Negotiation processes in urban redevelopment projects: Dealing with conflicts by balancing integrative and distributive approaches

Planning Theory and Practice

Volumn 16, Issue 3, 2015, Pages 363-384

  Baarveld, Marlijn ^a   Smit, Marnix ^a   Dewulf, Geert ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE   (Netherlands)

Author keywords

agreement; heritage; mutual gains; negotiation; planning; urban redevelopment

Indexed keywords

CULTURAL HERITAGE; NEGOTIATION PROCESS; PLANNING PRACTICE; REDEVELOPMENT; URBAN DEVELOPMENT; URBAN PLANNING;

NETHERLANDS;

EID: 84940436492     PISSN: 14649357     EISSN: 1470000X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/14649357.2015.1058972     Document Type: Article

References (75)

1. E.Alexander, (2009). Dilemmas in evaluating planning, or back to basics: What is planning for? Planning Theory & Practice, 10, 233–244. doi:10.1080/14649350902884177.
2. P.Allmendinger,, & M.Tewdwr-Jones, (2002). Planning futures: new directions for planning theory. London: Routledge.
3. K.G.Allred, (2000). Distinguishing best and strategic practices: a framework for managing the dilemma between creating and claiming value. Negotiation Journal, 16, 387–397. doi:10.1023/a:1026640906076.
4. Barcode Architects. (2011). Stadscampus-Tilburg: programmatisch masterplan van de spoorzone [City campus - Tilburg: programmatical masterplan of the railway-area]. Rotterdam: Barcode architects.
5. Bilan. (2004). Tilburg- Spoorzone: cultuurhistorische verkenning. [Tilburg- Railway area: cultural-historical study]. Tilburg: Bilan.
6. E.G.J.Blokhuis,, C.C.P.Snijders,, Q.Han,, & W.F.Schaefer, (2012). Conflicts and cooperation in brownfield redevelopment projects: Application of conjoint analysis and game theory to model strategic decision making. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 138, 195–205. doi:10.1061/(asce)up.1943-5444.0000122.
7. Boei. (2008). Centrale Spoorwegwerkplaats Tilburg: Bouwhistorisch onderzoek. [central railway workplace Tilburg: building history investigation]. Hoevelaken: Boei.
8. S.Connelly,, & T.Richardson, (2004). Exclusion: The necessary difference between ideal and practical consensus. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 47, 3–17. doi:10.1080/0964056042000189772.
9. J.R.Curhan,, H.A.Elfenbein,, & H.Xu, (2006). What do people value when they negotiate? Mapping the domain of subjective value in negotiation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 91, 493–512. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.91.3.493.
10. H.De Bruijn,, & E.Ten Heuvelhof, (2008). Management in networks: On multi-actor decision making. London and New York: Routledge.
11. G.De Roo,, J.Hillier,, & J.Van Wezemael, (Eds.). (2012). Complexity and planning: Systems, assemblages and simulations. Farnham: Ashgate.
12. G.De Roo,, & E.A.Silva, (2010). A planner's encounter with complexity. Farnham: Ashgate.
13. M.Der Foo,, H.A.Elfenbein,, H.H.Tan,, & V.C.Aik, (2004). Emotional intelligence and negotiation: The tension between creating and claiming value. International Journal of Conflict Management, 15, 411–429. doi:10.1108/eb022920.
14. K.M.Eisenhardt, (1989). Building theories from case study research. Academy of Management Review, 14, 532–550.
15. R.Fisher,, W.Ury,, & B.Patton, (1991). Getting to YES (2nd ed.). New York: Penguin Books.
16. B.Flyvbjerg, (2002). Bringing power to planning research: One researcher's praxis story. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 21, 353–366. doi:10.1177/0739456X0202100401.
17. B.Flyvbjerg, (2006). Five misunderstandings about case-study research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12, 219–245. doi:10.1177/1077800405284363.
18. B.Flyvbjerg,, & T.Richardson, (2002). Planning and Foucault: in search of the dark side of planning theory. In P.Allmendinger & M.Tewdwr-Jones (Eds.), Planning futures: New directions for planning theory (pp. 44–62). London: Routledge.
