Zhu Jingyi

Keywords： Governance; Planning Ideology; Nomocratic Planning; Complexity; Controlled Spontaneity; Framework Instrument; Oosterwold

Abstract：

The paper uses the example of “Oosterwold Freeland” to illustrate the idea of nomocratic planning. Nomocratic planning is different from the rational model of urban planning centered around land use plan, in that it emphases the use of dispersed and practical knowledge, the organization of the inherent spontaneity of urban development, and the use of a set of framework intending to regulate the development process with patterning instrument. This mode of planning is based on the critiques of rational and comprehensive planning, and aims to control the development process rather than the final product, which is more effective in dealing with urban uncertainties. In the case study, crucial elements and land development processes of “Oosterwold Freeland” is analyzed to unveil how the ideas of nomocratic planning and private planning can stimulate controlled spontaneity, which is inspiring in view of the declining of the traditional idea of land use planning and a demand for more flexible planning tools.

Funds：

• [1] 童明. 现代城市规划中的理性主义[J]. 城市规划汇刊, 1998(1): 3-8.
  [2] 仇保兴. 19 世纪以来西方城市规划理论演变的六次转折[J]. 规划师, 2003(11): 5-10.
  [3] LEWIS N P. The planning of the modern city: a review of the principles governing city planning[M]. Hoboken: John Wiley & Sons, 1916.
  [4] BOYER M C. Dreaming the rational city: the myth of American city planning[M]. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1986.
  [5] DAVIDOFF P. Advocacy and pluralism in planning[J]. Journal of the American institute of planners, 1965(31): 331-338.
  [6] DICARLO G. Architecture’s public[M] // ONES P B, PETRESCU D, TILL J. Architecture and participation. Abingdon: Spon Press, 2007: 3-22.
  [7] FAINSTEIN S. S. New directions in planning theory[J]. Urban affairs review, 2000(35): 451-478.
  [8] BANHAM R, BARKER P, HALL P, et al. Non-plan. experiment in freedom[J]. New society, 1969(13): 435-441.
  [9] HOLCOMBE R G. Planning and the invisible hand: allies or adversaries?[J]. Planning theory, 2013(12): 199-210.
  [10] FONTENOT A. Notes toward a history of non-planning[J/OL]. Place journal.(2015) [2016-10-23]. https://placesjournal.org/article/notes-towarda-history-of-non-planning/.
  [11] HAYEK F A. Law, legislation and liberty: a new statement of the liberal principles of justice and political economy, v. 1: rules and order[M]. London: Routledge, 1973.
  [12] JACOBS J. The death and life of great American cities[M]. New York: Random House, 1961.
  [13] COZZOLINO S. Insights and reflections on Jane Jacobs’ legacy. toward a Jacobsian theory of the city[J]. Territorio, 2015(72): 151-158.
  [14] MORONI S. Complexity and the inherent limits of explanation and prediction: urban codes for self-organising cities[J]. Planning theory, 2014(14): 248-267.
  [15] INNES J E, BOOHER D E. Planning with complexity: an introduction to collaborative rationality for public policy[M]. London: Routledge, 2010.
  [16] PORTUGALI J. Complexity theories of cities: implications to urban planning[M] // PORTUGALI J,MEYER H, STOLK E, et al. Complexity theories of cities have come of age. Berlin: Springer, 2012: 221-224.
  [17] ALEXANDER E R, MAZZA L, MORONI S. Planning without plans? nomocracy or teleocracy for social-spatial ordering[J]. Progress in planning, 2012(77): 37-87.
  [18] BUITELAAR E, GALLE M, SOREL N. The public planning of private planning: an analysis of controlled spontaneity in the Netherlands[M] // ANDERSSON D E, MORONI S. Cities and private planning: property rights, entrepreneurship and transaction costs. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2014: 248-268.
  [19] Municipality of Almere. Structural vision, Almere 2.0, environmental planning[R]. 2009.
  [20] COZZOLINO S, BUITELAAR E, MORONI S, et al. Experimenting in urban self-organization. framework-rules and emerging orders in Oosterwold (Almere, The Netherlands)[J]. Cosmos+taxis, 2017(4): 49-59.
  [21] MORONI S. Rethinking theory and practice of land-use regulation. towards nomocracy[J]. Planning theory, 2010(9): 137-155.
  [22] VAN STRAALEN F M, WITTE P, BUITELAAR E. Self-organisation in Oosterwold, Almere: challenges with public goods and externalities[J]. Tijdschrift voor economische en sociale geografie, 2017(108): 503-511.
  [23] ANDERSSON D E. Cities and planning: the role of system constraints[M] // ANDERSSON D E, MORONI S. Cities and private planning: property rights, entrepreneurship and transaction costs. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2014: 19-37.
  [24] FOLDVARY F E. Governance by voluntar y association[M] // ANDERSSON D E, MORONI S. Cities and private planning: property
  rights, entrepreneurship and transaction costs. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2014: 66-92.