Disciplinary Disconnects: Urban Planning’s Neglect of Nonrepresentational Thinking

Abstract

Problem, research strategy, and findings Despite direct calls to engage with nonrepresentational thinking (NRT) for urban planning analyses, the field has largely remained disconnected from it, unlike human geography, where NRT has gained substantial traction. This research probed into the potentials of NRT for urban planning and the puzzle of its limited presence. To assess its relevance, I conducted a literature search of leading urban planning journals, identifying and reviewing articles that explicitly engaged with NRT. In addition, I conducted 13 in-depth interviews with editors of urban planning and human geography journals. These interviews revealed five interrelated explanations for the disciplinary gap, offering nuanced insights into the evolution of urban planning, its objectives, and its scholarly dynamics. Building on these findings, I propose that the concept of disciplinary legitimacy—urban planning’s dual imperative to produce knowledge that informs planning practice and planning education—offers a critical complementary explanation for the field’s relative disconnect from NRT. Limited by its scope, the study did not provide empirical evidence for the usage of NRT in planning pedagogy.Takeaway for practice Urban planning’s disciplinary legitimacy rests on its dual imperative to generate knowledge that informs planning practice and education. NRT offers planners conceptual and practical tools to better navigate uncertainties and socio-spatial complexities in present-day cities, enriching planning education and practice.

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.