Sunday, October 4, 2009

Changes in meeting dates

Hi everybody,

Today we had our first meeting ‘Ruimte en Mobiliteit’. To me it was quit successful. We did not decide to change the set-up, so I presume the others were satisfied as well. You can check out our blog for a short report of the meeting.


Next meeting is Friday October 30th from 12.00 - 14.00, as mentioned in the previous e-mail.
Last announcement: the fourth meeting, planned on January 8th, will be scheduled one week later: January 15th.


The date for the meeting after that is problematic; November 27th does not suit us. 

Suggestions are:
Tuesday 24 November (12.00 – 14.00)
Thursday 26 November (12.00 – 14.00)
Or Tuesday 1 December (after 13.00)

Please, let me know which date suit you.
Els

2nd October 2009 - Ruimte en Mobiliteit Meeting: Minutes and Presentation

The theme group concluded a successful first meeting to set up a structure for future discussions and meetings. See below for more details.


Agenda
11:30
Introduction
12:00
General Discussion
12:30
Lunch
12:45
Presentation (J. Soria Lara –  guest PhD)
13:00
Discussion: Reaction to JS Presentation
13:15
Readings Reflection / Questions


Aim of meetings to have regular and structured contact and exchanges within theme group to enhance research and educational coordination. Theme group might be level of focus in new organisational structure; with more autonomy, involved in both teaching and research. Future discussion points include educational matters and research. Meetings as forum for internal/external guests.

Please click following links to download (PDF)

Presentation: Mobility and environmental quality in metropolitan areasThe case of Granada by Julio Alberto Soria Lara. Guest PhD Candidate from University of Granada (Spain)

Thursday, September 17, 2009

Meeting september 17th 2009

Thursday September the 17th we’ve discussed the paper written by Els about the use of the do-minimum alternative in the Social Cost Benefit Analysis (SCBA) (see library for the paper). One of the interesting issues described in the paper is the problem of contested knowledge which is explained in the article of van Buuren and Edelenbos (2004). To solve this problem the method of Joint fact-finding can be used as described by Ehrmann and Stinson (1999).

This solution of Joint-Fact-Finding seems very good and logic, but in our discussion we wondered in what way it can be implemented. High costs and long time periods may form barriers to implement this method. It also may need a bureaucratic authority to check the outcomes. The Central Planning Authority (in Dutch CPB) is the authority which checks the SCBA’s, but doesn’t take part in the making process of the SCBA. So if the method of joint fact-finding is implemented in the SCBA, that doesn’t guarantee the CPB approves. The discussion resulted in questions about cooping with uncertainties, using advisory boards, the influence of (policy) power changes every four year and so on.

Next meeting we will discuss the abstract of Andrew.

Two articles uploaded

Two articles have been uploaded in our library under 'theory'.

- Brömmelstroet, te M., P. Schrijnen (2009 forth coming), From Planning Support Systems to Mediated Planning Support, Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design

- Ehrmann, J., B. Stinson (1999), Joint Fact-Finding and the use of technical experts, in: Susskind (e.a.), The Consensus Building handbook. A comprehencive guide to reaching agreement, Sage, London

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Week 37 Discussion

8th September 2009, Amsterdam
We had our very first weekly discussion group at the Mensa at FMG, UvA.

Admin:

  1. Welcome to Julio
  2. Website/Blog for exchange/communication
  3. Weekly meeting dates
  4. Thanks to Els for organising the monthly meetings
Content:
  • Abstract discussed is for an upcoming conference on Railway and Real Estate Development.
  • Comments on abstract include;
  • Els points out that the relationship between land use and transport sector seems to be focused only on the politics and can be better expressed with politics as part of the problem. Theory of interest could be 'Joint Fact Finding', see article in LIBRARY/THEORY.
  • Julio asked if the same criteria for measuring disjointedness across the vertical sectors of the planning authorities will be applied to other related sectors (real estate development, transport operators). Also advised to look at AVE (Alta Velocidad Espanola) for Spanish equivalent of high speed transit corridors.
(to be continued...)
Abstract Discussed

Using the blog

Posting
You have to be using blogger to post. Only blog authors can post, so permissions will be required in advance.
Contact Admin (w.tan@uva.nl) for details.

Agenda
Our agenda is based with Google Calendar. Authorized users can edit/update any event.
For authorization, contact Admin (w.tan@uva.nl).

Library
Our library is hosted on Box.Net. Just click on the link in the library to view.Authorized users can edit/upload/view any document. For authorization, contact Admin (w.tan@uva.nl).

Welcome

We are a group of PhD candidates at the AMIDSt Institute at the University of Amsterdam, researching on various topics centered around issues of planning, institutions and transport.

We come together weekly for a lunch meeting to discuss papers, articles and review each others work. This leads up to a monthly group meeting where we or our guests give a presentation on relevant topics of interest for the larger research theme group.

Please check our Agenda for upcoming events.