Planning in the Face of Power 0520064135

Why do our best-laid plans often over-reach and under-achieve? Why do our attempts to solve problems in some rational wa

291 69 20MB

English Pages 283 [150] Year 1989

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD FILE

Polecaj historie

Planning in the Face of Power
 0520064135

Citation preview

Pla

........ ·g in the Face of

E John Forester

PLANNING IN THE FACE OFPOWER

JOHN FORESTER

UNIV ERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Los ANGELES BERKELEY

PRESS

L

ONDON

Universlry o( California Press . . Berkeleyand Los Angeles, Cahfom,a Univcrsiry of California Prns, Lrd. London,England C 1989 by

. . The Regenrsof rhe Universiryo( Cahforma

l.ibraryof Omgrcu Caraloging-in-PublicarionDara forester, John, 19.. 8l'lannlngin rhe faceof power. Bibliography:p. Includesindex. 1. Policysciences. 1. Socialpolicy. 3. Planning. I. Title. H97.F67 1989 361 .6' 1 118- ◄ 0l. ◄ I ISBN0-510-06310- ◄ (alk. papc,r) ISBN0-52 .0-0641 3-s (pbk. : alk. paper )

Printedin rhe United Stares of America 13456789

For my parents and the memory of their parents

Contents

List of Tables

ix

Preface

xi

Part One . Recognize Problems, Seize Opportunities 1.

The Challenges of Planning Practice

2.

What Do Planning Analysts Do? Planning and Policy Analysis as Organizing

3

14

Part Two. To Be Rational , Be Political 3. Planning in the Face of Power 4.

The Politics of Muddling Through

Part Three . Anticipate Organizational Power and Conflict 5.

Three Views of Planning Organizations

67

6.

Planning in the Face of Conflict: Mediated Negotiation Strategies in Practice

82

Part Four. Focus on What Counts: Planning and Design as Practical Communicative Action 7.

Listening: The Social Policy of Everyday Life

107

8.

Designing as Making Sense Together

119

vii

Contents viii

.

. ..,.h ry to Anticipateand Respond U Planning ' , eo

of Practice Partf,ve. tos;roblems 9 · 10.

. Planning Practice Understanding Pl ing Education: Teaching Planning Supplementon ann

Listof Tables

Practice Notes Bibliography Index

1.

Bounded Rationality Refined : Communicative Distortions as Bounds to the Rationality of Action

34

2.

Power, Information, and Misinformation: The Management of Comprehension, Trust, Consent, and Knowledge

38

3. Power and Misinformation in Health Planning: An Illustration of the Management of Comprehension, Trust, Consent, and Knowledge 4. Rationality and Practice in Administration and Planning

39 53

5. How We Experience Communicative Distortions

150

6. Correcting Communicative Distortions: Organizing Practices of Planners

151

IX

Preface

A book may be written by one person, but it is inevitably the product of many others. Among the varied sources of this book I find that one, one I seldom thought directly about as I wrote these chapters, lies at the foundation of all the others: my parents ' emigration from fascism in 1939. I doubt that the word "fascism" even appears in the chapters that follow. Yet this whole book is about the vulnerabilities of democracy, about power and professional responsibility, about political action and ideology, inequality, domination and resistance, illegitimate authority and democra tizing practices. These issues .frise as subtle matters of everyday practice for planners of all kinds, for planners routinely work to assess future choices, to think practically about who we shall become-in our neighborhoods, in our schools, in our health-care system, and so on. Citizens and public servants can presume the legitimacy of established power only at great risk. But if legitimacy cannot be presumed, and concentrations of economic power seem to threaten classical democratic political processes, what then ? What are planners to do? This is no simple question. It is one of the classical problem s that motivate the study of political philosophy, and it is one form of the more pressing political question faced every day by every p_olitical actor: "What is to be done?" This book draws from social and political theory to illuminate ordinary practical .~roblem~ of professional, bureaucratic, and, more generally, pohncal action. Thus, a second source of the chapters that follow is schol_arly. _Here my debts are many. Faculty at my alma mater, the Umvers1ty of xi

Pre(aa

p,-efiUe ,:_-t as Stephen Blum quip~

o

n -l-ele\ - ~

thatna-

.... ;.,....aties were. Mel WebLthe waY LUU·"''"" ua: tDJC.-as noc0 ~ ~~ stndents and f~~~ to explore ~ a grouP of of tanning.Where disciplinary doon ~ ~Kri~ blew them open. Jack Dyckman ~ dosed,>-~ andbriffianc:e to the srudy of planning that b(ooghtan ~re~ mspirarion. C. W~ Chur~n trans.~ an ~arguments into pracucal ~ategies-and fonDfO ~ differentways roo, Michael Tettz. and Richard ncr_ ~crsa.In ~ the heart ofman-asat ban~ the one by prob¼ia- ~ ~ the sub;ectwithout doing so. eil Smelser mg.me otha-~ bdpcd me co understand that social ~d politiwereall about planning, though they remamed a bit __..w ~ what went oo in Worster Hall, home of the :;;; City and Regional Planning.They were not alone m their puukmcnLFellowsrudentstaught_as much as the ~ty. Where ISSl1fS cl philosophy and social saence seemed cbaonc, Jan Deumabcouglnpawoo,insight.order, and humor. In the face o{ a diffuseplanning litttature, Dudky Burton was always thoughtful., c:ueful,systtmane. We worud w keep each other honest: Howell Saum,Supben Elum,Dudky Burton, Bayard Catron, Janet C.orpus, JanDekana, Richard Dodson, Oiip Downs, Ira Kurzban, MetaMmdd.,Ldaooand Donna Neubetg, and Gary Tobin-and o{ COWJC we bad our work rut out for us . &ad then, and m all the yea[s since, Simon eustein was edit· mg, ~obmg, rduring, clarifying, and editing again even before anythmgwas written. I should have known what to expect from h,m_bt.tr. Mort than anyone:else, he is responsible £or whatever damy,_g,:ace., andpowtt this book achieves. pt~l:f ~~a of this bookis ~olarly, another source is ~...1__ _ _ lengd,y0bsttvat10ns of c-nvironmental review .-.mer,, ~tra 1years of · · d gjonalhealth pla . pantetpant-observation in local an re· observingand P!ocnses, an.d, m re recently, fieldwork i>bnningdirtctur\ ~~ing ufh:'n and suburban planners and meuDr.c:_,. 11~_ 1~- n Franctsco I had been lucky enough to ~ ma ~•x th · · · h San f-ranc¾l Ci c,c _ ' _ en environmental review officer in t e J''1tCntdto me' A -.•ty- •nanning I) L_ • epanment. One spring day Sc1·1na " --1 tfi-A- . UC11Cr1ucmy inter - h . - · -- -, worlc:,and ,he i . CSts in the ways planner did t nvited me to the followi ng Tuesday s -

(a}ifortUaat~~

·

=

:1

I?eva~-

in =~

et;

. . There I founda fascinarin~ environmental renew _meeung. eviewcd, ncgooworld in which building pr~Ject or sent backto ared. investigated,~~ ~pr~~ of aesthetics, politiG, the drawing boards· an which~ ~ which the most simple w and teehnique were often ~ of poli n•ca1and bureaula • ..;_..i., ise.d uesuons conversations rou~•, ra q cha . dicatc , I have C1V"l'lf" c 11--...na pterS ID ~-

P~~r::i :i:~

8 A.M.

cratic strategy. As th .e

.

1.0U!J'WUJ.f:>

understandand



__

__,,1 --1 ;..;,....,,1

pomt to the more ~...... ~ years u-ymg to lina,s staff did each week. and moral signifi~n _ce of what Se . im licitly, this book also Sometimes expliady and other mnes p sti6ed and . draws from and seeks to clarify a ~~ ~y litical ~ cessible lirerarure referred to by SOCtologasts po ...c..1 eaders as critical social theory. If I have been ~en half-succes~~u.a., r . _ who are familiar with this literature wdl ~-to~~ applica tioos still more dearly; readers who a.re unfamiliar with it, ~ should not find these chapters any less ~r as a resuh. To :void confusion for readers unfamiliar with this body of work, the ~ocy chapter" has been placed at the end of ~ book_as _a synthetic conclusion (Chapter ine). everthdess, this book as directly concerned with planning practice. lt therefore uses and reformulares, but is not for the most part "about," planning theory. This book grew slowly over several years. Individual chapters have been widely circulated along the way and published. I have benefited from generous comments, suggestions, and criticisms from more colleagues and students than I might faithfully be able to acknowledge here. 1 am grateful to Simon eustein for bis persistent friendship, his ruthless editing. his criticisms of arguments matched only by his encouragement and hope. Without Howell Saum' encouragement and invitations to present material on planning practice with him at various conferences, several of these chapters might never have been written_ Ralph Hummel, Ray Kemp, and Stephen Blum struggled with many imilar issues and their uggestions and questions were continually hdpfuL Jim and Sy Adler had a sense of the forest even as l saw only the tr~; they as~ for !he whole when I saw only its parts, while 1 worked on carhtt ver 1ons of the following chapter . The Planner s etwork was a continual so urce of solidarity. With an essential mixture f co~fidence and patience, Elizabeth Falcao also watched and helped th1 book grow.

May o

Preface xiv

have come over many years fr · · 1comments oni Detailedcnoca Al ander RicardBolan,John Bryson, Dud] Ernest ex , R b D ey GuyAdams, BarryCheckoway, o ert enhardt J k rd Carron, M . G , ac Burton,Baya Fainstein,Jo hn Friedmann, enc ertler, 1-Iarv e Susan H ley Charles Hoch, Jerome Kaufman Jain y Dyckman, . p rsy ea , , es Goldsretn,a ch I Kim Richard Klosterman, Robert Kra . . rth Joo u , . S us. Ki11mgswo . Kr' r JacquelineLeavitt, eymour Mandelbau"' ' Whiteman,and Mi chae l z·tsser. At k..,, haar,Marttn k'iege d John Lawrence Susstn ' . th ey . bb B rlagesPoketo the connecnons, e concreteness porntsRo. . u · · 1 · l h d thatanyrealcnt1ca soc1a t eory-an analysis of' andthev1s10n . tanning-mustprovide. . P I amgrateful, coo, forspecificsuggestionsfrom Johann. Albrecht, DavidAllor,MichaelBasseches,Robert Beauregard, Michael Breheny,GordonClark, Pierre ~lavel, Janet Corpus, Dana Cuff, JudithDeNeufville, RichardDiehl,Charles ~owns, Leonar~ Duhl, LouiseDunlap,WilliamDunn, Charles Ellison, Steve Ferns, WilliamGoldsmith , ChesterHartman, BarclayJones, Deborah Kolb, NormanKrumholz, AlanMandell,Peter Marcuse, Peter Marris, Richard Meier , KennethPearlman,David Prosperi, Lloyd Rodwin, VictorRodwin,Shoulcry Roweis, Donald Schon, Ann Shepardson, BruceStiftel,MichaelTeitz,Michael Tomlan, William Torbert, MelvinWebber,MichaelWheeler,and Jay White. At CornellI havebeenfortunateto work with Cathy Campbell, John Davis, KieranDonaghy,LindaGondim,Pierre LaRamee, Bruce Pietry· kowski , CharlesRock,AnnetteSassi, and Francie Viggiani, stu· dentswhowerenaturalteachers.Thanks go, too, to Lynn Coffey, ~ancy~onhardt,Jan Rutledge,and Dianne Wiegand for preparmgearlierversionsof thesechapters, and, for editorial diligence, to MaryRenaud. 1a~ in~e~te _d alsoto a numberof colleagues and scholars who work_10 disciplmes otherthan planningand public administration. ~elpm~me particularlyto clarify a variety of methodological, mst1tut1onal · questions . . · • and normative were Richard Bernstetn, F d · · M re DallmayrM' h I D C h . , ic ae ear, Brian Fay Frank Fischer Tom c· art Y, Dieter Mi Id D ' ' Cl " J h sgeT , onald Moon, James O'Connor , aus Oue o n O'N ·11 Whi;e. et ' rent Schroyer, Peter Watkins, and Stephen I havebeenveryf .. . h onunateto havehad such instructive cnncism, andI h opet at as a I h' th d betterworkO h r~~ut t 1s book will stimulate fur er ~n and possibilitiesof planning pracuce. n t e pol1t1cs

Part One

Recognize Problems, Seize Opportunities

ChapterOne

The Challengesof PlanningPractice

Planning is the guidance of future action. In a world of intensely conflicting interests and great inequalities of status and resources, planning in the face of power is at once a daily necessity and a constant ethical challenge. This book is about planning for people in a precariously democratic but strongly capitalistic society. As we will see, the structure of the economy organizes autonomy and independence for some people, powerlessness and dependency for others. Planners do not work on a neutral stage, an ideally liberal setting in which all affected interests have voice; they work within political institutions, on political issues, on problems whose most basic technical components (say, a population projection) may be celebrated by some, contested by others. Any account of planning must face these political realities. Planning can take many forms. An environmental planner may draft regulations to protect air and water quality or public parklands. A land-use planner may work more as a generalist, reviewing a real estate developer's proposal in the morning and drawing up an open-space plan in the afternoon. A health planner may assess community needs for improved prenatal care or for new diagnostic technologies, and then work to meet these needs without , encouraging wasteful, however privately lucrative, oversupply. Their labels aside, each of these planners will remind us that they plan for people. This book explores the practice of planning and 3

