Development Theory

LECTURE 2

Presenter: Maria Ana Pulido, CE, EnP

A. Development Theory
 UN Decades of Development
Decade Themes & Frameworks
1960-70 “Growth at all Costs;”
–“Grow first, clean up later.”
1970-80 “Growth with Equity” and variants
–“Growth with Redistribution
–“Growth with Participation”
–“Social Transformation”
–“Integrated Area Development”
1980-90 “New International Economic
Order”
–“Structural Adjustment”
1990-2000 “Sustainable Development”
2000-2015 “Millennium Development Goals”
Supporting Schools of Thought
Modernization Theory
Growth Pole & Trickle Down
Neo-Classical Economics
Neo-Marxist Dependency Theories
World Systems Theory
Neo-Populism
Theories of Alternative Development &
Another Development
Neo-Liberal Economics
Reagonomics & Thatcherism
Theories of Globalization
Ecology Schools
Environmental Ethics
Theories of Human Capital and
Social Capital
Sustainable Development
• Sustainable Development is “development that
meets the needs of the present without
compromising the ability of future generations to
meet their own needs.”
– Bruntland Commission (World Commission on
Environment and Development, 1987)
• Sustainable Development consists of 3
fundamental tenets: (Dr. Julian Agyeman, Bullard
and Evans 2003)
– That we should strive to increase the quality of human
life, now and into the future;
– That this should be done in a just and equitable
manner;
– That it should be done while respecting the limits of
supporting ecosystems
CONCEPT OF SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT
(CED 1987)
Sustainable development is a dynamic process
In which the development and utilization of resources,
Orientation of technological development, Institutional change
And direction of investment are all in harmony and enhance both
Current and future potentials to meet human needs and aspiration
TECHNOLOGIES

RESOURCES

INSTITUTIONS INVESTMENTS

Conceptual Framework or Sustainable Development

Sustainable Development Paradigm

Services Well Being

Stocks Standard
& Capacities Needs of Living
Assets
Quality of
Goods Life
Teach people
how to fish
Elements of Sustainable Development
• “Needs + Capacities = Assets + Conservation”
• ‘Needs’, in particular of the world’s poor today
• Sustainable development is about well-being now
• Obligation to the present is Poverty Alleviation. The poor cannot raise
their own well being without better provision of assets and technology
• Hicksian Concept of Income – The amount that can be consumed
during a week and still leave the individual as well off at the end of the
week. The main objective is to keep capital intact.
• ‘Build Up Capacities to Meet Needs.’ Sustainable development is
about creating ‘capacities’ for raising per capita well being, living
standards, quality of life. Capacities are determined by the stocks of
assets which can be converted into goods and services which
contribute to “well being”
• ‘Limitedness of Capacities.’
• Finite “carrying capacity” of ecosystems
• Finite “caring capacity” of institutions/social organizations
• limited capacities of the state of technology to answer problems
Elements of Sustainable Development

• Equity and Justice.

