Given the philosophical oppositioin that cxisted between Foucault atnd Habermas, a FotucaulIdian reading of communicative planining theory may yield a very critical assessnient of that body of work. Rather than develop such a critique, this paper shows that there are in fact significant points of agreement between communicative theorists and the French historian of modernity, in particular with respect to the relationship between theory and practice. However, Foucault's work raises important questions about the relationship between theory and history, and it challenges Forester, Healey, and others to situate communicative planniing in its historical context and to assess the dangers that it poses for individuals and for society at large.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alexander, E.1996. After rationality: Towards a contingency theory for planning. In Explorations in Planning Theory, eds. S.J. Mandelbaum, L. Mazza, and R.W. Burchell, 45-64. New Brunswick, N.J.: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
2.
Alleni, B.1998. Foucault and modern political philosophy. In The Later Foucauilt, ed. J. Moss, 164-198. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
3.
Allen, J.1996. Our town: Foucault and knowledge-based politics in London. In Explorations in Planning Theory, eds. S.J. Mandelbaum, L. Mazza, and R.W. Burchell, 328-344. New Brunswick, N. J.: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
4.
Beauregard, R.A.1990. Bringing the city back in. Journal of the American PlanningAssociation56(2): 210-215.
5.
Beauregard, R.A.1996. Advocating preeminence: Anthologies as politics. In Explorations in Planning Theory, eds. S.J. Mandelbaum, L. Mazza, and R.W. Burchell, 105-110. New Brunswick, N. J.: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
6.
Beauregard, R.A.1998. Writing the planner. Journal of Planning Education andResearch18(2): 93-101.
7.
Berger, P.L., and T. Luckmann. 1966. The Social Construction ofReality: A Treatise in the Sociology of Knowledge. New York: Penguin Books.
8.
Boulding, K.E.1956. The Image: Knowledge in Life and Society. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
9.
Boyer, M. C.1983. Dreaming the Rational City. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
10.
Burchell, G., C. Gordon, and P. Miller, eds. 1991. The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.
11.
Castel, R.1994. “Problematization” as a mode of reading history. In Foucault and the Writing of History. ed. J. Goldstein, 237-252. Oxford, U.K.: Blackwell.
12.
Davidson, A. I.1997. Structures and strategies of discourse: Remarks toward a history of Foucault's philosophy of language. In Foucault and His Interlocutors, ed. A. I. Davidson, 1-17. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.
13.
Delmas-Marty, M.1994. Foucault et la justice. Magazine litteraire325: 52-56.
14.
Dreyfus, H.L., and P. Rabinow. 1983. Michel Foucault: Beyond Structuralism and Hermeneutics. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.
15.
Dryzek, J.S.1993. Policy analysis and planning: From science to argument. In The Argumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning, eds. F. Fischer and J. Forester, 213-232. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.
16.
Ewald, F.1986. Une experience foucaldienne: Les principes geniraux du droit. Critiques42(471 -472): 788-793.
17.
Ewald, F., A. Farge, and M. Perrot. 1985. Une pratique de la verite. In Michel Foucault, eds. J.-M. Charpentier, H. Israel, and C. Paris, 9-56. Paris: Syros.
18.
Fainstein, S. S.1991. Promoting economic development in the United States anid Great Britaiin. Journal of the American Planning Association57(1): 22-33.
19.
Faludi, A.1996. Rationiality, critical rationalism, and planning doctrine. In Kxplorations in Planning Theory, eds. S.J. Mandelbaum, L. Mazza, and R.W. BuLrchell, 65-82. New Brunswick, N. J.: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
20.
Ferraro, G.1994. “De te fabula narratur”: Exercises in reading plans. Planning Theory (10-11): 205-236.
21.
Fischler, R.1995. Strategy and history in professional practice: Planning as world mnaking. In Spatial Practices, eds. H. Liggett and D.C. Perry, 13-58. ThouLsand Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
22.
Fischler, R.1998. For a geniealogy of plannling: Zoning and the welfare state. Planning Perspectives13(4): 389-410.
23.
Fischler, R.2000a. ILinking planninlg theorv anid history: The case of early developmeint conltrol. Journal of Planning Education and Research19(3): 233-241.
24.
