Innovation in Planning Theory: The Upcoming Perspective

Hagen, Aksel; Higdem, Ulla

doi:10.1007/978-3-030-46136-2_12

Cited by 2 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This stigma will, from a political point of view, lead to a pessimistic view of shrinking societies as being unattractive for inhabitants to live in or move to. The innovative potential of a realistic approach (Hagen & Higdem 2020b), where development in a non-growth situation is possible, is not directly and distinctly found in the policy agendas in these municipalities.…”

Section: Incoherent Planning Responsesmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Krieger 1987;Flyvbjerg 1991;Stein & Harper 2012) have since agreed, and their works form the basis of our future planning research. Finally, future research should develop theories and models to stimulate more knowledge-based and innovative planning practices because innovation has become a pertinent and common term in regional as well as local planning and planning theory (Albrechts 2012;Hagen & Higdem 2020a, 2020b.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Planning to meet challenges in shrinking rural regions. Towards innovative approaches to local planning

Hagen

Higdem

Overvåg

2023

Fennia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we ask to what extent is current demographic development reflected in the present planning and policy practice of shrinking municipalities; whether there is a focus on strategies and measures for population growth; and, finally, to what extent do politicians and planners think we should change the way we plan based on the expected demographic changes. Our study illustrates how challenging it is for shrinking municipalities to break with established practices and modes of policy development and to adopt a more sustainable position. The ‘stigma’ of shrinking (Sousa & Pinho 2015) is at odds with the ideals of the local politicians. However, we find that the response in planning and policy is not uniform: several responses may appear simultaneously and connected to different parts of the societal (master) development plans, thus, making the plans incoherent and contradictory. Hence, we contribute to Beetz, Huning and Plieninger’s (2008) and Hospers’ (2014) types of responses by adding this muddled or hybrid response, which might be labelled an ‘incoherent response’. Overall, we suggest that today’s planning practice in rural areas in Norway has neither dared nor wanted to adapt to the most likely developments of a shrinking population, let alone actually doing so openly and consistently. This reluctance has had critical and negative implications for these municipalities. Future research should develop theories, concepts and models for more suitable knowledge-based and innovative local planning that can meet this complex societal challenge.

show abstract

Section: Incoherent Planning Responsesmentioning

confidence: 97%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Planning to meet challenges in shrinking rural regions. Towards innovative approaches to local planning

Hagen

Higdem

Overvåg

2023

Fennia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Citizens' involvement in the co-creation of public services, that is, as clients or users, has been studied extensively (Alves, 2013;Donetto et al, 2015;Müller & Pihl-Thingvad, 2020;Osborne et al, 2016;Trischler et al, 2019;Voorberg et al, 2015). However, collaborative approaches with citizens in innovation on societal development issues have received less attention (Hagen & Higdem, 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Co-creation, Collaborative Innovation and Open Innovation in the Public Sector: A Perspective on Distinctions and the Convergence of Definitions

Aastvedt¹,

Higdem²

2022

Nordic Journal of Innovation in the Public Sector

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Collaborative approaches to innovation with citizens are captured in various and often interchangeable terms, such as collaborative innovation, co-creation, open innovation, social innovation and innovation network. A systematic review of the literature was used to analyse this research area. The aim was to explore how terms regarding collaborative approaches to innovation with citizens have been defined and applied in the public sector and to identify research streams that characterise the literature.We found that collaborative approaches to innovation with citizens are named, defined and conceptualised in different ways and are poorly defined, leading to conceptual limitations and hampering comparisons between studies.The three terms used most often-co-creation, collaborative innovation and open innovation-share many similarities, although they stem from different academic origins. Our discussion of the terms may contribute to a clearer conceptual distinction between the terms, and improve both analytical precision and empirical comparison.

show abstract

Innovation in Planning Theory: The Upcoming Perspective

Cited by 2 publications

References 16 publications

Planning to meet challenges in shrinking rural regions. Towards innovative approaches to local planning

Planning to meet challenges in shrinking rural regions. Towards innovative approaches to local planning

Co-creation, Collaborative Innovation and Open Innovation in the Public Sector: A Perspective on Distinctions and the Convergence of Definitions

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About