Knowledge Flows, Spatial Strategy Making, and the Roles of Academics

I explore the contribution of academics to the activity of spatial strategy making for urban areas. I focus on how academics have been involved in such policy formation work, their contribution to the framing of key strategic concepts, the extent to which academic contributions have affected the understanding of urban and regional dynamics embodied in such frames, and the role of academics in legitimating the strategies produced. I use examples from cases from Italy, the Netherlands, and the UK to highlight the significance of the institutional contexts in which academics have been drawn into spatial strategy-making activity, and the different kinds of relationships which have developed. I conclude that more attention is needed to this issue, in the context of improving the knowledge ability of spatial strategy-making practices, encouraging more reflexivity among academics involved in such activity about the institutional dynamics and ethical challenges of such involvement, and promoting more attention among policy makers to how they use experts in different kinds of institutional context when undertaking spatial strategy-making work.

[1]  H. Baum,et al.  Fantasies and Realities in University-Community Partnerships , 2000 .

[2]  J. Forester.  Reflections on trying to teach planning theory , 2004 .

[3]  Harriet Bulkeley,et al.  Boundary Work: Knowledge, Policy, and the Urban Environment , 2006 .

[4]  K. Morgan,et al.  Organic vs. conventional agriculture: knowledge, power and innovation in the food chain 1 1 This pap , 2000 .

[5]  Louis Albrechts,et al.  Strategic (Spatial) Planning Reexamined , 2004 .

[6]  R. Bromley.  On and off campus: Colleges and universities as local stakeholders , 2006 .

[7]  J. Petts,et al.  Expert Conceptualisations of the Role of Lay Knowledge in Environmental Decisionmaking: challenges for Deliberative Democracy , 2006 .

[8]  Huw Thomas,et al.  Pressures, Purpose & Collegiality in UK Planning Education , 2005 .

[9]  E. Wenger.  Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning, and Identity , 1998 .

[10]  M. Hajer.  Policy without polity? Policy analysis and the institutional void , 2003 .

[11]  W. Zonneveld.  In search of conceptual modernization: The new Dutch ‘national spatial strategy’ , 2005 .

[12]  Kenneth M. Reardon.  Promoting reciprocity within community/university development partnerships: Lessons from the field , 2006 .

[13]  A. Loukaitou-Sideris,et al.  Choosing Confrontation or Consensus in the Inner City: Lessons from a Community-University Partnership , 2001 .

[14]  Patsy Healey,et al.  Relational complexity and the imaginative power of strategic spatial planning1 , 2006 .

[15]  H. Takeuchi.  Towards a Universal Management Concept of Knowledge , 2001 .

[16]  Angela Hart,et al.  Developing local ‘communities of practice’ through local community – university partnerships , 2006 .

[17]  P. Healey.  The Treatment of Space and Place in the New Strategic Spatial Planning in Europe , 2004 .

[18]  O. Bina,et al.  New Agendas for Appraisal: Reflections on Theory, Practice, and Research , 2004 .

[19]  Patsy Healey,et al.  Making Strategic Spatial Plans , 1997 .

[20]  L. Albrechts.  Creativity as a Drive for Change , 2005 .

[21]  H. Priemus,et al.  Regional and transnational spatial planning1: problems today, perspectives for the future , 2004 .

[22]  P Healey,et al.  Building Institutional Capacity through Collaborative Approaches to Urban Planning , 1998 .

[23]  H. Molotch,et al.  Building Milan: alternative machines of growth* , 1990 .

[24]  Jose Gavinha,et al.  The planning dialectic of continuity and change: The evolution of metropolitan planning in Madrid 1 , 2005 .

[25]  P. Haas.  Introduction: epistemic communities and international policy coordination , 1992, International Organization.

[26]  James Cornford,et al.  Regional institutions and knowledge - tracking new forms of regional development policy , 2000 .

[27]  Patsy Healey,et al.  Strategic Spatial Planning and Regional Governance in Europe , 2003 .

[28]  Andrew E. G. Jonas,et al.  Unblocking the City? Growth Pressures, Collective Provision, and the Search for New Spaces of Governance in Greater Cambridge, England , 2004 .

[29]  N. Morrison.  The compact city: Theory versus practice—The case of Cambridge , 1998 .

[30]  Andreas Faludi,et al.  Rule and Order, Dutch Planning Doctrine in the Twentieth Century , 1994 .

[31]  J. Innes.  Planning Through Consensus Building: A New View of the Comprehensive Planning Ideal , 1996 .

[32]  William Solesbury.  The Ascendancy of Evidence , 2002 .

[33]  L. Bertolini,et al.  Planning Concepts for Cities in Transition: Regionalization of Urbanity in the Amsterdam Structure Plan , 2003 .

[34]  Luigi Mazza,et al.  Technical Knowledge and Planning Actions , 2002 .

[35]  Wil Zonneveld,et al.  Spatial Planning in the Network Society-Rethinking the Principles of Planning in the Netherlands , 2000 .