Reframing strategic spatial planning by using a coproduction perspective

• Published in: Planning theory (London, England) Vol. 12; no. 1; pp. 46 - 63
• Main Author: Albrechts, Louis
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: London, England SAGE 01.02.2013; SAGE Publications
• Subjects: Cities; Collaboration; Communities; Democracy; Foresters; Government services; Intellectuals; Perception; Planning; Policies; Political ethics; Political influence; Public Goods; Public Services; Radicalism; Radicals; Regional planning; Strategic planning; Urban planning; power balance; Coproduction; equity; strategic planning
• ISSN: 1473-0952; 1741-3052
• DOI: 10.1177/1473095212452722

There is growing evidence that the problems, challenges and opportunities that our cities, city-regions and regions are facing cannot be tackled adequately by traditional spatial planning. One of the key challenges for planning in this respect is to analyse critically what type of planning is suited as an approach to deal – in an innovative/emancipatory and transformative way – with the problems and challenges developing and developed societies are facing. An expanding literature and an increasing number of practices all over the world seem to suggest that strategic spatial planning may be looked upon as a possible approach. But at the same time critical comments and reactions are raised on the theory and the practices of strategic spatial planning. This paper uses the theory and practices of coproduction to reframe strategic spatial planning. It first looks for a deeper understanding of the meaning(s) of coproduction as it emerged in different contexts and different intellectual traditions and then introduces coproduction as an immanent characteristic of a more radical type of strategic planning. Coproduction combines the provision of public goods/services needed with the building of a strong, resilient and mutually supportive community that could assure its members their needs would be met. This implies changing the perceptions and the approach of many professionals (public and private) about how plans, policies and public services are conceived and delivered, with the objective of enabling the (structural) change needed in an open and equitable way. The paper relies on a selective review of critical planning literature and the author's experience in practice.