In neoliberal democracies, regulatory planning systems are often characterized by tension between (1) efforts to treat developers as consumers and (2) the regulatory aspect of planning, frequently involving decisions that sacrifice individual interests in favor of a collective but ill-defined “public interest.” This unresolved tension creates a crisis of trust, as the underlying values of the planning system are rarely made explicit. Using an ethnographic methodology to investigate the embedded nature of trust relationships in one planning office, this article suggests that the prerequisite for invigorating trust in planning is a careful and coherent theorization of the relationship of individual to collective interests.
American Institute of Certified Planners.2005. Code of ethics and professional conduct. Washington, DC: AICP.
2.
Beetham, David.1993. In defence of legitimacy. Political Studies41: 488-91.
3.
Blackburn, Simon.1998. Trust, cooperation, and human psychology. In Trust and governance, ed. Valerie Braithwaite and Margaret Levi, 28-45. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
4.
Booth, Philip.2002. A desperately slow system? The origins and nature of the discourse on development control. Planning Perspectives17 (4): 309-23.
5.
Boyne, George, Julian Gould-Williams, Jennifer Law, and Richard Walker.2002. Plans, performance information and accountability: The case of Best Value. Public Administration80 (4): 691-710.
6.
Braithwaite, Valerie.1998. Communal and exchange trust norms: Their value base and relevance to institutional trust. In Trust and governance, ed. Valerie Braithwaite and Margaret Levi, 46-74. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.
7.
Campbell, Heather, and Robert Marshall .2000. Moral obligations, planning and the public interest: A commentary on currentBritish practice. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design27: 297-312.
8.
Campbell, Heather, and Robert Marshall .2002. Utilitarianism’s bad breath? A re-evaluation of the public interest justification for planning . Planning Theory1 (2): 163-88.
9.
Clarke, John, and Janet Newman.1997. The managerial state: Power, politics and ideology in the remaking of social welfare. London : Sage.
10.
Davis, Anna R.2001. Hidden or hiding? Public perceptions of participation in the planning system. Town Planning Review72 (2): 193-216.
11.
Department for the Environment, Transport and the Regions.2001. Local Strategic Partnerships: Government guidance. London: Department for Environment, Transport and the Regions.
12.
du Gay, Paul.2007. Organizing identity: Persons and organizations "after theory."London: Sage.
13.
Earle, Timothy C., George T. Cvetkovich.1995. Social trust: toward a cosmopolitan society. Westport: Praeger.
14.
Eiser, J. Richard, Tom Stafford, John Henneberry, and Philip Catney.2007. Risk perception and trust in the context of urban brown-fields. Environmental Hazards7: 150-56.
15.
Evans, Bob.1993. Why we no longer need a town planning profession. Planning Practice and Research8 (1): 9-15.
16.
Fainstein, Susan.2010. The just city. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
17.
Ferlie, Ewan, Lynn Ashburner, Louise Fitzgerald, and Andrew Pettigrew .1996. The new public management in action. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
18.
Fountain, Jane E.2001. Paradoxes of public sector customer service. Governance14 (1): 55-73.
19.
Friedson, Eliot.2001. Professionalism: the third logic. Cambridge: Polity.
20.
Giddens, Anthony.1990. The consequence of modernity. Oxford : Polity.
21.
Hardin, Russell.2001. Conceptions and explanations of trust. In Trust in society, ed. Karen S. Cook, 3-39. New York : Russell Sage Foundation.
22.
Hardin, Russell.2006. Trust. Cambridge: Polity.
23.
Healey, Patsy, and Jacky Underwood .1978. Professional ideals and planning practice: A report on research into planners’ ideas in practice in London Borough Planning Departments. Progress in Planning9: 73-127.
24.
HM Government.1998. Modern local government: in touch with the people. White Paper, Cmnd. 4014. London: HMSO.
25.
Hoggett, Paul.2005. A service to the public: The containment of ethical and moral conflicts by public bureaucracies. In The values of bureaucracy , ed. Paul du Gay, 167-90. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
26.
