SCHOOL OF PLANNING AND ARCHITECTURE, NEW DELHI

ARTICLE REVIEW ON

Fresh Wind Or Hot Air Does The

Governance Discourse Have Something
To Offer To Spatial Planning?

NI THYA ELI ZABETH . UP/1120 . DEPARTMENT OF URBAN PL ANNI NG

URBAN GOVERNANCE

ARTCLE REVIEW

ARTICLE REVIEW ON

Fresh Wind Or Hot Air Does The Governance Discourse Have

Something To Offer To Spatial Planning?
By Henning Nuissl and Dirk Heinrichs: Journal of Planning Education and Research 2011 31: 47
originally published online 6 January 2011
Governance is broadly speaking about the regulation of publicly relevant affairs and in this
context, spatial planning would be an integral part of governance. Fresh Wind Or Hot Air
Does The Governance Discourse Have Something To Offer To Spatial Planning, by authors
Henning Nuissl and Dirk Heinrichs explores whether spatial planning can benefit from the
governance concept. It outlines the main types of governance and analyses their relevance in
planning. The article further establishes the contribution of governance to spatial planning and
vice versa, through a concrete, real-life planning case. The article concludes that spatial
planning can benefit from using governance as both a conceptual reference for reflection on
planning action and an analytical tool for the study of concrete planning practices. However, its
utility as a normative guideline for spatial planning, however, is limited.
The authors begin the article by stating that governance is in vogue. The introductory paragraph
brings out the essence of governance by distinguishing it from steering- a more state-oriented
form of regulation. It further briefs about the article which will include the variants of
Governance; outlines Spatial planning as an element of governance and the relevance of
governance concept in spatial planning. The introduction also establishes the framework of the
article which begins with the review of governance literature, also, relates the variants of
governance concepts to spatial planning and critically discusses them. A detailed discussion on
third variant i.e., governance as a comprehensive analytical category pertaining to the
regulation of publicly relevant affairs at the interface of state, market, and civil society is also
undertaken. The article then proposes a set of analytical categories for the empirical analysis of
planning practice and illustrates its feasibility and potential results with a case example. The
article concludes with a brief account of the potential gains the governance discourse offers to
spatial planning.
The introductory paragraph concludes with the intention of the article of looking at spatial
planning through a governance lens, which can help to ground and define planning in
society. It also highlights that a governance perspective can support planners in their task of
identifying the scope and the opportunities for action in planning, and assists in adopting a
pragmatic approach in their practice (cf. Healey 2008).

The Governance Discourse

In this section of the article, the authors start with describing the inception of the governance
discourse in the context of globalization in the 1980s. Governance, which evolved as a response
to the adverse effects of globalization, had both analytical and normative facets from its
inception itself. Stating that most contemporary literature have failed to bring out a clear
distinction between them, the article further establishes the difference between the state

URBAN GOVERNANCE

ARTCLE REVIEW

centered analytical and the normative facets of governance through the study of pertaining
literature. Following the comparison of the two facets, it is evolved that governance is essentially
a Comprehensive Analytical Concept where the state, the market and the Civil Society are
integrated into policy making.