Fischler, R.2000b. Planniiing for social bettermiient: From standard of livinig to quality of life. In Urban Planning in ta Changing World: The TIventieth-Centuiry Urban Expesience, ed. R. Freestonie. Londoni: E&FN Spon.
25.
Flvvbjerg. B.1992. Aristotle, Foucaullt and progressive phronesis. Planing Theory (7-8): 65-83.
26.
Flvvbjerg, B.1998. Rationality and Power. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.
27.
Forester, J.1989. Planning in the Face of Pouwer. Berkeley: University of California Press.
28.
Forester, J.1992. Critical ethnography: OIn fieldwork in a Habermnasiain way. In Critical Management Stuidies, eds. M. Alvesson aind H. Wilmott, 46-65. IhhoLsand Oaks, C(alif.: Sage.
29.
Forester, J.1993. Learining frotmi practice stories: The priority of practical judgmeint. In The Artumentative Turn in Policy Analysis and Planning, eds. F. Fischer and J. Forester, 186-209. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press.
30.
Forester, J.1996a. Argument, power, and passion in planning practice. In Explorations in Planning Theory, eds. S.J. Mandelbaum, L. Mazza, anid R.W. Burchell, 241-262. New Brunswick, N.J.: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers Un-iversity.
31.
Forester, J.1996b. The rationality of listening, emotional sensitivity, and moral vision. In Evplorations in Planning Theory, eds. S.J. MandelbaLim, L. Mazza, and R.W. Burchell, 204-224. New Brunswick, N.J.: Center for Urbani Policy Research, Rutgers University.
32.
FouLcault, M. 1980. Power, moral values, anid the intellectual. Manuscript, Foucault Archives, Bibliotheque du Saulchoir, Paris.
33.
Foucault, M.1983. Structuralism and post-structuralism: An interview with G. Raulet. TelosXVI(55): 195-211.
34.
Foucault, M.1984a. The order of discourse. In Language and Politics, ed. M. Shapiro, 108-138. New York: New York University Press.
35.
Foucault, M.1984b. What is enliggtenment? In The Foucault Reader, ed. P. Rabinow, 32-50. New York: Penguin Books.
36.
Foucault, M.1984c. Space, knowledge, and power. In The Foucault Readei, ed. P. Rabinow, 239-256. New York: Penguin Books.
37.
Foucault, M.1984d. Politics and ethics: An interview. In The Foucault Reader, ed. P. Rabinow, 373-380. New York: Penguin Books.
38.
Foucault, M.1984e. Polemics, politics, anid problematizations.In The Foncault Reader, ed. P. Rabinow, 381-390. New York: Penguin Books.
39.
Foucault, M.1989. Michel Foucault: Resume des couirs: Conferences, essais et le{ons do College de France. Paris: Julliard.
40.
Foucault, M.1991a. Politics and the study of discourse. In The Foucalclt Efject: Stutdies in Covernmenztality, eds. G. Burchell, C. Gordon, anid P. Miller, 53-72. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.
41.
Foucault, M.1991b. Governmentality. In The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, eds. G. Burchell, C. Gordon, and P. Miller, 87-104. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.
42.
Foucault, M.1991c. Questions of method. In The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, eds. G. Burchell, C. Gordon, and P. Miller, 73-86. Chicago, Ill.: University of Chicago Press.
43.
Foucault, M.1997. “It faut defendre la societe” Cours au College de France (1975-1976). Paris: Gallimard & Seuil.
44.
Fraser, N.1985. Michel Foucault: A “young conservative”?Ethics96(1): 165-184.
45.
Fraser, N.1995. Justice Interruiptus: (ritiual Reflections on the “Postsocialist” Condition. L.ondon: RouLtledge.
46.
Gandal, K.1986. Michel FouLcaLllt: lntellectLial work anid politics. Telos (67): 121-134.
47.
Goffmanni, F.1959. Hli Presetcatioin of Se/ifn Eeryday Lifc. Garden City, N.Y.: D)oUbleday-Anchor.
48.
Goldstein, J.1984. FouLcaulIt aniong the sociologists: The “disciplinies” and the history of the professconis. History and Theory2.3(2): 17(0-192.
49.
Gros, F.1996. MichelFouccauli. PIaris: P.U.F.
50.
