نوع مقاله : مقاله پژوهشی

نویسندگان

1 دانشجوی دکتری شهرسازی، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه هنر تهران.

2 استاد گروه آموزشی شهرسازی، دانشکده معماری و شهرسازی، دانشگاه هنر تهران

چکیده

تاریخ شهرسازی قرن بیستم، مملو از نظریات و روش‌هایی است که به مفروضات هستی‌شناختی، شناخت‌شناختی و روش‌شناختی پارادایم اثبات‌گرایی (پوزیتیویستی) وابسته هستند؛ در واقع، برنامه‌ریزی شهری پیش از اواخر دهه هفتاد میلادی، میراث تسلط رویکرد عقلائی‌ مدرنیستی دهه 50 و 60 م. است.  در دهه 60 و 70 م.، بروز آثار فلسفۀ ساختارگرایی در نظریه شهرسازی، تا حدودی باعث کاهش اقتدار مدرنیسم و اثبات‌گرایی شد و این سیر تحول، متعاقباً به رواج پساساختارگرایی و اندیشه‌های پسامدرن در نظریه و عمل برنامه‌ریزی شهری انجامید به‌گونه‌ای که پساساختارگرایی، نقطه عطف این چرخش پارادایمی محسوب می‌شود. با گذشت چند دهه از این چرخش پارادایمی، هم‌چنان ابهاماتی درباره اصول و ویژگی‌های این پارادایم در برنامه‌ریزی شهری و زمینه‌های شکل‌گیری آنها وجود دارد. این مقاله با روش بازبینی سیستماتیک منابع و تکیه بر ابزار مطالعۀ تطبیقی و روش اسنادی در جمع‌آوری داده‌ها، ابتدا اصول فکری و فلسفی دو جریان پوزیتویسم و ساختارگرایی و بازتاب آن در برنامه‌ریزی شهری را مورد مطالعه قرار داده و سپس به هدف اصلی پژوهش یعنی تبیین ریشه‌ها و اصول پساساختارگرایی در برنامه‌ریزی شهری پرداخته است. داده‌های مورد نیاز پژوهش با روش اسنادی و  بیش از 130 ماخذ بازبینی شده در حوزه پساساختارگرایی در فلسفه، فیزیک، جغرافیا، برنامه‌ریزی و... به دست آمده است. نتایج این پژوهش نشان‌ می‌دهند که ریشۀ نظری اصلی برنامه‌ریزی پساساختارگرا مبتنی بر "هستی‌شناسیِ شدن" و متافیزیک پویشی است. بر اساس این یافته‌ها، ارتباطی بودن فضا-زمان، درهم‌بافتگی واقعیت‌های شهری و فضایی، کثرت‌گرایی، چندسطحی بودن مسائل شهری (فراباشندگی و درون‌باشندگی همزمان)، و مجادله‌محوری، اصول برنامه‌ریزی شهری پساساختارگرا محسوب می‌شوند. همچنین نمونه‌های عینی برنامه‌ریزی پساساختارگرا، سابقه‌ای نزدیک به دو دهه داشته و تحقق واقعی این پارادایم در عمل برنامه‌ریزی نیازمند تحول اساسی بسترهای رسمی نهادی و سنتی برنامه‌ریزی در سراسر دنیا و نیز گسترش مقیاس و تعداد کنشگران و تنوع پروژه‌های برنامه‌ریزی شهری، در کنار ادامه پژوهش‌های نظری و تضارب آرا در این حوزه است.

