IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envira/v36y2004i9p1549-1570.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Discourses of Objection: Towards an Understanding of Third-Party Rights in Planning

Author

Listed:
  • Geraint Ellis

    (School of Environmental Planning, Queen's University, Belfast, David Keir Building, Stranmillis Road, Belfast BT9 5AG, Northern Ireland)

Abstract

Public participation is central to the practice, legitimacy, and dominant normative principles of spatial planning. It has a strong presence in the discourse of communicative governance, which suggests that participatory rights should be strengthened as part of a systematic institutional design. Interest in the concept of rights within planning has been gathering pace, but is still undeveloped. In terms of third-party rights, attention has been focused on citizens as rights claimants and their use of rights to promote self-interest, rather than the values that should be protected by such rights or the balance of rights between different stakeholders. This paper explores some of the theoretical issues related to third-party rights in planning, using the existing literature on planning disputes to contextualise current debate. It examines a case study of third-party appellants in the Republic of Ireland and identifies five distinct ‘discourses of objection’. These discourses highlight the complex factors that stimulate third-party rights-claims and illustrate how they can be related to issues such as citizenship, the public interest, and property rights. The paper concludes with a number of general observations on the nature of rights in planning and the implications this has for the broader paradigm of communicative governance.

Suggested Citation

  • Geraint Ellis, 2004. "Discourses of Objection: Towards an Understanding of Third-Party Rights in Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 36(9), pages 1549-1570, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:36:y:2004:i:9:p:1549-1570
    DOI: 10.1068/a36176
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1068/a36176
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1068/a36176?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Annette Hastings, 1999. "Discourse and Urban Change: Introduction to the Special Issue," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 36(1), pages 7-12, January.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wolsink, Maarten, 2007. "Planning of renewables schemes: Deliberative and fair decision-making on landscape issues instead of reproachful accusations of non-cooperation," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(5), pages 2692-2704, May.
    2. Zhang, Xiang & Xu, Jian-gang & Ju, Yang, 2018. "Public participation in NIMBY risk mitigation: A discourse zoning approach in the Chinese context," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 559-575.
    3. Atkinson-Palombo, Carol & Kuby, Michael J., 2011. "The geography of advance transit-oriented development in metropolitan Phoenix, Arizona, 2000–2007," Journal of Transport Geography, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 189-199.
    4. Díaz, Paula & Adler, Carolina & Patt, Anthony, 2017. "Do stakeholders’ perspectives on renewable energy infrastructure pose a risk to energy policy implementation? A case of a hydropower plant in Switzerland," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 108(C), pages 21-28.
    5. Sarah Armstrong, 2014. "Siting Prisons, Sighting Communities: Geographies of Objection in a Planning Process," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 46(3), pages 550-565, March.
    6. Keiron Bailey & Benjamin Blandford & Ted Grossardt & John Ripy, 2011. "Planning, Technology, and Legitimacy: Structured Public Involvement in Integrated Transportation and Land-Use Planning in the United States," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 38(3), pages 447-467, June.
    7. Katrina Raynor & Tony Matthews & Severine Mayere, 2017. "Shaping urban consolidation debates: Social representations in Brisbane newspaper media," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 54(6), pages 1519-1536, May.
    8. Andy Inch, 2012. "Creating ‘a Generation of NIMBYs’? Interpreting the Role of the State in Managing the Politics of Urban Development," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 30(3), pages 520-535, June.
    9. Eero Valtonen & Heidi Falkenbach & Kauko Viitanen, 2017. "Development-led planning practices in a plan-led planning system: empirical evidence from Finland," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 25(6), pages 1053-1075, June.
    10. Jones, Christopher R. & Eiser, J. Richard, 2009. "Identifying predictors of attitudes towards local onshore wind development with reference to an English case study," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 37(11), pages 4604-4614, November.
    11. Stephen Willey, 2007. "Planning Appeal Processes: Reflections on a Comparative Study," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 39(7), pages 1676-1698, July.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Bruce Taylor & Tabatha Wallington & Sonja Heyenga & Ben Harman, 2014. "Urban Growth and Climate Adaptation in Australia: Divergent Discourses and Implications for Policy-making," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 51(1), pages 3-21, January.
    2. Malcolm Tait & Heather Campbell, 2000. "The Politics of Communication between Planning Officers and Politicians: The Exercise of Power through Discourse," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 32(3), pages 489-506, March.
    3. John Sturzaker, 2010. "The Exercise of Power to Limit the Development of New Housing in the English Countryside," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 42(4), pages 1001-1016, April.
    4. Ruth Fincher, 2007. "Is High-rise Housing Innovative? Developers' Contradictory Narratives of High-rise Housing in Melbourne," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 44(3), pages 631-649, March.
    5. Nick Bailey, 2008. "The Challenge and Response to Global Tourism in the Post-modern Era: The Commodification, Reconfiguration and Mutual Transformation of Habana Vieja, Cuba," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 45(5-6), pages 1079-1096, May.
    6. Julie Cupples & Victoria Guyatt & Jamie Pearce, 2007. "“Put on a Jacket, You Wuss†: Cultural Identities, Home Heating, and Air Pollution in Christchurch, New Zealand," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 39(12), pages 2883-2898, December.
    7. Chik Collins, 2000. "Developing the Linguistic Turn in Urban Studies: Language, Context and Political Economy," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 37(11), pages 2027-2043, October.
    8. Jiang Xu, 2016. "Environmental discourses in China’s urban planning system: A scaled discourse-analytical perspective," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 53(5), pages 978-999, April.
    9. Kevin Fox Gotham, 2002. "Marketing Mardi Gras: Commodification, Spectacle and the Political Economy of Tourism in New Orleans," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 39(10), pages 1735-1756, September.
    10. Fazito, Mozart & Scott, Mark & Russell, Paula, 2016. "The dynamics of tourism discourses and policy in Brazil," Annals of Tourism Research, Elsevier, vol. 57(C), pages 1-17.
    11. Thomas Buhler & Virginie Lethier, 2020. "Analysing urban policy discourses using textometry: An application to French urban transport plans (2000–2015)," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 57(10), pages 2181-2197, August.
    12. Juval Portugali & Nurit Alfasi, 2008. "An Approach to Planning Discourse Analysis," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 45(2), pages 251-272, February.
    13. Nicole Gurran & Kristian Ruming, 2016. "Less planning, more development? Housing and urban reform discourses in Australia," Journal of Economic Policy Reform, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(3), pages 262-280, July.
    14. Hake, Jürgen-Friedrich & Fischer, Wolfgang & Venghaus, Sandra & Weckenbrock, Christoph, 2015. "The German Energiewende – History and status quo," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 92(P3), pages 532-546.
    15. Keith Jacobs, 2004. "Waterfront Redevelopment: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the Policy-making Process within the Chatham Maritime Project," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 41(4), pages 817-832, April.
    16. Masahide Horita, 2000. "Mapping Policy Discourse with CRANES: Spatial Understanding Support Systems as a Medium for Community Conflict Resolution," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 27(6), pages 801-814, December.
    17. Jean Hillier & Michael Gunder, 2005. "Not over Your Dead Bodies! A Lacanian Interpretation of Urban Planning Discourse and Practice," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 37(6), pages 1049-1066, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:envira:v:36:y:2004:i:9:p:1549-1570. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.