비판적 계획이론 서론 - J. Forester를 중심으로 -

Abstract

As discipline of urban planning studies, planning theory is difficult to understand. What is distinctive about the subject of 'planning theory' is that it aims to provide some overall or general understanding of the nature of urban planning. Because of this, the sorts questions planning theorists ask about urban planning are fundamental questions. Questions such as: what kind of activity is planning? what do planners do? how planners do this? Until 1960s, planning was viewed as a neutral, apolitical activity, i.e. as a means to a particular end(instrumental action) and planners were considered as authoritative experts pursuing the public good on the basis of their special knowledge. But since the mid-1960s, planning has been increasingly recognized as a political process, involving conflicting interests. As participants, planners must make choices grounded on both technical expertise and value judgements. These are informed by planners' political and ethical views and structural and organizational constraints they face in their everyday work. Forester applies J. Habermas' critical communication theory of society to planning theory and practice. Forester argues Habermasian critical theory give us a new way of understanding action, or what planners do, as communicative action. If planners do not recognize how their ordinary actions may have subtle communicative effects, the planners may be well-meaning but counterproductive, sincere but distrusted, rigorous but unappreciated, reassuring yet resented. In other words, planners must be deliberative practitioners. In short, critical planning theory must be not only empirical, interpretive, and normative but also practical, because planning theory is what planners need when they get stuck.