Sustainability, Space and Social Justice: The 2008 UK-Ireland Planning Research Conference
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The Planning Research Conference is an annual event, providing a platform for academics from planning and related disciplines to discuss the most recent developments in the field. The 2008 UK-Ireland conference was hosted at Queen's University, Belfast from 18 to 20 March by the School of Planning, Architecture and Civil Engineering. The conference theme The 2008 conference was themed around the spatial dimension of sustainability and social justice.1 This theme addresses a number of pressing contemporary concerns to planning practice and research. The first element of the overall theme, 'sustainability', is seen by many as the current raison d'etre of planning (e.g. Gunder, 2006), encompassing the major challenges of ensuring the built environment both mitigates and adapts to climate change and a range of other issues related to resource depletion, the most pressing of which is the oncoming crisis of peak oil and the transformation of carbon-dependent economies that this entails. These challenges have become well known, with the appropriate responses still being disputed and debated. The second element of the conference theme, 'space' focuses on the specific realm of competence of planning, which emphasises the spatial impacts and responses to sustainable development, such as settlement form, the coordination of transport and land use, etc. The final element of the conference theme relates to 'social justice', as a constitutive part of the sustainability paradigm, recognising that resolution of questions of injustice are central to the development of stable, sustainable societies. The very concept of social justice remains, however, a contested one, operating in this context at a variety of scales (local, regional, global) and imbued with a number of specific meanings (e.g. environmental or spatial notions of justice). Each of these elements combine to produce a specific nexus to which planning offers the key response - the nature and scope of such a response is, of course, still subject to much debate to which many of the conference papers offered a useful contribution. Over the three days of the conference more than 130 papers were presented in a variety of plenary and themed track sessions by researchers from 20 different countries. With nearly 250 delegates, the 2008 conference was the largest and most international of its kind ever held. Indeed, while it has traditionally been dominated by UK planning researchers, the conference has increasingly reflected the growing internationalisation of the academic world, so that this year only 60 per cent of papers were delivered by academics at UK institutions, who were joined by delegates from the US, Canada, Brazil, China, Australia, Japan, north and southern Africa, the Middle East, and a number of European universities. Plenary sessions and keynote addresses The conference was structured around four plenary sessions at which a number of high-profile international speakers had been invited to address different aspects of the themes of space, sustainability and social justice. Jonathon Porritt, Chair of the UK Sustainable Development Commission, was in particularly fine form when he addressed the conference on the theme of 'Using science responsibly', which is one of the key principles of the UK Sustainable Development Strategy. Calling for urgent action by politicians, and the experts that advise them, he noted the duty on academics, particularly those working in the field of planning, to highlight the consequences of not making climate change the top government priority and underlined the opportunities for positive interventions using the system for regulating land use to help deliver a more sustainable society. Professor Susan Owens of Cambridge University also emphasised the responsibilities falling to the planning system, emphasising the theme of justice within the sustainable development paradigm. Drawing on her published work (Owens, 2002; Owens and Cowell, 2002; Cowell and Owens, 2006) and her experience as a member of the Royal Commission For Environmental Pollution, she explored the nature of democracy within the planning process, highlighting the opportunities for 'subversive' debates provided at public inquires into strategic developments, such as those into super-quarries and major infrastructure development. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,017 | 0,014 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,009 |
| Communication savante | 0,019 | 0,009 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,016 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,009 | 0,015 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,023 | 0,006 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».