70 Years’ Planning Theory: A Post-postmodernist Perspective

Titolo Rivista SCIENZE REGIONALI
Autori/Curatori Ernest R. Alexander
Anno di pubblicazione 2015 Fascicolo 2015/1 Lingua Inglese
Numero pagine 14 P. 5-18 Dimensione file 125 KB
DOI 10.3280/SCRE2015-001001
Il DOI è il codice a barre della proprietà intellettuale: per saperne di più clicca qui

Qui sotto puoi vedere in anteprima la prima pagina di questo articolo.

Se questo articolo ti interessa, lo puoi acquistare (e scaricare in formato pdf) seguendo le facili indicazioni per acquistare il download credit. Acquista Download Credits per scaricare questo Articolo in formato PDF

Anteprima articolo

FrancoAngeli è membro della Publishers International Linking Association, Inc (PILA)associazione indipendente e non profit per facilitare (attraverso i servizi tecnologici implementati da CrossRef.org) l’accesso degli studiosi ai contenuti digitali nelle pubblicazioni professionali e scientifiche

This survey, a subjective critical review of ‘planning theory’ as it evolved since the mid- 20th century, has three parts. The first is a condensed account of the emergence of three distinct schools of thought: the radical-communicative, post-structuralist, and institutionalist streams. In the second part each stream is represented reviewing a typical book: Friedmann’s (2011) Insurgencies, Gunder and Hillier’s (2009) Planning in Ten Words or Less, and Webster and Lai’s (2003) Property Rights, Planning and Markets. The last part argues the author’s position - there is no ‘planning’, only diverse planning practices - and develops its implications for planning theory and practice.

Questo articolo è una rassegna critica della ‘teoria della pianificazione’ così come si è evoluta dalla metà del ventesimo secolo. È diviso in tre parti. La prima parte è un resoconto condensato dell’emergenza di tre diverse scuole di pensiero: la prospettiva comunicativa, quella post-strutturalista e quella istituzionalista. Nella seconda parte, per ognuna delle precedenti prospettive, viene preso in considerazione un testo tipico, rispettivamente: «Insurgencies» di J. Friedmann, «Planning in Ten Word or Less» di M. Gunder e J. Hillier, «Property Rights, Planning and Markets» di C. Webster e L.W.C. Lai. Nella terza e ultima parte viene presentata la posizione di chi scrive - non esiste ‘la pianificazione’, ma solo diverse pratiche di pianificazione - e ne vengono sviluppate le implicazioni teoriche e pratiche.

Keywords:Planning theory; pianificazione comunicativa; pianificazione poststrutturalista.

