In the public interest? Planning in the Peak District National Park
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 12710019 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Christopher Maidment (0000-0002-9158-6910, Bassetlaw District Council, UK, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2016 |
| Volume | 15 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 366-385 |
| Publication date | 2016-08-10 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Planning Theory (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1473-0952 • E-ISSN: 1741-3052 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/1473095216662093 |
| OpenAlex | W2525699705 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 14 |
| References cited | 17 |
The recent history of the public interest is one of misappropriation. Practitioners have been found to value the concept but have struggled to articulate how it guides day-to-day planning practice. It has been used to portray a homogeneous public, furthering the interests of the powerful at the expense of recognising social diversity, and leading to calls for the concept’s abandonment. Yet this article starts from the argument that the public interest remains the justification that fundamentally underpins planning activities, in light of a continuing need to address collective concerns. To this end, the article adopts the typology put forward by Campbell and Marshall, outlining different ways in which the public interest may practically be addressed. Alongside this, Dewey’s work is used to understand how the extent of the public may vary, leading to the use of scale as a way of recognising when different conceptualisations of the public interest might be practically drawn upon. Following this approach, the typology is brought together with scale, as a lens for understanding the extent of a public with a common interest, to form a framework for analysing practice. This framework is used to analyse how the interests of different publics are addressed in a case study of the Peak District, a national park in England. From the case, conclusions are drawn around the need to pay greater attention to the extent of different publics with a common interest and, in turn, how the interests of different publics can be reconciled
Abandonment (legal · Argument (complex analysis · Diversity (politics · Geography · Misappropriation · Political science · Politics · Public interest · Public relations · Publics · Scale (ratio · Sociology · Typology · Value (mathematics · Conservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management · Environmental Philosophy and Ethics · Law · Urban Planning and Governance
Populism, Planning, and the Politics of Discontent
Public Planner – A Deliberative Authority
The public interest- schools of thought in planning
Timber beds, protests and publics
Tourism Governance in Komodo National Park, Indonesia
Examining the consultocratisation of urban planning in the UK
Profit or public service? Tensions and alignment in private planning practice
Institutionalization of public interest in planning
Whose interest finally counts? The statutory production of urban space at the fringes of Dhaka, Bangladesh
On issues of plurality and practice in considering planning’s public interest
A Reflection on Transactive Planning
Evicting the poor in the ‘overriding public interest’
Automatic for the people? Problematising the potential of digital planning
Locating the public interest in mega infrastructure planning
Collaborative Planning
Relational concepts of space and place
Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning
Moral Obligations, Planning, and the Public Interest
Re-enchanting democracy as a mode of governance
Towards a Reconstruction of the Public Interest Criterion
The Public Interest in Planning
Utilitarianism’s Bad Breath? A Re-Evaluation of the Public Interest Justification for Planning
Consensus Building
Trust and the Public Interest in the Micropolitics of Planning Practice
Perceptions of the common good in planning
The Public Interest Reconsidered
New Directions in Planning Theory
| Citations per year | 1.75 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2018 - 2025 (8) |
| Highly cited | No |