TlicCl,a//engrs of Plan11i11g Practice 4

. _ !"ties and difficulties, the challenge I e pract1l.a t h . f h s and assesse stl · • presented by t e pursmt o t e pub Ji op. rrunities that are . c good ·· po . f modern society . 1n many ~renas O 1 ners who seek to meet public needs f . . ace e N0 nee that p an than their more romant1c1zed privat Ven 11 greater cha enhge:orporate "strategic" planners . For publ~-slector nterparts, t e I b ic y o . cou eed to worry not on y a out waste but a\s b r1ented ~lannerst;ev need to worry not only about efficiency boa out social 1usuce; ' d Ut als0 . t Outcomes · they nee to worry not only about about decen ' I f d h . satis rs but also about t 1e oo , ousmg, and jobs th · me fied custo I k f .1 e Perromises and the actua mar et a1 s to provide C t k fect mar e P . I I · oin. pared to the job that publ_1c-sector p anners 1ave, the planner with private-sectorclients has It easy. as a shorthand for Throughout the book, ,~,e refer to ·'pl~nners'.' broad array of future-oncn~e~ actors, mcludmg project and pro3 gram managers. public admmtstra~ors, program evaluators , and polil'.yanalysts, as well as local, _reg10nal'. state, and federal agency planners, both urban and rural. Thus, this book explores the vocation of planning for public well-being or, to put it more tradition • ally, forsOl:ial welfare and soc ial justice . :rill' vocation of planning has often been 1nisunderstood in two w;1ys, howl'Vt'r,anll this book attempts to provide an alternative to 1hos1 · vkw~. l'l.\l\nin!-\has sometimes hn ·n understood either as a the opposite) as 11-chnic.tl problem-solving t·ndeavor or (somewhat purdy ., 111a11nof till' hustk, b11sdc, and m1stincss of politk s. Thnl' i111.1!-\t'S of pl:innin!-\h;ivc aspects of truth to tht·m - then· arr to planners' workohrn l11111>ll',hni,al and politil.'.al dimt·nsions l~tll ~u.ch stcmit ypt·s poorly c;1pturc the realities of planning 1~r ;H:llet'. I hat prani,c is both far more cnrnplex and far more foscinat· 111\1hanthcsl' imagl's suggest. .. 1hu~nrrsworkon probkms, with people . The problem -work ,s ~otennally technical, but it may often be more craft-like or rou· tmr·' the prop! • a Iways political . · •itly so, e-wor k 1s sometimes exp 1tc . ' k at other times not. As t h e problems planners wor on va ry ' froni •I I1ralth-planning financ1a . ca~cs lo n,1tural -resource management to . d to 1 pd~nmng,th e necessary techn iques and technical skills require rk the peoplel-wl~el :hatsls th0 sc problems var y as we ll. Likewise, P anners do will I f h f dera e ' from vol a so vary rom t he local to t e e . t'stra· untary organ · • . . f adm1n izattons to publi c age ncies, rom

The Challenges of Planning Practice

5

tive to staff positions, and so on . But nevertheless, a recurrent set of practical, organizational, and political issues confronts planners of all kinds, and this book is about those issues . Consider several briefly . In a world of poor information and limited time to work on problems, how are careful analyses of alternative futures possible? In a world of conflicting interests-defined along lines of class , place, race, gender, organization , or individuals-how are plan ners to make their way? In a society structured by a capitalist economy and a nominally democratic political system, how are planners to respond to conflicting demands when private profit and public well -being clash? When planners are mandated to enable "public participation" even as they work in bureaucratic organiza tions that may be threatened by such participation, what are planners to do? When " solving" problems depends in large part on the interests, perceptions, commitments, and understanding of others, how can planners best convey their ideas, show what is consequen tial, expose dangers, and open up fruitful opportunities for action? In planning practice, talk and argument matter . A rigorou s analysis that no one can understand can be worse than useless - it and damaging, just as it might also at can be counterproductive other times serve deliberately to obfuscate important issues. The planner's knowledge of the organizational world matter s, too, for a good idea presented the week after a crucial meeting (or too late on an agenda, or on thl· wrong agenda) will 110 longer do any good . Till : planner's ability to anticipa te conflict matters, for with 0111' an appreciation of structured interests, economic motives, and org:mizational defensiveness, planners may present rational analy ses to politicians, developers, citizen groups, and other agencies and then be bewildered when no one seems to listen, at least not to the merits of the case . This book focuses on these problems to ex plore the ways planners can anticipate obstacles and respond practically, effectively, in ways that nurture rather than neglect-but hardly guarantee-a substantively democratic planning process. This book is organized in five parts, including a supplement on planning education .' Part One asks how we understand and risk significantly misunderstanding what planners and policy analysts really do . Part Two takes on the problems of power and rationality in planning practice : How can planners act politically, anticipating

The Challenges 0 ( Planning Practice 6

and act rationally nonetheless? Pa f power, . h. h I rt Th relationsO . tional contexts m w 1c p anners wo k tee rurnsto theorgantzta well-ordered mechanisms to achiever : If or. . 10 · ns are no rampant an d con froot p Ianners ev goals, 1·1 gamzat . do~ Part Four examines two activitiesetryhday, indeedconflictsatroe · . at a h e planners w at ar l . g but have nevertheless received far less att . re tralto p anntn d . . I k ent1on cen h d rve· the practical an cntlca wor of listenin f h 1· . g and thant ey ese . . ning Throughout, o course, t e po 1t1cal and p that of des1g · . I p p· rac. h ter of planning remams centra . art 1ve then prese h 1. k h nts nca1c arac encoma synthetl·c theoreticalframework . dt at m s t e. arguments . . conceptionsof practice an power, rationality and organ, ·d d . . passmg . . . . . zarion,conflictand 1tsmed1at1on, mtefrventd1on an es1gn. ftnally, to explorea sorely negl~cted area o ~tu y, t~e Supp _ lement on PlanningEducationprovides an analysis of an mnovat1ve experimentin the teachingof planning practice. Consider now eachof thesepartsbrieflyin turn. PerhapsbecauseI studied planning after receiving a master's degreein mechanicalengineering, I was puzzled by claims that plannerswere "problem-solvers." When I studied environmental plannersin the course of my dissertation research, technical problem-solving seemed to be just one small part of the planners' multifacetedwork. A few planners did focus primarily on technicalproblems,as did some consultants' staff, but most of th~m didnot.Althoughthe technical problem -solving image of planning appealsto a sense of scientific legitimacy, it really sells planning pracnceshort. . Butif technica · l problem-solving was not an accurate descriprton Wh r :. or metaphorthat fit actual planning practice, what was? about the es · I d . I · dgment, a countabilitysehnttaan pe~plexmg place of_ ~a uleb!u the struc· ' t e power of mformation polinca ias, f ub· turaI politi I · ' · es o P I" ca ·economic setting the (symbolic;>) promis •bing •; participation?Neither Charl~s Lindblom's ;olution (d~scr)inor p anners and ad . . . ntahsts Herb 5. , mm,strators as disjointed mcreme , lower· ing 0 imon_sformulation (describing decision -makers allYro . ) began re expectations h f facethese bl w en aced with constraints r ical ric1L.ness the pro . ems. Beginning to account for the P 0 fit Janning ' practical jud I ·ry o P k practiceis th k gmems, and the comp ex• f this bo0 · Pan Tw etas of the first two chapters Part One, 0 must be o arguesth b . , . I nners at to e rational in practice, P a

;n

The Challenges of Planning Practice

7

able to think and act politically-not to campaign for candidates, but to anticipate and reshape relations of power and powerlessness. Only if the practical context of power relations, conflicting wants and interests, and political-economic structures are assessed clearly can planners respond to real needs and problems in any thing approaching an actually rational, if not textbook -like, way. Even the most factual information, for example, can mean different things in different contexts, in different institutional settings; and the planner who writes or speaks as if these settings do not matter is likely to fail miserably, to be misunderstood, to be seen as unresponsive, self-isolating, insensitive to the needs of others. Furthermore, as Simon and Lindblom have made vividly clear, the planner or administrator who fails to appreciate institutional constraints will overreach and underachieve-and will be ineffective, if only because time and resources are always scarce, organi zationally allocated, forcing bounds upon the practitioner's analy sis. Ignoring the opportunities and dangers of an organizational setting is like walking across a busy intersection with one 's eyes closed. How can planners practically anticipate the shifting influences of the institutional and informational environment in which they work? In different situations, different strategies will be required. Chapter Three shows how the control of information is a source of power in the planning process . How might a " progressive plan ner," concerned with responding to structural sources of power and inequality, handle information any differently from planners less attentive to the biases of the structural settings in which they act every day? Chapter Four provides a practical, political reformulation of H~rb~rt Simon's seminal notion of bounded rationality . Distin gmshmg several ways that planning practice may be constrained or bound~d, this analysis suggests a corresponding range of planning strategies to be used in differently constrained settings . Thus, this chapter provides a strategic account of what has recently been called "contingency planning." Only when we understand that it is quite rational to plan differently under different conditions can we then avoid the embarrassment of thinking and saying that our plannmg may be rational in principle (or "in theory " ), yet any thmg but rational in practice .

Practice I IIenges of Pla1111i11g Thec,a 8

roblemsof power and conflict in th k H e orga •aminesP PartThreeex . hichplanners wor . ow do those set . . tt'ngs m w Wh ting I se I whichplanners act? at should pl s nizariona . h stageson . :> W anners hen faced . h t e . ganizationalenvironments. Provide fromtheiror ts what can p lanners d o? When pla W11 expect f manysor ' . nners . confl1ctsO . d fendparticular interests, yet must act in oaateto e . . bl . some betweenconfl1ctmgpu 1cs as well what mustneg d. likeme iators ' can d ) Whatpossibilitiesare suggested by current plannin ways thev o. g .. ) expenence . f • d b . ganizations are, o course, constrame , ut the plan· pIannmgor . .. relations of poht1eal power: . ss also recreates mngproce . . . . Some mformat10n and others do not, some gam acces s ·meiy Ieget a peop to informal andformalsourcesof powe_r and some do not; some voices areorganized and maybe influential, whereas others areexcluded andmayremainsilentand ineffectual. Whether in the publicorprivate sector,organizationsare not egalitarian utopias; differences ofstarus,powerand authority, information and expertise , interests anddesiresabound. Those realities-including the incompetent manager,the arrogant section head, the misinformed staffanalyst, thefightbetweendeveloper and regulator-cannot bewished away . Givensuchproblems of daily work, what canbe done? Whatcanplannersdo? Toaddress these issues, Chapter Five compares threeviewsof the settings in which planners work: an 10stru mental,a social,and a reproductive view. Only the repro· ~~cave perspective beginsadequately to account for the messine ss . organizational lifeandfor the ways in which planning organiza · 11 ts recreate themselves and broader relations of status, knowl· e ~handpoweras well. _apterSixexploreshow planners do what some theorists and pract1t1oners cl · d · · be· tw .. aimcannotbe done: simultaneously me ,aung eenconfltctrng · . . d part)' themI . partieswhile negotiating as an mtere ste 1 seves.Thisch d' . h y (oca planning d' apter tscussesthe settings in wh1c man . . tsputesaris st . d pt in re e, rategies that planners can a O . . a· sponseandth . ' e prob( d d mrstr Y ttve-thatmustbe faems-em otional, political, an a micularl to set ced in turn. b sucs of power are part d' red tmponant 13 negottation · app outhclearIy: Must plann ers who a d op t me 5 at ti roac es I nner mesempower su h c_o-opt weaker parti es ? Can pa sses / Ina World ofs c P_art1esthrough these negotiation proce rail evereine 1· . . h r trea qua ities, planning strategies t a .

The Challenges of Planning Practice

9

parties "equally" end up ironically reproducing the very inequal ities with which they began. Nowhere is this paradox of "equal opportunity" more obvious and poignant than in apparently democratic, participatory planning processes-in which initial inequal ities of time, resources, expertise, and information threaten to render the actual democratic character of these processes problem atic, if not altogether illusory. Throughout the book we ask what planners, when they are so inclined, might do to foster more genuinely democratic politics in their communities. Part Four turns more directly to questions of skill and practice. It investigates the central activities of listening and designing. Even though planners may often have little formal authority, they influence decision-making processes in several subtle ways. We have a great deal to learn from the ways planners listen to some concerns but ignore others, call attention to these issues but neglect or deemphasize those, time what information they give to whom, and so shape other people's expectations, hopes, and fears. Chapter Seven focuses on a critical but widely neglected aspect of planning practice: the daily challenges of sensitive and critical listening in the face of possibilities for future action. Not only essential to any investigation of "what is to be done," skillful listening is also a particularly practical interpretive activity. It is funda mentally important in those typical planning situations where issues and statements are ambiguous, where social conflict is the order of the day, and where participants' senses of issues and intere_sts are fluid as well. This chapter reaches beyond planning practice to show how our work of listening well or poorly shapes the ~ctual social ~olicy of our everyday lives. Such listening in practice mvolvesnot simply having good intentions and hearing words, but also embodying respect, paying attention, employing critical judgment, and building relationships. Chapter E_ight explores the work of designing as a deeply social, commumcat1ve process. In this view, designing is not simply a matter of mastery and intuition . It is also a process in which social actors such as planners, architects, and clients seek to " make sense together" quite practically. This common creation of sense lies at the cor~ o_f the social process of designing: giving meaningful form to a bml~m?' a park, a project, a program that is recognizable, coherent, s1gmficant,and realizable by a variety of interested parties .

The Challenges of Planning Practic e IO

. t-review negotiations in a local planning offic f In proiec . . h d e, or d. e)(. nners and architects come to s are understa ampIe, pIa .. . k" d . n Jngs •ew plans cnncize wor -mg rawmgs, and search f as they rev1 '. l f . or alte . nativesthat promise better resu ~s- unctionally, aestheticalt r . • tty The design of the pro1ect evolves not only in th Y, or I po ,uca • . . e arch1• teet,s or planner's mmd , but more so . m the shared sketch es and drawings and propos~ls they can review and agree on together. What evolves is not simply an abstract form but a socially conf structed offer or p~oposal th~t g~ows rom a hi~tory o_fpractical, working conversations that lmk mterested parties . This " social! constructivist" notion of planning practice, and design practic/s more broadly, enables us to respect the intuitive aspects of the creation of form and also to appreciate the thoroughly social and indeed political character of the communicative process through which any working design is achieved . The first four parts of the book, then, treat an interrelated setof problems. Planners must have not only technical but also political skills-but what does this mean (Part One)? What relations of power must they be able to anticipate? How can planners ac· knowledgethe messy, political character of their work and yet b_e rational (Part Two)? What must planners know about the or~ant· zational environments in which they work? In complex settings'. how can planners deal with diverse conflicts while not perpetual\ .. . · · (P t Three· ar f h• mg mequa1ltles of mformation expertise and power ' ' • rs o t ' How can we understand the political and pracucal aspe~ . 1 nd . . f h ohucaF ar)1 careful 11stenmgthat planners must do? What o t e P l d" · · ou be . practica 1mens1onsof designing in a social wor Id (Part . These first four parts of the book thus argue that plann~ng c,~: at d nona i. , t h · 1 ec mca and political at once attuned to power an ra teract the same time, · •interpr etively ' critical and p1tc . h e d to coun needlesssuffering as well. . an we Havin · racnce, c I out these argum ent s about planmng P h cenrra develop ag set framework to help us co nn ec t an d c l art·fy t esek chap· problems) . · part F'ive attempts to de ve lop su e h a f ra rnewor n· acees· ter Nme bu'ld d veloP a hat I so n recent crit ical ~o cia l theo r y to "bl e ,rice t s1 e and I' · · pra . 10 po itically :,en~it ive ac cou nt o f p la nnin g d 1·usc1ce · meets three h ll st o d 11 th l c a engcs. fir st su ch an a ccount mu s eco 11 '1,e e rea , messy s t . . ' . . k . . 11Iacc - d rn~11. m b e tings m whi ch pla nrnng ta cs . an ust em race th f I·1 n n crs e everyday ex peri en ces o P •

