I - Young Academics Conference

Permanent URI for this collection

https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.14235/45
A network where academic leaders of tomorrow share ideas in an open and inclusive environment, challenging and supporting one another to better academic output.

Browse

Browsing I - Young Academics Conference by Author "Gilliard, Lukas"

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
  • Thumbnail Image
    ItemRestricted
    Potentials of Entrepreneurial Thinking for Planning: Debates during the 11th AESOP Young Academics Conference
    (Routledge : Taylor and Francis Group, 2017) Gilliard, Lukas; Wenner, Fabian; Lamker, Christian W.; Van den Berghe, Karel; Willems, Jannes J.
    This article reports on the 11th AESOP Young Academics Conference held in April 2017 at the Technical University of Munich, under the theme “Planning and Entrepreneurship – Planning and Public Policy at the Intersection of Top-down and Bottom-up Action.” The conference explored how planners can both support entrepreneurial ecosystems and benefit from adopting entrepreneurial thinking in their work. Key Themes and Findings Planning and Entrepreneurship – A False Dichotomy: Traditionally seen as opposites, planning (state-led, public good) and entrepreneurship (market-driven, profit-oriented) can be complementary. Planners can foster environments that support grassroots innovation and local economies, and they should adopt more flexible, entrepreneurial mindsets themselves. Three Main Aspects Discussed: Planning for Entrepreneurship: Creating conditions (e.g. infrastructure, policy support) that allow startups and local initiatives to thrive. Entrepreneurial Planning: A more market-driven, developer-led approach, which can marginalize public planning and reduce democratic accountability. Bridging Roles: Planners as social entrepreneurs, facilitators, and even “hackers” who disrupt old systems to enable inclusive and innovative change. Opportunities and Risks: Open data and digital tools (e.g. smart city platforms) can democratize planning but also risk empowering monopolistic private actors. Planners must adapt to emerging roles that balance technological, economic, and social shifts, avoiding marginalization by other professions (e.g. private consultants). Presentations and Discussions: Topics ranged from tactical urbanism and temporary uses of space to smart city critiques and planning support systems. Winning papers highlighted case studies from China, Spain, Austria, and Germany, addressing media influence, regeneration, and participatory planning tools. Recommendations for Future Planning Practice: Planning should evolve to support both top-down and bottom-up initiatives. Planners need better economic literacy, technological awareness, and social responsiveness. Interdisciplinary collaboration and a critical stance toward neoliberal urban development are vital. Conclusion The conference emphasized the need to rethink the roles of planners in an era shaped by entrepreneurship, digital innovation, and complex urban challenges. It advocated for a more integrated, activist, and adaptive planning profession capable of bridging public interest with entrepreneurial dynamism.