IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/urbstu/v61y2024i12p2435-2451.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Automatic for the people? Problematising the potential of digital planning

Author

Listed:
  • Ruth Potts

    (Cardiff University, UK)

  • Alex Lord

    (University of Liverpool, UK)

  • John Sturzaker

    (University of Hertfordshire, UK)

Abstract

This article contributes to the small but growing corpus of literature which analyses the increasing use of digital technologies as part of spatial planning activities. Much of that existing literature focuses on the opportunities such technology brings or explores the use of specific technology. Instead, the article seeks to problematise digital planning, explicitly questioning some of the optimistic claims made on its behalf. To do so, it makes use of a new conceptual framework to reflect upon the promises and potential pitfalls of greater use of digital technology within and beyond planning practice. The paper concludes that digital planning is no more immune to questions about exclusion and power than any other form of activity affecting the built environment, and that it is essential to question the rationale behind how decisions are made regarding the adoption of new technologies in urban planning systems.

Suggested Citation

  • Ruth Potts & Alex Lord & John Sturzaker, 2024. "Automatic for the people? Problematising the potential of digital planning," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(12), pages 2435-2451, September.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:urbstu:v:61:y:2024:i:12:p:2435-2451
    DOI: 10.1177/00420980241238863
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00420980241238863
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/00420980241238863?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. Constance Carr & Markus Hesse, 2020. "When Alphabet Inc. Plans Toronto’s Waterfront: New Post-Political Modes of Urban Governance," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(1), pages 69-83.
    2. Yu-Shan Tseng & Christoph Becker & Ida Roikonen, 2024. "Dialectical approach to unpacking knowledge-making for digital urban democracy: A critical case of Helsinki-based e-participatory budgeting," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(1), pages 112-129, January.
    3. James Charlton & Ian Babelon & Richard Watson & Caitlin Hafferty, 2023. "Phygitally Smarter? A Critically Pragmatic Agenda for Smarter Engagement in British Planning and Beyond," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 8(2), pages 17-31.
    4. Constance Carr & Markus Hesse, 2020. "When Alphabet Inc. Plans Toronto’s Waterfront: New Post-Political Modes of Urban Governance," Urban Planning, Cogitatio Press, vol. 5(1), pages 69-83.
    5. Sara Safransky, 2020. "Geographies of Algorithmic Violence: Redlining the Smart City," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 44(2), pages 200-218, March.
    6. Anastasia Stratigea & Chrysaida-Aliki Papadopoulou & Maria Panagiotopoulou, 2015. "Tools and Technologies for Planning the Development of Smart Cities," Journal of Urban Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(2), pages 43-62, April.
    7. Sherry R. Arnstein, 2019. "A Ladder of Citizen Participation," Journal of the American Planning Association, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 85(1), pages 24-34, January.
    8. Heather Campbell & Robert Marshall, 2000. "Moral Obligations, Planning, and the Public Interest: A Commentary on Current British Practice," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 27(2), pages 297-312, April.
    9. Marijana Pantić & Juaneé Cilliers & Guido Cimadomo & Fernando Montaño & Olusola Olufemi & Sally Torres Mallma & Johan van den Berg, 2021. "Challenges and Opportunities for Public Participation in Urban and Regional Planning during the COVID-19 Pandemic—Lessons Learned for the Future," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(12), pages 1-19, December.
    10. Thomas W. Sanchez & Hannah Shumway & Trey Gordner & Theo Lim, 2023. "The prospects of artificial intelligence in urban planning," International Journal of Urban Sciences, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 27(2), pages 179-194, April.
    11. Kerry Bobbins & Federico Caprotti & Jiska de Groot & Whitney Pailman & Mascha Moorlach & Hendrik Schloemann & Alex Densmore & Kimenthrie Finlay & Ellen Fischat & Siseko Siwali & Joslyn Links, 2024. "Smart and disruptive infrastructures: Re-building knowledge on the informal city," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(1), pages 165-179, January.
    12. Guido Vonk & Stan Geertman & Paul Schot, 2005. "Bottlenecks Blocking Widespread Usage of Planning Support Systems," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 37(5), pages 909-924, May.
    13. Kreps, Sarah & McCain, R. Miles & Brundage, Miles, 2022. "All the News That’s Fit to Fabricate: AI-Generated Text as a Tool of Media Misinformation," Journal of Experimental Political Science, Cambridge University Press, vol. 9(1), pages 104-117, March.
    14. Olga Kolotouchkina & Monica Viñarás-Abad & Luis Mañas-Viniegra, 2023. "Digital Ageism: Emerging Challenges and Best Practices of Age-Friendly Digital Urban Governance," Media and Communication, Cogitatio Press, vol. 11(3), pages 6-17.
    15. Tooran Alizadeh & Deepti Prasad, 2024. "The right to the smart city in the Global South: A research agenda," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(3), pages 426-444, February.
    16. Joe Weston & Michael Weston, 2013. "Inclusion and Transparency in Planning Decision-Making: Planning Officer Reports to the Planning Committee," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 186-203, April.
    17. Ruth Potts & Brian Webb, 2023. "Digital planning practices: benchmarking planners’ use of information and communication technologies (ICTs)," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 38(4), pages 520-540, July.
