Abstract
Greater consideration of transgender communities within planning has been called for from research highlighting their absence in policy and practice. However, there is little work that outlines how trans is considered within current planning practice. This article presents an empirical case study of how trans becomes articulated into city-level policy and practice in Brighton & Hove, the “LGBTQ capital” of England. A poststructural approach is used to analyse how trans is problematized within planning documents and interviews with planning practitioners. We develop the concept of “choreographing” to reflect the constrained rhythms and selective positioning at work in the articulation of trans in and out of planning policy and practices. By tracing the only consideration of a specific identified need of the transgender population in Brighton & Hove planning policy, we evidence the previous siloing of these concerns that positioned them in relation to other municipal services, but not planning. We show how interpretive practices within a Health and Equalities Impact Assessment process do not allow the specific needs of trans people and communities to be considered, instead positioning trans people as having greater “sensitivity” to generic changes in the built environment. This research concludes that current planning practices can facilitate the consideration of trans communities in planning and policy-making, yet simultaneously constrain and inhibit the ability to enhance trans liveability in the city. This article opens up theorizing into how consideration of trans and LGBTQ communities and knowledge are integrated into planning processes and calls for a creative disruption of current practice.
Reference65 articles.
1. Ahmed, S. (2007). “You end up doing the document rather than doing the doing”: Diversity, race equality and the politics of documentation. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30(4), 590–609.
2. Allmendinger, P., & Haughton, G. (2012). Post-political spatial planning in England: A crisis of consensus? Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(1), 89–103.
3. Angeles, L. C., & Roberton, J. (2020). Empathy and inclusive public safety in the city: Examining LGBTQ2+ voices and experiences of intersectional discrimination. Women’s Studies International Forum, 78, Article 102313.
4. Azzouz, A., & Catterall, P. (2021). Queering public space: Exploring the relationship between queer communities and public spaces. University of Westminster; ARUP. https://www.arup.com/perspectives/publications/research/section/queering-public-space
5. Bacchi, C. (2000). Policy as discourse: What does it mean? Where does it get us? Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 21(1), 45–57.
Cited by
2 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献