Abstract
ABSTRACT This paper analyses the gap between planning theory and planning practice in Swedish infrastructure planning. Planning theory was of limited relevance in order to understand the planning processes and the documents. Instead sociology, political theory and philosophy appeared as useful theoretical resources. Bourdieu’s theories on social and cultural capital, and ‘the feel for the game’ were useful in understanding planning practice. In order to develop communicative planning theory into a useful asset for planning practice the system perspective and the emphasis on public spheres from Habermas communicative action theory, critical realism and political pluralism might well serve as theoretical point of departures.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
