Legitimacy of Informal Strategic Urban Planning—Observations from Finland, Sweden and Norway

Abstract

In Finnish, Swedish and Norwegian cities and urban regions, strategic approaches in urban planning have been developed by introducing different kinds of informal strategic plans. The means of improving the strategic quality of urban and regional planning have thus been searched from outside the statutory land use planning system, determined by the national planning laws. Similar development has also taken place elsewhere. When strategic plans are prepared outside the statutory planning system, these processes also lack the legal guarantee for openness, fairness and accountability. This is a serious legitimacy problem. In this article, the problem is examined theoretically and conceptually by combining democracy-and governance-theoretical perspectives. With this framework, four different approaches to legitimacy are derived: accountability, inclusiveness, liberty and fairness. The article concludes that strategic urban planning must find a balance between the four approaches to legitimacy. Concerning political processes, this requires agonistic acknowledgement of different democracy models, excluding neither deliberative nor liberalist arguments. Concerning administrative processes, it requires acknowledgement of the interdependence of statutory and informal planning instruments and the necessity of developing planning methods for their mutual complementarity-thus avoiding the detachment of informal strategic planning into a parallel planning "system".

The Influence of Administrative Traditions and Governance on Private Involvement in Urban Climate Change Adaptation

“…The separation between politics and administration is stronger than in the United States (Hytönen, ) and reforms in the administration would simultaneously affect the nature of the state itself (Peters, ). Finnish municipalities have adopted some elements of managerial administration, but this does not sit very well with the welfare state model and strong role of local public administration (Mäntysalo, Jarenko, Nilsson, & Saglie, ; Thynne & Peters, ).…”

The Strategic Incrementalism of Lahti Master Planning: Three Lessons

“…Nonetheless, it is commonplace in Finland, as well as in its neighbouring Nordic countries, that municipal master (or comprehensive) planning is not perceived to function properly as an instrument of strategic planning (Mäntysalo, Jarenko, Nilsson, & Saglie, 2014a). The Land Use and Building Act ( §9) emphasizes heavily the need for "sufficient" surveys for goal-setting and impact assessment of planning, as well as the involvement of "interested parties" ( §62), for which a 'participation and assessment scheme' is to be drafted and statutory hearing periods arranged, in the preparatory work of master plans.…”

Planners – A silenced profession? The politicisation of planning and the need for fearless speech

“…Such a provision could possibly encourage new and effective ways to achieve real citizen participation. (SOU, 2012: 45) According to Mäntysalo et al (2011Mäntysalo et al ( , 2015, such a trend is currently leading to increasingly difficult situations for planners in all the Nordic countries. By trying to handle national rhetoric arguing for transparency and democratic legitimacy, on one hand, and increasing demands for informality and efficiency, on the other, Mäntysalo et al (2011Mäntysalo et al ( : 2121 argue that planners risk end up in parallel planning systems and thus in informal routines that would prohibit 'the voicing of crucial tensions in planning processes'.…”