Samenvatting
Summary Planning Theory literature
summary of all the literature in the course Planning Theory
[Meer zien]Voorbeeld 5 van de 41 pagina's
Voorbeeld 5 van de 41 pagina's
In winkelwagengesponsord bericht van onze partner
Gekoppeld boek
Titel boek:
Auteur(s):
- Uitgave:
- ISBN:
- Druk:
3 beoordelingen
Door: patriekhannema • 2 jaar geleden
Door: z_r_y • 3 jaar geleden
Door: selvistephany • 4 jaar geleden
Voorbeeld van de inhoud
Summary Planning Theory Allmendinger, P. (2017) Planning Theory, Palgrave, Houndsmill (UK).
De Roo, G. (2003) Environmental Planning in the Netherlands, Too Good to be
True, Ashgate, Aldershot (UK) (Chap 4).
De Roo, G., G. Porter (2006) Fuzzy Planning – Introducing actor-consulting as a
means to address fuzziness in planning and decision-making, Ashgate, Aldershot
(UK) (Chapters 6, 7 and 8).
De Roo, G. (2010) Being or Becoming? That is the Question! Confronting
Complexity with Contemporary Planning Theory, in: G. de Roo & E.A. Silva, A
Planner’s Encounter with Complexity, Ashgate Publ, Farnham, UK (Chapter 2).
Ritter, H. (1972) On the Planning Crisis: Systems Analysis of the ‘First and
Second Generation’, Bedriftsekonomen, Nr. 8, pp. 390-396.
1
, Allmendinger, P. (2017) Planning Theory, Palgrave,
Houndsmill (UK).
Chapter 1: What is Theory
Theory is:
‘An explanatory supposition which can be defined broadly or narrowly’ (McConnel 1981)
‘Theory is not a theory at all, until it has been used in practice over a considerable period of
time’ (Read 1987)
‘The main concerns of social theory is the same as that of the social sciences in general: the
illumination of concrete processes of human life (Giddens 1984)
It abstracts a set of general of specific principles to be used as a basis for explaining and acting,
with the theory being tested and refined if necessary.
Shortages:
- What distinguishes theory from conjecture(vermoedens) or from ideas
- Can all theories be used in different situations?
- It ignores the social construction of knowledge
- Theory in the social sciences is not immune from the influence of power (political and temporal
elements to theories
Difference between natural and social sciences
Natural and Social sciences: society cannot be explained in the same way in which we can explain the
workings of gravity.
Social sciences
- No universal laws because of difficulties with empirical testing and validation
- Not only reflects upon society, but can also shape it in a way that natural sciences cannot
- Open system
- Has a habit of shifting values, meaning and actions
Natural Sciences
- Closes system (e.g. natural laws such as gravity)
- Induction: examines the available evidence and uses it as a basis for formulating laws and
theories. Uses past information as a basis for the future. The basis of most scientific research.
(like the swan example / patterns and regularities)
o Generalizations or theories based on induction can never be ‘true’ its based on
conjuncture
Karl Popper: Fallibility
- Theories are speculative or provisional truths that stand for as long as they are not disproven. (All
the Swans are white, until 1 black swan is observed, then it’s wrong)
o Criticism
Observation: Theory rejection is based on observations, but observations
themselves are fallible. (Staircase or other images)
Falsification is not enough: science will never abandon a theory unless there
is a better one to replace it. (Imre Lakatos).
Thomas Kuhn (1970): Science works with paradigms or views of reality
- New paradigms emerge when problems cannot be solved by the old paradigm
o Old paradigm is abandoned
o The different paradigms have different worldviews and are incomparable
2
,- We are ‘programmed’ to see things in certain ways in both the natural and social sciences
o Relativist views emphasize and highlight the social dimension of theories and
methodologies.
All theory is to greater and lesser degrees normative There is no general theory of planning
A diversity of practices in planning, and different kinds of planners in different contexts should enact
different models or theories of planning
- Actor Network Theory (ANT): interaction between science and society (f.a. Pasteur and antrax).