Howe, Elizabeth.1992. Professional roles and the public interest in planning . Journal of Planning Literature6 (3): 230-48.
27.
Höppner, Corina.2009. Trust-A monolithic panacea in land use planning?Land Use Policy26: 1046-54.
28.
Inglehart, Ronald.1999. Trust, well-being and democracy. In Democracy and trust, ed. Mark E. Warren, 88-120. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.
29.
Korczynski, Marek.2000. The political economy of trust. Journal of Management Studies37 (1): 1-21.
30.
Kumar, Ashok, and Ronan Paddison.2000. Trust and collaborative planning theory: The case of the Scottish Planning System. International Planning Studies5 (2): 205-23.
31.
Laurian, Lucie.2009. Trust in planning: Theoretical and practical considerations for participatory and deliberative planning. Planning Theory and Practice10 (3): 369-91.
32.
Luhmann, Niklas.1979. Trust and power. Chichester, UK: Wiley.
33.
Luhmann, Niklas.1988. Familiarity, confidence, trust: problems and alternatives . In Trust: Making and breaking cooperative relations, ed. Diego Gambetta, 94-107. Oxford: Basil Blackwell.
34.
Miller, Daniel.2003. The virtual moment. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (NS)9: 57-75.
35.
Mishra, Aneil K.1996. Organizational responses to crisis: The centrality of trust. In Trust in organizations: Frontiers of theory and research , ed. Roderick M. Kramer and Tom R. Tyler, 261-88. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36.
Misztal, Barbara.1996. Trust in modern societies. Cambridge : Polity.
37.
O’Neill, Onora.2002. A question of trust. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
38.
O’Riordan, Timothy, and Rosie Ward.1997. Building trust in shoreline management: creating participatory consultation on shoreline management plans. Land Use Policy14: 257-76.
39.
Osborne, David, and Ted Gaebler .1992. Reinventing government: How the entrepreneurial spirit is transforming the public sector. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
40.
Pellizzoni, Luigi.2005. Trust, responsibility and environmental policy. European Societies7 (4): 567-94.
41.
Pennington, Mark.2002. Liberating the land: The case for private land-use planning . London: Institute of Economic Affairs.
42.
Pratchett, Lawrence, and Melvin Wingfield .1999. Petty bureaucracy and woolly-minded liberalism? The changing ethos of local government officers. Public Administration74: 639-56.
43.
Putnam, Robert.2000. Bowling alone. New York: Simon & Schuster.
44.
Ransom, Stewart, and John Stewart.1998. Citizenship in the public domain for trust in a civil society. In Trust and contracts: Relationships in local government, health and public services, ed. Andrew Coulson, 243-65. Bristol, UK: Policy Press.
45.
Rawls, John.1999. A theory of justice. Rev. ed. Oxford : Oxford University Press.
46.
Rose, Nikolas.1999. Powers of freedom. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
47.
Schön, Donald.1982. Some of what a planner knows. Journal of the American Planning Association48 (3): 351-64.
48.
Stein, Stanley M., and Thomas L. Harper .2003. Power, trust and planning . Journal of Planning Education and Research23: 125-39.
49.
Storper, Michael.2001. The poverty of radical theory today: From the false promises of Marxism to the mirage of the cultural turn. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research25 (1): 155-79.
50.
Swain, Christopher, and Malcolm Tait.2007. The crisis of trust and planning. Planning Theory and Practice8 (2): 229-47.
51.
Sylvester, J.2002. A positive force for planning. Planning1476.
52.
Thompson, John.2000. Political scandal: Power and visibility in the media age . Cambridge: Polity.
53.
Wilson, David, and Chris Game.2006. Local government in the United Kingdom . 6th ed. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.
54.
Zucker, Lynn G.1986. Production of trust: institutional sources of economic structure, 1840-1920. Research in Organizational Behavior8: 53-111.
