Much planning theory has been undergirded by an ontological exceptionalism of humans. Yet, city planning does not sit outside of the eco-social realities co-producing the Anthropocene. Urban planners and scholars, therefore, need to think carefully and critically about who speaks for (and with) the nonhuman in place making. In this article, we identify two fruitful directions for planning theory to better engage with the imbricated nature of humans and nonhumans is recognised as characteristic of the Anthropocene -multispecies entanglements and becoming-world. Drawing on the more-than-human literature in urban and cultural geography and the environmental humanities, we consider how these terms offer new possibilities for productively rethinking the ontological exceptionalism of humans in planning theory. We critically explore how planning

No abstract

This paper argues that a hybrid role for urban planners has emerged within the largely neoliberalised spaces of contemporary Australian governance. This new role is one that transcends previously rigid or clearly defined sectoral positions to blend public, private and community responsibilities in novel and complex ways. The first section of the paper briefly sketches the historical shifts that have led to this hitherto unseen hybrid role. The second section explores the notion of hybridity as a paradoxical professional 'third space' where dominant ideological discourses shaping planning practices such as neoliberalism can be both resisted (McGuirk, 2005) and/or reinforced (Roy, 2001). Whilst the third section of the paper shifts to ground the hybridity metaphor in real people and places through selected narratives from case-study research into the shift to performance-based planning in Queensland under the Integrated Planning Act 1997. Finally, the future of this hybrid professional role is considered within the context of an uncertain global financial climate.

Issues of urban equity have long been linked to urban planning. Yet in practice the quest for the 'just city', defined in terms of democracy, diversity, difference and sustainability, has proven to be highly problematic. Drawing on examples from the Australian urban context, we argue that the imperative of climate change adds urgency to the longstanding equity agenda of planning in cities. In our normative quest for the climate-just city we offer a conceptual and analytical framework for integrating the principles of climate justice and equity into urban planning thinking and practice.

No abstract