• Intra-generational Equity – fair sharing among today’s nations
and peoples
• Inter-generational Equity - Obligation to the future, to ensure
future well-being, leave to future generations the capacity to be
as well-off as we are
• Biogeographic Equity – balance among diverse ecosystems in
terms of human use and treatment
• Spatial Equity – balance between urban and rural areas.
 Three Schools of Thought in
Socio-Economic Development and Poverty
Alleviation
• Increase Income
– Economic Growth at all Costs
– ‘Development as Raising Incomes’
– Nobel Laureates Robert Solow & Simon Kuznets
– Neo-Liberals Milton Friedman & Friedrich von Hayek
• Meet Needs
– Social Development
– ‘Development as Meeting Needs’
– Nobel Laureate Dag Hammarsjkold et.al.
• Build Capacities
– Sustainable Development
– ‘Development as Capacitation or Capability-Building’
– Nobel Laureate Amartya Sen
B. Planning Theory
Major Schools of Thought in Planning
• Planning as Social Physics – (positivist Regional Science and
Regional Economics) Planning aims to discover presumed
natural laws or regular occurrences in social phenomena so
that these phenomena can be better predicted and managed.
• Planning and Social Darwinism – Planning studies human
societies as biological organisms subject to the laws of natural
evolution such as competition, adaptation, predation,
parasitism, co-evolution, survival of the fittest, matira ang
matibay, etc.
• Planning as Social Engineering – Planning is a State function
that aims to create purposive change by directing human
behavior through a combination of persuasive
and coercive strategies.
Major Schools of Thought in Planning
• Instrumentalist View – Planning needs no theoretical mooring
and has no inherent value apart from its being a pragmatic tool
to bring about results.
• Planning as Communicative Action– Planning aims to
understand & describe social interaction among sectors for
meaningful community discourse, harmonization of interests,
and collaborative action (interpretive)
• Critical or Radical Planning – Planning aims to smash myths
and mobilize people to radically (radix, i.e. roots) change
structures of domination & subjugation in society.
• Systems Theory of Planning – Planning functions like a
machine or computer unit that utilizes information and
feedback in an iterative, cyclical, self-feeding
fashion inorder to effectively describe, simulate,
forecast, and project societal conditions.
Instrumentalist View of Planning
• John Dewey, University of Chicago
• Instrumentalism -- the belief that theories are useful tools for
making predictions but cannot be literally true or false. Good
theories are only guides to successful action; it is immaterial
whether they represent the world accurately or not. how theory
works and its consequences is the standard for action and thought
• Spatial analysis and concepts may not accurately reflect reality.
Results are what count. What matters is what works.
• CRITIQUE: When there is no overall theory or general principle
that guide inquiry, actions tend to become…
– Disjointed, segmented, incoherent, and un-integrated
– Actions are Casuistic – “case-to-case” basis –
– Over time, decisions will tend to negate or nullify each
other amidst changing circumstances and evolving
conditions of the landscape.
Incremental Planning – also called “Disjointed
Incrementalism”
• Charles E. Lindbloom -- "the science of muddling through." also called
"disjointed incrementalism” or “partisan mutual adjustment"
• Unified public interest can not be defined; instead it is determined through
negotiation and political compromises.
• Plan is determined through politics; Planner acts as mediator to determine
common interest.
• At times, planning becomes a practice of what is feasible politically instead
of what is technically efficient and effective.
• policy decisions are better understood, and better arrived at, in terms of the
‘push and tug’ of established institutions that are adept at getting things
done through decentralized bargaining processes best suited to a free
market and a democratic political economy.
• Policy-makers have “cognitive limits” – they cannot “optimize decision-
making” (the best possible decision), they can only “satisfice” (compromise)
• Hence, Decision-making is a succession of approximations. Robert Dahl
• Mel Weber – planning has to be pluralistic.
• Robert Dahl – advocate of pluralism
• Amitai Etzioni: Mixed Scanning: A Third Approach to Decision-Making
 Systems Theory of Planning

0
+
A B B
Norbert Wiener
0
+
• “Cybernetics” (Norbert Wiener,1948;Ashby,1956) – interdisciplinary science dealing
with communication and control systems in living organisms, machines, and
organizations
• “System is a set or group of interconnected components interacting to form a unity
or integrated whole.” “Relationships” tie the system together
• Crude Depiction of Linear System: Input –►Throughput (Process) -► Output
• Cyclical System – free-flowing circuit
• Flows Through the System ► Flow of Energy or Matter ► Flow of Information /
Feedback
• “Iteration” -- executing the same set of instructions a given
number of times or until a specified result is obtained;
completion of a to-and-fro process
Systems Theory of Planning

• System Description – Scan, Profiling,

Goal Formulation
• System Modeling – Projection of Goals,
Forecasting, Scenario Building
• System Projection – Evaluation of
Scenarios and Projections
• System Synthesis – Evaluation of
Alternatives
• System Control – Evaluation of
Performances
 Systems Approach by George
Chadwick
Problem Finding

