Show simple item record

dc.contributor.supervisor Barry, Janice (City Planning) en_US
dc.contributor.author Smith, Conor
dc.date.accessioned 2018-09-10T17:19:07Z
dc.date.available 2018-09-10T17:19:07Z
dc.date.issued 2018-07-04 en_US
dc.date.submitted 2018-07-04T14:10:28Z en
dc.date.submitted 2018-07-16T19:35:00Z en
dc.date.submitted 2018-08-07T14:03:03Z en
dc.identifier.uri http://hdl.handle.net/1993/33279
dc.description.abstract The role of politics in planning practice is an enduring normative question in the history of planning thought. Over the course of the past twenty years, a debate has been developing that is centred on political conflict and the ethics of overcoming it in the planning process. In an effort to reimagine planning ethics along the lines of agonistic pluralism, this research seeks to identify and draw out the implications of the emancipatory potential of planning practice. By conducting a discourse analysis on the interview transcripts of practicing planners in Winnipeg, Manitoba, this research shows how the normative commitments of mainstream planning practice actualize the immanent potential for antagonism and conflict. I argue that the means of establishing an agonistic ethics must occur as part of a planning-disciplinary wide conversation about reimagining the constitution of planning activity. en_US
dc.subject collaborative planning en_US
dc.subject democracy en_US
dc.subject agonism en_US
dc.subject communicative action en_US
dc.subject ethics en_US
dc.subject discourse analysis en_US
dc.subject post-structuralism en_US
dc.title Toward a New Conversation: Agonism and the Emancipatory Limits of Planning Practice en_US
dc.degree.discipline City Planning en_US
dc.contributor.examiningcommittee Milgrom, Richard (City Planning) Lecce, Steven (Political Studies) en_US
dc.degree.level Master of City Planning (M.C.P.) en_US
dc.description.note October 2018 en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

View Statistics