The “public” is a central concept in planning, delimiting a realm of praxis as well as often indicating the reconciliation of disparate interests to create a collective basis for action. Recently, communicative action, informed by Habermasian critical theory, has enlivened these ideas. The author draws on ongoing feminist debates to rethink this “public” through two conceptual devices: the social and the global. In planning, the public has always been contested, but a feminist perspective demonstrates how the discursive constitution and legitimation of the public has crucial implications for social entitlements. And if communicative action has shown how the public interest is shaped by the dialogic parameters of the public domain, then feminist contentions point to the geopolitical conditions under which participatory dialogue is possible. The author offers this feminist interrogation of the ideal of the public not with the intent of replacing it but instead with the hope that it will strengthen the everyday idea of the public.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Ackelsberg, M. A. , and M. L. Shanley. 1996. Privacy, publicity, and power: A feminist rethinking of the public-private distinction. In Revisioning the political: Feminist reconstructions of traditional concepts in Western political theory, edited by N. Hirschmannand C. Di Stefano. Boulder, CO: Westview.
2.
Agarwal, B.1990. Social security and the family: Coping with seasonality and calamity in rural India. Journal of Peasant Studies17 (3): 341-412.
3.
AlSayyad, N.1995. From vernacularism to globalism: The temporal reality of traditional settlements. Traditional Dwellings and Settlements Review7 (1): 9-29.
4.
Appadurai, A.1984. How moral is South Asia’s economy? A review article. Journal of Asian Studies43.
5.
Barry, B.1993. Theories of justice. Berkeley: University of California Press.
6.
Beauregard, R.1989. Between modernity and postmodernity: The ambiguous position of US planning. Environment and Planning D7:381-395.
7.
Beauregard, R.1990. Intellectual journeys and political destinations. Planning Theory Newsletter4: 7-11.
8.
Beauregard, R.1991. Without a net: Modernist planning and the postmodern abyss. Journal of Planning Education and Research10:189-194.
9.
Bellah, R.et al.1991. The good society. New York: Knopf.
10.
Benhabib, S.1986. Critique, norm, and utopia: A study of the foundations of critical theory. New York: Columbia University Press.
11.
Benhabib, S. , and D. Cornell, eds. 1987. Feminism as critique. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
12.
Berman, M.1982. All that is solid melts into air: The experience of modernity. New York: Simon & Schuster.
13.
Bernstein, R.1971. Praxis and action: Contemporary philosophies of human activity. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
14.
Bernstein, R.1976. The restructuring of social and political theory. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
15.
Bernstein, R.1993. The new constellation: The ethical-political horizons of modernity/postmodernity. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16.
Bolan, R.1980. The practitioner as theorist: The phenemonology of the professional episode. Journal of the American Planning Association46:261-274.
17.
Bolan, R.1985. The structure of ethical choice in planning practice. In Ethics in planning, edited by M. Wachs. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
18.
Bookman, A. , and S. Morgen, eds. Women and the politics of empowerment. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
19.
Bordo, S.1990. Feminism, postmodernism, and gender-scepticism. In Feminism/postmodernism, edited by L. Nicholson. New York: Routledge.
20.
Boyer, C.1987. Dreaming the rational city: The myth of American city planning. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
21.
Boynton, R.1999. Who needs philosophy? (Interview with Martha Nussbaum). New York Times Magazine, 21 November.
22.
Brown, C.1981. Mothers, fathers, and children: From private to public patriarchy. In Women and revolution: A discussion of the unhappy marriage of Marxism and feminism, edited by L. Sargent. Boston: South End Press.
23.
Butler, J.1992. Contingent foundations: Feminism and the question of postmodernism. In Feminists theorize the political, edited by J. Butlerand J. Scott. New York: Routledge.
24.
Carney, J. , and M. Watts. 1990. Manufacturing dissent: Work, gender, and the politics of meaning in a peasant society. Africa60 (2): 207-241.
25.
Castells, M.1977. The urban question. London: Edwin Arnold.
26.
Clavel, P.1986. The progressive city: Planning and participation, 1969-1984. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.
27.
Crang, P.1992. The politics of polyphony: Reconfigurations in geographical authority. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space10:527-549.
28.
Dallmayr, F. , and T. McCarthy, eds. 1977. Understanding and social inquiry. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
29.
Davidoff, P.1978. The redistributive function in planning: Creating greater equity among citizens of communities. In Planning theory in the 1980’s, edited by R. Burchelland G. Sternlieb. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
30.
Douglass, M.1998. World city formation of the Asia Pacific Rim: Poverty, “everyday” forms of civil society and environmental management. In Cities for citizens, edited by M. Douglassand J. Friedmann. New York: John Wiley.
31.
Dryzek, J.1990. Discursive democracy: Politics, policy, and political science. New York: Cambridge University Press.