19. J.Forester, (1982). Planning in the face of power. Journal of the American Planning Association, 48, 67–80. 10.1080/01944368208976167.
20. J.Forester, (2006). Making participation work when interests conflict: Moving from facilitating dialogue and moderating debate to mediating negotiations. Journal of the American Planning Association, 72, 447–456. doi:10.1080/01944360608976765.
21. J.Forester, (2008). Participation as dialogue, debate, and negotiation: Entangled promises and practices. In S.Odugbemi & T.L.Jacobson (Eds.), Governance reform under real-world conditions: Citizens, stakeholders, and voice. Washington DC: World Bank Publications.
22. J.Forester, (2009). Dealing with differences: Dramas of mediating public disputes. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
23. L.Fox-Rogers,, & E.Murphy, (2014). Informal strategies of power in the local planning system. Planning Theory, 13, 244–268. doi:10.1177/1473095213492512.
24. B.Fuller, (2011). Power, adaptive preferences, and negotiation: Process specifics matters. Planning Theory & Practice, 12, 455–461. doi:10.1080/14649357.2011.617502.
25. Gemeente Tilburg. (2009). Gunningsleidraad herontwikkeling kerngebied spoorzone [Allocation guide redevelopment central area Spoorzone]. Tilburg: gemeente Tilburg.
26. Gemeente Tilburg. (2011). Nota definitief besluit concept Masterplan Kerngebied Spoorzone [Memo final decision concept Masterplan central area Spoorzone]. (Report No; 110920-22-GO). Retrieved from http://bis.tilburg.nl/upload/notas/2011/110920-22-GO-02%20110920-22-GO-02%20GO%20Def%20besl%20concept%20Masterplan%20Kerngebied%20Spoorzone_cnt.pdf.
27. Gemeente Tilburg. (2012). Raadsvoorstel Vervolg Samenwerking VolkerWessels De Werkplaats [City council motion Continuation of cooperation VolkerWessels De Werkplaats]. Retrieved from http://bis.tilburg.nl/upload/Raadsbesluiten/2012/23%20Vervolg_samenwerking_VolkerWessels_De_werkplaats_raadsvoorstel.pdf#search=Vervolg Samenwerking VolkerWessels De Werkplaats.
28. Gemeente Tilburg and VolkerWessels. (2013, May). Vaststellingsovereenkomst Herontwikkeling De:Werkplaats tussen Partijen Gemeente Tilburg en Werkplaats Ontwikkelingsbedrijf BV [Final agreement Redevelopment De:Werkplaats between party Municipality of Tilburg and Werkplaats Ontwikkelingsbedrijf BV]. Tilburg: Gemeente Tilburg and VolkerWessels.
29. Gemeente Tilburg, VolkerWessels and BDP Khandekar. (2011, April). De: Werkplaats, masterplan Spoorzone-Tilburg. [De:Werkplaats, Masterplan Spoorzone-Tilburg]. Tilburg: Gemeente Tilburg, VolkerWessels and BDP Khandekar.
30. Gemeente Zaanstad. (2010, February). Raadsinformatiebrief: Voortgangsrapportage Hembrugterrein [local council information letter: progress report Hembrugarea]. (No. Z/2010/40392). Retrieved from http://zaanstad.notudoc.nl/cgi-bin/showdoc.cgi/action=view/id=1056128/type=pdf/raadsinformatiebrief_bij_B_W-besluit_inzake_voortgang_Hembrugterrein.pdf.
31. Gemeente Zaanstad. (2011a, March). Raadsinformatiebrief: Hembrugterrein [Local council information letter: Hembrugarea]. (No. 2011/37421). Retrieved from http://zaanstad.notudoc.nl/cgi-bin/showdoc.cgi/action=view/id=1059132/type=pdf/raadsinformatiebrief_m.b.t._ontwikkelingen_Hembrugterrein.pdf.
32. Gemeente Zaanstad. (2011b, December). Raadsinformatiebrief: Hembrugterrein [local council information letter: Hembrug area]. (No. 2011/320538) Retrieved from http://zaanstad.notudoc.nl/cgi-bin/showdoc.cgi/action=view/id=1062050/type=pdf/raadsinformatiebrief_m.b.t._herontwikkeling_Hembrugterrein.pdf.
33. Gemeente Zaanstad, Provincie Noord-Holland, RVOB. (2012, May). Afsprakenkader Nieuw Hembrug [New Hembrug Agreement]. Retrieved from http://hembrugontwikkelt.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/120509-Afsprakenkader-Nieuw-Hembrug-ondertekende-versie1.pdf.
