Week 1 article 1: Summary of the article "On planning, planning theories, and
practices: A critical reflection" by Ernest R. Alexander (2022)
Introduction: There is no planning, only planning practices
The author highlights the futility of defining planning due to the abstract nature of most
definitions. This perspective leads to the central conclusion that planning is not one
practice, but a multiscalar set of diverse practices.
Practice, practices, and planning practices
Drawing on definitions from the sociology of knowledge, the article identifies three kinds of
planning practices:
1. Generic "planning": This refers to what people do when they are planning, a
fundamental characteristic of intelligent behavior such as forethought. It is abstract and
general.
2. (Something) planning: These are knowledge-centered planning practices, identifiable
by their specific epistemic objects. Examples include spatial planning, environmental
planning, transportation planning, or community planning.
3. Real planning: These are specific planning practices in particular contexts, such as
community development planning for a specific neighborhood/
Planning theory and practice
The article posits that planning theories are linked to these different planning practices.
At the most abstract and general level, "planning" theories are for and about generic
"planning" practice. These theories are abstract, general, and contextless, akin to Faludi's
"Theory of planning". Their normative value for specific practices is limited because they lack
specific epistemic objects. However, they make important contributions by helping planners
understand their actions and by translating planning paradigms and ideal models into
more concrete methods and norms for knowledge-centered practices. Key themes in
"planning" theory include planning paradigms and the concept of the Public Interest.
Knowledge-centered planning practices and theories
These theories, aligned with Faludi's "Theory in planning," are concerned with specific
knowledge-centered planning practices and their epistemic objects. Spatial planning
theories address four main aspects:
1. (What?) The object of spatial planning: Human activities in space and their
environment, with the land-property market serving as a practical surrogate.
2. (Where?) The context for spatial planning: The social-institutional environment in which
spatial planners operate, including their workplaces and institutional design.
3. (How?) Spatial planning tools: The concepts, methods, and skills that expert spatial
planners contribute to the co-construction of knowledge. Models, such as comprehensive
planning, and collaborative planning.
4. (Why?) The purpose of spatial planning: This involves questions about the goals of
spatial planning and project evaluation, often including normative aspects such as planning
ethics.
,Real planning practices—research and theory
The article reviews three generations of planning practice studies:
1. The first generation consisted of a-theoretical systematic studies and case studies of
exemplary planners.
2. The second generation, known as the "practice movement" (1980s–2000s), viewed
planning as fundamentally political and used empirical observation for their own theoretical
reflections.
3. The third generation is emerging, informed by practice theories (like STS) and utilizing
advanced qualitative and quantitative methods to understand the "epistemic cultures" and
practices of planners.
"Planning" theory and planning practices
An analysis of books reveals that they rarely apply generic "planning" theory to specific
planning practices. Instead, when explaining or teaching planning, these authors often
describe, explain, or teach knowledge-centered planning practices, typically spatial
planning.
Discussion
The core findings emphasize that there is no planning as a single practice; instead, it is
a diverse set of practices categorized into generic "planning,". The "planning
theory-practice gap" is attributed to the divorce between abstract "planning" theories and
the enacted planning practices. The article also introduces the concept of "co-production of
knowledge," describes the integration of expert and non-expert knowledge to produce
socially valid knowledge for action.
The article outlines several implications of this understanding:
• For planning theory: It suggests a "fractal" model of planning. This model helps to
explain the "planning theory-practice gap" and encourages the development of better
planning theories by distinguishing between abstract "planning" theories and context-specific
"(something) planning theories".
• For planning education: This model should prepare students for specialized
knowledge-centered practices while ensuring they possess essential competencies for
generic "planning" practice.
• For planning practice: It implies that planners are professionals and experts in their
specific practices, contributing their knowledge and experience to the collective
co-production of knowledge for action..