کلیدواژه‌ها

عنوان مقاله [English]

The Roots and Principles of Post-structuralism in Urban Planning

نویسندگان [English]

  • Samineh Ansari 1
  • Parvin Partovi 2

1 Ph.D Candidate in Architecture, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tehran Art University, Tehran, Iran

2 Professor, Faculty of Architecture and Urban Planning, Tehran Art University, Tehran, Iran

چکیده [English]

Urban planning of the 20th century is replete with theories and techniques that are associated with ontological, epistemological, and methodological assumptions of positivism; in fact, the urban planning before the last years of the 1970’s is the heritage of the dominant positivist and modernist rationality. In 1960s and 1970s the structuralism’s influence on planning theory decreased the dominance of modernism, and this transformation gradually resulted in a paradigm shift and the prevalence of Post-structuralism and postmodernism in the theory and practice of urban planning. This paper aims to explain the theoreticalroots and the principles of post-structuralism in urban planning. The method of this research is the systematic review of the literature, done by reviewing over 130 related works in fields such as philosophy, physics, geography, etc. We explore the qualities and assumptions of positivism and structuralism in urban planning and explain their affinity for the absolute space and linear time, and for naturalist tradition; as opposed to relational time-space in interpretive tradition. Thispaperproceeds to explore the development of post-structuralism, and its rootedness in process philosophy and process metaphysics. The findings of this research show that the "ontology of becoming" is the primarytheoretical root of post-structuralism in urban planning. We define and explain the five critical principles of post-structuralism in urban planning which include the relational time-space, the complexity of urban and spatial elements, the multiplicity of urban problems (integration of immanent and transcendent planes), pluralism and agonistic planning (agonizing over consensus).

کلیدواژه‌ها [English]

