"New Directions in Planning Theory" - Fainstein (2000)

The following is a review/summary of Fainstein's work entitled "New Directions in Planning Theory"

• Fainstein discusses 3 planning approaches throughout - communicative model, new urbanism and the Just-City model.
• From the beginning Fainstein states her favour for the Just-City model. This article is essentially to outline the disadvantages of the communicative and new urbanism approaches while heavily pushing the advantages of the Just-City model.

Communicative Model

• Based on planners as mediators and facilitators of discussion
• Celebrates top-down planning deploying 'enlightenment' discourse that posits unitary public interest
• Originates from different philosophies - realism, empiricism, Hegelian idealism and scrutiny of language

Fainstein scrutinises the communicative model:
- "When ideal speech becomes the objective of planning, the argument takes a moralistic tone and its proponents seem to forget the economic and social forces that produce conflict"
- "Communicative theorists avoid dealing with the classic topic of what to do when open processes produce unjust results. They also do not think paternalism and bureaucratic modes of decision making may produce desirable outcomes"
- Communicative planning in practise has gaps between rhetoric and action, lengthy time required for participatory processes and potential conflict between processes and outcomes

New Urbanism

• Outcome-based view of planning a "compact, heterogeneous city"
• Design-orientated appraoch - developed by architects and journalists
• Aim: using spatial relations to create close-knit communities that allow diverse elements of interaction

She again cristises:
- "Proponents oversell their product, promoting unrealistic environmental determinism"
- "Privileging spatial forms over social processes"
- Overcoming suburbanisation is high on the priority list of new urbanists - they rely on private developers they are therefore developing only slightly less exclusive suburbs as the ones they dislike
"Fail to consider segregation within the greater urban area - e.g. class and ethnicity - and may perpetuate it"

• She then goes onto say the new urbanist approach is better than the communicative model "because its hopefulness and because the place it seeks to create appeals to anyone tired of suburban monotony and bland modernism"    

The Just-City Approach

• "Utopian thinkers could not succeed because they developed a social ideal that did not coincide with a material reality dominated by capitalist interests"
• Just-City theorists are radical democrats and political economists - they have a radical view of participation and accept conflictual view on society
• Just-City theorists do not assume neutrality of govt - purpose of their vision is to mobilise the public rather than to prescribe a methodology of those in office
• Vision of just-city: include the entrepreneurial state - not only provides welfare but generates wealth, empowers the poor, disfranchised and the middle class (therefore, the majority)
• Deliberations in civil society "is a double-edged nature of the state, its ability to effect both regressive and progressive social change"
• An identified just-city may serve as a policy and process exemplar for other cities

"Anglo-American Town Panning Theory since 1945: three significant development but no paradigm shifts" - Nigel Taylor (1999)

The following is a brief review/summary of Taylor's work entitled "Anglo-American Town Panning Theory since 1945: three significant development but no paradigm shifts"

Taylor argues that although planning theory has developed greatly especially as a political and environmental process and to 'postmodernism' but these have 'filled out' primitive planning theory. He then goes on to introduce the idea of a paradigm as a changing world view - the whole way of perceiving something is overturned. With this in mind Taylor believes there has not been multiple planning paradigm shifts - he doesn't consider changing ethics and values which have been common in planning history as 'paradigm shifts'.

He then goes on to describe 3 significant shifts in the way town planning has been conceived:

1.  From the planner as a creative designer to the planner as a scientific analyst and rational decision maker

• Planning is seen as "architecture writ large" until the 1960s - advanced to the 'ideal-type' conception where towns were viewed as "'systems' of interrelated activities in a constant state of flux". Towns were then examined in social and economic terms - they were identified as a 'process'. Therefore planners were required to have more skills, techniques are were required to be able to analyse scientific.
• Therefore, there was a shift in planning as an 'art' to a 'science'
• As the design element of planning hasn't been overtaken, just superimposed by the scientific processes, Taylor argues this cannot be considered a paradigm shift

2.  From the planner as a technical expert to the planner as a manager and communicator

• After the 1960s shift to planners as 'rational-decision makers' questions were raised by the public which questioned planners qualifications over others to make executive decisions for the entire community. Therefore planning was seen as a "value laden political process"
• Theorists then agreed that planners have no such expertise
• Therefore, planners were required to have "skills in managing the process of arriving at planning decisions and facilitating action to realise publicly agreed goals"
• Led to increasing planners skills in ciphering other people's assessments of planning issues, mediation and therefore becoming a facilitator. 

3.  Modernist to postmodernist planning theory: a shift in normative planning thought

Postmodernists celebrate "complexity, diversity, difference and pluralism" but maintains base principles present in modernist theory - such as focus on environmental quality and on reason and scientific understanding

"The Communicative Turn in Planning Theory and its Implications for Spatial Strategy Formation" - Healey (1996)

The following is a review/summary of Healey's text "The Communicative Turn in Planning Theory and its Implications for Spatial Strategy Formation"

This paper explores "the potential of new ideas about public argumentation and communicative policy practice developing in planning theory addressing the task of strategic spatial strategy-making". With urban regions becoming more diverse and less inter-related there is an increasing need for spatial strategy, also as urban areas are almost set in compeition against each other - "people and companies seek locations with the institutional capacity to resolve conflicts, decrease tension and deliver a healthy local environment".

Public policy making as communicative argumentation
There have been two paradigm shifts in 20th Century planning:

1. Strategic planning based on modelling dynamics of urban systems and managing them with strategies developed through rational planning approach - brought vocabulary on instrumental rationality and regional economics aligned to management science.
2. Understanding of power relations of urban region economics came through analysis of the structuring dynamics of economic and political relations. 

These shifts focused on material conditions - construction, power struggles, economy and environment. They place little focus on 'fine-grain' economics and social relations, valuing places and rising environmental concerns. Therefore, they have failed to recognise cultural diversity

A new paradigm looks to recognise diversity, complex economic and social relations and development of normative approaches to judge discussions with the public. All these aims can be achieved with communicative practices. But to firstly enhance public communication an inclusionary approach must be adopted.  

A communicative approach to spatial strategy formation 

In order for communities to initiate strategic planning the following questions should be asked:

1. Where is the discussion to take place?
2. In what style will the discussion be?
3. How will issues which arise in discussion be addressed?
4. How can a strategy be created and managed?
5. How can a community agree and critique a strategy?

Arenas for Argumentation

• Should be a neutral location which can house legitimacy - may be an existing organisational arrangement (e.g. government building), however here the discussion may be discredited
• Arenas typically change throughout the policy innovation cycle - as the cycle progresses it goes from 'opening out' to consolidation around a particular idea.

Style of Discourse

• This is typically what gets discussed and how - not just identifying who and what, but explores what the strategy means to other people
• An inclusionary approach should be taken when choosing the style of discourse - "actively discussing and choosing a style of discussion and recognition that everyone won't be comfortable with in the beginning" 
• Communication and language techniques used during discourse should address diversity - certain cultures may miss metaphors, irony, particular economic/scientific terminology.
• The inclusionary approach should also consider the non-present parties at the discussion because more often than not the non-present outnumber the present 

Sorting Through Arguments

• In an inclusive arena and with an inclusionary style the response from the public will be large. This 'jumble' is then organised into 'analytical and non-analytical work' of spatial planning
• A more inclusive process which encourages public questions and further discussion will increase their knowledge and then spread out the 'jumble' - this also meets public morals and values

Creating New Discourse

• The inclusionary approach seeks to challenge, acknowledge and use, when pursued by the powerful, persuasive power of discourse embedded in existing planning practices
• A challenge against the inclusionary approach to spatial planning is used to experiment and test strategic ideas in tentative ways to evaluate potential of better alternatives 

Agreement and Critique

Upon evaluation some improvement to the strategic planing process may be needed. To discuss these and semi-judicial court may be necessary.

