Confronting conflicts

How urban professionals deal with everyday conflicts in Malmø & Copenhagen

Publikation: KonferencebidragPaperForskningpeer review

Resumé

This paper reports from a comparative study of urban leaders and their handling of everyday conflicts in urban regeneration projects in two cities (Malmø in Sweden and Copenhagen in Denmark). Processes of urban regeneration and have in many ways functioned as laboratories for public authorities in developing community development and participatory practices (Ledwith 2011) and they have a long tradition for working closely with citizens and other local stakeholders in the development of innovative solutions to wicked problems.

The everyday service delivery or lack thereof by public institutions and the direct contact between citizens and civil servants are of utmost importance for the citizens’ perceptions of public institutions. With inspiration from Healey (2012) we aim to analyse the contribution of governance micro-practices, drawing on experiences of “democracy-in –action” in the fine grain practices of spatial planning and urban policy in order to answer questions such as:

- What dilemmas, challenges and conflicts do public administrators experience in new forms of competing rationalities of governance processes and how do they cope with it?

- How do they mediate between different interests in public policy conflicts? And how do they incorporate principles such as fairness, inclusive representation and autonomy?

- How do public administrators balance between the demands of public authorities and the needs of multiple stakeholders involved in collaborative governance processes?

Based on readings of the theoretical literature on conflict resolution and on the roles of professionals we aim to revisit the theories of Liepsky and the street level bureaucrat in the context of urban network governance. The empirical data derives from field observations and interviews in Copenhagen and Malmø as well as qualitative interviews and workshop sessions held over a period from September 2012 to March 2013 with six urban leaders in Copenhagen
OriginalsprogEngelsk
Publikationsdato2013
StatusUdgivet - 2013
Begivenhed7th ECPR General Conference - Bordeaux, Bordeaux, Frankrig
Varighed: 4 sep. 201311 sep. 2013
http://www.ecpr.eu/Events/SectionList.aspx?EventID=5

Konference

Konference7th ECPR General Conference
LokationBordeaux
LandFrankrig
ByBordeaux
Periode04/09/201311/09/2013
Internetadresse

Citer dette

Agger, A. (2013). Confronting conflicts: How urban professionals deal with everyday conflicts in Malmø & Copenhagen. Afhandling præsenteret på 7th ECPR General Conference, Bordeaux, Frankrig.
Agger, Annika. / Confronting conflicts : How urban professionals deal with everyday conflicts in Malmø & Copenhagen. Afhandling præsenteret på 7th ECPR General Conference, Bordeaux, Frankrig.
@conference{5c3d2494ecc94ce5a55dd02365c00ad9,
title = "Confronting conflicts: How urban professionals deal with everyday conflicts in Malm{\o} & Copenhagen",
abstract = "This paper reports from a comparative study of urban leaders and their handling of everyday conflicts in urban regeneration projects in two cities (Malm{\o} in Sweden and Copenhagen in Denmark). Processes of urban regeneration and have in many ways functioned as laboratories for public authorities in developing community development and participatory practices (Ledwith 2011) and they have a long tradition for working closely with citizens and other local stakeholders in the development of innovative solutions to wicked problems. The everyday service delivery or lack thereof by public institutions and the direct contact between citizens and civil servants are of utmost importance for the citizens’ perceptions of public institutions. With inspiration from Healey (2012) we aim to analyse the contribution of governance micro-practices, drawing on experiences of “democracy-in –action” in the fine grain practices of spatial planning and urban policy in order to answer questions such as: - What dilemmas, challenges and conflicts do public administrators experience in new forms of competing rationalities of governance processes and how do they cope with it?- How do they mediate between different interests in public policy conflicts? And how do they incorporate principles such as fairness, inclusive representation and autonomy?- How do public administrators balance between the demands of public authorities and the needs of multiple stakeholders involved in collaborative governance processes?Based on readings of the theoretical literature on conflict resolution and on the roles of professionals we aim to revisit the theories of Liepsky and the street level bureaucrat in the context of urban network governance. The empirical data derives from field observations and interviews in Copenhagen and Malm{\o} as well as qualitative interviews and workshop sessions held over a period from September 2012 to March 2013 with six urban leaders in Copenhagen",
author = "Annika Agger",
year = "2013",
language = "English",
note = "null ; Conference date: 04-09-2013 Through 11-09-2013",
url = "http://www.ecpr.eu/Events/SectionList.aspx?EventID=5",

}

Agger, A 2013, 'Confronting conflicts: How urban professionals deal with everyday conflicts in Malmø & Copenhagen' Paper fremlagt ved 7th ECPR General Conference, Bordeaux, Frankrig, 04/09/2013 - 11/09/2013, .

