This article reviews the influence of U.S. pragmatist philosophy on the development of theories about the nature, purpose, and method of planning. It outlines the key contributions of the pragmatist and “neo-pragmatist” philosophers and identifies the influence of pragmatism on early concepts of planning as a rational process; on the perspectives of Friedmann, Lindblom, and Schon; on the development of Forester's “critical pragmatism”; and on other planning theory contributions in the 1980s and 1990s. The article concludes by identifying the importance of pragmatist ideas in emphasizing the dimensions of planning as a practically situated, social learning activity, which should draw on the full range of human capacities and promote the ability for critical, transformative systemic framing work in the public sphere.
Arendt, H.1958. The human condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
3.
Argyris, C., and D. Schon.1974. Theory in practice. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
4.
Ayer, A.J.1982. Philosophy in the twentieth century. London: George Wiedenfeld and Nicholson.
5.
Barrett, S., and C. Fudge.1981. Policy and action. London: Methuen.
6.
Beauregard, R.A.1998. Writing the planner. Journal of Planning Education and Research18:93-102.
7.
Berger, T., and P. Luckman.1967. The social construction of reality. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin.
8.
Bernstein, R.1983. Beyond objectivism and relativism: Science, hermeneutics and praxis. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.
9.
Blanco, H.1994. How to think about social problems: American pragmatism and the idea of planning, Westport, CT: Greenwood.
10.
Cars, G., P. Healey, A. Madanipour, and C. de Magalhaes, eds. 2002. Urban governance, institutional capacity and social milieux. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
11.
Churchman, C.W.1979. The systems approach. 2nd ed. New York: Dell.
12.
Coaffee, J., and N. Headlam.2007. Pragmatic localism uncovered: The search for locally contingent solutions to national reform agendas. Geoforum38 (4): 1585-99.
13.
Dewey, J.1910/1997. How we think. New York: Dover.
14.
Dewey, J.1927/1991. The public and its problems. Athens, OH: Swallow Press/Ohio University Press.
15.
Dewey, J.1982. The pattern of inquiry. In Pragmatism: The classic writings, edited by H. S. Thayer, 316-34. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett. (This can also be found in Jo Ann Boydston, ed. 1986. The later works. Vol. 12:15. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press.)
16.
Dewey, J.1993. The political writings, edited by Debra Morris and Ian Shapiro.Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
17.
Dickstein, M., ed. 1998. Revival of pragmatism: New essays on social thought, law and culture. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
18.
Dryzek, J.1990. Discursive democracy: Politics, policy and political science . Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
19.
Dryzek, J.1997. The politics of the earth: Environmental discourses. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
20.
Dyckman, J.W.1961. Planning and decision theory. Journal of the American Institute of PlannersXXVII:335-45.
21.
Eckstein, B., and J. Throgmorton.2003. Stories and sustainability: Planning, practice and possibility for American cities. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
22.
Fainstein, S.2000. New directions in planning theory. Urban Affairs Review34:451-76.
23.
Faludi, A.1986. Critical rationalism and planning methodology. London: Pion.
24.
Faludi, A.1987. A decision-centred view of environmental planning. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
25.
Fischer, F.1980. Politics, values and public policy: The problem of methodology . Boulder, CO: Westview.
26.
Fischer, F.1989. Technocracy and the politics of expertise. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
27.
Fischer, F.2000. Citizens, experts and the environment: The politics of local knowledge. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
28.
Fischer, F.2003. Reframing public policy: Discursive politics and deliberative practices. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
29.
Fischer, F., and J. Forester , eds. 1987. Confronting values in policy analysis and planning. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
30.
Fischer, F., and J. Forester , eds. 1993. The argumentative turn in policy analysis and planning. London: UCL Press.
31.
Flyvbjerg, B.1992. Aristotle, Foucault and progressive phronesis. Planning Theory7/8:65-83.
32.
Flyvbjerg, B.1998. Empowering civil society: Habermas, Foucault and the question of conflict, In Cities for citizens, edited by M. Douglass and J. Friedmann , 185-212. London: Wiley.
33.
Forester, J.1989. Planning in the face of power. Berkeley : University of California Press.
34.
Forester, J.1993. Critical theory, public policy and planning practice: Toward a critical pragmatism. Albany: State University of New York Press.
35.
Forester, J.1999. The deliberative practitioner: Encouraging participatory planning processes. London: MIT Press.
36.
Friedmann, J.1973. Re-tracking America: A theory of transactive planning . New York: Anchor.
37.
Friedmann, J.1987. Planning in the public domain. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
38.
Friedmann, J., and C. Weaver.1979. Territory and function. London: Edward Arnold.
39.
Gottleib, A.2000. The dream of reason: A history of philosophy from the Greeks to the Renaissance. London: Penguin.
40.
Habermas, J.1984. The theory of communicative action. Vol. 1 of Reason and the rationalisation of society. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
41.
Habermas, J.1987. The philosophical discourse of modernity. Cambridge, UK: Polity.
42.
Habermas, J.1996. Between facts and norms. Oxford, UK: Polity.
43.
Hajer, M.1995. The politics of environmental discourse. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
44.
Harper, T.L., and S.M. Stein.2006. Dialogical planning in a fragmented society. New Brunswick, NJ: CUPR Press.
45.
Harrison, P.2002. A pragmatic attitude to planning. In Planning futures: New directions for planning theory, edited by P. Allmendinger and M. Tewdwr-Jones, 157-71. London : Routledge.
Healey, P.2007. Urban complexity and spatial strategies: Towards a relational planning for our times. London: Routledge.
48.
Healey, P. Forthcoming. The idea of "communicative" planning: Practices, concepts and rhetorics. In The history of planning ideas, edited by L. Vale and B. Sanyal (available from the author).