Strategic debate between stakeholders in the matter can mean reasons for misinterpretation/conflict to be minimised

Discourse must be "subjected to continual reflective critique" - this doesn't mean constantly changing the process but the discourse should have regular attention

"Contested Cities: Social Process and Spatial Form" - David Harvey (1997)

The following is a review of David Harvey's work entitled "Contested Cities: Social Process and Spatial Form"

Throughout this text Harvey carries a 'dialectic' standpoint which is the art of arriving at the truth by the exchange of logical arguments (The Free Dictionary, 2014).

Throughout the introduction Harvey urges planners and policy makers to design flexible, adjustable cities and encourage fluid social processes that can be altered. He notes 'community' is not created through immaculate design, but "militant particular-ism in which a group coheres around a value" - e.g. environmental conservation.

• Harvey starts off by expressing the increasing urbanisation of the world, but hr questions why it is not discussed in political-economic processes and social trends. He goes on to state that continual urbanisation would lead to a 'dystopic' setting. 
• "Gas and water socialism" achieved a great deal in cleaning up cities throughout the late 19th and early 20th century, although it focused on social control it did allow living conditions for many to rise 
• Capital is not concerned with cities - it needs less workers and can move all over the world - this can lead to segregation of class within cities
• He highlights some fundamental questions and beliefs about the role of the city in political, economic, social and ecological life
• Relationships between process and form? Harvey believes process takes priority over 'things' - but often the 'things' shape the process and this is typically evident within the 'palimpsest' urban environment
• He suggests reducing urban (referring to the city as a minor feature of social organisation) - this can only occur when 3 assumptions are made about space and time:
• 1. They're passive and neutral containers of social action
• 2. They're containers of social action, but not neutral - space and time vary depending on the process
• 3. Relational view - space and time do not exist outside processes - the process determines space and time
• Therefore space and time are not simply constituted by but are also constituted by social processes
• Also true in the urban - urban and city are not simply constituted by but are also constitutive of them
• The process of urbanisation creates the thing-like structures of cities
• Social processes, in not giving rise to things, create the things which enhance the nature of those particular social pressures
• Aim should be to liberate processes of social change, however, we must understand politics will continue to be constrained to 'things' created in the past
• 
  
• Major points he makes:
• 1. Re-conceptualise the urban as a production of space and spatio-temporality to a dialectical relationship between process and time
• 2. Assumption that the 'community will save current city's mess - again, power with the thing not the process
• 3. No mention of cities in ecological literature - therefore failure to account for over 50% of the world's population
• 
  
• "Urbanisation is an ecological process and we desperately need creative ways to think and act on that relation
• We have to move urbanisation in a more central position to be debated, but before this occurs the following myths must be contested:
• 1. When we have the economic power, we then spend money of cities to support them
• 2. Political revolution sparks social relations - Harvey believes community mobilisation and transformation of militant particular-ism is vital - this enables us to find universal concerns that exist within a realm of difference
• 3. Cities are anti-ecological - however, they're ecological features themselves

'"Contested Cities" - the issue is not simply about contesting inside cities but more importantly concerns contests over the construction and framing of cities - especially into the future.'

"A Ladder of Citizen Participation" - Sherry R. Arnstein (1969)

The following is a review of Sherry Arnstein's work entitled "A Ladder of Citizen Participation". 

The basic concept of this text is summed up by Arnstein early - "citizen participation is arranged in a ladder pattern with each rung corresponding to the extent of citizens' power in determining the plan and/or program."

Arnstein describes citizen participation as citizen power, and citizen participation involves the redistribution of power that enables the 'have-nots' of society to have some say in economic and social processes. She then goes onto saying participation without redistribution of power is an empty process for these 'have-nots'.