Goal Formulation System Description

FEEDBACK

FEEDBACK
Projection of goals System Modelling

Evaluation of projection System projection

Evaluation of alternatives System Synthesis

Evaluation of
performance System Control
John Friedmann’s Radical Theory of Planning
• Planning promotes human growth by the use of
rational procedures of thought and action,
identifies best way of attaining needs, is deeply
concerned with the relation of goals to collective POLICIES
decisions and strives for comprehensiveness in KNOWLEDGE
policy and program.
• "all planning must confront the meta-theoretical
problem of how to make technical knowledge
effective in informing public actions"
• Planning is the component that links technical ACTION
knowledge with actions in the public domain.
• Social action is needed to promote interests of
disadvantaged
• Action → Activist → Mobilization SOCIAL SOCIAL
• Friedmann identifies five important aspects LEARNING REFORM
where planning plays a role:
1. Every planning activity involves a territorial/spatial
component
2. Planning activities respond to a social rationality
3. Planning facilitates market activities while SOCIAL
restricting noxious ones or even substituting the
market in others MOBILIZ
4. Planning in the public domain is conflictive and ATION
therefore political
5. Planning requires massive support and ability to
mobilize society in order to be successful
 ‘Advocacy Planning’
• Activist or Advocacy Planning -- Planners should advocate for those
who are powerless and disenfranchised. Goals are Social justice and
Equity in Housing, provision of services, Environment.
• Planners should work for the redistribution of power and resources to
the powerless and the disadvantaged; to defend the interests of weak Paul Davidoff
and the poor against the established powers of business and
government.
• Paul Davidoff (1965): – father of “advocacy planning,” idol of Barack
Hussein Obama during Obama’s community development work in
Chicago. Called for development of plural plans rather than a unitary
plan, claimed that “public interest” is not scientific but is political.
• Saul David Alinsky (Rules for Radicals, 1971) Conflict Pragmatics or
Conflict Confrontation as Philosophy in Community Organizing –
highlight “victimization” of the last, the least, and the lost.
– anarcho-syndicalist community-organizing and mosquito-like mass mobilization that Saul David Alinsky
confronts the State and dares the State to live up to its own principles – but without
Marxist/Maoist ideology of taking over the State
• Sherry Arnstein – “Eight Rungs in the Ladder of Citizen Participation”
(1969)
• Alan Altshuler – Allan
• Allan D. Heskin (1977) – concepts of ‘empowerment’ Heskin
• Norman Krumholtz – originator of “transactive planning” and became
President of the American Institute of Certified Planners
• Thomas Reiner – “A Choice Theory of Planning”
• David F. Mazziotti - “The Underlying Assumptions of Advocacy Planning”

Norman Krumholtz
 Communicative Planning
• Frankfurt School of Social Critical Theory; Jürgen
Habermas, ‘The Last of the Great Modernists’
and his followers in North America John Forester, Communicative Communicative
Anthony Giddens, Patsy Healy, Innes, D. Hill Competence
Rationality (enabling rather
• Planning is more ‘transactive’ (dialectical, to-and- (Science, Tech, than dominating,
fro)– finding ‘common ground’ and common Reason) Civil Society,
aspirations among conflicting groups or divergent Family, Mass
Media)
traditions; rather than ‘transactional’ (casuistic
compromises for short-term benefit)
• Institutional oppression limits ability of all to
have their interests met. Group interest has to be Communicative
determined through dialogue. Action (agreement
• Dialogue between “Systems of Rationality” with others,
(economics, science, capitalism, technology) and democratic
decision-making,
the “Life-world” (sphere of family, culture, non- collaborative
monetary values) action)
• Rational Dialogue based on Trust, Intersectoral
Collaboration, Inclusivity, deliberative democracy.
 Feminist Perspectives in Planning
• Feminists criticize Settlements Planning as being created by men who shared
certain assumptions about how cities operate, and represent a partial view of
urban life
• Planning models assume urban patterns are shaped by economic trade-offs :
– Trade-off between desire to live in suburban neighborhood appropriate to
one’s economic status and the Need to live close to the city center for
employment opportunities
– Traditional planning models assume a spatial separation of workplace and
home – this is no longer appropriate
– Models tend to reflect an urban structure that isolates women who do not
participate in the urban labor market.
• Models assume only one person is a wage worker — the male head; Ignore
dual-income families. Most families require two wage earners.
• Households headed by single women -- Problems of timing and organization
are priority for women who combine wage labor and domestic labor
• Women contend with a larger array of factors in making locational decisions
– Distances to child care and school facilities
– Other important services important for different members of a family
Feminist Perspectives in Planning
• Feminist critics have suggested that one of the
reasons for women’s relatively restricted
access to a range of public spaces is because
of the general assumption that women are in
need of protection from the hurly-burly of the
public arena. Women’s construction as
dependent on men, both economically and
morally … reduces their rights to freedom in
public spaces (McDowell 1999: 105)
 Planning Approaches Emanating from Schools of Thought
Planning Theoretical Approach Features Planner’s role Planning
School bases Areas

Traditional Organization Imperative planning detailing or Planner as hired Master planning

Planning (e.g theory (top-down) – tends to finetuning consultant or Urban Design
under Scientific command and to issue grand concept technician Private sector
authoritarian management specific directives from a dictator site planning
rule) or ruling elite

Rational- System Allocative or Application of Planner as self- Transportation

Adaptive Dynamics Regulatory Planning – reason and correcting Land use
Planning also Theory concerned with solving facts Scientist Capital facilities
called Policy chronic problems by searching for the planning
“Synoptic” Analysis way of allocating “correct” way to
Planning (e.g. resources efficiently plan Policy Planning
Tradition
SURP) (Public Adm) and enacting policies,
Criticized as rules, standards
‘normative’ ‘
utopian’
Strategic Corporate Innovative Planning – Oriented Planner as a Local Economic
Planning management improve or develop toward results visionary or development
(e.g. corporate whole systems, or outcomes entrepreneur
business, introduce new goals,
NEDA) shape change
 Planning Approaches Emanating from Schools of Thought
Planning Theoretical Approach Features Planner’s role Planning
School bases Areas

