Planetary Planning Podcast

This is a different episode from the usual ones. Here I’m the one sharing some insights and ideas from my own research project, the EU-MSCA-funded MobileWorlds Research Project, based at the Western Norway University of Applied Sciences and mentored by Prof. Wendy Tan. Most importantly, I share here some of the core ideas that intersect between the Planetary Planning Podcast and the MobileWorlds project, and share an exercise with you, which might help you, dear listener, identify, break, and re-imagine the boxes you and other put you in…So have a listen, get ready to participate with some pen and paper (see a relevant link below), check out the additional references below, and hopefully be inspired for your own research, practice, and or daily life. Feel free to share comments in case you tried out the exercise, and do let me know if there’s a specific guest you’d like me to interview next!Link to build your own box: References:On third cultures:Haste, H. (2016). Pluralism, Perspective, Order and Organization: The Fault-Lines of 21st Century ‘Cultures’ and Epistemologies. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 41(2–3), 167–187.Ortolano, G. (2016). Breaking Ranks: C. P. Snow and the Crisis of Mid-Century Liberalism, 1930–1980. Interdisciplinary Science Reviews, 41(2–3), 118–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/03080188.2016.1223577Pollock, D. C., Van Reken, R. E., & Pollock, M. V. (2017). Third culture kids: Growing up among worlds (Third edition). Nicholas Brealey Publishing.Snow, C. P. (1990). The Two Cultures. Leonardo, 23(2/3), 169–173.Useem, J., Useem, R., & Donoghue, J. (1963). Men in the Middle of the Third Culture: The Roles of American and Non-Western People in Cross-Cultural Administration. Human Organization, 22(3), 169–179. https://doi.org/10.17730/humo.22.3.5470n44338kk6733Some of my own work in relation to cultures of mobilities:Cadima, C., Von Schönfeld, K., & Ferreira, A. (2024). Beyond Car-Centred Adultism? Exploring Parental Influences on Children’s Mobility. Urban Planning, 9, 8643. https://doi.org/10.17645/up.8643von Schönfeld, K. C., & Ferreira, A. (2022). Mobility values in a finite world: Pathways beyond austerianism? Applied Mobilities, 1–27. https://doi.org/10.1080/23800127.2022.2087135Von Schönfeld, K. C. (2024). On the ‘impertinence of impermanence’ and three other critiques: Reflections on the relationship between experimentation and lasting – or significant? – change. Journal of Urban Mobility, 5, 100070. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.urbmob.2023.100070Von Schönfeld, K. C. (2024) Third Cultures—The (Cursed) Gold of Migrants? Migrant Knowledge Blog. https://migrantknowledge.org/2024/12/16/third-cultures-the-cursed-gold-of-migrants/Von Schönfeld, K. C. (2025). Questioning streets. On plural origins, plural uses, and plural futures. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2025.101403For those who prefer to read more than to listen, and since the transcript doesn’t seem to be working for this episode, I share a rough transcript of the episode below:“Hello everyone, thank you for listening.Today’s episode will be a little different from the usual - you’ll be hearing just from me, mostly about ways to “think otherwise” or “think outside the box” - something that guides me in my work more generally, but especially in the work I do for the research project MobileWorlds, which I’ve been doing now since 2023. It is an individual post-doctoral research project, funded by the European Union as part of the Marie Sklodowska-Curie Actions, about rethinking daily mobilities through what we call “third cultures”. I’ll get back to this in a moment. But why is this relevant to speak about here, though, you might wonder. Besides the quite close temporal coincidence of the start of the project and the start of this Podcast, they are also intimately connected in many other ways:First, they are both about thinking otherwise, as I was anticipating at the start. For Planetary Planning, we’ve been trying to think about how the Planning discipline could be more deeply and explicitly concerned with human-to-human as well as human-to-more-than-human relationships. This often requires thinking a bit out-of-the-box of what has more traditionally been the way of thinking about planning, as a frequently very technocratic discipline, frequently focused on maximising economic gain – or growth – based on the ways in which a given area – urban or rural – has been organized and distributed spatially and in terms of social relations and connectivity. I’m generalising there, I am aware, and there is much more to the planning discipline. Importantly, there is a by now quite large strand of thinking in planning – both research and practice – which includes what is called “participatory planning”, that is, reflections and implementations on how to include diverse voices in the decision-making about what should be prioritised and done in urban and regional planning – often this is about human residents in a given area, for example, sharing their lived expertise on what that area needs and wants to be a better space for them to live their lives in – also in other-than-economic terms, and certainly beyond what necessarily economic growth might be able to deliver. This doesn’t yet tend to include more-than-humans, but does frequently attempt to make important steps towards including diverse groups of people and their often diverging interests. We’ve spoken a little about these processes in the earlier episodes of this podcast, for instance with Jonathan Metzger. All this does often require planners (and researchers of planning) to step outside their usual thinking and acting, to question their assumptions and so on.Now, in the MobileWorlds project, we’ve been focusing on how to “think otherwise” especially regarding mobility and transport – how we get around, as an activity that is key for all other activities that we humans and most more-than-humans may want and need to engage in throughout our lives. And are sometimes forced to – it wasn’t so much the topic of the episode with António Ferriera a while back, but I recommend to check out his work for more on that. MobileWorlds emerged from the connection of three frustrations, one could say:1. With the continued car-centric and efficiency-centric planning around the world, in cities and regions, and the frequent “excuse” of “culture” to do so,2. With the dismissal of what are considered “non-scientific” approaches, such as anecdotal experiences and arts-based understanding, in both research and practice in planning – when a complimentary joining of these ways of thinking has always seemed an obvious necessity to me, and3. With the strangely exclusive way that “third cultures” were being discussed in much academic work on the subject. Let me briefly explain what third cultures are then. There have been many definitions, but I’ll briefly touch on two.One is that based on a supposed divide between the two cultures of the sciences and the humanities, identified as such by on J.P. Snow in the 1960s and 1970s, which could perhaps be transcended through a third culture, which would emphasise something like what we would now call more accessible science communication – again, simplifying his idea quite strongly, but I’m providing some relevant references for those curious in the episode notes. In any case culture here was clearly referring to specific norms, values, and ways-of-doing and understanding the world that were different between “sciences” and “humanities”.A second definition of third cultures emerged around the same time of Snow’s – interestingly – but in a rather different field and context. Ruth Useem and her husband coined the term third cultures, or more precisely “third culture kids” in the 1970s to refer to children who grew up in countries other than their parents’ passport countries, due to temporary work of the parents in those