New Directions in Planning

In this week’s reading, New Directions in Planning Theory, Susan Fainstein discusses and critiques three schools of planning theory, which are the Communicative, New Urbanism and Just Theory contemporary planning models. These models emerged in response to post industrialization planning issues and where seen as a method of improving the quality of life in capitalist’s economies.

The Communicative Model:

The Communicative model promotes that the planner’s primary function is to listen to all stakeholders’ needs and wants and forge a consensus with the community without showing any bias or technocratic leadership. A deficiency of this approach as outlined in the article however is the gap between rhetoric and action that is the length of time between participatory and communicative processes to the physical implementation of the plan. This is a long process which many see as a flaw of this process in planning.

New Urbanism Model:

New Urbanism refers to the design orientated practical approach to planning which focuses on the urban design of plans and there outcomes rather than the process. New urbanism resembles planning theories from early planning theorists such as Ebenezer Howard however is criticised for its overreliance on physical determinism which doesn’t allow it to address social justice issues adequately. It must be noted however that physical planning can to an extent address social issues as physical planning is often considered a starting point to address such issues.

Just City Model:

The Just Theory model is described by Susan Fainstein as a political economic planning model that is endorsed to combat inequality through civil participation and the equal distribution of wealth of resources. To me this approach is more philosophical and idealistic as unlike the previous two models it doesn’t in the reading that is stipulate a feasible approach to improve the quality of life rather an aspiration and idealistic approach of what a perfect society should be.

These models all pending on individual circumstances are feasible however realistically society and planners need to find a balance between all three approaches in the modern mixed planning environment to optimise their cities potential. A mixture of theories at the one time historically has not been the norm but as the planning profession grows and so too does society it is the most likely approach to future planning directions.