The humanists turn in geography and planning during the 1960’s and 1970’s led the planning investigation to focus directly in the life-world in order to learn and understand the way people are living their life. It was not an abstract call for collaboration between parts of society, as it was before, but a pragmatic approach that called for collaboration between planners and decision makers on the one hand, and citizen, people and communities on the other hand. This collaboration was justified by the need for having a better understanding of communities and places; and was initiated both by: (1) a bottom-up demands raised by communities, activists and scholars as in the case of Jane Jacobs, that claimed that “Cities have the capability of providing something for everybody, only because, and only when, they are created by everybody”; and (2) as a top-down attempts to answer challenges of the planning system as in the case of Paul Davidoff (1965), that claimed that “intelligent choice about public policy would be aided if different political, social, and economic interests produced city plans”.
The latter – Advocacy Planning – is also part of the deliberative “revolution” in planning that acquired during the 1960’s. Two texts, which will become canonical texts within the planning literature, are fine examples of this approach: “Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning” (Davidoff, 1965)”, and Ladder Leading to Citizen Control” (Arnstein, 1969) – both are calling for the involvement of citizens in planning processes and for a measure of control that citizens and communities should have in and over planning processes as well as for the representation of their interest.
In contrast to how people interpret these two texts today, these two ideas are not based on substantive democratic foundations, but on formal-procedural democratic foundations. According to Davidoff and Arnstein public participation is a process in which people, who are not decision makers or officials, are taking part in decision making regarding their lives, and planning should be understood as a plan-making process, in which the public involvement should be built-in into decision making system. In this way, the deliberative approach for participation reflects a demand for a new model of political behavior that expands direct involvement beyond legislatures and public bureaucracies to include citizens.
The big mystery is why Davidoff’s ideas are generally used to represent ideas that are much more than what they are – an institutional top-down call for engagement in planning?
Leave a Reply