Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Presentation is loading. Please wait.

Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Raine Mäntysalo Centre for Urban and Regional Studies (YTK) Inger- Lise.

Similar presentations


Presentation on theme: "Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Raine Mäntysalo Centre for Urban and Regional Studies (YTK) Inger- Lise."— Presentation transcript:

1 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Raine Mäntysalo Centre for Urban and Regional Studies (YTK) Inger- Lise Saglie Norwegian Institute for Urban and Regional Research (NIBR) Norwegian University of Life Science PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Strategies for legitimizing preliminary partnership arrangements in urban housing planning in Norway and Finland

2 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Research project DEMOSREG programme - Norwegian Research Council Authors: –Raine Mäntysalo YTK –Inger-lise Saglie NIBR/UMB Other participants: –Eva Falleth NIBR –Gro Sandkjær Hanssen NIBR –Annika Agger RUC –Göran Cars KTH

3 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Whats the problem? NPM : New forms of governance Policy tools: Public-private partnerships Critique: –Limited transparency –Weak role of local government –Domination of market criteria

4 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Planning process Negotiate: Early preliminary agreement between public authorities and market actors - private law justifies some degree of secrecy Publicise: Invite public participation Defence of preliminary agreement? –Token public participation - reduced to opposition to already agreed-upon solutions?

5 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Finland: Land Use and Building Act Section 91 b Land use agreements A local authority may enter into agreements on planning and implementing plans (land use agreement). However, land use agreements cannot be binding on the content of plans. A land use agreement that is binding on the parties to the agreement can be made only after the draft plan or proposal has been publicized. This does not apply to agreements to initiate planning. Land use agreements may be used to agree more comprehensively on the mutual rights and obligations of the parties to the agreement. A land use agreement shall be publicized in conjunction with drawing up the plan.

6 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Norway: Planning law commission In negotiations the interests of the parties involved are in focus, while the interests of the other participants are easily left out, at least in the most important stages in the negotiation process, contrary to the intentions of participation in this law. (NOU 2001:7 p 100.)

7 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Tension How do local planning authorities deal with the possible tension between early private agreements and public expectations of –openness –accountability –public participation How are early agreements justified?

8 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Development of the argument Description of the way early agreements are reached - general systemic level Case study of one Norwegian and one Finnish housing planning project - investigating legitimizing strategies Analytical framework: –Lukes three dimensions of power –Combined with input and output legitimacy theory Testing of the analytical capacity of the framework and its contribution to our understanding in the case study

9 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Lukes Power: A Radical View 1974/2005 Dimension I : –Authority rule in explicit planning conflict Dimension II –Manipulation of planning information; keeping the conflict under surface Dimension III –Structural influence of the planning condition: naturalized inequalities

10 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Lukes Power: A Radical View 1974/2005 Dimension I : –Authority rule in explicit planning conflict Dimension II –Manipulation of planning information; keeping the conflict under surface Dimension III –Structural influence of the planning condition: naturalized inequalities AB Ga Gb

11 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Lukes Power: A Radical View 1974/2005 Dimension I : –Authority rule in explicit planning conflict Dimension II –Manipulation of planning information; keeping the conflict under surface Dimension III –Structural influence of the planning condition: naturalized inequalities AB Ga Gb

12 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Lukes Power: A Radical View 1974/2005 Dimension I : –Authority rule in explicit planning conflict Dimension II –Manipulation of planning information; keeping the conflict under surface Dimension III –Structural influence of the planning condition: naturalized inequalities AB Ga Gb

13 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Democracy theory Legitimate decisions- Justifications of the exercise of governing authority –Input legitimacy: government by people- Participation by all: Vote Participation by those most affected - voice –Output legitimacy: capacity to solve problems that cannot be solved by the individual, the market or by voluntary cooperation – and thus require public involvement Include resourceful actors

