On the role of values in judgements on conflicting planning processes – prospects for agonistic planning?

Abstract

Adapting political science’s model of agonistic pluralism, literature in spatial planning reinterprets conflicts as constructive elements. The impact of stakeholders and their management of conflicting values remains uncertain. However, planning requires continual validation of its values. The article delves into the role of values in judgments on conflicting planning processes. An explorative German study reveals that courts prioritise procedural over substantive values, although they acknowledge the latter, such as environmental protection. We argue in favour of considering values in research on agonistic planning but acknowledge that the influence of courts is limited due to institutional constraints.