PROCEDURAL PLANNING lHEORY: THE SYNTHETIC NECESSITY*

John Muller
Professor of Town and Regional Planning
University of the Witwatersrand

Manuscript accepted February 1987.

*This paper is based on the paper presented at the Beplanningsteorie word jare lank reeds
international planning theory conference "La Teor­ op verskeie gronds/ae gekritiseer. Die
ia Nelle Pratiche Di Pianijicozione'; held in Turin
in September 1986. huidige kritiek berus op die waarneming
dat die teorie van bep/anning nie ver­
Procedural planning theory has, over a ·band hou met die konteks waarin dit
period of many years, been subjected to moet funksioneer nie, d.w.s. dat dit 'n
criticism on various grounds. The cur­ teoretiese skeppirig is, verwyder van
rent critique is based on the perception sosio-politiese werk/ikhede. Die neiging
that the procedural model is divorced om aspekte van prosedure te skei van die
from context - that it is a theoretical substantiewe terreine van bep/annings­
construct separated from socio-political teorie word verder onderhou deur 'n
reality. The tendency to separate the aansien/ike hoevee/heid studie wat han­
proceduralfrom the substantivefields of de/ oor die k/assifikasie van bep/an­
planning theory has been reinforced by a ningsteorie.
fairly broad body of work concerned A/hoewe/ die waarde van k/assifikasie­
with the classification of planning the­ tipes in 'n verge/ykende analise van die
ory. While the classification typologies bydraes van die verskillende teoretiese
have value in the comparative analysis benaderings le, neig hu//e om die waarde
they provide of the attributes of various van skake/ing tussen die teoriee te ig­
theoretical approaches, they have tend­ noreer.
ed to negate or neglect the significance
of the connectivity between theories. Die uitgangspunt van hierdie artikel is
The view presented in this paper is that dat die skakeling tussen teoriee van
procedural and substantive connections beplanning en substantiewe skake/ings
are essential to planning-in-practice and noodsaaklik vir praktiese bep/anning is.
that if procedural theory fails to accom­ As die teoriee van prosedures nie daarin
modate these linkages, it should be re­ s/aag om hierdie skake/ing te bewerk­
cast in non-theoretical methodological ste//ig nie, moet dit deur nie-teoretiese
form. The elements of planning theory vorms vervang word.
can then be freely connected or synthe­ Die e/emente van beplanningsteorie kan
sized, transferred to the methodology of dan vrylik gekonnekteer of sintetiseer,
planning and incorporated in the prac­ oorgedra na bep/anningsmetodologie en
tice of planning. in beplanningspraktyk inge/yf word.

1. PROCEDURAL THEORY
- THE DEBATE
One of the Jong-standing and distinc­ ning, led Bolen (1967), twenty years commodate socio-political reality.
tive features attaching to procedural ago, to pose the "real question" as to Procedural theory is viewed as having
planning theory must surely be the criti­ whether this model could, or should, collapsed in the face of the radical,
cal debate to which it has been, and still adapt to meet the challenges of the crit­ humanist and pragmatic offensive
is, subjected. The quintessential ics at that time. Although the current (Healey, McDougall and Thomas 1982);
procedural model, the rational - com­ set of challenges draw strength from ar­ as having abdicated its paradigmatic
prehensive process, has been dis­ guments other than the limitations of status (Alexander, 1984); as a distinctive
paraged and denigrated for some two to man's technical problem-solving capa­ form of thought and action that is un­
three decades but, as Dalton (1986) has bilities, the same question could be (and connected with the substance of the real
recently reiterated, it has been decidedly indeed is being) asked today. world and is thus, in the familiar words
slow in succumbing to the attack . The It is now co91mon cause that the burden of Thomas (1979) "contextless" and
early and familiar rejection by of the present critique of procedural "contentless"; and as "indeterminate
Braybrooke and Lindblom (l 963) of the theoty is in the perceived inability of the abstraction" embodying "vapid empiri­
tenets of rational-comprehensive plan- procedural model to recognize and ac- cal content" (Scott and Roweis 1977).