14 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Input legitimacy Output legitimacy Dimension I: Authority Dimension II: Misrepresented authority, misguided legitimation Dimension III: Structural influence Analytical framework: strategies of legitimation Dimension I –Drawing on legitimate authority enjoyed by the partnership Dimension II –Misrepresenting unauthorized power as legitimate authority. –Legitimizing biased input performance by directing attention to merits of the output, and vice versa Dimension III –Being structurally influenced to collectively bypass the issue of legitimacy

15 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Norwegian case: Valentinlyst Trondheim High rise building on top of suburban shopping centre –Early agreement on high-rise tower administration - early political acceptance –Too high level of exploitation- lack of outdoor spaces according to local norms- bought – out- acceptance through financing upgrading of nearby green area. Preliminary agreement on this before public inspection - little public knowledge about this Local organised opposition: 2000 signatories, lot of media attention –Acceptance of densification per se, but not as high rise - small housing preferred - visual disturbance in the landscape - already too many high rise buildings in the vicinity

16 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

17 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Finnish case: Sundsberg An historical farmland area in the municipality of Kirkkonummi, 25 km west from Helsinki Well connected to the major car traffic arteries of the Helsinki city region, an existing housing area with key services is nearby, and the location of the area on the south bank of Espoonlahti bay facing the Baltic Sea is attractive In 1997 the local government and the developer (land-owner) made a land use agreement: 100 hectares, allowed maximum floorspace m2 Master plan 1999 New specifications to the land use agreement in 2000, concerning the procedure of detailed planning for the area and the reservation of necessary parts of the area for public services Later addition of the Espoonlahti bay area to the Natura 2000 nature protection programme Major opposition by local environment association at the detailed planning stage: –Width of the green belt facing the Natura area in relation to the agreed floorspace –Lack of information on the land-use agreement –Local governments attempt to drop the association from the list of interested parties against the municipal planners advice

18 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

19 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Dimension I: Authority Input legitimacy: –Refer to the democratic representativeness of the partnership: V+S: Final decision by elected politicians –Refer to prior and higher level democratic decisions that are implemented in the project- V+S: Conformance with higher level plan Input legitimacy Output legitimacy Dimension I: Authority Dimension II: Misrepresented authority, misguided legitimation Dimension III: Structural influence

20 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Dimension I: Authority Output legitimacy: –Refer to the common benefits of the project outcome and to the professional and economic capacities within the partnership to produce them –V: Housing supply, aesthetic improvement, upgrading of football field –S: Apartment for needy at convenient price, happy new residents, new residents bring additional income Input legitimacy Output legitimacy Dimension I: Authority Dimension II: Misrepresented authority, misguided legitimation Dimension III: Structural influence

21 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Dimension II: Misrepresented authority & misguided legitimacy Input legitimacy: –Exaggerate the democratic representativeness of the partnership –Give a false impression of the projects subordination to prior and higher-level democratic decisions V: False impression that high rise is a necessary means to implement densification policy –Hide the partnerships decisive role in framing the planning agenda: V+S: Vagueness and mystification of the existence and content of the development/land use agreement –Hide the rights and possibilities of participation afforded by the planning system: S: Exclusion of local environmental association form the list of interested parties in the Participation and Assessment Scheme Input legitimacy Output legitimacy Dimension I: Authority Dimension II: Misrepresented authority, misguided legitimation Dimension III: Structural influence

22 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Dimension II: Misrepresented authority & misguided legitimacy (continued) Output legitimacy –Give a false impression of benefits of the project outcome and the professional and economic capacities within the partnership to produce it. –V: Misleading attractive sketches –V & S: Misrepresented gifts to the residents (V: football field/S: kindergarden) –Direct the stakeholders attention from the democratic biases in the planning process to the common good to be produced Input legitimacy Output legitimacy Dimension I: Authority Dimension II: Misrepresented authority, misguided legitimation Dimension III: Structural influence

