation. Berlin: WBGU.
Zhang, W., Guhathakurta, S., Fang, J., & Zhang, G. (2015). Exploring the Impact of Shared Autonomous Vehicles on Urban Parking Demand – An Agent-based Simulation Approach. Sustainable Cities and Society. 19: 34-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2015.07.006