49.
Healey, P., G. McDougall , and M. Thomas, eds. 1982. Planning theory: Prospects for the 1980s. Oxford, UK: Pergamon.
50.
Hillier, J.2007. Stretching beyond the horizon: A multiplanar theory of spatial planning and governance. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
51.
Hillier, J., and P. Healey , eds. 2008. Critical readings in planning theory. 3 vols. Aldershot, UK: Ashgate.
52.
Hoch, C.1984a. Doing good and being right: The pragmatic connection in planning theory. Journal of the American Planning Association50:335-45.
53.
Hoch, C.1984b. Pragmatism, power and planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research4:86-95.
54.
Hoch, C.1993. Commentary. Journal of Planning Education and Research12:93-95.
55.
Hoch, C.1994. What planners do. Chicago: Planners Press.
56.
Hoch, C.1996. A pragmatic inquiry about planning and power. In Explorations in planning theory, edited by S. Mandelbaum and L. Mazza, 30-44. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Center for Urban Policy Research.
Hoch, C.2007a. Pragmatic communicative action theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research26:272-83.
59.
Hoch, C.2007b. Making plans: Representation and intention. Planning Theory6:16-35.
60.
Hodgson, G.M.2004. The evolution of institutional economics: Agency, structure and Darwinianism in American institutionalism. New York : Routledge.
61.
Hoyer, K.G., and P. Naess.2008. Interdisciplinarity, ecology and theory of science: The case of sustainable urban development. Journal of Critical Realism7 (2): 1-21.
62.
Huxley, M., and O. Yiftachel.2000. New paradigm or old myopia? Unsettling the communicative turn in planning theory. Journal of Planning Education and Practice19:333-42.
63.
Innes, J.1995. Planning theory's emerging paradigm: Communicative action and interactive practice. Journal of Planning Education and Research14:183-9.
James, W.1912/2003. Essays in radical empiricism. New York: Dover.
66.
James, W.1920. Collected essays and reviews. London : Longmans, Green and Co.
67.
Latour, B.1987. Science in action. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
68.
Light, A., and E. Katz, eds. 1996. Environmental pragmatism. London: Routledge.
69.
Lindblom, C.1965. The intelligence of democracy. New York: Free Press.
70.
Lindblom, C.E.1990. Inquiry and change: The troubled attempt to understand and shape society. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
71.
Mäntysalo, R.2000. Land-use planning as inter-organizational learning. PhD diss. Department of Architecture, University of Oulu, Finland.
72.
Mäntysalo, R.2002. Dilemmas in critical planning theory. Town Planning Review73 (4): 417-36.
73.
Menand, L.2002. The metaphysical club. London: Flamingo (HarperCollins).
74.
Murdoch, J.2006. Post-structuralist geography. London : Sage.
75.
Peck, J., and A. Tickell.2007. Conceptualising neoliberalism: Thinking Thatcherism. In Contesting neo-liberalism: Urban frontiers , edited by H. Leitner, J. Peck, and E. S. Sheppard , 26-50. New York: Guilford.
76.
Porter, R.2000. Enlightenment: Britain and the creation of the modern world. London: Penguin.
77.
Rittel, H., and M.M. Webber.1973. Dilemmas in a general theory of planning . Policy Sciences4:155-69.
78.
Rorty, R.1980. Philosophy and the mirror of nature. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
79.
Rorty, R.1982. Consequences of pragmatism. Minneapolis : University of Minnesota Press.
80.
Rorty, R.1998. Achieving our country. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.
Sandercock, L.2004. Towards a planning imagination for the 21st Century. Journal of the American Planning Association70:133-41.
83.
Schon, D.1971. Beyond the stable state. London: Temple Smith.
84.
Schon, D.1983. The reflective practitioner. New York : Basic Books.
85.
Schon, D., and M. Rein.1994. Frame reflection: Towards the resolution of intractable policy controversies. New York: Basic Books.
86.
Shields, P.M.2005. Classical pragmatism does not need an upgrade: Lessons for public administration. Administration and Society37:514-8.
87.
Taylor, N.1984. A critique of materialist critiques of procedural planning theory. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design11:103-206.
88.
Tewdwr-Jones, M., and P. Allmendinger .1998. Deconstructing communicative rationality: A critique of Habermasian collaborative planning. Environment and Planning A30:1979-89.
89.
Thayer, H. S., ed. 1982. Pragmatism: The classic writings. Indianapolis, IN: Hackett.
90.
Throgmorton, J.1996Planning as persuasive story-telling. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
91.
Veblen, T.1919/1990. The place of science in modern civilization . New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Books.
92.
Verma, N.1993. Metaphor and analogy as elements of a theory of similarity for planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research13:13-25.
93.
Verma, N.1996. Pragmatic rationality and planning theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research16:5-14.
94.
Verma, N.1998. Similarities, connections, systems: The search for a new rationality for planning and management. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
95.
Vickers, G.1965. The art of judgement: A study of policy-making. London: Chapman Hall.
96.
Westbrook, R.B.1991John Dewey and American democracy. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
97.
Westbrook, R.B.2005. Democratic hope: Pragmatism and the politics of truth . Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
98.
White, M.1999. A philosopher's story. Philadelphia : Pennsylvania State University Press.
99.
Yiftachel, O.1998. Planning and social control: Exploring the dark side. Journal of Planning Literature12:396-406.
100.
Yiftachel, O., and M. Huxley.2000. Debating dominance and relevance: Notes on the "communicative turn" in planning theory. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research24:907-13.
101.
Young, K., and L. Mills.1983. Managing the post-industrial city. London: Heinemann Educational Books.