23 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Dimension III: Structural influence Input legimitacy: –A collectively narrow view of rights and possibilities in planning participation: –Reductions on participation at the project planning level in the planning system –V: Designation of management of participation to an unwilling party (developer) –V+S: instruments of private plan and land use agreement afford a privileged position to the private developer –V+S: This possibility afforded in the planning laws Input legitimacy Output legitimacy Dimension I: Authority Dimension II: Misrepresented authority, misguided legitimation Dimension III: Structural influence

24 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Dimension III: Structural influence Output legitimacy –Habituation into the neoliberal political culture and the governance approach (NPM) –Habituation into project-based and implementation-oriented planning with related adjustments in the planning system –V: Habituation into lack of alternative solutions, giving in to the developers proposal –S: A long standing policy of developer-led and land use agreement –oriented planning –V&S: the dependency of the local governments on private investments in housing planning and development Input legitimacy Output legitimacy Dimension I: Authority Dimension II: Misrepresented authority, misguided legitimation Dimension III: Structural influence

25 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Conclusion Planning activities strained by realism of securing investments and tax income, on which the municipality depends - has to be represented through the ideals of public participation Prevents honesty on the true condition - without honesty - no meaningful public participation

26 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Strategies for legitimizing preliminary partnership arrangements in urban housing planning in Norway and Finland Lessons from a review procedure Raine Mäntysalo Centre for Urban and Regional Studies (YTK) Inger- Lise Saglie Norwegian Institute for Urban and Regional Research (NIBR) Norwegian University of Life Science

27 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Journal: Planning Theory & Practice PT&P provides an international focus for the development of theory and practice in spatial planning and a forum to promote the policy dimensions of space and place. Published four times a year in conjunction with the Royal Town Planning Institute, London Publishes original articles and review papers from both academics and practitioners with the aim of encouraging more effective, two-way communication between theory and practice. The Editors invite robustly researched papers which raise issues at the leading edge of planning theory and practice, and welcome papers on controversial subjects. Contributors in the early stages of their academic careers are encouraged, as are rejoinders to items previously published. Authors are requested to draw out the wider significance of their particular contribution and to write in a clear style, accessible to a broad, international audience.

28 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Journal: Planning Theory & Practice Senior Editor: Heather Campbell - Professor, Department of Town and Regional Planning, University of Sheffield, UK Editors: John Forester Professor, Cornell University, USA Robert Upton - Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC), UK Selected members of the Editorial Board (total 41 members): Peter Ache – Aalto University, Finland David Booher - California State University, Sacramento, USA Susan Fainstein - Harvard University, USA Patsy Healey - Professor Emeritus, University of Newcastle, Willem Salet - University of Amsterdam, The Netherlands Leonie Sandercock - University of British Columbia, Canada Niraj Verma - University of Buffalo, New York, USA

29 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Review procedure, 1st round: Resubmission with corrections Editors suggestions based on the three Reviewers comments Suggestion 1: The discussion in the conceptual section could benefit from being more focused and less bitty. One reviewer also suggests simplification of the argument in the theoretical discussion for greater clarity. It is also suggested changes in the order of the text in order to improve linkages between theory and the case studies. Our responses: We have focused the theoretical discussion and made it less bitty by moving the discussion on the limitation of Lukesian power analysis (the threat of paranoid fallacy) from the end of the paper and connected it to the presentation of theoretical framework. In order to increase the clarity of the argumentation, we have removed the discussion on the dichotomy between power over and power to in connection to governance theory. We agree that it is an unnecessary side track We have moved the description of the Norwegian and Finnish cases to a place after the introduction and before the theoretical discussion. Thereby the argumentation from theory to the empirical analysis proceeds more smoothly

30 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Review procedure: 1st round Suggestion 2: In response to several of the challenges of the reviewers it would be useful to provide more justification of your conceptual and methodological approach prior to the case study description. The challenges and limitations of your conceptual and methodological approach could be acknowledged at this point. Our response: We have moved the discussion on the conceptual and methodological challenges and limitations to the presentation of the theoretical framework. This theoretical discussion is immediately prior to the analysis of the cases in order to improve the linkage between the theoretical framework and the case study.

