000			02144nab a2200253 4500
003			OSt
005			20220801194909.0
007			cr aa aaaaa
008			220719b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aEizenberg, Efrat _948994
245			_aPatterns of self-organization in the context of urban planning: Reconsidering venues of participation/
260			_bSage, _c2019.
300			_aVol 18, Issue 1, 2019 : (40-57 p.).
520			_aThis article unpacks the relations that exist between the planning institution and urban residents by examining processes of self-organization in planning. Approaching self-organization with the lens of assemblage, the article proposes three categories or patterns of self-organization of different urban actors and portrays how they act in different forms to induce urban change. The three self-organization categories are as follows: (1) self-organization by the disenfranchised for basic rights, (2) self-organization by the ordinary for community interests, and (3) self-organization by the powerful for economic gains. In these different forms of self-organization, power and agency are differentially constituted by the relations between the residents, the planning institution, and the physical space. Moreover, the impacts of these actions on the urban space vary. Nevertheless, there are also some resemblances between groups and actions that are commonly dissociated. Unpacking different manifestations of self-organization in urban planning proposes a more relational interpretation that emphasizes the inextricable and overlapping relations of formal and informal planning and of top-down and bottom-up planning, and surfaces a different understanding of urban power relations.
650			_aactive citizenship, _948995
650			_aassemblage, _948996
650			_aformal planning, _948997
650			_a insurgent planning, _948998
650			_aparticipation, _948999
650			_aself-organization _949000
773	0		_08831 _916470 _dLondon Sage Publications Ltd. 2002 _tPlanning theory _x1473-0952
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/1473095218764225
942			_2ddc _cART
999			_c12387 _d12387