countries. That is, for instance, children of missionary-workers, international-development workers, military, and other such work. The stays abroad for these children (and parents) would always be perceived as temporary, rather than what was often the case for migrants who might aim to stay in a new country permanently – and there was usually a perception of privilege, and perhaps even superiority, associated with the culture of the children moving to another country, as compared to the country they had moved to. In the Useems’ case, they studied children of missionaries from the USA who moved to India temporarily. The Useems argued that these children developed a third culture that was neither really a USA-culture, nor really an Indian-culture, but maintained parts of both, plus something quite other. Much literature on such “third culture kids” has since focused on the psychological and skill-based benefits and drawbacks of growing up in this way. There is much merit to this work, and much nuance about various aspects too, however, there was something I was triggered to think about in view of both my own background as a third culture kid, and in view of my wish to unbind some of the cultural justifications I kept hearing about not changing. Just to give you an example, I would hear people say they cycle because they are Dutch or were in the Netherlands, or people saying they drive because they’re from the USA, or people saying they parked a certain way because they were from Portugal, etc. There’s likely an important grain of truth in that, but at the same time I felt there could be an important value in exploring ways out of this kind of justification, because it might open us up to thinking more creatively about alternatives. And I saw third cultures as an opportunity to think that through – if we could acknowledge the extent to which many people nowadays come into formative contact with two or more cultures, either by moving between contexts themselves: country-to-country or from north-to-south or rur

In this episode, we hear from Sharon Sand. Sharon is an Urban Planner focused on climate change adaptation, protecting biodiversity, and providing equitable access to nature, parks and green schoolyards. She is on the Government Affairs team as Public Grants Program Senior Manager for Trust for Public Land in California (USA) to obtain public funding for land conservation and urban park projects in neighborhoods that need it most. In this role she also contributes to state and regional policy and strategy related to funding land preservation, access to green space, and climate change adaptation. Sharon is based in LA and has been part of the Stockton team since 2021. Before this work, Sharon worked in cancer genetics research and education including administering international consortia. She is author and co-author of numerous publications resulting from this work. Sharon earned a bachelor’s in Psychology from CSULA and a master’s from UCLA in Urban and Regional Planning with a certificate in Design and Development and another as a Leader in Sustainability through the Institute of the Environment and Sustainability.In the episode, Sharon is incredibly generous in sharing examples from her work as grant advisor and planner for the access to nature in the U.S.A., and especially in California. She shares insights from as wide ranging examples as access to riversides, to the greening of schoolyards, and shows the crucial emphasis on community-led, bottom-up work. We also reflect a little on how the crucial role of mobility and spaces for mobility in this context. Sharon also shares a little about the challenges that work in this field is encountering especially now, with a politically less advantageous arena, and how this is requiring pivoting to find funding for such important initiatives for ensuring access to and contact with natural environments for people from all economic situations and diverse abilities.Sharon ends on recommendations focused on this connection to nature and we end up hypothesising that perhaps it is both the communities planners work with, and planners themselves, who may need to re-connect with their natural environments more.Small correction of a detail mentioned in the episode: the EPA Community Change Grants were for $20 million max not $50 million.Take-aways for planners, by Sharon Sand:* Prioritize communities and their connection to nature* Think about how people can connect to nature, and water(scapes) specifically, as this is crucial for health and well-beingLinks to various examples mentioned:ParkServe shows access to parks in most cities across the U.S.A. (except very small ones) ParkScore ranks the parks in the 100 largest cities of the U.S. Richmond Wellness Trail, which connects the Iron Triangle neighborhood to transit, schools, medical center and to the Bay Trail and the San Francisco Bay itself (see also: https://richmondrisingca.org/projects/)More on Stockton parks work can be found here: https://www.tpl.org/city/stockton-california, and more on the Great California Delta Trail Master Plan here: https://delta.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/GDT-Master-Plan-508.pdf This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this episode, Mariko O. Thomas and Melissa M. Parks join us to share some of their insights on plant communication, and from and process of writing the book “Storying Plant Communication. More-than-Human Relationships in New Mexico”, available for pre-order now, and to be published in October. As the book description explains, the book “explores the narrative accounts of southwestern herbalists, healers, teachers, farmers, and other plant enthusiasts who maintain deep and reciprocal relationships with the local flora.”Mariko Oyama Thomas is Teaching Faculty at Skagit Valley College, USA. She holds a PhD in Environmental Communication from the University of New Mexico and is Co-Founder of the arts and ecology collaborative Submergence Collective.Melissa M. Parks is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication and the Environmental Humanities Program at the University of Utah. She is also the Associate Director of the Taft-Nicholson Center for Environmental Humanities Education in Centennial Valley, Montana, USA. For the podcast, Mariko and Melissa build on the fact that it seems much easier to imagine more-than-humans as animals than as plants, and how then, in the field of communications, they sought for a way to include plant communication in the picture and in their teaching as well. They describe of how they found storytelling as the best method to study plant communication from a social science perspective (a method we’ve come across a few more times in Planetary Planning, with previous guests such as Jamie Wang, Isabelle Doucet, and Phoebe Wagner, among others). They share several practical examples of how anyone - including planners! - can engage in plant communication, and plant awareness wherever they are.We discuss the language we use to speak about plants, the ways we can study plants through the stories told about them, and the potential that signage can have if it would use storytelling to speak of plants. They speak of the rhythms of plant communication and the need to de-centre the ego of academic work to be able to engage with this topic.Key take-aways for planners:* Allow ourselves to tell stories, and listen to other stories, to help break out of binaries and embrace a more multi-species and commons approach to the world* Remember to consider perspectives that can’t verbally tell their stories* We need all hands on deck and all disciplines on deck* We need to get comfortable with the lack of egoism that is necessary to work in groupsReferencesThomas, M. O. & Parks, M. M. (2025) Storying Plant Communication. More-than-Human Relationships in New Mexico. Bloomsbury.Robin Wall Kimmerer’s books: https://www.robinwallkimmerer.com/books (mentioned in relation