“Planning” or e-Planning?

2014 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ernest R. Alexander
Keyword(s):  
Strategic Planning ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Institutional Environment ◽  
Planning Theory ◽  
Planning Practice ◽  
Social Purpose ◽  
Construction Of Knowledge ◽  
Usable Knowledge

Planning theory is hardly relevant for E-Planning, because generic “planning” does not exist for practical purposes, except as distinct planning practices. E-Planning is such a practice, with implications for E-Planning theory, education and practice. Defining planning as “what planners do” makes planning a socially recognized practice; for such practices “planning” always has a qualifyer: urban-, environmental- or strategic planning. Meaningful discussion of planning demands contingent referents not abstract generalizations. Diverse planning practices are identifyable on several dimensions: sector, level or domain, and country. With various actors and blends of usable knowledge, planning practices contribute expertise to the co-construction of knowledge. The case for E-Planning follows the prototype of spatial planning, including tools: knowledge that E-planners contribute; practice: the E-Planner's role and social purpose; and context: E-planners' workplaces and their institutional environment. Evidence of institutionalization (including the IJEPR) confirms that E-Planning is a real planning practice, with E-Planning theory in development and awaiting integration.

Spatial Planning as a Design Discipline: A Paradigm for Western Europe?

10.1068/b2633 ◽  
2000 ◽  
Vol 27 (3) ◽  
pp. 437-453 ◽  
Author(s):  
Barrie Needham
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Western Europe ◽  
Strong Influence ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Planning Theory ◽  
Planning Practice ◽  
Planning Education ◽  
Long Time ◽  
The Relationship

There is an implicit paradigm in the theory of spatial planning, which we call “spatial planning as a design discipline”. It is implicit in much of planning theory, and the exposition here is in many respects an ordering of ideas from planning theory which have been in circulation for many years. I will make them explicit and relate them to each other in order to lay bare the underlying assumptions, to help planning education, and to improve the relationship between theory and practice. Such an ordering of existing ideas inevitably looks backwards, so I will also investigate how the paradigm presented here relates to some recent innovations in planning theory. Because many of the ideas have been in good currency for a long time, it is probable that they have had a strong influence on planning practice in much of Western Europe: there is not just a paradigm shared by academics but also a discourse shared by academics and practitioners.

On planning, planning theories, and practices: A critical reflection

2022 ◽  
pp. 147309522110663
Author(s):  
Ernest R. Alexander
Keyword(s):  
Regional Planning ◽  
Transportation Planning ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Critical Reflection ◽  
Sociology Of Knowledge ◽  
Planning Theory ◽  
Planning Practice ◽  
The Third ◽  
Three Generations ◽  
Regional Community

The futility of defining planning suggests that there is no planning as a recognizable practice. Sociology of knowledge definitions imply three kinds of planning practices: (1) Generic “planning”—what people do when they are planning; (2) Knowledge-centered “something” (e.g., spatial) planning; and (3) Real planning practiced in specific contexts, from metro-regional planning for Jakarta to transportation planning for the Trans-Europe Network, and enacted in general contexts, for example, informal- or Southern planning. Planning theories are linked to different practices: generic “planning” theories and “something” (e.g., regional, community, environmental, or Southern) planning theories. Selected topics illustrate the “planning” theory discourse and spatial planning theories are briefly reviewed. Three generations of planning practice studies are reviewed: the first, a-theoretical; the second, the “practice movement,” who studied practice for their own theorizing; and the third, informed by practice theories. Five books about planning show how their planning theorist authors understand planning practice. While recognizing planning as diverse practices, they hardly apply “planning” theory to planning practices. “Planning” theories are divorced from enacted planning practices, “something” (e.g., spatial) planning theories include constructive adaptations of “planning” theories and paradigms, but knowledge about real planning practices is limited. Implications from these conclusions are drawn for planning theory, education, and practices.

