Theoretical Background
The aim of this section is to illustrate a brief theoretical orientation. First, it will explain how a communicative planning approach is a relevant lens through which to view the case. After that, power relations between different stakeholders will be introduced and linked to the communicative planning theory.
After the radical change in planning literature and moving from the rationalistic approach led by planners towards the communicative approach, planning has evolved to a mutual learning and knowledge creation process between planners and citizens. Indeed, collaborative planning arose in response to the rational planning that ruled the second half of the 20th century. It evolved combined with the concepts of post-modernism and post-structuralism that were dominating other academic disciplines at the time.
Collaborative planning theory, in fact, has dealt with acknowledging and giving voice to difference and discussing issues in the public realm. Also, this concept goes by many names, including ‘deliberative planning’, ‘inclusionary argumentation’, ‘participatory democracy’, and ‘discursive democracy’. Healy (1996) describes inclusionary argumentation as “public reasoning which accepts the contributions of all members of a political community and recognizes the range of ways they have of knowing, valuing and giving meaning.” Moreover, Healy (ibid) stated that inclusionary argumentation, as the ideal planning process, is “a practice that underpins conceptions of what is being called participatory democracy.”
Healy, also, concludes that collaborative planning is a way to achieve consensus in a democratic society which respects differences and, which can live sustainably within its economic and soc...
... middle of paper ...
..., P (1998) Deconstructing communicative rationality: a critique of Habermasian collaborative planning. Environment and Planning A 1998, volume 30, pages 1975-1989.
Velasquez, J. (2005) Anchorage and Dialogue – Tensions betweens Planning and Local Democracy. Stockholm University English Summary pp 209-222
Watson, V. (2002) Do we learn from planning practice? The contribution to the practice movement to planning Theory, Journal of Planning Education and Research 22:178-187
Watson, V (2003) Conflicting Rationalities: Implications for Planning Theory and
Ethics, Journal of Planning Theory & Practice, Vol. 4, No. 4, December 2003. p. 395–407.
Wildavsky, A. (1973) If Planning is Everything, Maybe it’s Nothing. Policy Science 4:127-153.
Tett, A. , & Jeanne M. Wolfe. (1991) Discourse Analysis and City Plans, Journal of Planning Education and Research 10(3):195-200
In Canada, the participatory role of citizens in policy-making is made possible through consultative methods that seem to have far more negatives than positives. Woodford and Preston note that according to various Canadian scholars, consultative means include: “one way communication, infrequent feedback, limited involvement, poor representativeness,...
The problem, however, comes down to the fact that although these planners are able to find solutions to neighborhood problems, they lack the power, money, and means to make real changes occur. Even if a solution is raised, the decision has to not only get the approval of the specific department in which it deals but it also must be approved by the Department head and the Planning Commission. For these reasons, the process to make change happen takes a very long time . The lengthy process prevents policies and changes from adapting quickly to fast pace urban
The above article is closely tied to two concepts in the domain of planning and
Webber, M. M. (1973). Comprehensive planning and social responsibility: Toward an AIP consensus on the profession's roles and purposes. Journal of the American Institute of Planning, 232-241.
Christopher Ansell (Ph.D., Chicago, 1993) is a professor of Political Science from the University of California. He also received his B.A. in Environmental Science from the University of Virginia in 1979 and worked at the US Office of Technology Assessment from 1979 through 1984. His fields of interest include organization theory, political sociology, public administration, and Western Europe. His most current research interests involve risk management, collaborative governance, and Pragmatist philosophy.
The successful use of team practice aims to better serve respected stakeholders. In urban planning, the unity and cohesiveness of a finished work signifies professionalism and clarity, which can only be arrived from a great team. In order to achieve solidarity, good decision making tactics must be enforced. Decision making involves making a logical choice influenced by, and not limited to, facts and information, time, and emotions. These factors may be a sole factor or combined together. Thus, decision making aims to solve a problem. In regards to urban planning, decision making has great influence on the overall success or failure of a plan. This plan may involve key stakeholders or the public, regardless of what party is at stake, decision making must be based on rationality. This paper will examine four decision making practices: (1) decision by authority, (2) decision by majority vote/rule, (3) decision by averaging opinions, and (4) decision by consensus.
In the role of government, the public sector is the sole actor of implementing a strategy. But as the limits of public intervention were recognised and accepted, state action turned to governance. In this mode, the state recognise that more stakeholder must be involved in the formulation and implementation of strategies and this involve the private sector as well as citizens. This shift was also brought because of the private sector has the financial recourses that the public sector has not anymore (Rydin, 2013, p.3-5).
Ostrom, Elinor. 1990. Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective Action. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
In the contemporary planning practice, collaborative planning is critical within three areas. These three areas are multi-stakeholder planning processes, multi-disciplinary issues and the inter-disciplinary practice of plan making (Johnson, 2013). In the modern day planning practices, planners aim to improve the quality of life by integrating economically fundable projects, socially viable works, and plans that are environmentally sustainable (Healey, 1998). As planning is a rather large task, teamwork is essentially necessary to achieve every aspect of a sustainable development. Otherwise the demand of workload for planning projects is a riotous task if the development stages amongst a team are not evident. This theory is reinforced by planning theorist and professor of town and country planning, Patsy Healy, as she believes that collabora...
Power use is around us whether noticed or not. Power in Discourse Analysis is a medium to achieve an end. The end is for stronger of the two sides of the discourse. Power in discourse analysis is the use of language in a discourse allowing the person who acquires knowledge and high status in the discourse takes control of the discourse thus having the higher power. In the following paragraphs, I will discuss nature of power argued in Discourse Analysis, attempts made to define ‘power’ in social research and discuss the different types of power.
Wilcock, D. A. (2013). From blank spcaes to flows of life: transforming community engagment in environmental decision-making and its implcations for localsim. Policy Studies 34:4, 455-473.
Chaffey, J. (1994). The challenge of urbanisation. In M. Naish & S. Warn (Eds.), Core geography (pp. 138-146). London: Longman.
“Wise democratic processes are those which utilize a community's or society's diversity to deepen shared understanding and produce outcomes of long-term benefit to the whole community or society. Not all public participation serves this purpose. Public participation can either enhance or degrade the collective intelligence and wisdom involved in democratic processes such as making collective decisions, solving social problems, and creating shared visions. The principles below offer some guidance for designing wise democratic processes”. Tom Atlee, Co-Intelligence Institute
Consulting the community will be a two way interaction where the intentions are to make the people well informed and understand about the development plan. Other than that, is to receive feedback and getting rough ideas on what the thing that the community really want to see in their neighbourhood. This stage is also important in advising the people that their input will influenced the decision making process at the end. Rather than the usual meeting where everyone sit behind the tab...
A lot of people do not understand that regional planning is important for land development but most of them don’t care. Land development is very important to a community because without it,it would not be anything there or just a useless spot with nothing there.(According to Dr. David Prytherch on November 13,2013).In Miami University they teach planners techniques about being a regional planner. When individuals are at the University everyone has to be dedicated to the program. Plus individuals have to be willing to want to learn about the job and take it seriously. Another thing is when being a regional planner a lot of the planners believe in commitment to their skilled professionals. With that commitment they could end up being a superior themselves one day.