  • Post-structuralism
  • Relational Time-space
  • The Ontology of Becoming
  • Process Philosophy
  • Urban Complexity
  • Pluralism
احمدی، ب. (1370). ساختار و تاویل متن. در نشانه‌شناسی و ساختارگرایی (11–33). تهران: نشر مرکز.
ازکیا، م.، و مختارپور، م. (1391). نقش مکتب ساختارگرایی در شکل گیری تئوریهای توسعه. مجله مطالعات توسعه اجتماعی ایران، 4(3)، 7–24.
اسپینوزا، ب. (1364). اخلاق. ترجمه محسن جهانگیری. تهران: مرکز نشر دانشگاهی‏‫‏‏.
انصاری، ح. (1383). تاثیر آرا و اندیشه های دریدا بر معماری. هنرهای زیبا، (18)، 49–60.
براتی، ن. (1383). جهان بینی کل نگر در برابر رویکرد جزء گرایانه در شهرسازی. ماهنامه علمی پژوهشی باغ نظر، 1(1)، 7–24. برگرفته از http://www.bagh-sj.com/article_1491.html
پارسی‌پور، ح.، و ضیاء‌توانا، م. (1392). پست مدرنیسم و شهر با تاکید بر الگوها و طرح‌های برنامه‌ریزی شهری. پژوهش و برنامه ریزی شهری، 4(13)، 57–76.
پرتوی، پ. (1378). ساختارگرایی در معماری و شهرسازی. هنرنامه، 2(5)، 104–121.
پیری، ع.، روشنایی، ح.، و رضاییان، م. (1393). تبیین الگوی نااقلیدسی در برنامه ریزی شهری. در ششمین کنفرانس ملی برنامه‌ریزی و مدیریت شهری با تأکید بر مؤلفه‌های شهر اسلامی. مشهد، شورای اسلامی شهر مشهد. برگرفته از https://www.civilica.com/Paper-URBANPLANدرG06-URBANPLANدرG06_056.html
تاجیک، م. (1386). پساساختارگرایی و روش. روش شناسی علوم انسانی (حوزه و دانشگاه)، 13(50)، 43–70. برگرفته از http://fa.journals.sid.ir/ViewPaper.aspx?ID=89734
ترنس استیس، و. (1381). فلسفه هگل. ترجمه حمید عنایت. ت‍ه‍ران‌ : ش‍رک‍ت‌ ان‍ت‍ش‍ارات‌ ع‍ل‍م‍ی‌ و ف‍ره‍ن‍گ‍ی‌.
جمالی، ف.، و حیدری چیانه، ر. (1380). بحثی درباره شهرسازی پست مدرن. دانشکده ادبیات و علوم انسانی تبریز، 180181(پاییز و زمستان 1380)، 79–124.
خیر‌الدین،  ‌رضا، و دلایی‌میلان،  ‌ابراهیم. (1395). تحلیل محتوای سطوح چهارگانه روش‌شناسی پژوهش در مطالعات شهرسازی (مورد پژوهی: پایان‌نامه‌های شهرسازی دانشگاه علم و صنعت ایران 1380-1393). روش شناسی علوم انسانی، 89(22)، 107–136. برگرفته از https://www.noormags.ir/view/fa/articlepage/1259417
زرآبادی، ز. س. س. (1390). تحلیل ساختارگرا در نشانه شناسی کالبد شهر. نشریه علمی- پژوهشی انجمن علمی معماری و شهرسازی ایران، (2)، 35–42.
شاقول، ی.، و مرتضوی، س. (1389). دریدا: واسازی، از نقد مابعدالطبیعه غربی تا سیاست. غرب شناسی بنیادی، 1(2)، 97–117.
عسکری،  ‌محسن، و بهزادفر،  ‌مصطفی. (1395). به سوی یک گونه‌شناسی الگو واره‌ای در معماری و شهرسازی. روش شناسی علوم انسانی، 89(22)، 195–228. برگرفته از https://www.noormags.ir/view/fa/articlepage/1259420
قائدی، م.، و گلشنی، ع. (1395). تحلیل محتوا، از کمی گرایی تا کیفی گرایی. روشها و مدلهای روان شناختی، 7(23)، 57–82.
کاپلستون، ف. چ. (1387). تاریخ فلسفه: از فیشته تا نیچه. ترجمه داریوش آشوری. به ویراستاری اسماعیل سعادت. تهران: سروش.
کانت، ا. (1362). سنجش خرد ناب (نقد عقل محض). ترجمه: میر شمس الدین ادیب سلطانی. نشر امیر کبیر.
محمودی نژاد، ه. (1389). مولفه های اساسی در معماری فولدینگ. در دلوز و گاتاری برای معماران مبانی نظری معماری فولدینگ (179–205). تهران: طحان-هله.
مهاجری، ن.، و قمی، ش. (1387). رویکردی تحلیلی بر نظریه های طراحی کریستوفر الکساندر از یادداشت هایی بر ترکیب فرم و زبان الگو تا مفاهیم جدیدی از نظریه پیچیدگی. هویت شهر، 2(2)، 45–56.
مهدیزاده،  ‌جواد. (1385). تحول در پارادایم های شهرسازی. جستارهای شهرسازی، 1516(5)، 6–24. برگرفته از https://www.noormags.ir/view/fa/articlepage/330529
هارلند، ر. (1388). ابرساختگرایی: فلسفه ساختگرایی و پساساختگرایی. ترجمه فرزان سجودی. انتشارات سوره مهر، به سفارش پژوهشگاه فرهنگ و هنر اسلامی
Agger, B. (2014). Critical Theory, Poststructuralism, Postmodernism: Their Sociological Relevance. Annual Review of Sociology, 17(1991), 105–131.
Allen, P. M. (2012). Cities: The Visible Expression of Co-evolving Complexity. In J. Portugali, H. Meyer, E. Stolk, & E. Tan (Eds.), Complexity Theories of Cities Have Come of Age An Overview with Implications to Urban Planning and Design (pp. 67–89). Springer.
Allmendinger, P. (2001). Planning in post modern times. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Allmendinger, P. (2002). Towards a post-positivist typology of planning theory. Planning Theory, 1(1), 77–99. http://doi.org/10.1177/147309520200100105
Allmendinger, P. (2005). The Post-Positivist Landscape of Planning Theory. In P. Allmendinger & M. Tewdwr-jones (Eds.), Planning Futures: New Directions for Planning Theory (pp. 3–17). Routledge. Retrieved from http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&lr=&id=pOWCAgAAQBAJ&pgis=1
