It is a truism that in the contemporary experience of planning there appears to be a growing gap between aspiration and performance, a gap increasingly visible over the past 15 years or so. ’ It has become difficult quite often to identify unequivocal benefits flowing from the more or less elaborate machinery of planning, benefits that can be unambiguously related to real improvements in popular welfare. The disillusion is an element in the revival of a faith in the market and, in economics, in the ‘automatic’ mechanisms said to flow from monetary policies. Improvements there have certainly been, but how far has planning achieved them? Could more have been achieved with the same effort? Would things have been better or worse without the planners? In retrospect, the long-term ‘crisis in planning’ was largely an intellectual problem; it became a real and painful one with the onset of the world slump in 1974-75, and apparently long-term stagnation thereafter. In the past there were hosts of problems, particularly in securing the coordinated action of many competing public agencies; the Ministry of Agriculture’s fertiliser plant defied the metropolitan ban on new industry; sudden urgent projects with the Presidential seal of priority the new Conference Hall, the new complex of government buildings, the new capital, the new facilities for the international sporting occasion drove a coach and horses through the best laid plans. But those were at least the problems of growth, of growing incomes and aspirations. World downturn, although affecting countries differently, tends to put universal pressure on the sources of public revenue and to create an increasingly unstable environment. Governments are driven to live from week to week, eschewing hopes of longer term coherence. It is understandable that people should grow sceptical of the possibility of defining mediumor long-range objectives and pursuing them; that there should be increasing irritation at the planner, apparently fiddling while great Rome burns. The disillusion was epitomised in the conclusion of an important multinational company in a 1979 discussion of company planning: “Planning is just a waste of time nowadays, especially so-called strategic planning. In today’s world, there’s no point in looking further forward than a one or two year budget. Anything long term is just not worth the paper it’s written on.“2 It emerges in the laconic comment on the performance of a government which has prided itself on its planning machinery for 25 years two-thirds of the projects
Read full abstract