Conclusions
The article concludes that planning is a set of diverse practices rather than a single
recognizable one. The "fractal" model helps to clarify the relationship between planning
theory and practice by establishing a multiscalar hierarchy of practices and
corresponding theories. This distinction resolves dilemmas in planning theory and
practice, explaining the "planning theory-practice gap" by showing that generic "planning"
theory is not designed for the specific, knowledge-centered practices that planners actually
engage in.
,Week 1 article 2: Introduction: Theory and Planning Research - Rydin
This book focuses on how theories and theorizing are central to planning research. The
book adopts an analytical approach, seeking to understand how planning processes work,
rather than a normative approach that prescribes how planning should be done, although it
acknowledges that all research is value-laden. The emphasis is on "theory of planning"
(understanding how planning works) rather than "theory for planning" (producing knowledge
for planning practice).
Researching Planning
Planning as a Focus for Research
Defining planning results in different framings. Those frames can carry value judgments
about what is important and what planning should achieve, meaning analytical research can
align with or against professional and political ideologies. Planning research contributes to
ongoing professional debates about procedures, tasks, values, and social objectives like
democracy and sustainability.
Why Do Planning Research?
Research goes beyond mere information gathering to generate knowledge by focusing on
the dynamics that produce a situation. It involves developing a generalized understanding of
how planning works and applying that to specific cases, fostering an interplay between
specific and general understanding. Theory-informed research also supports practitioners by
enabling reflection on planning processes.
The Challenges of Planning Research
Planning research is complex, involving challenges in focusing research questions,
methodological concerns, and generating generalizable conclusions from data. Data
interpretation is not straightforward and involves making choices and building persuasive
narratives, which inherently include value judgments. Explicitly incorporating a theoretical
perspective helps in negotiating these challenges.
The Role of Theory
What Is Theory? Theory is defined as a heuristic aid for understanding complex situations,
providing general patterns and coherent narrative accounts of processes at work. Theories
involve fundamental ontological assumptions (how the world is), normative positions
(how it should be), and epistemological positions (how knowledge is generated).
Is Theory Necessary?
The empiricist view, which argues that "facts speak for themselves," because data collection
and analysis is never neutral. A theoretical framing is essential for planning researchers to
focus attention, analyze findings better, and build a broader picture of planning.
The Advantages of Using Theory
Incorporating theory offers several advantages:
- It helps researchers make early decisions about what to focus on and what to
emphasize, making judgments explicit and operating within practical constraints.
- It links empirical research to a broader, pre-existing narrative about planning, aiding
in analysis, generalization of findings, and creating persuasive narratives.
, - It allows empirical research to build, revise, and amplify theoretical frameworks,
contributing to a deeper understanding of society through planning investigation.
- Theory offers the intellectual attraction of engaging with "big ideas" and
developing a more fundamental understanding of the world.
- While primarily analytical, some theoretical frameworks overlap with normative
planning theory (e.g., governance theory and collaborative planning).
- Theory-led approaches, combined with clear communication, can support
self-reflection and change in practice among practitioners and policymakers.
Link to Course Goals
1) Explain the main concepts of different planning theories. This chapter introduces the
fundamental idea that planning theories offer distinct "lenses" for interpreting planning
processes and issues, and that each theory involves specific concepts, ontological, and
epistemological assumptions. It sets the groundwork for understanding that different theories
will present different core concepts for explaining how planning works.
2) Apply planning theories to interpret planning issues and demonstrate how
theoretical frameworks guide research design and analysis. The chapter explicitly states
that theoretical frameworks guide and frame research, influencing the research questions
addressed, the methodology used, and the kind of findings that result. It highlights how
theory helps researchers interpret planning situations, understand underlying dynamics, and
operationalize empirical research.