to the grammar used surrounding plants and other more-than-humans) This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this episode, Edda Bild shares insights on human and more-than-human sounds, and which of these are considered more positively, versus which tend to be considered “noise”. Edda currently works as post-doctoral research associate at the Institute for Work and Health in Toronto, Canada, where she focuses on topics around occupational health and safety, like the newcomer experience in the workplace, small businesses and psychological health and safety. She also continues her work as a post-doctoral soundscape researcher and an ambassador of the Sounds in the City team at McGill University. She works on the hearing modality, the broader urban sensory experience, and its implications for urban practice, and has now shifted focus to encouraging sound awareness and education. She is passionate about knowledge transfer and turning research into meaningful interventions and practices. In the episode, we discuss the difference between noise and sound, and which human and more-than-human sounds are more or less considered as noisy. Humans seem to tend to like hearing the sounds of other humans (though not all of their sounds), of birds chirping, and of various “urban waters”, while machines such as cars or construction are often considered only as noise (negative). However, as we discuss towards the end, there are also political policy decisions regarding for example which noises should be tolerated for public purposes even when they are not considered pleasant (e.g. public transportation versus private cars). Edda shares several examples of how sound matters in public spaces (including inside buildings and transportation), and how it is most commonly approached in planning: as noise, that is, as primarily problem. She shows how this makes sense, but that sound is also more complex than staying below 80 decibels to avoid noise, and that sound co-habitation must take many perspectives into account. She also shares some insights on the ways human sound has affected more-than-humans both in (urban) public spaces and under water (referring e.g. to the field of Bioacoustics, see reference below). We end on her take-aways for planners (see below) and on how the theme of sound, like most themes planners work with, have important political implications - e.g. in defining where which sounds are to be permitted, which beings protected from which noises, and so forth. Sound is political.Take-aways for planners, by Edda Bild* Place more emphasis on genuine communication: when you talk, make sure the messages are simple and / or straight-forward enough for the various audiences involved* But do not only talk. Good communication is also about keeping an “open ear”. That is: make sure to listen, be considerate and attempt to understand various perspectives. (For some hints for how to “listen” to more-than-humans, see for instance the episode with Emilija Vaselova or the one with Jonathan Metzger)* Sound is one more element on the list of many that planners need to look out for, but this is why collaborating cross-disciplinarily is key in planning.References and resourcesBild, E., Steele, D., & Guastavino, C. (2024). Supporting the Living Laboratory: A Literature Review of Montreal Sound-Related Research. Journal of Planning Literature, 08854122241266816. https://doi.org/10.1177/08854122241266816Corbin, A., & Corbin, A. (1986). The foul and the fragrant: Odor and the French social imagination. Harvard University Press. Di Croce, N., & Bild, E. (2024). How do urban policies shape atmosphere? A multimethod inquiry of the sonic environment. Urban Research & Practice, 17(3), 416–437. https://doi.org/10.1080/17535069.2023.2232344Mitchell, A. (2022) Bioacoustics: What nature’s sounds can tell us about the health of our world. Canadian Geographic.Ross, A. (2024) What is Noise? The New Yorker.Stamm, C., Bild, E., Tarlao, C. and Guastavino, C. (2024) ¿Por qué deberías preocuparte por lo sonoro? Instituto de Estudios Urbanos y Territoriales. Pontifica Universidad Católica de Chile.Steele, D., Bild, E., & Guastavino, C. (2023). Moving past the sound-noise dichotomy: How professionals of the built environment approach the sonic dimension. Cities, 132, 103974. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103974Thompson, E. A. (2008). The soundscape of modernity: Architectural acoustics and the culture of listening in America, 1900 - 1933 (1. paperback ed., [Nachdr.]). MIT Press.Trudeau, C., Steele, D., & Guastavino, C. (2020). A Tale of Three Misters: The Effect of Water Features on Soundscape Assessments in a Montreal Public Space. Frontiers in Psychology, 11, 570797. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.570797Other podcasts discussing Sound (as a key theme or on occasional episodes):* The Rest is Just Noise Podcast* Sound Matters Podcast* Crossing City Limits Podcast with episode with Edda on Quebec soundThanks for reading Planetary Planning! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this episode, Subina Shrestha, Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Network for Equity in Sustainable Transition (CERC NEST) at the University of Toronto Scarborough in Canada, shares her insights about how the field of logistics is changing spaces, human relations, and more - and especially through the increasing dominance of more-than-human, or perhaps rather: less-than-human, digital technologies. This episode sheds important light on digital more-than-human dynamics that a Planetary Future must take into account. In many societies, especially among the financially wealthiest countries around the world, it has become taken for granted that any object should be available to us within days or even hours, even when it is not something that is normally available in our immediate surroundings. At the same time, many other places, the people in those places, are working hard for an economy that is nowhere near them and that they see little to no benefit from. And then there are the people working in transporting those objects, be it over long distances or for the least mile. As Subina shares with us, much of these logistics are dominated by a corporate objective of speed, efficiency and productivity. She argues that planning can and must play an important role in challenging those objectives in favour of more wellbeing-oriented values. This means that seeking a more-than-humanness in terms of technology and automation, as major corporations tend to do, should not be allowed to be achieved when these go to the detriment of human wellbeing - and perhaps also other more-than-human wellbeing, though we explore this less in this episode. Subina does also see the digital more-than-human world to offer many positive contributions, if one is careful to use them to that end, such as by enabling “platform cooperativism”.In this episode we touch on “cyborg jobs”, workers’ rights and solidarity networks, agency of consumers and local municipalities, the dominance of large corporations in the current planning and execution of logistics, the increasing dominance of less-than-human digital technologies in this, and what planners can do.Take-aways for planners, by Subina Shrestha:* Think about logistics in terms of human wellbeing perspectives - including consumers as well as workers* Focus on urban vitalism as the key objective in urban planning, meaning to aim to elevate wellbeing for everyone in the city* Think well about how digital tools can be used well, and avoid using them to the detriment of the local population. When thinking of people-centered planning, this should also include workers in logistics. And be sure to ask: whose interests are technological innovations serving, in both research and practice?References:Haarstad, H., Rosales, R., & Shrestha, S. (2024). Freight logistics and the city. Urban Studies, 61(1), 3–19. https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980231177265Mimes, C. (2021) Arriving Today. From Factory to Front Door -- Why Everything Has Changed About How and What We Buy. Harper Business. CityFreight projectAnd Antidote’s work, mentioned by Kim, for instance to find a way to support alternatives to Amazon, and to help consumers avoid Amazon. