Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Vision Making in Large Urban Settings: Unleashing Anticipation?

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Handbook of Anticipation

Abstract

Our society will increasingly be an urban society, with large metropolitan regions as the centers of development. These metropolitan spaces are supposed to create the economic and technological dynamics to solve the problems of the very same urban society. They are extremely complex structures, overall, difficult to understand in all their dimensions and asking for new ways of management, strategy formation, and general politics: “if we cannot imagine, we cannot manage.” Stakeholders, citizens, and planners alike will be faced with the challenge to develop appropriate ideas guiding the dynamics and complex settings and to keep development horizons open for not yet anticipated trajectories. Vision-making processes become very important in such a context, in the best case creating open political horizons, interested in becoming and the “midwifing of futures.” A survey of 30 vision-making processes in Europe forms the empirical backcloth for a presentation and discussion of urban systems, vision-making documents, time horizons and instant futures, vision formulations, and the “perpetual pursuit of unknowable novelty.”

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ache, P. (2000a). Cities in old industrial regions between local innovative milieu and urban governance-reflections on city region governance. European Planning Studies, 8(6), 693–709.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ache, P. (2000b). Vision and creativity – challenge for city regions. Futures, 32(5), 435–449.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ache, P. (2011). Creating futures that would otherwise not be – Reflections on the Greater Helsinki vision process and the making of metropolitan regions. Progress in Planning, 75(4), 155–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ache, P. (2013). Between vision and response capacity – Configuring metropolitan development (Oratie, June). Nijmegen: Radboud Universiteit Nijmegen.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ache, P. (2017). Metropolitan visions: instant, concrete, and conflict free futures? Territorio, 80, 7–14.

    Google Scholar 

  • Albrechts, L. (2015). Ingredients for a more radical strategic spatial planning. Environment and Planning B-Planning and Design, 42, 510–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barber, B. R. (2014). If mayors ruled the world: Dysfunctional nations, rising cities. New Haven/London: Yale University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Benevolo, L. (2000). Die Geschichte der Stadt (8th ed.). Frankfurt/New York: Campus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Berking, H., & Löw, M. (2008). Die Eigenlogik der Städte: Neue Wege für die Stadtforschung (2 Bde). Frankfurt: Campus.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bloch, E. (1985 [1954]). Das Prinzip Hoffnung. Berlin: Suhrkamp.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brenner, N., & Schmid, C. (2015). Towards a new epistemology of the urban? City, 19(2–3), 151–182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Castells, M. (2010). Globalisation, networking, urbanisation: Reflections on the spatial dynamics of the Information Age. Urban Studies, 47(13), 2737–2745.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • City of Goteborg. (2009). Comprehensive plan for Goteborg (Summary). Retrieved from Goteborg.

