The Evolution of Communicative Planning Theory
There are a number of questions that seem to nag almost every planning student: Why are some plans successful, while others are not? What makes a plan meaningful and, therefore, useful to the people it affects? How can we design processes that help ensure that plans become meaningful and, therefore, actually used? In other words, how can we help create plans that will make a difference? Every planning student ought to be familiar with the work of Judith Innes because she has devoted her career to exploring these questions.
Allen, P. M. (2001) “A complex systems approach to learning in adaptive networks.” International Journal of Innovation Management no. 5 (02):149-180.
Allison, G. T. (1971) “Essence of decision.” Boston: Little, Brown no. 536.
Altshuler, A. (1965) “The goals of comprehensive planning.” Journal of the American Institute of Planners no. 31 (3):186-195.
Alvesson, M. and Skoldberg, K. (2000) Reflexive Methodology: New Vistas for Qualitative Research. London: SAGE.
Argyris, C. S., and Schön, D. (1996) “DA (1996) Organizational learning II: Theory, method and practice.” Reading, PA: Addison-Wesley.
Berkes, F., Colding, J. and Folke, C. (2003) Navigating social-ecological systems: building resilience for complexity and change. Vol. 393: Cambridge University Press Cambridge.
Booher, D. E., and Innes, J. E. (2002) “Network Power in Collaborative Planning.” Journal of Planning Education and Research no. 21:221-236.
(1979) “The two-communities theory and knowledge utilization.” American Behavioral Scientist no. 22 (3):459-70.
Capra, F. (1982) The Turning Point. New York: Simon and Schuster.
Castells, M. (1996) The rise of the network society. Vol. 1 of The information age: Economy, society and culture. Massachusetts and Oxford: Blackwell.
(1997) The information age: Economy, society and culture. Vol. 2, The power of identity.
Malden, MA: Blackwell. (1998) End of Millennium, The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture Vol. III.
Malden, MA: Blackwell. Cilliers, P. (2005) “Knowing complex systems” Managing Organizational Complexity: Philosophy, Theory, and Application.” ISBN, 1952580194 (2005): 7-19.
Clark, W. C., and Dickson, N. M. (2003) “Sustainability science: the emerging research program.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences no. 100 (14):8059-8061.
Connick, S. and Innes, J. (2003) Outcomes of Collaborative Water Policy Making: Applying Complexity Thinking to Evaluation. Berkeley, CA: University of California at Berkeley Institute of Urban and Regional Development.
De Neufville and Innes, J. (1975) Social Indicators and Public Policy: Interactive Processes of Design and Application. Amsterdam: Elsevier Scientific Publishing Company.
(1986) “Human Rights Reporting as a Policy Tool: An Examination of the State Department Country Reports.” Human Rights Quarterly (8):681-699.
De Neufville and Innes, J. (1978) “Validating Policy Indicators.” Policy Sciences (10):171-188.
Fainstein, S. S. (2000) “New directions in planning theory.” Urban affairs review no. 35 (4):451-478.
(2005) “Planning theory and the city.” Journal of Planning Education and Research no. 25 (2):121-130.
(2010) The just city. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
Fisher, R. and Ury, W. L. (1981) Getting to yes: Negotiating agreement without giving in. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Forester, J. (1982) “Planning in the face of power.” Journal of the American Planning Association no. 48 (1):67-80.
Friedmann, J. (1987) Planning in the public domain: From knowledge to action. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Funtowicz, S. O. and Ravetz, J.R. (1993) “Science for the post-normal age.” Futures no. 25 (7): 739-755.
Gibbons, M., Limoges, C., Nowotny, H., Schwartzman, S., Scott, P., and Trow, M. (1994) The new production of knowledge: The dynamics of science and research in contemporary societies. London: Sage.
Giddens, A. (1984) The Constitution of Society. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Habermas, J. (1984) The Theory of Communicative Action: Vol. 1: Reason and the Rationalization of Society, trans. T. McCarthy, Boston: Beacon.(Original work published 1981).
