In this piece Houston et al. 2018 consider the questions of human identities and responsibilities within multispecies communities in relation to how planning theory might better respond to the social, ecological and ethical challenges posed by the Anthropocene.

They propose two directions for planning theory- multispecies entanglements and becoming-world (i.e. wording) noting, “Much planning theory has been undergirded by an ontological exceptionalism of humans.”

“Urban exceptionalism (like human exceptionalism) encourages modes of thought that regard cities as places that have somehow risen above the physical constraints of ‘nature’ – as places of enlightened human value and technological mastery.”

"...we add, flora – to be considered as part of the life and spirit of the city, as vital to ideals of what the city ought to be and as lively and sentient participants in the co-production and planning of urban spaces."

These ideas "move us beyond a view of humans as autonomous individuals housed within sovereign bodies... into a ‘co-emergent world based on intimate human-more-than-human relationships of responsibility and care'"

"From such a position, we may develop relational understandings of planning as ‘co-becoming’ in and for diverse multispecies com- munities, where humans, plants, soils, microbes, birds, fungi, insects, native and non- native animals shape urban landscapes and interactions..."

"Urban planners and scholars need to think carefully and critically about who speaks for the nonhuman in city and place making, and about whether and how the nonhuman might speak for themselves."

"Recognition of becoming-world could enable humans to recognise with respect the role of nonhumans as active, responsive participants, ‘making kin’ (Haraway, 2015) in planning-related encounters, in which humans would yield their position of dominance."