 Planning for Shrinkage: Paradox or ParadigmSílvia Sousa and Paulo Pinho European Planning Studies, 2015, vol. 23, issue 1, 12-32 Abstract: A great number of contributions regarding shrinking cities correspond to generic discourses on urban problems, which cover planning policies with approaches and strategies developed in somewhat diverse or even very different urban contexts. The debate on shrinkage is still feeble and fragmented. Perhaps this is owing to the character of shrinkage or its relative novelty. An explicit, unequivocal, and comprehensive theoretical debate and framework on the topic of planning for shrinkage is lacking. This entails a previous reflection about what shrinkage means or should mean, the role of urban and regional planning, and the contradictions of planning for shrinkage, which cause the paradox of planning for shrinkage. How can planning deal with shrinkage? What should policies for shrinkage look like? Is planning for shrinkage, planning for population decrease? Is it managing population decrease? Is it business as usual: planning to resume growth? What does managing shrinkage mean? The paper presents a theoretical debate and some preliminary conclusions addressing these questions. Date: 2015 Downloads: (external link) Related works: Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:taf:eurpls:v:23:y:2015:i:1:p:12-32 Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from DOI: 10.1080/09654313.2013.820082 Access Statistics for this article European Planning Studies is currently edited by Philip Cooke and Louis Albrechts More articles in European Planning Studies from Taylor & Francis Journals |
Is your work missing from RePEc? Here is how to contribute.
Questions or problems? Check the EconPapers FAQ or send mail to .
EconPapers is hosted by the
School of Business at Örebro University.