Th e Challenges of Planning Practice

II

sense of their perceptions of the complexities, uncertainties, and ambiguities of daily practice . Third, it must explicitly address normative questions of information distortion, manipulated participa tion, legitimation, and ideological versus legitimate exercises of power . A critical account of planning practice-as the selective , communicative organizing or disorganizing of attention-points immediately to such questions: to the practical contexts of plan ning and the communicative, contingently meaningful character of planners ' actions ; to both the political stag ing and the dimensions of planners ' arguments; and to the advantages of the organized and the vulnerabilities of the unorganized . Chapter Nine argues not only that the day -to-day work of plan ners is fundamentally communicative, but also that the organiza tional and structural staging of that work is contingently historical and political-economic. Most previous accounts of planning have focused either at the micro-level, thus diverting attention from social and political structure, or at the macro-level, thus diverting attention from social and political action, daily practice. Chapter Nine argues that critical social theory allows us to integrate these levels of analysis. Furthermore, although previous accounts of planning and administrative behavior dealt poorly, if at all, with normative questions or problems of ideology, the critical communicative account of planning advanced here makes such issues central : At stake in such a theory of planning is our recogni tion not only of planners ' potential efficacy and influence but of their possible political functions and problematic legitimacy as well. Any theory that helps us to recognize these problems should also suggest what is to be done, and Ch apter Nine seeks to work in that direction, though inevitably without providing recipes or guarantees . How, one might wonder , can such a compl ex politic::il and ethi cal practice be taught? The Supplement on Planning Education (Chapter Ten) explores a seriously neglected area of research : the practical difficulties of teaching practit ioner s, and the lessons to be learned from this experi ence. The supplement accordingl y provides an in-depth look at an innovative and experim ent al cours e taught at the M assachu sett s Institut e of Technology (M.l.T .) on " Planning and Institutional Processe s." Because this course drew togeth er leading faculty -pr actitioners to assess and evalu ate their

The Challenges of Planning Practic e Il

. . tice in the classroom-as students explor d . . I ff d e van pro e f h ractice-th1s supp ement a or s a rare 1. f cetso t at P • d . g 1111p ous a . • n of research, teachmg, an practice . se the intersecno . . f . at nt begins by rev1ewmg our case studies that h ThesuppIeme . h. k h . c aiand faculty ahke to t in t rough issues of gr h lenged students . . . . d . owr ublic parnc1pat1on, racism an community dev 1 controIs and P . d 1· . d . e op. ·zational learning an po 1t1cs, an environmental m ment,organl f Th . end associated problems o power . 1s supplement r _ . . d1anon a . . . ll d l e viewsthe four case studies cnuca Y ~n a so assesses pressing issuesthat promise to confront planning faculty, students, and practitionersin the future. . . . In sum a critical theory of planning 1s no panacea . It 1s neither dogma,d~ctrine, nor a quick_concept~al fix for timeless problems, a cookbookrecipe for planning practice that truly serves the public.The critical theory of planning practice formulated here must be furthertested: Can it help students of planning, in school s or in agencies,to recognizemore clearly and act on the precarious P?S· sibiliriesof effective, ethically sensitive, politically astute plannmg practice? It is true, of course, that theories do not solve problems in the world; peopledo. Nevertheless, good theory is what we need when we get stuck. Theories can help alert us to problems, point us to· ward strategiesof response, remind us of what we care about, or prompt our practical insights into the particular cases we co;· front._In that spirit, Chapter Nine in particular seeks_ to captu~e t 1~ essennalaspects of a critical understanding of planning pr~cncle. . book goes even halfway toward such ends an d s umuhates this s . furt h er, per ap h ot ers to carry out critical work th at goes still both theory and practice will imp rove . 5 It F. ma11 · Y,th.1s book makes no foolis h clai m to comp Ietenes d he fasc claims ne!ther the presumpt uou s tru th of havi n g off~r~ that so word on its subject nor the illusor y, detac h ed objec tIVl~i~g and oftelnleads not to freedom from bia s bur to mi sun dcr st anl·ry· tha1 lfre evance I st d h laus 1b1, . · n ea , t ese chapter s claim st r ong P . hese ar· . b in road real f I . . ms O P annmg and admini st rati ve pra cnce 'i t 0 nte){t , l power ration . a lity . · riona curJlenrs guments about roes, organiza and pract" 1 . ' ' h , arg . . ica strategies of interventi o n fit that t est: f Jano1ng, can enrich b h ' ·. o P . ot our understanding and our pr acnce poIicyanalysis d d - . ' an a mm1stration . 1prac t ss1ona

Th e Challenges of Planning Practice

These arguments complement, rather than substitute for, other important analyses that must be done . Planning in the face of power is work by real people in real situations, but people vary and so do the contexts of their actions. The psychological dimen sions of planning practice are not extensively treated here, and they demand attention. Likewise, structural political-economic forces that stage day-to-day practice are often referred to , but they are not systematically assessed in the chapters that follow ; these forces also demand more attention . Thus, while this book provides an analysis of practice that is both general in its reach and practical in its focus, it does not present comparative analyses of different domains of planning and administrative practice . Nevertheless, psychological, structural , and comparative analy ses depend in turn on fundamental notions not only of what plan ning and administrative practitioners now do, but also of what they may yet do, may better do, in the messy and conflictual, the constrained, promising , and painful situations in which they work. As one stimulus to further work, then, this book attempts to present a pragmatic but political account of planning practice. Criticisms of these arguments must carry further the psychologi cal, structural, and comparative analyses that will teach us about the possibilities of planning in the face of power . What, finally, is new here? By developing an argumentative account of planning practice in which planners play a variety of roles, this book argues against several of the old oppositions and dichotomies in the field. Rationality and politics, incremen talism and radicalism, individual action and structural constr aints, planners ' discretion and established power : These may be dist inguished in theory, but they must be integrated in any progressive planning practice. Many analyses suggest the various roles that practitioners may play, or the limits to citizens ' particip ation , or the political-economic stacking of the democratic deck . This book ~eeks to integrate and build upon the se lines of argument and show Just what public-serving planning practitioners can do nevertheless-not in theory but in pract ice, in an organizationally messy world of political inequality and economic exploitation, and in re~ponse to Paul Goodman's continually nagging pr actical question, Now what?"

What Do Planning Analysts Do?

Chapter Two

What Do Planning Analysts Do? Planning and Policy Analysis as Organizing

We know that planning analysts are not simply problem-solvers but we do not know what they really do . We still need an accoun; of what the practice of planning analysis is all about. By "planning analysts"I refer to a family of roles that involve deliberation about proper courses of action : evaluators, policy analysts, planners, administrators,and managers. To understand these practitioners as technicalproblem-solvers or information-processors would bemisleadingat best. We would do better, this chapter argues, to under· stand planning analysts as selective organizers of attention to real possibilitiesof action. This attention-organizing view can describe what analystsdo as well as suggest the distinctive ethical responsi· bilitiesand opportunities analysts face in their daily work. Before we turn directly to this argument, let us consider the limits of two commonaccounts of what planning analysts do .

Two Conventional Theories One_widely held cultural view treats planning as technical problbe~; solving· e · Given goa1s or ends, planners are to figure O ut rhe . • of · h f varieties means to achieve t em. A second view borrows rom . · for· sySr~mstheory and treats planning as a means of process _ing 10[llay manon and feedb ack . Bot h views . . b u t neither are appealing,

be true to the realities of practice, as many students of planning have noted .' When we look at the day-to-day work of putting out brushfires, dealing with "random" telephone calls, debating with other staff, juggling priorities, bargaining here and organizing there, trying to understand what in the world someone else (or some document) means, the first, means-ends, view quickly comes to be a tempting but inadequate reconstruction of what actually goes on. We might like to think that a straightforward rationale or goal justifies every action, but justifications are so diverse, so varying and wideranging, that no simple (and certainly no formal) overall end helps us explain what planning analysts do. Saying that environmen tal analysts or planners are working to "preserve environmental quality" does not tell us much about what they really do . Do they protect neighborhoods from disruptive development? Do they "preserve environmental quality" at the cost of slowing housing construction for those who need it? Do they enhance or thwart widespread public participation? To say with hindsight that planner_s and evalu_ators "assess or shape reasonable means to organizational or legislated goals " gives us more ambiguity than insight. In contrast, the second, information-processing, view does bring us closer to day-to-day work in settings where problems are well define~, where goals and measures of success are clear where cooperatJon between participant s is extensive, and wher~ we know cle~rly what an "error signal " is. But the opposite situation is more typical: Problems, outcomes , and even programs and outputs are usually not well d~fined; goals and outcome measures are ambigu~1i:hand confhct1~g; participants are often in conflict and may wit old cooperat10n; ~nd "error " or " success " is not so obvi ous-what to settle for is half the problem. Clearly, planning analysts do much more than "p f d d ·· recess ee ba k" c to e~1~1on-makers.As they formulate problems anal sts mpt dec1s1n-makers; they define and select the fe;dbac{ as ~s ~recess it. They watch for new opportunities. The fa cert~mttes that are anything but well defined and that y ce u; rloutmely monitored. The " systems" and networks w·th_ca~not e ysts' organization are fluid h . I m t e ana outsiders. Problems shift ' as are ti ose connectmg analysts to ' new peop e are contacted, goal state-

~:~f

What Do Planning Analysts Do ? i6

f

l

.

strategies shi t. P annmg analysts are nge program h. Th more mentscha ' h keep their s tps on course : ey are · ators w O 2 A neces. than navig d .th formulating that course . nalysts do ·1 · volve wi h . more san Y m h layers and orchestrate; t ey are inevitably . than infor~. t leiP. writing the score as well . The informat· inion. I d ohnca Y m vo ve P . of practice abstractly models systems behavi processing1ml a?e " but it does not help us understand or expts "self-reguatmg, d f ain as da practice and action. As one stu ent _o politics com. everydy . t dly social systems-the systems m and on which k ·· mente pom e ' d policy analysts wor -are no more poht1cally self. plannle~santhanthe Bastille was self-storming (Winner 1977). reguanng Neglected Dimensions

of Practice

In complexpolitical situations, planning analysts need to poseand createproblems as much as to analyze them. They resolve problems less by calculation ("solving" them) and more by creating them anew, reformulating them so action and stra~egy are possible,sensible,and agreeable in the case at hand. Given complex problems,analysts often cannot provide either formal analysesor "all the facts." In addition to presenting any "facts," they also practicethe art of the possible: They work to create new program possibilities,and they shape attention selectively to these program· . designoptions and inevitably neglect others . 1 In a political world analysts often need to marshal not on_ydtn· . and data but also support. They are coa 1ttton · · bu1Iers formanon f · h h · II de as we as m ormatton accumulators . Because t ey ave to shap the expectations of elected officials neighbors, developers: an1 , . analysts cannot just others, PIannmg render d etac h ed ' d1s1an h analyses.The analysts need to be close to these people, dose en~~~to understand them and to communicate effectively wit~ t qui· Such · · ·sm 1sretysis . contact need not lead to biased analyses . C rittct . siteto objectivity ; detachment is not . Objective and sohd anarna i may help persuade potential coalition members; detachment simplyproduce irrelevance. 3 ot11 · Tu · f . ~c d sell · get m ormation they need analysts may require puter access h , d acts an as muc as a network of truste cont ah~a 15 · .· mterested co . . · not I5 b • operation, even if such cooperauon lypo1,n· emgn.If planning analysis were mechanical and not deep

What Do Planning Analysts Do?

17

cal, information technology alone might be the top prio~ity . As it stands, though, communications networks, formal and ~nfor_mal, are often more important, for without them informat10n itself would be meaningless . In addition, a set of questions may be far more effective in shaping action than a report, especially in day -to-day practice . What "flows" in the analyst-other interaction is not simply information, but responsibility-and the ability to respond-as well. When goals are vague, the environment unstable and uncertain, opportunities yet to be clearly recognized, and significant facts still obscure in conflicting stories, spreading questions can be as important for planning analysts as marshaling facts or processing infor mation about a case. Why Are Analysts Effective at

All?

The planner's sources of influence include specialized knowledge or technical expertise, a monopoly on organizationally and politi cally relevant information, and the role of "gatekeeper" of information and access. Specialization may indeed inform the choice of mean~, once ends are given; information is both a political and a techmcal resource. Yet many other sources of analysts ' effectiveness and power exist: widespread contacts; formal or informal bu reaucr~tic and political pressure; bargaining with bureaucratic co?Peratton or possible delays; . managing uncertainty and shaping images of the future; preemptmg definitions of problems and thus a_pproache~t~ solutions; alerting, warning, or working with out Side~s (or ms1d~rs); coalition building ; and selectively calling at tention to _particular opportunities or threats .• We explore such sources of influence further in Chapters Three and Four 'T' thes . . 10 assess e avenues or strategies of analysts ' power and influence, how ever, we need another image and understanding of what I . analysts do . P annmg

Organizing Attention to Possibilities Cfonsid_er the planner or the public administrator who prov ·d . ormat1on to a neighborh d( _ . 1 es m organization about a proposed project A pt~ - or coknstidtue_n~y) • I ic wor s a numstrator may inform a

WhatDo planningAnalysts Do ?

•anon about a street-widening p . I ro1eq 1· local rnerc an c and pedesrria~ access to ocal busine sses. •ktly to disruptrraffif community residents about an AIOcaJ a,· JO orrn "ghb h d I . h apart planner 01 . _ _ ,,.,i for their ne1 or oo . ~ en er caseth l!Jtn. complexpro':'"- 15unlikelv to telephone mterested t Plan. 3to~ street w(dening (or an apartment ~a'.11:" alld neror adrni~stT 1 1 1 . 1.- sav He o. ' ; G db " U1d1no sunp1~ • ' d ar you. Hear . oo ye. "b, t\ t.,eiog propO; ~enner or administrator is likely to de . Instead, : p ~ ;,uJiutethe possible riming; design/tecri be !tit -~...t pro1ect, . h . . !lour pro!-""'"". f nnao·on· exp/am t e pro1ect review prnr = Ct\ ofiurtherJO o ' . . ~- ~\· aL. ·gbborhood residents to their possible parricipatio .' 1C11 theOel be. ·gh n, P,lllrt .bl alcemam·es that are mg or m1 t be con · , 1_ oul PoS51 e .. . . . Slucrbf: ., · ementsfor cmzen parnc1panon, such as sub . .. speCI TYrequrr . f . . m1 entsor panng appeal ees, suggest other in•wnrrencomm · d .fy . "-'tsttd . ·ho might be contacte ; not, residents of pa,..; 1. P~~~ d . - ~~ ~eeringsto discu.Ss rhe propose pro1ect; and ask for comm emi andresponsesto rhe proposals as they now stand. ln these wa;·1. plannersand adrninimators shape not. only facts but anenn~ Doingmorethan hsnng data, they deliberately call attentiontu both"the fam" (''The proposal just came in yesterday: I Cf.Jlltacted\·ouassoon as I could" ) and to future possibilities ("Yoo might;aisethosequestions at the meeting next week" ). Simply to saythat analysts provide information is correct,bt:: notterribly helpful.How do they provide information, and wlu.: practica l, political,and ethical difference can they make? Thear.2~·sts' talk manm. \t'hen they speak, analysts act: they notify,rrr form,alert, point out, designate, ask, warn, and so on.5 In as~ for citiz.ms ' responsesto proposals, analysts also shift responsibility to othersand shapetheir participation, thus organizing (or_disorganizmgi anentionboth to project alternatives and to posstbiliaes of action.' So analysts are not apolitical problem-solversor social engineers.Instead, they are actually pragmatic critics \\~ mu5r makeselecci,·e arguments and therefore influence what om(! ptuple_ltam about,not by technically calculating means t~ endsOf er.rorsignals,but by organizingattention carefully to pro1ectpassmiltues,or~nizing for practical political purposes and organUJ· Uunal ends.' \\'·/hen analysts trust the reports and warnings · o f 0 cherstall 1

h ts' assoc•

What Do Planning Analysts DrJ?

