Responsibility for Sustainable Development in Europe: What Does It Mean for Planning Theory and Practice?

Abstract

Responsibility in planning for sustainable development (SD) is little conceptualised in the planning literature. This paper sets up a theoretical framework to extend understanding of this by drawing on ethics (duty versus care) and political (communitarian versus cosmopolitan) constructions of responsibility at their intersection with planning studies and SD debates. The framework is then applied to explore responsibility outlooks in planning practice in two examples of planning for SD in Sweden and England. Three main claims are made: duty and care responsibility exist side-by-side, but it is care responsibility that drives planning for SD; cosmopolitan and communitarian responsibilities do not coexist, but they shape responsibility outlooks and further our understanding about differences in planning practice for SD; and municipal planning sits at the centre of responsibility in planning and increasingly works with other stakeholders. This has wider implications for planning theory and practice: planning theory needs to further engage with the care dimension of responsibility in planning, but also with its politics (communitarian and cosmopolitan); while planning practice suggests a variety of models of responsibility and calls for a reexamination of responsibilities in planning for SD.

Governing the Circular Economy in the City: Local Planning Practice in London

“…First, governments and policy makers place planning at the centre of delivering sustainable development (Healey, Shaw, Healey, & Shaw, 2018;ODPM, 2005;Turcu, 2018aTurcu, , 2018b. The relationship between sustainable development and CE is complex and their overlap little discussed, with the two terms used interchangeably.…”

“…Second, there is an increasing recognition of diverse multi-level networks of stakeholders, and associated power dynamics, involved in planning, especially when sustainable development is concerned (Yvonne Turcu, 2018a). Through its facilitation role which aims to mediate the competing interests of urban stakeholders (Bulkeley, 2006), planning is politically 'charged' while translating knowledge, acting on collective issues and looking into the future in a way that cuts across scales and governance landscapes (Hurlimann & Wilson, 2018;Turcu, 2018b).…”

“…Third, the planning literature highlights the city and, especially, local/ municipal level as foci for the greatest pressures on resources and hence, the environment (Owens & Cowell, 2010;Preuss, 2007;Turcu, 2018aTurcu, , 2018b. Cities are important resource consumers and municipalities have extensive local knowledge, and manage most of these resources including land, infrastructure, water, energy and waste.…”