8
 T he latter argue that the abstract ra­ plied to the methodology of planning. was seen as a work of seminal impor­
tionality of procedural theory disguises The intention is to delve into theory and tance when it was first published in the
the instrinsically political quality of extract elements pertinent to practical early 1960s and remains recognized as
planning intervention by transforming planning procedures - an approach such today. Less well recognized and
that intervention into no more than which in principle emulates that of Wil­ remembered is Davidoff and Reiners'
administrative decision-making rules. liam James, the American philosopher (1962:37) concluding assertion that,
Substance and procedure are thus of pragmatic persuasion, who made while it had become necessary to focus
divorced; a separation that Roweis "raids into philosophy" in order to re­ on planning method, "procedures and
(1983:143) characterizes as a "standard late academic philosophy with com­ substance cannot be treated separate­
article of faith in mainstream planning mon life. This approach will gather ly".They state unambiguously that the
theory". The quest to link procedural together those proced1,1ral, substantive planning act or process derives from a
and substantive theory is rejected by and contextual elements in planning consideration of the substantive pro­
Taylor (1984) who puts the proposition theory that have long been construed as perties of the world-as-it-is. Choice
that procedural theory is a formal or a separate - and which have been pre-, Theory is nevertheless classified outside
priori conceptual theory intrinsically sented as such in various models or the boundary zone as pure procedural
unconcerned with empirical or synthe­ typographies on the classification of theory and even today is described as
tic considerations, and that materialist theory. Inasmuch as the predilection perhaps the most articulate expression
critiques of the theory are thus falla­ among theorists is divorce and deline­ of the rational planning model (Alex­
cious.This proposition is in turn ques­ ate theory into discrete camps is pro­ ander, 1984).
tioned by Huw Thomas (1985:59) who bably most pronounced in these cate­ Faludi (1972:7) accepts Hightower's ex­
asserts that"...the approach to analyt­ gorization models, they can usefully plicit distinction and echoes it in the
ical philosophy must be one which is serve as a means of identifying and syn­ familiar split between theory of plan­
conscious of the political and moral thesizing those theoretical elements ning (procedural) and theory in plan­
context of philosophical debates .. :• that should feed into planning proce­ ning (substantive). In suggesting how­
This dialectic is appealing and the argu­ dure. ever that the categorization"should not
ments and counter arguments are by result in an entirely separate develop­
and large persuasive, but one is led to 2. CLASSIFICATION OF ment of the two", he acknowledges the
wondet where the intellectual muscle­ PLANNING THEORY relationship between the two. The ele­
flexing is now leading; where and how it ment of mutual exclusion is implicitly
contributes to the furtherance of plan­ The differentiation between procedural recognized as a denial of factual condi­
ning-in-practice. While accepting the and substantive theory is clearly the tions - as indeed it should be.A plan­
bond of reciprocity between theory and most common and recurrent feature of ning procedure is a methodological
practice, it is a matter of concern when classification models. This twofold response to an issue within prevailing
the trappings of theory are used to categorization appears to have had its societal conditions (substantive reality)
smother the problems and promise of beginnings in the distinction between and these conditions are transformed
practice.Reference to the philosophy of theories of the planning process and through planning intervention (proce­
science - to the principles of ration­ theories concerning phenomena which durally structured) into new sets of con­
ality and scientific method - shows Hightower identified in his study of ditions, which must then impact on sub­
that planning procedures are by nature planning school curricula in the late sequent procedural approaches. If, as
neither rationally nor empirically pure, 1960s. In this early entry into the field Roweis (1983) states, it is not possible to
and it is therefore questionable - prob­ of theory classification, Davidoff and describe how planners should plan
ably presumptious - to expect purity Reiners' Choice Theory (1962) and without reference to substance - which
in procedural theory.Accordingly, since Banfield's Conceptual Scheme (1955) is surely true - then the differentiation
procedural theory has limitations when are cited as procedural theories, which between theories of planning and the­
measured agairist the principles of are "properly identified as planning ories in planning must be rejected.
"real" or accepted theory, perhaps it theory", and Reilly's Law is presented as
an example of phenomena or substance The general acceptance of the split pro­
would be sensible to remove it from the cedural/substantive model as common
rarified realms of theory and recast it in which is"not part of the theory of plan­
ning per se" (Hightower 1969:326). The cause in planning circles would seem to
methodological form. Methodology is, make rejection a difficult proposition.
after all, the area of concern and con­ qualification is made that the distinc­
tion between process and phenomena is Statements that address the inter­
tent of procedural theory and it is in this relationship of the two are frequently
area that the theory makes its contribu­ "sometimes arbitrary" and that certain
areas of activity such as citizen partici­ vague: the "...main problem with this
tion to the practice of planning. dichotomous classification is that the
pation enter the "boundary zone be­
This is the approach that is adopted in line between substantive and procedu­
tween procedural and substantive the­
this paper. The focus is on planning ral theory is blurry . . :• (Hudson,
ory" (Hightower, 1969:327).
procedure rather than procedural the­ 1979:396).It is precisely because there is
ory. In order to illustrate the manner in The selection by Hightower of Choice no line between the two that the inter­
which theory can inform and support Theory as a prime example of ,proce­ face appears blurred.It is, in an intellec­
practice, elements will be drawn from dural theory is not surprising. Its three­ tual and practical sense, not a line but
the field of planning theory and (freed stage process of value formulation - an overlap - a meshing of the one with
of the bonds of theoretical rigour) ap- means identification - effectuation the other - and it is for this reason that