Haberitmas, J.1977. Hannah Arendt's comniiititicationis conicept of power. Social Research44(l): 3-24.
51.
Habermas, J.1979. C ornmunication and the ELvolulion of Society. Bostoln, Mass.: Beacon Press.
52.
Habermiias, J.1984. Thc Theory of C omwrciuniccitiisc Ac ttnon. B3oston, Mass.: Beacotn Press.
53.
Habermas, J.1994. Some questionls concerning the theory of power: FoLncault again. In Critique and Powser: Recasting the Foucault/Habermas Debatce, ed. M. Kelly, 79-107. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
54.
Hamel, P.1997. La critique postmodernie et le courant communicationnel anl scin des theories de la planification: Une rencontre difficile. Cahiers degeographiedu Quebec41(114): 311-321.
55.
Harvey, D.1989. The Condition of Postmodernity: An Enquiry into the Orngins of Cultuiral Chan ge. Cambridge, Mass.: Blackwell.
56.
Healey, P.1992a. A planner's day: Knowledge and action in communiicative practice. Journal ofthe American PlanningAssociation53(1): 9-20.
57.
Healey, P.1992b. Planning through debate: The communicative turn in plannitng theory. Town Planning Review63(2): 143-162.
58.
Healey, P.1993. The commLinicative work of development plans. Fnviron-Tnent and Planning B: Planning and Design20: 83-104.
59.
Healey, P.1996. The communicative turn in planning theorv and its implicationis for spatial strategy formnationi. Environmnent and Planniinlg B. Planning and Design23(2): 217-234.
60.
Healey, P.1997. Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmnented Societies. Houndsmills and Londoni, U.K.: Macmillani Press.
61.
Hillier, J.1998. Beyonid confused noise: Ideas toward communicative procedural justice. Journal of Planning Education and Research18(1): 14-24.
62.
Hirst, P.1993. Foucatilt and architectLire. AAfiles (26): 52-60.
63.
Hoch, C.1994. What Planners Do: Power, Politics, and Persuasion. Chi- cago, Ill.: APA Planners Press.
64.
Hoch, C.1996. A pragmatic inquiry about planning and power. In Explorations in Planning Theory, eds. S.J. Mandelbaum, L. Mazza, and R.W. Burchell, 30-44. New BrLinswick, N.J.: Center for Urban Policy Re-search, Rutgers University.
65.
Hoy, D.C., ed. 1986. Foucault: A Critical Reader. London: Blackwell.
66.
Hoy, D.C.1998. Foucault and critical theory. The Later Foucault, ed. J. Moss,18-32. Thousan-d Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
67.
Ingram, D.1994. Foucault and Habermas on the subject of reason. The Cambridge Compancion to Foucault, ed. G. Gutting, 215-261. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
68.
Innes, J.E.1992. Group processes and the social construction of growth management: Florida, Vermont, and New Jersey. Journal of the Amenican PlanningAssociation58(4): 440-453.
69.
Innes, J.E.1995. Planning theory's emerging paradigm: Communicative action and interactive practice. Journal ofPlanning Education and Re-search14(3): 183-189.
70.
Innes, J.E.1996. Planning through consensus building: A new view of the comprehensive planning ideal. Journal of the American PlanningAssociation62(4): 460-472.
71.
Innes, J.E.1997. The planners' century. Journal of Planning Education and Research16(3): 227-228.
72.
Innes, J.E.1998. Information in communicative planninlg. Journal of the American PlanningAssociation64(1): 52-63.
73.
Innes, J.E., J. Gruber, M. Neuman, and R. Thompson. 1994. Coordinatinig growth and environmental management through consensus building. CPSbrief(California Policy Seminar, University of California at Berkeley)6(4): 1-8.
74.
Kelly, M., ed. 1994a. Critique and Poower: Recasting the FoucaulteHabermas Debate. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
75.
Kelly, M.1994b. Foucault, Habermas, and the self-referentiality of critiquv. In Critique and Power: Recasting the Foucault/Habermas Debate, ed. M. Kelly, 365-400. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
76.
Levy, J.M.1990. What local economic developers actually do: Location quotients versus press releases. Journal of the American PlanniTngAssociatioI56(2): 153-160.
77.
Mandelbaumn, S.J.1990. Reading planis. Journal ofthe American Plannizng Association56(3): 351-356.
