Navigating Cultural Difference in Planning: How Cross-Border Adaptation Nurtured Cosmopolitan Competence Among U.S.-Taught Chinese Practitioners

Colleen Chiu-Shee and Linda Shi

Journal of the American Planning Association, 2024, vol. 90, issue 4, 642-655

Abstract: Problem, research strategy, and findingsAs urban issues become globally intertwined, planning education must train future practitioners to confront cross-border, intercultural conflicts. In U.S. planning schools, although campus diversity has internationalized, it remains hotly debated how to teach global dimensions of planning. We tackled this understudied subject from the perspective of mainland Chinese practitioners who studied planning in the United States and then returned home to work. We examined how cross-border journeys shaped their career choices and their attitudes toward different planning cultures. Through in-depth interviews, we found that although intercultural struggles triggered nationalist-leaning defensiveness in some returnees, most developed bicultural appreciation, embraced plural worldviews, and pursued transformative agency locally and cross-culturally. Returnees’ intercultural competencies and expanded consciousness reflect the value of cosmopolitanism for navigating differences. Amid cultural wars and geopolitical shifts, we call for a cosmopolitan ethos in planning education and practice and invite continual dialogues about future priorities for global planning debates.Takeaway for practiceWhen working across borders, urban professionals inevitably confront cultural differences, institutional constraints, and value conflicts. U.S.-taught Chinese practitioners helped ideas, practices, and ethics travel and take root across borders through entrepreneurial, internationalist, interventionist, and reformist approaches. This suggests that international, multicultural training can equip practitioners with cosmopolitan competencies and pluralist worldviews, which can enable them to navigate cultural–political differences, identify ethical common grounds across borders, and nudge meaningful shifts through incremental, value-aligned action.

Date: 2024
References: Add references at CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/01944363.2023.2290499 (text/html)
Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

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:taf:rjpaxx:v:90:y:2024:i:4:p:642-655

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.tandfonline.com/pricing/journal/rjpa20

DOI: 10.1080/01944363.2023.2290499

Access Statistics for this article

Journal of the American Planning Association is currently edited by Sandi Rosenbloom

More articles in Journal of the American Planning Association from Taylor & Francis Journals
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Chris Longhurst ().