9
 delineation is found problematic. Hud­ that the tradition of rationalism consti­ The interaction between political struc­
son (1979:396, footnote) does in fact tutes the o_nly category accurately cor­ ture and planning procedure is accepted
make the point that "procedures are relating with Hightower's procedural by McConnell (1981).He expresses the
often specialized in their application to definition; that the humanism of the view that "because planning practice is
particular substantive problem areas. philosophical synthesis tradition is far dependent on the sanction of those
Typically, in fact, a new procedure is removed from the methodological con­ with political power on each level of
invented to deal with a particular pro­ cerns of planning procedure and that government with a responsibility for
blem".Excluding the questionable no­ the transference of the tenets of the or­ planning, planning theory must be
tion of regular procedural invention, ganization development tradition to the related to political theory if it is to relate
this is a common sense statement that institutional processes of planning is to practice". In other words, planning
serves to highlight the practical links (by the author's own admission) pro­ practice must inevitably be related to
between procedure and substance. blematic. However, Friedmann and political systems. He goes on to say that
Hudsons' (1974:3, 5) statement that the since planners are concerned with so­
McCallum (1/974) presents another
"compartmentalisation is by no means cietal well-being in their decision­
view. In support of the contention that watertight'\, and their search for pat­
the "confused state of planning theory" making processes, planning theorising
terns of "cross-fertilization and synthe­ should be moderated by ethical reason­
results from a lack of adequate distinc­
sis among the traditions which have ing. The politico-ethical dimension
tion between fundamentally different
been separated in the past ..:• serve to then gives rise to an additional cate­
sub-sets of planning theory, he intro­
underscore the contention that classes gory: to theories in planning and the­
duces an additional component. The
of theory should not be isolated. This ories of planning is added a third
body of theory is divided into three:
becomes clear when a few of the semi­ category, "social theories for plan­
theories of society, of the generic plan­
nal works cited and classified in their ning". This latter classification is per­
ning process and of urban/regional
paper are extended from one category ceived as offering explanations of, and
phenomena. Emphasis is placed on the
to another. The philosophical writings prescriptions for, society, and as relat­
heterogeneity of the field of planning
of Mannheim enter the tradition of ra­ ing to political and moral theory. It also
theory and the "real differences be­
tionalism through the means-ends con­ explains "why planning is as it is". The
tween qualitatively distinct sub-sets of
ceptions of functional and substantial correlation between planning and polit­
the field" (1974:739). The tripartite
rationality; Dahl and Lindblom's work ical theory has been illustrated else­
classification results from a separation
belongs as much to the rationalism tra­ where: Fainstein and Fainstein (1971)
of societal and phenomenal issues, pre­
dition as to that of philosophical syn­ draw analogies between traditional,
viously accommodated under the com­
thesis (in which it is placed) since their user-oriented, advocacy and incremen­
mon substantive umbrella. Inasmuch as
incrementalist decision model consti­ tal planning, and technocratic, demo- .
theories of society incorporate the
tutes both an interpretation of and reac­ cratic, socialist and liberal political the­
values and decisions of the formal insti­
tion to the premises of rationality, and ories respectively. Studies such as this
tutions of society, and it is those institu­
the four-stage conceptual plan derived reveal the political values that under­
tional or political decisions of society
from Meyerson and Banfield's Chicago pin various planning procedures and in­
that give rise to the spatial and socio­
study obviously moves beyond the tra­ dicate why certain societies favour and
economic patterns contained within
dition of empiricism into that of ration­ adopt certain procedures rather than
theories of urban/regional pheno­
alism.Etzioni's model of the active so­ others. Planning method relates to po­
mena, the split simply creates a gulf
ciety is located within the tradition of litical culture - as illu·strated by the
across which unnecessary bridges must
philosophical synthesis - logically so, chosen procedural approach in any
be built.Further, and as indicated pre­
since his concept of societal guidance is country at particular times.
viously, the removal of the decision­
pertinent to the work of the planning
based theories of the "generic planning Hudson's SITAR classification (1979)
theorists of the new humanism school.
process" from the institutional contexts is, unlike those previously discussed,
Etzioni could, however, have been ac­
within which planning operates, plac�s not derivative of the procedural/sub­
corded equal prominence in the ration­
plannirig in a vacuum. And it is of stantive convention, but is a mix of
alism category, where he receives little
course largely against this scenario that methodology (synopticism), political
more than a passing reference. The
the critique of the procedural mod\!! is analysis (radicalism), professional role
meshing of elements of the synoptic
directed. (advocacy), planning style (transactive
and incremental decision processes in
Published at the same time as McCal­ his mixed scanning strategy is in itself of planning) and decision-making ap­
lum's article, Friedmann and Hudsons' importance to planning procedure, but proach (incrementalism). The five tra­
"Knowledge and Action: a Guide to the synthesizing of the strategy with ditions, which are shown to have dis­
Planning Theory" (1974) reviews the social and political systems is certainly tinctive internal attributes, are sub­
traditions of planning theory primarily of comparable significance. In analys­ jected to comparison on the basis "of a
in terms of Hightower's planning pro­ ing the levels of power, control and con­ uniform set of criteria. Hudson (1979)
cess category. In what is probably still census in totalitarian and democratic· accepts that the selected traditions and
the broadest coverage of the attributes societies, and relating these to mixed evaluative criteria are matters of per­
of procedural theory in the classifica­ scanning, incremental and rationalistic sonal choice but does not query the va­
tion idiom, the authors identify four in­ models, Etzioni (1967, I �68) provides a lidity of entering upon a comparative
tellectual traditions and associated telling example of the reciprocal rela­ analysis of disparate approaches with
cross-influences. It could be argued tionship of substance and procedure. essentially different purposes and per-

10
 spectives. Can a radical political phi­ operandi of mediation, and in doing so liar to the problems.
losophy be rigorously and directly com­ have provided useful (if largely apoliti­ The final classification model to be
pared with a sequentially structured cal) indicators of the ways in which par­ considered is that of Healey, McDou­
methodology? While the answer is no, ticular planning roles incorporate gall and Thomas (1982).Their concern
the conclusions drawn from the com­ procedural approaches appropriate to is that of the plurality of planning posi­
parative study have value: "systematic circumstances or context.Similarly, the tions and the lack of critical evaluation
evaluation of historical precedents like application of the process of strategic and understanding of those theoretical
these would help create more realistic choice in Dutch planning practice positions. The discussion moves from
strategies for getting diverse traditions (Dekker and Mastop, 1979) could be the premise that various theoretical
to work together ...The real issue is regarded as a methodological interpre­ stances - such as those held by the po­
whether any planning style can be effec­ tation of the tenets of incremental litical economy, humanist and prag­
tive without parallel imputs from other decision-making, the successive rounds matic schools - have fairly recently
complementary and countervailing tra­ of problem definition and comparison emerged in opposition to, or as further
ditions. According to Hudson (1979: being consistent with Lindblom's me­ developments of, procedural planning
396) the synoptic planning tradition ... thod of successive limited comparisons. theory.Their arguments are interesting:
has serious blind spots, which can only Strategic choice occupies a prominent social and advocacy planning are classi­
be covered by recourse to other plan­ position in Faludi's (1982:82) three fied as developments of procedural the­
ning traditions".These sentiments pro­ planning theory "paradigms" - being ory, and as being attached to the pro­
vide direction but fall short of explana­ pertinent to his decision-centred view motion of sectoral values while accept­
tions and illustrations as to how, and of planning; the "heir to the throne ing "the general method" of planning.
in what circumstances, planning ap­ after the abdication of procedural plan­ Thus the methodological or procedural
proaches can be combined. ning theory". The decision-centred convention is construed as capable of
Hudson suggests that advocacy plan­ view, together with the object-centred accommodating the interests of the dis­
ning does not replace synoptic plan­ and two control-centred views of plan­ advantaged under a social or advocacy
ning, but provides the latter process ning, constitute the components of this planning approach. Activities falling
with a broader perspective on issues classification. Unlike his earlier cate­ under the implementation and policy
such as the public interest.Conversely, gorization, Faludi now enters the poli: category are similarly developmental to
advocacy can itself adopt much of the tical domain.Marxist ideology is equa­ procedural theory in that "theoretical
synoptic m�thod in the production of ted with the total control-centred perspectives shift around the function­
alternative plans, while adhering to the approach, liberalist concepts with the alism typical of procedural theory".In­
principle of promoting and articulating partial control-centred approach and crementalism is presented as a proce­
the interest of disadvantaged groups. democratic ideals with the decision­ dural development in that it attempts to
Integration of role and method is evi­ centred view of planning.The conver­ construct an alternative · decision­
dent here. This is not without sig­ gence between the latter view ·and the making methodology.While the incre­
nificance since writings on the role of procedural model is clear: the �ork of mental approach arguably, and indeed
the planner have in the past frequently Banfield, Davidoff and Reiner, and originally, stands in opposition to the
excluded consideration of the proce­ Friend and Jessop, is cited as precedent. rational-comprehensive model, its
dure or methodology which would give Although Geddes' 'incipient procedural recognition as an outgrowth of the lat­
practical meaning to the role.Media­ approach is seen by Faludi (1982:90) as ter model is obviously valid.The major
tion is interesting in this context: Web­ carrying with it "the seeds of the deci­ opposition resides in the Marxist-based
ber (1978:7) perceives the purpose of sion-centred view", it is interpreted sole­ new political economy school which
the mediator/facilitator as being the ly as object-centred and characterized presents procedural theory as a mecha­
opening up of governmental processes as a "fallacious planning doctrine". nism of the capitalist state, the produc­
to all parties by "improving the process Simplistic as it appears today, Geddes' tive mode of whi_ch perpetuates un­
of public debate and public decision", model has made a clear (yet unsung) equal resource distribution and hence
but is not explicit in respect of the prac­ contribution to planning: it represents class conflict. The rational, technical
tical means of doing so.In addressing the first attempt to join civic substance and apolitical underpinnings of the
· the function of the planner within the with a structured decision-aiding me­ synoptic method and its offspring have
state apparatus, Roweis (1983) sees ur­ thodology. been roundly discredited through the
ban planning as professional mediation Ultimately, and interestingly, Faludi critical analysis and explanations of ad­
in territorial politics - as the interpre­ returns to his previous procedural/ vanced capitalist society by the propo­
tation of territorial realities and the substantive dichotomy by questioning nents of the political economy ap­
effect which such knowledge-based in­ whether a separation of the two cate­ proach. The radical left has thereby
terpretation has on political actions. gories is possible in decision-making, broadened the planning fraternity's un­
The general thrust is on the planning and whether the fundamental problems derstanding of socio-economic organi­
function in the production or reproduc­ facing planners do not require solutions zation and the power base of the state,
tion of workable spatial organization different to those conventionally ad­ but has offered little in the way of
and not on methodological prescrip­ vanced. The questions are rhetorical: prescription or procedure to the plan­
tion.More recently however, Susskind the substance of particular problems ner.
and Ozawa (1984) have used a number requires the application of appropriate The radical new humanism position is
of case studies to illustrate the modus procedures to generate solutions pecu- also placed by Healey, McDougall and

