Abstract
Due to a controversial historical and political background and the prolonged socioeconomic crisis, the culture of collaboration and dialogue is not cultivated at any governance level in Greece. On the contrary, the conventional self-financed real-estate development model is deeply rooted within Greek society—planning regulation supports greenfield development instead of implementing urban renewal or compact-city policies. As a result, Greek cities are affected by sprawl and, often, illegitimate development tendencies. In order to effectively cope with such urban problems, there is an idea of introducing a communicative rationality approach—a tool towards promoting a resilient governance system. However, since collaborative dialogue, networks and trustful relationships among the relevant players build the core of communicative rationality, it is rather challenging to implement an approach in Greece such as a fuzzy-governance context. The paper revolves around two main questions: How can tailor-made initiatives transcend the current sociopolitical obstacles in Greece and contribute to resilient spatial development? How could the country absorb the social, political and intellectual capital in practice that is produced by collaborative initiatives? The central part of the research is the case study presenting the informal planning method (called the Test Planning Process), applied for the first time in the Greek planning context in the city of Patras. Elucidating the role of various actors involved in the process, the paper shows how collaboration in consecutive steps, based on expertise and impartial participation, may reverse irrational decisions, thus promoting the gradual development of an informal approach to spatial planning.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
According to the classification by Newman and Thornley (1996), there are five legal and administrative families in Europe: British, Napoleonic, Germanic, Scandinavian and East European.
- 2.
The ERGOSE undertakes the management of OSE’s Investment Program projects and in particular those co-funded by the EU Programs. The ERGOSE’s tasks include planning, development, support, management, design, supervision, and construction of all types of projects for third parties in Greece and abroad, as well as land acquisition for the state or other public bodies.
- 3.
A publication on the results of the Joint Seminar Week 2017 will follow in autumn 2018.
- 4.
A more detailed and complete overview of the recommendations can be found at www.codepatras.ethz.ch.
References
Davoudi, S., & Strange, I. (2009). Conceptions of space and place in strategic spatial planning. Abingdon, Oxon, GBR: Routledge.
EC (European Commission). (2011). TEN-T Core network including core network corridors. Brussels: European Commission.
Forester, J. (1989). Planning in the face of power. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Forester, J. (1999). The deliberative practitioner: Encouraging participatory planning processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Getimis, P., & Giannakourou, G. (2014). The evolution of spatial planning in Greece after the 1990s: drivers, directions and agents of change. In M. Reimer, P. Getimis, & H. H. Blotevogel (Eds.), Spatial planning systems and practices in Europe (pp. 149–168). New York: Routledge.
Giannakourou, G. (2011). Europeanization, Actor constellations and Spatial Policy in Greece. disP—The Planning Review, 47, 32–41.
Habermas, J. (1984). The theory of communicative—Volume 1: Action, reason and the rationalization of society. Boston: Beacon Press.
Healey, P. (1992). An institutional model of the development process. Journal of Property Research, 9, 33–44.
Healey, P. (1995). The institutional challenge for sustainable urban regeneration. Cities, 12, 221–230.
Healey, P. (1997). Collaborative planning—shaping places in fragmented societies. London: MacMillan Press.
Innes, J. (1995). Planning theory’s emerging paradigm: communicative action and interactive practice. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 14, 183–189.
Innes, J. (1996). Planning through consensus building: A new view of the comprehensive planning ideal. Journal of American Planning Association, 62, 460–472.
Innes, J., & Booher, D. (2010). Planning with complexity: An introduction to collaborative rationality for public policy. New York: Routledge.
Knieling, J., & Othengrafen, F. (2009). Planning cultures in Europe: Decoding cultural phenomena in urban and regional planning. Surrey: Ashgate.
Knieling, J., & Othengrafen, F. (Eds.). (2016). Cities in Crisis: Socio-spatial impacts of the economic crisis in Southern European cities. New York: Routledge.
Newman, P., & Thornley, A. (1996). Urban planning in Europe: International competition, national systems & planning projects. New York: Routledge.
Papaioannou, A., & Nikolakopoulou, Ch. (2016). Greek cities in crisis: Context, evidence, response. In J. Knieling & F. Othengrafen (Eds.), Cities in Crisis: Socio-spatial impacts of the economic crisis in Southern European cities (pp. 172–189). New York: Routledge.
Papamichail, T. (2015). Railway and urban development in Patras: Towards the improved participation of local governance in complex planning problems. Serbian Architectural Journal, 7(3), 365–380.
Pappas, V. (2017). Spatial planning in Greece, Lecture, MAS program in spatial planning, European aspects of spatial planning, symposium Part III, Zurich: ETH Zurich, February 7, 2017.
Pappas, V., Kalamiotis, I., & Karidi, A. (Eds.). (2013). CODE PATRAS Joint seminar week, urban and railway development in Patras: Report. Patras: University of Patras.
Reimer, M., Getimis, P., & Blotevogel, H. H. (Eds.). (2014). Spatial planning systems and practices in Europe. New York: Routledge.
Romero, J., Jiménez, F., & Viloria, M. (2012). (Un)sustainable territories: Causes of the speculative bubble in Spain (1996–2010) and its territorial environmental and sociopolitical consequences. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 30, 467–486.
Sager, T. (1994). Communicative planning theory. Aldershot: Averbury.
Sandercock, L. (1998). Towards cosmopolis: Planning for multicultural cities (p. 1998). Chichester: John Wiley and Sons.
Scholl, B. (2017). Building actor relationships and alliances for complex problem solving in spatial planning: The test planning method. disP—The Planning Review, 53(1), 46–56.
Scholl, B., Frezadou, I., Milionis, N., Moraitis, K., Noser, P., Papamichail, T., et al. (2015). Code patras—rail & city—A test planning process for patras. Zurich: ETH Zurich, Institute for Spatial and Landscape Development.
Scholl, B., Frezadou, I., Papamichail, T., & Signer, R. (2016). Code patras—rail & city, a test planning process for patras. Exhibition of the results 2015/workshop of ideas 2016. Zurich: ETH Zurich, Institute for Spatial and Landscape Development.
Scholl, B., Staub, B., & Vinzens, M. (Eds.). (2013). Test planning—A method with a future. Zurich: vdf Verlag.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature
About this paper
Cite this paper
Papamichail, T., Perić, A. (2018). Informal Planning: Towards Promoting Resilient Governance in Greece. In: Bisello, A., Vettorato, D., Laconte, P., Costa, S. (eds) Smart and Sustainable Planning for Cities and Regions. SSPCR 2017. Green Energy and Technology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75774-2_35
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75774-2_35
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-75773-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-75774-2
eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)