32.
Ehrenreich, B. , and F. Piven. 1984. The feminization of poverty. Dissent31 (2): 162-170.
33.
Eliot, T. S.1917. Preludes. In Selected poems: Prufrock and other observations. London: Faber and Faber.
34.
Escobar, A.1992. Encountering development: The making and unmaking of the Third World. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
35.
Etzioni, A.1988. The moral dimension: Toward a new economics. New York: Free Press.
36.
Fainstein, N. , and S. Fainstein. 1982. New debates in urban planning: The impact of Marxist Theory within the United States. In Critical readings in planning theory, edited by C. Paris. New York: Pergamon.
37.
Fainstein, S.1992. Planning in a different voice. Planning Theory7-8:27-31.
38.
Foglesong, R.1986. Planning the capitalist city. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
39.
Folbre, N.1986. Hearts and spades: Paradigms of household economics. World Development14:245-255.
40.
Forester, J.1982. A critical empirical framework for the analysis of public policy. New Political Science3 (1-2): 33-62.
41.
Forester, J.1985. Critical theory and planning practice. In Critical theory and public life, edited by J. Forester. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
42.
Forester, J.1989. Planning in the face of power. Berkeley: University of California Press.
43.
Forester, J.1990. Reply to my critics. Planning Theory Newsletter4:43-60.
44.
Forester, J.1993. Critical theory, public policy, and planning practice: Toward a critical pragmatism. Albany: State University of New York Press.
45.
Fraser, N.1987. What’s critical about critical theory? The case of Habermas and gender. In Feminism as critique: On the politics of gender, edited by S. Benhabiband D. Cornell. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
46.
Forester, J.1989. Unruly practices: Power, discourse, and gender in contemporary social theory. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
47.
Forester, J.1995. Pragmatism, feminism, and the linguistic turn. In Feminist contentions: A philosophical exchange, edited by S. Benhabibet al. New York: Routledge.
48.
Fraser, N. , and L. Gordon. 1997. Decoding “dependency”: Inscriptions of power in a keyword of the US Welfare state. In Reconstructing political theory: Feminist perspectives, edited by M. L. ShanleyU. Narayan. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
49.
Fraser, N. , and L. Nicholson. 1990. Social criticism without philosophy: An encounter between feminism and postmodernism. In Feminism/postmodernism, edited by L. Nicholson. New York: Routledge.
50.
Friedmann, J.1987. Planning in the public domain: From knowledge to action. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
51.
Giddens, A.1982. Labor and interaction. In Habermas: Critical debates, edited by J. Thompsonand D. Held. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
52.
Greenhalgh, S.1988. Families and networks in economic development. In Contending approaches to the political economy of Taiwan, edited by E. Wincklerand S. Greenhalgh. New York: M. E. Sharpe.
53.
Grewal, I.1996. Home and harem: Nation, gender, empire, and the cultures of travel. Durham: Duke University Press.
54.
Habermas, J.1971. Knowledge and human interests. Translated by J. Shapiro. Boston: Beacon Press.
55.
Habermas, J.1975. Legitimation crisis, translated by T. McCarthy. Boston: Beacon Press.
56.
Habermas, J.1984. The theory of communicative action, translated by T. McCarthy. Boston: Beacon Press.
57.
Habermas, J.1987. Modernity—An incomplete project. In Interpretive social science: A second look, edited by P. Rabinowand W. Sullivan. Berkeley: University of California Press.
58.
Hall, P.1988. Cities of tomorrow. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
59.
Hall, P.1991. Old and new identities, old and new ethnicities. In Culture, globalization and the world-system, edited by A. King. Binghamton: State University of New York.
60.
Hall, P.1992. Cultural studies and its theoretical legacies. In Cultural studies, edited by L. Grossberget al.New York: Routledge.
61.
Hanson, S. , and G. Pratt. 1988. Reconceptualizing the links between home and work in urban geography. Economic Geography64:299-321.
62.
Hanson, S. , and G. Pratt. 1991. Time, space, and the occupational segregation of women. Geoforum22:149-157.
63.
Haraway, D.1990. A manifesto for cyborgs. In Feminism/ postmodernism, edited by L. Nicholson. New York: Routledge.
64.
Harding, S.1990. Feminism, science, and the anti-enlightenment critiques. In Feminism/postmodernism, edited by L. Nicholson. New York: Routledge.
65.
Harper, T. L. , and S. M. Stein. 1992. The centrality of normative ethical theory to contemporary planning theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research11:105-116.
66.
Harper, T. L. , and S. M. Stein. 1995. Out of the postmodern abyss: Preserving the rationale for liberal planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research14:233-244.
67.
Hart, G.1993. Gender and household dynamics. In Rural poverty in Asia: priority issues and policy options, edited by M. G. Quibria. New York: Oxford University Press.
