This article examines a central assumption that underlies what has been termed the practice movement in planning theory. The term refers to the great diversity of recent writings that focus on the activity of planning and the practices of planners. It is assumed that empirical accounts of planning practice can help to build a more useful and pragmatic kind of planning theory than can the generalized procedural or normative models that previously constituted planning theory and that they have a pedagogical role to play in relation to practicing planners and planners in training. This article asks questions about how we learn from practice, how we learn from other people writing about practice, and therefore what kind of writing about practice will be most conducive to a learning experience.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Alexander, Ernest . 1996. After rationality: Towards a contingency theory for planning. In Explorations in planning theory, edited by Seymour Mandelbaum, Luigi Mazza, and Robert Burchell, 45-64. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
2.
---. 1998. Rationality revisited: Planning paradigms in a postmodern perspective. Paper presented at the Planning Theory Conference, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK.
3.
Baum, Howell . 1983. Planners and public expectations. Cambridge, MA: Schenkman.
4.
---. 1986. Politics and ambivalence in planners' practice. In Strategic perspectives on planning practice, edited by Barry Checkoway. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath.
5.
---. 1996. Practicing planning theory in a political world. In Explorations in planning theory, edited by Seymour Mandelbaum, Luigi Mazza, and Robert Burchell, 365-82. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
6.
Beauregard, Robert . 1996. Advocating pre-eminence: Anthologies as politics. In Explorations in planning theory, edited by Seymour Mandelbaum, Luigi Mazza, and Robert Burchell, 105-10. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
7.
---. 1999. Writing the planner. Journal of Planning Education and Research18 (2): 93-101.
8.
Boud, David , Ruth Cohen, and David Walker, eds. 1993. Using experience for learning. Bristol, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
9.
Bruner, Jerome . 1986. Actual minds, possible worlds. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
10.
---. 1996. The culture of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
11.
Christensen, C. Roland , David Garvin, and Ann Sweet, eds. 1991. Education for judgement. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
12.
Dreyfus, Hubert , and Stuart Dreyfus. 1986. Mind over machine: The power of human intuition and expertise in the era of the computer. New York: Free Press.
13.
Fainstein, Susan . 1995. Politics, economics, and planning: Why urban regimes matter. Planning Theory14:34-41.
14.
Faludi, Andreas . 1996. Rationality, critical rationalism, and planning doctrine. In Explorations in planning theory, edited by Seymour Mandelbaum, Luigi Mazza, and Robert Burchell, 65-82. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
15.
Feldmann, Marsh . 1997. Can we talk? Interpretive planning theory as comedy. Planning Theory17:43-64.
16.
Feuerstein, Reuven , Pnina Klein, and Abraham Tannenbaum. 1991. Mediated learning experience: Theoretical, psychological and learning implications. London: Freund.
17.
Finnegan, Ruth . 1998. Tales of the city: A study of narrative and urban life. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18.
Fischler, Ralph . 1998. Communicative planning theory and genealogical inquiry. Paper presented at the Planning Theory Conference, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK.
19.
---. 2000. Linking planning theory and history: The case of development control. Journal of Planning Education and Research19 (2): 233-41.
20.
Flyvbjerg, Bent . 1989. Socrates didn't like the case method: Why should you? In Case method research and application: New vistas, edited by Hans E. Klein, 33-42. Needham, MA: World Association for Case Method Research and Application.
21.
---. 1998a. Empowering civil society: Habermas, Foucault and the question of conflict. In Cities for citizens: Planning and the rise of civil society in a global age, edited by Mike Douglass and John Friedmann, 185-211. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
22.
---. 1998b. Rationality and power: Democracy in practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
23.
---. 2001. Making social science matter: Why social inquiry fails and how it can succeed again. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press..
24.
Forester, John . 1989. Planning in the face of power. Berkeley: University of California Press.
25.
---. 1997. Learning from practice: Democratic deliberations and the promise of planning practice. College Park: University of Maryland Press.
26.
