Integrating Policies, Plans and Programmes in Local Government: An Exploration from a Spatial Planning Perspective

Smith, Mark Caleb

doi:10.1080/03003930.2013.823407

Cited by 13 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 33 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…National authorities in Sweden are endeavouring, through inspiration and best practices in planning manuals, to induce municipal politicians and officials to plan on an integrated basis (Tornberg 2009;Swedish Transport Administration 2010, Swedish National Board of Housing, Building andPlanning 2013). But translating objectives for integrated planning into practice has proved difficult (see for example studies in Australia, the United Kingdom and the Scandinavian countries: McEldowney et al 2007;Legacy et al 2012;Curtis 2012;Hrelja et al 2013;Naess et al 2013;Smith 2013, Smith et al 2014. Previous studies have shown the integration of transport and land use to require careful handling of sectoral interests by politicians and officials (Isaksson et al 2009).…”

Section: Integrated Planning and Steering Culturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating transport and land-use planning? How steering cultures in local authorities affect implementation of integrated public transport and land-use planning

Hrelja

2015

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has shown integrated planning to be important for achieving aims concerning more environmentally friendly transport operations, but less good at explaining prerequisites of implementation. This paper analyses how management and working practises in local authorities, here understood as steering cultures, affect implementation of integrated land-use and public transport planning approaches. The analysis builds on case studies of planning in two Swedish municipalities. These have developed two antithetical steering cultures, namely one that can be described as deliberative and one that can be described as sectorised. The paper describes the advantages and disadvantages of these steering cultures. The findings show the deliberative model to facilitate integration through advanced mechanisms of consensus and co-ordination between policy-makers and officials. The sectorised model has no such mechanisms, but this need not result in poor prospects of integrated planning. It is important for integrated planning approaches, whatever the steering culture, to be in line with the institutionalised norms and objectives by which planning practices are governed. Integration therefore needs a normative component, so as to ensure implementation. The important normative component in this context can be construed as discourses and rationales concerning transport and the urban development of which public transport forms part.

show abstract

Section: Integrated Planning and Steering Culturesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Integrating transport and land-use planning? How steering cultures in local authorities affect implementation of integrated public transport and land-use planning

Hrelja

2015

Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Data were analysed immediately following approval by the respondents, with emergent themes validated against existing data and MSA (as a sensitising concept), with this phase then informing subsequent interviews [63,86,87]. Once data saturation was reached, the identified themes were reviewed, defined [86], and coded as enablers or barriers [14,88,89], with some themes noted to have the potential to act as both.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Policies, Politics, and Paradigms: Healthy Planning in Australian Local Government

McCosker

Matan

2018

Sustainability

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Local government in Australia is critically positioned to provide built environment initiatives that respond to the increasing prevalence of non-communicable diseases (NCD), climate change, and various other human and ecological health considerations. However, action on the ground has not been as widespread as might be expected, particularly in improving community health. This research explores the barriers to and enablers of the implementation of healthy planning and active living initiatives through in-depth interviews with healthy planning and active living advocates. Advocates are seen to promote healthy planning in relatively weak policy settings, where politicised, largely reactive decisions by individual politicians or practitioners are the main determinants of project success. The most important factor affecting project uptake and implementation is how the 'problem' of healthy planning, or what might be considered a healthy planning paradigm, is presented. Such a paradigm includes a strong reliance on the co-benefits of projects; it is also subject to the way that healthy planning is communicated and framed. Potential problems around such a setting are subsequently examined, identifying the potential reasons for the slow delivery of healthy planning.

show abstract

“…Pressman and Wildavsky's (1973) work remained wedded to a rational view of implementation in that (a) policy was perceived hierarchical and synonymous with topdown government so local actors remit extended only so far as delivering centralised objectives ( Barrett and Fudge, 1981), and (b) policy is still thought to cause rather than result from actions (Vigar et al, 2000). While this criticism might indicate bottom-up governance is more suited to initiating implementation, questions persist on the extent such actions are isolated and independent (Allmendinger and Thomas, 1998;Smith, 2014). To investigate bottom-up governance constraints, urban planning scholars observe linkages between planning and policy mechanisms with contextual environments rather than accentuate models and frameworks which translate knowledge into action based on naturalistic presumptions of causality.…”

Section: Implementation As Fitmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Transformative change as structure (rules, norms and values) and agency (individual recognisance) (e.g. Biddulph et al, 2003;Smith, 2014;Vigar et al, 2000).…”

Section: Structure and Agencymentioning

confidence: 99%

Revisiting implementation theory: An interdisciplinary comparison between urban planning and healthcare implementation research

Smith¹

2017

Environment and Planning C: Politics and Space

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Implementation remains a somewhat neglected dimension within urban planning research after a surge of interest during the 1960s and 1970s in contrast to related cognitive disciplines, particularly healthcare research which has seemingly grappled with the phenomenon with more gusto. Here, we assess the state of urban planning implementation science and compare these efforts with healthcare frameworks explaining implementation to ascertain what new insights can be gleaned on how we investigate the phenomenon.

show abstract

Integrating Policies, Plans and Programmes in Local Government: An Exploration from a Spatial Planning Perspective

Cited by 13 publications

References 33 publications

Integrating transport and land-use planning? How steering cultures in local authorities affect implementation of integrated public transport and land-use planning

Integrating transport and land-use planning? How steering cultures in local authorities affect implementation of integrated public transport and land-use planning

Policies, Politics, and Paradigms: Healthy Planning in Australian Local Government

Revisiting implementation theory: An interdisciplinary comparison between urban planning and healthcare implementation research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About