|
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This group
now functions as
EU COST C11 research team - Greenstructure and Urban
Planning
This Message Board
contains information and comment relating to the work of our
research group - the European Research Network on Urban
Density and Green Structure. It will only be useful if
everyone joins in and adds their views/ ideas/ information.
Non -members are welcome to add their comments. CLICK
ANY TOPIC or TOPICS
you wish view in the column to the right. To
ADD
A MESSAGE use the
FORM you will find to the left of each TOPIC. This is a moderated site
and open to the public - which means all incoming messages
have been checked before they are posted to this MESSAGE
BOARD. This process is only designed to ensure that messages
are either from Group Members or from non-members having
something relevant to add in relation to our research topic
- it does not ensure that the factual content has been
checked. The Webmaster and MAP21Ltd can therefore take no
responsibility for the content or its accuracy -
responsibility in relation to copyright issues lie entirely
with the original contributor. NOTE : Please USE THE GENERAL
INFORMATION SECTION for short messages and to suggest
ideas TO
VIEW THE MESSAGES click
a Topic below IDEAS
& COMMENTS Strand
One Strand
Two IDEAS
& COMMENTS Strand
One Strand
Two click
a Topic below IDEAS
& COMMENTS Strand
One Strand
Two click
a Topic below IDEAS
& COMMENTS Strand
One Strand
Two click
a Topic below IDEAS
& COMMENTS Strand
One Strand
Two click
a Topic below IDEAS
& COMMENTS Strand
One Strand
Two click
a Topic below IDEAS
& COMMENTS Strand
One Strand
Two click
a Topic below IDEAS
& COMMENTS Strand
One Strand
Two click
a Topic below IDEAS
& COMMENTS Strand
One Strand
Two click
a Topic below IDEAS
& COMMENTS Strand
One Strand
Two click
a Topic below IDEAS
& COMMENTS Strand
One Strand
Two click
a Topic below IDEAS
& COMMENTS Strand
One Strand
Two click
a Topic below IDEAS
& COMMENTS Strand
One
click
the underlined words
to go directly to message
Message
from a student about the US concept
New
Urbanism 8
May - More info. now on the Helsinki
Greenscom Conference site 29
March - More links to webpages added and a query in
the general section about definitions Add your latest
information here and then click the Submit Button
below it. Normally your information will be added
to the site within 24 hours.
28
March - Message from Anne Greenstructure
and Greenways The
meanings may be obvious to each of us as an
individual but do we all understand the same
thing? I
am asking this mainly because I have recently found
that the Greenscom title has been translated
different ways by different countries - the UK
officials tell me the title is "Greenstructures and
Urban Civil Engineering" - others have told me it
is "Greenstructures and Urban Planning" -
curious! 27/28
March - Message from Anne To
try to encourage use of this message system I have
changed the way you can send messages - just click
on the boxes in the left hand column and add your
comments. 14
March - Message from Anne I
have added several new features this week in the
form of Search Facilities - one to allow you to
search our own site, one to let you search Internet
called Google ( it is really quite good - for
instance try entering the words - "ecological
sustainability"). Finally I have added links to the
Amazon Bookstore - not necessariliy to get you to
buy books but to use to find the names and full
references for new and recent books - I find it
quite useful for that. I
will not be on-line from 20 to 24 March as I'm off
for a few days in the south of Spain - but I expect
a lot of stuff for me to add on the 25 - please
send any stuff for this week before 20.00 Friday
17. Please keep your reactions coming - just look
at the Counter at the bottom of this page to see
how many visits we have already had.
Anne
Beer 6
March - Message from
S
Langeveld Starting from
the 15th of April, I will be working with
Both
ENDS in
Amsterdam. Both
ENDS is
a NGO. Both ENDS' aim is to contribute to
responsible management of nature and the natural
environment, by strengthening fellow NGOs and
community groups that are working on these issues,
especially in developing countries.Those who know
my interests will see that this aim fits well with
my ambition. After 9 years with the
(Dorschkamp=oud) IBN (Alterra=nieuw) I wish now to
be active in linking the people that live in
developing countries to people living in countries
like ours who have the skills and expertise to help
them achieve their environmental objectives.
Starting from environmental questions in the social
context of the people in the developing countries,
I will be working in the international sphere using
my expertise, experience and contacts to identify
new funding sources and to open doors to new
opportunities. I did not come
to Gothenburg as I was working with the help of a
special agency to find this job. I have had to
spend much of last two years increasing the
turnover and developing a new system of
account-management for the Institute so I have had
less time to spend on the Group's activities.