Forsyth, Ann . 1999. Constructing suburbs: Competing voices in a debate over urban growth. Reading, MA: Gordon and Breach.
27.
Harris, Neil . 2000. Practice through a lens: A metaphor for planning theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research19 (2): 309-15.
28.
Healey, Patsy . 1992a. A planner's day: Knowledge and action in communicative practice. Journal of the American Planning Association58 (1): 9-20.
29.
---. 1992b. Planning through debate: The communicative turn in planning theory. Town Planning Review63 (2): 143-62.
---. 1998. Institutional analysis, communicative planning and shaping places. Paper presented at the Planning Theory Conference, Oxford Brookes University, Oxford, UK.
32.
---. 1999. Institutional analysis, communicative planning and shaping places. Journal of Planning Education and Research19 (2): 111-21.
33.
Hoch, Charles . 1994. What planners do: Power, politics and persuasion. Chicago: Planners Press, American Planning Association.
34.
---. 1996. A pragmatic inquiry about planning and power. In Explorations in planning theory, edited by Seymour Mandelbaum, Luigi Mazza, and Robert Burchell, 30-44. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
35.
Innes, Judith . 1995. Planning theory's emerging paradigm: Communicative action and interactive practice. Journal of Planning Education and Research14 (3): 183-89.
36.
Krieger, Martin . 1974. Some new directions for planning theories. Journal of the American Planning Association40:156-63.
37.
Lauria, Micky , and Robert Whelan. 1995. Planning theory and political economy: The need for reintegration. Planning Theory14:8-33.
38.
---. 1997. Communicating in a vacuum: Will anyone hear? Planning Theory17:40-64.
39.
Liggett, Helen . 1996. Examining the planning practice conscious (ness). In Explorations in planning theory, edited by Seymour Mandelbaum, Luigi Mazza, and Robert Burchell, 299-306. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
40.
Mandelbaum, Seymour . 1996. Introduction: The talk of the community. In Explorations in planning theory, edited by Seymour Mandelbaum, Luigi Mazza, and Robert Burchell, xi-xix. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University.
41.
Meyerson, Martin , and Edward C. Banfield. 1955. Politics, planning and the public interest: The case of public housing in Chicago. New York: Free Press.
42.
Sandercock, Leonie . 1995. Voices from the borderlands: A mediation on a metaphor. Journal of Planning Education and Research14 (2): 77-88.
43.
---. 1998. Towards cosmopolis: Planning for multicultural cities. Chichester, UK: John Wiley.
44.
Schon, Donald . 1983. The reflective practitioner. New York: Basic Books.
45.
---. 1987. Educating the reflective practitioner. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
46.
Schon, Donald , and Martin Rein. 1994. Frame reflection. New York: Basic Books.
47.
Schutte, Lauren . 1997. New training approaches: Exploring the paradigm shift. In Managing sustainable development in South Africa, edited by Patrick Fitzgerald, Anne McLennan, and Barry Munslow, 292-308. Cape Town, South Africa: Oxford University Press.
48.
Throgmorton, James . 1996. Planning as persuasive storytelling: The rhetorical construction of Chicago's electric future. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
49.
Usher, Robin . 1993. Experiential learning or learning from experience: Does it make a difference? In Using experience for learning, edited by David Boud, Ruth Cohen, and David Walker, 169-80. Bristol, UK: Society for Research into Higher Education and Open University Press.
50.
Verma, Niraj . 1993. Metaphor and analogy as elements of a theory of similarity for planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research13:13-25.
51.
---. 1995. What is planning practice? The search for suitable categories. Journal of Planning Education and Research14:178-82.
52.
Watson, Vanessa . 2002. Change and continuity in spatial planning: Metropolitan planning in Cape Town under political transition. London: Routledge.
53.
Yiftachel, Oren . 1999. Planning theory at the crossroad: The Third Oxford Conference. Journal of Planning Education and Research18 (3): 267-70.
54.
Yin, Robert . 1994. Case study research: Design and methods. Vol. 5, Applied Social Research Methods Series. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
