Do ‘city shapers’ really support urban consolidation? The case of Brisbane, Australia

Katrina Raynor, Severine Mayere and Tony Matthews
Additional contact information
Katrina Raynor: University of Melbourne, Australia
Severine Mayere: Queensland University of Technology, Australia
Tony Matthews: Griffith University – Gold Coast Campus, Australia

Urban Studies, 2018, vol. 55, issue 5, 1056-1075

Abstract: Cities all over the world have activated policy support for urban consolidation in recent decades. Rationales for urban consolidation focus on its perceived ability to achieve sustainability goals, including decreased automobile dependence, increased social cohesion and greater walkability. Despite this, there are few international examples of urban consolidation policy implementation that has achieved its stated aims. This paper explores the nature and character of perceptions of urban consolidation held by urban planners, developers, architects and local politicians. The perspectives held by these ‘city shapers’ are integral to urban consolidation debates and delivery, yet the nature and character of their specific views are underexplored in urban studies literature. This paper combines the theoretical lens of Social Representations Theory with the methodological approach of Q-methodology to understand the common sense understandings of urban consolidation held by city shapers in Brisbane, Australia. It identifies, synthesises and critically discusses the social representations employed by city shapers to understand, promote and communicate about urban consolidation. Findings indicate that urban consolidation debates and justifications diverge significantly from stated policy intentions and are based on differing views on ‘good’ urban form, the role of planning and community consultation and the value of higher density housing. We conclude that there is utility and value in identifying how urban consolidation strategies are influenced by the shared beliefs, myths and perceptions held by city shapers. Understanding these narratives and their influence is fundamental to understanding the power-laden manipulation of policy definitions and development outcomes.

Keywords: housing; Q-methodology; social representation theory; urban consolidation; urban development professionals; ä½ æˆ¿; Q 方法论; ç¤¾ä¼šè¡¨å¾ ç †è®º; åŸŽå¸‚æ•´å ˆ; åŸŽå¸‚å ‘å±•ä¸“ä¸šäººå£« (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2018
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0042098016688420 (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:urbstu:v:55:y:2018:i:5:p:1056-1075

DOI: 10.1177/0042098016688420

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in Urban Studies from Urban Studies Journal Limited
Bibliographic data for series maintained by SAGE Publications ().