The concept of frames or framing, especially cast as "frame analysis," has an established history in public policy. Taking off from the work of Donald Schön and Martin Rein, we develop the idea of policy analytic framing, the more dynamic of the two terms, in ways that strengthen what we see as its promise for a more process-oriented and politically sensitive understanding of the activities it is used to characterize. We argue that such an approach needs to engage the following aspects of the work that framing does: sense-making; selecting, naming, and categorizing; and storytelling. In addition, frame theorizing needs to engage not only the way issues are framed but also the intertwining of framing and frame-makers' identities, and the meta-communicative framing of policy processes.
Interest in storytelling in planning has grown over the last two decades. In this article two strands of research are identified: research that looks at storytelling as a model of the way planning is done and research that looks at storytelling as a model for the way planning could or should be done. Recently, the second strand has received the most attention. This article builds on theories of storytelling as an important aspect of everyday planning practice. It draws on an ethnographic case in which a range of actors struggled with the meaning of what was going on, (re)framing the past, present and future with the help of stories. The case illustrates how new stories are built on top of older ones and new understandings emerge along the way. The article also looks into the relationship between storytelling and other planning activities. The article ends with a plea for ethnographic fieldwork to further develop ideas on storytelling in planning practice.
General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.-Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research-You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain-You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright, please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
No abstract
In order to understand how exemplary work is done in the complex urban environment of disadvantaged neighborhoods, we studied a group of 43 individuals-civil servants, professionals and active citizens-who make a difference. Various so-called 'exemplary practitioners' were found in the literature and in the neighborhoods of five cities. The working methods of exemplary practitioners show a mix and a dose of entrepreneurialism, strategic networking and empathic engagement that differ from standard bureaucracy but fit very well with what is needed in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Two striking examples illustrate these working methods.
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the "Content") contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content.
She is currently involved in research projects on new forms of local democracy and public deliberations in the context of urban and environmental planning. She has written articles and contributions to books on how to create institutional design for participation as well as on how to evaluate citizen participation projects.Abstract: Th is article responds to and develops the fragmented literature exploring intermediation in public administration and urban governance. It uses Q-methodology to provide a systematic comparative empirical analysis of practitioners who are perceived as making a diff erence in urban neighborhoods. Th rough this analysis, an original set of fi ve profi les of practitioners-enduring, struggling, facilitating, organizing, and trailblazing-is identifi ed and compared. Th is research challenges and advances the existing literature by emphasizing the multiplicity, complexity, and hybridity, rather than the singularity, of individuals perceived as making a diff erence, arguing that diff erent practitioners make a diff erence in diff erent ways. Th e authors set out a research agenda, overlooked in current theorization, that focuses on the relationships and transitions between the fi ve profi les and the conditions that inform them, opening up new avenues for understanding and supporting practice. Practitioner Points• Th is research develops an original set of fi ve ways in which practitioners can make a diff erence in urban neighborhoods: enduring, struggling, facilitating, organizing, and trailblazing. • By better understanding these diff erent practices, public administration can develop ways to support and generate local action. Taking this opportunity presents a strategic challenge for public administration in ensuring that neighborhood interventions are suffi ciently fl exible and open to being informed and shaped by these diff ering approaches. • At the same time, it is necessary to challenge assumptions, foster mutual respect, and generate eff ective relationships between people with diff erent ways of working and diff erent, and perhaps confl icting, views of the neighborhood, public administration, and urban governance. • Public administration needs to avoid prescribing a particular approach in urban neighborhoods and instead should aim to confi gure these practices as appropriate to diff erent neighborhoods or around a particular priority.
General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.-Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research-You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain-You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal Take down policy If you believe that this document breaches copyright, please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim.
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.