MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7071457777

A Speculative Exploration into the Current Planning Paradigm through Academic Planner Perspectives

2023· dissertation· en· W7071457777 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2023
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViewpointsParadigm shiftValue (mathematics)Scenario planningPlannerCraftArgument (complex analysis)Balance (ability)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis centres on research aimed at understanding the essence of the current planning paradigm, identifying the factors that facilitate or hinder paradigm shifts, and determining the prevailing paradigm that governs contemporary scholarly pursuits within planning in an academic setting. This is achieved through an approach based on findings from interviews with planning academics. \n \nThe first objective, vital to this thesis, scrutinizes whether the prevailing planning paradigm represents a novel trend, a continuation of previous paradigms, or perhaps a synergy of both. It seeks to unveil the core attributes of the existing paradigm and questions if we are operating within the thresholds of an unrecognized new approach in planning. Furthermore, recognizing the critical role of the factors that influence paradigm shifts stands as a focal point in this thesis. The research aspires to elucidate the circumstances and elements that either catalyze or restrain potential shifts in planning paradigms. It delves into understanding the intellectual environment surrounding these shifts, accentuating the critical role played by prevailing perspectives on truth and discourse. \n \nThe intellectual landscape is bifurcated into two dominant paradigms: the traditional liberal paradigm, founded on the philosophies of stalwarts such as Descartes, Locke, and Mill, and the critical social theoretical paradigm, deeply influenced by diverse viewpoints including postmodernists, feminists, postcolonial theorists, and critical race theorists. This study navigates the delicate balance between these paradigms, dissecting their roles in fostering or hindering open discourse and critical examination. \n \nBy spotlighting the intrinsic value each paradigm brings to the table and the challenges they pose, the research endeavors to craft a roadmap for a more balanced intellectual environment. It underscores the necessity for fostering open dialogue, critical evaluation, and respect for varying cultural contexts, thus nurturing an environment conducive to progressive shifts aligned \nwith societal transitions, equity, and social progress. This is important as paradigm shifts have been largely corrective in nature and frequent shifts help keep planning up to date with rapidly changing societal reality. \n \nLastly, the thesis is invested in determining the prevailing paradigm of truth within this academic sphere. It seeks to delineate the predominant assumptions, methodologies, and values that characterize this discipline. This involves an analysis of the frameworks adopted by scholars and researchers in their relentless pursuit of truth and knowledge creation, paving the way for a richer and more nuanced academic dialogue in planning theory. Regarding methodology, this study adopts a pragmatic approach to scrutinize evolving paradigms in the planning field, primarily utilizing Thomas's general inductive approach for \nqualitative analysis to identify trends within data collected from interviews. This methodology facilitates the transformation of extensive interview data into concise summaries, directly aligning findings with the research objectives and fostering the formulation of insightful theories. \n \nInterviews with planning academics from various Ontario institutions were conducted despite the hurdles presented by the Covid-19 pandemic. This process, albeit impacted by the pandemic, yielded rich insights from 11 academic planning experts. \nThe interview questionnaire was crafted to delve into current trends, barriers to paradigm shifts, and the prerequisites for facilitating change in the planning field's approaches. It also probed the participants' perceptions of "truth" and the significance of viewpoint diversity in strengthening the discipline's knowledge base. \n \nThis thesis is a preliminary exploration into current trends and has several weaknesses. Since an inductive approach was used to analyze data, the presence of larger trends is assumed based on interviewee opinions. Several diverse data sources should have been used to bolster the veracity of these identified trends. Due to time and monetary constraints, this thesis focused \nsolely on interviewing planning professors. Other potential data sources could have included students, administrative staff, planners within the private sector, planners within the public sector, and recent studies published by academic planning institutions, among others. This could be a focus for future research. Only Ontario institutions were considered as the original \nintent was to conduct interviews face to face and driving distances were considered, as such other planning institutions outside of Ontario were excluded from the study. Another weakness is that only 11 experts were interviewed, increasing this sample size would improve confidence in the veracity of the claims made within this thesis. Due to all of these limitations, the conclusions of this thesis should be considered weakly justified, and additional research will be required in the future to verify the accuracy of the claims made. \n \nThis study provides a dive into the shifting currents of academic planning, uncovering a distinct move towards a social justice paradigm. Emphasizing equity, diversity, and inclusivity, the research underscores the planning profession's expansion beyond mere technical urban design into the realm of balancing economic, environmental, and social imperatives. The dialogues captured shed light on the profession's adaptability, revealing its commitment to creating communities that mirror the diverse needs and contributions of their members. A major finding is the notable convergence towards a critical social justice perspective, which values interpretive truths and has a heightened awareness of power dynamics. However, the journey towards this shift is intricate, with potential differences in its application and understanding, indicating the need for continuous reflection and examination. The transition from traditional liberal paradigms to a more context-dependent, power-conscious paradigm poses both opportunities and challenges. The research suggests that while this shift promises a more inclusive urban planning outlook, it may also face challenges, including potential epistemic closure and possible conflicts due to diverse interpretations. \nIn essence, the findings spotlight the evolving landscape of academic planning, highlighting the rise of a social justice paradigm and the complexities accompanying such a paradigm shift. The research concludes with a call for persistent discourse, exploration, and critical assessment to ensure a balanced, sustainable, and inclusive urban future.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.191

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0110.049
Scholarly communication0.0210.023
Open science0.0040.009
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.224 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)→Same topicAtmospheric and Environmental Gas Dynamics→French-language works237,207→