However, it doesn't mean the end of the European
Network Urban Density and Green Structure for me as
in my discussion with the Board of Both ENDS I
stressed the importance of the environmental
questions concerning metropolisation in the
developing countries and the support needed to
solve them. Also I stressed the insights that are
achieved in our region and with our Urban Density
and Green Structure network. While working
for BothENDS I intend to mediate between the NGOs
and small groups of these countries and you who are
involved in the European Network. So I will
continue my contacts with you all in this
perspective. I am very happy with this new position
as director of this organisation and I am very
happy that I can end the recent marketing
activities which were very demanding. When there are
concrete questions I will get in contact again via
the Network Message Board or direct to individuals.
If you have got
any suggestion for my organisation please let me
know. Click
here to email me.
3
March - Olli 29
Feb - Message Board - Anne
- I have
now made the Text blocks on the Add a Message page
larger as Kimmo and Sybrand have a lot to say.
Remember if you have any photos or other
illustrations you want to send use Jpeg or Gif
format and make small and email directly as
attachments to me - Anne 25
Feb -
Patsy
Healey and the Message Board -
Björn Dear
colleagues, Our honored
guest at the conference in Gothenburg, October
1999, Prof. Patsy Healey has just arrived to
Chalmers for here first period as Jubileum
Professor at Chalmers. We welcome her and
appreciate very much her assistance in ongoing work
to make conclusions and further reflections from
the conference. We would also very much appreciate
input from other participants. Use this Message
Board and perhaps a interesting discussion will
emerge. Thank you in advance from Bjorn.
http://www.americanforests.org/
Lots of useful info. about trees in cities. (23 Feb
Anne
Beer) http://www.gardenvisit.com/index.htm
Lots on Parks and Gardens in UK and USA http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/events/reith_2000/programme.stm
(15 March Anne
Beer)
The BBC Reith Lectures this year deal with
Sustainable Development isses http://iisd1.iisd.ca/policy.htm
-Biodiversity
links, Sustainability and Public Policy links,
Compendium of Sustainable Development Indicator
Initiatives etc - up to the minute international
site by International Institute for Sustainable
Development based in Canada http://www.tracker.elibrary.com
- uk pubs -sust devel http://www.has.vcu.edu/usp/links.htm
- Planning resources on internet http://www.sustainable.doe.gov/
- US dept of env info on sustainability - see
also
Environmental
Planning Please
click the Add a Message link at the top of
the righthand colum and add your own
publications to this list as well as any
other useful related publications
(reports, papers, as well as books). This
will be a great use to students visiting
our site. Habitat
Conservation and Urban Growth Ecologically
Sound Development Ecopolis
HELSINKI
CONFERENCE The date is fixed: from the 5th to the
6th of June, plus pre-conference excursion on
Sunday, and perhaps meeting on Saturday Evening
(since most of you are probably flying with Apex).
So I hope that you will not miss it, and that
we´ll seeyou in Helsinki. Kimmo
Lapintie
Message
from
Olli
Maijala The first
GREENSCOM -conference - Espoo, Finland, 4th - 6th,
June, 2000 COMMUNICATING
URBAN GROWTH AND GREEN Planning and
Governance of the Urban Landscape Click here
to register and or send an abstract to
Olli
Maijala FIRST
ANNOUNCEMENT and a CALL FOR ABSTRACTS Researchers and
practioners (and everybody
interested in the
subject)
are hereby invited to participate in the first
GREENSCOM-conference, titled Communicating Urban
Growth and Green - Planning and Governance of the
Urban Landscape. The conference is organised
jointly by the Institute of Urban Planning and
Design and the Centre for Urban and Regional
Studies, Helsinki University of Technology. The
conference is held at the Department of
Architecture (HUT) in Espoo, Finland, June 4th -
6th, 2000. The conference
is related to the EU 5th Framework project
GREENSCOM -Communicating Urban Growth and Green,
started in March 2000. The project is coordinated
by ALTERRA Green World Research (the Netherlands),
and the other partners are Helsinki University of
Technology (Finland), School of Architecture,
Chalmers University of Technology (Sweden), Danish
Building Research Institute (SBI) (Denmark) and
FORS Recherche Sociale (France). The purpose of the
conference is to gather information, scientific
knowledge and practical experience related to the
Urban green and open areas. The focus of the
conference is on how the issue of urban open space
and green structure is understood in various
planning practices, legislation, and policy
frameworks, and how urban growth is handled - or
should be handled - in different urban and cultural
contexts. The conference
program will include pre-conference tour in
Helsinki (on Sunday 4th of June), keynote lectures,
case presentation, and workshop sessions. The
preliminary list of workshop themes is the
following: - Urban
compaction and sustainable development The
participants are invited to join the GREENSCOM
project team and share their views, knowledge and
practical experience with us. Those
who wish to participate but not present a paper,
should also click here
to
email
him
for registration.