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this episode, we speak with Liz Challinor, researcher in anthropology at the Centre for Research in Anthropology (CRIA) of the New University of Lisbon, as well as fiction and poetry writer. She shares her reflections on categories along which we see others - and ourselves - and how it is often forgotten that we have multiple identities, when in fact this is crucial. In fact, creating connections between those multiple identities might be key. Although the more-than-human lens is not Liz’s field, it becomes clear that at least some of what she has studied among humans is likely to also count between humans and more-than-humans (in themselves categories that may better be transcended, perhaps). Liz highlights the a-historical and a-political approaches that have become more dominant in regards to people crossing borders, essentializing the question of identities and cultures of people often to harmful extents. She also points to how calling out a “crisis” (be it a refugee (or refuge?) crisis, a housing crisis, or a “polycrisis”) can make one feel without agency, hopeless, when in fact we humans have a lot of agency - as well as responsibility for the consequences we now witness. Perhaps as a way to connect our multiple identities with our agency, we go on to speak on the important role that various arts forms, and especially fiction and poetry, can have for bringing back some of the emotion and intuition - and some careful playfulness, too - that is involved in human relations, but that more academic or “scientific” or “rigour-based” approaches tend to reject. Perhaps there is a place for all these approaches, but writing is certainly a legitimate and perhaps even crucial one to maintain as part of our inquiries.Take-aways for planners, by Liz Challinor:* Recognize Planning as presence* Engage with Planning as not only about avoiding disruption, but rather also about being open to disruption, and knowing how to welcome it and realize what it’s bringingReferences:Challinor, E. (2018). "Cross-border citizenship: mothering beyond the boundaries of consanguinity and nationality". Ethnic and Racial Studies 41 1: 114-131. https://doi.org/10.1080/01419870.2017.1293278Challinor, E. (2019). When does difference matter? Border-generating categories in the lives of foreign nationals in northern Portugal. International Journal of Migration and Border Studies, 5(4), 308. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJMBS.2019.105811Challinor, E. (2022). Who Marks the Borders of the (Un)Known? Relational Reflexivity in the Production of a Play on Forced Mobility in Northern Portugal. In N. G. Ortega, & A. B. M. García (Eds.), Representing 21ST-Century Migration in Europe: Performing Borders, Identities and Texts (1st ed., pp. 208-223). Berghahn Books. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781800733817-014Challinor, E. (2024). Navigating through the Cracks of the State System: Shifting Spaces of Hope in the Portuguese Mobility Regime. Anthropological Quarterly 97(1), 95-124. https://dx.doi.org/10.1353/anq.2024.a923085Horgan, M. (2012). Strangers and Strangership. Journal of Intercultural Studies, 33(6), 607–622. https://doi.org/10.1080/07256868.2012.735110Maalouf, A. (2012). In the name of identity: Violence and the need to belong (B. Bray, Trans.). Arcade Publishing.Sacramento, O., Challinor, E., & Silva, P. G. (Eds.). (2020). Quest for Refuge. Reception Responses from the Global North. Edições Húmus. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

This episode is a conversation with António Ferreira, multidisciplinary researcher and writer on themes as varied and interconnected as degrowth/post-growth, urban and regional planning, mobilities and transport, critical innovation and digitalisation studies, and more. António works as principal researcher at CITTA, Centre for Territory, Transports and Environment, at the University of Porto. In this episode, we focus on cyborgs, a topic António dives into in depth in one of the chapters of his recent book, Mobilities in a Turbulent Era. We discuss what cyborgs are, the extent to which they are more-than-human, less-than-human, or perhaps something else entirely. António gives us many examples of the cyborgs already within and among us, as well as the possibilities that could emerge in relation to cyborgs in future. We discuss kaleidoskopic ways of looking at the world (and problems within in) - as an alternative to feeling stuck in dilemma’s or always applying the same go-to “solution”. António applies some of this thinking when we discuss digitalisation more broadly, and how seeking digital solutions to any problem has become the go-to option that - by losing critical reflection about the why and how underlying it - has many hidden downsides. Of course, we also touch on the materiality of the cyborg and the digital, that brings another dimension to the critique of the human-nature binary that has been previously discussed in this podcast. Finally, António shares his take-aways from all this for Planetary Futures and Planetary Planning based on this conversation:Take-aways for planners (and others), by António Ferreira:* Humans in general and Planners in particular should seek more maturity in their decision structures and actions.* Let’s not “throw computers at the problem” assuming that “something should come out of it, right?” - think a bit further and more critically (and creatively?) about this* Protect children from excessive computer exposure, digital exposure and ciborgisation, before they are capable of making their own choices in this matter* All the above can help to have a planning education that is not about a ciborgisation process only because we cannot imagine an alternative* Less computers, less digitalisation, and more humanity in adressing complexityReferences mentioned during the episode:Ferreira, A. (2024) Mobilities in a Turbulent Era. Edward Elgar.Hine, D. (2023) At Work in the Ruins. Finding Our Place in the Time of Climate Crises and Other Emergencies. Chelsea Green.Sennett, R. (1970) The Uses of Disorder. Personal Identity and City Life. Verso Books.Daniel Schmachtenberger on the Multi-Polar Trap (see for example, here) The Karate Kid 1984 (Film)RoboCop 1987 (Film) This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this episode, we speak with Jamie Wang, urban environmental humanities scholar, editor and poet. She works as Research Assistant Professor in the Department of Literature and Cultural Studies at the Education University of Hong Kong, and is editor of the journal Feminist Review. Jamie has recently published the book Reimagining the More-Than-Human City. Stories from Singapore, and we discuss some of what she explores in the book, as well as her broader perspectives, inspiration, and some examples on more-than-human cities and the example of Singapore in particular.In this conversation, Jamie shares some key insights from her book, especially around the interrelations between the three core themes of eco-modernist theory, more-than-human studies, and future / futuring studies. Through this, Jamie helps de-center not only the human but also the urban that is so central to human thought and also to the Planning discipline nowadays. She furthermore gives special emphasis to the idea that more-than-human thinking is not equal to non-human, that is, that this lens does not flatten the still important relations between humans among themselves, but perhaps rather sharpens and complexifies our understanding of this also. In her book, Jamie seeks to use storytelling methods - inspired by Deborah Bert Rose and