Speaker
Description
This paper examines the roles of 'opening' and 'closure' in planning theory, arguing that systemic change aimed at addressing deep-seated inequalities requires both the creation of political space for dialogue and its subsequent consolidation to enable meaningful decisions. Drawing on Laclau and Mouffe’s hegemony theory, the paper proposes a framework that balances these dynamics by fostering collective will formation and unity to facilitate decision-making. The four-step approach outlined here illustrates how unity emerges not by erasing differences but by working through and engaging with them:
- Opening at the level of everyday politics: The first step involves struggle at the level of everyday politics and planning, where initial debates surface around particular issues.
- Opening at the level of meanings and identities: The second step occurs when the dispute escalates to a contest over meanings and identities. Here, the subject of planning takes on multiple interpretations, which may transcend its original purpose.
- Closure at the level of meanings and identities: The third step involves the temporary fixation of these meanings and the emergence of collective identity around them.
- Closure at the level of everyday politics: In the final step, the temporarily unified front influences decision-making at the level of everyday politics. The reconfiguration of social order, marked by the new discourse and the emergence of clear political fronts, facilitates decision-making over a particular planning issue.
By reframing closure as complementary to openness, this paper offers insights into reconciling planning's transformative goals with the practicalities of decision-making.
References
Laclau, E .and Mouffe, C. (1985). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy. London: Verso.
| Keywords | Planning democracy; post-foundational theory; systemic change |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | Yes |
