Planungskultur als neues Paradigma in der Planungswissenschaft.
Routledge
item.page.uri.label
Loading...
Date
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Routledge
item.page.orlis-pc
GB
item.page.orlis-pl
Abingdon
item.page.language
item.page.issn
0251-3625
item.page.zdb
item.page.orlis-av
ZLB: Kws 155 ZB 6792
BBR: Z 2513
IFL: I 4087
BBR: Z 2513
IFL: I 4087
item.page.type
item.page.type-orlis
relationships.isAuthorOf
Abstract
Die Autoren gehen auf die Vielfalt der unterschiedlichen Kulturkonzepte ein, die in der Planungskultur-Forschung Anwendung finden. Sie stellen die interessante Frage, inwiefern der Planungskultur-Ansatz ein neues Paradigma in der Planungswissenschaft darstellt und beantworten diese anhand der theoretischen, empirischen, methodologischen und programmatischen Komponenten des Ansatzes.
A cultural perspective on the production of space in planning science is en vogue, as recent debates and publications on "planning cultures" indicate. In this context we raise two questions in this article: (1) which understandings of the term "culture" contribute substantially to the formation of a new (cultural) paradigm in planning science? (2) How can such a paradigm be formed considering the variety of different conceptualisations of planning culture? To answer these questions the plurality of "cultural turns" and a typology of different concepts of culture are discussed in a first step. It is highlighted that a cultural turn in planning science is an open and incomplete process which includes perspectives on spaces and planning practices. In a second step, the formation of planning culture as a scientific paradigm is analysed through the comparison of empirical-analytical concepts of planning culture. Thus, theoretical, methodological, empirical and programmatic components of these different concepts are compared within a "cognitive system". The analysis reveals certain similarities and complementary characteristics of the various conceptualisations. It is therefore argued that there is a constructive coexistence of these approaches, which might lead towards a new paradigm in planning science. In conclusion, the essence of this paradigm might be characterised by five features: (1) a relational understanding of space and (2) a holistic and meaning/knowledge-based definition of culture, which is (3) primarily operationalized through analytical approaches to organisational cultures. Therefore, the essential idea is that planning cultures are characterised by the way actors of planning think and act within (or corresponding to) organisations, producing spaces of meaning through social practices. From a programmatic view, this paradigm might include the (4) comprehension and comparison of different planning cultures that (5) are embedded in certain structural (especially societal) contexts.
A cultural perspective on the production of space in planning science is en vogue, as recent debates and publications on "planning cultures" indicate. In this context we raise two questions in this article: (1) which understandings of the term "culture" contribute substantially to the formation of a new (cultural) paradigm in planning science? (2) How can such a paradigm be formed considering the variety of different conceptualisations of planning culture? To answer these questions the plurality of "cultural turns" and a typology of different concepts of culture are discussed in a first step. It is highlighted that a cultural turn in planning science is an open and incomplete process which includes perspectives on spaces and planning practices. In a second step, the formation of planning culture as a scientific paradigm is analysed through the comparison of empirical-analytical concepts of planning culture. Thus, theoretical, methodological, empirical and programmatic components of these different concepts are compared within a "cognitive system". The analysis reveals certain similarities and complementary characteristics of the various conceptualisations. It is therefore argued that there is a constructive coexistence of these approaches, which might lead towards a new paradigm in planning science. In conclusion, the essence of this paradigm might be characterised by five features: (1) a relational understanding of space and (2) a holistic and meaning/knowledge-based definition of culture, which is (3) primarily operationalized through analytical approaches to organisational cultures. Therefore, the essential idea is that planning cultures are characterised by the way actors of planning think and act within (or corresponding to) organisations, producing spaces of meaning through social practices. From a programmatic view, this paradigm might include the (4) comprehension and comparison of different planning cultures that (5) are embedded in certain structural (especially societal) contexts.
Description
Keywords
Journal
DISP
item.page.issue
Nr. 4
item.page.dc-source
item.page.pageinfo
S. 30-42