ABSTRACT
In this Part the authors explore the dynamics of the intertwining of the fields of culture and planning as the involution of this relationship intensifies through the globalization of networks, economies and social practices. This drawing together is reflected on a number of levels: at the level of the international state, governance policy, principles and instruments have been adopted as intended ‘beacons’ for the illumination and guidance of positive cultural approaches; in terms of cultural planning policy-makers in all fields using culture instrumentally for broader policy goals occupy a two-way street which could allow their own perspectives to be transformed by contact with local culture; and a cultural paradigm for planning and governance is identified as a major option to address culture in more sensitive, meaningful and locally specific terms regardless of the scale, sector or setting. In spite of these trends formulaic and problematic culture-led strategies exist and prosper as forms of cultural planning recognized by Hillier in her chapter. However, above and beyond this in Bianchini’s opinion views about places and cultural resources differ and are the subject of ‘a local politics of symbolic contestation’ with narratives that can vary according to ‘people’s age, neighbourhood, occupation, ethnicity and gender’.
