European Spatial Research and Policy


The present paper evaluates Hungarian strategic urban planning from the perspective of well-being. It conceptualises well-being in line with Amartya Sen’s capability approach (CA). We argue that the CA provides a meaningful concept of common good or public interest for evaluation. The open-ended nature of CA allows one to embrace the complexity of strategic planning, but it is definite enough to provide a clear normative framework for evaluation. We base our conclusions on 49 interviews with various local actors in three second-tier cities. We conclude that the CA-based evaluation can supplement the dominantly used conformance or performance-based evaluation approaches. We also found that instead of depicting an unachievable ideal state, the CA is able to provide guidance for feasible steps to further well-being.


urban strategic planning, capability approach (CA), well-being, agency, Hungary




ALBRECHTS, L. (2004), ‘Strategic (spatial) planning reexamined’, Environment and Planning B, 31 (5), pp. 743–758.

ALBRECHTS, L. (2006), ‘Shifts in strategic spatial planning? Some evidence from Europe and Australia’, Environment and Planning A, 38 (6), pp. 1149–1170.

ALEXANDER, E.R. (2002a), ‘Planning Rights: Toward Normative Criteria for Evaluating Plans’, International Planning Studies, 7 (3), pp. 191–212.

ALEXANDER, E.R. (2002b), ‘The public interest in planning: from legitimation to substantive plan evaluation’, Planning Theory, 1 (3), pp. 226–249.

ARNSTEIN, S.R. (1969), ‘A Ladder of Citizen Participation’, Journal of American Planning Association, 35 (4), pp. 216–224.

BAJMÓCY, Z. and GÉBERT, J. (2014), ‘Arguments for deliberative participation in local economic development’, Acta Oeconomica, 64 (3), pp. 313–334.

BAJMÓCY, Z., GÉBERT, J. and MÁLOVICS, Gy. (eds.) (2017), Helyi gazdaságfejlesztés a képességszemlélet alapján, JATEPress, Szeged.

BARTA, Gy. (2009), ‘Integrált városfejlesztési stratégia: a városfejlesztés megújítása’, Tér és Társadalom, 23 (3), pp. 1–12.

BASTA, C. (2016), ‘From justice in planning toward planning for justice: A capability approach’, Planning Theory, 15 (2), pp. 190–212.

BASTA, C. (2017), ‘On Marx’s human significance, Harvey’s right to the city, and Nussbaum’s capability approach’, Planning Theory, 16 (4), pp. 345–363.

BIGGERI, M. and FERRANNINI, A. (2014), ‘Opportunity gap analysis: Procedures and methods for applying the capability approach in development initiatives’, Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 15 (1), pp. 60–78.

BRINKMANN, S. and KVALE, S. (2015), InterViews. Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing, Third edition, Sage, Los Angeles–London–New Delhi–Singapore–Washington DC.

CAMPBELL, H. and MARSHALL, R. (2002), ‘Utilitarianism’s bad breath? A re-evaluation of the public interest justification for planning’, Planning Theory, 1 (2), pp. 163–187.

CSANÁDI, G., CSIZMADY, A. and KŐSZEGHY, L. (2010), ‘Nyilvánosság és részvétel a településtervezési folyamatban’, Tér és Társadalom, 24 (1), pp. 15–36.

FAINSTEIN, S.S. (2014), ‘The just city’, International Journal of Urban Sciences, 18 (1), pp. 1–18.

FALUDI, A. (1989), ‘Conformance vs. performance: Implications for evaluation’, Impact Assessment, 7 (2-3), pp. 135–151.

FARAGÓ, L. (2005), A jövőalkotás társadalomtechnikája: a közösségi tervezés elmélete, Dialóg Campus, Pécs–Budapest.

FARAGÓ, L. (2012), ‘Urban regeneration on a «city of culture». The case of Pécs, Hungary’, European Spatial Research and Policy, 19 (2), pp. 103–120.

FREDIANI, A.A. (2007), ‘Amartya Sen, the World Bank, and the Redress of Urban Poverty: A Brazilian Case Study’, Journal of Human Development, 8 (1), pp. 133–152.

FREDIANI, A.A., BONI, A. and GASPER, D. (2014), ‘Approaching Development Projects from a Human Development and Capability Perspective’, Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 15 (1), pp. 1–12.

GASPER, D. (2007), ‘What is the capability approach? Its core, rationale, partners and dangers’, The Journal of Socio-Economics, 36 (3), pp. 335–359.

GAVENTA, J. (2006), ‘Finding the spaces for change: a power analysis’, IDS Bulletin, 37 (6), pp. 23–33.

GÉBERT, J., BAJMÓCY, Z. and MÁLOVICS, Gy. (2017), ‘How to Evaluate Local Economic Development Projects from a People-Centred Perspective? An Analytical Framework Based on the Capability Approach’, Deturope, 9 (2), pp. 4–24.

GP (2007), Leipzig Charter on Sustainable European Cities, CEC, German Presidency. Luxembourg.

HAYWARD, C.R. (1998), ‘De-Facing Power’, Polity, 31 (1), pp. 1–22.