11
Thomas (1982:17) in opposition to the
procedural model, but again this an­
tithetical approach offers planning no
modus operandi - it tells planners
H.C.HIGHTOWER 1969 A . FALU DI 1972
"what they should do in a different
world but (says) little about what to do Theories concernin11
PROCEDURAL THEORY
now". This pithy statement serves to
I PROCEDURE (Theories of plonnin11)
underscore the previously-made point
on the need to extend theoretical ap­
proaches into the methodological do­
I PHENOMENA
SUBSTANTIVE THEORY
(Theories in plonnin11)
main, if such approaches are to be
amenable to practical implementation.

J.C.Mc CALLUM 1974 J.FRIEDMANN El B.HUDSON 1974

3. ELEMEN TS OF CLASSIFIED
Theories of Troditions. of
THEORIES

The classification of planning theory is

I GENERIC PLANNING PROCESS I RATIONALISM

not in itself a field of theory. It is essen­ I URBAN/REGIONAL PHENOMENA I EM PIRICISM

tially an analytical exercise that seeks to
uncover the underlying characteristics I SOCIET Y PHILOSOPHICAL SYNTHESIS
and premises of the areas of intellectual
investigation which fall under the gen­ ORGANIZATION DEVELOPMENT
eral heading of planning theory. As a
form of analysis, it is not concerned
with synthesis; the primary thrust is
that of disaggregation. The classifica­
B.M.HUDSON 1979 S.McCONNELL 1981
tion models have accordingly separated
out fields of planning theory in various
ways. (Figure 1) In so doing they have
SYN OPTIC PLANNING I PROCEDURAL THEORIES
(of plonninQ)
tended either to sever the connections
I
INCR EMENTAL PLANNING
between the fields or have failed to SUBSTANTIVE THEORIES
show how and where the connectivity TRANSACTIVE PLANNING (in planning)
occurs. It is of course this which has
occasioned criticism of procedural the­ ADVOCACY PLANNING I SOCIAL THEORIES

ory by Thomas and others; it is this that (for planning)

Roweis has attempted to correct and it RADICAL PLANNING

is this separation that, in the analytical
philosophical view of Taylor, should be
regarded as theoretically proper. It is
primarily this connective issue that has
A.FALUDI 1982
precipitated the procedural theory im­ P. HEALEY, G. McDOUGALL a M.TK>MAS
passe. Views of plannin11

I
PROCEDURAL PLANMNG THEORY
If however the concern is with practical DECISION-CENT RED I
issues of planning procedure rather INCRE MENTAUSM
I
I
than the nuances of theory (which is the
stance adopted in this paper), then ele­ CONTROL-CENTRED {
partia l
I PRAGMATISM I
ments can be taken from the body of .total -----'---- I
SOCIAL PLANNING I
theory and synthesised to show the.fac­
tual interdependency of the substantive I OBJECT -CENTRED I
I
NEW HUMANISM I
-----'---
and procedural components of plan­ I MPLEMENllTION
I
I
ning. The eight classification models AND POLICY I
I
reviewed previously have isolated and
categorised a variety of theories and,
I POLITICAL ECON01,1Y I
hence, elements. Of these elements, a
few are common to all models, some
appear in the majority of the models FIGURE l PLANNING THEORY: CLASSIFICATION MODELS
and others, although not explicitly
recognised in all models, have a sig­
nificance that should be acknowledged.
The ele.ments identified in this way pro- I