19

members, citizens, or friends, they subtly shift responsibility to those others and come to depend on them. Thus analysts protect good working relationship s with other agencies, not just to get accurate information but also to cultivate trusted networks of contacts who can be counted on to respond sensitively, appropriatel y, and quickly. Planning analysts transmit facts, but they also shape relationships, political ties, and other s' attention, thus shaping no t only others' thinking but their concerns and partiapa tion, too. t Practice and Politics Once we recognize the organizing and attent ion-shaping strategies of planning analysts, we can make sense of much of the appar ent noise of daily work: the endless meetings that socialize and co-opt no less than disseminate information, the persistent ring of the telephone, and- instead of others' willingness to reason togetherthe staff member's worry, the supervisor's pressure, the neighbor hood resident's disgruntlement, the client's anger or confusion heard on the other end of the telephone, if not face-to-face. An attention-organizing view clarifies the politics of plann ing analysis as the means-ends and information-processing views do not .' Goals and information are important , but they are not givens to work with or toward. They are practical and political problems to be formulated, reinterpreted, continually reevaluated and reconstructed. How analysts organize attention is the central political problem of their practice. They must stress some issues and downplay others. They clarify some opportunities but obscure others. They encourage the participation of some citizens, but not that of others. They open up particular practical questions, but they close off the discussion of others. Inescapably and subtly, then, planning analysts focus citizens' attention selectively. They organize attention to some possibilities while disorganizing attention to still other options. To ask how analysts organize or disorganize others' attention leads not only to questions about the adequacy, legitimacy, and openness of their practice but also to the same questions about the organizations in which they work-issues the conventional views seem to ignore, as if feedback flows and goals were unambiguous, clearly defined targets. The conventional views

What [)o PlanningAnalysts Do ? 20

. he price of denying the reality of h< 1.. cunty at t . 'cl b ,, > 1t1c~1,,. romise sc . view prov, es oth ~our . . · · 1it P . . arrcnuon-shaping . · II cc~of organizing, d olirical vis10n as we . Prac.

.

ticalstrategyan p Implications for Daily Practice . veral implications of this general account of I . Cons1der ,,seF. note that the planning an alysts' daily a/t . ann,ng . . ions ct1ce irst, municative-crcatmg, recon stituting ref art pra ·11 practicaly com well as simply reporting on them , An orllllula1 . . g probems as h d f · anaY~t' ,n . to a building deve1oper, t e ra ting of a se . s 1 · . ct,onof quesnon put . or impact report, even a ertmg a ne1ghborh d an evaIuanon . . h oo or. . . to a forthcoming meenng-t ese arc not only Ill ~~00 . . . ~ to ends,but they are a_ls~ commdunh1cat1ve ahctt~~s that build rela. . h. s open poss1b1hnes,an s ape ot ers interpretation f t10ns,p , . f "I ,, "I , ,, so . g and opporrumry,o can or can t. Revealingth meanm d 'bT . h e deepestbut neverthdesshor inarykpfos1s1 1 ~ties ~~eh,StephenBlurn hasoftencharactenzedt e wor o p annmg as t e organization of hope."" As analystsshape arguments, they can broaden rather than preemptthe bases of policy formulation. _ Their ~biliry to speak and writeeffectively-to argue cogently m a pohttcal world-is crucial.Rhetoric,the classical art of speech and persuasion,not sophistry,counts. Second,planning analysts' organizations are not problemsolvingmachineswith simple inputs and outputs. They are structuresof powerand thus of distorted communication-they selectivelychannel information and attention, systematically shape participation, services,and (often problematic) promises. Everyorganizationreproducesa world of promise, hope, expectation, frustration,dependence , and trust, just as it may shape the naturalor materialworld. Third,the ethicaland political responsibilities of planninga: : 1Yst5nowappearin a new light. Because their actions are not0ca~ 105t rumenral , the implicit responsibility of planning analyStS . no longersimplybe to "be efficient " to function smo 0th1Yas01e~ 1" ' well defined en ds. AnaYu11 traI meansto given and presumably 111 work m complex,conflict-ridden political worlds. So they [IIU· speak and listen, ask and answer, act practically and corn

Whal Do l'/anninx Analysts J)n?

2. 1

nicativcly within multilayered structure s of variously distort ed communications, claims and counterclaims, promises and predictions. Under the~e constrained conditions, the responsibility of planning analysts is not to work toward the impossible perfection of "fully open communications." ft is to work instead toward the correction of the needless distortion s, some systematic and some not, that disable, mystify, distract, and mislead others : to work toward a political democratization of daily communications. 11 for example, seen as organizers or disorganizers, analysts become responsible for the parts they can play to prevent and correct false promises; to correct misleading expectations; to eliminate clients' unnecessary dependency; to create and nurture hope; to spread policy and design questions to those affected; to nurture dialogue about options and about the "values" and "interests" by which those options for policy and design may be evaluated; and, thus, to communicate genuine social and political possibilities, to say not only "Hey, that's the way it is," but also "Here's what could be done" and "Here's what we could do." As any planner or public administrator knows, practical work is full of unnecessarily distorted communication. The very language analysts use in many bureaucracies creates such problems. Analysts often speak in a shorthand few others can understand. Public notices are often incomprehensible to anyone except agency staff. Ralph Hummel recently characterized bureaucratic communication with clients (what there is of it) as predominantly one-way. 14 After all, who tells whom how things are and what is possible? Benjamin Singer speaks of the " form work" demanded of clients before further interaction is possible. In many planning encounters, defensive behaviors include withholding information, suppressing feelings, and the strategic pursuit of unilateral control or dominance.'5 In so-called public hearings, exaggeration, fear, and intransigence often displace any public exploration of the issues involved in the proposals at hand. But Paulo Freire put it most powerfully: To deny other people's abiliry to communicate, to make sense, to understand and inquire both about what is and about what can yet be is tantamount to doing violence to them. 16 The crucial point for practice is not that the claims of planners and policy advisors can be distorted. Of course they can be. Yet much distortion is avoidable, contingent and subject to change,

\Vl,,itDo Plan11i11g Analysts Do ? 11

·iy harmful to the relativel y poo h . S h . r, t c ecessan and thus unn ss llnor. I in particular. uc practically alt ganizcd,the power~ simplest of settings . The neightabte dis. ccur in t e . or of tortionso calls or the community group stews, and the the 'h call much less to set up a mectin Planner buildingsite returnt e ' g.._ed· · g is slowto · I •port may seem more rewarding . 0 d 1t1n f anot ,er re . d d r eve\ thetextO . d up in proiects an nee to move th op. crs havemoney nc fford to work more intimately coo en, along . kl they can a . ff h ' Perativ qu1c ' y; . 1 with the plannmg sta t an can th _ .c1Y, d co-optanve y ff d Th e Vario an . or anizationsor a ecte groups . e control of us communi ty g ly fewin society mean s more than the p cap,. 1b he re1anve . assess· ta y; h (Gavcntai 980). It means access, tim e, and expert ab·;on ofwcat . . ns and arguments in both form al-bureaucr • 111)' to press posmo . d" . attcand . 1stort1on of the po .6. 1sctn•ngs·, it spells a systematic . . ss1 1\. informa . . f II ffectedpeople commg to terms with events sh . ,nes o a a . k h I . I aping . 1· Intheirdaily wor , t en, p annmg ana ysts face a re thcir 1ves. . . d . II cur.t·cal choice·to annc1pate an parna y counteract s h . . . h f f uc rentpo1I I m t .e ace o them, to be corn. d1.storted claims, or to acqmescebl. 17 . . · obscuring.them from pu 1cview. p1!Cit In . . . . Here lies a crucialpracncal and ethical issue for plannmg analysts. In a democraticsociery citi~en_s should be able not onlyto findout aboutissues affectmgtheir lives but also to communicate meaningfully withother citizens about problems, social needs,and alternative policyoptions. If the very work of planners and policy analysts is to shapethe communications-the warnings, report s, promises , assurances,justifications,and so on-that influencecitizens' action,then should not planning analysts be responsibleto anticipateand counteract alterable, misleading, and disabling claims and learn to nurture well-informed, genuinely democrati c politic s anddiscourseinstead?

What Do l'/a11 11i11 g Analysts Do?

23

Analysts should recognize that any organization sha~es un~erstandings, expectations, and hopes as well as any material services it may provide. Organizations provide their members with sch~mes of categories and stereotypes that affect insiders and outsiders alike. Adopting these schemes, we may be patients in our doctors' offices,employees at work, children within families, neighbors in our towns and cities, and citizens within nation-states . With each identity come socially constructed prerogatives, obligations, and relations of power and authority. Analysts should attend, too, to the false promises of some par ties and to the futile attitudes, mistaken expectations, or cynicism of others. Doing that, they can work to overcome both stereotypes of others and stereotypes of what it is desirable and possible to do.19 They might help affected persons explore project and policy possibilities,consequences, values, and uncertainties. They might organize effectiveparticipation, building power both outside and within mediated negotiations, for example, and so explore various processesof participatory design or policy criticism and dialogue. 20 Planners and analysts should also work to counteract the political noise and flak coming from the very structure of the organiza tions they work within: the flak intimidating outsiders, the noise confusing insiders, the peremptory, bureaucratic "that's how it is [i.e., must be]." Such work requires planning analysts to pose real possibilitiesof action, asking citizens for reformulations and new proposals, rather than simply "passing along solutions," so perpetuating "one-way communication," as Hummel puts it. Analysts must recognize clearly that what gets done depends heavily on what gets said, and how it is said, and to whom. By doing so, they can seize opportunities to counteract a wide range of disabling and distorted claims: exaggerated threats, needlessly obscure and confusing analyses, strategically hidden information manipulated expectations, and so on. Working in these ways: plannmg analysts can expose, however subtly and partially, unCommunicative Ethics : warranted exercises of power and the resulting obstacles to citiPracticalAction and Political Vision zens' political acti.on. T~~se analysts can aid citizens' organizing How shouldanalystsdo such work? As analysts speak or act.in effo_rts to reestabhsh legitimate and responsive public policy inipractice,the waysthey organize or disorganize others' anenuon tiatives. The chapters that follow discuss these possibilities in tStfi detail. mevnablylink issuesof ethics and politics. 1" How are analyS underStand theirresponsibilitiesand the possibilities here? Wewi In contrast to this organizing view, finally, the means-ends and explore severalpoints in the following chapters .

WhatDo PlanningAnalysts Do ? 14

. cessingaccounts of planning analys,· · f auon-pro functionallyand strateg1cally • arc eniPir less s.11 · 11 less wng, . d , urn·1 I• ca Y h' II less instrucnve. To un erstand plann· natinP nd et ica y .. I . ing an I °' a otentiallycnnca argumentative practic a Ysts • work as a P .• ) h , • e, sele • ct1ve1 y . . (or disorganizingot ers attention to fut organizing b h Ure"o . . . f t'ng appearsto e a muc more powerful t' ss1bj\ . 1t1c s o ac I , d d acco whatplanninganalystsreally o-an can yet do. Untof

1norm fi .

Part Two

To Be Rational,Be Political

Chapter Three

Planning in the Face of Power

If planners ignore those in power, they assure their own _powerlessness. Alternatively, if planners understand how relatio~s of power shape the planning proce ss, they can improve _the q~ahty of their analyses and empower citizen and communtty actI _o~ . By focusing on the practical issues of information control, m1smfor mation, and distorted communications more generally, this chapter will elaborate a pragmatic and progressive planning role for all those planning in the face of power. Whether or not power corrupts, the lack of power surely frustrates. Planners know this only too well. They often feel overwhelmed by the exercise of private economic power, or by politics, or by both .' In health planning, for example, as in local land -use planning, planners must often react defensively to the initiatives of established, usually private medical care " providers " or project developers . Those providers have time, money, expertise, informa tion, and control of capital; the countervailing consumers, in con trast, have few such resources. Nevertheless, planners in many areas are legally mandated to make democratic citizen partici pation in the planning process a reality rather than a romantic promise . Furthermore, planners often have had little influence on the im plementation of their plans. Those painstaking plans have too often ended up on the shelf or have been used to further political purposes they were never intended to serve . Given these conditions of work and the intensely political nature of planning practice, how then can planners work to fulfill their legal mandate to foster -i.7

Planningi11the Face of Power 28

ratic planning process? What power can I . 1 democ a gcnumcY . of retrenchment, these questions be Pan. conie"' have) In a nme ~. . t than ever. . . . importan d f -all solutions 111 planning practice should Once-anh- or er because the object of planning futu nothe , re a • d owev , expe_cte '. I es the unique and novel. Even when plann· Ct1on , unnclymvov .. . b tngserv ro . 1. economicdeetstons, 1t must e attentive to h es rattonaize h d E t e sp to roblemspresentedby the case at an . ven technical ecialPh be solvedwith standard methods exist arnid Prob. !emst at can . bl' h d confli ct. . . rationsand interests, esta ts e power and e 1 mgmterpre f h. . ' xcuded the population-all o w tch mevitably Ii . segmentsof . d . rn1tthe f purely technicalsolunons . But esp1te the fact that 1 O ffi e cacy h f . Pan. o .ownership and power ners havelittle influenceon . t e structure h . .m th'1s soct'ety, they can influence ... . . t e cond1t1ons that renderc1n able (or unable ) to part1c1pate, act, and organize effectiv zens h . . e1y regardingissuesthat affect t ctr 11ves. Thischapterseeksto demonstrate that by choosing to address or ignorethe exerciseof political power in the planning process plannerscan make that process ~ore democratic o~ less,mor; technocratic or less, st1llmore dommated by the establishedwieldersofpoweror lessso. For instance, planners shape not onlydocumentsbut alsoparticipation: who is contacted, who participate sin informaldesign-reviewmeetings, who persuades whom of whicn optionsfor projectdevelopment. Planners do so not only byshapingwhichfacts certain citizens may have, but also by shapingrhe trustand expectationsof those citizens. Planners organizecooper· ation,or acquiescence,in addition to data and sketches. Theyare oftennot authoritativeproblem-solvers, as stereotypical engineer s maybe, but, instead,they are organizer s (or disorganizers) ofpub· lie attention: selectively shaping attention to options for acnon , particularcosts and benefits, or particular arguments for and againstproposals.2 A key source of the planner's power to exert suchinfluenceis the control of information ..1 1 Thischaptertherefore argues that (r) information is a compex . .. . ~~ sourceof power111 the planning process · (2) mtsmformatton .. · types-some inevitable some ' · ble, some sis era1d'istmct avo1da . , d~ ~ temattc,somead hoc-can be anticipated and counteract_e J!l~ tute P!anners; (_3) such misinformation undermi _nes ';ell-m:~\00. planmngand citizen action by manipulating cinzens behe '