HAYWARD, C.R. (2000), De-facing power, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

HEALEY, P. (2003), ‘Collaborative planning in perspective’, Planning Theory, 2 (2), pp. 101–123.

HEALEY, P. (2010), Making better places: The planning project in the twenty-first century, Palgrave, Macmillan, Basingstoke–Hampshire.

HILLIER, J. (2003), ‘Agonizing over consensus: Why habermasian ideals cannot be real’, Planning Theory, 2 (1), pp. 37–59.

INNES, J.E. (2004), ‘Consensus building: Clarifications for the critics’, Planning Theory, 3 (1), pp. 5–20.

LUKES, S. (2005), Power: A radical view, Macmillan International Higher Education, London.

LUX, G. (2015), ‘Minor cities in a metropolitan world: Challenges for development and governance in three Hungarian urban agglomerations’, International Planning Studies, 20 (1–2), pp. 21–38.

MAIER, K. (1998), ‘Czech planning in transition: Assets and deficiencies’, International Planning Studies, 3 (3) pp. 351–365.

MAIER, K. (2001), ‘Citizen participation in planning: Climbing a ladder?’, European Planning Studies, 9 (6), pp. 707–719.

MAIER, K. (2012), ‘Europeanization and Changing Planning in East-Central Europe: An Easterner’s View’, Planning Practice and Research, 27 (1), pp. 137–154.

MASTOP, H. and FALUDI, A. (1997), ‘Evaluation of strategic plans: the performance principle’, Environment and Planning B, 24 (6), pp. 815–832.

MEZEI, C. (2006), ‘Helyi gazdaságfejlesztés Közép-Kelet-Európában’, Tér és Társadalom, 20 (3), pp. 95–108.

MURPHY, E. and FOX-ROGERS, L. (2015), ‘Perceptions of the common good in planning’, Cities, 42 (B), pp. 231–241.

NEWMAN, P. (2008), ‘Strategic spatial planning: Collective action and moments of opportunity’, European Planning Studies, 16 (10), pp. 1371–1383.

OLIVEIRA, V. and PINHO, P. (2010), ‘Evaluation in urban planning: advances and prospects’, Journal of Planning Literature, 24 (4), pp. 343–361.

PÁLNÉ KOVÁCS, I., BODOR, Á., FINTA, I., GRÜNHUT, Z., KACZIBA, P. and ZONGOR, G. (2017), ‘Farewell to decentralisation: The Hungarian story and its general implications’, Croatian and comparative public administration, 16 (4), pp. 789–816.

PELLISSERY, S. and BERGH, S.I. (2007), ‘Adapting the Capability Approach to Explain the Effects of Participatory Development Programs: Case Studies from India and Morocco’, Journal of Human Development, 8 (2), pp. 283–302.

PLØGER, J. (2001), ‘Public participation and the art of governance’, Environment and Planning B, 28 (2), pp. 219–241.

RAUSCHMAYER, F., OMANN, I. and FRÜHMANN, J. (eds.) (2010), Sustainable Development: Capabilities, Needs, and Well-being, Routlegde, London–New York.

RECHNITZER, J. (2019), ‘Nagyvárosok a magyar területi politikában és területfejlesztésben a rendszerváltozástól napjainkig’, Tér és Társadalom, 33 (1), pp. 3–26.

ROBEYNS, I. (2005), ‘The Capability Approach: a theoretical survey’, Journal of Human Development and Capabilities, 6 (1), pp. 93–117.

ROBEYNS, I. (2006), ‘The Capability Approach in Practice’, The Journal of Political Philosophy, 14 (3), pp. 351–376.

SCHISCHKA, J., DALZIEL, P. and SAUNDERS, C. (2008), ‘Applying Sen’s Capability Approach to Poverty Alleviation Programs: Two Case Studies’, Journal of Human Development, 9 (2), pp. 229–246.

SEN, A.K. (1977), ‘Social choice theory: a re-examination’, Econometrica, 45 (1), pp. 53–88.

SEN, A.K. (1993), ’Capability and well-being’, [in:] NUSSBAUM, M. and SEN, A.K. (eds.), The quality of life, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

SEN, A.K. (1999), Development as freedom, Oxford University Press, Oxford.

SEN A.K. (2009), The idea of justice, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.

SHAHAB, S., CLINCH, J.P. and O’NEILL, E. (2019), ‘Impact-based planning evaluation: Advancing normative criteria for policy analysis’, Environment and Planning B, 46 (3), pp. 534–550.

SUVÁK, A. (2010), ‘Integrated urban development strategies – comparison of European and Hungarian approaches’, Journal of Landscape Studies, 3 (3). pp. 139–146.

TITSCHER, S., MEYER, M., WODAK, R. and VETTER E. (2000), Methods of Text and Discourse Analysis, Sage Publications, London, Thousand Oaks, New Delhi.

VARRÓ, K. and FARAGÓ, L. (2016), ‘The politics of spatial policy and governance in post-1990 Hungary: The interplay between European and national discourses of space’, European Planning Studies, 24 (1), pp. 39–60.

First Page


Last Page