Framing processes in planning disputes: analysing dynamics of contention in a housing project in Hong Kong

Opposition to planned housing projects can lead to considerable delays. Hong Kong is characterized by an executive-dominant planning system, whereby the government possesses strong planning powers, while elected district councillors play an advisory role only. Curiously, planning delays are fairly common. The above paradox is analysed in this paper through examining a major dispute over public housing development in Hong Kong. This dispute involved lengthy processes of bargaining, which were vulnerable to legitimacy challenges. Councillors acted strategically by tapping into prevailing social values to frame the legitimacy of bargaining processes. Despite discontent with these informal bargaining processes, the dispute has not evolved into more radical challenges to existing governance arrangements. The paper concludes by considering how hegemonic discourses of planning efficiency may have constrained the emergence of radical contention, which adds to broader debates about the conditions which shape the trajectories and transformative prospects of contentious urban developments.