000			01572nab a2200241 4500
999			_c11371 _d11371
003			OSt
005			20210226115131.0
007			cr aa aaaaa
008			210226b ||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aÖzdemir, Esin _944476
245			_aPlanners’ role in accommodating citizen disagreement: The case of Dutch urban planning
260			_bSage _c2019
300			_aVol 56, Issue 4, 2019 : (741-749 p.)
520			_aCitizen disagreement on urban policies and planning decisions is both ubiquitous and fundamental to democracy. Post-political debates debunk the ‘consensus approach’, which is grounded in Habermasian communication theory, for circumventing disagreement. This article presents a counter argument. Our analysis of the highly institutionalised and consensus-oriented Dutch planning framework shows that this system does not necessarily prevent effective voicing of disagreement. The empirical material demonstrates that consensus is not a pre-defined and static outcome but a dynamic and sensitive process in which urban planning is an instrument. We conclude that planners could facilitate consensus through accommodative roles that address disagreement by taking an adaptive, proactive and more human stance.
650			_a citizen disagreement _944477
650			_apost-politics _930217
650			_aDutch urban planning _944478
650			_aconsensus _944479
700			_aTasan-Kok, Tuna _944480
773	0		_011188 _915499 _dsage, 2019. _tUrban studies
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/0042098017726738
942			_2ddc _cART