WHAT IS NEW IN COMPARATIVE INTERNATIONAL PLANNING: WHY, WHAT, AND HOW?

Organizers

Olivier Sykes, University of Liverpool
Ela Babalik, Middle Eastern Technical University

Contributors

Bruce Stiftel, Georgia Institute of Technology
Andrea Frank, University Birmingham
Juliana Martins, University College London
Manuela Madeddu, University of Liverpool

In this roundtable contributors to a forthcoming compilation - the Routledge Handbook on Comparative International Planning - will discuss the current state of the field of comparative international planning studies. 

Comparative international planning research has a considerable history and the reasons for undertaking such work have been well rehearsed in the literature from at least the 1970s. The comparative impulse can derive from multiple and often complementary motivations. For example, from an interest in studying and learning from other places as means of general or personal enrichment; comparing the governance performance in different places (e.g. in meeting sustainability goals); studying different planning approaches and their effectiveness in addressing particular planning themes; improving understanding of different situations and planning contexts; developing theories or shaping and influencing agendas and supporting government lobbying. A distinct feature of international comparative studies in planning is that these are not the sole preserve of academics. In fact, there is a significant amount of comparative work being undertaken in planning practice both by the public sector as well as large international consultancies. Planning education is also characterised by varied methods of comparative international studies and the teaching and learning of the subject in Higher Education is explored by a section and contributions in the compilation with a particular emphasis on dissecting methodological approaches.

The roundtable will stimulate critical reflections across these three domains of planning - research, practice, education – including interrogations of power relations amongst global regions and the potential for the adoption of decolonial perspectives. Though it will highlight the value of adopting a comparative approach, it will also highlight its possible limitations. The roundtable will emphasise that a comparative approach must be grounded in a good understanding of the local context, and that the methodology adopted, level of analysis, scope, scale, language, transferability, and the direction of flow of ideas (considering the decolonial perspective mentioned above) all require considerable attention.

Key words: N/A