Incremental Liberal Transactional – finds Satisfaction of Planner as a oAcross the

Planning (e.g. politics compromises among contending mediator of the board
DPWH, DBM) contending grounds; groups instead of public and
utility special interest
maximization groups
Disjointed

Equity Planning Historical Activist or Advocacy Social justice Planner as an oEnvironment

(e.g. DAR, NAPC) Materialism Planning -- Plan should Empowering advocate (pro oHousing
Social work for the the powerless bono) oCommunity
Reform redistribution of power development
Tradition and resources to the
Social powerless and the
Critical disadvantaged
Theory
Democratic Social Indicative Planning – lays Public Planner as an oAcross the
Learning down general guidelines participation educator of board
Trad’n and remains advisory in Bottom-up citizen’s choices
Democratic nature planning
Theory
The Planning Process is Cyclical
Step 7: Step 1:
Monitor, Engage
Evaluate Partners and
and Review Build
Plan (self- Consensus
correction)

Step 6:
Implement
selected strategy Step 2:
(programming and Assess Needs, Assets,
execution) and Capacities

Planning
Step 5: Process
Relate to wider
public goals and
collective values
Step 3:
to win broad
Formulate
support for Step 4:
Goals and
chosen strategy Evaluate
Strategies
Scenarios
and Test
Alternative
Options
Francis Stuart Chapin’s Planning Process

SCAN FORMULATE
ENVIRONMENT GOALS

DETERMINE COURSES
REVIEW PLAN
OF ACTION

EVALUATE COURSES OF ACTION

TAKE
THROUGH AVAILABLE
ACITON
MEANS
Brian McLoughlin Planning Process
Decision to adopt planning

Goal Formulation
Identification of objectives
Review ( Monitoring )
of State system

Study of possible courses of action with aid of

models

Evaluation of alternatives by reference to

values and costs/benefits

Action through public investment or control

over private investment
 Allan Wilson’s Linear Planning Process
1. Action

2. Goals POLICY

3. Evaluation

4. Plan Formulation

5. Design techniques DESIGN

6. Problem Formulation

7. Systems Models
UNDERSTANDING
8. Techniques
 Traditional Planning Approach
• The Master Plan Approach or Imperative Planning - a grand
one-shot attempt, its end-product is long range (20–40
years) affecting one whole generation, but can be massively
disastrous when in error
• Requires full control and full powers of Sovereign who
authorizes the plan
Daniel Burnham
• Tends to be ‘top-down’ or implementing only the dominant
vision of an authoritative leader or clique;
• Strong on physical planning; comprehensive in terms of
physical design (architecture, engineering, etc) but
inadequate in terms of social & other forms of analysis
• Tends to be ‘atavistic’ – pining for a ‘throwback’ or Classical
or Neo-Classical ‘Golden Age’ in distant past
• Seems to be more applicable in planning tabula rasa –
planning from scratch, where there is empty land and no
people occupying it, but not when cities are already settled;
wherein public consent has to be solicited.
 Rational-Adaptive-Comprehensive or
Synoptic Planning
• Uses Reason more intensively -- ‘rational’ or scientific
tools Sir Patrick Geddes
and Lewis Mumford
• Adjusts or ‘Adapts’ to Local Demands, Limitations &
Peculiarities; “adaptive” element was influenced by the tenet of
Systems Theory that “the only thing permanent is change”
• Has roots in Geddes ‘Survey-Analysis-Plan’ (SAP)-- theoretically benefits
the whole of society and the larger natural environment
• ‘Comprehensive’ because it tends to ‘cover all bases’, all aspects, all
sectors, hence – overwhelming in terms of information quantity
• Data overload – massive, extensive, voluminous-- neophytes can get
lost in the maze. Challenge is not to miss the trees as you walk through
the forest
• Process is long and tedious, realistically not less than four months– it
can not make quick decisions
• Has a window for participation, allows many people from all walks of
life to contribute.
 Rational-Adaptive-Comprehensive or Synoptic Planning