    18. Reinout Kleinhans & Maarten Van Ham & Jennifer Evans-Cowley, 2015. "Using Social Media and Mobile Technologies to Foster Engagement and Self-Organization in Participatory Urban Planning and Neighbourhood Governance," Planning Practice & Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(3), pages 237-247, June.
    19. Matthew Cook & Andrew Karvonen, 2024. "Urban planning and the knowledge politics of the smart city," Urban Studies, Urban Studies Journal Limited, vol. 61(2), pages 370-382, February.
    20. Anna M. Hersperger & Corina Thurnheer-Wittenwiler & Silvia Tobias & Sara Folvig & Christian Fertner, 2022. "Digitalization in land-use planning: effects of digital plan data on efficiency, transparency and innovation," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(12), pages 2537-2553, 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. Haozhi Pan & Si Chen & Yizhao Gao & Brian Deal & Jinfang Liu, 2020. "An urban informatics approach to understanding residential mobility in Metro Chicago," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(8), pages 1456-1473, October.
    2. te Brömmelstroet, Marco, 2017. "Towards a pragmatic research agenda for the PSS domain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 77-83.
    3. Martin J Wassen & Hens Runhaar & Aat Barendregt & Tomasz Okruszko, 2011. "Evaluating the Role of Participation in Modeling Studies for Environmental Planning," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 38(2), pages 338-358, April.
    4. Anne Seneca Terkelsen & Christian Tolstrup Wester & Gabriel Gulis & Jørgen Jespersen & Pernille Tanggaard Andersen, 2022. "Co-Creation and Co-Production of Health Promoting Activities Addressing Older People—A Scoping Review," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(20), pages 1-20, October.
    5. Marco Te Brömmelstroet & Luca Bertolini, 2010. "Integrating land use and transport knowledge in strategy-making," Transportation, Springer, vol. 37(1), pages 85-104, January.
    6. Jongwng Ju & Jaecheol Kim, 2023. "Applying the Delphi Approach to Incorporate Voiceless Stakeholders in Community Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    7. Tessa Eikelboom & Ron Janssen, 2015. "Comparison of Geodesign Tools to Communicate Stakeholder Values," Group Decision and Negotiation, Springer, vol. 24(6), pages 1065-1087, November.
    8. Geertman, Stan, 2017. "PSS: Beyond the implementation gap," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 70-76.
    9. Erik Glaas & Mattias Hjerpe & Martin Karlson & Tina-Simone Neset, 2020. "Visualization for Citizen Participation: User Perceptions on a Mainstreamed Online Participatory Tool and Its Usefulness for Climate Change Planning," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(2), pages 1-16, January.
    10. Haozhi Pan & Stan Geertman & Brian Deal, 2020. "What does urban informatics add to planning support technology?," Environment and Planning B, , vol. 47(8), pages 1317-1325, October.
    11. The Re‐Arrangements Collective & Fabien Cante & Ajmal Hussain & Timo Makori & Surer Qassim Mohamed & Alana Osbourne & Francesca Pilo' & Kavita Ramakrishnan & AbdouMaliq Simone & Rike Sitas & Adeem Suh, 2023. "Movement 3. Navigating Urban Arrangements," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(3), pages 483-495, May.
    12. Codruț-Georgian Artene & Ciprian Oprișa & Cristian Nicolae Buțincu & Florin Leon, 2023. "Finding Patient Zero and Tracking Narrative Changes in the Context of Online Disinformation Using Semantic Similarity Analysis," Mathematics, MDPI, vol. 11(9), pages 1-26, April.
    13. Papa, Enrica & Coppola, Pierluigi & Angiello, Gennaro & Carpentieri, Gerardo, 2017. "The learning process of accessibility instrument developers: Testing the tools in planning practice," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 108-120.
    14. Silva, Cecília & Patatas, Tiago & Amante, Ana, 2017. "Evaluating the usefulness of the structural accessibility layer for planning practice – Planning practitioners’ perception," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 137-149.
    15. Indranil De & Rooba Hasan & Mubashshir Iqbal, 2022. "Natural Treatment Systems and Importance of Social Cost Benefit Analysis in Developing Countries: A Critical Review," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(7), pages 1-15, March.
    16. Erin McElroy, 2023. "DIS/POSSESSORY DATA POLITICS: From Tenant Screening to Anti‐Eviction Organizing," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 47(1), pages 54-70, January.
    17. Janjira Sukwai & Nobuo Mishima & Nattasit Srinurak, 2022. "Balancing Cultural Heritage Conservation: Visual Integrity Assessment to Support Change Management in the Buffer Zone of Chiang Mai Historic City Using GIS and Computer-Generated 3D Modeling," Land, MDPI, vol. 11(5), pages 1-27, April.
    18. Cristian Campagnaro & Nicolò Di Prima & Sara Ceraolo, 2021. "Co‐Design and the Collective Creativity Processes in Care Systems and Places," Social Inclusion, Cogitatio Press, vol. 9(4), pages 130-142.
    19. Yoonshin Kwak & Brian Deal & Grant Mosey, 2021. "Landscape Design toward Urban Resilience: Bridging Science and Physical Design Coupling Sociohydrological Modeling and Design Process," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(9), pages 1-17, April.
    20. Francisco Javier Moreno Marimbaldo & Miguel-Ángel Manso-Callejo & Ramon Alcarria, 2018. "A Methodological Approach to Using Geodesign in Transmission Line Projects," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(8), pages 1-30, August.

    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:urbstu:v:61:y:2024:i:12:p:2435-2451. 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: http://www.gla.ac.uk/departments/urbanstudiesjournal .

    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.