Phronesis and the participants' perspective

Caterino, Brian

doi:10.1111/1468-4446.12047

Cited by 4 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These include Schön's (1983) reflective practice, Forester's (1999) deliberative/participatory approach, performativity, practice and materiality-oriented, interpretivist, hermeneutics and action research, power and place-based studies. The critical literature and the preceding account of phronesis signpost, nonetheless, important interdependent open issues that crucially impinge on problem specification and analysis (Beauregard and Lieto, 2018;Caterino, 2013;Gimbel, 2013;Gunder, 2010;citing also Forester, 1999;Gunnell, 2013;Soja, 2013;Thuesen, 2011). For the present purposes, these are grouped into: treatment of phronesis and ontology of the planning situation.…”

Section: The Phronetic Approach To Social and Planning Researchmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…The critical literature and the preceding account of phronesis signpost, nonetheless, important interdependent open issues that crucially impinge on problem specification and analysis (Beauregard and Lieto, 2018; Caterino, 2013; Gimbel, 2013; Gunder, 2010; citing also Forester, 1999; Gunnell, 2013; Healy, 2014; Soja, 2013; Thuesen, 2011). For the present purposes, these are grouped into: treatment of phronesis and ontology of the planning situation.…”

Section: The Phronetic Approach To Social and Planning Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The making of good public plans Phronesis, Phronetic Planning Research and Assemblage Thinking

Briassoulis

2022

Planning Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Planning for the common good requires the exercise of phronesis and a fitting ontology of planning situations. This paper critically appraises Flyvbjerg’s Phronetic Planning Research approach through the lens of Aristotelian phronesis and Assemblage Thinking, showing that it inadequately addresses these interdependent issues. It proposes an Assemblage-based Phronetic Planning Approach (APPA) and a methodology to implement it. APPA conceptualizes planning situations as multiplicities comprising assemblages which best represent their complexity, materiality and spatiality and simultaneously enunciate the relationality and situatedness of individual and collective phronesis. APPA offers an immanent approach to study and support the making of public plans. It stresses the co-constitution of phronesis, phronimos, collective phronesis and the situated ‘common good’ within interacting assemblages and entangled planning multiplicities unfolding in a milieu over the planning process. Making good public plans under present and future uncertainty involves steering these multiplicities to foster the emergence of collective phronesis and the good plan that delivers the situated common good. Professional planners and other actors, desiring the ‘successful symbiosis’ of humans and the material world, may strive to become phronimos. Future research needs to engage with the Deleuzoguattarian and Aristotelian scholarship to elucidate critical theoretical issues, develop novel methodologies and analytical tools and empirically test APPA in diverse planning situations and geographical contexts.

show abstract

Section: The Phronetic Approach To Social and Planning Researchmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: The Phronetic Approach To Social and Planning Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

The making of good public plans Phronesis, Phronetic Planning Research and Assemblage Thinking

Briassoulis

2022

Planning Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Our first tension point comes from Brian Caterino's ideas of ‘mutual understanding’ and ‘collaboration’ between researchers and actors (Caterino : 739–45). He appears to be arguing that phronetic social science must have these features, but we disagree.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Tension points in real social science: A response

Flyvbjerg

Landman

Schram

2013

British Journal of Sociology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Social science today often contents itself with trying to explain particular events in terms of general models without understanding those events as experienced by the people being studied and without providing findings that might help people address the problems they are experiencing. It can be argued that the recent development of social science has focused too much on its own 'evidence--inference methodological core' and has lost sight of what is being studied, who is being studied, and how the results of research can challenge popular understanding, misconceptions, and power relations. At the most basic level, our edited volume Real Social Science: Applied Phronesis (Cambridge, 2012) is designed to provide examples of research that is situated in real communities, grows out of the concerns of people in those communities and is conducted in ways that can help those people address those concerns. These examples demonstrate that what we are calling "phronetic social science" (as originally coined by Bent Flyvbjerg) offers a meaningful approach for making social science useful and relevant to real people experiencing real problems. Phronetic social science calls for social scientists foregoing the attempt to build generic models of social behavior and instead situate their work in ongoing political struggles as they occur in specific contexts.The three short essays in this symposium on issues raised by our collection are most welcomed not just for their generous compliments but also for their thoughtful criticisms that help move the debate about our work further. The key issue is what to make of the idea of phronetic social science now that it is associated with a growing number of research projects across the social sciences. In our volume, we suggest that the case studies provided by our colleagues highlight how phronetic social science is not just context--specific and designed to be relevant to addressing issues people are confronting, but that it is research that is sensitive to power relations and the tension points that those power relations create. Focusing on tension points, we suggest, is key to making phronetic social science useful. These tension points highlight how power relations are standing in the way of addressing the particular problems being studied. The same can be said for this response. We focus on selected tension points our commentators have provided in the name of helping to make progress on moving phronetic social science forward. (Our commentators have given us much to consider but space limitations prevent us from considering all.)Our first tension point comes from Brian Caterino's ideas of 'mutual understanding' and 'collaboration' between researchers and actors. He appears to be arguing that phronetic social science must have these features, but we disagree. Phronetic researchers may decide such mutual understanding will form part

show abstract

Once Upon a Time… The Gypsy Boy Turned 15 While Still in the First Grade

Stathopoulou

2017

ICME-13 Monographs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Phronesis and the participants' perspective

Cited by 4 publications

References 6 publications

The making of good public plans Phronesis, Phronetic Planning Research and Assemblage Thinking

The making of good public plans Phronesis, Phronetic Planning Research and Assemblage Thinking

Tension points in real social science: A response

Once Upon a Time… The Gypsy Boy Turned 15 While Still in the First Grade

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About