Alvesson, M. (1995). The Meaning and Meaninglessness of Postmodernism: Some Ironic Remarks. Organization Studies, 16, 1047–1075. http://doi.org/10.1177/017084069501600606
Amin, A., & Graham, S. (1997). The Ordinary City. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 22(4), 411–429. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.0020-2754.1997.00411.x
Andrew, B. (1993). Schelling and Modern European Philosophy. Routledge, London.
Batty, M. (2012). Building a science of cities. Cities, 29, 1–8. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2011.11.008
Bergson, H. (1992). The creative mind: An introduction to metaphysics. New York: Citadel Press.
Bertalanffy, L. Von. (1968). General systems theory. New York: George Braziller.
Best, S., & Kellner, D. (1991). Postmodern theory: Critical interrogations. Guilford Press.
Boelens, L., & de Roo, G. (2016). Planning of undefined becoming: First encounters of planners beyond the plan. Planning Theory, 15(1), 1–26. http://doi.org/10.1177/1473095214542631
Boelens, L., & Goethals, M. (2016). Planning tactics of undefined becoming. In Y. Rydin & L. Tate (Eds.), Actor Networks of Planning: Exploring the Influence of Actor Network Theory. Routledge.
Boelens, L., & Roo, G. de. (2014). Planning of undefined becoming: First encounters of planners beyond the plan. Planning Theory, 1473095214542631. http://doi.org/10.1177/1473095214542631
Boonstra, B. (2016). Mapping trajectories of becoming: four forms of behaviour in co-housing initiatives. Town Planning Review, 87(3), 275–296. http://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2016.20
Brand, R., & Gaffikin, F. (2007). Collaborative Planning in an Uncollaborative World. Planning Theory, 6(3), 282–313. http://doi.org/10.1177/1473095207082036
Brenner, N., Madden, D. J., & Wachsmuth, D. (2011). Assemblage urbanism and the challenges of critical urban theory. City, 15(2), 225–240. http://doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2011.568717
Castells, M. (2009). Communication Power. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Chadwick, G. (1971). A systems view of planning: Towards a theory of the urban and regional planning process. Oxford: Pergamon.
Chia, R. (1999). A ‘Rhizomic’ Model of Organizational Change and Transformation: Perspective from a Metaphysics of Change. British Journal of Management, 10(1999), 209–227. http://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8551.00128
Chia, R. (2009). Organization Theory as a Postmodern Science. The Oxford Handbook of Organization Theory. http://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199275250.003.0005
Davidoff, P. (1965). ADVOCACY AND PLURALISM IN PLANNING. Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 31(4), 331–338. http://doi.org/10.1080/01944366508978187
Davoudi, S., & Strange, I. (2009). SPACE AND PLACE IN TWENTIETH-CENTURY PLANNING An analytical framework and an historical review. In Conceptions of Space and Place in Strategic Spatial Planning (pp. 7–43). Taylor & Francis Routledge.
de Jong, B. (2012). The airport assembled: Rethinking planning and policy making of Amsterdam Airport Schiphol by using the Actor-Network theory. Delft: Eburon Academic Publishers. Retrieved from https://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/257977
De Landa, M. (2010). Deleuze: History and Science. New York: Atropos.
De Roo, G. (2010). Being or Becoming? That is the Question! Confronting Complexity with Contemporary Planning Theory. In G. De Roo & E. A. Silva (Eds.), A Planner’s Encounter with Complexity. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
De Roo, G., Hillier, J., & Wezemael, J. Van. (2012). Complexity and Planning Systems, Assemblages and Simulations. Ashgate. http://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
De Roo, G., & Rauws, W. S. (2012). Positioning Planning in the World of Order, Chaos and Complexity: On Perspectives, Behaviour and Interventions in a Non-linear Environment. In J. Portugali, H. Meyer, E. Stolk, & E. Tan (Eds.), Complexity Theories of Cities Have Come of Age An Overview with Implications to Urban Planning and Design. Springer.