Hoch, C. J. (2007) “Pragmatic Communicative Action Theory.” Journal of Planning Education and Research (26):272-283.
Huxley, M., and Yiftachel, O. (2000) “New paradigm or old myopia? Unsettling the communicative turn in planning theory.” Journal of Planning Education and Research no. 19 (4):333-342.
Hwang, S.W. (1996) “The implications of the nonlinear paradigm for integrated environmental design and planning.” Journal of Planning Literature no. 11:167-180.
Innes, J. (1995) “Planning Theory’s Emerging Paradigm: Communicative Action and Interactive Practice.” Journal of Planning Education and Research no. 14 (3):183-190.
Innes, J. E. (1998) “Information in communicative planning.” Journal of the American Planning Association no. 64 (1):52-63.
Innes, J. E., and Booher, D.E. (1999) “Consensus Building as Role Playing and Bricolage: Toward a Theory of Collaborative Planning.” Journal of the American Planning Association no. 65 (1):9-26.
(2004) “Reframing Public Participation: Strategies for the 21st Century.” Planning Theory and Practice no. 5 (4):419-436.
(2010) Planning with Complexity: An introduction to collaborative rationality for public policy. New York: Routledge.
(2014) “A turning point for planning theory? Overcoming dividing discourses.” Planning Theory:1-19.
Innes, J. E. (1990) Knowledge and Public Policy: The Search for Meaningful Indicators. Second Expanded Edition ed. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
(1992) “Group Processes and the Social Construction of Growth Management: Florida, Vermont, and New Jersey.” Journal of the American Planning Association no. 58 (4):440-453.
Kahneman, D. (2011) Thinking Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Kates, RW, and Clark, WC. (1999) “Our common journey.” National Academy, Washington DC.
Levi-Strauss, C. (1966) The Savage Mind The Nature of Human Society Series. London: Weidenfeld & Nicholson.
Mandelbaum, S. J., Mazza, L., and Burchell, R. W. (1996) Explorations in planning theory. Rutgers, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research.
Mouffe, C. (1999) Deliberative democracy or agonistic pluralism? Social research, 66(3), 745-758.
Neuman, M. (2000) “Communicate this! Does consensus lead to advocacy and pluralism?” Journal of Planning Education and Research no. 19 (4):343-350.
Prigogine, I. and Stengers, I. (1984) Order out of chaos. New York: Bantam.
Rittel, H. WJ, and Webber, M.M. (1973) “Dilemmas in a general theory of planning.” Policy sciences no. 4 (2):155-169.
Rivlin, A. M. (1971) Systematic thinking for social action (Vol. 3). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.
Sandercock, L. (2003) “Out of the closet: The importance of stories and storytelling in planning practice.” Planning Theory & Practice no. 4 (1):11-28.
Stacey, R. D. (2001) Complex responsive processes in organizations: Learning and knowledge creation. London: Routledge.
Susskind, L. and Cruickshank, J. L. (1987) Breaking the impasse: consensual approaches to resolving public disputes. New York: Basic Books.
Susskind, L. and Ozawa, O. (1984) “Mediated negotiation in the public sector: The planner as mediator.” Journal of Planning Education and Research no. 4 (1):5-15.
Swart, R.J., Raskin, P. and Robinson, J. (2004) “The Problem of the Future: Sustainability Science and Scenario Analysis.” Global Environmental Change no. 14:137-146.
Tewdwr-Jones, M. and Allmendinger, P. (1998) “Deconstructing communicative rationality: a critique of Habermasian collaborative planning.” Environment and planning A no. 30 (11): 1975-1989.
Tsoukas, H. (2004) Complex knowledge: Studies in organizational epistemology. Oxford University Press.
World Commission on Environment Development. (1987) Our common future. Vol. 383: Oxford University Press Oxford.
Yiftachel, O. (1999) “Planning theory at a crossroad: The third Oxford conference.” Journal of Planning Education and Research no. 18 (3):267-269.
Keywords:Planning, Planning Theory, Communicative Planning Theory, Judith Innes
Copyright (c) 2015 Leonard Machler, Dan Milz
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.