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

Harada, Y & Jørgensen, G 2016, 'Area-based urban regeneration comparing Denmark and Japan', Planning Practice and Research, vol. 31, no. 4, 1180572, pp. 359-382. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2016.1180572

APA

Harada, Y., & Jørgensen, G. (2016). Area-based urban regeneration comparing Denmark and Japan. Planning Practice and Research, 31(4), 359-382. [1180572]. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2016.1180572

Vancouver

Harada Y, Jørgensen G. Area-based urban regeneration comparing Denmark and Japan. Planning Practice and Research. 2016;31(4):359-382. 1180572. https://doi.org/10.1080/02697459.2016.1180572

Author

Harada, Yoko ; Jørgensen, Gertrud. / Area-based urban regeneration comparing Denmark and Japan. In: Planning Practice and Research. 2016 ; Vol. 31, No. 4. pp. 359-382.

Bibtex

@article{e3c155edf471436fb33bc113f98d87fd,
title = "Area-based urban regeneration comparing Denmark and Japan",
abstract = "In this paper, we study the characteristics and results of two different approaches to urban regeneration which we have termed {\textquoteleft}Metagovernance{\textquoteright} and {\textquoteleft}Pluricentric coordination{\textquoteright} 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.",
keywords = "Faculty of Science, Urban Regeneration; public participation; Denmark; Japan",
author = "Yoko Harada and Gertrud J{\o}rgensen",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1080/02697459.2016.1180572",
language = "English",
volume = "31",
pages = "359--382",
journal = "Planning Practice and Research",
issn = "0269-7459",
publisher = "Routledge",
number = "4",

}

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