Hutter and Wiechmann sharpen the temporal problem by distinguishing time as a scheduling dimension from temporality as the patterned organisation of duration, tempo, sequence and timing. Their key intervention is methodological: strategic spatial planning is intrinsically processual, yet case studies often use time merely as a container in which events are narrated. The authors call instead for fine-grained process analysis capable of tracing how specific sequences and timing decisions affect legitimacy and effectiveness. Process tracing is proposed as one route because it can connect observable events to underlying causal mechanisms. The contribution is therefore not a new temporal philosophy but a disciplined research programme for making temporality empirically consequential. Its bridge to institutional analysis is particularly strong: informal communication, statutory procedure, implementation and evaluation occupy different positions in a sequence, and changing their order can change outcomes even when the substantive content remains constant. Time becomes an analytical variable rather than a chronology appended to planning history.
