Paikallisen kaupunkipolitiikan jakolinjat: Puolueiden tavoitteet ja ristiriidat Helsingin, Tampereen ja Oulun kaupunkisuunnittelussa

Municipalities are at the core of Finnish local democracy. Despite this, public interest in municipal elections is low. The turnout for the 2025 municipal elections was 54,2 %, which is the lowest since the 1945 municipal elections. The low turnout is against the public debate on urban planning, where urban planning decisions on land use and zoning cause huge public interest and political debate both in traditional media and social media. The social importance of urban planning is underlined by the urbanisation of Finnish society, which is why cities have a key role in mitigating social phenomena such as climate change, loss of biodiversity and segregation of residential areas. In addition, the importance of urban planning for Finnish local policy is underlined by the planning monopoly of municipalities, which makes them responsible for the development of their territory.

Despite the political importance of urban planning in local level, the opinions of political parties on urban development have not been studied earlier. This study fills this research gap by studying parties’ goals and political conflicts in urban planning in the cities of Helsinki, Tampere and Oulu. In the study, parties’ goals and conflicts are examined through Scott D. Campbell's (2016) planning conflict model and Henri Lefebvre's (1991) theory of social space. The theoretical framework allows to examine through the social, environmental and economic goals of urban planning as well as through the social meanings of urban space. The research material for the study consists of parties’ election programmes, decision-making materials of the general plans of the study cities and interviews with political representatives and officials of the study cities. As the research method, I use theory-driven and data-driven content analysis, guided by the policy analysis model.

The empirical analysis of the study shows that the parties' opinions on the development of study cities differ and that the parties' goals have an impact on urban planning in the studied cities. Based on the theoretical framework of the study, the Coalition Party emphasises economic goals in urban planning, the Greens Party environmental protection and the SDP social justice. From the perspective of Campbell's (2016) theory, the Left Alliance emphasises environmental justice, which aims to combine environmental protection and social justice in urban planning.

The Centre Party also emphasises environmental justice in urban planning, but alongside this, the party's main objective is regional equity. This is especially important aim for the party between the urban and peri-urban areas. The Centre's approach to urban planning is therefore referred to in the study as environmental and regional justice. The Finns Party differs from other parties as it takes a critical opinion on the transformation of urban space. From the Lefebvre’s (1991) theoretical perspective, the party emphasizes the importance of the lived space in urban planning. Therefore, the views of the Finns Party on urban planning are referred to as conservative urban planning in this study.

In addition to the parties' objectives, the study examines planning conflicts in the study cities. Based on the studied planning conflicts and the differences in party objectives, the study constitutes five key political divisions in urban planning. According to the study, these political divisions are local level versus city level environmental protection, decentralised versus dense urban structure, private car versus walking and cycling transport policy, conservative versus progressive urban planning, and enabling versus coercive planning power. Taken together, these political divisions of urban planning constitute the political cleavages of urban politics.

Alongside parties’ goals and political divisions, the research examines the role of political culture and the influence of non-party political influencers on parties’ opinions on urban planning. My research shows that cities’ different political cultures have a significant impact on the formation of political conflicts in urban planning. My research defines political culture of Helsinki as open cabinet politics, the political culture of Tampere as a culture of agreement, reflecting the city's history of brother-in-arms axis, and the political culture of Oulu as consensus politics. The most important non-political influencer behind urban planning in the study cities are citizen movements which are typically ad hoc and single-issue movements to oppose various building projects when it comes to urban planning. The study claims that these citizen movements are a main reason for the politicization of planning projects in the studied cities.