Tom van Doren who have also come up previously, for instance in the episode with Isabelle Doucet; see also our episode with Phoebe Wagner on Solarpunk storytelling. Through this approach, she argues that it becomes much more possible to speak of complexity and multiplicity, and to address planetary themes without losing sight of micro-narratives that are key for deeper understanding.Jamie also shares some examples from Singapore, such as concering its changing politics regarding green spaces, shifting from “garden city”, to “city in a garden”, to “city in nature”, and gives us a glimpse into how very particular politics and modernisation aspirations can shape a city over time, also as this city-state claims its place in global politics and global imaginaries. She highlights that solutions for more-than-human futures will most likely not be harmonious, that choices about inclusion and exclusion are inevitable, but can be much more transparent and considerate of all species (for those interested, this also links back nicely to our episode with Jonathan Metzger). Jamie shares some concrete examples of what this might look like, but also says much work is still needed, including the inclusion of multiple species in the visualisations of changing landscapes - which also means that the past, present, and future should be folded into one another when imagining futures, so that we can better perceive whose habitats are being prioritized, who is winning and who is losing.Take-aways for planners (jointly with others!), by Jamie Wang:* Accelerating discussions and action on environmental issues, co-existence, displacement, global capitalism, and related themes.* Think about the past and the present as imagined futures. See what had to be removed so that this could be, who is in it and who had to be removed. Also when imagining and imaging (creating images) about it.* Enable the public (including planners) to “imagining better”. In other words, creating conditions for imagination.* In the face of climate change, Planning probably needs to go beyond a mathematical issue, but take a more holistic view.References:Deborah Bird RoseEmily O’GormanNixon, R. (2013) Slow Violence and the Environmentalism of the Poor. Harvard University Press.Thom van DoorenWang, J. (2024) Reimagining the More-Than-Human City. Stories from Singapore. MIT Press. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this episode, we speak with Olivia Bina, Senior Researcher at the Instituto de de Ciências Sociais Universidade de Lisboa (ICS - Institute of Social Sciences University of Lisbon), and Fellow of the World Academy of Art and Science (WAAS). We delve chiefly into three points with her, each fascinating angles on how a “nature”-human relationship can be questioned. First, we broach the theme of imaginaries, futures and utopia as posing various questions about how a sustainable world might look, which Olivia has studied, for example, through the fascinating lens of science-fiction (see especially Bina et al. 2020, referenced below). Yet ultimately continuing to leave open Donella Meadows’ question from 1994 about how difficult - but not impossible - it is to envision a desirable sustainable world.Second, Olivia shares insights gathered through various specific experiences in a life journey across Italy, Chile, China, Hong Kong and Portugal, and especially her experiences in Santiago de Chile, Beijing and Hong Kong. She shares how these three deeply urban environments highlighted different (problematic as well as positive) ways the human-“nature” relationship can take shape and deeply affects how urban environments are made and experienced. Olivia clarifies that one of the key motivations throughout her multidisciplinary work has always been the premise that change is needed, but also the ongoing need to question: what change, for which reasons, and what it would look like exactly. This also leads to persistent questions of diverse epistemologies and ontologies.Third, Olivia recounts the main results of the Form Follows Life competition, a fascinating project she has been recently involved in (see links below for the two winning teams). She reflects on the kids of results they obtained, and what they seem to indicate and lead her to think further about now. Finally, as all our guests, Olivia also left us with her takeaways for planners, which we share below. Please also see the references below to some of her most relevant work on the above themes, and to the competition page and winning groups from Form Follows Life.Take-aways for planners, by Olivia Bina:* Unlearn and decolonize the knowledge systems that we have so preciously cultivated and accumulated in ourselves, opening up to both diversity and plurality of ways of knowing and ways of thinking.* Learn humility and take time.References:Form Follows Life Competition, via Non-A: https://www.non-a.com/open-architecture-competitions/form-follows-life/ The two winners of the Form Follows Life Competition:* Team Advanced living corridors. https://www.fair.archi/* Team Skyfall; Birth of a Biocity. Here is the link to the post to our Instagram which is a collaboration post: Academic references:Bina, O. (2024) What if… “Form followed Life”? In Blogue SHIFT, 11th July, https://ambienteterritoriosociedade-ics.org/2024/07/11/what-if-form-followed-life/ Fokdal, J., Bina, O., Chiles, P., Ojamäe, L. and Paadam, K. (Eds.) (2021) Enabling the City: Interdisciplinary and transdisciplinary encounters in research and practice Routledge, New York and Abingdon, https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/9780367277390 Bina, O., Baptista, M. D., Pereira, M. M., Inch, A., Falanga, R., Alegría, V., Caquimbo-Salazar, S., Duarte, D. H. S., Mercado, G., Valenta, A. T., Vasquez, A. and Verellen, T. (2024) Exploring desired urban futures: the transformative potential of a nature-based approach, Futures, 103362, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2024.103362. Bina, O., Inch, A. and Pereira, L. (2020) Beyond techno-utopia and its discontents: On the role of utopianism and speculative fiction in shaping alternatives to the smart city imaginary, Futures, 115, 102475, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2019.102475. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this super-short episode, we share two quotes by David Graeber, which are mentioned and discussed in the collection of essays “The Ultimate Hidden Truth of the World…”, edited by Nika Dubrovsky and published in 2024 (among other places where the quotes have previously been published). As an anthropologist and activist for social justice, David Graeber focused his work chiefly on human relations and their myriad facets, and the fact that these relations are much more flexible than they are made to seem in today’s largely globalized and interconnected social world. We briefly share the quotes and how they have inspired us to also feel the enormous potential this can hold for embracing and acknowledging the myriad positive ways human to human as well as human to more-than-human relationships could look and evolve. Finally, we announce our next episode, to be published on 3 February 2025, on Questioning Imaginaries of Change, with Olivia Bina.We look forward to a new year full of insightful conversations, and hope that you as listeners will join us on the way. Do send us your recommendations for speakers or themes you would be interested in!Reference:“The Ultimate Hidden Truth of the World… Essays.”, 2024, by David Graeber, Edited by Nika Dubrovsky. Allen Lane. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this episode, we speak with Isabelle Doucet, Professor of theory and history of architecture at Chalmers University of Technology, Sweden. She here reflects on multi-species perspectives and social and environmental justice. I, Kim, met her at the IRS Academy in Berlin last spring, and am very glad I subsequently asked her to come on the podcast. This episode is a fascinating exploration into a very multi-disciplinary take on architecture, design and how to consider the “other” while de-centering the frequently white, male and human dominant perspectives we are faced with around the world today.Isabelle cites a wealth of authors that we cite / link to below and heartily invite our listeners to have a look into. The list includes Anna Tsing, Donna Haraway and Rosi Braidotti, among many others. She also provides examples of architectural visions and experiences that truly consider multi-species realities in surprisingly realistic ways.Throughout the journey of this conversation, Isabelle speaks of how a multi-species perspective “forces us to think the world through connections and entanglements”, and to move beyond human exceptionalism. She highlights how important storytelling is for “de-centering” the designer, and how central economics can be for the potential for change in these regards: challenging contemporary practices in relation to land and the accumulation of value through built structures for example. Finally we also broach the subject of participation and how including various perspectives is a theme that equally surfaces in architecture and planning, and yet remains a challenge, even more so when attempting to move beyond the human.Take-aways for planners, by Isabelle Doucet:* Ask the question of who benefits, but also of who is damaged? In both architecture and planning there seems to be strong positivity about the make-ability of the world, but this often neglects the (conscious or unconscious) damages that this “making” can also inflict.* Planning has an amazing opportunity as a broad field to bring together environmental, social and spatial justice and questions of the owning, (re)claiming, and accessibility of land.References:Isabelle Doucet, Interspecies Encounters: Design (Hi)stories, Practices of Care, and Challenges. In K. Förster (Ed.), Environmental Histories of Architecture. Canadian Centre for Architecture. https://www.librarystack.org/environmental-histories-of-architecture/Isabelle Doucet, Anticipating Fabulous Futures, E-Flux Journal (Overgrowth Series), September 2019. https://www.e-flux.com/architecture/overgrowth/284918/anticipating-fabulous-futures/Isabelle Doucet, Architectural Storytelling: A Space Between Critical Practice and Fragile Environments. In: Hélène Frichot, Adrià Carbonell, Hannes Frykholm, Sepideh Karami, eds., Infrastructural Love. Caring for Our Architectural Support Systems (Birkhäuser 2022).Akwugo Emejulu, Fugitive Feminism (Silver Press 2022) https://www.silverpress.org/products/fugitive-feminism?srsltid=AfmBOop5h2awzKQaWV6BMf_NjKzji3U8u05vG2nAzAa28jivQrakP0LvAstrida Neimanis, Cecilia Åsberg, & Johan Hedrén, Four Problems, Four Directions for Environmental Humanities: Toward Critical Posthumanities for the Anthropocene. Ethics and the Environment, 20(1), 2015, 67–97. https://doi.org/10.2979/ethicsenviro.20.1.67May-Britt Öhman, “Settler Colonialism in Ungreen, Climate-Unfriendly Disguise & As a Tool for Genocide” in: Climate: Our Right to Breathe, eds. Chu, Down, Mabaso et al. (L’Internationale And K verlag, 2022) (Book chapter. Access: https://internationaleonline.org/site/assets/files/8140/lio_climate_2022.pdf)Thom Van Dooren and Deborah Bird Rose, Lively Ethography: Storying Animist Worlds, Environmental Humanities 8, no. 1 (May 2016): 77–94. https://doi.org/10.1215/22011919-3527731Additional authors mentioned:* Donna J. Haraway* Anna L. Tsing* Deborah Bird Rose* Thom van Dooren* Vinciane Despret* Isabelle Stengers* Rosi Braidotti This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

*note: we apologize for a relatively bad sound quality. We suggest the use of the accompanying transcript to better be able to follow. We hope you can thus nevertheless enjoy this insightful conversation!*During this episode, Jan Visser shares his views on “scientific” and caring mindsets, about which he has learned much through his various transdisciplinary experiences. We begin with a definition of theoretical physics, and first try to understand how this connects to processes of learning and caring. Through this process, we have a fascinating conversation about how dispositions for thinking “scientifically” and in caring ways might emerge. Jan shares several conditions for “Building the Scientific Mind”, which he has developed over many years at transdisciplinary colloquia around the world, which are shown in an overview in the following image:We follow Jan’s journey of discovery towards these ideas, which in itself is fascinating because it shows how deep involvement with one quite specific discipline - theoretical physics - can be brought into important dialogues with many other disciplines, while also being the root for seeking knowledge and understanding about how people learn, and what kind of learning might be more in tune with a healthy planet. Jan argues that care, not being rule-based nor a product, is rather a disposition (just like the “scientific mind”), which must be developed, and certain conditions that can be more or less helpful for this. He has learned that care depends on how we perceive relationships within specific diads (one with one other) and argues that care requires some level of knowledge about one-another, from both sides, including between the earth and human beings. To build such knowledge and understanding that can encourage care, however, Jan highlights that learning, in schools and throughout life, needs to be about more than the things that are immediately useful for the daily lives of individuals. As he puts it, “it’s important to recognise that our planet is a living planet, and not just a physical planet with life on top of it, but life is an intricate part of that physical structure that our planet has become.” In this sense, theoretical physics and planetary planning seem to come quite close together.Take-aways for planners, by Jan Visser:* Do not plan in a way that it forces people in a certain direction, because then any change they undergo will not be owned by the people who adopt it.* Instead, create conditions that facilitate the adoption of different behaviours individuals are happy with and about and that contribute to constructive interaction with a changing environment.Links mentioned in the episode, and further reading:* The transdiciplinary Learning Development Institute, set up by Jan Visser* Retrospective on Building the Scientific Mind series of colloquia* Building the Scientific Mind interviews on YouTube* Book “Seeking Understanding”: Visser, J., & Visser, M. (Eds.) (2020). Seeking understanding: The lifelong pursuit to build the scientific mind. Leiden and Boston: Brill | Sense. * Paper on “Care for the Earth, Ourselves, and Others”* Paper on Learning and the Scientific Mind, called “Two Things Commanding Attention”* Book on Learning: Visser, J., & Visser-Valfrey, M. (Eds.) (2008). Learners in a changing learning landscape: Reflections from a dialogue on new roles and expectations. Dordrecht: Springer. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this episode, we speak with Matti Kuittinen, Professor of Sustainable Construction at Aalto University in Finland. We begin with an exploration of the role of construction industries as well as the planning of construction and land-use in the breaching of several planetary boundaries - taking the opportunity to dive a little deeper into what those boundaries are, as well. Matti reveals how construction is one of the biggest contributors to many of the problems caused by humans for the environment and non-humans (and humans themselves, too), including for biodiversity. He also highlights this with recourse to the interconnection between areas related to land-use, including the role of future food-practices around the world.But this also leads us to discuss ways that construction could be a key for more planetary thinking and acting, or what could be called “planetary aware construction”. Matti discusses several already-existing examples of such forms of construction, including finding solutions where the need for built space is solved without the need for new construction. Matti then highlights that construction that is mindful of other species should take them into account as if they were our neighbours. Construction will perhaps necessarily include some kind of destruction, but perhaps it could be less intensive, and more considerate of others. Especially given our responsibility as human beings towards species that are much less able to defend their own needs.As we explore this and more, it becomes clear that - be it in the area of construction or any other - a return to more respect and care for the more-than-human is key for a planetary approach. And, Matti points out, perhaps a way to reach this would be to find joy in the responsibility that humans have for the wonder of life on the planet as a whole.Take-aways for planners, by Matti Kuittinen:* Prioritize regeneration, so that anything done in planning or construction improves living conditions and wellbeing of all life.* Place more emphasis on resilience. We don’t know what the future will look like exactly, but we know we will need to be resilient to face the challenges that will already inevitably occur. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this episode, we speak with Ralf Syring, expert in decolonial and solidarity work and later so-called “international development” in the African and Central American continents. He studied theology, sociology and medicine, and is an avid reader of fiction and non-fiction on the most diverse subjects - all of which have helped to inform the conversation we share here. The episode takes us through the topics of what development does, can or should mean, and to whom; to what the role of time-limited “projects” is in this; and to the role of specific contexts - be they about language or something else; and bringing us ultimately to the great importance of a contextually specific approach to anything we wish to act on. This decidedly does not mean that everything is relative or that nothing can be more widely valid than one specific context, as Ralf points out from the beginning, but when we want to make a change somewhere, we had better know that place, those people, that language, and not least that more-than-human context.Take-aways for planners, by Ralf Syring:* Make sure to consider context well before you act - in terms of history, linguistics, definitions and wishes of development, the role of your identity in relation to those you work with, and many more themes (think critically and reflectively).* Be careful not to make “planetary planning” about making one plan for the entire planet! (answer from the hosts: we certainly hope planetary planning will always be about diverse and various solutions, not about masterplans and blueprints!)References from the episode:Kingsolver, Barbara (1998) The Poisonwood Bible. New York (Harper Collins).Campbell, Catherine (2003) Letting Them Die. Why HIV/AIDS Prevention Programmes Fail. Oxford (African Issues, James Currey, the International African Institute), Bloomington (Indiana University Press)Syring, Ralf (2019) Seeking to Find out Why Things Happen. Variations on a Theme of Diallo Sampa’s Grandfather. In: Jan Visser, Muriel Visser (ed.): Seeking Understanding. The Lifelong Pursuit to Build the Scientific Mind. Leiden (Brill)Syring, Ralf (2005) The Mine, Dignity, and a Hospital's Protection against Raids. In: Lukas Einsele: One Step Beyond – The Mine Revisited. Berlin (Hatje Cantz) This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

This brief introduction is to welcome you all back to the podcast after the summer break, and to very briefly introduce the podcast to any newcomers. A longer introduction can be found in the first episode, and we welcome everyone to go back and listen to any previous episodes, as they continue to be relevant! Immediately after this introduction, you’ll also find the next episode, with Ralf Syring, published. Stay tuned for new episodes every month! We are open to suggestions for new speakers and/or topics, so do leave us a message if you’ve thought of something we should cover. We look forward to hearing back from you! This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this last episode before our summer break, Susa and Kim explore various more-than-human voices in Coimbra (Portugal), Berlin (Germany), and Matosinhos (Portugal). By doing so, we touch on various types of symbiosis between humans and more-than-humans in cities, and when they are more or less toxic. We also reflect on whether more-than-humans are always coming from “nature”, or whether they might also include machines, for example. As always, we welcome your input on how such episodes might be done in future, and hope you have enjoyed our attempt to give voice to and explore possible meanings of more-than-human voices around us.We will be back with our next episode in September! Until then, we leave some ideas for how you might engage with more-than-humanness over your summer! :) Take-aways for planners (and others!):* Revisiting relations between humans and more-than-humans so that nature isn’t perhaps so aligned with trash or “leftovers”* Emphasizing a sense of mutual care with birds (and other more-than-humans)* Thinking about how much priority we are giving to which more-than-human and human side, i.e. “nature”, human, machine* Recognizing the huge diversity of more-than-humanness even within urban environments, perhaps challenging the urban-rural binary* Go listen for more-than-humanness, also in urban environments, seeking to hear and experience beyond our usual human senses, and allow this to challenge the directionalities we chose to prioritize in daily lifeReferences from the episode:Bridle, J. (2023). Ways of being: Animals, plants, machines: the search for a planetary intelligence. Penguin Books.Hagens, Nate (2024) Daniel Schmachtenberger: "Moving from Naive to Authentic Progress: A Vision for Betterment”. The Great Simplification Podcast. 5.6.2024. https://www.thegreatsimplification.com/episode/126-daniel-schmachtenberger-7 This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this episode, we speak with Emīlija Vaselova, Doctoral researcher in Multispecies Design at Aalto University, Finland, about her fascinating experiences in designing with Nature, in the truest sense of the word. She has worked for many years at expanding the definition of a “stakeholder” to include more-than-humans, in desin and planning practice and research, even while not losing sight of the importance of inclusion of diverse human groups. This includes the process of identifying which more-than-humans are stakeholders in diverse design processes, as well as practical explorations of how, once identified, they might be included. Emilija has explored multiple ways of incorporating various shapes Nature can take, from weather processes (such as snow), to mushroom ecosystems to winter and other seasons, and much more. She explains the difference between including various individual “organisms” (e.g. one specific dog) versus single species collectives (e.g. a single bee versus a bee hive), or even multi-species collectives (e.g. lichens en trees, etc.), which for some (most?) species is crucial, as they require more than one of themselves and/or other beings to live (well). This to provide only one of many fascinating examples of the themes explored in this episode.Emīlija shares that in her experience, even if such more-than-human inclusion is still rudimentary, an aspect of “added care” does make a difference in making sure that more-than-humans are at least somewhat considered in decision-making. She highlights how both experiential and more abstract knowledge about the natural environment can be crucial for gaining a better sense of the interconnectedness and needs concerned in human and more-than-human relations. And she asks anyone to ask themselves: does this project or this decision involve any more-than-human stakeholder? Even if a more-than-human stakeholder is not immediately apparent, which might be there in hidden ways, after all, while emphasising the fun, curious side of this exploration.Take-aways for planners, by Emīlija Vaselova: * Explicitly acknowledge that we need nature, now, in 10 years, in 100 years.