This document discusses four traditions of planning as outlined by Friedmann: social reform, policy analysis, social learning, and social mobilization. It provides details on each tradition, including their origins, approaches to planning, roles of planners and the state, and influences. Social reform focused on using science/efficiency to guide government. Policy analysis applied scientific methods to find optimal policy solutions. Social learning emphasized community participation and bottom-up problem solving. Social mobilization viewed planning as political and the state as serving class interests.

1. UNIVERSITY OF ZIMBABWE
DEPARTMENT OF RURAL AND URBAN PLANNING
FUNDAMENTALS OF PLANNING THEORY
RUP 218
2017
• TRADITIONS OF PLANNING : PART 2

2. TRADITIONS OF PLANNING
• INTRODUCTION
• According to Friedmann, J (1987) planning is meant to guide society
in development.
• Planning is a dynamic process. It has been changing over time in
terms of its approaches on how it influences development.
• Friedmann, J (1987) has noted that planning has developed around
four themes which he has called the four (4) traditions of planning.

3. The Traditions of Planning
• These four traditions of planning are as follows
• Social reform
• Policy analysis
• Social learning
• Social Mobilization

4. CONT’D
• The changes in planning revolve around the following aspects
1. Time- Friedmann (1987) has periodised these traditions as follows
• The 2 older traditions of Social Reform and Social Mobilisation
had to do with the first half of the 19t century
• The other 2 traditions namely the Policy Analysis and Social
Learning originated around the period between 1930 and 1945.
• While certain differences exist among these traditions and one or
more forms of these traditions tended to exist in the same period.
This is the case with the traditions of social learning and social
mobilization which are co-existing to date.

5. CONT’D
3. Changing roles of the Planner and Planning
• The emergence of these traditions had also to do with the
changing roles of the planners . These changes affected
planning theory and practice. Planners/Planning changing from
being Apolitical to Neutral to Political)
4. Changing roles of the State
• The planning traditions also affected the state. They extend
across the ideological spectrum form from support for the state
and affirmation of its authority to the abolition of every form of
authority including that of the state. (From conservative to
being anarchist)

6. CONT’D
5. Role of Society in planning also changed with the emergence
of these traditions from being inactive/passivity to
partnership/collaborators to active participation/ activism .
6. The driving force for these changes were the influence of other
disciplines namely neoclassical economics, sociology, philosophy
or social movements like pragmatism, historical materialism and
utopianism/radicalism.
7. These traditions were associated with intellectual works of
authors or key figures in the history of planning thought who had
to be familiar with one or more similar languages like economics,
mathematics and in which their scientific work was carried out.

7. CONT’D
• They had to address a number of central questions that defined
for them the matters in dispute about planning at any given
time.
8. All the 4 traditions revolved around one core concern about
how knowledge should be linked to action, that is how planning
knowledge should guide societal change or transformation.
9. These traditions promoted /espoused certain social values
which range from conservative ideology, to pragmatism to
radicalism/utopianism .These had to deal with the relationship
between the state and society in planning.

8. SOCIAL REFORM
• This tradition is concerned with the role of the state in societal
guidance, that is, the role of the state in promoting development.
• Social reform is concerned with how to reform government to behave in
a rational way and make it more efficient, effective and transparent.
• It is concerned with what is the proper relationship between planning
and politics. The ultimate goal is to institutionalize planning practice as
a state function and therefore make government action more efficient.
• Those who were involved in this tradition regard planning as an
scientific endeavor and they wanted the scientific paradigm to inform
planning and govt functions , that is, in the development field and limit
politics to what are deemed its proper concerns
• This tradition draws its techniques and vocabulary from the fields of
sociology, institutional economics and political philosophy.

9. CONT’D
• The philosophy of the authors in this tradition is that planning is the
application of scientific knowledge to public affairs and therefore should
be considered as profession and executive function. As such these
authors want planning to be fenced from the interference by politicians
and ordinary citizens who are not informed to be engage in planning.
• This philosophy coincides with public policy ideas of making planning a
scientific endeavor applied to solve social problems.
• These authors advocate for the strong role of the state in the
development field. They believe that government has key role to
achieve economic growth and prosperity, that is, achieve full
employment and redistribute income. They also believe that
government has the legitimate role to intervene in the market economy
based on social rationality or public interest.

10. COMMENTS
• This tradition has influenced planning in the following manner
• Based on the philosophy of this tradition planning is viewed as a
technical field.
• Planning is taken as function of the state
• This tradition developed a number planning of tools for the state to
manage the economy in the public interest. These tools have
remained useful to the mainstream planning discipline and include
• The business cycle by Mitchell, the social accounting technique by
Kuznets, Input-output model by Leontief, economic policy models by
Tinbergen and urban and regional economics by Hirschman

11. POLICY ANALYSIS
• This tradition was strongly influenced by the early works of Herbert
Simons whose revolutionary study, Administrative Behavior published in
1945 focused on the behavior of large organization in terms of how they
might improve their ability to make rational decisions.
• 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”

12. POLICY ANALYSIS- DEFINITION
• Dror (1971a) in Carley, M (1987:24) posits that Policy analysis is an
approach and methodology for design and identification of preferable
alternatives in respect to complex issues. It provides an aid to policy
making.
• Ukeles (1977) in Carley, M (1987:24) Policy analysis is defined as
the systematic investigation of alternative policy options and the
display and gathering of evidence for and against each policy option.
• According to Carley M, 1987:25 Policy analysis is a problem solving
approach, which involves the collection of and interpretation of
information and some attempt to predict the consequences of
alternative courses of action. Due to the complexity of policy issues
it is encouraged that policy analysis should now recognise the
importance of analytic and non-analytic elements in the policy
making process.

13. Other Related Concepts
• The following concepts are used to mean the same as policy analysis;
• Policy Evaluation,
• Policy Studies,
• Programme Evaluation,
• Public Management Science
• And Policy Science.

14. Approach to Policy Analysis
• Emphasizes the application of scientific knowledge to social issues.
• The Policy Analysis process is systematic and follows certain stages.
• There is an ideal decision model applied by the authors of policy
analysis tradition.

15. CONT’D
• Searches for “correct” solutions to social problems becoming
“social physics”
• In practice Policy Analysis involves determining which of the
various alternative government policies will most achieve a
given set of goals in light of the relations between the policies
and the goals. It answers the question ‘’Which policy alternative
is worth adopting’’.

16. CONT’D
• The vocabulary of Policy Analysis tends to specialised as its overall
technical orientation. It draws its techniques and methods from neo-
classical economics , statistics and mathematics
• Policy Analysis has no distinctive philosophical position.
• The planner becomes a technocrat whose role is to “serve the existing
centers of power” be it large corporations or the state.
• The Planners are apolitical or neutral advisors.

17. Central Role of Policy Analysis
• Assess costs and benefits of alternative courses of action using Cost
Utility techniques/methods.
• Assess impacts of alternative courses of action using Impact
assessment Techniques
• Forecast about economic variables, impacts of alternative courses of
action , expected changes in behaviour, changes in land use patterns
and many other trends using fore casting techniues.

18. Comments
• Planning is technical under this tradition.
• Planners are apolitical, neutral and unbiased.
• The importance of information is central. Planning deals with
uncertainty and therefore there is need for factual information in
order to make informed decisions about the future.
• Planning is central in decision making.
• The Planner is detached from the society and politicians.

19. Social Learning
• 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.
• Transactive Planning and collaborative planning
•

20. Social Mobilisation
• 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.
• Approaches-Politics of disengagement and Confrontational politics.
• Influenced by the French Revolution and Spanish Civil War
• Vision of the new society non- hierarchical