Abstract: As a public policy, it is proved by discourse analysis that urban planning is the outcome deduced by involved parties after discourse competition. Hence, discourse analysis of all the parties involved in urban planning can help to understand the value orientation of different parties, show their negotiation and dispute solving techniques, and promote the development of a plan from a protocol to a final draft. Moreover, it can interpret problems and limitations for public participation in urban planning more clearly.
　　In this paper, a case study based on an urban renewal plan for Hubei Village in Shenzhen City was carried out. Internal discussions, interviews and reports, WeChat articles, and planning schemes of parties involved from the initiation to solving of disputes over the preliminary scheme were analysed. Moreover, it not only investigated how the dispute is solved through discourse interaction and competition, but also analysed whether appeals of all parties have been expressed fully and whether the discussion mechanism was perfect.
　　The study found three discourse subjects in the dispute over the renewal of Hubei Village, including the growth alliance, anti-growth alliance, and public media. The Growth Alliance is composed of real-estate developers and urban reconstruction departments who transmitted information through press conferences, interviews, and disclosure of planning schemes. The core discourse strategy of the Growth Alliance is to use ambiguous expression by taking advantage of the 'planning language'. On one hand, it emphasises the philosophy of protection in popular language. On the other hand, it avoids specific disputes over protection area and means through semantic ticks and ambiguous expressions, appeasing the public opinions and reserving possibilities for amendment of the scheme in the future. The anti-growth alliance is composed of experts, scholars, and civic groups concerned about historical protection, cultural inheritance, and spatial justness. They express themselves through forums of organisations and We-Media. However, it became silent for two reasons. Firstly, experts mainly presented three philosophies of protection due to different professional backgrounds and there is a significant dispute in the alliance about the protection techniques, which further influenced the enthusiasm of some experts. As such, it became difficult for them to form continuous resultant forces. Secondly, the public discussion platform is not perfect. The public media and government are unwilling to disclose appeals of civic groups. As the dominator of public opinion, public media is only concerned about the participants (e.g. government, real-estate developers, and villagers) in the renewal project of Hubei Village in the narrow sense due to the lack of deep investigation of disputing events. They ignore the important public, urban stakeholder of 'Hubei 120'. The discourse of public media generally changed from 'emphasis on protection' to 'promotion of development'. Their role changed gradually from a member of anti-growth alliance to a member of growth alliance. They also rebuilt the reasonability of renewal successfully from four perspectives of the government, real-estate developers, villagers, and experts. After continuous discourse competition among three parties, the public media was monopolised by the growth alliance, and its dominant discourse changed from 'full protection and activation of ancient villages' to 'maintenance of ancient village layout and activation of old buildings'.
　　Theoretically, the discourse analysis theory can be interpreted as the dispute over urban planning and the whole public participation process. As a new analytical method, it discloses the 'black box' of disputes over plans, scheme amendments, and final decision-making to some extent. Practically, discourse expression in the formulation and discussion of public policies shall be standardised. It also recommends strengthening reasonable guidance and discourse analysis in public participation, offsetting barriers against communication, and making full use of excellent opinions of all parties to promote co-construction, co-governance, and sharing of urban spaces.

Key words: discourse analysis, public participation in planning, dispute settlement, renewal of Hubei District

摘要： 从话语分析的视角来看，作为公共政策的城市规划是各方在话语竞争后推导出的结果，因此对城市规划各参与者进行分析话语，能了解各方的价值取向，以及各方如何商讨、解决争议，推动规划从草案走向定稿。以深圳市湖贝村所在片区的城市更新规划争议为例，分析了由初步方案爆发争议到争议平息的过程中，增长联盟、反增长联盟、公共媒体三方面的话语。研究发现，由于公众参与的机制尚不健全，各方难以相互了解并进行充分的讨论，最终争议虽然平息，但问题并未解决。在此过程中，增长联盟采用了模糊表达、回避争议的话语表达；反增长联盟由于不受关注和话语主题分散，逐渐走向沉默；公共媒体由于视角单一，未能起到公共讨论平台的作用。认为，话语分析理论对城市规划争议甚至整个公众参与过程具有较强解释力，在实践中，应加强对公众参与的话语分析与合理引导，打通话语沟通的障碍，促进城乡空间共建共治。

关键词: 话语分析, 规划公众参与, 争议平息, 湖贝更新