12
vide the basis for a synthetic framework making (Webber, 1978).The socio-eco­ crucible in which the role of the planner
for planning theory - for a framework nomic surrounds of planning activity is formed. The planner's role has been
developed around the interrelation­ are contained within the sustantive the­ variously defined over the years: techni­
ship of the elements of theoretical ap­ oretical categories in the majority of the cian, analyst, facilitator, mediator,
proaches. These elements are sum­ classification models previously dis­ teacher, inventor (Webber, 1978), en­
marised as follows: cussed. trepreneur, administrator, advocate and
guerrilla (Alexander, 1979). But the
- The political system. The proposi­ - Spatial organization. The preceding manner in which the role emerges from
tion that the political dimension ex­ elements are ultimately manifest in pat­ the theoretical and practical context -
tends across the planning field is no terns of land use, land development and and the extent to which it is consistent
longer a matter of debate.It is, perhaps, land values - all of historical and con­ with the perceptions and perspectives
largely through the work of the the­ temporary import to planning.The ear­ attaching to the context - is not infre­
orists of Marxist persuasion that there ly studies emphasizing the physical end­ quently obscure.The correlation of in­
is now a broad acceptance of the bond results of land use planning retain rele­ strumental rationality with community­
between planning and politics, and that vance, but have (in a theoretical sense at based utopian visions of the good life is,
between the planning function and the least) been supplemented by more prob­ for example, found "ironic'' by Dyck­
operations of the state. Since political ing investigations into the political un­ man (1983).There is, similarly, a !�ck of
parameters are perceived by the critics derpinnings of territorial allocations clarity in the transference of the plan­
as absent in procedural theory, it is (Roweis, 1983), state involvement in ning role to a compatible procedural
necessary that the linkage of politics areas such as housing (Marcuse, 1982) approach: "... Friedman gives no agen­
with procedure (and indeed with oth�r and the provision of public services d� to guide transactive dialogue, and
aspects of planning) be demonstrated. (Rich, 1982). Spatial organization is a Lmdblom provides neither size nor di­
The fundamental importance of the po­ substantive issue and is covered in the rection for any increment in particular.'
litical system has only fairly recently "phenomena" classifications of High­ (1:foch, 1984:341).The issue of the plan­
been reflected in classification models tower and McCallum, and in the sub­
mng role - if not its connections - is
- it is touched upon by Hudson and is stantive and object-centred categories addressed at varying levels of detail by
thereafter more clearly incorporated in in the two Faludi models. Friedmann and Hudson, Hudson,
the categorizations of McConnell Ethical stance. The four contextual ele­ Healey et al and Faludi.
Healey et al and Faludi (1982). ments outlined above are subject to
- Planning procedure. All the classifi�
- The institutional strncture. The po­ morally-grounded interpretation by the
cation models incorporate procedure as
litical system finds expression in the planner. This interpretation, this exer­
a category of planning theory. As ob­
formal institutions of the state and so­ cise of professional ethics, has a direct
served previously, the practical realisa­
ciety.These are the instruments of pow­ impact on the way he executes his re­
tion of the goals of any pla.nning ap­
er, through which the policy-making, sponsibilities.Issues central to the plan­
proach requires the application of an
resource distribution and other control ner's ethical stance - conscienc�; obli­
appropriate methodology.It is surely in
mechanisms are exercised. Planning gations, responsibilities and values -
the nature of a professional discipline
operates largely within the formal in­ have been fairly extensively covered in
- medical, legal or any other - to seek
stitutional structure, but not exclusive­ the literature recently (Klosterman,
1978; Howe and Kaufman, 1979; Bolen, to resolve a problem through the use of
ly, as Dyckman (1983) demonstrates.
1983) and serve to indicate that neutral �uitable modus operandi, and planning
The less formal institutions - citizen 1s not an exception.The overriding con­
groups, community organizations and attitudes to political and societal'condi­
tions are no longer tenable. Ethics has sideration is, however, that of the suita­
the like - also bear upon planning ac­ bility, the relevance, the appropriate­
tivity.Advocacy and mediation are ob­ deep and historical philosophical con­
notations and is tied to theoretical in­ ness of the adopted planning procedure
vious examples. The institutional ele­ in rrjation to the contextual, theoretical
ment is evident in the work of McCal­ terpretations of reality: socio-histori­
cal, politico-economic, epistomological, and ethical elements. There is,. to state
lum, Friedmann and Hudson, Faludi the obvious, no single procedure capa­
and Healey, �cDougall and Thomas. phenomenological, etc (de Neufville
1983). Such theories give direction t� ble of resolving all problems and no
- Socio-economic conditions. The so­ ethical approaches. Communications
problem amenable to all procedures.
cial and economic environment is of theory in the work of the critical the­ The outright rejection of the synoptic
course a contextual element of plan­ orists is an example. With the excep­ model fails to recognize its latent
ning. Socio-economic conditions are tions of Friedmann and Hudson, who propensity for modification, for adap­
indicative of the efficacy (or otherwise) en�er the ethical field in their philoso­ tation to circumstances, or to ac­
of state policy and have been at the base ph1cal synthesis category, McCallum, knowledge that the most effective
of much of the theorising in the' plan­ who touches on ethics briefly, arid methodology may well be a sensible
ning discipline. The justifiable concern mix of the attributes of more than one
McConnell who invokes the Rawlsian
with the circumstances of disadvan­ theory of justice in his "theories for procedural approach (Muller, 1982). In
taged sectors of society has, for exam­ the end, planning procedure or metho­
planning" category, the classification
ple, been extended from early sociologi­ models are silent on this issue. dology must address, and be informed
cal and physical studies into the fields by, the political, social, economic, ins
of political reform (Fainstein and Fain­ - Planning role. The contextual, theo­ stitutional and spatial issues that con­
_
stein, 1982) and democratic decision- retical and ethical elements make up the stitute the surrounds of planning - as