··~

Planningi11the Faceof Power

t trust and sense of relevant problems, and planners ~an coun sen c't the~e influences· (4) planners themselves sometimes pabr' . • d · · I ases, .may tera . f e ticipate in distorting commumcat10nsan , m specta c justifiedin doing so; and (5) because planners ~an expect mtsm. ormation to influence processes of decision makmg, agenda set~m?, and political argument more generally, they can _counter~ct It 111 several ways to foster a well-informed, democratic plannmg process, thereby empowering affected citizens as well. Information as a Source of Power How can information be a source of power for planners? Fo~r ways of answering this question are rather common, but we w1!I also consider a fifth. These reflect the perspectives of the technt cian the incrementalist or pragmatist, the liberal-advocate, the stru~turalist, and what I will call the progressive.4 Each perspective suggestsa different basis of power that planners may cultivate in their practice. We will discuss below how the different approaches to the control and management of information can make a practical differencein planning and in broader political processes. Although each of these perspectives will be discussed separately, in actual practice planners might combine several of them in any given case. For example, a transportation planner might strategically combine the attitudes of the technician and the progressive,5 or a health planner might utilize approaches of both the pragmatist and the liberal-advocate.6 The technician. The technician supposes that power lies in technical information: knowing where the data can be found, which questions to ask, how to perform the relevant data analysis. Here, becauseinformation supplies solutions to technical problems, it is a source of power. This view reflects at once the most traditional proble~-~olvin~ notion of planning and one of the profession's most crtt1c1zedideals-for it avoids, or pretends it need not conc_e~nit~elf directly with, pol!tics. The technician supposes that poltttcal Judgmentscan be avoided, that the political context at hand ca~ be ignored. Adopting a benign view of politics, the technician believesthat sound technical work will prevail on its own merits . But many _planners and critics alike have been skeptical of this technocratic attttude.7

Planningin the Face of Power . . II Planningin the Faceof Power • tall·st· The orgamzanona yf pragmatic incre"' ,cremen · The 11 h •nformation is a source o power beca '"en. talism. The structuralist perspective suggests that p_lanne~s have d use it . h Ids t at 1 I 1 ta 1st O re. . ational needs. Peop e nee to know wh power but, despite their best intentions, keep people m their place . d . ere to ds to organiz get spon . h w to get a pro1ect approve with minimu and protect existing power. The planners' power cannot serve informanon,o of design problems to avoid . Here kno rndelay, freedom.11 • f and what sortsce of power: informal networks, st;ady wc ing the The progressive. Finally, the progressive approach~s _m ~rma I . f Ontact opesis a sour r keep p anners m armed. This . s, tion as a source of power because it can enable the part1c1pat1onof I ommunication andreguarc .. h. h " · 1" · isasocitizens and avoid the legitimizing functions of which the ~truccialproblem-solving v1e\~'mlw ic dsoc1af is narrowly construed turalist warns. The planner's information can also call attention to "organizational. P anners o, o course, work in O . to mean . .ff d rgan1the structural, organizational, and political barriers that needles~ly . 1ne'" zanona ..,'orks in which . d1 erent h actors h epend on one another distort the information citizens rely on to act. 12 The progressive w en ot ers depend on the plan. for key 1·nformation.Irorncally, . . . perspectivethus combines the insights of the libe_ral and the ~tmc1s a source of power-des Pile . ncrs, 1•nformation ' that mformanon . . views and goes one step further. It recogmzes that polmcal turalist thefactthat incrementahstplanners (as Lindblom suggestedthirty economic power may function systematically to misinform afarsago) maynot know what good such power may servebeyond fected publics, by misrepresenting risk or costs and benefits, for rt: impacton narrow organiz~tional politics. 8 • • instance. The progressive view anticipates such regular, structurThe liberal-advocate. The liberal-advocate views informationas ally rooted misinformation and organizes information to countera sourceof powerbecauseit responds to a need created by a pluact this "noise" (or "ideologizing," as some would call it). u ralistpoliticalsystem; information can be used by underrepreEach of these planning perspectives points to a different source sentedor relativel y unorganized groups to enable them to particiof the need for information, and thus defines a different basis of patemoreeffectivel y in the planning process. This is the traditional power: technical problems, organizational needs, political inequal advocacyplanningperspective.9 It seeks to redress inequalities of ity, system legitimation, or citizen action. participationand distribution by bringing excluded groups into Since the progressive view builds on the other positions, it is politicalprocesseswith an equal chance, equal information, and particularly important to consider it in more detail. Emphasizing equaltechnicalresources.Traditional technical-assistance projects popular participation and planners' organizing practices, the proalsofallwithinthis view,aiming to provide technical skills andex· gressiveview also recognizes the obstacles to such participation. We will first compare the other views; then we will examine the pertiseso that communitygroups, among others, can competeon progressive'sposition. an equal footing with developers. The liberal-advocate focuses on the informationneedsof a particular client, i.e., the disenfran· chised,the underrepresented,the poor, and the powerless.10 Limitations of Common Views Thestructuralist. The structuralist paradoxically supposesrhat Th~ ~ec~nicianis not wrong so much as intentionally neglectful. the planner'sinformation is a source of power because it serves Poltttcs1sthought to "get in the way" of rigorous work. The politist necessarily, first, to legitimize the maintenance of existing ruc· cal context of planning is understood as a threat, not as an opporturesof powerand ownership and, second, to perpetuate yubl~~ tunity.14 Yet it was a political process that created not only the set mattenttonto such fundamental issues as the incompanbihty of problems to be addressed but the technician's job as well. Theredemocraticpoliticalprocesseswith a capitalist political-econom Y• fore one canno~choose between being technical or being political. Thestructuralistview,ironically is reminiscent of the conservark1ve The techmc1an1snecessarilya political actor; the crucial questions funcf r Of , t ra es ionaism severaldecades ago, but now the argumen Ianare: In w~at way? How covertly?Servingwhom? Excluding whom? a polmcal-economic turn: The actions of the state, and the p ·. Followmgthe publication of Lindblom's classic article "The Sci. up caP1 ners who wo k · h. . . . r wit m tt, mevttably function to prop

30

P/allllillg in

the Face of Power

ll

· ddl. Through," the incrementalist view fi f Mu mg . . rst fo ence O f b •ng practica, I b ut t h en msp1red no end llnd f vor or e1 1 · . I . of . great a . nprincipled, apo mca , or, m a phras f cr1tj. cism for berng u " make do ." 15 In its rejection of thee, or ad. · h·ng us to . ratt0 nal. moms 1 . all to get all the facts, the mcrementalist rehens1vec . b · • Pos1f comp ·mporrant anttdote, ut 1t says little about h ~on rves as an I . b h t eI se f planning practtce, a out w at planner s sh I tn. d . ou d b provement o e . dhow they might o it. doing an , • · d 1· · s view game a more exp 1c1tlyeth1· If The lI.beral-advocate , . . f . . ca ol . ·n part for addressing issues o mequahty, but it ha b · Iowing f ·1· dd h h" . s een ,i 1 criticized for a1 mg to a ress t e 1stoncal and 16 Th correctY . l"b I d strucharacter of these issues. e I era -a vacate has b tura1 c . . . h . k een cterizcd as a nurse, m1mstermg to t e sic yet unable t chara . . h fi I o pret their illnessesfrom occurnng m t e rst p ace . ve~he structuralist's position is as tragic as the liberal -advocat , . pure in intention, y~t fr~strating in practice. Finding all plann~:~ practiceto be a legmmatton of the status q~~• t~e structuralist systematicallyfails to address real opportumt1es m planning. '7 The structuralistview may fail even to identify and exploit what might be called "internal contradictions" in the structure of the political economyand the planning process in particular . The irony of the liberal-advocates' position is that their best intentions may be betrayed by their ignorance of the structural effects of politicaleconomic organization-for example, private control of invest· ment, or the fact that an increased number of environmentalimpact reports will not prevent environmental destruction . The tragedyof the structuralist view is that its apparently comprehen· sive position may be wholly undialectical in that it supposes the powerplanners face (or serve) to be monolithic and without inter· nal contradictions.18

The ProgressiveAnalysis of Power 'f!1eprogressiveshave problems, too . Like the more strictly tech· mealplanners, they need good information . Like liberal-advocates, · · and la· they need to supp1Y m · formation to citizens commumnes, bor groups . d .d . . . ' t .c efforts, m or er to a, their orgamzmg and democra 1 • Yetthe pr · 1· · ) analysis h ogressives need to act on the basis of a po mca ·11 tfuattells them how the political system in which they work wig nct1onregul 1 •. • h plann1n ar Y to m1smform both participants m t e

Planning in

the Faceof Power

33

process and affected citizens more generally . 19 The progres sive lanner needs to anticipate, for example, tha _t developers may ~ithhold information or misrepresent likely pro1ect consequence~, such as revenues ; that consultant s may ?e used less for analysis than for legitimation ; that agency meeting schedules _may favor rivate entrepreneurs while excluding affected workmg people ~hose business is their own daily employm~nt; t~at ~ocum~nta tion prov ided by a project's planners for pubhc ~ev1ew ts n?t hk~ly to discuss project flaws or alternatives as candidly as pro1ect virtues; and so on . . Unlike the incrementalist or liberal -advocate, the progressive believes that misinformation is often not an accidental problem in planning : It may well be a systemic problem to be a~dressed and counteracted on that basis. 20 The practical tasks facing the progressive planner, then, are like those that community organizers and political actors have traditionally performed. Health planners, for example, increasingly recognize the need for educative and organizing skills to address the problems of daily planning practice.2 1 Still, developing such educative, organizing responses to ex pectable misinformation requires planners to address several crucial, practical questions of political and organizational analysis. What types of misinformation can be anticipated? Are some distortions inevitable while others are avoidable? Are some distortions socially systematic while others are not? How does misinformation affect planning and citizen action? What practical responses are possible? Might planners themselves be sources of distortion? Can this be justified? How can planners expect misin formation to flow through the relations of power that structure the planning process? Finally, in the face of expectable misinformation and distortion threatening well-informed planning and citizen action, what can progressive planners do in practice? The remainder of this chapter addresses these questions and the larger question of w~at this analysis means for an effective, progressive planning practJCe. Types of Misinformation We should distinguish several types of misinformation (see Table 1). Some misinformation will be ad hoc, random, or spontaneous . For example, in a public hearing a developer's consultant may

p/a,rniug i11the Face of 14

Power Planning m the Face of Power

Bounded Rationality R efined · TABLE I . . · . Distortions as Bounds to th e Rati onality of _ eommu111cative Action Autonom y of the Source of Distortion Socially Ad Hoc

Contingency of Disroroon

Jne,;rable distortions

Socially unnecessary distortions

ldiosvncraric personal traits aff~g communication

Sociall y SyStemati c/ Structural

2 Information inequar . suiting from leo;n·itiesre,,. mate . · d 1v1s1on of labor

Random noise

Transmission /content IQSscs across orgaruzational boundaries

(cogniri,·e limits )

(divi sion of labor )

3 \\illful unresponsiveness

Monopolistic exchange

4 disronio ns oi

Interpersonal deception

Monopolistic needs

creation of

Interpersonal bargaining behavior; e.g., bluffing

Ideological rationaliza tion of class or power structure

(interpersonal manipulation )

(structural

legitim ation)

speaktoo quickly or unwittingly use technical terms that the audi· ence fails to understand. As a result, communication suffers, but ~ardlyas the result of any systematic cause. Other instances of mis· mformation, though, will reflect actors' political-economic roles. Consider_the remarks of James C. Miller III, executive director ofa preSiclenttaltask force on regulatory relief indicating that indu5rr)' repredsentatives can be expected to exagg~rate likely costs of propose regulations, w h"l · t e government representatives (1.e., t he regu· 1ators) can be d . . ,, expecte to mflate the benefits of the same proposed regu1anons·- such misrepresentations · he)' are clearly not ad h oc; t_ are rather struct I d . hips , If I ura pro ucts of political-economic relanons P anners can anttctpate · · b oth types of misinformatton• (systern·

35

aric and ad hoc ), they can vary their practical responses accord ingly. For example, impromptu and informal measures m!ght suffice in response to nonsystematic distortions of information, because such distortions may merely be matters of blind habit. Clarifications can be requested; time for questions and crossexamination can be allotted in hearings, reviews , or commission meeting s; a sensitive chairperson can intervene to suggest that a speaker speak more slowly, mor e directly into the microphone , less technically, and so forth . In contrast, responses to systematic misinformation must be more strategic, based on the planner 's analysis of the power structure at hand. As Steven Lukes argues, systematic misinformation is rooted in the political-economic structures that define who initi ates and who react s; who invokes authority or expertise and who is mystified or defers ; who appeals to trust and who chooses to trust or be skeptical ; and who defines agendas of need and who is thus defined. 13 Some instances of misinformation might be socially necessary (that is, unavoidable ), whereas still others are not . That there is some division of expertise and knowledge in society seems to be a socially, if not a biologically, necessary matter, not in the particu lars of distribution (that being a political question ), but in the fact of _any unequal ?istribution at all. Some people will have developed skills for graphic arts, others for community organization, others for music composition ; some might be mechanics , others painters, others farmers, and still others teachers. How the division of labor is structured in a given society is a political question-but that the~e ~ust be a division of labor in capitalist, socialist, or future soc1et1esseems to be necessary in social life. Thus, some misinformation will be unavoidable ; it will flow from some division of la bor and _t~us of knowledge, expertise, and access to information. ~ther m1smformation, such as capricious propaganda, will be socially unnecessary and thus avoidable. This analysis of misinformation and communicative distortion pro~ides the basis for a powerful reformulation of Herbert Simon's nonon of the "boundedness " of the rationality of social action .24 !he _rattonahty of action is bounded, to be sure ; but how? How mev1tably? How politically? We turn to these questions below and ' at greater length in the next chapter .

