This article reflects on a theoretical framework for the analysis of planning systems based on an institutionalist planning theory broadened with Jessop's strategic-relational approach. The aim is to explore the concept of the planning system with an actor—structure perspective so as to underline possible research consequences for analyses and comparisons of planning systems. The article highlights the interactions of actors and social institutional elements, clarifying the strategic-relational nature of a planning system and the dialectical process at the basis of its changes and evolutions.

Alternative food networks (AFNs) encounter governance challenges stemming from their own organizational growth pains and their search for cultivable land, but also from their confrontation with urban planning policy and state structures whose affinity with urban agriculture is on average quite low. The agro-food literature does not sufficiently account for the governance complexity of AFNs. As AFNs develop, different governance tensions arise both within their organization as well as in the institutionalization processes in which they are embedded. This theoretical paper makes use of a redefined concept of hybrid governance – different from that in neo-institutional economics (NIE) – to elucidate the governance dynamics of AFNs. Finding inspiration in three strands of theory belonging to the ‘institutional turn in social science’, it redefines hybrid governance as a dialectical nexus of four basic forms of governance (solidarity based, networked, hierarchical, market stirred) reproducing three types of governance tensions (organizational, resource oriented, institutional). Using hybrid governance as an analytical mirror, the paper examines to what extent the agro-food literature has addressed the complexity of AFNs’ governance and how its analysis can be improved.

This study examines how local agents (non-profit-seeking actors and residents of Pahawang Island) developed empowering methods to address ecological problems during the island’s transformation from a small, secluded island to a tourist destination. Building capacity through grassroots initiatives, bottom-linked collaboration, and improved political bargaining power were critical components, constituting the conceptual framework to analyse the data. The socio-spatial shift in Pahawang Island reflects the nature, degree of involvement, and participation of multiple stakeholders. Slowly and gradually, bottom-up and later bottom-linked institutional efforts were implemented to lay the groundwork for a more sustainable ecology, social economy, and political transformation. Capacity building was dynamized by including it in a social innovation process, bottom-linked governance, and stimulated empowerment, which altered the governance, political bargaining power and policymaking power balance. Under these conditions, collaborative grassroots learning and action efforts can be a virtuous panacea for improving the sustainable governance of small islands, which is frequently disregarded in a neoliberal society.

Strategic Spatial Projects presents four years of case study research and theoretical discussions on strategic spatial projects in Europe and North America. It takes the position that planning is not well equipped to take on its current challenges if it is considered as only a regulatory and administrative activity. There is an urgent need to develop a mode of planning that aims to innovate in spatial as well as social terms. This timely, important book is for spatial planning, urban design and community development and policy studies courses. For academics, researchers and students in planning, urban design, urban studies, human and economic geography, public administration and policy studies.

This article explains how and why strategic spatial planning in Flanders has gone through some important transformations in the last 20 years. To do this, it relates spatial planning and its tools to some major societal changes. It first explains some of the complexities of this interplay from a theoretical point of view and argues for a socio-political and co-evolutionary perspective on planning tools. The article then provides some empirical evidence, exploring Flemish planning tools in general and strategic spatial planning more specifically. Although not evident at first sight, it appears that both the tools and the socio-political position of Flemish strategic spatial planning have changed. This poses some major challenges in rehabilitating spatial planning tools and repositioning spatial planning in Flanders.