A post-postmodernist perspective on power in planning: situating practices and power

Abstract

This chapter tells how different planning theories and practices relate to power in planning. There are three kinds of planning practices: generic ‘planning’ - what people do when they are planning; knowledge-cantered planning practices, e.g. spatial planning; real-life planning, e.g. transportation planning for the EU TEN or insurgent planning in Nairobi. Planning theories are for these practices: ‘planning’ theories and ‘something’ (e.g. spatial) planning theories. Changing planning theories and evolving concepts of planning practices and power are presented in three stages: modern, postmodern and post-postmodern. Modern planners were professional experts, empowered to plan rationally in the public interest. Postmodernists saw them as oppressive technocrats abusing their power; postmodern planning is communicative practice. Post- postmodern planners are not technocrats, communicators or social-change agents, but experts in their fields, contributing their knowledge to the social co-construction of knowledge that is planning. This reveals the positive potential of planners’ enabling and constraining power. Planners’ positional and expert power can enable beneficial actions: plans, programs and projects that improve peoples’ life-worlds, and institutional design for social change. Constraining power can also be positive: spatial planning channelling development to achieve policy goals and conserve environmental resources, and environmental regulation to enhance environmental quality and promote sustainability.