This paper scrutinises the effects that the financialisation of land has on the land use planning process. Although finance is increasingly penetrating not only real estate but also land planning and development, there are few in-depth case studies describing and analysing this process. Contemporary urban development is characterised by the clustering of investments, the relocation of projects into peripheral areas and an instrumental approach to planning. These trends are expressions of a change in the development process, characterised by the increased detachment between land use planning processes at the local level and financial investor logics located at other scales. We call this the decontextualisation of land capital. An in-depth analysis of the internal economic mechanics of an urban project in the Milan area is provided to illustrate these trends. We conclude by reflecting on the challenges that the conditions of financialised land capital pose to local and national governments.
Planning through processes of "co-creation" has become a priority for practitioners, urban activists, and scientific researchers. However, urban development still shows a close instrumentalism on goal-specific tasks, means, and outcomes despite awareness that planning should enlarge possibilities for social change rather than constrain them. The article explores the dilemmas of planning agency in light of the contemporary need to open spaces for innovative practices. Planning is understood as a paradox; a structural tension between organization and spontaneity. The article provides a detailed profile of three specific dilemmas stemming from this condition. We distinguish and conceptually explore the dilemmas of intervention, regulation, and investment in current practices. The article provides a specific understanding of today's planning dilemmas, exploring the key notions of "space and time" in the intervention dilemma, "material and procedural norms" in the regulation dilemma, and "risk and income" in the investment dilemma. We suggest that planning practice today needs to make sense of these dilemmas, navigating through their extremes to find new contextualized forms of synthesis.
Conventional wisdom holds that the circular economy will provide a sustainable pathway to economic growth. Advocates of circularity insist that maintaining economic growth, while simultaneously reducing both inputs of materials and outputs of waste, entails closing material streams in cities. This article examines the roots and legacy of these prescriptions in environmental policymaking. It argues that the circular economy represents a regime of eco-accumulation in which waste is main resource of production and consumption. Focusing on the legacy of circular economy policies in the Netherlands and Amsterdam, the article provides an account of the building of a nationwide green-growth urban agenda underpinned by the valorization of waste. It dissects three social, economic, and institutional processes and factors through which circularity takes shape: (a) the reconfiguration of the multi-level structure through which waste processing has been governed; (b) the promotion of a city-regional economy of micro-logistics and industrial manufacturing for waste materials; and (c) the centrality of households in producing and consuming waste in the urban environment. The article concludes by questioning the limits of an economy dependent on waste.
Experimentation has become an increasingly dominant and celebrated practice in urban governance. Used by planners and policy-makers seeking to manage and organize a positive transition to a 'better' world, experiments are generally seen as desirable and even necessary to achieve this goal. The quintessentially political nature of this approach to urban change, however, remains insufficiently addressed in planning and policy literature. This paper argues that experimental agency entails a set of political biases and normative assumptions that deserve to be problematized. Critically building on the analytical insights of evolutionary theory, we develop a critique of experimental action, arguing that experiments express a 'politics of niches' which occur across three processes: the creation, selection and retention of emergent practices within established institutional orders. Using empirical evidence from contemporary practices in Amsterdam, we sketch four trajectories of niches: death, marginalization, assimilation and transformation. We conclude by reflecting on the political implications of experimentation for urban theory and practice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.