De Roo, G., & Silva, E. A. (Eds.). (2010). A Planner’s Encounter with Complexity. Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
Delanda, M. (2006). A new philosophy of society: Assemblage theory and social complexity. CONTINUUM.
DeLanda, M. (2002). Intensive science and virtual philosophy. CONTINUUM.
Deleuze, G. (1988). Nouveau Millénaire. Défis littéraire, n. 257. Retrieved September 29, 2006, from http://www.france-mail-forum.de/index2b.html#Deleuze
Deleuze, G. (1997). Difference and repetition. (P. Patton, Trans.). CONTINUUM.
Deleuze, G. (2001). The Logic of Sense. (C. V. Boundas., Ed., M. Lester & C. Stivale, Trans.). London: Continuum.
Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateaus: Capitalism and schizophrenia. (B. Massumi, Trans.) (2005th ed.). Minneapolis London: University of Minnesota Press.
Derrida, J. (1981). Positions. (A. Bass, Trans.). The University of Chicago Press.
Dovey, K. (2010). Becoming Places: Urbanism/Architecture/Identity/Power. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.
Dovey, K. (2013). Assembling Architecture. In H. Frichot & S. Loo (Eds.), Deleuze and Architecture (pp. 131–148). Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Dovey, K., & Pafka, E. (2013). The urban density assemblage: Modelling multiple measures. URBAN DESIGN International, 19(1), 66–76. http://doi.org/10.1057/udi.2013.13
Emberley, P. (1989). Places and stories: the challenge of technology. Social Research, 56(3), 741–785.
Fainstein, N. I., & Fainstein, S. S. (1979). New debates in urban planning. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 3(1–4), 381–403.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2000). Ideal Theory , Real Rationality : Habermas Versus Foucault and Nietzsche. In the Political Studies Association’s 50th Annual Conference, The Challenges for Democracy in the 21st Century (pp. 1–20). London School of Economics and Political Science.
Flyvbjerg, B., & Richardson, T. (2002). Planning and Foucault: In Search of the Dark Side of Planning Theory. Planning Futures: New Directions for Planning Theory, 1–28. http://doi.org/10.1177/1473095208090432
Foucault, M. (1970). The Order of Things: An Archaeology of the Human Sciences. New York: Random House.
Friedmann, J. (1993). Toward a Non-Euclidian Mode of Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, 59(4), 482–485. http://doi.org/10.1080/01944369308975902
Gare, A. (2002). The roots of postmodernism: Schelling, process philosophy and poststructuralism. In C. Keller & A. Daniell (Eds.), Process and Difference: Between Cosmological and Poststructuralist Postmodernisms (pp. 31–53). New York, NY: SUNY Press: State University of New York.
Gibson Jr., R. F. (1987). Quine on naturalism and epistemology. Erkenntnis, 27(5), 57–78.
Graham, S., & Healey, P. (1999). Relational concepts of space and place : Issues for planning theory and practice. European Planning Studies, 7(5), 623–646. http://doi.org/10.1080/09654319908720542
Gunder, M. (2003). Passionate planning for the others’ desire: An agonistic response to the dark side of planning. Progress in Planning, 60(3), 147–234. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0305-9006(02)00115-0
Gunder, M., & Hillier, J. (2004). Conforming to the expectations of the profession: a Lacanian perspective on planning practice, norms and values. Planning Theory & Practice, 5(2), 217–235. http://doi.org/10.1080/14649350410001691763
Hall, P. (2014). CITIES OF TOMORROW: An Intellectual History of Urban Planning and Design Since 1880, Fourth Edition (4th ed.). Wiley-Blackwell.
Harvey, D. (1973). Social justice and the city. Johns Hopkins University Press.
Harvey, D. (1996). Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference. Blackwell Publishers Inc.
Harvey, D. (2005). Space as a Keyword. In Spaces of neoliberalization: towards a theory of uneven geographical development. Franz Steiner Verlag.
Healey, P. (2001). Planning theory: interaction with institutional contexts. In Encyclopaedia of the Social and Behavioural Sciences (pp. 11485–11491). Elsevier. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/B0080430767044326