Registration
data should include: ·
position/title and institution · postal,
telephone, fax and/or e-mail addresses The
proposals for papers should include ·
position/title and institution · postal,
telephone, fax and/or e-mail addresses · title of
paper · possible
thematic track or desired grouping (you can also
suggest alternative
themes) · an
abstract of no more than 250 words The costs of
the conference For further
information and a list
of
hotels and travel
arrangements,
please contact Olli
Maijala,
Centre for Urban and Regional Studies, P.O Box
9300, FIN-02015 HUT, Finland. Phone:
+358-9-451 4428; fax: +358-9-451 2140, E-mail:
olli.maijala@hut.fi Please
register NOW by
emailing
Olli
Maijala
direct
from this page
To have the
action started, we need at least 5 countries
(national governments!) to sign the action (or to
be precise, the MoU, Memorandum of Understanding,
of this Cost action. You can join
the action by having a research project (somehow
linked to the theme of the action) that has
national financing. COST does not finance research.
COST only enhances cooperation in the field of
scientific and technical research, and finances the
costs of this cooperation, mainly travelling
costs. What is needed
now is that when you have this kind of research
project, you should now contact your national
COST-coordinator, and ask her for further details
of how to join the action and get your country to
sign it. The procedures may differ a bit between
countries, so I won´t mix you up. I contacted the
Finnish coordinator, TEKES and Ms. Eija Auranen, to
ask what is the current situation. She said that
they do not yet have the official announcement to
declare the action open for signing, but it is very
usual that it takes weeks from the approval meeting
of CSO till the papers come officially to the
national coordinators (they also go throughsome
kind of language check in the meantime). Still, the
signing procedures can be prepared far already
beforehand. So, please contact your national
coordinators already now to get things
moving! COST has also
its own www-pages. If you are interested,
visit: http://www.netmaniacs.com/cost If you do not
know your national coordinator, you may also find
her/him in these
pages. With warm
regards, Olli Maijala Message
from
-
Marleen van den
Top,
ALTERRA Green World Research, Urban Rural
Interactions tel. +31-317-478701 Our COST action
is 'created'. This means that it is officially
approved.All Urban Density and Greenstructure
Network members, and other interested persons, need
to contact their national COST-co-ordinators to
have their country sign our COST action. At least 5
signatures will be needed, but the more, the better
of course - Olli will contact national
representatives - please react.. The COST ACTION
C11 "Greenstructures and Urban Planning" - the
initiative of which was born among the network -
has now been preliminarily approved, but it still
might need some support to get the final
acceptance.(Feb 10 Olli
Maijala
) "Last friday I
had a telephone call with Franck Charmaison in
Brussels. He confirmed that our COST proposal will
be discussed at the next meeting of the Technical
Committee on february 16th at Coimbra, Portugal. He
now told me that the Committee of Senior Officials,
at its december meeting, had officially agreed with
our proposal. They sent it to the TC to be looked
at on 16 February. Sybrand
Tjallingii
general
info. Hello everyone, Just
posting this message to get some feedback from
other Europeans involved with sustainable urban
development. I have the following question: New
Urbanism seems to be rather popular in the US right
now. I was wondering if you consider New Urbanism a
valuable contribution to our strive for sustainable
urban planning. And if so, is it also useful in our
European context? I'm not sure what to think about
it. I think that the general ideas behind their
approach have a lot in common with our own ideas of
sustainability (they make me think of the ideas of
Chistoffer Alexander), but I have the feeling that
their actual realizations are rather conservative
and not that sustainable after all. Just something
I was wondering about... Message
from: Nyhuus
Signe
RÅD-MOS
<signe.nyhuus@radhuset.oslo.kommune.no> Short
Note in relation to use of greenspace- in Norway at
the moment there is an interesting thing happening:
each
Township is in the process of making a "Green
Recreational Poster", that is they are
investigating what open/ green areas are in use and
for what purpose. This
work will show the specific "regulation status" on
the town map for each area of open green land -
then it will show how and for what purpose the
areas are actually used as well as which groups of
people are using them. In
fact this way of looking at things can be connected
to the hypothesis by Patrick Grahn - in his
dr.theses he has suggested the diversity of green
areas that various categories of people need in
urban areas. If for instance, the Green
Recreational Poster shows that no kids are using
any green areas in a Township, it will probably
mean that they are unsuitable for them and that in
turn will have implications locally for how those
areas of land should be planned, designed and
managed in the future.
