In Volume 11(2) of Planning Theory and Practice, of course!  And it's 
now available online at http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals/RPTP

Our interface explores the work of PETER MARRIS, sociologist, planning 
consultant, and pedagogue. Throughout his long career, Marris extended 
his analysis of how the powerful push uncertainty onto the powerless. 
For an audience in urban planning, he demonstrated how to analyze the 
personal societal consequences of complex public decisions. For an 
audience in sociology, psychiatry, and psychology, he connected theories 
of loss and attachment to broader questions of urban policy. 
Contributions from Dolores Hayden, Bish Sanyal, Ann Forsyth, Hemalata 
Dandekar, Keith Pezzoli and James Throgmorton provide a series of 
analytical and personal reflections on Marris’s work.  The section 
includes a series of pieces from Marris himself which will fascinate 
newcomers to his thought and remind those familiar with his work of its 
wit, versatility, and intellectual rigour.  We are very proud that they 
include a hitherto unpublished set of lecture notes, ‘Reflections on 
Planning Theory’.

INSURGENCY is often celebrated in planning and geographical literature 
as a liberating form of community involvement.  However, in a 
groundbreaking article, Paula Meth argues that such value judgements not 
only ignore a darker, more repressive side to insurgency, but also 
prevent researchers from uncovering the full, complex and contextually 
specific set of relationships that structure insurgent acts.  Her work 
draws on the compelling stories of marginalized South African women to 
argue the need to develop a position beyond simple celebration or 
condemnation when dealing with the contributions of the marginalised in 
diverse and unequal cities.

Is the anonymity of the modern city – at an individual and at a 
neighbourhood level - a blessing or a curse?  JOHN FRIEDMAN’S polemical 
'Place and Place-making in Cities' looks at place as both a physical, 
built environment and as the locus of subjective feelings of a community 
to argue that newly industrializing global regions suffer from a lack of 
collaborative place-making that is eroding traditional community to the 
detriment of millions.  Friedman’s argument is characteristically bold 
and full of flair, and is  bound to generate debate for some time to come!

Meanwhile, David Adams and Steve Tiesdell draw on cutting-edge economics 
to call for a re-evaluation of PLANNING’S RELATIONSHIP TO THE MARKET, in 
particular a recognition of its ability to reconfigure market 
conditions.  Coming at a time when the connections between planning, 
business, and government are under stress, this paper represents an 
vital intervention into debates about the nature and extent of 
planning’s economic involvement and is compulsory reading for anyone 
interested in such topics.

Jennifer Foster brilliantly employs discourse analysis to reflect on 
different, ideologically laden uses of the term ‘LANDSCAPE’.  Looking at 
ways in which the concept of ‘nature’ is invested with power by 
planning, she argues that discourses about landscape serve to conceal a 
potent current of social injustice.

Finally, Isabel Breda-Vázquez, Isabel , Paulo Conceição, and Pedro Móia 
explore the effectiveness of EVALUATION PROCEDURES as an active learning 
tool capable of coping with the sheer diversity of urban policies and 
governance structures.

We hope you enjoy this edition!
-- 
Planning Theory and Practice is now on Facebook: 
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=71222067432

Dr Kiera Chapman, Journal Manager

Planning Theory and Practice
Department of Town and Regional Planning
University of Sheffield
Sheffield
S10 2TN

Tel: 0114 222 6940
Email: [log in to unmask]