Plans Versus Political Priorities

Albert Tonghoon Han · Lucie Laurian · Jim Dewald

23 citations0/0 files storedJournal of the American Planning Association

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Local Governance and Planning Public Policy and Administration Research Urban Planning and Governance

Abstract

Problem, research strategy, and findings Local elected officials play a leadership role in setting plan directions and can jeopardize implementation if they are not committed to plan goals. In this research, we apply topic modeling, semantic networks, and sentiment analyses to Calgary’s (Canada) plans and candidates’ social media communications in the 2017 Calgary municipal election to assess alignments or divergences between plans’ and candidates’ priorities. Though the mayor, ward representatives, incumbents, and challengers prioritized different topics, we find overall support for transit infrastructure, development, and improving the downtown and the municipal tax base. However, candidates showed little interest in environmental issues, growth management, and regional cooperation, which are important plan goals that may not be addressed. The methodology has limitations: Using social media posts underrepresents the views of some candidates; text data processing may miss metaphorical phrases; elected officials’ priorities during campaigns may not determine their actual votes once in office; and this cross-sectional analysis does not capture the ever-changing relations between officials’ priorities, plan-making, and implementation.Takeaway for practice Candidates focused mainly on transit and taxes to the detriment of regional and environmental issues (energy, watershed, and growth management), revealing the incoming municipal administration’s priorities and its potential blind spots. Planners may use this methodology to analyze large text data from both online and offline sources, understand local implementation barriers, explain shifts in municipal policy directions, and engage elected officials to build support for important plan components.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

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

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 23 citations exist upstream.

References

2020Journal of Universal Computer Science 2010Predicting Elections with Twitter: What 140 Characters Reveal about Political Sentiment 1993Political research quarterly 2019Policy failure and the policy-implementation gap: can policy support programs help?1993Coding Choices for Textual Analysis: A Comparison of Content Analysis and Map Analysis 2017Text Mining with R: A Tidy Approach 2015ETC: A Review of General Semantics 1992Extracting, Representing, and Analyzing Mental Models

Cited by

2023Strategic types, implementation, and capabilities: Sustainability policies of local governments 2024The planning of urban–rural linkages: An automated content analysis of spatial plans adopted by European intermediate cities 2024Planning, Property, and Political Logics of Development Compared 2022Tracking plan implementation using elected officials’ social media communications and votes 2025Evaluating Citizen Participation in Local Public Meetings: Exploring a Large Language Model Approach Using Transcripts from the United States

Explore the map →

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

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.