• Save
103 Planning Theory i
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

103 Planning Theory i

on

  • 879 views

Includes the Planning History in times of Thomas Kuhn, Antonio Faludi, Friedmann..etc.

Includes the Planning History in times of Thomas Kuhn, Antonio Faludi, Friedmann..etc.

Adjunct Faculty: Omkar Parishwad.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
879
Views on SlideShare
879
Embed Views
0

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
36
Comments
0

0 Embeds 0

No embeds

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

103 Planning Theory i 103 Planning Theory i Presentation Transcript

  • Defining Planning Theories.. • Thomas Kuhn • Planning.. • Top down vs. bottom up approach. • Friedmann’s Classification of Planning Theories. • Paradigm (A. Faludi) – Hydra Model College of Engineering, Pune
  • Planning and Science.. Thomas Kuhn and the structure of the scientific revolutions points out that scientific inquiry is a process: 1. Pre-paradigmatic ( searching for a theory) 2. Normal science (developed a theory & method) 3. Anomalies emerge 4. Paradigm shift 5. Return to normal science Expand our accepted knowledge, not question the validity of our fundamental assumptions. Science can return to a situation of normality. COEP
  • • How and how much planners could affect decision making? • Inclusion of Social science, especially political science. • Planners first learn from sharing experiences and building consensus. • Citizens and Civic leaders vs. Planners: core of planning • Friedmann’s “Transactive Planning”- Planners should carry out decisions of citizens rather than making plans by themselves in a top down pattern. • Chris Argyris’s “Theory of Action”- Planners act as catalysts to create a self-correcting decision structure capable of learning from their own errors. COEP
  • What is Planning? • Friedmann states that "..all planning must confront the meta- theoretical problem of how to make technical knowledge in planning effective in informing public actions" • In sum, Friedmann defines planning as the component that links knowledge & action. KNOWLEDGE ACTION • Planning cannot be isolated from the political context of the city or region because the policy decisions affect local interests. Thus, planning becomes a practice of what is feasible politically instead of what is technically efficient and effective. • The question of power becomes relevant in the planning process. COEP
  • • K A (Rational Planning) • K A (Incremental Planning) • K A (Transactive Planning) • K P (Activist Planning) • P A (Radical Planning) 1. Every planning activity involves a territorial/spatial component 2. Planning activities respond to a social rationality 3. Planning facilitates market activities while restricting noxious ones or even substituting the market 4. Planning in the public domain is political and therefore conflictive 5. Planning requires massive support and ability to mobilize society in order to be successful. Friedmann’s Planning aspects.. COEP
  • Policy analysis emphasizing tool rationality is more conservative Knowledge to action CONSERVATIVE RADICAL In societal Guidance Policy Analysis Social reform In societal transformation Social Learning Social Mobilization • The fields of policy analysis are system analysis, welfare & social choice, and policy science. • Emphasizes the application of scientific knowledge to social issues. • Searches for “correct” solutions to social problems becoming “social physics” • The planner becomes a technocrat whose role is to “serve the existing centers of power” COEP
  • Social Learning focusing on value rationality is moderate Knowledge to action CONSERVATIVE RADICAL In societal Guidance Policy Analysis Social reform In societal transformation Social Learning Social Mobilization • It is draws from the organization development theory • How society learns to solve its problems • Learning comes through an iterative process of trial and error • The planner becomes a community facilitator, instead of the scientist, whose role is to promote community participation in the search for solutions. • Emphasizes a bottom-up approach and attempts to empower communities to solve their own problems. Planning’s gravity center is moved from government and City Hall to the community. COEP
  • Social reform intending to pursue reform within the existing institutional setting is relatively progressive. Knowledge to action CONSERVATIVE RADICAL In societal Guidance Policy Analysis Social reform In societal transformation Social Learning Social Mobilization • This tradition draws from the fields of sociology, institutional economics and pragmatism. • Social reform is concerned with how to reform government to behave in a rational way (efficiency, effectiveness, and transparency). • It is concerned with what is the proper relationship between planning and politics and whose ultimate goal is to institutionalize planning as a governmental function. • The key goal is what government can do to achieve its goals of economic growth and prosperity. It coincides with public policy in the idea of making planning a scientific endeavor applied to solve social problems. COEP
  • Social mobilization encouraging political movements is most radical Knowledge to action CONSERVATIVE RADICAL In societal Guidance Policy Analysis Social reform In societal transformation Social Learning Social Mobilization • Traces its roots to utopian socialists, radical anarchists, historical materialism, and Neo-marxism. • “Planning appears as a form of politics, conducted without the mediation of science” • Planning also moves away from the notion that the state is neutral and attempting to mediate competing interests. • Perceives the state as an instrument of a social class whose sole purpose is to facilitate capital accumulation against the interest of labor. COEP
  • Paradigms in Planning: Andreas Faludi • Contradictory to Kuhn’s model, we have an accumulation rather than evolution of theories. • Hydra Hypothesis (Hydra is a mythical creature with many heads): Urban Planning also has several major theoretical views that simultaneously exist and they all have a contribution to make. • When the discipline experiences an important development, what normally occurs is the emergence of a new theoretical standpoint, not the suppression of the existing ones: the Hydra gets another head. COEP
  • Its not easy to anticipate where conformance should be considered more important than performance.. Difficult to adopt certain approach and discard the others.. COEP
  • Lessons learned.. • The real driving force behind the development of planning theory is social change including economic, social, and political developments. So, the situation makes the development of planning. • The planning profession has a common core as an applied science. Planning focuses on resource allocation (land and space in particular) and redistribution among various interest groups to pursue a balance between the segments of society and society as a whole, and between current and future costs and benefits. But the core itself is also context-defined instead of fixed—the variation in social—cultural development in different contexts requires planners to define their core work differently. COEP