Zeit als Gestaltungsthema und Rahmenbedingung - am Beispiel der Stadtentwicklungsplanung

Abstract

Zeitpolitische Bemühungen setzen oftmals an Zeitkonflikten zwischen Akteuren an (z.B. Konflikte zwischen Arbeitgeber und -nehmer über Gestaltungsmöglichkeiten der Arbeitszeitflexibilisierung). Der vorliegende Beitrag hingegen richtet den Fokus auf einzelne Akteure und ihren Anspruch, Zeit zu gestalten ("Mikroanalyse"). Der Beitrag unterscheidet zwischen zwei Arten von Zeitgestaltern: (1) Zeitpioniere und (2) Agenten von institutionellem Wandel. Zeitpioniere betonen die Absicht der eigenen individuellen Zeitwohlstandserhöhung durch die Gestaltung ihres Lebensstils, während Gestalter des institutionellen Wandels von Zeitstrukturen kollektive Wohlstandsgewinne und deren Verteilung in den Vordergrund stellen. Institutionenorientierte Zeitgestalter sind von besonderer Bedeutung für die Realisierung einer zeitgerechten Stadt. Theoretisch liegt es nahe, dass institutionenorientierte Gestalter das informelle Instrument der Stadtentwicklungsplanung nutzen, um Schritte in Richtung einer zeitgerechten Stadt zu gehen, z.B. um das Querschnittsthema der Zeitgestaltung in den bestehenden räumlichen Planungsinstrumenten und in den Fachplanungen zu verankern. Ein Blick in die Planungspraxis ist allerdings ernüchternd. Zeitgestaltung spielt sowohl im Stadtentwicklungsplan der Stadt Aachen aus dem Jahr 2012 als auch im Integrierten Stadtentwicklungskonzept der Stadt Dresden aus dem Jahr 2016 keine prominente Rolle. Hierfür gibt es fallspezifische Ursachen (z. B. der Prozessverlauf in Aachen, die geringe Bedeutung von Zeit als planerisches Gestaltungsthema in Dresden). Der Beitrag formuliert anhand dieser konzeptionellen Überlegungen und Beispielanalysen einige Hinweise für die künftige Planungsforschung als Beitrag zur Realisierung einer zeitgerechten Stadt.

Time-policy endeavours often highlight time conflicts between actors (e.g. conflicts between employers and employees about the scope of flexibility in working hours). In contrast, this paper focuses on individual actors and their aspirations to manage time ('microanalysis'). The paper differentiates between two types of time managers: (1) time pioneers and (2) agents of institutional change. Time pioneers focus on improving their individual time budgets through the design of their lifestyles. Agents of institutional change, on the other hand, emphasise collective improvements in time budgeting and distribution through changes in regulative, normative and cognitive structures. Time managers oriented towards institutions are particularly important for achieving temporal justice in the city. In theory it seems likely that institutional agents would use the informal instrument of urban development planning to take steps towards improving temporal justice in the city, e.g. by tackling the cross-sectoral topic of time management by using existing spatial planning instruments and sectoral planning. Two case studies from planning practice paint a somewhat different picture, however. The example of family time policy and urban development planning in Aachen demonstrates systematic attempts to establish time policy approaches in overall municipal action. Nonetheless, consideration of the urban development plan passed in December 2012 by the city council, 'Aachen*2030 Masterplan. Perspectives and impulses for the spatial development of the city of Aachen' (Stadt Aachen 2012), suggests that there is still plenty of scope for improvement in terms of the coordination and integration of family time policy and planning. The 2012 urban development plan contains few statements on family policy and primarily refers to time in terms of a reference to the future for scheduling the implementation of plan statements. The focus of the plans is clearly on spatial relations and the consideration and integration of sectoral policies. Aachen’s urban development plan is thus not - in any direct sense - a document on municipal family-time policies. The lack of consideration of time policies in the urban development plan can be at least partially explained by the process of planning procedures in Aachen. Time policies did not gain significance in urban planning in Aachen until after the urban development plan had been completed. The paper then turns to a case study of planning in Dresden where in February 2016 the city council passed the integrated urban development concept (INSEK) 'Future Dresden 2025+' (LHD 2016). The investigation suggests that urban development planning in Dresden has thus far operated largely in a 'conventional time' manner. The actors involved in developing the concept thus use time as a quasi self-evident framework for their actions. There are few references to time in INSEK and where they occur they are used to refer to the future and the anticipated necessity of further specifying and adapting plans because of the uncertain social, economic and ecological conditions that affect urban development planning. It seems possible, however, that opportunities for time-policy based planning and implementation activities may arise in the future in Dresden due to new political circumstances in the city council and current strategic initiatives. Overall, the findings on time policies in planning practice are sobering but also somewhat 'mixed' and certainly not conclusive. This may be because concise analyses of case-study municipalities do not adequately reflect the social, temporal and spatial complexity of collective attempts to manage and coordinate time in cities. To develop strategies in cities, the paper therefore calls for investigations of planning and implementation that are time-policy inspired, systematic, comparative, and genuinely processual and evaluation-oriented.