Four cases of affecting change
Downloads
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24306/plnxt/42Keywords:
Activism, planning, engagement, methods, action researchAbstract
Researchers in urban planning are frequently motivated by the desire to facilitate positive social change. In seeking better ways to effect change, the researcher becomes an activist by engaging with social and environmental issues in a meaningful way to solve a problem. It is also often at this nexus where practice and academia meet, where the researcher adopts an activist role. In this paper we argue that activist research requires researchers to place themselves in one of two dominant positionalities or engagement positions: the insider or the outsider, as they join efforts with their research participants and activities. Using four case examples from our own research, we discuss how each positionality influences the production of new knowledge in both practice and theory. We reflect on challenges faced by early-career activist researchers in adopting activist research approaches, highlighting implications for undertaking this type of research in urban planning, and the need for a rethink from current discourses to set a path for a more hopeful future.
Published
Issue
Section
References
Askins, K. (2009). ‘That’s just what I do’: Placing emotion in academic activism. Emotion, Space and Society. 2(1): 4-13.
Bocchi R., & Marini S. (2015). Re-cycle Italy. In search of new life-cycles for the territories of waste and abandonment. Techne. 10: 16-18.
Bradbury, H., & Reason, P. (2003). Action Research. Qualitative Social Work: Research and Practice. 2(2): 155-175.
Carta, M. (2017). Augmented City. A Paradigm Shift. Trento,: LIStLab.
Carta, M. (2016). Innovation, Circularity and Local Development. In M. Carta, B. Lino & D. Ronsivalle (Eds.), Re_cyclical Urbanism: Visions, Paradigm and Projects for the Circular Metamorphosis (pp. 92–103). Rovereto: LIStLab.
Choudry, A., & Kuyek, D. (2012). Activist Research: Mapping Power Relations, Informing Struggles. In A. Choudry, J. Hanley, & E. Shragge (Eds.), In Organize! Building the Local for Global Justice (pp. 23–35). Oakland: PM Press.
Corbetta P. (1999). Metodologie e tecniche della ricerca sociale. Bologna,: Il Mulino.
Day, S. J. (2016). Managing water locally: an inquiry into community-based water Resources management in fragile states. Unpublished doctoral dissertation.. Cranfield University
Delanty, G. (2011). Cultural diversity, democracy and the prospects of cosmopolitanism: a theory of cultural encounters. The British Journal of Sociology. 62(4): 633-656.
Fainstein, S. S., & DeFilippis, J. (Eds.) (2016). Readings in Planning Theory (4th ed.). Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.
Greenwood, D. J. & Morton, L. (Eds.) (1998). Introduction to Action Research: Social Research for Social Change. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Gustavsen, B. (2003). New forms of knowledge production and the role of action research. Action Research. 1(2): 153-164.
Healey, P. (2011). The universal and the contingent: Some reflections on the transnational flow of planning ideas and practices. Planning Theory. 11(2): 188-207.
Herr, K., & Anderson, G. L. (2005). The Action Research Dissertation: Guide for Students and Faculty. Oakland: Sage.
Hillier, J. (2001). Direct action and agonism in democratic planning practice. In P. Allmendinger & M. Tewdwr-Jones (Eds.), Planning futures: New Directions for Planning Theory (pp. 110-135). London: Routledge.
Jordan, S., & Kapoor, D. (2016). Re-politicizing participatory action research: unmasking neoliberalism and the illusions of participation. Educational Action Research. 24(1): 134-149.
Kindon, S. (2016). Empowering Approaches: Participatory Action Research. In I. Hay (Ed.), Qualitative Methods in Human Geography (4th ed.) (pp. 350-370). Canada: Oxford University Press.
Merry, S. (2006). Transnational Human Rights and Local Activism: Mapping the Middle. American Anthropological Association. 108(1): 38-51.
McNiff, J. (2013). Action Research: Principles and Practice (3rd ed.). Oxon: Routledge.
McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2010). Doing and Writing Action Research. London: Sage.
McNiff, J., & Whitehead, J. (2011). All You Need to Know About Action Research (2nd ed.). London: Sage.
Miller, R. L., & Brewer, J. D. (Eds.) (2003). The A - Z of Social Research: A Dictionary of Key Social Science Research Concepts. London: Sage.
Mottee, L. K., & Howitt, R. (2018). Follow-up and social impact assessment (SIA) in urban transport-infrastructure projects: insights from the Parramatta rail link. Australian Planner. 55(1): 1-11.
Moulaert, F., Martinelli, F., Swyngedouw, E., & Gonzalez, S. (2005). Towards Alternative Model(s) of Local Innovation. Urban Studies. 42(11): 1969-1990.
Phills, J.A., Deiglmeier, K., & Miller, D. T. (2008). Rediscovering social innovation. Stanford Social Innovation Review. 6(4): 34-43.
Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2001). Handbook of Action Research : Participative Inquiry and Practice. London: Sage.
Siemiatychki, M. (2012). The Role of the Planning Scholar: Research, Conflict, and Social Change. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 32(2): 147–159.
Scaffidi F. (2018). Territorial creativity in peripheral context. Urban and regional effects of the re-cycle of A ana saltworks. In: J. Schr der, M. Carta, M. Ferretti & B. Lino (Eds.), Dynamics of Periphery (pp. 282-289). Jovis Verlag: Berlin.
Silverman, R. M., Taylor, H. L., & Crawford, C. (2008). The role of citizen participation and action research principles in Main Street revitalization. An analysis of a local planning project. Action Research. 6(1): 69-93.
Stanek, L. (2011). Henri Lefebvre on Space: Architecture, Urban Research and the Production of Theory. Minneapolis: University of Minessota Press.
Svirsky, M. G. (2010). Defining activism. Deleuze Studies. 4(Suppl. 1): 163-182.
Tekin H., & Tekdogan O. F. (2015). Socio-Cultural Dimension of Innovation. Social and Behavioral Sciences. 195: 1417-1424.
Thomas-Slayter, B. (1995). A brief history of participatory methodologies. In R. Slocum, L. Wichart, D. Rocheleau & B. Thomas-Slayter (Eds.), Power, Process and Participation: Tools for Change. London: Intermediate Technology Publications.
Turnheim, B., Berkhout, F., Geels, F., Hof, A., McMeekin, A., Nykvist, B., & van Vuuren, D. (2015). Evaluating sustainability transitions pathways: Bridging analytical approaches to address governance challenges. Global Environmental Change. 35: 239-253.
Vanclay, F. (2003). International principles for social impact assessment. Impact Assessment and Project Appraisal. 21(1): 5-12.
Vanclay, F., Esteves, A. M., Aucamp, I., & Franks, D. M. (2015). Social Impact Assessment: Guidance for assessing and managing the social impacts of projects. International Association for Impact Assessment. Retrieved October 25, 2018, from: https://www.rug.nl/research/portal/files/17534793/IAIA_2015_Social_Impact_Assessment_guidance_document.pdf
Webb, R., Bai, X., Smith, M. S., Costanza, R., Griggs, D., Moglia, M., … & Thomson, G. (2018). Sustainable urban systems: Co-design and framing for transformation. Ambio. 47(1): 57-77.
Whyte, W. F., Greenwood, D. J., & Lazes, P. (1991). Participatory Action Research. In W. F. Whyte (Ed.), Participatory Action Research (pp. 19–55). Los Angelos: Sage Publications, INC.
Wolfram, M., & Frantzeskaki, N. (2016). Cities and systemic change for sustainability: Prevailing epistemologies and an emerging research agenda. Sustainability. 8(2): art. 144.