    Google Scholar 

  • City of Oslo. (2008). The 2008 municipal master plan – Oslo towards 2025. Retrieved from Oslo.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer, F. (2003). Reframing public policy. Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Friedmann, J. (2002). The prospect of cities. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganis, M. (2015). Planning urban places. Self-organising places with people in mind. London and New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaeser, E. (2011). Triumph of the city. How our greatest invention makes us richer, smarter, greener, healthier, and happier. New York: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaeser, E. (2012). Triumph of the City. Ely: Pan Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gleeson, B. (2012). Critical commentary. The Urban Age: Paradox and prospect. Urban Studies, 49(5), 931–943. doi:10.1177/0042098011435846.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gottmann, J. (1961). Megalopolis. The urbanized northeastern seaboard of the United States. Cambrigde, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P. (2002). Cities of tomorrow. An intellectual history of urban planning and design in the twentieth century (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hall, P., & Pain, K. (Eds.). (2006). The polycentric metropolis. Learning from mega-city regions in Europe. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harding, A. (2007). Taking City regions seriously? Response to debate on 'City-regions: New geographies of governance, democracy and social reproduction'. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 31(2), 443–458.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harvey, D. (2012). Rebel cities: From the right to the city to the urban revolution (Kindle ed.). London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hillier, J., & Healey, P. (Eds.). (2008). Foundations of the planning enterprise. Critical essays in planning theory (Vol. 1). Aldershot: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Huxley, M. (2002). Governmentality, gender, planning: A Foucauldian perspective. In P. Allmendinger & M. Tewdwr-Jones (Eds.), Planning futures. New directions for planning theory (pp. 136–155). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jessop, B. (2016). Territory, politics, governance and multispatial metagovernance. Territory Politics Governance, 4(1), 8–32. doi:10.1080/21622671.2015.1123173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knieling, J., & Othengrafen, F. (Eds.). (2009). Planning cultures in Europe. Decoding cultural phenomena in urban and regional planning. Farnham: Ashgate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, H. (1968). Le Droit à la ville. Paris: Anthropos.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lefebvre, H. (2003 [1965]). The style of the commune. In S. Elden, E. Lebas, & E. Kofman (Eds.), Henri Lefebvre: Key writings. London: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacLeod, G., & Jones, M. (2011). Renewing urban politics. Urban Studies, 48(12), 2443–2472.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, E. J. (2001). Collaborative visioning or urban planning as therapy? The politics of public-private policy making. The Professional Geographer, 53(2), 207–218. doi:10.1111/0033-0124.00280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McCann, E. (2013). Policy boosterism, policy mobilities, and the extrospective city. Urban Geography, 34(1), 5–29. doi:10.1080/02723638.2013.778627.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ministry of National Development. (2011). The territorial state and perspectives of the European Union. 2011 update. Background document for the territorial agenda of the European Union 2020. Presented at the Informal Meeting of Ministers responsible for Spatial Planning and Territorial Development on 19th May 2011, Gödöllö, Hungary. Retrieved from NN.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mouffe, C. (2000). Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism. Retrieved from Vienna.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, M., & Hull, A. (2009). The futures of the city region. Regional Studies, 43(6), 777–787.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (2012). Redefining urban: A new way to measure metropolitan areas. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ohmae, K. (1995). The end of the nation state: The rise of regional economies. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ostrom, E. (2005). Understanding institutional diversity. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinder, D. (2005). Visions of the City; utopianism, power and politics in twentieth-century urbanism. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pinder, D. (2013). Reconstituting the possible: Lefebvre, utopia and the urban question. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 39(1), 28–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pløger, J. (2004). Strife: Urban planning and agonism. Planning Theory, 3(1), 71–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Poli, R. (2010). An introduction to the ontology of anticipation. Futures, 42(7), 769–776. doi:10.1016/j.futures.2010.04.028.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reimer, M., Getimis, P., & Blotevogel, H. H. (Eds.). (2014). Spatial planning systems and practices in Europe. A comparative perspective on continuity and changes. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, J. (2006). Ordinary cities: Between modernity and development. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosen, R. (1985). Anticipatory systems. philosophical, mathematical and methodological foundations. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sassen, S. (2001). The Global City: New York, London, Tokyo. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P. J., Hoyler, M., & Verbruggen, R. (2010). External urban relational process: Introducing central flow theory to complement central place theory. Urban Studies, 47(13), 2803–2818.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • UN. (2014a). Cities. Chapter 2. In Better growth, better climate: The new climate economy report. Retrieved from New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN. (2014b). World urbanization prospects. Highlights. Retrieved from New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Habitat. (2006). The State of the World's Cities Report 2006/2007. The Millenium development goals and urban sustainability: 30 years of shaping the Habitat Agenda. London: Earthscan.

    Google Scholar 

  • University of Valencia, et al. (2006). ESPON project 2.3.2 – Governance of territorial and urban policies from EU to local level. Draft Final Report. Retrieved from Valencia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wakeman, R. (2016). Practicing utopia. An intellectual history of the new town movement. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Welzer, H. (2014). Selbst Denken: Eine Anleitung zum Widerstand. Frankfurt: Fischer (TB).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute for Management Research, Radboud University, Thomas von Aquino Straat 3, Nijmegen, 6525 GD, The Netherlands

    Peter Ache

Authors
  1. Peter Ache
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Ache .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Dept of Sociology & Social Research, University of Trento Dept of Sociology & Social Research, Trento, Italy

    Roberto Poli

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 Springer International Publishing AG

About this entry

Cite this entry

Ache, P. (2017). Vision Making in Large Urban Settings: Unleashing Anticipation?. In: Poli, R. (eds) Handbook of Anticipation. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31737-3_43-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-31737-3_43-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-31737-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-31737-3

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference Religion and PhilosophyReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Humanities

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation