Topic outline

  • Responsible teacher

    Dominic Stead, dominic.stead@aalto.fi


    Other contributors

    Aino Hirvola, Aalto University (guest lecture, session 7)

    Daniel Galland, Aalborg University (guest lecture, sessions 8 and 9)

    Peter Schmitt, Stockholm University (guest lecture, session 10)


    Learning outcomes

    After successful completion of the course, students will be able to:

    • analyse planning systems and their role and importance in land use planning 
    • evaluate elements and characteristics of planning systems 
    • recognise different types of planning systems, and analyse and compare their characteristics to the Finnish planning system
    • understand societal, spatial and legal contexts of land use planning  
    • utilize planning and policy ideas in studio courses and in planning work 

    Course structure

    The course comprises 11 sessions:
    1.   Introduction. What is planning?  Monday 4 September 2023
          [No session on Wednesday 6 September 2023]
    2.   Why plan? Monday 11 September 2023
    3.   Governing planning.  Wednesday 13 September 2023
    4.   Dimensions of comparison.  Monday 18 September 2023
    5.   Planning systems.  Wednesday 20 September 2023
    6.   European influences.  Monday 25 September 2023
    7.   Planning in Finland.   Wednesday 27 September 2023
    8.   Planning in Denmark.  Monday 2 October 2023
    9.   Planning in Norway.  Wednesday 4 October 2023
    10. Planning in Sweden.  Monday 9 October 2023
    11. Synthesis. Q&A.  Wednesday 11 October 2023

      Assessment

      The grades for the assignments and home exam will be weighted as follows:


      Assignment 1 
         5%
      Assignment 2
         10%
      Assignment 3
         10%
      Assignment 4
         25%
      Home exam  50%
      Total
         100%

      Grading scale

      Grade   
      Verbal (EN)   
      Verbal (FI)
      Verbal (SE) 
      0
      fail hylätty underkänd   
      1 passable välttävä försvarlig
      2 satisfactory   
      tyydyttävä nöjaktig
      3 good hyvä god
      4 very good
      kiitettävä berömlig
      5 excellent erinomainen   
      utmärkt


    1. course timeline

    2. Discussion groups will be held every Monday morning at 09:30-10:30 (immediately before the lecture) and consider one specific question each week. Questions on the same literature will feature in the essay. PDF copies of all the materials listed below can be found in the section 'Supporting materials'.


      Monday 11 September 2023

      What are Klosterman’s main areas of critique of planning and to what extent are these critiques still valid today?

      Article to read and discuss:

      Klosterman, R.E. (1985). Arguments for and against planning. Town Planning Review 56(1) 5-20, https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.56.1.e8286q3082111km4


      Monday 18 September 2023

      What are the reasons behind Rittel & Webber's contention that the ‘modern-classical’ model of planning is unattainable and perhaps even undesirable?

      Article to read and discuss:

      Rittel, H.W.J. & Webber, M.M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sciences 4(2) 155-169, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405730


      Monday 25 September 2023

      To what extent do you agree with Wildavsky's view that planning creates ‘unreal expectations that cannot be met’?

      Article to read and discuss:

      Wildavsky, A. (1973). If planning is everything, maybe it’s nothing. Policy Sciences 4(2) 127-153, https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01405729


      Monday 2 October 2023

      To what extent do you consider planning to be primarily about the control of future outcomes as Alexander suggests?

      Article to read and discuss:

      Alexander, E.R. (1981). If Planning isn’t Everything, Maybe it’s Something. Town Planning Review 52(2) 131-142, https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.52.2.x34435m0x5555454


      Monday 9 October 2023

      To what extent can planning be identified as an analytically distinct method of decision-making? Reade argues that “Those who claim to be planners do not usually admit to basing their recommendations merely on the same methods as do politicians, or public officials in general.” (p.71)

      Article to read and discuss:

      Reade, E. (1982). If planning isn’t everything… A comment. Town Planning Review 53(1) 65-72, https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.53.1.61363l0g33910226 (read also the rejoinders by Alexander and Wildavsky at the end of this article)


       

      Group 1 Group 2 Group 3 Group 4
      Borowski
      Albertini
      Anisimov
      George
      Goderis
      Burlon
      Domnick
      Halmes
      Isoranta
      Hämäläinen
      Husso
      Kühnis
      Leskinen
      Kukkonen
      Junghanns
      Lyu
      Mäenpää
      O'Connell
      Pingen
      Papanek
      Suihko Partanen
      Saarikivi
      Turpeinen
      Tykkyläinen Pörhölä Salmensuu
      Vārna
      Zander Saikku Yin
      Vuohelainen

      Turunen

       

      Group 5
      Group 6
      Group 7
       
      Kauppila
      Huber
      Bigatti
       
      Kongsparten
      Löfgren
      Cucco

      Leppänen
      Neulasalmi
      Gustafsson

      Pillet
      Petäjä
      Kalimo

      Sorsimo
      Salo
      Leinoluoto

      Suninen
      Shultz
      Lu

      Talvitie
      Stompff
      Nummelin

      Xu
      Ylitalo
      Raatikainen







    3. Not available unless: You belong to L01 (SISU)

      PDF copies of all materials are available below!


