How Planners Might Improvise in the Face of Power: Waking Up Theory for Practice

John Forester
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/14649357.2023.2210474
2023-05-17
Abstract:How we understand the kinds of challenges that planners face on the job remains a central problem for planning 'theory.' Writing in a style that non-academics can read remains another problem. Easy labels get in the way: 'communicative' or 'post-colonial' or 'insurgent' (planning) often signal aspirations or righteous intentions, but they tell us precious little about what such planners do in the complex and messy circumstances of their practices. Telling us what planners 'should do,' however righteously, should not displace careful analysis of how planners might actually do what they can. For years it seems, discussions of communicative planning led to broader problems of democratic participation; discussions of post-colonial planning led to analyses of trajectories of colonialism; discussions of insurgent planning ushered in further examinations of neo-liberalism or capitalism. Surely, the logic seems to go, to understand any kind of planning, we need to understand its context, the system in which it exists. Yes, but rarely then do we return to what such planners might do and how they might do that in their grounded practices – even as those practices might also teach us about the weaknesses of those encompassing structures.
urban studies,regional & urban planning
What problem does this paper attempt to address?