Thanks
to Sybrand for a quick reply. I will continue by
trying to clarify and higlight the issues that seem
to me essential in our attempt to understand what
really happens in planning
communication. First
of all, I think that we should try to avoid making
artificial distinctions between theory and
practice. If some strategies to reach consensus
succeed in practice, or fail to do so, then we have
to try (in theory) to explain what happened, i.e.
what kind of consensus was reached, and what
aspects of the situation were responsible for it.
It is not possible that some things that are not
possible in theory could work in practice; practice
(or empiria) is always the test of theory.
Alternatively, we may use theory to help to
understand the complexities of practice, or to give
normative guidelines for practice. One
of the important contributions of theory is,
naturally, conceptual analysis. In our situation,
the most important conceptual issue, in my opinion,
is this: what kind of shared understanding are we
talking about? Or are there perhaps several senses
of the term and, respectively, several relevant
strategies? Or perhaps the concept of strategy is
not suitable in all situations (I will return to
this later). In
another article (Ecological Planning as a
Professional Challenge, in Paivanen & Lapintie
(ed.): After All These Years, Helsinki University
of Technology, Centre for Urban and Regional
Studies C 48), I tried to use argumentation theory
to distinguish these senses. According to van
Eemeren and Grootendorst, for instance, there is
the distinction between settlement and solution;
whereas in the former, negotiations, referees, or
judges may be used to reach a kind of acceptance,
in the latter all parties must agree that the
arguments at hand really lead to the solution (e.g.
a plan) adopted. However, the concept of solution
is still ambiguous, and I would distinguish at
least three possible interpretations. The parties
can end up in a common belief or understanding for
various reasons: as a result of the exculsion of
certain stakeholders (i.e. by including only those
who seem to agree in the first place), or as a
result of successful persuasion using rhetorical
means. This is what I have called solution 1.
Alternatively, we may require that certain
elementary rules of critical discussion are obeyed
in the discussion (e.g. by avoiding fallacies), and
if we still end up in shared understanding, this
may be called solution 2. But still, there may be
structural reasons why we tend to avoid critical
and controversial issues in communicative
situations (i.e. we try not to be argumentative),
and that is why our solution 2 may still be a
"wrong" solution in the sense that a better
solution would have been abvailable. For instance,
we may accept environmental risks only because we
do not understand the actual long-term impacts or
our decisions. Now all these different types of
shared understanding clearly require different
strategies. Kimmo 29
Feb- Reply from Sybrant to Kimmo's
comment 1.
From a thereoretical point of view consensus might
be only partial and related to a particular
context, in practice consensus exsists. We need it
to take democratic operational decisions that may
have long lasting effects. Our experience with
workshops as a part of the local and regional
planning process, shows that it usually is more
easy to approach consensus if the actors
participating in these workshops focus on long term
issues. Steps towards 'shared understanding' also
will be more likely if the workshop participants
start with carrying conditions like water and
traffic infrastructure Clearly the struggle for
power is more evident in short term issues about
the performance of direct land-use functions like
housing, commercial development, agriculture or
'nature'. 2.
The strategy of the two networks(S2N), as a
planning tool, starts with a selection of actors
that are stakeholders in structure planning,
including public and private actors, NGOs and
politicians. S2N frames the discussion and frames
the selection of actors. One of the
responsibilities of the politicians, at this stage,
is to create space for residents and businesses to
have something to choose at a later stage.
3.
There is some confusion about the term strategy.
