The purpose of this article is to explore the role of politics in planning and the highly political role of planners. The structure planning process for Flanders illustrates that planners are an active force in enabling change and that political decision-making is a process of its own with its own actors. Interviews with key political actors allow unravelling the planning process from the perspective of the political class. The case brings powerful informal arenas to the open and documents power plays involving planners and politicians. The case also illustrates that much of the actual planning discourse is at odds with the rationale of some politicians.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Albrechts, L. (1995) ‘B’tir le Visage d’une Region (Constructing the Image of a Region)’ , DISP122: 29–34 .
2.
Albrechts, L. (1999) ‘Planners as Catalysts and Initiators of Change: The New Structure Plan for Flanders’ , European Planning Studies7(5): 587–603 .
3.
Alexander, E. (2001) ‘The Planner–Prince Interdependence, Rationalities and Post-communicative Practice’ , Planning Theory and Practice2(3): 311–324 .
4.
Altshuler, A. (1965) The City Planning Process. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press .
5.
Beauregard, R.A. (1989) ‘Between Modernity and Postmodernity: The Ambiguous Position of US Planning’ , Environment and Planning: Society and Space7(4): 381–395 .
6.
Benveniste, G. (1989) Mastering the Politics of Planning. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass .
7.
Bryson, J. and Crosby, B. (1992) Leadership for the Common Good: Tackling Public Problems in a Shared-power World. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass .
8.
Castells, M. (1978) City, Class and Power. London: Macmillan .
9.
De Jouvenel, B. (1964) L’Art de la Conjecture(The Art of Conjecture). Monaco: Du Rocher .
10.
Elchardus, M., Hooghe, M. and Smits, W. (2000) ‘De Vormen van Middenveld Participatie (Participative Models in Civil Society)’, in M. Elchardus, L. Huyse and M. Hooghe (eds) Het Maatschappelijk Middenveld in Vlaanderen(Civil Society in Flanders), pp. 15–46. Brussels: VUB Press .
11.
Etzioni, A. (1967) ‘Mixed Scanning a Third Approach to Decision-making’ , Public Administration Review27: 385–392 .
12.
Flyvbjerg, B. (1998) Rationality and Power Democracy in Practice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press .
13.
Flyvbjerg, B. (2001) Making Social Science Matter. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
14.
Forester, J. (1989) Planning in the Face of Power. Berkeley: University of California Press .
15.
Forester, J. (1999) The Deliberative Practitioner. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press .
16.
Forester, J. and Stitzel, D. (1989) ‘Beyond Neutrality: The Possibilities of Activist Mediation in Public Sector Conflicts’ , Negotiation Journal(July): 251–264 .
17.
Foucault, M. (1980) The History of Sexuality. New York: Vintage .
18.
Foucault, M. (1984) ‘Space, Knowledge and Power’, in P. Rabinow (ed.) The Foucault Reader. New York: Pantheon .
19.
Friedmann, J. (1998) ‘Planning Theory Revisited’ , European Planning Studies6(3): 245–253 .
20.
Friedmann, J. and Douglas, M. (1998) ‘Editor’s Introduction’, in M. Douglas and J. Friedmann (eds) Cities for Citizen. Chichester: Wiley .
21.
Friend, J. and Jessop, W. (1969) Local Government & Strategic Choice. Oxford: Pergamon Press .
22.
Gualini, E. (2001) Planning and the Intelligence of Institutions. Aldershot: Ashgate .
23.
Habermas, J. (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action, Vol. 1. London: Heinemann .
24.
Healey, P. (1997a) Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmented Societies. London: Macmillan .
25.
Healey, P. (1997b) ‘An Institutionalist Approach to Spatial Planning’, in P. Healey, A. Khakee, A. Motte and B. Needham (eds) Making Strategic Spatial Plans: Innovation in Europe, pp. 21–36. London: UCL Press .
26.
Healey, P. (2001) ‘Editorial’ , Planning Theory and Practice2(3): 255–258 .
27.
Hillier, J. (2002) Shadows of Power: An Allegory of Prudence in Land-use Planning. London: Routledge .
28.