* Acknowledge that we shape the future with the actions we take today, including the spaces all species will live in, and the way humans and all species view these spaces and how they/we coexist.* Have curiosity about how the processes could be different already today, and test it today, or tomorrow, or next week.* Support nature so that in turn it can support us. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this - double-themed and thus somewhat longer - episode, we speak with Philippe van Parijs, Belgian political philosopher and political economist. We discuss both basic income and linguistic justice, neither of which might immediately seem logical themes for this podcast, especially compared to the themes discussed so far. However, we want to challenge our listeners to see the connections, because seeking ways of binding together exciting ideas for the future and relating them to how this would impact a “planetary” approach, is precisely what drives this podcast. This conversation really highlights how radical a change in all aspects of life - for humans and more-than-humans would likely emerge, from the apparently “simple” implementation of a basic income. For instance, although individual basic income might seem to further highlight individualism and individual, human-centered living, thinking about it in very practical terms makes one realize that it would actually more likely incentivise more community-oriented living. At the same time, Philippe also highlights that some changes might be less radical than we might hope or expect - for example, he suggests that people would still probably specialize in a specific field of work or discipline of thought. We also speak of how basic income leaves more space and incentive for life-long learning, for instance.As we move to the theme of linguistic justice, we discuss the impact this could have on people’s choice to stay in given locations, as their realities would be much more contected to a locality, bound together with a language, and moving to another locality would (more than now) mean that one would need to learn a potentially very different language. Might this also be another incentive for humans to reconnect with localities? Even when they do choose to move, perhaps this movement would be less removed from the realities of the locality - after all, culture, nature, and language are arguably deeply intertwined…Take-aways for planners, by Philippe van Parijs:* Planning is most crucial in its function as a form of intelligent interdisciplinary foresight.* As such, planning will unavoidably lead to coercive measures, but these are necessary in a context where human action so often results in highly negative consequences for non-humans.* Despite its coercive side, planning should always maintain the promise of a utopia of maximum freedom for people, and this will most likely require some form of Universal Basic Income.References from the episode:Philippe van Parijs’ Université Catholique de Louvin pagePhilippe van Parijs’ Wikipedia pageParijs, P. van, & Vanderborght, Y. (2019). Basic income: A radical proposal for a free society and a sane economy (First Harvard University Press paperback edition). Harvard University Press. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

This episode is the first in a series of more-than-human interviews Susa and I have planned for this podcast. Every third episode will be one of these. In these episodes, we do our best to give a little space for a more-than-human to “speak”, and discuss a little about the context and about what messages we can read into this. We try to listen, but of course our own human capacities and patterns of thought influence what we are able to hear and interpret here. This is why the episodes also include soundscapes without speech. We hope that our listeners might be inspired by this to think of various ways these soundscapes may be interpreted.In this particular episode, we host “Finnish Winter”, with the help of Susa, who lives in Finland and regularly experiences this winter. The soundscapes for this episode were recorded in April 2024, and this Winter was already turning towards Spring, although the amount of snow was still quite high. Birds that normally eschew the coldest winter months in Finland can be heard returning. These sounds trigger Susa and Kim to reflect on the pleasantness of natural soundscapes, on Finnish seasonalities, on the importance of seasonality more broadly, on how seasonality is being affected by climate change, and much more. Of course, all with an eye for implications for “Planning”, that is, imagining futures and how to reach (or avoid) them…We hope you enjoy the episode!We refer to one book in the episode, here is the reference:Graeber, D., & Wengrow, D. (2021). The dawn of everything: A new history of humanity. Penguin Random House UK. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com

In this episode, we explore the topic of more-than-human planning with Jonathan Metzger, Professor at the KTH Royal Institute of Technology. Jonathan is a truly transdisciplinary scholar, connecting Planning Studies, Human Geography, STS (Science- and Technology Studies) and Organizational Studies. He studies various angles of decision-making concerning complex environmental issues – generally with a focus on urban and regional planning, policy and politics. More than for these reasons, though, we invited him for the podcast because he is one of the few “planners” we are aware of, who has actively sought to connect more-than-human perspectives with planning decision making. He has published, for example, about planning’s relationship with Moose, and with Mosquitoes (together with Jean Hillier).In this episode, Jonathan gives us examples as well as triggers more abstract thinking about how no planning process (or any process) is neutral or equally “postive” in terms of affecting or benefiting various groups - be they human or more-than-human. Choices are made, and losses experienced, but too frequently there is not even any awareness of much of that. And this is something that can change, and might be an important step towards creating a different discussion also among and between those who are able to speak up in defense of themselves and other species.Take-aways for planners, by Jonathan Metzger:* Avoid common pitfalls by better connecting the existing theory and practice on more-than-human planning! Check out the wealth of what is already out there, and bring it together.References from the episode:Metzger, J. (2014). The moose are protesting: the more-than-human politics of transport infrastructure development. In Planning against the Political (pp. 191-213). Routledge.Metzger, J. (2019). A more-than-human approach to environmental planning. In The Routledge companion to environmental planning (pp. 190-199). Routledge.Hillier, J., & Metzger, J. (2021). Towns within Towns: From Incompossibility to Inclusive Disjunction in Urban Spatial Planning. Deleuze and Guattari Studies, 15(1), 40–64. https://doi.org/10.3366/dlgs.2021.0428Metzger, J. (2023). The Cosmopolitics of Urban Planning in a More-than-Human World. In The Routledge International Handbook of More-than-Human Studies (pp. 348-358). Routledge.Other authors mentioned in the episode, with links to their work:Noel CastreeSarah WhatmoreDonna HarawayPatsy HealeyIsabelle StengersRobin Wall-KimmererLudwig WittgensteinHeather CampbellClaire Coldbrook This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit planetaryplanning.substack.com