Planning and the Politics of the New Infrastructure Economy

A Special Issue of the Journal of the American Planning Association

Around the world, local communities are grappling with a new wave of infrastructure expansion associated with the digital economy. Data centers and AI infrastructure are reshaping land use and placing growing demands on energy and water, with consequences that extend beyond conventional planning and zoning decisions (Monstadt and Saltzman 2025; Kollar and Danielak, 2026). These developments represent the latest in a series of far-reaching economic transformations that have reshaped urban and rural industrial land—including the rise of e-commerce and the expansion of warehousing and logistics networks. Across these sectors, communities weigh promised economic benefits against public infrastructure costs and uneven environmental impacts, renewing debates over environmental justice and the fiscal politics of development (Schmahmann 2025, 2026). Amid related opposition to Flock cameras and other surveillance technologies, conflict is increasingly visible in local government meetings and political mobilization, sometimes uniting unexpected coalitions across traditional political divisions.

Such conflicts recall longstanding planning debates over regional development and the legitimacy of public intervention, including organized opposition to sustainability planning and the emergence of tactical political coalitions (Trapenberg Frick, 2013). Yet the scale and pace of contemporary infrastructure expansion are testing planning’s capacity to direct growth, even as its ambitions have broadened to address climate change and energy systems amid mounting political and economic pressures (Chapin, 2012; Chapin & Stevens, 2022). Today, major infrastructure investments are increasingly shaped by utility regulation and state policy, alongside private investment strategies that span jurisdictions and may establish significant commitments before local land use review (Avni et al., 2026). These changing arrangements invite a reassessment of when and through which institutions planners and affected communities can meaningfully shape infrastructure investment, particularly as energy and other systems extend beyond local planners’ authority and expertise.

This special issue examines how planning can shape the infrastructures of the contemporary economy and how these investments are reshaping planning authority and practice. We seek contributions that connect contemporary infrastructure conflicts to broader economic and political transformations, with attention to the possibilities for public intervention. Topics include, but are not limited to:

• How data centers, AI infrastructure, e-commerce, warehousing, and logistics networks are reshaping land use and the built environment while intensifying resource demands.
• Economic development trade-offs including employment, fiscal revenues, public subsidies, infrastructure costs, and uneven environmental burdens.
• How megaprojects and infrastructure investment reshape regional governance and redistribute planning authority through jurisdictional fragmentation and state preemption.
• How social movements and community identities shape coalitions around infrastructure development, surveillance technologies, and locally unwanted land uses (LULUs), including public participation, moratoria, and litigation.
• Implications of technological and economic change for planning scholarship, theory, and practice, including institutional capacity, gaps in education and training, and the evolving boundaries of planning expertise, particularly in areas such as energy systems planning and collaboration across professional disciplines.
• International, comparative, and historical perspectives on infrastructure conflicts, including lessons from earlier periods of transformation and alternative arrangements for planning governance and public oversight.

Scope and considerations

The special issue focuses on the physical, institutional, and political implications of technological change rather than the application of AI tools in planning practice. A separate special issue in JAPA has focused on these concerns. Recognizing the pace of these developments, we also invite critical reflections on the challenges of conducting research and informing planning decisions amid rapidly changing technologies and political conditions. Papers published in JAPA must link to planning practice as well as planning scholarship.

Submissions

Submit a title and 500-word extended abstract by February 1, 2027, to the guest editors at jkollar@nus.edu.sg, laura.schmahmann@tamu.edu, and kfrick@berkeley.edu. Abstracts will be evaluated by the guest editors to assess their fit and contributions to the aims of the special issue. Authors of selected abstracts will be invited to submit a full manuscript for consideration by August 1, 2027.

Abstracts should follow JAPA's abstract structure and include the following sections:

• Problem, Research Strategy, and Findings: Clearly describe the planning problem or research question, the research strategy and methods employed, and the principal findings and conclusions. Authors should also include at least one sentence discussing the limitations of the research approach, methods, and/or data, and the implications of those limitations for the findings.
• Takeaway for Practice: Clearly explain the relevance and implications of the research for planning practice, governance, policy, or professional decision-making.

Acceptance of full manuscripts is contingent upon JAPA's standard peer-review process.

Guest Editors

Justin Kollar, National University of Singapore (jkollar@nus.edu.sg)
Laura Schmahmann, Texas A&M (laura.schmahmann@tamu.edu)
Karen Trapenberg Frick, UC Berkeley (kfrick@berkeley.edu)

References

Avni, N., Nachmany, H., & Németh, J. (2026). Who governs growth? Abundance, preemption, and local democracy under pressure. Journal of the American Planning Association. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2026.2722226

Chapin, T. S. (2012). Introduction: From growth controls, to comprehensive planning, to smart growth: Planning's emerging fourth wave. Journal of the American Planning Association, 78(1), 5–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2011.645273

Chapin, T. S., & Stevens, L. E. (2022). Growth management's fourth wave, revisited. Journal of Comparative Urban Law and Policy, 5(1), 327–335. https://readingroom.law.gsu.edu/jculp/vol5/iss1/26/

Kollar, J., & Danielak, S. (2026). Planning conflict in the age of AI infrastructure: Governing data center growth in the United States. Journal of the American Planning Association. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2026.2720635

Monstadt, J., & Saltzman, K. (2025). How data centers have come to matter: Governing the spatial and environmental footprint of the “digital gateway to Europe”. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 49(4), 757–778. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2427.13316

Schmahmann, L. (2025). City competition for e-commerce sales tax revenue: Qualitative evidence on the politics of land fiscalization in California. Economic Development Quarterly, 39(3), 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1177/08912424251331896

Schmahmann, L. (2026). Planning for Locally Unwanted Land Uses: State Preemption and Warehouse Development in California. Journal of the American Planning Association. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2026.2742417

(3), 190–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2013.885312

Top image: Photo by iStock/Getty Images/ akinbostanci