• Tends to be “static” within its own time-frame; needs to be constantly

updated after each planning period (e.g. every three years)
• Tends to be “utopian” in its belief that all people are driven by Reason
and good intentions
• Planner can be likened to an Expert-Scientist, Technical Specialist,
Forecaster who is making a prognosis, educating the public on future
scenarios.
• Because it is wide-open process, it can be dominated by Powers-That-
Be or by Vested Interests who seek to upstage the Planner-Scientist
• ‘synoptic’ planning is criticized for its a-priori goal setting – that experts
and people already know “the common good” before undertaking
planning, it presumes a general public interest rather than pluralist
interest; with the high importance given to role of Experts, it also has
tendency to centralize or control
• “utopian”, “normative”, “technocratic”
Rational-Adaptive-Comprehensive or
Synoptic Planning
1. Decide to plan
2. Analyze the situation/formulate problem
3. Formulate Goals and Objectives
4. Identify and design alternative strategies /
project & forecast / build scenarios / Simulation
and Modelling
5. Assess alternatives by tracing their
consequences
6. Decide / Select course of action
7. Implement the plan – action through public
investment and private investment Sir Patrick
8. Evaluate the plan; seek feedback for plan Geddes and
Lewis
review or Re-planning Mumford
 Rational-Adaptive or Synoptic Planning
FORMULATE PROBLEM

•PLAN FORMULATE GOALS

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION
•DO IDENTIFY
ALTERNATIVES
•CHECK EVALUATE
ALTERNATIVES
•ACT
SELECT THE BEST
ALTERNATIVE

PLAN IMPLEMENTATION &

EVALUATION
 Strategic Planning
• Strategic PLANNING is defined as the process of
Understanding the types of DECISIONS that need to
be made by Assessing OPPORTUNITIES and
LIMITATIONS of the future, identifying the short-and-
long-term consequences of alternative choices
designed to take advantage of these opportunities or
respond to these limitations.
• A continuous learning process that defines the
purpose of an organization and how it will achieve
performance results that lead to its desired state
Strategic Planning
 Strategic Planning
• Strategic Planning is interwoven into Management. It is not separate
and distinct from the process of Strategic Management
• It is an aggressive pursuit of “change” through a potent strategy that Dr. Henry
can bring optimal results Mintzberg

• Ensures that all options are explored and that most appropriate option
is selected
• Does not need comprehensive or voluminous data but only
manageable data relevant to strategic issues
• Can be used in conjunction with broader forms of planning
• Tends to focus more on economic, physical, infrastructural, institutional
solutions that often benefit the enthusiastic lead actors and lead
sectors who carry it out;
• Strong on designing a ‘fit’ organization led by ‘champions’ who carry
out change
• Strong on establishing ‘performance standards’ and on measuring
results
• Tends to gloss over deep-seated, complex, value-based or culture-
based problems that have no overnight solutions; e.g. ‘social
transformation’
Strategic Planning IDENTIFY STRATEGIC ISSUES

EXTERNAL ENVIRONMENT

INTERNAL ENVIRONMENT
IDENTIFY CONTEXT OF
STRATEGIC ISSUES
Key Aspects of Strategic

AGENCY

AGENCY
Planning SORT COMPLETE
INFORMATION
• Future-focused
• Client-driven EMPLOY ANALYTICAL TOOLS
SWOT ANALYSIS
• Outcome and results-
oriented
STRATEGIC ISSUES IDENTIFIED
• High involvement:
workforce, clients,
suppliers, partners EVALUATE ALTERNATIVES