Types of participation and non-participation 

8   Citizen Control

7   Delegated Power          Degree of citizen power

6   Partnership

5   Placation

4   Consultation                 Degree of tokenism

3   Informing

2   Therapy                        Non-participation

1   Manipulation

Characteristics and Illustrations

1. Manipulation

• On advisory committees to educate the 'have-nots'
• In the committees it is the officials who educate, persuade and advise, not the reverse
• Community Action Agencies have little power and act as grass-roots programs to somewhat include the 'have-nots'

2. Therapy

Refers to extensive activity to cure powerless of their 'pathology' rather than curing the core features (racism and victimisation for example) which cause the pathology

3. Informing

• Informing of rights, responsibilities and options citizens have
• The informing process tends to be one way - official to citizens - with little or no negotiation. This tends to be through media, pamphlets and responses to inquires

4. Consultation

• This refers to inviting citizens opinions (e.g. through attitude surveys)
• By doing this citizens "participate in participation"

5. Placation

• This refers to where citizens have some influence - tokenism is still present 
• This is the degree to which citizens are placated depends on:
• 1. Quality of technical assistance in articulating priorities
• 2. Extent to which citizens have been organised to press for these priorities 
• Citizens have clear and direct access to decision-making process

6. Partnership

• Power is redistributed through negotiation between citizens and power holders
• Shared responsibilities (joint policy boards, planning committees)
• Works best with organised power base in community - citizen leaders are accountable

7. Delegated Power

• Negotiation between citizens and power holders - may lead to citizens having majority support
• Citizens hold accountability to the program 
• Separate and parallel groups of citizen and power holders with provision for citizen veto if negotiation fails
• City councils have final veto even if citizens have majority support 

8. Citizen Power

• The degree of power where people can govern a program/institution, be in full charge of managerial aspects, be able to negotiate the conditions under which outsiders may change them
• Works best with neighbourhood co-operation with no intermediaries between it and source of funding
• Capitalised with research and development funds from the office of Economic Opportunity and other major sources of federal funding
• No model city can meet citizen control as final power and say always is with city council

Limitation of the typology

It does not include an analysis of the most significant roadblocks to achieving genuine participation - including: racism, paternalism and resistance to power redistribution, poor community's political socioeconomic infrastructure and knowledge base and difficulties of organising a citizen group in the face of futility, alienation and destruction.

Proposed West Belconnen Development

The proposal for future development further west of the already immensely sprawled suburbs of Canberra is astonishing. It first came to my attention about 3 weeks ago, but today, our guest speaker Michael Pilbrow - who is involved in the West Belconnen development, raised the issue again, and I was further puzzled. (Area of proposed development shown below):




Canberra, with a population density of just 443.5 people per km squared, is heavily sprawled. This immense sprawl is an identified issue - it's not unknown. In fact, as outlined in Time to Talk's Canberra 2030 report, it is one of the major goals for Canberra to become "a compact city" with "integrated and sustainable transport" and "lower carbon emissions" (Canberra 2030 report, 2010). Yet it seems - with confirmation from Pilbrow, that physical development will begin in around 18 months time, that these direct goals will be completely ignored - hence my astonishment.

A new suburb on the existing urban fringe would not achieve a more "compact city" and would not result in an "integrated and sustainable transport" system with "lower carbon emissions". Residents of the proposed suburb would be encouraged to use private transport just as much as existing fringe suburbs due to continual lack of access to public transport. This would lead to compounding issues within the suburb and city including increased traffic congestion and noise.

Additionally, I believe the West Belconnen development would hinder Canberra's sustainability goals - also identified in Canberra 2030. The development would be bordered by two waterways - the Murrumbidgee River and Ginninderra Creek (as shown above). A stated vision of the development is "protecting the environment - including the protection and rehabilitation of the Murrumbidgee River and Ginninderra Creek". However, in my view, a new suburb adjacent to natural waterways would disrupt the natural marine ecosystems and cause major damage to environmental functioning.

If the board of the West Belconnen development is serious about "protecting the environment" I'd consider not directly digging it up and developing it.

That's my opinion, check out the West Belconnen devlopment website and see what you think here: http://talkwestbelconnen.com.au/


References:

Canberra 2030 report - http://timetotalk.act.gov.au/storage/78d10e40d957379825347909b6e2bfd9.Time%20to%20talk%20-%20web%20version.pdf

Demographics info -
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Canberra