Abstract:Plans and policies rely on knowledge about communities that is often made by actors outside of the community. Exclusion from the creation of knowledge is a function of exclusion from power. Marxists, feminist, decolonial and postmodernist theorists have documented how the knowledge of some subjects is disqualified based on their gender, race, socio-economic position or a range of other constructed differences. Often, several of these constructions intersect in one person's life, compounding their exclusion in ways that are both relational and structural (Crenshaw, 2017). Participatory planning approaches bring members of the community into contact with planning authorities in an effort to include their voices and interests in official plans. Essential to meaningful engagement in such a process is the participant's ability to turn their ideas into change through the exercise of their agency. When that potential for transformation is missing, participation is tokenistic at best and dangerous at worst (Cooke and Kothari, 2001, Hickey and Mohan, 2004; Forester, 2020). When planners ask people whose agency is restricted by institutional and cultural forms of subjugation to talk about issues that adversely impact them, but over which they have little control, we can create exposures to internal and external risks that we are ill-equipped to mitigate. How can planners work towards social transformation without shifting the burden of speaking truth to power onto community members? One of the ways in which power and knowledge are related is through the complicated process of communication. Reflecting on power and communication in planning practice, this paper contemplates the question: when working with communities that have been historically excluded from the creation of knowledge about themselves, should planners strive for undistorted communication or should the distortion in communication be analysed for what it can tell us about agency and power, and opportunities for resistance and transformation?

Planning Language Change: A Strategy for Promoting Human and Ecological Security

Some Reflections on Language Planning As a Discipline Chinese Full Text

An Ecological View of Language Planning——A Review of "Language Planning: from Practice to Theory"

The Necessity,Inevitability and Limitations of Language Planning

Language Planning at the Age of Globalization and Social Harmony

Language Problems and Language Planning

On the Mutual Restraint Relationship between Language Planning and Language Conservation

Refusing “Endangered Languages” Narratives

The Discourse of Security: Language, Illiberalism and Governmentality

Terminology and Language Planning

From Planned Language to Language Planning

Language Planning and Language Services for the Belt and Road Initiative

National Language Capabilities,Language Planning and National Security

Cultural Heritage As a Key Motivation for Sustainable Language Protection: a Case Study of the Suzhou Dialect Protection Project

Analysis of Motivation of Language Planning

' ¡ Eso no se dice'!: Exploring the value of communication distortions in participatory planning

Discourse as (In) security Practice:Theory and Rhetoric of "Axis of Evil"

Language, Ideology and Sociopolitical Change in the Arabic-speaking World

On the Basic Principles of Language Planning

Language Planning with Respect to English into China

Language Planning for Naming and its Socio-cultural Connotations: A Case Study in Taiwan