13
 well as by the ethical and operational The linkages between the elements - and would be morally bound to reject
(role) issues that derive from those sur­ horizontal, vertical and diagonal - in­ those institutional policies that further
rounds. dicate the interlacing nature of plan­ enti:ench the favoured position of the
Procedure is thus tied to context, and to ning theories, and thereby confront the affluent. Bolen (1983) refers to the
the obvious extent that problems reside practice of separating and delineating professional pull between the teleologi­
within and develop out of a particular theories into discrete categories. cal and deontological ethical view:
context, and exhibit characteristics While the intensity of the interconnec­ whether good ends should be sought
symptomatic of that context, it follows tivity between the various elements is regardless of means or whether good
that problem and procedure are in­ not constant and, indeed, may vary ends should be forfeited if the means
separable. Adam's (1932: 15) adage of with personal interpretation, the fact are intrinsically wron:g. Ethical judge­
the early 1930s is still apposite: "The art that there is a definite form of connec­ ment of the defensibility of politically
of planning is as much the art of per­ tion between each and every element is based institutional policies (or, equally,
ceiving the problem to be solved as it is deducible from the framework. For ex­ of private sector programmes) now falls
the art of presenting a design for its so­ ample, the vertical link 1-3-6 joins the squarely within the planner's bailiwick
lution". Accurately identified, the pro­ political system with the ethical stance - he can no longer assume the d·is­
blem should function as a determinant and role of the planner. To the obvious credited stance ofa neutral, value-free
of not only the methodology to be used extent that the "question is not whether scientist, technician or administrator.
in the search for a viable solution, but planning will reflect politics, but whose The planner's ethical position extends
also as a means of exposing contextual politics will it reflect" (Long in Kloster­ logically to that of the planner's role.
conditions - which then bear directly man, 1978:39), planning cannot but The early value-free planner g_ained
upon the role and ethical attitude of the enter ethical field. If the planner is guidance from logical-positivist and ra­
planner. party to the promotion of public policy tional means-ends approaches to sup­
objectives, it must be assumed that the port his role as a technical expert. Now,
dictates of his conscience and values the ethical concern with political and
4. SYNTHETIC FRAMEWORK
permit acceptance of those objectives. social equality, which stem from the
' The framework illustrated here (Figure An adherent to Rawl's principles of ideals of democratic theory, carry
2) incorporates the elements identified justice would support distributive poli­ through to the representational prin­
in the preceding section. cies which benefit the disadvantaged, ciples of the advocacy role. The analyti­
cal critics of capitalism have a moral
stance which leads them to socialist
theory and on to largely undefined roles
supportive of welfare and oppositional
INSTITUTIONAL
to market capitalism (Fainstein and
POLITICAL
SYSTEM / 'STUCTURE Fainstein, 1982).
/
/ 2 II The diagonal link 2-4-6 correlates the
f->,,,----------...,-�-1- - -/1
t / I role of the planner with planning proce­
/ dure and institutional structure. This
introduces, inter alia, the function of
/
/ the planner operating within the bu­
reaucracy, and the associated conflict
I A-----1.L-- SPATIAL
situation between official policy and
ETHICAL
STANCE I� -TI-----"
� I '10RGANIZATION planning ideology that can arise in
I 3 I
1
I 5 I problematic planning environments.
' ' 1,
I - - � .._____,
I I
,-- I The difficulty of undertaking an ad­
vocacy role in city government - of at­
tempting to reconcile sectoral interests
' ·"'· with the public interest - illustrates the
point. The activities of the private sec­
tor advocate, mediator or transactive
PLANNING 17-
I / - fl-7'
I '-----------..,,.._,+,-
t ', t SOCIO-ECON
- "-j CONDITIONS planner are perforce located within the
ROLE
I 6 I 7 I parameters of the institutionalized
,,_..!. �--/ power structure of the state. These
parameters also serve to define the
procedural approaches open to the
planner, in the form of statutory
prescriptions attaching to planning per­
FIGURE 2 SYNTHETIC FRAMEWORK mission.
The split procedural/substantive con­
vention is addressed in the 1-4-7 di­
I ' agonal linkage. Governmental polici�s
and decisions mirror politically-based