Potential Relevance of Governance for Spatial Planning

This section highlights that as pointless as it may seem, the proposition of governance concept to
support spatial planning is strongly rooted in the similarities of ideas of governance with the
numerous theories of spatial and physical planning. Therefore, spatial planning evolves as a
particular domain of public decision making, which is essentially governance. Looking back at
the two facets of governance, it potentially offers two major benefits to spatial planning - As a
normative concept, it provides guidelines and norms, i.e., orientation, for good spatial
planning and as an analytical concept, and it can facilitate reflection on planning reality.
While reflecting on the normative principles of good planning, the authors have critically
analyzed the pitfalls of public participation including being undemocratic, discriminatory and
dysfunctional, thereby hampering the planning process. Hence, spatial planning should usually
employ a mix of participatory and regulatory instruments, subjective to the specific planning
situation. Reflecting on the practice of spatial planning, the article sets a perspective for public
decision making in the governance concept which in turn helps to identify the primary source of
power of contemporary planning and understand the sequence of the paradigm shift from the
synoptic via the incrementalist to the discursive ideal of planning, that characterized the history
of the planning profession.
Governance as a Tool for Exploring Planning Processes
This section of the article explores a framework that can serve the empirical studies of a
governance-inspired analysis of planning. This has been applied to a real-life planning scenario.
The case in focus is a large-scale residential development for several thousand households,
located on the urban periphery at a distance of about forty kilometers from the core of a fastgrowing Latin American capital city. It is a prepackaged, gated development including housing
units, and infrastructure and on-site facilities for retail, health, and education. It is also linked to
road infrastructure connecting to the citys CBD. For the purpose of implementation, a
development corporation that engages both private- and public-sector representatives in a
public-private partnership has been established.
The case is assessed in terms of
Actors: while certain national ministries and private real estate developers are actively
involved the planning process, the role of local authorities, regional government and
citizens are limited
Relationships: the powerful coalition between certain public and private parties
influence the direction of planning process
Institutional Framework: rules of conduct which affect the actors decisions and course of
action; new legal frameworks introduced for the development especially for zoning, land
use, accessibility, etc.
Decision-making process: influential interest of actors

URBAN GOVERNANCE

ARTCLE REVIEW

This has helped to exemplify the insights of applying a genuine governance focus to a realworld spatial planning case. The analysis of the case study highlights that there is limited scope
for engaging wider public in projects of this nature, in terms of actors. The key proponent is the
tight-knit coalition of personalities from politics and business community. An analysis of day-today affairs of the development uncovers interplay between the interests of actors, their
relationships, and their strategies to shape and influence the regulatory framework. Such a rapid
assessment provides useful knowledge for planners to assess opportunities of different actors to
participate or the potentials to generate alternative actor constellations and the related realistic
outcomes. It also contributes to explain the beneficiaries and why they are considered so. With
respect to the crucial role that road infrastructure has for development, it reveals that there are
important arenas other than the housing estate itself where negotiations take place. To
summarize, planning practitioners benefit from a clearer view of the context in which they
operate.

Conclusions
The article explores whether, and in what respect, the planning profession can benefit from
contemporary concern with governance. Though governance may not be a new paradigm for
planning as it is already an integral part of the planning process, governance facilitates an
understanding of actual planning processes (and their shortcomings) by relating them to the
wider societal context and its continuous transformation. The critical discussion on the notion of
good governance can serve as a reality check for the expectations regarding the efficacy of
approaches to participatory, transparent, and proactive spatial planning. Governance concept
can stimulate empirical research on spatial planning with the aim of understanding objectives
and outcomes of actual planning processes. However, it requires adopting a specific
perspective on societal and political reality, inviting criticism of being culturally and theoretical
biased.
Therefore, governance has the potential to inform and support spatial planning as long as it is
not stringently enforced. It provides orientation for the contemporary role of spatial planning as
a subset of governance, in the wider context of society. Governance also encourages
systematic reflection on current planning practices, which contributes to understanding and thus
overcoming disappointing experiences. It may serve as a conceptual basis for the empirical
analysis of planning processes. However, it appears to be inappropriate as a normative device
that could tell planners exactly how to go about their daily job.

Critique
The article takes a systematic approach in establishing the relevance governance to and in
spatial planning. It builds a strong case by applying the rules of governance to real-world
scenarios and exhibiting the impacts of governance in planning. While the various facets of
governance - good as far as it goes, are considered, the authors seem to have a skewed
approach to determining the role of participation in governance. While the authors have
criticized the lack of opportunity and for the local authorities and citizens and lack of
transparency in the decision-making process, no inputs have been given as to how it can
effectively be ensured in the planning process.