Planning ;11 the Face of Power 36

Pla1111ing in the Face of Power

. ts on social action may be necessary but . · I ·f ' 0th Some constrain ' ·ust be social or po 1ittca artl acts-constraints er 1 bounds ma) mere relations of custom, status, or pow that tingent on . er th are condl . ·table or immutable . Working to alter the nee at har y mev1 b f 1· h essa"" are d d of rational action may e oo 1s ness, but work ·, boun e ness . th d. . tngto at 1stort rational action cessarv constraints alter the unn e rnay be liberating. . · I · · ·o·on some constramts on soc1a action will be the r 1 In add1 , . h .11b esut of random disturbances: but snll ot ers w1 ~ systematic , rooted . h olitical-economte structures that provide the context f mr ep d d. . h h or anv action. Treating ran om 1storn~ms as t oug the y were syste~atic is a sign of paranoia; treating syste_matic distortio ns·as thoughthey were mer~ly ad hoc phenomena 1~to b_e ethically and politicallyblind, assunng only repeated surprise , d1sappointrnem, and, most likely,failure.

How Misinformation Can Manipulate Action How can information and communication, alwa ys potentially distorted, shape the actions of the people with whom planners work?25 How can a politician's promise, a developer's project proposal, or a planner's report influence the actions of city residents! Informedand unmanipulated citizen action depends on four practical criteria in social interaction. 26 In every interaction, a speaker may speak more or less ( 1) comprehensibly, (2) sincerely, (3) appropriately or legitimately in the context at hand, and (4) accu· rarely. In every interaction, too, a listener's subsequent action_de· pendsin part on how these same four criteria are satisfied. Consider each brieflyin turn. . First, depending on the terms in which issues are discussed, cin· zen_s may find the issues clear or barely comprehensible, relevant10 their own concerns or not, framed in . ordinary . Ianguage or m . bu· · key issues reaucratese· Planners may, for example either . . pinpomt or bury th · d ' · elevant . em in ata, verbiage computer printouts, or irr ·11 deta1ls-a d h •• ' h ·on W1 n w at c1t1zensunderstand their compre enst ' grow or suffer as a result , · . . . • are pre· Second de d. . '. pen mg on the intentions with which issues 3y sented' Citizensmay find their. trust deserved or not. c·10·zens rn

37

be misled by false assurances of self-protecting a~ency ~taff, by technicians who claim to be neutral, or by established interests who deceptively claim to serve the greater public go~d. Thus public trust , always precarious, may be honored or mampul~ted. Third, depending on what justifications are u~ed as issues are presented , citizens may find their consent mampulated or not. Agency staff may claim legitimacy beca use the _proper pr~cedur _e s have been followed ; rivals within the commumty ma y claim legit imacy because the y are acting in the public intere st, acting to right wrongs , or acting as representative s of population s in need. ln each case, the claim to legitimacy is an attempt to shape citiz ens' a ction through the mobilization of their consent. Fourth, depending on the use of evidence and data , citizens ma y find issues either misrepresented or reported accuratel y. Politic ian s and project proponents and opponents alike ma y exagger ate or fabricate estimates of costs, benefits , risks, and opportunit ies. Whether or not the truth sets anyone free, systematic m isrepre sentation in the planning process is likely to breed cynici sm , cripple action, and manipulate citizens ' beliefs as well. 27 There is no guarantee against the presence of manipulation in planning . Informed planning and citizen action are vulnerable to the mismanagement (whether ad hoc or systematic ) of pl a nners ' and citizens ' comprehension, trust , consent, and beliefs . Tables 2 and 3 show how such mismanagement can occur as the exercise of power through the processes of decision making agenda setting ' ' or the shaping of people 's felt needs. Responses to Misinformation

Eac~ of the four criteria suggests how different type s of misinfor'.Ilanon can influence parti _c ~pation in the planning process. 2ij More important, each type of m1smformation calls for a different ty f resp~nse f~om planne~s. The progressive planner may counte~~~e :ampul~t1on _of a ne1ghborhoo~ _organization 's trust by reveal ~ previous msta_nces of such m1smformation presented to other ~e1ghborholods-m the case of a developer's suspicious promise or examp e By weeding · f ' II' ·. . Jargon out o communications and by ~: t~g attention to unportant planning issues that might otherwise o scured by the sheer volume of data in consultants' reports or

TA 111.1° 2, l'oll'cules in Browni.m nHHtt)n. These StKi.11.1-:ct,rsinsrt',td .1r-e1._)lt\'11 positioned with and .1g.1insr 1'lll ' .mt1ther in St),i.11.rnd p1.. ·onomic stru ctures th.It 1.lispl.iy s1grnti-:.mtly th)nr.uhlt,m \'.'t)ll tinuity. Thl' UOl'lllplnyt·d ,lrl' unlikdy hl dis.1ppl' ,1r f\)mt,rr\,w. Thl· downrown business illtt'rt·sts .irt · unlikdy fl) stop .1sking for r.1:x .1h:1teml'lltsronH1rrnw. Tlw umi~.,!:mi7.l'd .111tltill' I t'llnt, mediated nc~otiatfons between developer s and neighbo rs arc li~cly 10 seem i11 s11rmountable . We return to this issue of representation below.

,1,,,11,,,.,. 0 / c:,111/l lt'I

f '/111111 /IIJ{ /11t/J1• / 111, I' 11/ ( :1111///1 /

/'/,11111111 // 111

.1.1,~ o( fn/ i1r111,1tio11, / ,1•,,11111I I , , I , tt'' t' ////(/ fi11 1/ll ( III)./ hX/"'' , I

( mwcr? Jk vdopcr s, I yp ically, iiiiii• · I , l11 m:cs o I · I I . ·( I •llt Whal :1ho11I ,111 ,., 1'l·1111ll' l'S rc.,p,11111.Nc1g I )Ors, J I wy ar1• in. ·1·1c ,k vdop1m•111 s. . . ·1m11d10 both . Jkvdo1wr .~ hav1· fi11 a11 S I I iry 10 ri S I l· volwd :11al , 1,cn . . .1. iwi••hhor s h:1v1 · vo 1111t:1 ry assol'iaiio, " '1 I 10 111VlS ' /1 • • • • • ' .. •• I I I\ i1JI'aud L,1p1:I I . I kvl'lo11crs lun t x pl rt 11-ii.:' IImp · Iemc11• . , , processes . 1 n n •1'ltll . ... ,ft tnUSt l · st pl:1nu1ng' I . tyr,ic:illyserve : (a) to pre ss profcs. l:·rst 1• , • fatest icy , ' • )' hutdist111c11n,tlll • ·. , for 1,:irticular snbstanttve go als (3 ., th, . 'h ff ' ' . . . CV g(J along.' W1_t sta tr a in!ng in ncgot1at1on and mediation principle '· 10ods"sll , '- • l ·l · I.I IIy Wl',I kl ' y or~ .11\1/l'l I on r S, ·1·hl'~l 'lllCSlionsan · l'r,h ·tk ;II .,-nd ;hn1rc·t1,. tl ,It 1>th·r, .,ml thl'\' h.n·l· 1\\ 1 purd y ttd1111~ ·.d .111 swn s. 1•r:At first gb11n·. till' str.11-~,· ,,t k tt111~ d ·,· ·l,•1' -r~.111I 11·1~:h1'

. I face o( Conflict

1 ,e rlan11i11 g 111

ff nee seems only to reproduce the . sta prese h h I vithoutan acnve . Yetdepending on ow t e p anners meetI\strengths of theparuesh. might be strengthened or weakm1na , or anot er . . . tervcneonepart) h helpeddevelopers ant1C1pateand ulm ' I ners ave . hb cned.Attimes,Pan of oppositional ne1g ors. Yet plan. d the concerns . f . d timatcl y cva c 'd ertisc access, in ormatlon, an so on • h 3!so prov1e exp ' . . "' ncrs m1gr k • hborhood'spos1t1on. ff h h , wca.er ne1g to strengten.l_ ·sts for planning sta w o engage in d,screnonex1 I k . h T c same H lannermight counse wea er part1e~to 3 shuttled,plomac Y·f ere duringactual negotiation s by identifyh I themboth6core an h . P h · ht effectively be raised, experts c .1ngconcerns t at m1g . • or ot er• mflu. • h b calledon and pre-ncgot1at1on strateg ics and . ' I d. I cnualswhomtg t e . L I yed Thepractitionerof shun e· 1p omacy need tacuc~ to 11ccmpO • d notappearnc·utralto· all parties·' he or she needs mstca to appear usefulto thoseparties. Plann ers whoact as interestedmediatorsface many of the same problems andopportunities that shuttle dipl_omats_confront_-In addition,though,theactivist mediatormay risk bemg percc1ved by planningboardmembers,officials,or elected repr esentatives a, makingdeal~that preempttheir own formal authority . Thu s, the invisibility oftheshuttlediplomathas its advantages; the planner, cangivecounseldiscreetly, suggestingopportunities and packagt"> butavoiding theglare-and the heat-of the limelight . 1 ' finally,the strategyof separating mediation and ncgotiaMn functiom alsoinvolwssubstantial staff discretion. Her c, too, the way,thatmediatorsandnegotiatorsconsider the interest.sities; they ca n be overcome . These

t

. ract,ce

. 14 r es of neediess su ff ermg are thu s the t sourC d argets of c . . olitical theory an , as we have argued f nticaf social and P . " , o a progr · ningpracttce. ess1veplanCriticaltheory thus sets the stage for an empiric al .. . that exposes the subtle ways in which a g· political analysis . f 1ven struc t f . d productive re 1at10ns unction s: ( 1 ) to le • . ure o state an . . k . g1t1mate and extend Its pow er · ( 2 ) t perpetuteitselfwhile 1t.seeIJs to a f ' o exc Iude . roupssysternanca y rom deci sio n-making particular g . h . . proc esses th t ff theirfives; (3) to promote t e political and mo 1 .11 . a a ect · ra I us1on th enccand teeh no logy, t h roug h prof essional s and at sc1experts ca I problems ; an d so (4) to restrict public p 1• . 1' n so ve Political .. . d 6·1· . o it1ca argum part1c1patton, an mo 1 1zat1on regarding a bro d ent, welfare-oriented policy alternatives that are 1.a range _of public . • f • ncompat1blc · h existingpatterns o ownership, wealth and powe 8 wit . f h . , r. ecause of th hegemontcpower o sue distort ed communicat ' .. e . I. . . . ions Citizens of d capita 'f h . advance 1st1csoc 1et1es may remain igno . 1· . I d' . rant o t e1r own democraticpo 1t1ca tra ltlon s and oblivious to th · 6·1· · · • eir a I tty to take correctiveaction . Inequality, poverty an d 1·11 -hea It h come to be . . . , seenas pro bfems for which the v1ct1m is respo ·bl · . l" d " ns1 e or as probIemsso " po 11t1ca an complex" . th at citizens can h ave nothtng • to say about t h em. Yet democratic politics O I · • r P anntn g requires trueconsent, an d sue h consent grows o ut O f d . ·· · 1· • l uncoerce collective po mca argument and dia lo f . mt1c1sm, . ' gue, not rom silence or a party' me. A critical theory of planning mu st th £ h . in .I .. ere ore suggest ow ex1 tg socra and po_lit1cal-eco nomic relation s ac tu ally operate to distortcommurncations . . , t o o b sc urc issues, to manipulate trust and consent to twist fact d '6•1 · ho b ' . ~n po ssi 1 ity. ln thi s chapter we will identify ccs:s/bs1ctypedsof dtst~rtcd co mmuni cation in the planning proven un crstandmg a d k Id f zatio nal and r . n . now c ge at ace-to-face, organi , po tt1ca l-cco norn1c o r structura l levels of analysis.'

Att~ntion-Shaping Thro ugh Com muni catil!e Action Any · action work s I promise,sha in , · . no: _on _Y a~ a mean s to an end bu_t also as a causeth, p g expectations. P'3nner s can be effective not becy put . h word. s· on paper, b ut b ecausc they can altt·r others ' txpcctatio ns Y doing so . A planner's for mality may tell cny resi-

U11derstandi11g Plm111i11g Practice

Understanding Plamzing p

den~ more than the ap11hlic co1111n1111i ca t1om a nd arg111ncnh; (3) by idcnt1 · f Ylll g I he n,c nt ial type s of d1~ahlrn g disto rtion :-.to be corrccrcJ, . •g t I1r..:plann er\ role i11pcrpcru ati ng or counrer:.ic ' (Ill ~ (4 ) I)Y l ·Ian.(Y11 ·' 11~h di, torl ~om; :111d ( ~ ) hy locating ,1 pr agma tic and arguni_cnf t:11'1v c pL11111111 g pr ac 11cc within a pohti ca l-cco nom ic srrucrurc 0 pow er and idcology - 1rca tcd here a:-.a hegemo nic stru cture of\ )'>' ~,·ni:iiically di:-.1or1 c d co1111111111 ica t1on of a,,uram :c, threat, P~' ' 11•1j J!,c, :llld lcgi iinialio11, I( the clt·1111 ·n1, of org :11111.ing strategic~l,~icll · · 11~·W· ()JI y 1·so Ia1c1I ideas, th ey arc not I1111g

• I a .~ •·,hove •·1n· l ., ' ,.,,., ,,• I1·rt·1

ii rhe)' :ire undcr srooJ .llld c.1rricd out 111 the context of the strucrur.il :rn,ilysis of sys tematicall y distorted co mmum cation illustr.1tt'd in ·1:ihk s 5 a nd 6 c.1n the y he sern in a new light, fornsed 011 new go:1ls .ind objectives .rnJ put 111t o pr.1ctice m increasingly sensitive :ind cffrcriw w:iys. Consider tin.illy, now, the bro ader theoretic:11 significance of rhesc .1rg11111cnt s and their implications for re carcl1 and practice. Implicatio ns for Theory , Re earch, and Practice By treating planning practi ce as co mmuni cative action, we arc given a con ceptual (a nd resc :irc hahl e) bridge from analysis ro implementati o n (via the shaping of attention ), from informati on to c:rg: 1nization (via the shapi ng and reprodu ction of political identity), from cog nition to action (via the claims-making structure of rnm~unicativc action ), and thu s from the analysis of .1bstracr nican111gto a pragmati c assessment of practical professional activity. Researc h ca n thu s shift from the assessment of more narrow prnc:cssc~of experimentation a nd testi ng (social engineering from ~oc,al sc,e~1cc)to the study of proce sses of argumentation and dialogue, political di scour se and J c ign critici sm, mediated ncgoriation.' and de1nocr:1t1za · t1on · ·zmg. · •" an J orga 111 furt~crmorc, the ana lysis of planning practice a~ communicallvc an ion ha s, cIeep roots 1n . t I1e "ct I11 .cs o f orl 1111 · ary d'1scoursc., we gen • II p _.6.~ra Y pr csuppo sl' in daily life. We ordinarily appeal ro the •lity of co mmuni cation frcl' from domination when Wl' make · htn ess- that is, we as ·ume we shou Id not aim,• abo • ur facts or rig 1 11Princ1pl . .. I to cocrcl' others to accept our claims. · · · IY, ia c ncn Similar P • nncrs -ir 11 I po .-1 .1·. .• r..:ca ctedally, a '>U'>p1 cwu'> " " 11~ , a 1r l> t co c st lll y. To keep the per so nal a nt int l·ral .· • · I _ Urse ti f their i111t1 .1 in trod· ' . tc text rdcrs to faculty and guests-a cer .1 1 Uct1ons . . II . rt1' ·i1),1nts, ll . · - on a hr st- na111eb as is, as a p.t 1..