• Dynamic SELECT THE BEST

ALTERNATIVE

IMPLEMENT PLAN
EVALUATION
 Strategic Planning Process
1. Initiate and agree on a strategic planning process;
2. Identify organization mandates; clarify organization mission and values;
3. Scan and assess the external (opportunities and threats) and internal
environments (strengths and weaknesses); undertake external &
internal analysis
4. Select key issues
5. Set broad mission statement; Develop goals and objectives with respect
to each other
6. Develop strategy; “future trajectory”
7. Identify and quantify inputs; Identify and quantify outputs; validate the
efficiency of the strategy
8. Establish an effective organization for the future.
9. Develop and plan implementation to carry out strategic actions
10. Monitor outcomes, calculate impact, compare to objectives, update and
review plan
 Development Alternative for the Third World: Paradigms,
Supraregional Strategies, regional Strategies
Center-down/top down
(First development Decade –
1960s)
Center-down/top down with
features of bottom-up paradigm
(Second Development Decade -
1970s)
Development from below
bottom-up
(New International Economic
Order (NIEO) – 1980s to date
Economic growth (based on neoclassical
economic theory)
Redistribution with growth/basic need (Still
basically neoclassical theory structuralist)
Variants:
Employment generation (ILO)
Redirecting investments (Hollies & Chenery)
Human Resource development (Irma Aaalam)
Agriculture first development (John Mellor)
Integrated rural development (RD) (Albert
Waterston)
Balance agro-industrial development (BAIDS)
Ecological balance (Club of Remo)
Self-reliance (based on radical economic theory, viz,
dependency theory, economic imperialism theory,
world system theory, economic disequilibrium
theory)
(Andre Gunder Frank, Vladimir Lenin, Immanuel
Wallerstein, Samir Amin, Joseph Sehumpeter)
(Large ; Growth center strategy)
Rural growth center strategy rural development strategy
(functional integration strategy)
Variants of the rural growth center strategy
Johnson’ss rural market center strategy
Rondinelli’s Urban Function in Rural Development (UFRD)
Strategy
Variants of the rural development strategy:
Community development strategy
Single commodity strategy
Integrated Area Development (IAD) strategy
Decentralized territorial integration or territorial
decentralization strategy
Variants:
Freidmann’s agropolitan strategy
Rauch and Redder’s autocentric development strategy
Misra’s urban centers and settlement complex planning
(SCP) strategy
Umali’s rural-rural interaction model (RRIM)
Roxa’s community-centered economic model
Local Resource Management (LRM)
Agrarian Reform Community (ARC)
Kalahi-CIDSS
The Model of Long-term Regional Development

Growth Pole
• Emphasis on exchange economy
• Development benefits through
ripple effect from concentrated
Investments
• Principally export-based linkage
from the regional growth pole to
the primate city

Functional Integration
• Emphasis on exchange economy
• Development benefits through
intraregional linkages fostered by
dispersed investments
• Diverse functional linkages to
other regions
Decentralized Territorial
Integration
• Emphasis on use economy
• Development benefits through
subregional self-sufficiency
fostered by locally determined
dispersed investment
• Selective closure
 Summary Characteristics of the Models of Long-term
Regional Development
Characteristics
Emphasis on exchange or use
economy
How are development
benefits distributed?
What is the dynamic of
Intraregional linkages?
What is the nature of
interregional linkages?
Growth Pole
Emphasis on exchange
economy
Through ripple effects from
concentrated investments in
the growth pole, the main
regional town
Economics of agglomeration
in the growth pole, which
supplies production,
commercial, and
administrative services for
the region. Spontaneous
market links to the rest of
the region.
Concentrated on exports
from the growth pole to a
metropolitan center outside
the region, and imports of
supplies and consumer
goods to the growth pole
Functional Integration
Emphasis on exchange
economy, but attention to
use economy also
Through intraregional
linkages fostered by
investments strategically
dispersed throughout the
region
Linkages from a “rational
system” based on
economically optional
locations of functions within
the region and are highly
coordinated
Diversified linkages to other
regions primarily; but not
only through the main
regional town
Decentralized
Territorial Integration
Emphasis on use economy
Through subregional self-
sufficiency fostered by locally
determined dispersed
investments
Selective linkages, economic
production, distribution, and
planning linkages evolve
organically over time
Selective closure to minimize
dependency and
vulnerability of the region to
external economic forces.
Selected linkages with other
regions fostered.
 Summary Characteristics of the Models of Long-term
Regional Development
Characteristics
How is Intraregional
coordination accomplished?
What is the economic growth
orientation?
What is the nature of the
associated development
planning process, if any?
What is the associated view
of national space?
Growth Pole
Mainly through spontaneous
market mechanisms
Maximize undifferentiated
economic growth
Centralized planning based
on economic cost-benefit
consideration of individual
projects
The nation is made up of
regional modules connected
to metropolitan centers
Functional Integration
Mainly a framework of
institutionalized planning
and coordination mechanism
that work largely on a top-
down basis
Long-term growth
optimization. Explicit concern
with distributional aspect of
growth.
Integrated
centralized/decentralized
planning; “disaggregative,
“Highly technical,
interdisciplinary
The nation is a structural
hierarchy of central places
and their hinterlands
Decentralized
Territorial Integration
Mainly through selective
bottom-up mechanisms that
evolve organically over time
Economic growth, as such,
secondary to self-sufficiency
and self-determination
Decentralized planning:
“aggregative, "merges
technical and popular input
The nation is a loosely
structured federation of
regions, each a loose cluster
of subregional areas.
 Rational or Comprehensive Planning Approach

Three Steps Needed in Realizing a Rationally Calculated Decision

1. The decision maker considers all of the alternatives (courses of action)

open to him. i.e. he considers what courses of action are possible
within the conditions of the situation and in the light of the ends he
seeks to attain

2. He identifies and evaluates all of the consequences which would follow

from the adoption of each alternatives i.e. he predicts how the total
situation would be changed by each course of action he might adopt.