Healey, P. (2002). Planning in relational space and time: Responding to new urban realities. In G. Bridge & S. Watson (Eds.), A Companion to the City (pp. 517–530). Oxford, UK: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
Healey, P. (2003). Creativity and Governance. In Local Planning and Change, Nordic Symposium, Lillehammer.
Healey, P. (2004). The treatment of space and place in the new strategic spatial planning in Europe. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(1), 45–67.
Healey, P. (2006). Relational complexity and the imaginative power of strategic spatial planning. European Planning Studies, 14(4), 525–546. http://doi.org/10.1080/09654310500421196
Healey, P. (2007). Urban Complexity and Spatial Strategies: Towards a Relational Planning for Our Times. Routledge. http://doi.org/10.1080/01944360701755584
Hillier, J. (2003). `Agon’izing Over Consensus: Why Habermasian Ideals cannot be `Real’. Planning Theory, 2(1), 37–59. http://doi.org/10.1177/1473095203002001005
Hillier, J. (2005). Straddling the Post-Structuralist Abyss: Between Transcendence and Immanence? Planning Theory, 4(3), 271–299. http://doi.org/10.1177/1473095205058497
Hillier, J. (2010). Post-structural Complexity: Strategic Navigation in an Ocean of Theory and Practice. In Making Strategies in Spatial Planning (pp. 87–97). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. http://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3106-8_6
Hillier, J. (2011a). Encountering Gilles Deleuze in another place. European Planning Studies, 19(5), 861–885. http://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2011.561041
Hillier, J. (2011b). Strategic navigation across multiple planes: Towards a Deleuzean-inspired methodology for strategic spatial planning. Town Planning Review, 82(5), 503–527. http://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2011.30
Hollis, M. (1994). The Philosophy of Social Science: An Introduction. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. Retrieved from http://mudrac.ffzg.hr/~dpolsek/hollis.pdf
Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2010). Planning with Complexity: An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy. Routledge.
Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2015). A turning point for planning theory? Overcoming dividing discourses. Planning Theory, 14(2), 195–213. http://doi.org/10.1177/1473095213519356
Jones, M. (2009). Phase Space: Geography, Relational Thinking, and Beyond. Progress in Human Geography, 33(4), 487–506. http://doi.org/10.1177/0309132508101599
Karadimitriou, N., Doak, J., & Cidre, E. (2010). Rethinking Brownfields: Discourses, Networks and Space-Time. In G. de Roo & E. A. Silva (Eds.), A Planner’s Encounter with Complexity (pp. 263–283). Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
Kauffman, S. (1995). At Home in the Universe. New York: Oxford University Press.
Kim, C.-T. (1987). Transcendence and immanence. Journal of the American Academy of Religion, 55(3), 537–552. http://doi.org/10.1093/jaarel/LV.3.537
Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space. (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Basil Blackwell.
Lévi-Strauss, C. (1979). Myth and Meaning. Routledge classics (Vol. 1977). New York: Schocken Books. Retrieved from http://www.amazon.com/Myth-Meaning-Routledge-Classics-L?vi-Strauss/dp/0415253942
Littell, J. H., Corcoran, J., & Pillai, V. (2008). Systematic Review and Meta- Analysis. Pocket Guides To Social Work Research Methods. Oxford.
Lüchinger, A. (1981). Structuralism in architecture and urban planning. Bern, Germany: Eyrolles.
MacLoughlin, J. B. (1969). Urban and and Regional Regional Government Planning: A Systems Approach. London: Faber & Faber.
Madanipour, A. (1996). Urban design and dilemmas of space. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 14(3), 331–355. http://doi.org/10.1068/d140331
Madanipour, A. (2013). Researching Space, Transgressing Epistemic Boundaries. International Planning Studies, 18(3–4), 372–388. http://doi.org/10.1080/13563475.2013.833730