Confronting conflicts : How urban professionals deal with everyday conflicts in Malmø & Copenhagen. / Agger, Annika.

2013. Afhandling præsenteret på 7th ECPR General Conference, Bordeaux, Frankrig.

Publikation: KonferencebidragPaperForskningpeer review

TY - CONF

T1 - Confronting conflicts

T2 - How urban professionals deal with everyday conflicts in Malmø & Copenhagen

AU - Agger, Annika

PY - 2013

Y1 - 2013

N2 - This paper reports from a comparative study of urban leaders and their handling of everyday conflicts in urban regeneration projects in two cities (Malmø in Sweden and Copenhagen in Denmark). Processes of urban regeneration and have in many ways functioned as laboratories for public authorities in developing community development and participatory practices (Ledwith 2011) and they have a long tradition for working closely with citizens and other local stakeholders in the development of innovative solutions to wicked problems. The everyday service delivery or lack thereof by public institutions and the direct contact between citizens and civil servants are of utmost importance for the citizens’ perceptions of public institutions. With inspiration from Healey (2012) we aim to analyse the contribution of governance micro-practices, drawing on experiences of “democracy-in –action” in the fine grain practices of spatial planning and urban policy in order to answer questions such as: - What dilemmas, challenges and conflicts do public administrators experience in new forms of competing rationalities of governance processes and how do they cope with it?- How do they mediate between different interests in public policy conflicts? And how do they incorporate principles such as fairness, inclusive representation and autonomy?- How do public administrators balance between the demands of public authorities and the needs of multiple stakeholders involved in collaborative governance processes?Based on readings of the theoretical literature on conflict resolution and on the roles of professionals we aim to revisit the theories of Liepsky and the street level bureaucrat in the context of urban network governance. The empirical data derives from field observations and interviews in Copenhagen and Malmø as well as qualitative interviews and workshop sessions held over a period from September 2012 to March 2013 with six urban leaders in Copenhagen

AB - This paper reports from a comparative study of urban leaders and their handling of everyday conflicts in urban regeneration projects in two cities (Malmø in Sweden and Copenhagen in Denmark). Processes of urban regeneration and have in many ways functioned as laboratories for public authorities in developing community development and participatory practices (Ledwith 2011) and they have a long tradition for working closely with citizens and other local stakeholders in the development of innovative solutions to wicked problems. The everyday service delivery or lack thereof by public institutions and the direct contact between citizens and civil servants are of utmost importance for the citizens’ perceptions of public institutions. With inspiration from Healey (2012) we aim to analyse the contribution of governance micro-practices, drawing on experiences of “democracy-in –action” in the fine grain practices of spatial planning and urban policy in order to answer questions such as: - What dilemmas, challenges and conflicts do public administrators experience in new forms of competing rationalities of governance processes and how do they cope with it?- How do they mediate between different interests in public policy conflicts? And how do they incorporate principles such as fairness, inclusive representation and autonomy?- How do public administrators balance between the demands of public authorities and the needs of multiple stakeholders involved in collaborative governance processes?Based on readings of the theoretical literature on conflict resolution and on the roles of professionals we aim to revisit the theories of Liepsky and the street level bureaucrat in the context of urban network governance. The empirical data derives from field observations and interviews in Copenhagen and Malmø as well as qualitative interviews and workshop sessions held over a period from September 2012 to March 2013 with six urban leaders in Copenhagen

M3 - Paper

ER -

Agger A. Confronting conflicts: How urban professionals deal with everyday conflicts in Malmø & Copenhagen. 2013. Afhandling præsenteret på 7th ECPR General Conference, Bordeaux, Frankrig.