A Materialist Basis for Planning Theory and Practice: Comments on the Papers by Roweis and by Forester

1983 ◽  
Vol 1 (4) ◽  
pp. 469-479 ◽  
Author(s):  
C Jensen-Butler
Keyword(s):  
Social Practice ◽  
Scientific Explanation ◽  
Qualitative Change ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Planning Theory ◽  
Rational Approach ◽  
Negative Consequences ◽  
Planning Practice ◽  
Base Analysis ◽  
Epistemological Position

Analysis of the practice of planning is increasingly being used to develop planning theory, The papers by Roweis and Forester in the second issue of Environment and Planning D: Society and Space base analysis of planning practice on hermeneutic, linguistic, and phenomenological approaches, as an alternative to the technical -rational approach to planning theory, In the present paper, I argue that the approaches adopted by these two authors create more problems than they solve, and a critique of Roweis's and Forester's theoretical ideas is made, It is argued that these approaches rest upon idealist ontological assumptions, rendering explanation of qualitative change (development) impossible. Discussion of Giddens's concept of structuration and of the negative consequences for scientific explanation of Habermas's epistemological position is presented, as both approaches are used by Roweis and Forester. Criticism is also made of the separation of territorial relations from relations of substance. Finally, the serious consequences of their approaches for scientific and social practice are outlined. I conclude that this type of approach cannot provide a satisfactory basis for planning theory, and furthermore, that the approach is inherently conservative. Some ideas arc presented concerning planning theory based on materialist ontological foundations.

scholarly journals Mainstreaming ecosystem science in spatial planning practice: Exploiting a hybrid opportunity space

2018 ◽  
Vol 70 ◽  
pp. 232-246 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alister Scott ◽  
Claudia Carter ◽  
Michael Hardman ◽  
Nick Grayson ◽  
Tim Slaney
Keyword(s):  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Planning Practice ◽  
Ecosystem Science

scholarly journals Planning to care: the case for a broader implementation of therapeutic planning

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Alton
Keyword(s):  
Urban Planning ◽  
Key Words ◽  
Indigenous Communities ◽  
Theory And Practice ◽  
Planning Theory ◽  
Planning Practice ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Relationship

Planning does not see itself as a caring profession, yet there are elements of care that underlie the relationship between planners and the public. Therapeutic planning is an emerging approach to planning that has shown promise at building on those elements of care and reimagining planning as healing and transformative for planners and the public. However, therapeutic planning has so far only been used as a specialized practice when planning with indigenous communities. Through an analysis of the literature on planning theory and therapeutic planning practice, this study seeks to build a case for a broader application of therapeutic planning. Key findings of this analysis show that therapeutic planning has the capacity to improve planners’ ability to address trauma, conflict and reconciliation. This ends with a concrete set of recommendations to guide the profession in embracing its potential for care. Key words: An article on urban planning theory and practice, used the key words: therapeutic; planning; caring; communication; profession.

scholarly journals Strategy as planning document

2006 ◽  
Vol 86 (1) ◽  
pp. 203-210 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zora Zivanovic ◽  
Sinisa Trkulja
Keyword(s):  
Strategic Planning ◽  
Spatial Planning ◽  
Successful Implementation ◽  
The Future ◽  
New Form

The need for planning, as a process through which the future can be influenced to a certain extent, gave a new form of this activity, that has characteristics of generalization, flexibility and adaptability in time and in space which it refers to. That is strategic planning, which tends to coordinate the variety of development components and has for its aim successful implementation based on planning objectives. In the practice of spatial planning in Serbia, important differences can be recognized in perception of the term "strategy" as a planning document, and in consequence differences in perception of its form, content and aim. In that sense, this paper is dedicated to the interpretation of different approaches in strategic spatial planning in Serbia and it points out strengths and weaknesses of those approaches.

scholarly journals Justice and the planning process: how far have we come and where are we going?

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Augustyn
Keyword(s):  
Planning Process ◽  
Institutional Context ◽  
Planning Theory ◽  
Planning Practice ◽  
Theories Of Justice ◽  
Practice Gap ◽  
Context Dependent ◽  
The Law ◽  
Theory Practice Gap ◽  
Regent Park

Justice is a context-dependent, multi-faceted concept that has historically been associated with planning theory. In this paper, the literature surrounding the concept of justice will be explored to understand where the concept of justice has come from, how it has evolved, and how it can be applied to the planning process. In addition, how justice interacts with other critical concepts, such as the law, morality, and ethics, as well as its ability to function within the institutional context will also be assessed. The concept of justice is be applied to the planning process as it occurs in planning practice in an attempt to bridge the theory-practice gap that exists in planning. Using Fainstein’s concept of justice, with her three criteria of equity, diversity, and democracy, the planning process of the two redevelopments of Regent Park is assessed through the lens of justice in an attempt to apply theories of justice to planning practice.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document