3. He selects that alternative the probable consequences of which would

be preferable in terms of his valued ends.
 Rational or Comprehensive Planning Approach

Characteristics of the Planning Process

1. Planning is a technical exercise involving the elaboration of means and the

prediction of their consequences. The planner provides the technical base for
the political decision-maker
2. Planning is characterized by comprehensiveness under the rational approach.
The planner is required to consider all of the alternatives and all of the
consequences of each of these.
3. Planning is a essentially allocative mechanism – a means through which
resources are allocated in the most efficient manner within a comprehensive
framework
4. The rational model of decision-making/planning assumes that objectives can
be identified and articulated, that the outcomes of alternatives strategies can
be projected and their expected utilities assessed by some goal-related
objective criteria, and that the respective probability of occurrence of relevant
conditions can be predicted on the basis of available information.
 Rational or Comprehensive Planning Approach

Thus, the orthodox and rational view of the planning process which may
be termed comprehensive planning involves the following steps:

1. Establishment of goals

2. Development of alternatives

3. Testing and evaluation

4. Choice of the best alternatives

5. Implementation of the plan

6. Monitoring and evaluation of the plan implementation

 Rational or Comprehensive Planning Approach

Criticism of the Rational Model

1. Determination of which/whose values to follow, i.e. how can/should the preferences of
one group be traded off with those of another? This problem comes up particularly in
the processes of goal formulation and selection of the best alternatives. This problem is
resolved usually in accordance with the realities of political power, which makes
planning inevitably a political activity.
2. This “look before you leap” approach is saddled by inadequacy of information or
knowledge that is needed when identifying all of the possible alternative means or
strategies or when predicting all of the consequences of a course of action. Limited
information and crude forecasting models create the problem of uncertainty.
3. Difficulty of implementation of the plan amidst institutions and decision-makers that
have limited power and amidst an administrative structure of governance where the
components have their own goals that makes coordination and integration of
implementation activities difficult
4. Herbert Simon, using his “man-the-satisfier” approach, says that amidst the lack of
information, it is difficult for human beings to come up with the best or optimum
decision. Most often people choose only what is “satisficing” or good enough using a
trial and error or iteration process and basing their decision on their attainable
aspiration level.
 Disjointed Incrementalism Planning Approach
Characteristics of the Disjoined Incrementalism or “Muddling Through” Planning Approach

As proposed by C.E. Lindbloom the disjointed incrementalism approach is characterized by a

continuous reaction to problems as they merge. The aims with which it is concerned are not the
realization of some value but the solution of immediate, pressing problems, i.e., the “muddling
through” a succession of problems and providing solutions for them.

The approach is one of continuous short-run marginal adjustments to policies rather than the
evaluation of more radical alternatives. The approach avoids the problem of generating ideal goals
and reflects the fragmentation of agencies in real life but is ill-equipped to deal with complex
problems and may be a recipe for inertia planning constantly chasing after yesterday’s problems.

Analysis and policy making are seen as fragmented, undertaken by different agencies inside and
outside government in a disjointed manner. It rejects the view of authority or government
associated with the rational model where values are centrally aggregated and allocated.

The process is marked by manageability since there is no attempt at an exhaustive gathering of

information or at considering all the alternatives and their consequences. It is the strategy which
policy makers actually follow, believing that the way to improve policy making is to improves what
is done is practice rather than struggling to realize some logical but unattainable ideal.
 Disjointed Incrementalism Planning Approach
Characteristics of the Disjoined Incrementalism or “Muddling Through” Planning Approach

The process is marked by manageability since there is no attempt at an exhaustive gathering of

information or at considering all the alternatives and their consequences. It is the strategy which
policy makers actually follow, believing that the way to improve policy making is to improves what
is done is practice rather than struggling to realize some logical but unattainable ideal.