S11f>f1h •1111 •11t011 l'l ,11mi11gEd11c,1tio11

S11pplem e11t0 11 Pla1111i11 g F.d11e,11i011

Tht' l'Ourse Cl' lltered 011 four l·asc studies. Profe ssor s Phil Hn r .rnd (; :,ry Hack tirst pn'Sl 'nted a growth -managemt.'nt C\St.' invol ·. lllg thl· proposed l' Xpansion of a major rq.~ional shoppinot> cent\rr. . ln t 1,e Sl'Coml cast.', Protcssor Frank Jones discu ssed Ed Logue' work l)n nimmunity development in tht ' South Bronx. In the third i::1sc, Don Sd,iin presented his work of organi zation;:il diagn osis and 1nterwntion :lt the \X'orld llank. Environmental pbnning anJ regulatmn lwcanw l·t·ntral in tlw fourth cisc, as Professor L:.1wrcn (c Susskiml assessl·d the rok that planners nuy play as mediat ors uf publi~ · disputes. Tlw courSl' nwt as a whok in ninety -minutl ' Sl'S· sions twil -l' ., wet·k; in addition, students attl·ndcd a one -hour rent .I· tion se, :tion in sm:1lkr ~roup s. This supplcmrnt is divided into tliret ' parts. The first p.m rl'· views the cist·s, if in ., lll'l't'ssarily impressionistic way . N.,mt·s of non facult y pr:1l·titio1wrs haw bt·en changed to protl'Ct tht·ir identities . Q1HHes :ntrihutl·d to fai:ulty seek primarily to conve y ml'.lll· Illµ ; whert · they :ire not vt·rhatim, they :tre dost ' paraphr:1ses, .rnd they h,Wl' , like till' report as ,\ whole, been l'l' Viewed for accur;Ky by .,11i:omSl ' p :trticipants . This rt·port is basell on tlw author' s ohst·rv :1tion of l'ad, cast· .md the tl' :Khing of the course .,s ., whok . The st·c011d part disn1sscs significant issm 's (from argumt ·nt.1· tion to racism ) that wert· problematic in the class .md th.it ~·:1ll m1w for furthl·r :tttl 'ntion. Tht · final section then proposes ., w.1y ni tllllkrst .mding planning practi..:c that suggests how Sl'Vt'r:1I of thl· lll.1jnr unrl ·sol\'l 'd issues in thl' coursl' might bl· rcforlll11l.unl. It ,ir · gut ·s th.lt thl· pr :1ctil'c of pl:tnning cm lw understood .1s thl· pr,ztart on all the1eproblcm1,?"Logue had restated the question . " On all of them at once!" Th e incrementali,t,; were !>keptical. The isefom alwget er 1111~\ti . . . . . -c. 'd . of recognizing ic P111t of n:co1•n1z111gtheir spern1c I enury, . bl · r, f JI an cxn r•l'rienfil 1·111 ,·11t "" l'/,1111 1111 g 1-.lu, ,,,,1111

S11/>f,/r1111 •111"" 1'/,11111111 g h /11 .-,,11111

;

sh.11w d wllll till'~' wt·n-. d1.11l·1111ld 1101h111l·olor r vt·r thin, h• tlH11 1ght , kit , .rnd ,·1111ldyt·t hn pl' for . Till' p.1111 tht•st· survivt~s11'.11' · · 1 · I . I I I was I ll ' pn111ol 't 'lltg t )'l't'l".tst, w111 g , t' 111111 ,1111;,t •d, ht·111 ,, ,, . l J[ . . " 1"11 or,· .ts 1w11pk with :1 11111q11t · l11s1nr , hl'111 g ohh1t·r:11t·d as rt·al Pt'oplr tllll't' ag :11n- 1u1w1101b • N:11.is, thl' (;t•s1:1po, and thl' ramp gn.trdi hut hr th nst· i11thr " frl'r " .111dgrnr ra ll · " liht·ra l," t'Vt'll hum.inisti,· ' n1111n11111 itit·s in whi ch th t.·y so11gh1 10 liVl'. \X'lwn tlw issm· of rac ism aris t·s, t hl·n, wh .11is being r.1isl'd isnor ,Ill issllt' of plann ing lt'l'hniqut \ or pro n ·ss skills, or lihn.11s mp.,. th y. Wh at is br ing raist·d at tht· w ry k as1 is a prim,1 f:11 : ir d,1im for n ·spt'l.·t: tht· rt·spt'l't dut' to tho sl' a fkctl'll and directly sh:ipt·d hi' , histori es of instit11tio n:1I and person al rac is111and fro111thost· wh~ a n· daimin g to plan wii-h, or for , tht•m. This tirst-ordrr daim for rl'spt'l't of, \ n 1111m1111i ty's idl'ntit y and history is not J irt·ctly instru• nwnt al. \'Vlwn tht'sc issm·s wt·rc broa ched briefly about planning practice should be ;tudied in further research, examined in the classroom, and considm:d in our practice aU an t1a a aptaticm ,,f my article " What [),, Plan"""1 n1a Y\t \ l),g Planni ng and P,,l111c .. 1Jf .\1uddlm~Thrr,ugl,," Pub!:cAd•t " an n ev ,ew44 , n~, . .-\ ·,

1hcsc .n:1s .tr c co nt mge m h· . !:o L , ' · rertonneJ J k l' .1 J '£111 e rcn cc 111 ou r Ii,-.. Jn ,'On~ 1 l · h , s. ee 1hc h n !'rJ·t I ) .. · Pr.11!matK S. m Ha l'rmas ( 1 - ) c Jpter "\th · _ ' '-J • 1· 9 9 . n- JI o n >t Jt I, L'nl\-el'SJl . I..f, l't' . _or l'X.1mpl e. K~rl-Otto Apel's .. t J • Pa ul , . London: Penguin. "

Critical Sociology: SelectedReadmgs. "Negotiating

. ., In Desi{! n Rese.irch [nter.ic· Archirecrure. ~

Bibliography

tions, edited by Arvid Osterberg, c_. Tiernan , and N. Findlay. 12th Proceedings of the Environmental Design Research Association (EDRA). "The Context for Design: Six Characteristics ." In Knowledge for Design, edited by P. Bart, A. Chen, and G. Francescato. 13th Proceedings of the Environmental Design Research Association (EDRA). Dahl, Robert 1961 Who Governs? Democracy and Power m an Am erican City. New Haven: Yale University Press. Dallmayr, Fred 1974 "Toward a Critical Reconstruction of Ethics and Politics." Journal of Politics 36 : 926-957 . Beyond Dogma and Despair. Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press. Dallmayr, Fred, and Thomas McCarth y 1977 Understandingand Social Inquiry . Notre Dame, Ind.: University of Notre Dame Press. Dalton, Linda 1987 "Local Plan Implementation in California : Planning as Development Control." Department of City and Regional Planning, California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo. Typescript. Davidoff, Paul r965 "Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning. " Journal of the American Institute of Planners 31 : 596-615 . Dekema, Jan D. 1981 "lncommensurability and Judgment." Theory and Society 10 : 521-546 . DeNeufville, Judith 1 98 2 " Planning Theory and Practice: Bridging the Gap." Paper prepared for the National Conference of the Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning, Chicago, Illinois, 22.-24 October. Denhardt, Robert 1977 '.'Praxis as Enlightened Action." Paper presented at a meetmg of the Southern Political Science Association New Orleans, Louisiana, November. , In the Shadow of Organization . Lawrence : Regents' Press of Kansas. Descartes, Rene 1 964 Discourse on Meth O d · Ba ltimore . : Penguin.

Bibliography

Dewey, John 1 92 7 . The Public and Its Problems• Denvcr: H0 It Diamond , Michael · 1986 " Resistance to Change: A Psychoa I· · C .. . d S h .. ' . na }tic m1que of Argyns an c on s Contributions to o · d I · ,, J rgamzauon Theory an ntervent1on. o11rnalof Management Studies '3 (5)· 542-562 . - . Dreitzel, Han s-Peter, ed. ~ ecent Sociology #1.: Patternsof Communicative Behai,1970 1or. New York: Macmillan. Dutton, Willi am, and K. Kraemer I 98 5 Modelling as Negotiating:ThePoliticalDynamics of Computer Models in the PolicyProcess.Norwood,N.J.: Ablex. Dyckman , John 1969 "The Practical Uses of PlanningTheory." Journalof the American Institute of Planners35 : 298-301. "Three Crises of AmericanPlanning." In Planning Theory in the I98o 's, edited by Robert BurchellandGeorge Sternlieb. New Brunswick, N.J.: Center for UrbanPolicy Research, Rutgers University . Edelman, Murray 1964 The Symbolic Usesof Politics.Urbana: Univer sity of Illinois Press. Politics as Symbolic Action.New York: Academic Press. Political Language:\'(lordsThatS11 cceed andPol1C1 es That Fail. New York: AcademicPress. Etzioni, Amitai 1 968 The Active Society. New York: FreePress. Euben, J Peter 198 r " Philosophy and the Professions:·democracy r (2): i 1!127. Fainstein N or man and Susan Fainstein d Ch•ng·" . ' · : C11entsan " '· " Innovation in UrbJn Bureaucracies 1972. ' American Be/Jai,ioralScienti_st i 5i-1 !: {I SJge. Urban Policy Under Cap1tabs111 . e1ery ' 1982 Faludi, Andre as N . York· Perg3mon . d 1973 Pla1111i11g Theory. eii 1· . \lethodology. Lon on: 1 I 986 Critical R11ti o11iilism and p annmg Pion. y . Cornell Unil'ers1ry Fay, Brian lth3Cl , N· .. · Critical Social 5crence. 1987 Press.

~~1i /~alfi:.

Diblingraphy

Hi/Jliol{raph y

Feldman, Marshall " Manuel Castell~' The Urhan Q uestion : A Review Essay." 197 8 Review of Radical l'olitical faonom ics 10(3) : , 36-, 4 4. Ferguson, Kathy E. 1984 The femin ist Case AKainst llureaucracy. Philadelphia: Temple University Press. Feshb ach, Dan, and Takuya Nakamoto " Poliucal Strategics for Health Systems Agencies." In Citi198 1 ze11 s and /-lea/th Care: Participation and l'lannin>:(or Social ChanKe, edited by Barry Checkowa y. New York: Pergamo n. Fischer, Frank 1980 l'olitics, Values and l'uhlic Policy. Boulder, Co lo.: Wrnview. rischn , Frank, and C. Siri:111ni,eds. 1984 Critical Studies in Orl{anization and llurea11cracy. Philadelphia : 'lcmple University Press. Fisher, Roi;er erica11/lchavioral Scientist 27(2): 198 3 "Nei; otiating Power." A111 149- 166 . Fisher, Roger, and William llr y 191!3 Gettinl{ to Yes: NeKotiatillKAgreement Without (;ivinK /11. New York: Penguin. Fisher, Steve, and Jim Foster "C lass, Political Con sciousness, and Destructive Power: 1978 Strategy for Change in Appalachia. " Appala chian Journal 5(3): 290- 3 I I . Fleischman, Joel L., and Bruce I.. Payne 1 980 1-:thi ca/ Dilemma s and the f•:ducatio11 of l'olicy Makers. Vol. 8, Monograph s on the 'lea ching of Ethics. Hasting,011-l ludson, N .Y.: Ha sting s Ce nter . Forester, John 1977 :•~~ucstioning and Shaping Attention as Plannin g Strategy: loward a Critical Theory of Planning. " Ph.D. diss., Universrty of Ca lifornia, Berkeley. 1 9 80 " How Much Docs the Environmental Review Planner Do?'' 1-:nvirrmm ental Impact Assessment Review 1: 104- 107· 19 8 1a " 1lannah Arendt and Critical Theory : A Cr itical Respon se." Journal of l'ulitics 4 3(February ): 196-202. 19111h "Que st ioning and Organizing Attention as Plannin g Strategy: li>ward a Cr itical Theory of l'lanning ."Ad ministratiun a11dSociety 13(2): 1r, i - 2.o5.

