Hoorcollege 1 - Introduction: foundations of planning theory (2 sept)
In pairs:
1. Identify 2 different definitions of planning
A form of decision-making that seeks to achieve specific goals through implementing
particular actions, plans, policies or programmes. This frames planning as an instrumental
process, using means to achieve ends. It lends itself to a view of planning as a public
administration activity, downplaying any political dimension
➔ Planning as a means of control of the environment
➔ Rational comprehensive planning, policy analysis & rational choice
One way in which this analysis had been developed is through seeing planning as a form of
governmentality, in which actors come to see their interests aligned with those of the state,
through the influence of societal and policy discourses and through the operation of
‘governmental technologies”
➔ Planning also operates in a system where there are certain discourses, planners also
create these discourses about how space should be used
➔ Discourses, power, knowledge
It is possible to politicise this definition further by seeing such planning action as not
necessarily in the collective or public interest but as engaging with different interest and
needing to be judged in terms of the interests that benefit most from such planning action
➔ A more politicised definition, where it’s really about a battle of different interests
between different actors
➔ Urban regime theory, political economy & urban politics
Shift the focus very slightly to define planning as an activity whereby the state seeks to order
the environment, and this reframes that activity. In this view, planning shapes both the
natural and built environment… The aim of such planning is to promote the public or
collective interest
➔ Planning is an activity that is carried out to protect the public by the collective interest
➔ Neo-institutionalism
In these different definitions, we see very different understandings of what planning is
● Planning is intervention in built environment, in order to shape what they want
● Planning is a political process
● Planners know what’s best and they use that knowledge to create spaces that are
good
How does each definition frame planning as an activity?
See first →
What assumptions about the role of planners, the nature of decision-making
processes, etc. are built into it?
They are not neutral, Rydin argues that the way we define planning already sets an agenda
for how we perform research and how we perform practice
, Which is closest to how you understand spatial planning?
I understand spatial planning primarily as a state activity that seeks to order the built and
natural environment in pursuit of the collective interest
Why does it matter which definition we use in research?
It matters how we define spatial planning, because your definition of planning shapes what
research questions you ask, what methods you trust and what answers you will find.
Ontology: what is there?
What kind of world do we believe exists? Is society made out of rational actors, maybe not?
Epistemology: how do we know?
Not only what do we consider real, but how can we perceive it? How do we understand
knowledge, where does it come from, what are the limits of the knowledge that we can gain?
What is its nature, how can we acquire it?
➔ These assumptions on epistemology matter because they also directly shape what
kind of methods you pick when you are doing planning research
What is planning theory?
● “a body of assumptions, of which the mutual relations have been made explicit”
(Føllesdal et al., 1990, p. 57)
● “a heuristic aid to understand a situation, a way to try to know what is essentially
unknowable in its completeness” (Rydin, 2021, p. 9)
Practical approach of theory: As planning researchers we deal with very messy and complex
realities and it’s almost impossible to fully know them. Theory becomes a tool that we can
use to help us make sense of situations that are in reality so complex that we can actually
not analyze them if we don’t simplify them.
Theory is both a land to make assumptions visible and it’s also a tool to navigate the
complexity of planning in your research
Analytical framework (this is what theory is useful for)
In pairs:
1. Identify 2 different definitions of planning
A form of decision-making that seeks to achieve specific goals through implementing
particular actions, plans, policies or programmes. This frames planning as an instrumental
process, using means to achieve ends. It lends itself to a view of planning as a public
administration activity, downplaying any political dimension
➔ Planning as a means of control of the environment
➔ Rational comprehensive planning, policy analysis & rational choice
One way in which this analysis had been developed is through seeing planning as a form of
governmentality, in which actors come to see their interests aligned with those of the state,
through the influence of societal and policy discourses and through the operation of
‘governmental technologies”
➔ Planning also operates in a system where there are certain discourses, planners also
create these discourses about how space should be used
➔ Discourses, power, knowledge
It is possible to politicise this definition further by seeing such planning action as not
necessarily in the collective or public interest but as engaging with different interest and
needing to be judged in terms of the interests that benefit most from such planning action
➔ A more politicised definition, where it’s really about a battle of different interests
between different actors
➔ Urban regime theory, political economy & urban politics
Shift the focus very slightly to define planning as an activity whereby the state seeks to order
the environment, and this reframes that activity. In this view, planning shapes both the
natural and built environment… The aim of such planning is to promote the public or
collective interest
➔ Planning is an activity that is carried out to protect the public by the collective interest
➔ Neo-institutionalism
In these different definitions, we see very different understandings of what planning is
● Planning is intervention in built environment, in order to shape what they want
● Planning is a political process
● Planners know what’s best and they use that knowledge to create spaces that are
good
How does each definition frame planning as an activity?
See first →
What assumptions about the role of planners, the nature of decision-making
processes, etc. are built into it?
They are not neutral, Rydin argues that the way we define planning already sets an agenda
for how we perform research and how we perform practice
, Which is closest to how you understand spatial planning?
I understand spatial planning primarily as a state activity that seeks to order the built and
natural environment in pursuit of the collective interest
Why does it matter which definition we use in research?
It matters how we define spatial planning, because your definition of planning shapes what
research questions you ask, what methods you trust and what answers you will find.
Ontology: what is there?
What kind of world do we believe exists? Is society made out of rational actors, maybe not?
Epistemology: how do we know?
Not only what do we consider real, but how can we perceive it? How do we understand
knowledge, where does it come from, what are the limits of the knowledge that we can gain?
What is its nature, how can we acquire it?
➔ These assumptions on epistemology matter because they also directly shape what
kind of methods you pick when you are doing planning research
What is planning theory?
● “a body of assumptions, of which the mutual relations have been made explicit”
(Føllesdal et al., 1990, p. 57)
● “a heuristic aid to understand a situation, a way to try to know what is essentially
unknowable in its completeness” (Rydin, 2021, p. 9)
Practical approach of theory: As planning researchers we deal with very messy and complex
realities and it’s almost impossible to fully know them. Theory becomes a tool that we can
use to help us make sense of situations that are in reality so complex that we can actually
not analyze them if we don’t simplify them.
Theory is both a land to make assumptions visible and it’s also a tool to navigate the
complexity of planning in your research
Analytical framework (this is what theory is useful for)
