Arenas of conflict: Planning and Participation in plural Democracy

冲突领域：多元民主的规划和参与

• 批准号: 505243147
• 负责人: Dr. Manfred Kühn
• 金额: --
• 依托单位: Leibniz-Institut für Raumbezogene Sozialforschung e.V. (IRS)
• 依托单位国家: 德国
• 项目类别: Research Grants
• 资助国家: 德国
• 项目状态: 未结题
• 来源: https://gepris.dfg.de/gepris/projekt/505243147?language=en
• 关键词: Arenas; conflict; Planning; Participation; plural

The aim of the project is to further develop existing planning theories in dealing with conflicts by distinguishing between rational, communicative and agonistic planning types and, on this basis, examining various planning conflicts in practice by using empirical case studies. The project seeks for a closer connection of planning research with political science approaches of democracy and participation research. For the empirical analysis of planning conflicts, the project transfers the term “arena” from political to planning research. Arenas are understood as places of public conflict resolution in planning participation processes, in which actors with conflicting interests meet and argue in advance of decisions. The political science approach of conflict field analysis is used for empirical analysis. A distinction is made between the context, the object, the actors, the resolution, the regulation and the dynamics of conflicts. When carrying out empirical case studies, the focus is on three central questions: First: What is the relationship between rational, communicative and agonistic planning types in conflict cases in practice? Second: Which arenas and levels of participation contribute to the democratic resolution and regulation of conflicts and how? Third: Under what conditions do participation processes transform antagonistic into agonistic conflicts in planning? The six empirical case studies cover planning conflicts in the fields of urban development planning, land-use planning and the approval of projects. The case selection relates to conflicts between the acceleration of housing construction and the preservation of open spaces in the growing metropolises of Berlin and Hamburg, conflicts over the common good in Potsdam and Freiburg, and conflicts in the approval of wind turbines in the context of the energy transition in the small towns of Sinzing and Amöneburg. By switching from deductive and inductive methods of qualitative research, the project aims for a close connection between planning theory and practice.

该项目的目的是进一步发展现有的规划理论，在处理冲突，区分理性，沟通和竞争的规划类型，并在此基础上，检查各种规划冲突在实践中使用实证案例研究。该项目寻求将规划研究与民主和参与研究的政治学方法更密切地联系起来。对于规划冲突的实证分析，本项目将“竞技场”一词从政治研究转移到规划研究。竞技场被理解为规划参与过程中解决公共冲突的场所，在那里，利益冲突的行为者在决策之前会面并进行辩论。实证分析采用冲突场分析的政治学方法。对冲突的背景、对象、行为者、解决办法、管理和动态作了区分。在进行实证案例研究时，重点是三个中心问题：第一：在实践中，冲突案件中的理性，沟通和竞争性规划类型之间的关系是什么？第二：哪些领域和层次的参与有助于以民主方式解决和管制冲突，以及如何做到这一点？第三：在什么条件下参与过程会将规划中的对抗性冲突转化为对抗性冲突？这六个经验性案例研究涉及城市发展规划、土地使用规划和项目核准等领域的规划冲突。案例选择涉及柏林和汉堡等日益发展的大都市中加快住房建设与保护开放空间之间的冲突，波茨坦和弗赖堡在共同利益方面的冲突，以及辛津和阿默内堡小城镇在能源转型背景下批准风力涡轮机方面的冲突。通过从定性研究的演绎和归纳方法转换，该项目旨在将规划理论与实践紧密联系起来。