Habermas himself may have contributed to this
confusion (if I understand it correctly) by placing
strategic and communicative rationality in opposite
positions. Yet we need strategies to make
procedures more democratic, to make dialogues more
Habermasian and to make an understanding of common
basic conditions shared by more. In Kimmos paper on
rationality and in the view of many planning
theorists, 'strategy' is linked to the linear
relationship between cause and effect and, hence,
between goal and means. However, there seems to be
no need to be reluctant to acknowledge the role of
strategies for interactive communication leading to
robust, 'no regret', decisions on creating
conditions in a situation of
uncertainty.
Sybrant 28
Feb - Message from Kimmo
Lapintie However,
I feel that there are some issues in recent
planning theory literature that we have to address
before engaging ourselves fully in the development
of planning tools. We have to decide, for instance,
whether we still consider the original Habermasian
conception of communicative action as valid, or
whether we have to move beyond it. This is related
to the concept of "shared understanding" that is
essential in the "strategy of the two networks"
(S2N). In the post-modern perspective, such a
consensus can only be conceived in a limited,
particular context, and it can never have any
absolute validity. Even scientific knowledge should
be seen as historically and locally (within a
profession, or within a network) produced, and the
same is naturally true for expert knowledge and
know-how. This is not, however, the same as seeing
it as simply relative to the social context, that
is, determined by the local power relations (as
Flyvbjerg would seem to suggest). It may have
different qualifications, and be more or less
relevant to the life-world of the citizens.
But
it does entail that within a complex context like
planning no shared understanding (of the plan) is
to be expected, only an awareness that we are using
the same space and resources. Planning and urban
governance would thus be understood as a continuous
struggle between different stakeholders, with only
limited and localised common objectives and
interpretations. What
does this mean to the S2N? First of all, we are
perhaps not entitled to start with the two networks
(traffic and water) and their respective flows and
areas, but we shoud start with the actors or
agents. It is the fact of contemporary planning
that both traffic and water planning and management
represent very powerful professions and social
practices, which very often manage to prevent any
substantial communicative options. Moreover, their
historical legacy has not been connected to
sustainability (or biodiversity etc.) but to local,
regional and national economic development, and
today more and more to EU growth policies (consider
TENs for instance). If two such powerful agencies
are combined into one integrated planning BEFORE
the residents or NGOs are brought to the scene,are
we to expect a more democratic communicative or
collaborative process? I should hardly think
so. Should
we not, in contrast, start with the actors (i.e.
stakeholder analysis), with an analysis of their
existing power relations (in the way Flyvbjerg
did)? In this way we would avoid imagining that
traffic or water management planning would consist
of "benevolent" agents promarily directed at
sustainability. Kimmo
Lapintie European
Research Network - Urban density and Green
Structure Proceedings
of the Gothenburg Conference:
update 27 Mar2000
Ecological Sustainability and Green Structure
Communication in Urban Planning
click a Topic below
Ecological Sustainability and Green Structure
Communication in Urban Planning
Ecological Sustainability and Green Structure
Communication in Urban Planning
Ecological Sustainability and Green Structure
Communication in Urban Planning
Ecological Sustainability and Green Structure
Communication in Urban Planning
Ecological Sustainability and Green Structure
Communication in Urban Planning
Ecological Sustainability and Green Structure
Communication in Urban Planning
Ecological Sustainability and Green Structure
Communication in Urban Planning
Ecological Sustainability and Green Structure
Communication in Urban Planning
Ecological Sustainability and Green Structure
Communication in Urban Planning
Ecological Sustainability and Green Structure
Communication in Urban Planning
Ecological Sustainability and Green Structure
Communication in Urban Planning
Ecological Sustainability and Green Structure
List of recent messages
20 Nove
27 March - Message from Anne Beer - note the
changes to the ADD
A MESSAGE to
this website system
14 March - Message from Anne Beer - see our
New
Search Facilities
9 March -
COST
"Greenstructures and Urban Planning" - contact your
national co-ordinator
7
March - Message from Signe Nyhuus about the
"Green
Recreational
Posters"
in Norway
6 March - Message from Marleen van den Top - we
have been successful with the COST
proposal - action needed by us all - see below
6 March - Message from Sjef
Langeveld
about
his new job
3
March- Message about the
GREENSCOM
-conference,
Finland, 4th - 6th, June, 2000 - CALL FOR ABSTRACTS
- ANYBODY INTERESTED WELCOME TO JOIN US
3
March- Message from Kimmo
Lapintie. -
Planning
Theory
29 Feb -
Sybrant's reply to Kimmo's comment -
Planning
Theory
27 Feb - Kimmo - Planning
Theory
25 Feb - Björn - General
info
Patsy in Gothenburg
8
May - More info. now on the Helsinki Greenscom
Conference site - click this http://www.hut.fi/Yksikot/YKS/Greenscom/Greens1.htm
Talking
to non group members I have realised it would be
useful to add definitions of the words we use. For
a start can I have you definitions of:
Please test these links and facilities out
-
you
can connect to them from the top of this page
for
me and let me know what works and what does not -
the fact that they are "free" has been a major
factor in my choice of them!
