IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/envirc/v38y2020i7-8p1367-1385.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Performing legitimacy in neighbourhood planning: Conflicting identities and hybrid governance

Author

Listed:
  • Andy Yuille

Abstract

Neighbourhood planning in the UK is a striking example of the international turn to localism and public participation, the statutory weight afforded to it setting it apart from many other initiatives. Its promoters portray it as a straightforward transfer of power from state to community. However, its legitimacy relies upon complex, hybrid forms of representative, participatory and epistemological authority. A growing literature is interrogating the relations between neighbourhood planning groups – the collectives utilising these new powers – and the neighbourhoods for which they speak. This paper brings empirical evidence forward to build on such work by exploring how the identities of neighbourhood planning groups are constituted. Three different and sometimes conflicting relational identities are characterised. Each identity is associated with particular material relations, types of knowledge and ways of representing the neighbourhood, and consequently produces different forms of legitimacy. Analysing identities in this way aids understanding of the practices through which legitimacy is achieved in experiments in democracy that rely on hybrid forms of authority. It may also open possibilities for intervention that speak to some of the concerns raised in the literature about these hybrid forms.

Suggested Citation

  • Andy Yuille, 2020. "Performing legitimacy in neighbourhood planning: Conflicting identities and hybrid governance," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 38(7-8), pages 1367-1385, November.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:envirc:v:38:y:2020:i:7-8:p:1367-1385
    DOI: 10.1177/2399654420925823
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2399654420925823
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2399654420925823?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. Graham Haughton & Phil Allmendinger, 2013. "Spatial Planning and the New Localism," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(1), pages 1-5, February.
    2. Simin Davoudi & Paul Cowie, 2013. "Are English neighbourhood forums democratically legitimate?," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 14(4), pages 562-566, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Katherine Brookfield, 2017. "Getting involved in plan-making: Participation in neighbourhood planning in England," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(3), pages 397-416, May.
    2. Michal Hrivnák & Peter Moritz & Katarína Melichová & Oľga Roháčiková & Lucia Pospišová, 2021. "Designing the Participation on Local Development Planning: From Literature Review to Adaptive Framework for Practice," Societies, MDPI, vol. 11(1), pages 1-25, March.
    3. Sarah Ayres & Graham Pearce, 2013. "A Whitehall perspective on decentralisation in England’s emerging territories," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 28(7-8), pages 801-816, November.
    4. Carol Ludwig & Gregory Ludwig, 2014. "Empty gestures? A review of the discourses of ‘localism’ from the practitioner’s perspective," Local Economy, London South Bank University, vol. 29(3), pages 245-256, May.
    5. John Sturzaker & Michael Gordon, 2017. "Democratic tensions in decentralised planning – Rhetoric, legislation and reality in England," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 35(7), pages 1324-1339, November.

    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:envirc:v:38:y:2020:i:7-8:p:1367-1385. 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.