Malins, P. (2004). Body-space assemblages and folds: theorizing the relationship between injecting drug user bodies and urban space. Continuum, 18(4), 483–495. http://doi.org/10.1080/1030431042000297617
Manson, S. M. (2001). simplifying complexity: Areview of complexity theory. Geoforum, 32, 405–414. http://doi.org/10.1016/S0016-7185(00)00035-X
Marshall, S. (2012). Planning, Design and the Complexity of Cities. In J. Portugali, H. Meyer, E. Stolk, & E. Tan (Eds.), Complexity Theories of Cities Have Come of Age An Overview with Implications to Urban Planning and Design (pp. 191–205). Springer.
Massey, D. (1993). Power-geometry and a progressive sense of place. In J. Bird, B. Curtis, T. Putnam, & L. Tickner (Eds.), Mapping the Futures: Local Cultures, Global Change (pp. 60–70). Routledge.
McFarlane, C. (2011a). Assemblage and critical urbanism. City. http://doi.org/10.1080/13604813.2011.568715
McFarlane, C. (2011b). The city as assemblage: dwelling and urban space. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 29(4), 649–671. http://doi.org/10.1068/d4710
Meyerhoff, J. (2010). Bald ambition: a critique of Ken Wilber’s theory of everything. Retrieved from http://www.integralworld.net/meyerhoff-ba-7.html
Miles, M. (1997). Another Hero? Public Art and the Gendered City. Parallax, 3(2), 125–135. http://doi.org/10.1080/13534645.1997.9522393
Murdoch, J. (2006). Post-structuralist geography: a guide to relational space. Sage.
Naturalism. (2016). In Oxford English Dictionary Online. Retrieved from http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/125337?redirectedFrom=naturalism
Nayak, A., & Chia, R. (2011). Thinking becoming and emergence: process philosophy and organization studies. In Philosophy and Organization Theory (Research in the Sociology of Organizations, Volume 32) (Vol. 32, pp. 281–309). Emerald. http://doi.org/10.1108/S0733-558X(2011)0000032012
Neumann, I., & Deppisch, S. (2018). Prospective scenario planning in collaborative transdisciplinary research. In Transdisciplinary Research and Sustainability (pp. 241–266). ROUTLEDGE in association with GSE Research. http://doi.org/10.9774/GLEAF.9781315441481_13
Nyseth, T. (2012). Fluid Planning: A Meaningless Concept or a Rational Response to Uncertainty in Urban Planning? In J. Burian (Ed.), Advances in Spatial Planning (pp. 27–46). InTech. http://doi.org/10.5772/2123
Nyseth, T., & Holm, T. (2010). Planning beyond the horizon: the Tromse experiment. Planning Theory, 9(3), 223–247. http://doi.org/10.1177/1473095210366196
Overton, W. F., & Ennis, M. D. (2006). Relationism, ontology, and other concerns. Human Development, 49(3), 180–183. http://doi.org/10.1159/000091895
 Ownby, R. L., Crocco, E., Acevedo, A., John, V., & Loewenstein, D. (2015). Depression and Risk for Alzheimer Disease Systematic Review, Meta-analysis, and Metaregression Analysis. ARCH GEN PSYCHIATRY, 63(May 2006).
Portugali, J. (2012a). Complexity Theories of Cities: Achievements, Criticism and Potentials. In J. Portugali, H. Meyer, E. Stolk, & E. Tan (Eds.), Complexity Theories of Cities Have Come of Age An Overview with Implications to Urban Planning and Design (pp. 47–67). Springer.
Portugali, J. (2012b). Complexity Theories of Cities: Implications to Urban Planning. In J. Portugali, H. Meyer, E. Stolk, & E. Tan (Eds.), Complexity Theories of Cities Have Come of Age An Overview with Implications to Urban Planning and Design. Springer.
Portugali, J., Meyer, H., Stolk, E., & Tan, E. (Eds.). (2012). Complexity Theories of Cities Have Come of Age An Overview with Implications to Urban Planning and Design. Springer. http://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Purcell, M. (2013). A new land: Deleuze and Guattari and planning. Planning Theory & Practice, 14(1), 20–38. http://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2012.761279
Quine, W. V. O. (1951). Main Trends in Recent Philosophy: Two Dogmas of Empiricism. The Philosophical Review, 60(1), 20. http://doi.org/10.2307/2181906
Quine, W. V. O. (1981). Theories and things. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Rescher, N. (1996). Process Metaphysics: An Introduction to Process Philosophy. SUNY Press.