The incrementalist decision-maker develops only a few strategies and none of them differs from
the status quo. The evaluation of these options then focuses on their differences from one another
and from the existing state of affairs, rather than, as under the rational approach, analyzing each
alternative as a whole. One reason for this is that decision makers actually find it impossible to
deal with the mass of information laid out before them. Another reason is that they do not perceive
as feasible courses of action that differ radically from what they are used to, or ones that lie outside
the narrow range imposed by institutional constraints. Such contexts display well-defined
institutions, continuity of social and organizational norms and actually reflect the American
government and corporate bureaucracies that were the objects of Lindblom’s observation e.g. the
process of budgeting in a climate of liberal political theory and a highly fragmented pluralistics
structure of government. An advantage of the approach is that social agreement is more likely to
be attained than in the case when targets are ideal values. Lindblom reaffirms Karl Popper’s view
that it is easier to obtain agreement on some evii than on some ideal goal.
 Disjointed Incrementalism Planning Approach
Characteristics of the Disjoined Incrementalism or “Muddling Through” Planning Approach

In sum, the potentially important advantages of the strategy include: concern for manageability and
thus non-comprehensiveness; concern to be empirically grounded; openness and fluidity and thus
readiness to perceive new problems; and sympathy with the increasing groundswell of feeling in
many democracies that decision making needs to be more decentralized and more sensitive to the
values of different groups.

Lindbloom himself gives the following summarized comparison of the features of his approach vis-
à-vis the rational-comprehensive approach:

Rational-Comprehensive Approach
1a. Clarification of values or objectives distinct from and usually prerequisites to empirical
analysis of alternative policies
2a. Policy formulation is therefore approached through means-end analysis; First the ends are
isolated, then the means to achieve them are sought.
3a. The test of a “good” policy is that it can be shown to be the most appropriate means to
desired ends.
4a. Analysis is comprehensive; every important relevant factor is taken into account.
5a. Theory is often heavily relied upon.
 Disjointed Incrementalism Planning Approach

Successive Limited Comparisons of the Disjointed Incremental Approach

1b. Selection of value goals and empirical analysis of the needed action are not distinct from
one another but are closely intertwined.
2b. Since means and ends are not distinct, means-end analysis is often inappropriate or
limited
3b. The test of a “good” policy is typically that various analyses find themselves directly
agreeing on a policy (without their agreeing that it is the most appropriate means to an
agreed objective).
4b. Analysis is drastically limited:
i. important possible outcomes are neglected
ii. Important alternative potential policies are neglected
iii. Important effected values are neglected
5b. A succession of comparison greatly reduces or eliminates reliance on theory.
 Disjointed Incrementalism Planning Approach

Criticisms of the Disjointed Incremental Approach

The strategy is limited in terms of its ability to confront certain types of situation and problems.
Where the consequences of past policies in tackling a problem have been unsatisfactory, then
incrementally changing these may be of little benefit.

Amidst its tendency to perpetuate the status quo and its inability to generate solutions, it cannot be
used unstable or rapidly changing situations or in response to any novel problem or crisis. Thus,
under incrementalism complex problems demanding a battery of different actions remain unsolved.

The model may be incomplete in terms of its disregard a long-term aims impinging on the decision
maker. Lindbloom has acknowledged.
This role of lone-term goals and although the pursuit of
short-term goals is the strategy policy-makers pursue, this
implies the lack of empirical grounding of the model.

It is pointed out that planning has little to do with trial-and-

error approaches to problem-solving. This is not to say that
planning cannot incorporated experiments in a limited way,
but this will be in the context of a deliberately conceived
strategy. Decision making based on incremental trials and
comparison is not planning.
 Mixed Scanning Approach
The “mixed scanning” approach of Amitai Etzioni offers a compromise strategy which seeks to combine a longer-
run broad framework to guide fundamental decisions together with more specific shorter-run studies to guide
incremental decisions. Stated otherwise, it combines a truncated view of other sectors with a detailed
“rationalistic” examination of some sectors.

Scanning the planning environment may be divided into more than two levels, i.e. There can be several levels with
varying degrees of detail and coverage. It seems, however, most effective to include an all-encompassing level
(so that no major option will be left uncovered but not at a most exhaustive level of examination of the rational
approach) and a highly detailed level (so that the option selected can be explored as fully as is feasible).
Scanning at higher levels of decision making gives a more “strategic” picture whereas scanning at lower or
“tactical” levels using the incremental mode allows problems to be solved based on alternative not too different
from the status quo.

The two tiers of the approach are interrelated through a series of rules (e.g. after a number of incremental
decisions have been made the decision-maker should undertake more comprehensive review of the broad
framework).

The contingency approach, which is similar to Avron Ben-David’s reduced planning approach, may overcome the
information requirement problem of the rational systematic approach and the conservative bias of the
incrementalist approach. The approach which combines operational prescriptions with situational realism,
however, still has to be amplified and operationalized before it can perform this compromise role. Nevertheless,
there is some evidence of an evolution in the United Kingdom regional strategies from a comprehensive
systematic approach towards a mixed scanning approach.
 Local Land Use Process

Click here