Hoch, Ch. (1994) What Planners Do: Power, Politics and Persuasion. Chicago, IL: Planners Press .
29.
Huxley, M. (2000) ‘The Limits of Communicative Planning’ , Journal of Planning Education and Research19(4): 369–342 .
30.
Huyse, L. (1994) De Politiek Voorbij(After Politics). Leuven: Kritak .
31.
Innes, J. (1996) ‘Planning through Consensus-building: A New View of the Comprehensive Planning Ideal’ , Journal of the American Institutes of Planners62(4): 460–472 .
32.
Innes, J. and Booher, P. (1998) ‘Network Power and Collaborative Planning: Strategy for the Informational Age’ , paper presented at the ACSP Congress, Pasadena, 5–8 November.
33.
Innes, J., Grüber, J., Thompson, R. and Neuman, M. (1994) Coordinating Growth Management through Consensus Building: Incentives and the Generation of Social, Intellectual and Political Capital. Berkeley: Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California .
34.
Kitchen, T. (1997) People, Politics, Policies and Plans. London: Paul Chapman .
35.
Krumholz, N. (1982) ‘A Retrospective View of Equity Planning, Cleveland, 1969–1979’ , Journal of American Planners Association48(4): 163–174 .
36.
Krumholz, N. and Forester, J. (1990) Making Equity Planning Work. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press .
37.
Loeckx, A. (1995) ‘The Difficult Art of Duality: The Structure Plan for Flanders’ , Archis10: 48–53 .
38.
Majone, G. and Wildavsky, A. (1979) ‘Implementation in Evolution’, in J. Pressman and A. Wildavsky (eds) Implementation, pp. 177–194. Berkeley: University of California Press .
39.
Mastop, H. and Faludi, A. (1997) ‘Evaluation of Strategic Plans: The Performance Principle’ , Environment and Planning B24(6): 815–822 .
40.
Meyerson, N. M. and Banfield, E.C. (1955) Politics, Planning and the Public Interest: The Case of Public Housing at Chicago. New York: Free Press .
41.
Ozbekhan, H. (1969) ‘Towards a General Theory of Planning’, in E. Jantsch (ed.) Perspectives of Planning, pp. 45–155. Paris: OECD .
42.
Pressman, J. and Wildavsky, A. (eds) (1974) Implementation. Berkeley: University of California Press .
43.
Reuter, W. (2000) ‘Komplementarit‰t von Diskurs und Macht in der Planung (Complementarity of Discourse and Power in Planning)’ , DISP141: 34–65 .
44.
Sager, T. (1994) Communicative Planning Theory. Avebury: Aldershot .
45.
Salet, W. and Faludi, A. (2000) ‘Three Approaches to Strategic Planning’, in W. Salet and A. Faludi (eds) The Revival of Strategic Spatial Planning, pp. 1–10. Amsterdam: Koninklijke Nederlandse Akademie van Wetenschappen .
46.
Scharpf, F.W. (1989) ‘Decision Rules, Decision Styles and Policy Choices’ , Journal of Theoretical Politics1(2): 151–178 .
47.
Schn, D. (1984) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. Aldershot: Avebury .
48.
Tewdwr-Jones, M. (2002) The Planning Polity. London: Routledge .
49.
Tewdwr-Jones, M. and Allmendinger, P. (1998) ‘Deconstructing Communicative Rationality: A Critique of Habermassian Collaborative Planning’ , Environment and Planning A30(n): 1175–1189 .
50.
Webber, M. (1978) ‘A Difference Paradigm for Planning’, in R.W. Burchell and G. Sternlieb (eds) Planning Theory in the 1980s, pp. 151–162. New York: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers University .
51.
Weeks, J. (1993) ‘Rediscovering Values’, in J. Squires (ed.) Principled Positions: Postmodernism and the Rediscovery of Value, pp. 189–211. London: Lawrence & Wishart .
52.
Wildavsky, A. (1979) ‘Implementation in Context’, in J. Pressman and A. Wildavsky (eds) Implementation, pp. 163–176. Berkeley: University of California Press .
53.
Yiftachel, O. (1998) ‘Planning and Social Control: Exploring the Dark Side’ , Journal of Planning Literature12(4): 395–406 .