Sánchez-Fernández, R., & Iniesta-Bonillo, M. Á. (2007). The concept of perceived value: A systematic review of the research. Marketing Theory, 7(4), 427–451. http://doi.org/10.1177/1470593107083165
Schelling, F. W. J. (2000). Werke (Vol. 1). Frommann-Holzboog.
Scott, A. J., & Roweis, S. T. (1977). Urban Planning in Theory and Practice: A Reappraisal. Environment and Planning A, 9(10), 1097–1119. http://doi.org/10.1068/a091097
Scruton, R. (2012). Modern philosophy: An introduction and survey. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Scheele, R., Kearney, N. M., Kurniawan, J. H., & Schweizer, V. J. (2018). What Scenarios Are You Missing? Poststructuralism for Deconstructing and Reconstructing Organizational Futures. In H. Krämer & M. Wenzel (Eds.), How Organizations Manage the Future. (pp. 153–172). Palgrave Macmillan. http://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-74506-0_8
Searle, G. (2013). ‘Relational’ Planning and Recent Sydney Metropolitan and City Strategies. Urban Policy and Research, 31(3), 367–378. http://doi.org/10.1080/08111146.2013.826579
Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three Approaches to Qualitative Content Analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288. http://doi.org/10.1177/1049732305276687
Shields, R. (1995). A guide to urban representations and what to do about it: alternative traditions in urban theory. In A. D. King (Ed.), Re-presenting the city: Ethnicity, capital, and culture in the twenty-first-century metropolis (p. 227—252). London: Macmillan.
Silva, E. A. (2010). Complexity and Cellular Automaton: Exploring its Practical Application. In G. de Roo & E. A. Silva (Eds.), A Planner’s Encounter with Complexity (pp. 187–207). Farnham: Ashgate Publishing Limited.
Smith, P. (2001). Cultural Theory: An Introduction. Blackwell.
Sober, E. (2013). EMPIRICISM. In M. Curd & S. Psillos (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Philosophy of Science, Second Edition (2nd ed., pp. 160–169). London: Routledge.
Taylor, N. (1998). Urban planning theory since 1945. Sage.
Van den Berghe, K., Jacobs, W., & Boelens, L. (2018). The relational geometry of the port-city interface: Case studies of Amsterdam, the Netherlands, and Ghent, Belgium. Journal of Transport Geography, 70(May), 55–63. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jtrangeo.2018.05.013
Verbeek, T., & Boelens, L. (2016). Environmental health in the complex city: a co-evolutionary approach. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 59(11), 1913–1932. http://doi.org/10.1080/09640568.2015.1127800
Watson, L., & Fox, R. (2018). Adopting a participatory methodology and post ‐ structural epistemology : Reflections on a research project with young people. Journal of Community & Applied Social Psychology, 1–12. http://doi.org/doi.org/10.1002/casp.2380
Webber, M. (1964). The urban place and the non-place urban realm. In M. WEBBER, J. DYCKMAN, D. FoLEY, A. GUTTENBERG, W. WHEATON, & C. WHURSTER (Eds.), Explorations into urban structure (pp. 79–153). Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
Webber, M. M. (1969). Planning in an Environment of Change Part II: Permissive Planning. Town Planning Review, 39(4), 277. http://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.39.4.c058xp738v338600
Whitehead, A. N. (1926). Science and the Modern World. Cambridge University Press.
Whitehead, A. N. (1968). Modes of thought (Vol. 93521). Simon and Schuster.
Whitehead, A. N. (1978). Process and reality. (D. R. GRIFFIN & D. W. SHERBURNE, Eds.). The Free Press. A Division of Macmillan Publishing Co., Inc.
Wood, S. (2009). Desiring Docklands: Deleuze and Urban Planning Discourse. Planning Theory, 8(2), 191–216. http://doi.org/10.1177/1473095209102234
Zych, I., Ortega-Ruiz, R., & Del Rey, R. (2015). Systematic review of theoretical studies on bullying and cyberbullying: Facts, knowledge, prevention, and intervention. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 23, 1–21. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2015.10.001