34. L.Gerrits,, W.Rauws,, & G.de Roo, (2012). Dutch spatial planning policies in transition. Planning Theory & Practice, 13, 336–341. doi:10.1080/14649357.2012.669992.
35. P.Healey, (1997). Collaborative planning: Shaping places in fragmented societies. Vancouver: UBC Press.
36. E.Heurkens,, & F.Hobma, (2014). Private sector-led Urban development projects: Comparative insights from planning practices in the Netherlands and the UK. Planning Practice & Research, 29, 350–369. doi:10.1080/02697459.2014.932196.
37. J.Hillier, (2003). Agonizing over consensus: Why Habermasian ideals cannot be “real”. Planning Theory, 2, 37–59. doi:1473-0952(200303)2:1;37–59;033104.
38. J.E.Innes, (1995). Planning theory's emerging paradigm: Communicative action and interactive practice. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 14, 183–189. doi:10.1177/0739456X9501400307.
39. J.E.Innes, (2004). Consensus building: Clarifications for the critics. Planning Theory, 3, 5–20. doi:10.1177/1473095204042315.
40. J.E.Innes,, & D.E.Booher, (1999). Consensus building and complex adaptive systems. Journal of the American Planning Association, 65, 412–423. 10.1080/01944369908976071.
41. J.Janssen,, E.Luiten,, H.Renes,, & J.Rouwendal, (2014). Heritage planning and spatial development in the Netherlands: Changing policies and perspectives. International Journal of Heritage Studies, 20(1), 1–21. doi:10.1080/13527258.2012.710852.
42. R.M.Kanter,, & D.Brinkerhoff, (1981). Organizational performance: Recent developments in measurement. Annual Review of Sociology, 7, 321–349. 10.1146/annurev.so.07.080181.001541.
43. J.F.M.Koppenjan,, & E.H.Klijn, (2004). Managing uncertainties in networks: A network approach to problem solving and decision making. London and New York, NY: Routledge.
44. A.Langley,, & J.Truax, (1994). A process study of new technology adoption in smaller manufacturing firms. Journal of Management Studies, 31, 619–652. doi:10.1111/j.1467-6486.1994.tb00632.x.
45. D.A.Lax,, & J.K.Sebenius, (1986). The manager as negotiator: Bargaining for cooperation and competitive gain. New York, NY: The Free Press.
46. D.A.Lax,, & J.K.Sebenius, (2002). Dealcrafting: The substance of three-dimensional negotiations. Negotiation Journal, 18, 5–28. doi:10.1111/j.1571-9979.2002.tb00248.x.
47. C.Leeuwis, (2000). Reconceptualizing participation for sustainable rural development: Towards a negotiation approach. Development and Change, 31, 931–959. doi:10.1111/1467-7660.00184.
48. D.Malhotra,, & M.Bazerman, (2007). Negotiation genius: How to overcome obstacles and achieve brilliant results at the bargaining table and beyond. New York: Bantam Dell.
49. M.B.Miles,, & A.M.Huberman, (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded sourcebook (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
50. J.Murtoaro,, & J.Kujala, (2007). Project negotiation analysis. International Journal of Project Management, 25, 722–733. doi:10.1016/j.ijproman.2007.03.002.
51. M.A.Neale,, & M.H.Bazerman, (1992). Negotiator cognition and rationality: A behavioral decision theory perspective. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 51, 157–175. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(92)90009-V.
52. H.Ness,, & S.A.Haugland, (2005). The evolution of governance mechanisms and negotiation strategies in fixed-duration interfirm relationships. Journal of Business Research, 58, 1226–1239. doi:10.1016/j.jbusres.2003.08.013.
53. A.M.Pettigrew, (1997). What is a processual analysis? Scandinavian Journal of Management, 13, 337–348. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0956-5221(97)00020-110.1016/S0956-5221(97)00020-1.
54. J.Pløger, (2004). Strife: Urban planning and agonism. Planning Theory, 3, 71–92. doi:10.1177/1473095204042318.
55. L.L.Putnam,, & M.E.Roloff, (1992). Communication and negotiation (Vol. 20). Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