See
Message in the Greenscom section below about
the first
GREENSCOM
-conference,
in Finland, 4th - 6th, June, 2000 . Please book
your place NOW by emailing Olli
Maijala
direct from this page
Links
to Websites
Please add any connects you have found
useful
http://www.carfree.com/
Info
on cars in cities
http://www.sustainable.doe.gov/management/geninfo.htm
The books underlined are available directly from
Amazon - online. If you want to search for other
books use the Amazon search facility below.
Provided "In Association with
Amazon.co.uk"
Randall G. Arendt, et al /
Paperback / Published 1996
Price: $34.95
William M. Marsh / Paperback /
Published 1991
Price: $50.95
The
Living Landscape : An Ecological
Approach to Landscape
Planning
Frederick R. Steiner, George A.
Steiner / Hardcover / Published
1991
Price: $60.65
Cliff Moughtin, J. C. Moughtin /
Hardcover / Published 1996
Price: $56.95
Environmental
Planning for Site
Development
Anne R. Beer and Catherine Higgins
/ Second Edition Published 2000
Price: $43.95
City
Form and Natural
Process
Michael Hough, first published 1984
but reissued more recently
Timothy Beatley / Paperback /
Published 1994
Price: $14.36
Sybrand P. Tjallingii, published1995,
Backhuys,, Leiden.,NL
Ecological Conditions
Sybrand P. Tjallingii, published1996,
ibn-dlo, Wageningen,NL
8
May - Details now on the Helsinki
Greenscom Conference site
8
May - Details now on the Helsinki Greenscom
Conference site
http://www.hut.fi/Yksikot/YKS/Greenscom/Greens1.htm
before
the 18th of April 2000
- Sustainable urban infrastructure and green
areas
- Participation, conflict and conflict management
in urban planning
- Argumentation and rhetoric in planning
- Government and governance in contemporary urban
politics
- Quality and assessment of the urban green
areas
- The role of different professions in planning and
urban development
- Perception and social construction of the urban
green
Those
who wish to register and to present a paper should
send an abstract to
Olli
Maijala
(olli.maijala@hut.fi) before
the 18th of April 2000.
· your name
· your name
300
FIM (approx. 50 Euro) including
conference fee, lunches, refreshments and a
half-day study tour, but
excluding
lodgings.
The language of the conference is English.
Cost 11 - C11 Greenstructure and urban
planning
Message from
Olli
Maijala
Good News! The Cost Action "Greenstructures and
Urban Planning" that was created among our network,
is now officially approved by the CSO (Committee of
Senior Officials; the highest decision-making body
of COST).
Strand One - Ecological
Sustainability and Green Structure
Message from: jurgen.dewaegemaeker@yucom.be
Strand Two -
Communication
in Urban Planning
3 March - Message from Kimmo Lapintie
Let me first thank Ann for her efforts to offer us
this exciting opportunity to discuss our issues at
this new forum. I cannot resist reacting on Kimmos
message in which he comments on the paper Paul,
Marleen and myself presented at the Gothenburg
Conference.
I am very grateful for Anne for making it possible
to continue our discussion through the internet. I
am using the opportunity right away to comment on
an issue that we have earlier discussed in private
with Sybrand, but which is also addressed in
Sybrand´s, Paul´s and Marleen´s
paper (and my own paper as well) in Gothenburg. My
interest is related to the contribution of planning
theory to the practical issues of planning and
urban governance. I am well aware that many
practitioners are uneasy about "grand theories"
(Excuse me for adopting your term, Bjorn) like
those of Habermas and Foucault in connection with
practical tools, like the workshops described by
Sybrand et. al.
Professor of Urban and Regional Planning
Department of Architecture
Helsinki University of Technology
Communication in Urban Planning - Oct 1999