  1. Adams D. and Tiesdell S., 2010, «Planners as Market Actors: Rethinking Statemarket Relations in Land and Property». Planning Theory & Practice, 2, 11: 187-207. DOI: 10.1080/14649351003759631
  2. Alexander E.R., 1982, «If Planning isn’t Everything, Maybe it’s Something». Town Planning Review, 52, 2: 131-142.
  3. Alexander E. R., 1987, «Planning as Development Control: Is that all Urban Planning is for?». Town Planning Review, 58, 4: 453-467.
  4. Alexander E.R., 1992, Approaches to Planning: Introducing current planning theories, concepts and issues. Montreaux: Gordon & Breach.
  5. Alexander E.R., 1995, How Organizations Act Together: Interorganizational Coordination in Theory and Practice. Amsterdam: Gordon & Breach.
  6. Alexander E.R., 1998, «Doing the Impossible: Notes for a General Theory of Planning ». Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design, 25, 5: 667-680.
  7. Friedmann J., 1987, Planning in the Public Domain. Princeton NJ: Princeton U.P. Friedmann J., 2011, Insurgencies: Essays in Planning Theory. Abingdon: Routledge.
  8. Ganapati S., 2007, «An Istitutional Analysis of the Evolution of Housign Cooperatives in India». In Verma N. (ed.), Institutions and Planning. Amsterdam: Elsevier: 155-174.
  9. Gualini E., 2001, Planning and the Intelligence of Institutions. Aldershot, Hamps: Ashgate.
  10. Gunder M., Hillier J., 2009, Planning in Ten Words or Less: A Lacanian Entanglement with Spatial Planning. Farnham, Surrey: Ashgate.
  11. Habermas J., 1981, Theorie des Kommunikativen Handelns. Band I Handlungsrationalität und Gesellschaftliche Rationalisierung. Frankfurt a.M.: Suhrkamp.
  12. Healey P., 2006, «The New Institutionalism and the Transformative Goals of Planning ». In Verma N. (ed.), Institutions and Planning. Amsterdam: Elsevier: 61-87.
  13. Healey P., 2007, «On the Project of ‘Institutional Transformation’ in the Planning Field: Commenting on the Contributors». Planning Theory, 4, 3: 301-310. DOI: 10.1177/1473095205058498
  14. Hijdra A., Woltjer J., Arts J., 2014, «Value Creation in Capital Waterway Projects: Application of a Transaction Cost and Transaction Benefit Framework for the Miami River and the New Orleans Inner Harbor Navigation Canal». Land Use Policy, 38, 1: 91-103. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2013.10.024
  15. Lyotard J-F., 1979, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
  16. Marcusen A., 2000, «Planning as Craft and as Philosophy». In Rodwin L., Sanyal B. (eds.), The Profession of City Planning. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers The State University of New Jersey: 261-274.
  17. Matthews T., 2013, «Institutional Perspectives on Operationalising Climate Adaptation through Planning». Planning Theory & Practice, 14, 2: 198-210. DOI: 10.1080/14649357.2013.781208
  18. Mazza L., 1995, «Technical Knowledge, Practical Reason and the Planner’s Responsibility ». Town Planning Review, 66, 4: 389-410.
  19. Mazza L., 2002, «Technical Knowledge and Planning Actions». Planning Theory, 1,1: 11-26. DOI: 10.1177/147309520200100102
  20. Moroni S., 2007, La Città del Liberalismo Attivo. Torino: CittàStudi.
  21. Moroni S., 2010a, «Rethinking the Theory and Practice of Land Use Regulation: Towards Nomocracy». Planning Theory, 9, 2: 137-155. DOI: 10.1177/1473095209357868
  22. Moroni S., 2010b, «An Evolutionary Theory of Institutions and a Dynamic Approach to Reform». Planning Theory, 9, 4: 1-23. DOI: 10.1177/1473095210368778
  23. Raja S., Verma N., 2010, «Got Perspective? A Theoretical View of Fiscal Impact Analysis». Planning Theory, 9, 2: 126-136. DOI: 10.1177/1473095209357866
  24. Teitz M.B., 2007, «Planning and the New Institutionalisms». In Verma N. (ed.), Institutions and Planning. Amsterdam: Elsevier: 17-35.
  25. Verma N., 2007, «Institutions and Planning: An Analogical Enquiry». In Verma N. (ed.), Institutions and Planning. Amsterdam: Elsevier: 1-14.
  26. Vickers Sir G., 1968, Value Systems and Social Process. New York: Basic Books.