78.
Margolis, J.1993. Redeeming Foucault. In Foucault and the Critique of Institutions, eds. J. Caputo anid M. Yount, 41-59. University Park, Plenn.: Pennsylvania State Utiversity Press.
79.
Markus, T.A.1993. Buildings and Powcer: Freedomn and C(ontrol in the Origin of Modern Building Types. London: Routledge.
80.
Moss, J.1998. Introduction: The later Foucault.-In The Later Foucault, cd. J. Moss, 117. Thousanid Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
81.
Murray, M.1995. Correction at Cabrini-Green: A sociospatial exercise of power. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space13(3): 311-327.
82.
Myers, D., W.C. Baer, S.-. Choi1996. The chailginig probleml of oser-crowded housing. /ossirnal of cthe Asiersuasn PlcirisiisgAssociation62(1): 66-84.
83.
Noiriel, G.1994. Foucault and history: TIhe lessoins of a disillcision0. Joois/asil of Modersii Histosy66(3): 547-568.
84.
Osborne, D., an-d IT. Gaebler. 1993. Resnrnevesctisng (sovernirnesnt: Hon c the Fntrepreneurial Spirit Is Transforrnsilg the Public Sector. New York: Plume Books (Penqulii).
85.
Perry, D.C.1995. Making space: Planning as a mode of thought. In Spatial Practices, eds. H. Liggett anid D.C. Perry, 209-242. Thousanid Oaks, Calif.: Sage.
86.
Porter, S.1996. Contra-Folicault: Soldiers, nuLrses and pow.er. Sociology30(1): 59-78.
87.
Poster, M.1993. Foucault anid the problem of self coinstitution. In Foueaislt and tce (Critique oflsnstitutions, eds. J. (,apLtro and M. YoLItnt, 63-80. University Park, Penn.: Pensylsvlvania State Universitv Press.
88.
Poouller, P.J.1994. Disciplinary society and the myth of aesthetic juLstice. I1 DesigTn Revziew: Challenging Urban Aesthetic Control, eds. B.C. Scheer and W.F.E. Preiser, 175- 186. New York: Chapman & Hall.
89.
Rabinow, P.1989. French Modern: Normls and Forms of the Social EnLviron- msnet. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
90.
Rabinow, P.1997. 1The history of systens of thouLght. Int Mic/sel Fouscault. Ethics, Subjectivity and Truth, vol. 1, The Essential Works ofMichel Fousasslt, 1954 1984, ed. P. Rabiniow, xi-xlii. New York: The New Press.
91.
Rorty, R.1982. Coioseqoieoices of Pagsautlsm (Essay.: 1972-1980). Milnlne- apolis: University of Miooiesota Press.
92.
Roweis, S.TI.1983. Urban planniiing as professional mnediationi of territorial politics. LovirooTnent and Planoiog D: Society and Space1(2): 139-162.
93.
Sanidercock, L.1998. Towards Cosmopolis: Planning for Mullticuiltural Cities. Chichester, U.K.: Wiley.
94.
Schon, D.A.1983. The Reflective Pructitioner. New York: Basic Books.
95.
Sintomer, Y.1992. Power and civil society: Foucault vs. Habernmas. Phlilosophy 5Dr Sociil Critcisrn18(3-4): 357-378.
96.
Smart, B.1988. MichelFoucault. London: Routledge.
97.
Taylor, C.1985. FonLcatult on freedom and trtuth. In Philosophvy asnd the Hnnman Sciences: Pjli/osophical Papers 2, 152-184. Caimbridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.
98.
Taylor, N.1998. Mistakein interests and the discourse im-odel of planninlg. Journal of the American Planning Assocatson64(1): 64-75.
99.
Vesine, P.1993. ihe finial Foucault and his ethics. Critical Inquiry20(l): 1-9.
100.
YouLng, I.M.1989. Polity and group differenice: A critiquLe of the ideal of tuisersal citizenship. Ethics99: 250-274.
101.
Webber, M.M.1968. Planning in an environmenit of chanige. Part 1: Beyond the industrial age. Town Planning Review39(3): 179-195.
102.
Webber, M.M.1969. Planining in ani environment of change. Iart II: Permissive planininig. Town Plasnnisng Revieuw39(3): 277-295.