14
 values and goals, and are realisable that factual societal data formed the have opted for self-rule or autonomy -
through the application of planning basis of the plan-making process.This albeit under conditions of economic
method. Etzioni's and the Fainsteins' procedure has, over the decades, been dependency on the Republic. Racial
correlation of political value systems expanded by the incorporation of the segregation is more tangible in the ur­
with rational, incremental and other principles of systems and decision the­ ban areas of South Africa where the
planning procedures highlight the con­ ory, but its application remains tied to lower income Black population is, typi­
junction of political systems with plan­ real-world-derived data.The manner in cally, housed in extensive dormitory set­
ning methodology. Some political cli­ which the data has been interpreted and tlements on the urban fringe. A com­
mates are amenable to participatory has been procedurally applied may well parison of the density and environ­
processes while others are not and in­ be open to criticism on social, political mental patterns between these settle­
cline toward processes that accommo­ and ideological grounds, but the fact re­ ments and White suburbia provides a
date pre-determined policy ends. Fur­ mains that the data is fed into the clear picture of socio-economic dif­
ther, the procedural mode of planning procedural model and the model is used ferentiation in the cities.
must be a response to a particular issue as a practical methodological medium Planning for urban regions is currently
or problem, which cannot but be a for addressing and seeking to resolve executed under the Guide Plan proce­
reflection of socio-economic condi­ planning problems in the real world. dure of the government Department of
tions - which are, in turn, a manifesta­ Constitutional Development and Plan­
tion of the resource-distributive goals 5. SOUTH AFRICA
ning.These Guide Plans designate long
of the political system. The planning situation in..,the Republic term land uses on, inter alia, the basis of
Turbulent socio-economic conditions of South Africa provides an example of state policy for industrial location and
may preclude the use of sophisticated, the working of the elemental linkages population distribution. The Guide
time-consuming methodologies, and outlined in the synthetic framework. Plan, which is a binding legal docu­
call for the adoption of less complex, While there is today a universal aware­ ment, is a blueprint (that product of a
possibly piece-meal, planning proce­ ness of the untenable conditions per­ discredited form of planning) and
dures; the environmental orientation of taining in the Republic under the doc­ makes little concession to the prospect
the traditional comprehensive planning trine of apartheid, less is known of the or inevitability of change. The proce­
approach has applicability in physical effect of the separatist racial policy on dure that spawns the Guide Plan is
improvement programmes. The latter planning activity and procedures. perhaps best described as a modifi_ed
serves as an illustration of the ethical Apartheid has in fact given planning in version of the comprehensive planning
stance/planning procedure/spatial or­ South Africa a "split personality, two approach. It certainly cannot be con­
ganization (3-4-5) combination. Inner faces, clearly evident in the marked strued as rationalistic since the proce­
city physical renovation requires of the · differentiation in ethical approach in dure is constrained in terms of alterna­
planner a clear sense of responsibility in planning for the Blacks and Whites. tives and the like, and is exclu�ionary in
respect of the affected community, and Planning for the White group ha� been respect of purpose. It is a process that is
the formulation of a modus operandi prescriptively permissive, that for the oriented toward the protection of the
that is compatible with those commu­ Black sector has assumed a form of interests of the White minority and is
nity-directed concerns. puppetry played out under the guiding thus consistent with the prevailing po­
The above examples seek to demon­ hand of the state" (Muller 1983: 18). litical ideology.
strate the inter-dependency and interac­ Thus, "planning in South Africa emer­ The role of the planner operating
tion of the elements of planning theory. ges as a comparatively mildly con­ within such procedural parameters can
On this basis, the conception of the syn­ straining process in the White social be construed as that of the apolitical
optic procedure as a methodological system and as a highly constraining technical expert. It is a role centred
approach based primarily on the process in the Black social system". around the production of means to
premises of rationality and divorced (Fair and Muller 1981: 179).Since plan­ meet the predetermined ends of state
from the socio-political surrounds of ning for the White group follows by and policy.As Catanese (1984:59) says "The
planning has limited validity. large the conventions of the British apolitical-technical planner uses tradi­
It has validity only where planning planning system and the operation of tional techniques and methods of plan­
methodology and procedural planning the free market, it reflects only partially ning ... They try to perform these tech­
theory are seen as synonymous and pro­ the workings of government policy. nical functions without invoking their
cedural theory is perceived as an ab­ Planning for the Black majority has political and social values, although
stract model for decision-making: an however been an integral activity in the many will acknowledge that this is not
intellectual· construct, a "discipline of implementation of the apartheid policy always possible". This latter comment
the mind which does not itself make and illustrates well the interaction be­ pushes role definition toward ethical
claims about the nature of reality" tween context, substance and proce­ considerations. There is an ethical
(Thomas, 1985:58). But this denies dure. judgement in the formulation of a pro­
both the historical development of the The political system is clearly manifest blem - about what is included in the
procedural base of planning and the use in the spatial organization of South problem - and there is consequently
of the rational-comprehensive process African society. Separation in space is an ethical attitude in the adoption of a
in practice. The incipient Geddesian evident at the national level in, the form planning procedure which seeks to re­
survey-analysis-plan procedure was de­ of designated "homelands" for the var­ solve the problem. It must accordingly
vised precisely as a means of ensuring ious Black tribal groups, four of which be concluded that those planners, con-

15
tributing directly to the implementation
of the state's objectives have an ethical
stance congruent with apartheid ideol­
ogy.
But this is, in my view, a negation of the
ideology of planning; a dismissal of the
principles on which planning was
founded and on which its philosophical
superstructure has been built. The 19th
century seeds of modern planning were
planted in the fertile bed of social re­
form in Great Britain and the United
States: in the sanitary, public health and
housing reform movements which
sought to expose and remove the repre­
hensible living conditions of the
labouring poor (Muller, 1983). This dis­
ciplinary responsibility to the disadvan­
taged sector of society remains an ethi­
cal imperative today. At a time of tur­
bulance and change in South Africa,
that responsibility must be recognized
by the planning fraternity and must be
translated into role and procedure. This
must be done in the interests of the
credibility, and hence effectiveness, of
the planning profession in the changed
social order of the future.

6. CONCLUSION
The foregoing brief review of South
African planning illustrates the fun­
damental linkages that join political
system, institutional structure, socio­
economic conditions and spatial order
with planning role and ethical stance.
The practical inter-relationship of the
various elements with planning proce­
dure places questions at the door of the
convention that separates the substan­
tive and procedural components of
planning theory. Further, if theoretical
rigour precludes the meshing of fields
of planning theory then, in th.e quest to
improve the efficacy of planning-in­
practice, it is defensible and sensible to
extract pertinent elements from the cor­
pus of theory and link these to planning
procedure. Such synthesis is necessary
if planning theory is to support and be
complementary to practice.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
Financial assistance rendered by the Human
Sciences Research Council through its Manage­
ment Committee of the HSRC Investigation into
Research Methodology for undertaking the re­
search is hereby acknowledged. The views ex­
pressed in this work or the conclusions drawn are
those of the writer and should not be regarded as
those of the Human Sciences Research Council or
the Management Committee of the HSRC Jnves- /
tigation into Research Methodology.

