New directions in planning theory 0_0

The communicative model
When 2 things are communicate, there is always a sender and a receiver. At least there is an intended receiver. In the diagram above A is the sender, B is the receiver.
A and B have different personal realities. They each have their own world formed by their experiences, their perceptions, their ideas, etc. They will perceive, experience, and interpret things differently. The same event will always be perceived a little different by each of two people.
For the consideration to communicate to appear at all there must be some kind of shared space. The participants must have some kind of concept of each other's location and of a possible channel of communication existing between them. They must agree sufficiently on these to agree that communication is taking place.
The sender will have some kind of meaning she wishes to convey to the receiver. It might not be conscious knowledge; it might be a sub-conscious wish for communication. What is desired to be communicated would be some kind of idea, perception, feeling, or datum. It will be a part of her reality that she wishes to send to somebody else.
Theoretical and practical deficiencies
One problem in communicative planning in practice is the gap between rhetoric and action. Another problem is the lengthy time, this leads to burnout among citizen participants and disillusion. Also the difficulties involved in framing alternatives when planners desist from agenda setting can raise another issue.
In communicative planning theory the spotlight is on the planner. Instead of asking what is to be done about cities and regions, communicative planners typically ask what planners should be doing, and the answer is that they should be good (i.e. tell the truth, not be pushy about their own judgments). Like the technocrats whom they criticize, they appear to believe that planners have a special claim on disinterested morality:
New urbanism
New urbanism refers to a design-oriented approach to planned urban development.The principle of new  urbanism includes 10 points: walk ability ,connectivity, mixed-use and diversity,mixed housing,quality architecture and urban design, traditional neighbourhood structure, increased density,green transportation,sustainability and quality of life!And the benefits of  urbanism are residents, business,developers and municipalities.
Critique

•Emphasis on public  space, its consideration  of the relationship between work and living, and its stance toward environmental quality.

• One of the frequently made criticisms is that it merely calls for a different form of suburbia rather than overcoming metropolitan social segregation.

• The New Urbanism can commit the same errors as modernism – that is assuming that changing peoples physical environment will somehow take care of the social inequalities that changed their lives.

• Only a publicly funded effort to combine social groups through mixing differently priced housing with substantial subsides for the low-income component can produce such a result.

• For planning theory, the most interesting aspect of the new urbanism is that its assurance of a better quality of life has inspired a social movement.

The just city

Just-city theorists fall into two categories: radical democrats and political economists. They believe that progressive social change results only form the exercise of power by those who previously had been excluded from power. Participation in public decision making is part of the ideal of the just city.

A theory of just city values participation in decision making by relatively powerless groups and equity of outcomes. The just city needs to incorporate an entrepreneurial state that not only provides welfare but also generates increased wealth, it also needs to project a future embodying a middle-class society rather that only empowering the poor and disfranchised.

Resurrecting optimism

The three types of planning theory described in this article all embrace a social reformist outlook. They represent a move from a purely critical perspective that characterised much theory in the 1970’s and 1980’s to one that once again offers a promise of a better life. More recent theorising has advanced from mere critique to focusing instead on offering a more appealing prospect of the future.

 

______-_-///______+_+_______o(n_n)0________what a hard  article it is  >_<

American Town Planning Theory since1945 —。—

The focus of  presentation this week is---American Town Planning Theory since 1945:Three significant developments but no paradigm shifts. (Nigel Taylor)
Over the past of fifty years, town planning has developed  more and more important in Britain and North Americca..And this article is an overview of the history for town planning  thought since 1945 .There are three outstanding changes in town planning over that period.
First, the shift from the view of  planning as an exercise in physical planning in 1960s and urban design to the systems and rational process views of planning.
Second, the shift from the view of town planning as an activity require to some technical skills for planning as a political process of making value-judgements about environmental change in which the planner act as a manager and facilitator of that process.
Third, the shift from 'modernist' to 'postmodernist' planning theory.
Half a century ago, there have been  significant development  in town planning theory  .We have to learn more about the town planning of urban environments and the diverse values of different communities
.