Cities and The Spirit Level: Reasserting the Public Interest in Planning Governance

Research output: Contribution to conferencePaper

Abstract

Urban planning in Europe has its roots in social reform movements for reform of the 18th and 19th centuries and in the UK evolved into the state-backed comprehensive planning system established as a pillar of the welfare state in 1947. This new planning system played a key role in meeting key social needs of the early post-war period, through, for example, an ambitious new town programme. However, from the late 1970s onwards the main priorities of the planning system have shifted as the UK state has withdrawn support for welfare and reasserted market values. One consequence of this has been an increased inequality in access to many of the resources that planning seeks to regulate, including affordable housing, local services and environmental quality.
Drawing on evidence from recent literature on equality, including Wilkinson and Pickett’s The Spirit Level this paper will question the role of planning in an era of post-politics and a neo-liberal state. It will review some of the consequences for the governance and practice of planning and question what this means for the core values of the planning profession. Finally, the paper will discuss the rise of the Healthy Urban Planning Movement in the US and Europe and ask whether this provides any potential for reasserting the public interest in planning process.
Original languageEnglish
Publication statusIn preparation - 19 Nov 2014
EventInternational Seminar on 'Shaping Our Cities for Smart, Inclusive and Sustainable Urban Future' - Andhra Pradesh, Vijaywada, India
Duration: 19 Nov 201419 Nov 2014

Seminar

SeminarInternational Seminar on 'Shaping Our Cities for Smart, Inclusive and Sustainable Urban Future'
Country/TerritoryIndia
CityVijaywada
Period19/11/201419/11/2014

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Cities and The Spirit Level: Reasserting the Public Interest in Planning Governance'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this