Is planning possible in cities divided by violent conflict?

Abstract

This article applies Healey's perspective to explain the political and economic contexts of power, represented in interest alignments/distortions that are woven into the planning discourse of the Nicosia Master Plan. Central to the perspective is that the alignments are negative in nature and have to be removed in order for the parties concerned to arrive at a consensus. In contrast, the Master Plan discourse supports the many critics who affirm that distortions characterise planning practice and the discourse analysis reported in this article goes further by concluding that distortions are not merely seen negatively but rather positively, enabling planning at the local level. Not only does this article seek to lay the foundations for documenting conflicting realities of divided planning practice, but also it reports what the joint plan may tell us about the relationship in planning occurring between 'structure' and 'agency'.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 2 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.