Scientist also develop power through these networks (esp. in planning). They produce the
knowledge but also can decide what counts as knowledge (ch. 8,9 more)
Unpacking ‘Theory’
Theory Characteristics Example (in planning)
Normative theory Concerns how the world ought Marxist, liberal, communicative,
and to be achieved ( to be collaborative
Theories of planning)
Prescriptive theory Concerned with best means of Kosten-baten analyse, mixed
achieving a desired condition scanning
Theories in planning
Empirical theory Concerned with explaining reality, Impact of out-of-town retail upon
through causal relationships town centers
(dependent variables etc.)
Models Representations or stylized and Kristaller
simplified pictures of reality
Conceptual frameworks or Ways of looking at or conceiving Marxist perspective on class or
perspectives an object of study freedom
Theorizing Thinking/debating about some
aspect of a phenomenon to
ascertain their suitability and
applicability
All theory is to greater and lesser degrees normative
Theory as discourse
Theory and truth are socially constructed. Because truth varies within contexts and is relative to
language and culture. Truth: ‘A system of ordered procedures for the production, regulation,
distribution, circulation and operation of statements’
- So Theory can be seen as a discourse, which consists of Language use, Communication of beliefs
and Interaction in social situations.
(Example of ‘the mad’ and ‘Green Belts’) Also theory can then be a discourse and could be a mask for
power and politics. Theory has 2 inputs: normative elements and discursive elements.
And planners are the ‘Agents of Norms’.
Theory, structure and agency
Agents of norms: To what extent are individuals (agents) autonomous in their thoughts and actions
and how much does society (structure) influence them? In planning: is the plan a reflection of local
desires or influenced by central government or powerful economic forces?
The relationship between structure and agency:
Important because:
- The use of theory by planners is limited by the role of structure
- Some theories ignore these relationship, and thereby limit their usefulness
3
,There are approaches:
1. Structuralism: a. Emphasizes the role of structure in dictating and shaping actions and events b.
Criticized for ignoring the role and influence of actors (seen as automatons)
2. Intentionalism: a. Focusing on individual action and the micro-politics for interaction. b. Criticized
for the illogical nature of human behavior and the importance of unintended consequences for
action.
Together: Structuration: replaces the dualisms with duality (two coins two sides of one coin). One
influences the other.
Duality of structure: structures enable behavior, but behavior can potentially influence and
reconstitute structure
Duality of structure and agency: : transcend the dualism of structuralist views of structure and
internationalists views of agency
Then a link between the two emerges: ‘social structures are both constituted by human agency, and
yet at the same time are the very medium of this constitution’; ‘both structure and agency are
important since people make structures and structures influence people’.
Agents (e.g. planners) create and interpret theories in the light and knowledge of existing
theories.
Planners do not operate in a vacuum. There are rules, existing processes and norms, that limit
what they can do.
So: planners are influenced by structure, as well as creating that structure.
Theory, time and space
Theory is historically contingent and dependent upon cultural, social, and political circumstances.
Theories sometimes built upon each other, but are dictated by changes in society and the
grounds upon which they can be tested often change
Locality effect: different locations also interpret ideas and theories differently
Geological metaphor: various layers influence a unique social geology in different
areas
General theories like Marxism are more likely to be interpreted similarly in different areas than
more context-specific theories.
Theories have a highly political role since they are part of the society.
The theory-practice gap
The gap: academic say that theory is ignored and practitioners say that theories have no meaning in
het ‘real world’.
Governments and planner are interdependent
Parts of the professionalism of planners are neutrality and expert status.
Planners are unlikely to take political stances or perspectives that are overtly anti-status quo.
Planners are (almost) all member of an institute that binds you with codes and ethics.
The professional status of planners limits the extent to which they can act as reflective
individuals and the extent to which they are subject to the normal influences of social sciences
approaches.
So planner are not independent. In studying planning theory we should ask why this particular theory
was used, who is using it and for what purpose.
Conclusion: Theory is often used to legitimize planning and provide power to the planners: Planners
pick and choose theory, depending on the situation, so they can legitimize almost every decision. This
is partly caused by the conflicting pressures upon them.
