Search

This article concerns the growing interest in 'co-production' in spatial planning, focusing on its relationship with planning systems. The article refers to Italy and England – two institutional contexts with different planning systems – and concludes that co-production can operate outside or inside the planning system. Both models have pros and cons. However, the critical factor determining co-production regarding the planning system appears to be related to how land use rights are allocated. While prior allocation through prescriptive plans keeps co-production out of the system, only allocation as a final case-by-case decision allows co-production to be part of it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The paper discusses the role of private planning consultants as intermediary-actors and their implications in relation to planning theory and practice. To do so, the paper focuses on niche consultants involved in servicing neighbourhood scale plan-making in England, clarifying that they hold crucial agency in local planning processes and adding to the understanding of consultancy roles and co-production dynamics in planning. The paper draws together the literature on private sector consultancy and on intermediaries, along with theoretical work highlighting the diversification of planning, the rise of the collaborative turn and the effect of regulation on creating niche markets in planning expertise. The conclusions drawn help clarify the 'action on others' that planning consultants, as intermediary-actors, have in collaborative governance and planning in and beyond neighbourhood planning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Temporary uses are claimed to be new solutions for urban challenges, especially in a scenario characterized by scarce public-private resources. However, the role of temporariness in urban development is still ambiguous. The paper discusses the concept of temporary urbanism in the light of urban regeneration, other problematic concepts. The paper addresses current urban phenomena proposing a taxonomy of temporary uses to help clarify these ambiguities, highlighting differences and similarities among various European cases. Notably, the contribution aims to discuss whether temporary urbanism can be considered as a new method of urban regeneration or as a tool to perpetrate neoliberal policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]