  27. Webster C., Lai L.W-C., 2003, Property Rights, Planning and Markets: Managing Spontaneous Cities. Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar.
  28. Woltjer J., 2000, Consensus Planning: The Relevance of Communicative Planning Theory in Dutch Infrastructure Development. Aldershot UK: Ashgate.
  29. Friedmann J., 1978, «The Epistomology of Social Practice: A Critique of Objective Knowledge». Theory & Society, 6: 75-92. DOI: 10.1007/BF01566158
  30. Friedmann J., 1973, Retracking America: A Theory of Transactive Planning. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press.
  31. Faludi A., Waterhout B., 2002, The Making of the European Spatial Development Perspective: No Masterplan. London: Routledge.
  32. Ellis C., 2005, «Planning Methods and Good City Form». Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 22, 2: 138-147.
  33. Davidoff P., Reiner T.A., 1962, «A Choice Theory of Planning». Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 28: 103-115. DOI: 10.1080/01944366208979427
  34. Crosta P.L., 1996, «Connecting Knowledge with Action in the Interactive Process of Planning: What Knowledge is Relevant and with whose Actions should we be Concerned?». Planning Theory, 16: 104-122.
  35. Chiodelli F., 2012, «Repoliticising Space through Technical Rules». Planning Theory, 11: 115-127. DOI: 10.1177/1473095211420839
  36. Buitelaar E., 2009, «Zoning, More than Just a Tool: Explaining Houston’s Regulatory Practice». European Planning Studies, 17, 7: 1049-1065. DOI: 10.1080/09654310902949588
  37. Brunetta G., Moroni S., 2012, Contractual Communities in the Self-Organizing City: Freedom, Creativity, Subsidiarity. Dordrecht: Springer.
  38. Bolan R.S., 1996, «Planning and Institutional Design». in Mandelbaum S.J., Mazza L., Burchell R.W. (eds.), Explorations in Planning Theory. New Brunswick, NJ: CUPR – Rutgers The State University of New Jersey: 497-513.
  39. Beauregard R.A., 1996, «Commentary - Advocating Preeminence: Anthologies as Politics». In Mandelbaum S.J., Mazza L. and Burchell R.W. (eds.), Explorations in Planning Theory. New Brunswick, NJ: CUPR – Rutgers The State University of New Jersey: 105-110.
  40. Alexander E.R., Mazza L., Moroni S., 2012, «Planning Without Plans: Nomocracy or Teleocracy for Social-spatial Ordering». Progress in Planning, 77, 2: 37-87. DOI: 10.1016/j.progress.2011.12.001
  41. Alexander E.R., 2014, «Land-property Markets and Planning: A Special Case». Land Use Policy, 41: 533-540. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2014.04.009
  42. Alexander E.R., 2013b, Forbidden Fruit? – The Expert Planner: A Post-postmodernist Take on Planners in Spatial Planning and Development Control. Presented at the AESOP/ACSP Joint Congress 2013, Dublin, 15-19 July.
  43. Alexander E.R., 2013a, «Book Review: Friedmann (2011) Insurgencies». Planning Theory, 12, 1: 104-106. DOI: 10.1177/1473095264862597
  44. Alexander E.R., 2011, «Book Review: Gunder and Hillier (2009) Planning in Ten Words or Less». Planning Theory, 10, 4: 379-382. DOI: 10.1177/1473095211401731
  45. Alexander E.R., 2010, «Introduction: Does Planning Theory Affect Practice, and if so, How?». Planning Theory, 9, 2: 99-107. DOI: 10.1177/1473095209357862
  46. Alexander E.R., 2006, «Institutional Design for Sustainable Development». Town Planning Review, 77, 1: 1-28. DOI: 10.3828/tpr.77.1.2
  47. Competencies, Methods and Skills». Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 22, 2: 91-106.
  48. 173-179. DOI: 10.1177/1473095204044780.AlexanderE.R.,2005,«WhatdoPlannersNeedtoKnow?IdentifyingNeede
  49. Alexander E.R., 2004, «Book Review: Webster and Lai (2003) Property Rights, Planning and Markets: Managing Spontaneous Cities». Planning Theory, 3, 2:
  50. Alexander E.R., 2001, «A Transaction-cost Theory of Land Use Planning and Development Control». Town Planning Review, 72, 1: 45-76.

Ernest R. Alexander, 70 Years’ Planning Theory: A Post-postmodernist Perspective in "SCIENZE REGIONALI " 1/2015, pp 5-18, DOI: 10.3280/SCRE2015-001001