68.
Hartmann, H.1979. The unhappy marriage of Marxism and Feminism: Towards a more progressive union. Capital and Class8:1-33.
69.
Harvey, D.1985. The urbanization of capital: Studies in the history and theory of capitalist urbanization. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
70.
Hayden, D.1981. The Grand Domestic Revolution: A history of feminist designs for American homes, neighborhoods, and cities.Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
71.
Hayford, A. M.1974. The geography of women: A historical introduction. Antipode6:1-19.
72.
Healey, P.1992. A planner’s day: Knowledge and action in communicative practice. Journal of the American Planning Association58:9-20.
73.
Healey, P.1996. Planning through debate: The communicative turn in planning theory. In Readings in planning theory, edited by S. Campbelland S. Fainstein. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
74.
Heskin, A.1980. Crisis and response: A historical perspective on advocacy planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, pp. 50-63.
75.
Himmelweit, S. , and S. Mohun. 1977. Domestic labor and capital. Cambridge Journal of Economics1:15-31.
76.
Hirschmann, N. J. , and C. Di Stefano, eds. 1996. Revisioning the political: Feminist reconstructions of traditional concepts in Western political theory. Boulder, CO: Westview.
77.
Hochschild, A.1989. The second shift. New York: Viking.
78.
Howe, E.1992. Professional roles and the public interest in planning. Journal of Planning Literature6 (3): 230-247.
79.
Innes, J.1995. Planning theory’s emerging paradigm: Communicative action and interactive practice. Journal of Planning Education and Research14 (3): 183-189.
80.
Jacobs, J.1996. Edge of empire: Postcolonialism and the city. New York: Routledge.
81.
Jennings, B.1987. Interpretation and the practice of policy analysis. In Confronting values in policy analysis: The politics of criteria, edited by F. Fischerand J. Forester. London: Sage Ltd.
Kemp, R.1985. Planning, public hearings, and the politics of discourse. In Critical theory and public life, edited by J. Forester. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
84.
Laclau, E. , and C. Mouffe. 1985. Hegemony and socialist strategy: Towards a radical democratic politics. London: Verso.
85.
Landes, J. ed. 1998. Feminism, the public and the private. New York: Oxford University Press.
86.
Laslett, B. , and J. Brenner. 1989. Gender and social reproduction: Historical perspectives. Annual Review of Sociology15:381-404.
87.
MacIntyre, A.1984. The virtues, the unity of a human life, and the concept of a tradition. In Liberalismand its critics, edited by M. Sandel. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
88.
MacIntyre, A.1985. Utilitarianism and the presuppositions of cost-benefit analysis: An essay on the relevance of moral philosophy to the theory of bureaucracy. In Ethics in planning, edited by M. Wachs. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
89.
Marcuse, P.1985. Professional ethics and beyond. In Ethics in planning, edited by M. Wachs. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
90.
Mark-Lawson, J.et al.1985. Gender and local politics: Struggles over welfare policies, 1918-1939. In Localities, class, and gender, edited by L. Murgatroydet al.London: Pion Press.
91.
Marris, P.1994. Advocacy planning as a bridge between the professional and the political. Journal of the American Planning Association, pp. 143-146.
92.
Marshall, J. , and M. Peters. 1985. Evaluation and education: The ideal learning community. Policy Sciences18:263-288.
93.
Massey, D.1995. Thinking radical democracy spatially. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space13 (3): 283-288.
94.
McCarthy, T.1979. The critical theory of Jurgen Habermas. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
95.
McCarthy, T.1982. Rationality and relativism: Habermas’s “overcoming” of Hermeneutics. In Habermas: Critical debates, edited by J. Thompsonand D. Held. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
96.
McDowell, L.1983. Towards an understanding of the gender division of urban space. Environment and Planning D1:59-72.
97.
Milroy, B. M.1990. Critical capacity and planning theory. Planning Theory Newsletter4:12-18.
98.
Milroy, B. M.1992. Some thoughts about difference and pluralism. Planning Theory7-8:33-38.
99.
Milroy, B. M.1994. Values, subjectivity, sex. In Values and planning, edited by H. Thomas. Aldershot, UK: Avebury.
100.
Mohanty, C.1988. Under Western Eyes: Feminist scholarship and colonial discourses. Feminist Review30:61-88.
101.
Moore, H.1994. A Passion for difference. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
102.
Moore, M.1985. Realms of obligation and virtue. In Ethics in planning, edited by M. Wachs. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
103.
Mouffe, C.1992. Feminism, citizenship, and radical democratic politics. In Feminists theorize the political, edited by J. Butlerand J. Scott. New York: Routledge.
104.
Milroy, B. M.1993. The return of the political. New York: Verso.
105.
Naples, N.1997. The “new consensus” on the gendered “social contract.”Signs22 (4): 907-945.
106.
Narayan, U. , and M. L. Shanley. 1997. Contentious concepts. In Reconstructing political theory: Feminist perspectives, edited by M. L. Shanleyand U. Narayan. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
107.
Nelson, B.1984. Women’s poverty and women’s citizenship: Some political consequences of economic marginality. Signs10 (2): 209-231.
108.
Nussbaum, M.1999. Sex and social justice. New York: Oxford University Press.
109.
Pateman, C.1998. The patriarchal welfare state. In feminism, the public and the private, edited by J. Landes. New York: Oxford University Press.
110.
Peattie, L.1994. Communities and interests in advocacy planning. Journal of the American Planning Association, pp. 151-153.
111.
Peck, J.1998. Workfare: A geopolitical etymology. Environment and Planning D16 (2): 133-161.
112.
Probyn, E.1990. Travels in the postmodern: Making sense of the local. In Feminism/postmodernism, edited by L. Nicholson. New York: Routledge.
113.
Putnam, R.1993. Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
114.
Rabinow, P. , and W. Sullivan, eds. 1987. Interpretive social science: A second look. Berkeley: University of California Press.
115.
Rawls, J.1971. A theory of justice. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press.
116.
Rawls, J.1973. Distributive justice. In Economic justice: Selected readings, edited by E. Phelps. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin Education.
117.
Ritzdorf, M.1992. Feminist thoughts on the theory and practice of planning. Planning Theory, pp. 7-8.
118.
Robertson, R.1991. Social theory, cultural relativity and the problem of globality. In Culture, globalization and the world-system, edited by A. King. Binghamton: State University of New York.
119.
Rose, G.1993. Feminism and geography: The limits of geographical knowledge. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
120.
Rubin, G.1975. The traffic in women. In Toward an anthropology of women, edited by R. Reitner. New York: Monthly Review Press.
121.
Sandel, M.1984. Justice and the good. In Liberalismand its critics, edited by M. Sandel. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
122.
Sandercock, L.1995. Voices from the borderlands: A meditation on a metaphor. Journal of Planning Education and Research14:77-88.
123.
Sandercock, L. , and A. Forsyth. 1992. A gender agenda: New directions for planning theory. Journal of the American Planning Association58:49-59.
124.
Schon, D.1979. Generative metaphors. In Metaphor and thought, edited by A. Ortony. New York: Cambridge University Press.
125.
Schutz, A.1977. Concept and theory formation in the social sciences. In Understanding and social inquiry, edited by F. Dallmayrand T. McCarthy. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame Press.
126.
Scott, J.1988. Gender and the politics of history. New York: Columbia University Press.
127.
Scott, J.et al , eds. 1997. Transitions, environments, translations: Feminisms in international politics. New York: Routledge.
128.
Sen, A.1981. Ingredients of famine analysis: Availability and entitlements. Quarterly Journal of Economics (August): 433-464.
129.
Sen, A.1990. Gender and cooperative conflicts. In Persistent inequalities: Women and world development, edited by I. Tinker. New York: Oxford University Press.
130.
Smith, G.1994. Towards an ethnography of idiosyncratic forms of livelihood. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research18 (1): 71-87.
131.
Spivak, G.1988. Can the subaltern speak? In Marxism and the interpretation of culture, edited by C. Nelsonand L. Grossberg. Urbana: University of Illinois Press.
132.
Taylor, C.1987. Interpretation and the sciences of man. In Interpretive social science: A second look, edited by P. Rabinow, P. andW. Sullivan. Berkeley: University of California Press.
133.
Tribe, L.1972. Policy science: Analysis or ideology?Philosophy and Public Affairs2:66-110.
134.
Walzer, M.1984. Welfare, membership, and need. In Liberalism and its critics, edited by M. Sandel. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.
135.
Webber, M.1978. A difference paradigm for planning. In Planning theory in the 1980’s, edited by R. Burchelland G. Sternlieb. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
136.
Williams, R.1973. The country and the city. New York: Oxford University Press.
137.
Williams, R.1983. Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society. 2d. ed.New York: Oxford University Press.
138.
Wilson, E.1991. The sphinx in the city: Urban life, the control of disorder, and women. Berkeley: University of California Press.
139.
Wilson, W. J.1987. The truly disadvantaged: The inner city, the underclass, and public policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
140.
Wirth, L.1938. Urbanism as a way of life. American Journal of Sociology.
141.
Wolf, D.1992. Factory daughters: Gender, household dynamics, and rural industrialization in Java. Berkeley: University of California Press.
142.
Woolf, V.1929. A Room of one’s own. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
143.
Young, I. M.1992. Concrete imagination and piecemeal transformation. Planning Theory7-8:59-62.
