Building illusory unity with Ernesto Laclau - Why 'closure' should not be a dirty word in planning theory

Loading...
Thumbnail Image

Access rights

openAccess
CC BY
publishedVersion

URL

Journal Title

Journal ISSN

Volume Title

A1 Alkuperäisartikkeli tieteellisessä aikakauslehdessä

Major/Subject

Mcode

Degree programme

Language

en

Pages

22

Series

Planning Theory, Volume 24, issue 4, pp. 370-391

Abstract

Critically oriented planning theories aim for emancipation and systemic change. This paper explores the challenges of communicative and agonistic approaches in achieving this goal, arguing that difficulties arise when these theories are applied at inappropriate operational levels. By examining these approaches in terms of opening and closing political space – crucial for initiating and securing systemic change – it highlights the risks of overemphasizing disagreement and opening-up, which can hinder reflexive decision-making in planning and ultimately systemic change. Drawing on Ernesto Laclau and Chantal Mouffe’s hegemony theory and Laclau’s populism theory, the paper proposes a framework that balances opening and closing by fostering a unity and collective will that facilitates decision-making while pursuing systemic change. This unity, while necessary, is ultimately illusory in nature; a tool for temporarily stabilizing new hegemonic orders when navigating the field of planning marked by difference and disagreement.

Description

Other note

Citation

Hirvola, A 2025, 'Building illusory unity with Ernesto Laclau - Why 'closure' should not be a dirty word in planning theory', Planning Theory, vol. 24, no. 4, 14730952251343701, pp. 370-391. https://doi.org/10.1177/14730952251343701