Journal of Planning Literature

This article explores the possibilities for using administrative discretion to do planning that reflects urban and regional planners’ own deeply held values. The article first charts the broad character of administrative discretion and the limits of discretion. Potential problems include a lack of accountability, manipulation, unpredictability, intrusiveness, and poor decision making. The second section of the article examines one area of value-based planning—progressive planning. It concludes that administrative discretion may provide enough space for value-based planning, but using discretion for such actions often requires testing a set of ethical and political limits of working within governments.

In recent years, mortgage originators, government-sponsored enterprises, and others have changed underwriting guidelines to make borrowing more affordable to traditionally underserved populations such as low-income and minority households. Unfortunately, there is anxiety about the performance of these affordable loans. The key concern stems from the fear that affordable loans may be riskier than other loan products. This article reviews the research evidence and explores two types of reasons for the conflicting nature of that evidence. These reasons include the practices of the institutions involved in mortgage lending and methodological considerations. Implications for research and policy are derived from the review.