Call for book chapters

Published at: 27 January 2020

Alternative Planning Theory (Routledge) 

 

Academic Editor

Dorina Pojani, PhD

Senior Lecturer in Urban Planning

The University of Queensland, Australia 

d.pojani@uq.edu.au

http://researchers.uq.edu.au/researcher/11894

Routledge Editor 

Ms Faye Leerink 

Faye.Leerink@tandf.co.uk

https://www.routledge.com/contacts/7937

 

In teaching planning history and theory, many planning programs tend to follow the planning cannon, which is summarised in the table below: 

 

Period

Urban planning era – the Canon*

late 1800s-1900

Birth of planning:

Sanitation and water supply, building and fire regulations, social reforms

1900-1945

Formalisation of planning:

Nation building, utopian urban models, zoning, first planning programs at university level

1945-65

Growth of planning: 

Post-war reconstruction, suburban expansion, first metropolitan/regional planning schemes

1965-80

Midlife crisis of planning:

Environmentalism, oil crisis, feminism, civil rights, social movements 

1980-2000

Maturation of planning:

Neoliberalism, privatisation, public-private partnerships, sustainability.

2010-present

New planning crisis

Climate change, populism, mass migration, new technologies, economic implosion, Great Recession.

* Adapted from: Jackson, Porter, Johnson (2017). Also based on Fainstein, Campbell (2011). 

 

However, this is a normative perspective that mostly accounts for the experience of white, Anglo, middle class, heterosexual, able-bodied, men. 

An alternative planning theory timeline could be rewritten for or by each of the following groups:  

•          Women

•          Children

•          People of color

•          The poor

•          Disabled people (physically/mentally)

•          Immigrants

•          Indigenous peoples 

•          The elderly 

•          LGBTQIA+

The editors are looking for contributors for each of these chapters. 

Each chapter will follow a similar chronological structure (as in the table above). A Word template will be provided for this purpose.  

The chapter word limits are 7000-9000. Chapters should adopt a US or UK perspective. 

For broader appeal, the content needs to be written in a digestible way. Most importantly, each chapter should be underpinned by urban planning perspectives (i.e., the experience of that group in the city, and the interaction, or lack thereof, with urban space).  

The chapter should seek to provide an insight into the core issues in each time period, and review the different stances and critiques. As this will be a historical analysis synthesising existing texts, there is no expectation of new empirical material. 

While this is envisaged as a research book, the chapter should include the following pedagogical features, in order to make the book more appealing to students and instructors, and increase the likelihood that it will be used in university courses: 

  • up to 2 boxed case studies, to showcase theory in practice (preferably recent examples of positive change) 
  • a table like the one above, which lays out an alternative planning theory timeline for the group covered in the chapter
  • 3-6 suggestions for further reading (books, articles, websites)

 

Expressions of Interest should include; 

(1)  a short pitch that outlines the prospective contributor’s expertise in the area 

and 

(2) a list of existing publications in the area

EoI limit: one page maximum 

EoI deadline: 14 February 2020

Please email your EoI to Dorina Pojani (d.pojani@uq.edu.au)

Notification of acceptance: 21 February 2020

First chapter draft due: 30 October 2020 

  

References 
Fainstein, S. Campbell, S. (eds.). 2011. Readings in Planning Theory (3rd edition). New York: Wiley-Blackwell. 
Jackson, S., Porter, L., Johnson, L. 2017. Planning in Indigenous Australia: From Imperial Foundations to Postcolonial Futures (1st edition). New York: Routledge.