      Session 1: What is planning?  Monday 5 September 2022

      European Commission (1997). The EU compendium of spatial planning systems and policies. Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy, European Commission. Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, https://op.europa.eu/s/vEQD (pages 21-26)

      Parker, G. & Doak, J. (2012). Key Concepts in Planning. Sage, London, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473914629 (pages 1-28)

      Session 2: Why planning?  Monday 12 September 2022

      Klosterman, R.E. (1985). Arguments for and against planning. Town Planning Review 56(1) 5-20, https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.56.1.e8286q3082111km4

      Parker, G. & Doak, J. (2012). Key Concepts in Planning. Sage, London, https://doi.org/10.4135/9781473914629 (pages 14-28 and 195-205)

      Session 3: Governing planning.  Wednesday 14 September 2022

      Haughton, G. & Allmendinger, P. (2007) ‘Soft spaces’ in planning. Town & Country Planning 76(Sept) 306-308, https://archive.tcpa.org.uk/archive/journals

      OECD (2017). The Governance of Land Use in OECD Countries: Policy Analysis and Recommendations. OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264268609-en

      Session 4: Dimensions of comparison Monday 19 September 2022

      Nadin, V.; Fernández Maldonado, A. M.; Zonneveld, W. A. M. et al. (2018). COMPASS: Comparative Analysis of Territorial Governance and Spatial Planning Systems in Europe. ESPON EGTC, Luxembourg, https://www.espon.eu/planning-systems

      Nadin, V. & Stead, D. (2013). Opening up the Compendium: an evaluation of international comparative planning research methodologies. European Planning Studies 21(10) 1542-1561, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.722958

      Session 5: Planning systems Wednesday 21 September 2022

      European Commission (1997). The EU compendium of spatial planning systems and policies. Directorate-General for Regional and Urban Policy, European Commission. Office for the Official Publications of the European Communities, Luxembourg, https://op.europa.eu/s/vEQD (pages 33-50)

      Nadin, V.; Fernández Maldonado, A. M.; Zonneveld, W. A. M. et al. (2018). COMPASS: Comparative Analysis of Territorial Governance and Spatial Planning Systems in Europe. ESPON EGTC, Luxembourg, https://www.espon.eu/planning-systems

      Nadin, V. & Stead, D. (2013). Opening up the Compendium: an evaluation of international comparative planning research methodologies. European Planning Studies 21(10) 1542-1561, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2012.722958 

      Session 6: European influences.  Monday 26 September 2022

      Adams, N. (2008). Convergence and policy transfer: an examination of the extent to which approaches to spatial planning have converged within the context of an enlarged EU. International Planning Studies 13(1) 31-49, https://doi.org/10.1080/13563470801969608

      Evers, D. & Tennekes, J. (2016). Europe exposed: mapping the impacts of EU policies on spatial planning in the Netherlands. European Planning Studies 24(10) 1747-1765, https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2016.1183593

      Session 7: Planning in Finland.  Wednesday 28 September 2022

      Böhme, K. (2002). Nordic Echoes of European Spatial Planning. Report 2002:8. Nordregio, Stockholm, http://hdl.handle.net/2066/19205 (pages 102-131)

      OECD (2017). Land-use Planning Systems in the OECD: Country Fact Sheets. OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264268579-en (pages 93-98)

      Session 8: Planning in Denmark.  Monday 3 October 2022

      Böhme, K. (2002). Nordic Echoes of European Spatial Planning. Report 2002:8. Nordregio, Stockholm, http://hdl.handle.net/2066/19205 (pages 69-101)

      OECD (2017). Land-use Planning Systems in the OECD: Country Fact Sheets. OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264268579-en (pages 81-86)

      Session 9: Planning in Sweden.  Wednesday 5 October 2022

      Böhme, K. (2002). Nordic Echoes of European Spatial Planning. Report 2002:8. Nordregio, Stockholm, http://hdl.handle.net/2066/19205 (pages 181-213)

      OECD (2017). Land-use Planning Systems in the OECD: Country Fact Sheets. OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264268579-en (pages 197-202)

      Session 10: Planning in Norway.  Monday 10 October 2022

      Böhme, K. (2002). Nordic Echoes of European Spatial Planning. Report 2002:8. Nordregio, Stockholm, http://hdl.handle.net/2066/19205 (pages 152-180)

      OECD (2017). Land-use Planning Systems in the OECD: Country Fact Sheets. OECD Publishing, Paris, http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264268579-en (pages 161-166)