31 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Suggestion 3: The suggestion of a comparative table of the case study would be useful, and clarification of context. Our response: More contextual information about the situation of the municipalities has been added. We have chosen a text rather than a table, as there is already a number of tables in the article. Suggestion 4: The conclusions need to be developed and made clear what is really new in the paper and how this contributes to conceptual and practical understanding. Our responses: The conclusions have been revised to underline the new theoretical tools for analysing urban development processes, as well as its implications for planning practice. We have restructured the paper as indicated above and the sub-headings are reviewed to ensure more coherence and flow. Review procedure: 1st round

32 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Referee: 1 This paper has moved considerably from the initial draft and the narrative of the two case- studies is much improved as a result. The paper is close to being publishable, but there are some areas that still require further work: First, having been flagged up at the start of the introduction, the Nordic dimension could have been explored in more detail throughout the paper. Id have expected to see more discussion of changes in approach to Nordic planning (neolib etc) in a conceptual section at the start of the paper and in the analysis/conclusions. It could be argued that the Nordic dimension is the most interesting aspect of the paper e.g. what do the case-studies tell us about Nordic consensus planning? What do they tell us about transformations in Nordic planning? Second, the author(s) could be more explicit about their intended contribution to knowledge, especially in the abstract and in the conclusions. Ultimately the precise focus of the paper is unclear. Third, my earlier point about the Foucault and the conceptualisation of power has been sidestepped rather than addressed. The discussion of Foucaults approach (p.34) should go in Section 4 to offer an integrated analytical framework which can then be applied, or it should not be mentioned at all. Overall the paper is close to being publishable, but the author(s) could perhaps be pushed a little further on the Nordic question e.g. how typical are the case-studies? The conclusion could say more about how conceptualisations of power might contribute to our understanding of the changing strategic context for planning decisions in countries such as Norway and Finland. Bob Jessops concept of state strategic selectivity might be helpful in this regard (see Jessop B, 2002, The Future of the Capitalist State, Cambridge: Polity). Review procedure: 2nd round

33 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Referee: 2 Overall I do see that my recommendations on changes in the paper's structure have been applied. The paper does indeed read much better now. But my (admittedly qualified) recommendation to set up a comparative table of the two case studies was not implemented. You may have discussed this with PTP Editorial staff. I am looking forward to the paper's publication! This will be a very nice contribution both to planning theory and planning regulation. Referee: 3 I made only a few relatively detailed suggestions on the original paper that might improve the argument. The authors have taken these into account in the revised paper, which reads very well. Review procedure: 2nd round

34 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Categories of argument ARGUMENTRELATION TO EMPIRIC CONTRIBUTION TO INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH DISCOURSE THEORETICALNew theoretical insights Empiric as test bench for the analytical capacity of theory or example to illustrate theory Critical dialogue with the existing theoretical tradition and its analytical capacity METHODO- LOGICAL Development of methodology New methods and instruments Empiric as test bench, laboratory or pilot case Critical dialogue with the existing methodology: how the biases and uncertainties have now been solved EMPIRICALNew and interesting empirical findings Empirical object of research at the centre Critical dialogue with former empirical findings and assumptions on the empirical thematic

35 Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Article: R. Mäntysalo & I-L Saglie, Private influence preceding public involvement - Strategies for legitimizing preliminary partnership arrangements in urban housing planning in Norway and Finland ARGUMENTRELATION TO EMPIRIC CONTRIBUTION TO INTERNATIONAL RESEARCH DISCOURSE THEORETICALCombination of power theory (Lukes) and legitimacy theory Combination reveals legitimation strategies Interactionist and Foucauldian power analytics can be integrated? METHODO- LOGICAL Analytical framework Two cases (Norway & Finland) as test benches Framework offered for further case studies EMPIRICAL


Download ppt "Raine Mäntysalo & Inger-Lise Saglie PRIVATE INFLUENCE PRECEDING PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Raine Mäntysalo Centre for Urban and Regional Studies (YTK) Inger- Lise."

Similar presentations


Ads by Google