3) Compare and contrast the political-philosophical and epistemological assumptions
that underpin planning theories. The chapter emphasizes that theories are not neutral but
are built upon fundamental political-philosophical (normative) and epistemological
assumptions. Choosing a theory means engaging with alternative conceptualizations of how
the world works, what counts as valid knowledge, and inherent value judgments.
practices: A critical reflection" by Ernest R. Alexander (2022)
Introduction: There is no planning, only planning practices
The author highlights the futility of defining planning due to the abstract nature of most
definitions. This perspective leads to the central conclusion that planning is not one
practice, but a multiscalar set of diverse practices.
Practice, practices, and planning practices
Drawing on definitions from the sociology of knowledge, the article identifies three kinds of
planning practices:
1. Generic "planning": This refers to what people do when they are planning, a
fundamental characteristic of intelligent behavior such as forethought. It is abstract and
general.
2. (Something) planning: These are knowledge-centered planning practices, identifiable
by their specific epistemic objects. Examples include spatial planning, environmental
planning, transportation planning, or community planning.
3. Real planning: These are specific planning practices in particular contexts, such as
community development planning for a specific neighborhood/
Planning theory and practice
The article posits that planning theories are linked to these different planning practices.
At the most abstract and general level, "planning" theories are for and about generic
"planning" practice. These theories are abstract, general, and contextless, akin to Faludi's
"Theory of planning". Their normative value for specific practices is limited because they lack
specific epistemic objects. However, they make important contributions by helping planners
understand their actions and by translating planning paradigms and ideal models into
more concrete methods and norms for knowledge-centered practices. Key themes in
"planning" theory include planning paradigms and the concept of the Public Interest.
Knowledge-centered planning practices and theories
These theories, aligned with Faludi's "Theory in planning," are concerned with specific
knowledge-centered planning practices and their epistemic objects. Spatial planning
theories address four main aspects:
1. (What?) The object of spatial planning: Human activities in space and their
environment, with the land-property market serving as a practical surrogate.
2. (Where?) The context for spatial planning: The social-institutional environment in which
spatial planners operate, including their workplaces and institutional design.
3. (How?) Spatial planning tools: The concepts, methods, and skills that expert spatial
planners contribute to the co-construction of knowledge. Models, such as comprehensive
planning, and collaborative planning.
4. (Why?) The purpose of spatial planning: This involves questions about the goals of
spatial planning and project evaluation, often including normative aspects such as planning
ethics.
,Real planning practices—research and theory
The article reviews three generations of planning practice studies:
1. The first generation consisted of a-theoretical systematic studies and case studies of
exemplary planners.
2. The second generation, known as the "practice movement" (1980s–2000s), viewed
planning as fundamentally political and used empirical observation for their own theoretical
reflections.
3. The third generation is emerging, informed by practice theories (like STS) and utilizing
advanced qualitative and quantitative methods to understand the "epistemic cultures" and
practices of planners.
"Planning" theory and planning practices
An analysis of books reveals that they rarely apply generic "planning" theory to specific
planning practices. Instead, when explaining or teaching planning, these authors often
describe, explain, or teach knowledge-centered planning practices, typically spatial
planning.
Discussion
The core findings emphasize that there is no planning as a single practice; instead, it is
a diverse set of practices categorized into generic "planning,". The "planning
theory-practice gap" is attributed to the divorce between abstract "planning" theories and
the enacted planning practices. The article also introduces the concept of "co-production of
knowledge," describes the integration of expert and non-expert knowledge to produce
socially valid knowledge for action.
The article outlines several implications of this understanding:
• For planning theory: It suggests a "fractal" model of planning. This model helps to
explain the "planning theory-practice gap" and encourages the development of better
planning theories by distinguishing between abstract "planning" theories and context-specific
"(something) planning theories".
• For planning education: This model should prepare students for specialized
knowledge-centered practices while ensuring they possess essential competencies for
generic "planning" practice.
• For planning practice: It implies that planners are professionals and experts in their
specific practices, contributing their knowledge and experience to the collective
co-production of knowledge for action..