16
 REFERENCES Etzioni, A. 1968. The Active Society: A Klosterman, R. E. 1978. "Foundations
Adams, T. 1 932. Recent Advances in Theory of Society and Political Pro­ for Normative Planning'.' Journal of
Town Planning. London, J and A cesses. New York. The Free Press. the American Institute of Planning.
Churchill. Fainstein, N. N. and Fainstein, S. 1971. Vol. 44, No. 1, January.
Alexander, E. R. 1 979. Planning Roles "City Planning and Political Values:' Marcuse, P. 1 982. "Determinants of
and Context. In Catanese, A. J. and Urban Affairs Quarterly. March. State Housing Policies: West Ger­
Snyder, J. C. (Eds). Introduction to many and the United States!'In Fain­
Urban Planning, New York, Mc­ Fainstein, N. N. and Fainstein, S. 1982. stein, N and Fainstein, S (Eds). Ur­
"New Debates in Urban Planning:
Graw-Hill.
theImpact of Marxist Theory within ban Policy under Capitalism. Beverly
Alexander, E. R. 1984. ''After Ration­ Hills, Sage Publications.
the United States'.' In Paris, C. (Ed).
ality, What?" Journal of the Ameri­ McCallum D. J. 1974. "Planning The­
Critical Readings in Planning Theory.
can Planning Association. Vol. 50, Oxford. Pergamon Press. ory in Planning Education!' The
No. I, Winter.
Fair, T. J. D. and Muller, J.G. 1981. "The Planner. Vol. 60, No. 6, June.
Banfield, E. C. 1 955. In Meyerson, M. McConnell, S. 1981. Theories for Plan­
Johannesburg Metropolitan Area"
and Banfield, E . C . Politics, ning. London. Heinemann.
In Pacione, M (Ed). Urban Pro­
Planning, and the Public Interest. blems and Planning in the Developed Mcloughlin, J. B. 1969. Urban and
New York. The Free Press. Regional Planning: A Systems Ap­
World. London. Groom Helm.
Banfield, E. C. 1959. "Ends and Means proach. London. Faber and Faber.
Faludi, A. 1973. Planning Theory. Ox­
in Planning:' International Social Muller, J. G. 1 982. "Promotive Plan­
Science Journal. Vol. II, No. 3. ford. Pergamon Press:
ning: Towards an Approach to Plan­
Bolen, R. S. 1967. "Emerging Views of Faludi, A. 1 982. "Three Paridigms of ning for the Disadvantaged'.' In
Planning!' Journal of the American Planning Theory.' In Healey, P, Healey, P, McDougall, G and Tho­
Institute of Planners. Vol. 3, No. 4, McDougall, G and Thomas, M J mas, M J (Eds) Planning Theory:
July. (Eds). Planning Theory: Prospects Prospects for the 1980s. Oxford. Per­
Bolen, R. S. 1983. "The Structure of for the 1980s Oxford. Pergamon gamon Press.
Ethical Choice in Planning Practice:' Press. Muller, J.G. 1983. Theory and Practice:
Journal of Planning Education and Friedmann, J. and Hudson, B. 1974. The Janus Face of Planning. Johan­
Research. Vol. 3, No. I. "Knowledge and Action: a Guide to nesburg. Witwatersrand University
Baybrooke, D. and Lindholm, C. 1963. Planning Theory.' Journal of the Press.
A Strategy of Decision. New York. American Institute of Planning. Vol. Rich, R. C. 1982. "The Political Econo­
The Free Press. 40, No. I, January. my of Public Services:' In Fainstein,
Catanese, A. J. 1984. The Politics of Healey, P., McDougall, G. and Thomas, N and Fainstein, S (Eds) Urban Poli­
Planning and Development. Beverley M. J. 1982. "Theoretical Debates in cy Under Capitalism. Bev�rly Hills.
Hills, Sage Publications. Planning: Towards a Cohererit Dia­ Sage Publication.
Dalton, L. C. 1986. "Why the Rational logue'.' In Healey, McDougall and Roweis, S. T. 1983. "Urban Planning as
Paradigm Persists - The Resistance Thomas (Eds) Planning Theory: Professional Mediation of Territorial
of Professional Education and Prac­ Prospects for the 1980s. Oxford. Per­ Politics:• Environment and Planning.
tice to Alternative Forms of Plan­ gamon Press. D: Society and Space. Vol. I.
ning:• Journal of Planning Education Hightower, H. C. 1969. "Planning The­ Scott, A. J. and Roweis, S. T. 1977. "Ur­
and Research. Vol. 5, No. 3. ory in Contemporary Professional ban Planning in Theory and Prac­
Davidoff, P. and Reiner, T. A. 1962. ''A Education'.' Journal of the American tice: A Reappraisal'.' Environment
Choice Theory of Planning'.' Journal Institute of Planners. Vol. 35, No. 5, and Planning. A. Vol. 9.
of American Institute of Planners. September. Susskind, L. W. and Ozawa, C. 1984.
Vol. 28, No. 2, !\fay. Hoch, C. J. 1984. "Pragmatism, Plan­ "Mediated Negotiation in the Public
Dekker, F. and Mastop, H. 1979. "Stra­ ning and Power.' Journal of Planning Sector: the Planner as Mediator.'
tegic Choice: an Application in Education and Research. Vol. 4, No. Journal of Planning Education and
Dutch Planning Practice:' Planning 2. Research. Vol. 4, No: I.
Outlook. Vol. 22, No. 3, Winter. Hoch, C.J. 1984A. "Doing Good and Taylor, N. 1984. "A Critique of Mate­
de Neufville, J.I. 1983. "Planning The­ Being Right!' Journal of the Ameri­ rialist Critiques of Procedural Plan­
ory and Practice: Bridging the Gap!' can Planning Association. Vol. 50, ning Theory.' Environment and Plan­
Journal of Planning Education and No. 3. Summer. ning B. Vol. ll.
Research. Vol. 3, No. I. Howe, E. and Kaufman, J. L. 1979. "The Thomas, H. 1985. Analytical Philoso­
Dyckman, J. W. 1 983. "Reflections on Ethics of Contemporary American phy and Planning Theory. Planning
Planning Practice in an Age of Reac­ Planners'.' Journal of the American Outlook. Vol. 28, No. 2.
tion'.' Journal of Planning Education Planning Association. Vol. 45, No. 3, Thomas, M. J. 1 979. "The Procedural
and Research. Vol. 3, No. I. July. Theory of A. Faludi!' Planning Out­
Hudson, B. M. 1 979. "Comparison of look Vol. 22, No. 2. Autumn.
Etzioni, A. 1 967. "Mixed-Scanning: a . Webber, M. 1 978. "A Difference Para­
'Third' Approach to Decision-mak­ Current Planning Theories: Coun­
digm for Planning!' In Burchell, R W
ing:' In Faludi, A (Ed). A Reader in terparts and Contradictions!' Jour­ and Sternlieb, G. (Eds) Planning The­
Planning Theory. Oxford. Pergamon nal of the American Planning Associ­ ory in the 1980s. New Brunswick The
Press. ation. Vol. 45, No. 4, October. Centre for Urban Policy Research.

17