2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.jup.2016.02.008
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Just a talking shop? – Informal participatory spatial planning for implementing state wind energy targets in Germany

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0
5

Year Published

2017
2017
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 40 publications
(16 citation statements)
references
References 29 publications
0
11
0
5
Order By: Relevance
“…In 2013 the authors systematically analysed 301 newspaper articles published in the newspaper Sächsische Zeitung between March 2012 and April 2013, the time of the most intensive public debate. Moreover, as moderators of a working group that, between November 2013 and November 2014, brought together opponents and proponents of wind power on behalf of the regional planning association, Peter Wirth and Markus Leibenath obtained direct insights into the discussions [29].…”
Section: Methods-case Study and Causal-process Tracingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In 2013 the authors systematically analysed 301 newspaper articles published in the newspaper Sächsische Zeitung between March 2012 and April 2013, the time of the most intensive public debate. Moreover, as moderators of a working group that, between November 2013 and November 2014, brought together opponents and proponents of wind power on behalf of the regional planning association, Peter Wirth and Markus Leibenath obtained direct insights into the discussions [29].…”
Section: Methods-case Study and Causal-process Tracingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Solche Koordinationsprobleme lassen sich auch in der Energiewende finden. Aktuell argumentiert hingegen Arthur Benz (2019) (Huge und Roßnagel 2018;Komendantova und Battaglini 2016;Leibenath et al 2016;Roßmeier et al 2018;Kapeller und Biegelbauer 2020). So plädieren Bürgerinitiativen bei Netzausbau-Beteiligungsverfahren für eine dezentrale Energiewende, die den Ausbau in Teilen mutmaßlich überflüssig machen würde -eine Forderung, die für die Planerinnen und Planer sowie die Netzbetreiber kaum eine probate Diskussionsgrundlage darstellt (Neukirch 2017).…”
Section: Was Ist Akzeptanz -Und Wie Verhält Sie Sich Zur Legitimation?unclassified
“…It is essential to analyse the literature, which describes informal planning, and to understand the role of tools and stakeholders, who influence spatial planning. The outcome of this analysis will help formulate the characteristics of informal spatial planning: − Informal planning process or methods should not replace the existing spatial planning practice of that region, but informal planning should "facilitate formal process" of spatial planning (Reimer et al, 2014;Blotevogel et al, 2014;Briassoulis, 1997;Leibenath et al, 2016;McFarlane et al, 2012;Needham, 2005;Scholl, 2017); − Informal planning adds "flexibility" in the spatial planning process, which allows the planners to focus on a specific problem (Reimer et al, 2014;Getimis & Giannakourou, 2014;Getimis et al, 2014;Newman & Thornley, 1996;Mäntysalo et al, 2015); − Informal spatial planning can help in achieving matured results with the help of "discourses" (Reimer et al, 2014;Getimis & Giannakourou, 2014;North, n.d.;Certomà, 2017;Sartorio, 2005;Syssner & Meijer, 2017;Papamichail & Perić, 2017;Carmona, 2017;Leibenath et al, 2016;Roy, 2009); − Informal planning could also be an "ad hoc" system that is used whenever needed (Blotevogel et al, 2014;Getimis & Giannakourou, 2014;Briassoulis, 1997;Reimer, 2013;Assche et al, 2012); − Informal spatial planning requires a degree of "innovation" to continuously face the challenges of planning (Reimer et al, 2014;Getimis et al, 2014;Roy, 2009;Certomà, 2017;Scholl, 2017); − Informal planning method is a "non-traditional method" of spatial planning, which is not influenced by hierarchy culture of planning…”
Section: Informal Spatial Planningmentioning
confidence: 99%