198 1 c

1982a 1 982.b

1983a

, 98 3b 1984

198 5 r 986

1987

"Sel lin g You ~he Brooklyn Bridgeand Ideology(A Review of H a berm as s Communicatirm and the Evnlutiunof Society) ." Theory and Society ro : 745-750. s of Public "A Criti cal Empirical Framework for the Analysi Policy ." New Political Science2 : 145-16 4. "C riti ca l Reason and Political Powerin ProjectReviewActivity ." Policy and Politics ro ( r ): 65-83 . "C riti cal Theory and Organizational Analysis." In /Jeyond M ethod : Strategies for Social Research,edited by Gareth Mor ga n, 234-246. BeverlyHills, Calif.: Sage. "T he Geograp hy of Planning Practice." Environment and Planning D: Society and Space , : 163-180. " Pra ctica l Ration ality in Planning." In Rationalityin PlanMakin,: , edited by Michael Breheny and Alan Hooper, 48-59 . London : Pion. .. Critical Theory and Public U(e. Cambridge,Ma~i.: Ml I Press. "C riti ca l Theory and Public Life: Only Connect." Inter· national Journal of Urban and Regional Research10(2 ): I 8 5-206 . . p . · ,. . in "A nt icipa ting Implementation: Normative ract1'CS/ Plannin g and Policy Analysis.'' In Con(ront111 g . Va,; s . 1~ 1· A 1 . . 'f ' 1e Politics of Criterl(/, edited y 111 o i cy na ys1s. i • B·v ,rJy Hilb, hank fischer and John ForeStcr, 153- 173· c c

Ca lif.: Sage. · . and Problem~ "How Planners Argue: Rhetorical tratcgics'p _ . .. " In d p .· in Planning racncc. of Substance, Pow_er, an as~l~J~ Direction s, editedby Planning Theory III the 1 99° \ er~. b New Brunswick, Robert Burchell and George tern 1~ RutgersUniversity. N J . Center for Urban l'olrq Rcscarc ' • . ·· ·Ila Foster, How a rd, A. Abram son, and M. Par_c • S·hools: A Comparative 1982. "Planner s' Skill~ and Plannmgd; the NationalConfer· Stud y of Alumni." Paper prc~arle. o~Schoob uf Planning, . , of Col cg1ate cnce of the Assocrauon . . October. Chicago lll1no1s, 22- 24 B. th of the Priso11 . New York: Foucault Mi chel ' 1979 ' Discipline and P11111sh : '/11e rr .. · d Other\'Vr1tmg s. Vmt a~c. . ,J fllterviewsa11 1 1980 J'o111er!Kno111ledgc: Se ecteNcwYork: Pantheon. Edited by Colin Gordon. S . I ·n ton quJrc Frankl, Victor " . New York: Was11 g 19115 Man's Searchfor Mealllfll/• Press. 1988

Bibliography

Bi/Jliograp/Jy

2i9

Fraser, Nancy · · I · h "Foucau lt 011Modem Power: Empir _ica ln s1g ts and Nor19 g 1 mative Co nfu sion s.'' Praxis lntemat, ona l I : 272-28 7 . Freire, Paulo 1 970 Pedagogy of tl,e Oppressed. New York: Seabury . Education for Critical Consciousness. New York : Seabury . 1973 Friedland, Roger, F. F. Piven, and R. Alford "Political Conflict, Urban Structure, and ~he Fiscal Crisis. " 1977 International journal of Urban and Regional Resear ch 1 : 44 7-471. Friedman, Maurice l972 To11cl,stones of Reality : Existential Trust and the Community of Peace. New York : E. P. Dutton . Friedmann, John 1973 Retracking America . New York : Anchor . 1978 "The Epistemology of Social Practice." Theory and Society 6 : 75-92. The Good Society . Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press. "On the Theory of Social Construction : An Introduction." DP 138, School of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of California, Los Angeles . Knowledge and Action: Mapping the Planning Theory Domain . Princeton, N.J. : Princeton University Press. Gadamer, Hans-Georg 1975 Truth and Method. New York: Seabury . "The Problem of Historical Consciousness." ln Interpretiv e 1979 Social Science: A Reader , edited by Paul Rabinow and William Sullivan, 103- 160. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. Galper, Jeffry 1975 The Politics of Social Services . Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall. Gaventa, John 1980 Power and Powerlessness: Q11iescence and Rebellion in all Appalachian Valley. Urbana : University of Illinois Press. Giddens, Anthony 1977 New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positiv e Critique 0 ( Interpretive Sociologies. London : Hutchinson . 1 979 Central Problems in Social Theory : Action, Strucwre , and Contradiction in Social Analysis . Berkeley :md Los Angeles: University of California Press . A Contemporary Critiq11eof Historical Materialism. Berkeley and Los Angeles : University of California Press.

The Constitution of Society : Out/in f Th B k I e o a eory of Struc. t ura t 1011 . er e ey and Los Angeles· U . . . . p • mvers1tyof California res s. Gilligan, Carol 1 982 In a Different Voice: Psychological Theory and Women's Development . Cambridge Mass · Harva d u · · Press. ' .. r mvers1ry 19 84

Giroux, Henry Theory and Resistance in Education. South Hadley. Mass.: 198 3 Bergin and Garvey . Goffman, Erving The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. Garden Ciry, 19 5 9 N .Y.: Doubleday. 1981 Forms of Talk. Philadelphia : Universiry of Pennsylvania Press. Gondim, Linda 1986 " Planners in the Face of Power." Ph.D. diss., Cornell University . Goodman, Nelson 1978 Ways of Worldmaking . Cambridge. Mass.: Hackett. Gorz, Andre 1967 Strategy for Labor . Boston: Beacon. Gouldner, Alvin The Dialectic of Ideology .i11dTech11ology.New York: 1976 Seabury . Grossman, Randolph M. C s d , .. 1978 "Vo ting Behavior of HSA Interest Groups: A ase tu \. . HeaIth 6S(December): 1 1 9 r American journal of P11bl,c l 1 94 · B . Habermas, Jurgen . IS 'etv Bosron· e.1,on. Toward , l Rat1om1 OCI • · . . · C pet~nce" In Re1970a C n1c:1nve om , · 1970b "Toward a Theory O f onunu f c· ,,nicatitie Beh,wior. •1 # p41ttems o 0 111111 cent Socio ogy z: . ·I New York: Macmillan. Bosto n: Beacon. edited by Hans-Peter Dretrzt . Knowledge and H11111a11l11ter e. -. 1971 . B -ron· Beacon. Theorv and Prt1ctice. 0 ~ · . 1 973 - . . .. B ·ton: Bea,on. f , . .. Legitimation Cr1s1~. o~ . . Concerc o I o" er. 1 975 . C ,municanons d "H.urn:ih Aren t s on Social Reseurch 44 ( i ): 3,-:r-t· th and Method." In Umfrr-1 • ot· G··1d·1n1er s. I rud' d bv Fred D3 llm•l)'r .in, "A Review • · /1 q111n1 e ne ' I d Noire standi11g mid ~octa '.'. __ · Notre DamQ ; m Jt""St~n . \ t'->; (thm ..:stvlt-in. 114 : h.tf\l .rnlls,,tt str.ttt·~,t"S t~ r. 1S4: hsttmn~ "·nttl'.tlly 111.1 1 : 1..."4•

M,111Jdb.111m.Sn. .t.; tx · plonng powbrlrtio 2nd hope, r~ ; aplonng wgmliancc md a;narm, 1 1 I ; wJu rt to l)fOU, ,xy,oawr' t dtkmma.2.3111.11.;a., neaearrw apiort cfiffcrtneo, 1113- 1~4; ID orpmunona l ~ 176- 177, 194 - I 9 s; tmpmgacnon, I 7; thtfnn,; r~ ,17

Index

Index Rationality (co11ti111 1cd ) 169- 170; political, in design, 130132, 236n .23; in political world, 6-7 ; and power, 58- 62; in public-sector mediation , 182 - 185; relation of, to context. 48: systematic account of, 64,

215 n.24. See also Anticipation; Emotion; Listening Reproduction : as always contingent, 245 n.55; as contingent on listening, 109; in design practice, 129-'30; and enactment, 221.n .7; in everydaypractice, 152-154, 244n .46; of identity, and racism, r 88 - 190; and learning, 128- 12~ 176- 17h 211n.15 ;a nd loss amid change, 225 n.19; of relationships in listening, 108 - r 10, 1, 1 ; and ritual, 144 n.46; of sense in designing, 125- 131; social and political, of knowledge, consent, trust, and formulation of problems, 70-72, 147148, 2230.13 , 244 n.43, ll6n.23 , 225n .ll; structural, 78- 81; and structuration , 237 n. 5; and technology, 24 3 n.4 1. See also Action, communicative; Exploitation; Misinformation; Organizational settings; Power Ruston, John, 184 Safdie, Moshe, 1 30 Satisficing, defined, 5 1. Sec also Rationality Schon, Donald : and design conversations, 235 n.9, 135 n. 11; and judgment, 233 n. 18; and organizational diagnosis, 175-180, 191- 195, 198,205 ; and sell-defeating actions, 111 n.1 5; and teaching practice, 163, 164, 165, 169- 170 Schroyer, Trent, 1240.16 , 2320 .13 Self-regulation, 16 Simon, Herbert , 6, 7, 50 , 5 1, 52, 56, 125, 130, 1140.18 Single negotiat ing texts, 181 SoC1alconstruction :_of identity, 205207; of ideology JO design practice, 130- _r 3 2; of hved worlds, in design practice, 116- 1l 7; of meaning, 1400.22; of sense, in design, 9- IO, _120, _234 n.2; strategies of, to construct 1dent1ty,207; of technical work 2220.10. See also Designing; R'eproduct1on; Speech Sociological imagination, 1300 . 1. See also Anticipation South Bronx Development Office, 1 70 , 173-174, r91

Space, geographic versus institutional, 168 Speech: acts, in designing, 117- 118; acts, in planning, 18, 142., 21on .5; and attention-organizing, 18, r38-1 39, 141- 143, 199-101 ; and communications skills in planning, 13 3 n.17; and democratic talk, 111 n. 13, 2 30 n. 1; and detachment, 97; and developers' professiona l language, 87, 2270.1, 241 n.27; and dialect, 115; and ethnicity, 114; facility with, in mediation , 95- 96; political char acter of, 239 n.14; and possibility of multiple voices, 87; responsibility for, 241 n.2 6; and speaker, 108 - 111 , 112.,

115 ,

116-11 7;struc -

ture of, 2.380.11, 1380.13 ; and suffering and silence, 189; and voice, 23 1 n.7 ; and "wha t to say when," 97-98, 199-101 ; and women's mode oftalk, 1300.2, 231 n.7. See also Action , communicative ; Argumentation;

Practice; Strategy Spirit of the people, 171, 173, 191 Strategic planning. See Rationality ; Strategy Strategies, mediated negotiat ion, in planning, 88-96, 226n. 1, 2270.3 , ll9n .8; as complement s to organizing, 103; diplomatic skills in, 96-99; distinguishing mediation and negotiation in, 95-96, 102; and interested mediation, 93-95 , 101; organization and administration of, 99-101 , 103; and premediation, 89-90, IOI ; and regulator, 88-89, 101; as resource, 90-92, 101 - I02; and responses to power imbalances, 101-103 ; and shuttle diplomacy, 92-93, 102, 2.270.1, 227 0..3 Strategy : and argumentative abilities, 199-201 , 2110.18; bargaining, 53, 58; and big plans, sma ll components, 174; comprehensive versus incremental, 60-62, 166, 187 - 188; as contingent on co mmunicat ive distortions, 53; and danger of premature agreements, 154 ; and development czar, 172-175 , 187-188;e lemen1sof . . organizing, 15 5, 211 n.9; of e_xp_lo1nng differences in med iated negonanons, 183- 184; knowledge requisite for anticipatory, 166; managing idennty, racr and gender 206- 2o7" networking, 53• 56; of non;eformist r;fo rm, 6i; no on< best, 64, 173; optimizing, 51, 53, 54; ordinary usage of term, L36n. 1; . organizing, 53, 59-62, 243 n.38; pnn-

cipled negotiation, 184-185 ; pr~blems of o rgan izing, 156 ; problem solvmg, 50, 5 3, 54; redistributive, 61; reper toires of, required, 64, 96, IOo, 103 ; and responses to distorted communications, 114,149 , 151-152, 218n.47 ; and responses to organizational power , 79; and respon se to ambiguity, 240 n. 2 5; and respo nse to constraints, 52-53 ; and response to uncertainty , 2.400.25 ; satisficing, 51, 53; shaping hope, exciting imaginations, 174- 175, 19r ; and social movements, 61-62; and strategic planning, 54-62; surgical, with comp rehen sive impact, 172; testing, r 76- 177, 180. See also Anticipation; Listening ; Organizational diagnosis; Practice; Rational ity; Strategies, mediated negotiation Structural change, requirin g collective action, 102-103 , 2450.55 . See also Power; Reproduction Structuralist's view of information as source of power , 30-3 1, 31 Structuration. See Reprodu ction Structure, 21 5 n.20, 24 5 n. 50 Success, evaluating, 186-18 7, 2130 .11 Susskind, Lawrence , 164, 180-185 , 205 , 2260.1 , 2280.5 , 2300.5 Teaching with cases, 197- 208 ; and anticipated worlds of practice, 197- r 98 Technician's view of information as source of power, 29, 3 1 Technique. See Judgment, technical Technology , communi cative effects of, 243 n.41 Theory : and anticipation, 63-64 ; and argumentation, 157, 199-201 ; and communi cative action and ethics, 157; of context, as necessary for rational action, 6 3; critical, and communicative action, 138- 139, 157; critical , and distorted communica tions, , 39 - 141; critical, and hermeneutics in listening , 1 13-114 ; and critical pragmatism, 211 n. 1 1; denial of politics in, 21 1 n. 10; of design practices, 12 3- 132; dichoto-

Compositor: Printer : Binder: Text : Display :

mies of, integrated in pracuce , 13; 10 direct attenti on, 64; and empirical, in terpretive, and critical research, 160161; and hegemony, , 6, ; and interactive issues, 159; needed when planners get stuck , 137; and need for comparative analyses, 159, 2170.28 ; and organizational action, 159; of power JO organizations, 79- 81; recognizing history of suffering, 191; relation of, to practice, 12; and reprodu ction, 161; required to interpret ambiguity of context, 63, 11.3; and requirements m planning , 1o- 1 1; and research, 157161; role of, in plannin g, 137; and structural attention investment, productive and reprodu ctive, 157-158 ; m use by practiti oners, 176, 180, 235 n.9. See also Critical theory Torbert, William, 221 n.25 Trust . See Power; Reproducti on Uncertainty. See Ambiguity ; Power Urban design : example of, 121- n3 ; and incremental ism, 166; and regulation , 166 Values. See Ethics: Power Vickers, Sir Geoffrey, 126,211 n.8, 2330 . 18, 2350.12 Vulnerability : of democratic politics. xi, 140; in formulation of problems. 101- 103, 169; and history of suffering, 189; of listening, 110, 2420._11; of participation , 17-24, 44-47 , 76 - 81; of social action, 140, 2 17 n.28. See also Rationality; Reprodu ction Warzlawick, Paul, 24 3 n.40 Wellmer, Albrecht , 2300.-1 World Bank, 175- 180, 191- ,9 3, 20 1, 204, 205 ; and informati o n filtering, 178; and learning system inferred, 178 ; and lending for development, 175 Zoning, 165. See also ConAicr; Mediation

G & S Typesetters, Inc. Maple -Vail Book Mfg. Group Maple -Vail Book Mfg. Group , 1/ 13 Sabon Sabon

Political

Science/Urban

Stupies

" (This book) is a gem . In fresh and original ways, it illuminates the .practical, political, an .ct bureaucratic dilemmas of professional city planning . It makes clear what every practicing · planner must understand : that planni~g is deeply political as well as technical, that styles of talk and argument matter, that information is power. It is a penetrating and p _ rovocative book and a wise one in many essential matters :· Norman Krumholz Cleveland State University "A major contribution to the the9ry and practice of planning-an indispensable text for planners and for all those concerned about the future of democratic organizations :· David Held The Open University "Full of insight qnd fun Forester's book will direct students and scholars in creative directions :' Aaron Wildcivsky University of California, Berkeley John Forester is Associate Professor of City and Regional Planning at Cornell University .

University ot California

Press

BERKELEY 94720

( ISBN 0 - 520-06413-5

J