To Plan or Not to Plan

The Reading: Arguments for and Against Planning, Richard E. Klostermann 1985

Source: chinadaily.com.cn

So as I hoped, planning theory has involved the other disciples that we study in our very broad degree. All of a sudden our knowledge from social policy or economics is being referenced as influential for the development of urban planning theory.

I think the Klostermann’s reading can be summarised to state that planning is necessary in the case of failure. This is analysed from various perspectives. Economically speaking, where the market failed to provide for itself, government intervention is required. From a pluralist perspective, the individual concerns of the multiple smaller groups mean they fail to provide a consistent set of planning parameters that satisfy the whole community. Again planners must intervene to reach a solution.

The economic arguments for planning argued by Klostermann are important because, despite what some people may argue, I do believe the world revolves around money. It provides funding for projects and ensures participation within society. As we also discussed in class, urban planning can be considered a form of social policy or government intervention. However, such policy would only be effective if it reflected the wants and needs of the community (or market). If the market could provide adequate planning and development organically, there would be no need for additional planning intervention. However, cities that are unplanned are often, you guessed it, unplanned and unstructured. This represents market failure which requires government intervention. In this case, the intervention comes in the form a structured urban planning.

The idea, from the Marxist perspective, that “fundamental social improvements can result only from the revolutionary activity of labour” (p 94) is also very intriguing. Should planners be considered visionaries and revolutionaries? Should planners aim to create widespread social reform through redevelopment of urban places or is it in the public interest to move slowly? Promoting large scale changes has provided solutions in the past. Suburbia developed in response to massive population growth, but urban sprawl has proved isolating and unsustainable. Maybe it will be the contemporary ideas of urban consolidation and infilling which provide the planning reforms that reshape the modern built environment.