4
, Chapter 2: The Current Landscape of Planning Theory
Planning as a profession needs some form of theory or thinking to underpin its claim to have
specialist knowledge.
Every field of endeavor has its own history and traditions of debates and practices, which now acts as
a kind of store. This store provides advice, proverbs, recipes and techniques for understanding and
anting, and inspiration for ideas to play with and develop.
‘Shift’ from positivism to Post-positivism: A shift from technocratic, reasoning plan-making to social
plan-making method. In the post-positivism we state that no one is ‘neutral’ since power and
discourses are involved in the process, and interpretations and application of theories differs per
person, location, and moment in time. ‘’Shifting from causal reasoning as a basis for plan-making to
discovering and confirming meaning’’. The shift was made because:
1. The failure of technocratic planning
2. A shift in paradigm from positivistic views to ‘no universal truths’ in social sciences
Positivism:
Base knowledge upon empirical or mathematical observations, trying to uncover the ‘truth’ or
relationships between objects.
post-positivism:
Contextualize theories and disciplines in larger social and historical contexts
Normative criteria for deciding between competing theories
An understanding of individuals as self-interpreting, autonomous subjects.
Planners are fallible advisors who operate in a complex world where there are no answers and
‘truth’
The emphasis is on language and ‘making meaning’ through language.
Collaborative planning & postmodern planning are examples.
Planning has not developed as an intellectual discipline like economy or mathematics. It draws upon
certain foundation disciplines, and the balance between these disciplines is shifting all the times. The
basis of planning is therefore flexible and fluid. (eclectic, landscape of ideas)
Typologies of planning theory
Typologies provide a ‘frame’ or a common understanding of subject area, methodologies, language
and history of the development of ideas and practice beyond the random. Planning has no
endogenous body of theory because:
1. Planning as a state activity was legitimized by government before it developed any
justification for itself.
2. Planners themselves are not interested in theory.
Faludi: distinction procedural-substantive theory:
- Procedural theories: define and justify methods of decision making (process)
- Substantive theories: pertain to interdisciplinary knowledge relevant to the content of planning
(analysis)
Both are needed for planning. This notion is criticized because of it portrays planning as
apolitical and technical.
A post positivistic stance: Planning is a non-linear process: a more eclectic pick and mix basis to
theory development and planning practice that relates issues, time and space in a linear and non-
linear manner. Also:
5
Voordelen van het kopen van samenvattingen bij Stuvia op een rij:
Verzekerd van kwaliteit door reviews
Stuvia-klanten hebben meer dan 700.000 samenvattingen beoordeeld. Zo weet je zeker dat je de beste documenten koopt!
Snel en makkelijk kopen
Je betaalt supersnel en eenmalig met iDeal, creditcard of Stuvia-tegoed voor de samenvatting. Zonder lidmaatschap.
Focus op de essentie
Samenvattingen worden geschreven voor en door anderen. Daarom zijn de samenvattingen altijd betrouwbaar en actueel. Zo kom je snel tot de kern!
Veelgestelde vragen
Wat krijg ik als ik dit document koop?
Je krijgt een PDF, die direct beschikbaar is na je aankoop. Het gekochte document is altijd, overal en oneindig toegankelijk via je profiel.
Tevredenheidsgarantie: hoe werkt dat?
Onze tevredenheidsgarantie zorgt ervoor dat je altijd een studiedocument vindt dat goed bij je past. Je vult een formulier in en onze klantenservice regelt de rest.
Van wie koop ik deze samenvatting?
Stuvia is een marktplaats, je koop dit document dus niet van ons, maar van verkoper DeGeograaf. Stuvia faciliteert de betaling aan de verkoper.
Zit ik meteen vast aan een abonnement?
Nee, je koopt alleen deze samenvatting voor €6,48. Je zit daarna nergens aan vast.
Is Stuvia te vertrouwen?
4,6 sterren op Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
Afgelopen 30 dagen zijn er 70055 samenvattingen verkocht
Opgericht in 2010, al 14 jaar dé plek om samenvattingen te kopen