Click here to download

La dimensione etica dei compiti disciplinari nella contrapposizione tra valori non conciliabili
Journal Title: ARCHIVIO DI STUDI URBANI E REGIONALI 
Author/s: Francesco Lo Piccolo 
Year:  2013 Issue: 106 Language: Italian 
Pages:  7 Pg. 159-165 FullText PDF:  89 KB
DOI:  10.3280/ASUR2013-106015
(DOI is like a bar code for intellectual property: to have more infomation:  clicca qui   and here 



  1. Benhabib S. (1992). Situating the Self. Gender, Community and Postmodernism in Contemporary Ethics. New York: Routledge
  2. Benhabib S., ed. (1996). Democracy and Difference. Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton: Princeton University Press
  3. Bonafede G. e Lo Piccolo F. (2010). Participative planning processes in the absence of the (public) space of democracy. Planning Practice and Research, 25, 3: 353-375., DOI: 10.1080/02697459.2010.503430
  4. Bond S. (2011). Negotiating a “democratic ethos”: moving beyond the agonistic – communicative divide. Planning Theory, 10, 2: 161-186., DOI: 10.1177/1473095210383081
  5. Brand R. e Gaffikin F. (2007). Collaborative planning in an uncollaborative world. Planning Theory, 6, 3: 282-313., DOI: 10.1177/1473095207082036
  6. Crosta P. L. (1998). Politiche. Quale conoscenza per l’azione territoriale. Milano: FrancoAngeli
  7. Forester J. (2006). Making participation work when interests conflict: From fostering dialogue and moderating debate to mediating disputes. Journal of the American Planning Association, 72, 4: 447-456., DOI: 10.1080/01944360608976765
  8. Forester J. (2009). Dealing with Differences. Dramas of Mediating Public Disputes. New York: Oxford University Press
  9. Forester J. e Laws D. (2009). Toward a naturalistic research ethic: Or how mediators must act well to learn, if they are to practice effectively. In: Lo Piccolo F. e Thomas H., eds., Ethics and Planning Research. Farnham: Ashgate
  10. Gunder M. (2003). Passionate planning for the others’ desire: An agonistic response to the dark side of planning. Progress in Planning, 60, 3: 235-319., DOI: 10.1016/S0305-9006(02)00115-0
  11. Hillier J. (2002). Shadows of Power. An Allegory of Prudence in Land-Use Planning. London and New York: Routledge
  12. Hillier J. (2003). “Agon”izing over consensus: Why Habermasian ideals cannot be “real”. Planning Theory, 2, 1: 37-59., DOI: 10.1177/1473095203002001005
  13. Innes J. E. (1996). Planning through consensus building: A new view of the comprehensive planning ideal. Journal of the American Planning Association, 62, 4: 460-472., DOI: 10.1080/01944369608975712
  14. Laclau E. e Mouffe C. (2001). Hegemony and Socialist Strategy: Towards a Radical Democratic Politics. 2nd ed. London: Verso.
  15. Lo Piccolo F. (2006). Colori. In: Indovina F., Fregolent L. e Savino M., a cura di, Nuovo Lessico Urbano. Milano: FrancoAngeli
  16. Lo Piccolo F. (2008). Il principio di cittadinanza attiva nella sua mutabilità interpretativa ed applicativa nell’ambito dei processi e degli strumenti di pianificazione. In: Lo Piccolo F. e Pinzello I., a cura di, Cittadini e cittadinanza. Palermo: Palumbo
  17. Lo Piccolo F. (2010). The planning research agenda: Plural cities, equity and rights of citizenship. Town Planning Review, 81, 6: I-VI., DOI: 10.3828/tpr.2010.31
  18. Lo Piccolo F. e Thomas H. (2001). Legal discourse, the individual and the claim for equality in British planning. Planning Theory & Practice, 2, 2: 187-201., DOI: 10.1080/14649350120068795
  19. Mouffe C. (1993). The Return of the Political. London: Verso
  20. Mouffe C. (1999). Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism. Social Research, 66, 4: 745- 758.
  21. Mouffe C. (2000). The Democratic Paradox. London: Verso
  22. Mouffe C. (2005). On the Political. Abingdon and New York: Routledge
  23. Norval A. J. (2007). Aversive Democracy. Inheritance and Originality in the Democratic Tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press., DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511490316
  24. Pløger J. (2004). Strife: urban planning and agonism. Planning Theory, 3, 1: 71-92., DOI: 10.1177/1473095204042318
  25. Porter L. (2009). On having imperial eyes. In: Lo Piccolo F. e Thomas H., eds., Ethics and Planning Research. Farnham: Ashgate
  26. Purcell M. (2009). Resisting neoliberalization: communicative planning or counter-hegemonic movements? Planning Theory, 8, 2: 140-165., DOI: 10.1177/1473095209102232
  27. Sandercock L. (1998). Towards Cosmopolis. Planning for Multicultural Cities. Chichester: Wiley
  28. Sandercock L. (2003). Out of the closet: The importance of stories and storytelling in planning practice. Planning Theory & Practice, 4, 1: 11-28., DOI: 10.1080/1464935032000057209
  29. Young I. M. (1990). Justice and the Politics of Difference. Princeton: Princeton University Press
  30. Young I. M. (2000). Inclusion and Democracy. Oxford: Oxford University Press

Francesco Lo Piccolo, in "ARCHIVIO DI STUDI URBANI E REGIONALI" 106/2013, pp. 159-165, DOI:10.3280/ASUR2013-106015

   

FrancoAngeli is a member of Publishers International Linking Association a not for profit orgasnization wich runs the CrossRef service, enabing links to and from online scholarly content