Spatial Planning, Devolution, and New Planning Spaces

Phil Allmendinger and Graham Haughton
Additional contact information
Phil Allmendinger: Department of Land Economy, University of Cambridge, Cambridge CB3 9EP, England
Graham Haughton: Department of Geography, University of Hull, Hull HU6 7RX, England

Environment and Planning C, 2010, vol. 28, issue 5, 803-818

Abstract: In this paper we put forward the case for viewing ‘spatial planning’ as a political resource, one which has been largely supportive of the rollout neoliberal approach of New Labour. Drawing on work on postpolitics, we argue that ironically the progressive credentials of spatial planning in terms of consensus building, policy integration, and the search for ‘win – win – win’ solutions may have helped script out oppositional voices. We then outline how the combination of changes to planning systems, devolution, and local government reform has not generated a ‘double dividend’ of greater planning powers devolving from new territorial administrations to local planning authorities. Instead a more complex process of creating new planning spaces has emerged after devolution. Five types of new planning spaces and spatial practices are identified, including new soft space forms of governance.

Date: 2010
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations: View citations in EconPapers (2)

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/c09163 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:sae:envirc:v:28:y:2010:i:5:p:803-818

DOI: 10.1068/c09163

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Environment and Planning C
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().