Area-based urban regeneration comparing Denmark and Japan
Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Standard
Area-based urban regeneration comparing Denmark and Japan. / Harada, Yoko; Jørgensen, Gertrud.
In: Planning Practice and Research, Vol. 31, No. 4, 1180572, 2016, p. 359-382.Research output: Contribution to journal › Journal article › Research › peer-review
Harvard
APA
Vancouver
Author
Bibtex
}
RIS
TY - JOUR
T1 - Area-based urban regeneration comparing Denmark and Japan
AU - Harada, Yoko
AU - Jørgensen, Gertrud
PY - 2016
Y1 - 2016
N2 - In this paper, we study the characteristics and results of two different approaches to urban regeneration which we have termed ‘Metagovernance’ and ‘Pluricentric coordination’ following. We studied this through a comparative study of area-based, participatory urban regeneration projects in Denmark and Japan, representing each one approach. The paper aims to clarify results of the two approaches in terms of five aspects of urban regeneration, relevant to the process and results: (1) strategic spatial improvement, (2) influence of the legal system and transparency of the processes, (3) empowerment of citizens and diversity of participants, (4) innovative capacity (diversity and creativity of the projects) and (5) continuity and flexibility of the projects. The paper concludes that each approach has strengths and weaknesses and that each country can learn from the other to strengthen future participatory urban regeneration.
AB - In this paper, we study the characteristics and results of two different approaches to urban regeneration which we have termed ‘Metagovernance’ and ‘Pluricentric coordination’ following. We studied this through a comparative study of area-based, participatory urban regeneration projects in Denmark and Japan, representing each one approach. The paper aims to clarify results of the two approaches in terms of five aspects of urban regeneration, relevant to the process and results: (1) strategic spatial improvement, (2) influence of the legal system and transparency of the processes, (3) empowerment of citizens and diversity of participants, (4) innovative capacity (diversity and creativity of the projects) and (5) continuity and flexibility of the projects. The paper concludes that each approach has strengths and weaknesses and that each country can learn from the other to strengthen future participatory urban regeneration.
KW - Faculty of Science
KW - Urban Regeneration; public participation; Denmark; Japan
U2 - 10.1080/02697459.2016.1180572
DO - 10.1080/02697459.2016.1180572
M3 - Journal article
VL - 31
SP - 359
EP - 382
JO - Planning Practice and Research
JF - Planning Practice and Research
SN - 0269-7459
IS - 4
M1 - 1180572
ER -
ID: 161917422