56. K.Ruming, (2012). Negotiating within the context of planning reform: Public and private reflections from New South Wales, Australia. International Planning Studies, 17, 397–418. doi:10.1080/13563475.2012.739335.
57. RVOB, gemeente Zaanstad, provincie Noord-Holland. (2011). Ontwikkelkader Nieuw Hembrug: metropolitaan monument vol buitenkansen [Development frame New Hembrug: metropolian monument full of opportunities]. Retrieved from http://hembrugontwikkelt.nl/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/111100-Ontwikkelkader-NieuwHembrug-definitief.pdf.
58. T.Ø.Sager, (2013). Reviving critical planning theory: Dealing with pressure, neo-liberalism, and responsibility in communicative planning. New York: Routledge.
59. D.A.A.Samsura,, E.Van der Krabben,, & A.M.A.Van Deemen, (2010). A game theory approach to the analysis of land and property development processes. Land Use Policy, 27, 564–578. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2009.07.012.
60. V.Schei,, J.K.Rognes,, & D.L.Shapiro, (2011). Can individualists and cooperators play together? The effect of mixed social motives in negotiations. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 371–377. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.09.010.
61. J.K.Sebenius, (1992). Negotiation analysis: A characterization and review. Management Science, 38, 18–38. doi:10.1287/mnsc.38.1.18.
62. J.K.Sebenius, (2009). Negotiation analysis: From games to inferences to decisions to deals. Negotiation Journal, 25, 449–465. doi:10.1111/j.1571-9979.2009.00238.x.
63. H.Shin, (2010). Can one actually say what one wants? Adaptive preferences in the negotiation process. Planning Theory & Practice, 11, 339–357. doi:10.1080/14649357.2010.502016.
64. D.F.Shmueli,, S.Kaufman,, & C.Ozawa, (2008). Mining negotiation theory for planning insights. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 27, 359–364. doi:10.1177/0739456X07311074.
65. B.V.SteenhuisMeurs, (2010). Hembrugterrein - Zaanstad: Cultuurhistotrische analyse [Hembrug area -Zaanstad: Cultural-historical analysis]. Schiedam: SteenhuisMeurs.
66. L.Susskind, (2008). Arguing, bargaining, and getting agreement. In M.Moran, M.Rein, & R.E.Goodin (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of public policy. London: Oxford University Press.
67. M.Tewdwr-Jones,, & P.Allmendinger, (1998). Deconstructing communicative rationality: A critique of Habermasian collaborative planning. Environment and Planning A, 30, 1975–1989. doi:10.1068/a301975.
68. L.L.Thompson,, & R.Hastie, (1990). Social perception in negotiation. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 47, 98–123. doi:10.1016/0749-5978(90)90048-E.
69. L.L.Thompson,, J.Wang,, & B.C.Gunia, (2010). Negotiation. Annual Review of Psychology, 61, 491–515. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.093008.100458.
70. S.S.Tzafrir,, R.J.Sanchez,, & K.Tirosh-Unger, (2012). Social motives and trust: Implications for joint gains in negotiations. Group Decision and Negotiation, 21, 839–862. doi:10.1007/s10726-011-9252-8.
71. E.Van der Krabben,, & H.M.Jacobs, (2013). Public land development as a strategic tool for redevelopment: Reflections on the Dutch experience. Land Use Policy, 30, 774–783. doi:10.1016/j.landusepol.2012.06.002.
72. E.Van der Krabben,, & B.Needham, (2008). Land readjustment for value capturing: A new planning tool for urban redevelopment. Town Planning Review, 79, 651–672. doi:10.3828/tpr.79.6.4.
73. M.van Rijswick,, & W.Salet, (2012). Enabling the contextualization of legal rules in responsive strategies to climate change. Ecology and Society, 17, 18, doi:10.5751/es-04895-170218.
74. R.E.Walton,, & R.B.McKersie, (1965). A behavioral theory of labor negotiations: An analysis of a social interaction system. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
75. D.Yanow,, & P.Schwartz-Shea, (2006). Interpretation and method: Empirical research methods and the interpretive turn. New York: M.E. Sharpe.