This project deals with planning of a modern city life. Planning has its roots in practice and therefore has to be put into a context, this project will be based on a case to illustrate planning as phenomenon. The projects case covers the conflict over the former “Ungdomshus” at Jagtvej 69. The project’ focus both on the period where the municipality was a responsible administrator, taking the decision about selling the property and dealing with the conflict concerning the users of the house on Jagtvej 69. This case illustrates the conflict by focusing respectively on the municipally of Copenhagen and the users of the “Ungdomshus” as the most important stakeholders. This project analyses the conflict of planning with a Habermasian perspective, meaning that the focus is on the dialog and the Habermas ideal picture about communicative action as a scale for ideal planning- and decision-making. Habermas’ vision is also expressed through the project’ view of former descript stakeholders. The project argues that Habermas thesis system life-world can help describing the difference between the stakeholders. The issue mention above is addressed in the following problem statement: “Why could the citizen representation of the City of Copenhagen and the users of the “Ungdomshus” not achieve a consensus about the future of the house and could the conflict have been solved through a communicative planning?” To answer this problem the project will be using different kinds of methods. First part of the analysis involves an analysis based on documents. The documents source is from Copenhagen’s municipality and deals with “Ungdomshuset” in the period of 1981-2000. The first analysis has the purpose to illustrate the extent to which the municipality of Copenhagen has used collaborative planning. The collaborative planning ideal has its origin in the city planner Patsy Healey. She sees planning from the perspective of Habermas, the same perspective as the project is illustrated. Second part of the analysis is also based on documents from the municipality of Copenhagen. The document analysis is based on meeting reports from the citizen representation in the period 2007-2008. The second analysis has the purpose to study which rationales are applied in the meetings, and provided an assessment of whether the members of the municipally have been using the communicative rationality. The rationality terms, which are used in the second part of analysis, is based on sociologist Jürgen Habermas terminology. The third analysis involves an analysis based on two interviews performed by the group. The two interviews are with former users’ of the “Ungdomshuset” at Jagtvej 69. The analysis focus on common values of the house and the users way of acting. The third analysis is based on sociologist Pierre Bourdieu terms of social fields. Fourth and last part of the analysis is also conducted on the two interviews. The fourth analysis explores the users of the “Ungdomshus” through Pasty Healeys term stakeholders and has the purpose to describe how the users acted from a collaborative planning point of view. The following discussion is based on conclusions of all four analyses to answer the problem statement. The conclusion of the project argues that, the municipality of Copenhagen have not used collaborative planning, because the users of the “Ungdomshus” not sufficiently has been included in the planning. Furthermore the project argues that the planning for the “Ungdomshus” stops when the municipality of Copenhagen sold the house at Jagtvej 69. It highlights the role of the municipality in the process after selling the house, the situation shifts from planning to conflict management. It is evaluated that the municipality’s rationale, in the conflict has been affected by substantive rationality. Furthermore is it assessed that the consequence of poor integration of the users of the “Ungdomshus”, led to the users use of violent demonstrations as a way to communicate. Based on the following conclusion is that both stakeholders have not lived up to a communicative ideal, because both parties would not compromise with their values.
|Uddannelser||Basis - Samfundsvidenskabelig Bacheloruddannelse, (Bachelor uddannelse) Basis|
|Udgivelsesdato||2 jun. 2014|