Conclusions
The article concludes that planning is a set of diverse practices rather than a single
recognizable one. The "fractal" model helps to clarify the relationship between planning
theory and practice by establishing a multiscalar hierarchy of practices and
corresponding theories. This distinction resolves dilemmas in planning theory and
practice, explaining the "planning theory-practice gap" by showing that generic "planning"
theory is not designed for the specific, knowledge-centered practices that planners actually
engage in.
,Week 1 article 2: Introduction: Theory and Planning Research - Rydin
This book focuses on how theories and theorizing are central to planning research. The
book adopts an analytical approach, seeking to understand how planning processes work,
rather than a normative approach that prescribes how planning should be done, although it
acknowledges that all research is value-laden. The emphasis is on "theory of planning"
(understanding how planning works) rather than "theory for planning" (producing knowledge
for planning practice).
Researching Planning
Planning as a Focus for Research
Defining planning results in different framings. Those frames can carry value judgments
about what is important and what planning should achieve, meaning analytical research can
align with or against professional and political ideologies. Planning research contributes to
ongoing professional debates about procedures, tasks, values, and social objectives like
democracy and sustainability.
Why Do Planning Research?
Research goes beyond mere information gathering to generate knowledge by focusing on
the dynamics that produce a situation. It involves developing a generalized understanding of
how planning works and applying that to specific cases, fostering an interplay between
specific and general understanding. Theory-informed research also supports practitioners by
enabling reflection on planning processes.
The Challenges of Planning Research
Planning research is complex, involving challenges in focusing research questions,
methodological concerns, and generating generalizable conclusions from data. Data
interpretation is not straightforward and involves making choices and building persuasive
narratives, which inherently include value judgments. Explicitly incorporating a theoretical
perspective helps in negotiating these challenges.
The Role of Theory
What Is Theory? Theory is defined as a heuristic aid for understanding complex situations,
providing general patterns and coherent narrative accounts of processes at work. Theories
involve fundamental ontological assumptions (how the world is), normative positions
(how it should be), and epistemological positions (how knowledge is generated).
Is Theory Necessary?
The empiricist view, which argues that "facts speak for themselves," because data collection
and analysis is never neutral. A theoretical framing is essential for planning researchers to
focus attention, analyze findings better, and build a broader picture of planning.
The Advantages of Using Theory
Incorporating theory offers several advantages:
- It helps researchers make early decisions about what to focus on and what to
emphasize, making judgments explicit and operating within practical constraints.
- It links empirical research to a broader, pre-existing narrative about planning, aiding
in analysis, generalization of findings, and creating persuasive narratives.
, - It allows empirical research to build, revise, and amplify theoretical frameworks,
contributing to a deeper understanding of society through planning investigation.
- Theory offers the intellectual attraction of engaging with "big ideas" and
developing a more fundamental understanding of the world.
- While primarily analytical, some theoretical frameworks overlap with normative
planning theory (e.g., governance theory and collaborative planning).
- Theory-led approaches, combined with clear communication, can support
self-reflection and change in practice among practitioners and policymakers.
Link to Course Goals
1) Explain the main concepts of different planning theories. This chapter introduces the
fundamental idea that planning theories offer distinct "lenses" for interpreting planning
processes and issues, and that each theory involves specific concepts, ontological, and
epistemological assumptions. It sets the groundwork for understanding that different theories
will present different core concepts for explaining how planning works.
2) Apply planning theories to interpret planning issues and demonstrate how
theoretical frameworks guide research design and analysis. The chapter explicitly states
that theoretical frameworks guide and frame research, influencing the research questions
addressed, the methodology used, and the kind of findings that result. It highlights how
theory helps researchers interpret planning situations, understand underlying dynamics, and
operationalize empirical research.
3) Compare and contrast the political-philosophical and epistemological assumptions
that underpin planning theories. The chapter emphasizes that theories are not neutral but
are built upon fundamental political-philosophical (normative) and epistemological
assumptions. Choosing a theory means engaging with alternative conceptualizations of how
the world works, what counts as valid knowledge, and inherent value judgments.
