In this article I take up the topic of plan evaluation. I compare two approaches. One approach uses Rational analysis, the other pragmatic reasoning. I argue that planners should place less emphasis on rational analysis and adopt a distinctly pragmatic approach when evaluating plans. Analysis may offer objectivity and precision, but it sacrifices context and continuity. A pragmatic outlook embraces context and seeks continuity among diverse viewpoints. It avoids the separation between analysis and action, providing a useful rationale for what some practitioners might call common sense judgment.
Altshuler, Alan
(1965) The City Planning Process. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.
2.
Baer, William
(1997) ‘General Plan Evaluation Criteria: An Approach to Making Better Plans’, Journal of the American Planning Association63(3): 329-344.
3.
Baum, Howell
(1983) Planners and Public Expectations. Cambridge, MA: Schekman.
4.
Baum, Howell
(1987) The Invisible Bureaucracy: The Unconscious in Organizational Problem-Solving. New York: Oxford University Press.
5.
Baum, Howell
(1998) The Organization of Hope: Communities Planning Themselves. Albany: State University of New York Press.
6.
Blanco, Hilda
(1994) How to Think about Social Problems: American Pragmatism and the Idea of Planning. New York: Greenwood.
7.
Brandon, P.S.
, Lombardi, P.S. and Bentivegna, V. (eds) (1997) Evaluation of the Built Environment for Sustainability. London: Chapman and Hall.
8.
Dalton, Linda
(1989) ‘Emerging Knowledge about Planning Practice’, Journal of Planning Education and Research9(1): 29-44.
9.
Davidoff, Paul
(1965) ‘Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning’, Journal of the American Institute of Planners31(4): 331-338.
10.
Dorner, Dietrich
(1996) The Logic of Failure: Recognizing and Avoiding Error in Complex Situations. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
11.
Faludi, Andreas
(1987) A Decision-Centered View of Environmental Planning. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
12.
Flyvberg, Bent
(1998) Rationality and Power: Democracy in Practice. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
13.
Forester, J.
(1983) ‘The Geography of Planning Practice’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space1: 163-180.
14.
Forester, John
(1989) Planning in the Face of Power. Berkeley: University of California Press.
15.
Forester, J.
and Roweis, S. (1983) ‘On Planning Practice: Materialism And Politics’, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space1: 481-491.
16.
Foucault, Michel
(1975) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. New York: Random House.
17.
Fox, Charles J.
and Miller, Hugh T. (1995) Postmodern Public Administration: Toward Discourse. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
18.
Grant, Jill
(1994) The Drama of Democracy. Toronto: University of Toronto Press.
19.
Hall, Peter
(1980) Great Planning Disasters. Berkeley: University of California Press.
20.
Harmon, Michael M.
(1995) Responsibility as Paradox: A Critique of Rational Discourse on Government. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
21.
Harper, Thomas
and Stein, Stanley (1996) ‘Postmodernist Planning Theory: The Incommensurability Premise’, in S. J. Mandelbaum, Luigi Mazza and R.W. Burchell (eds) Explorations in Planning Theory, pp. 414-429. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research.
Healey, Patsy (ed.) (1997b) ‘Planning Theory, Political Economy and The Interpretive Turn: The Debate Continues’, Planning Theory17(Summer): 10-87.
24.
Hoch, Charles
(1984) ‘Doing Good and Being Right: The Pragmatic Connection in Planning Theory’, Journal of the American Planning Association50(3): 335-345.
25.
Hoch, Charles
(1988) ‘Conflict at Large: A National Survey of Planners and Political Conflict’, Journal of Planning Education and Research7(4): 25-34.
26.
Hoch, Charles
(1992) ‘The Paradox of Power in Planning Practice’, Journal of Planning Education and Research11(3): 206-215.
27.
Hoch, Charles
(1994) What Planners Do. Chicago, IL: Planners Press.
28.
Hoch, Charles
(1995) ‘Teaching Ethics and Planning Theory’, in Sue Hendler (ed.) Planning Ethics: A Reader in Planning Theory, Practice and Education, pp. 281-300. Rutgers, NJ: Center for Urban Policy and Research.
29.
Innes, Judith
(1995) ‘Planning Theory’s Emerging Paradigm: Communicative Action and Interactive Practice’, Journal of Planning Education and Research14(3): 183-190.
30.
Jacobs, Alan
(1978) Making City Planning Work. Chicago, IL: American Society of Planning Officials.
31.
Kaplan, Abraham
(1964) The Conduct of Inquiry: Methodology for Behavioral Science. San Francisco, CA: Chandler.
32.
King, Cheryl Simrell
and Stivers, Camilla (eds) (1998) Government is Us, Public Administration in an Anti-Government Era. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
33.
Krumholz, Norman
and Forester, John (1989) Making Equity Planning Work. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University.
34.
Krumholz, Norman
and Clavel, Pierre (1994) Reinventing Cities: Equity Planners Tell Their Stories. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
35.
Lichfield, Nathaniel
(1996) Community Impact Evaluation. London: UCL Press.
36.
McClendon, Bruce
and Quay, Ray (1988) Mastering Change: Winning Strategies for Effective City Planning. Chicago, IL: American Planning Association.
37.
Mandelbaum, Seymour
(1991) ‘Telling Stories’, Journal of Planning Education and Research10(3): 209-214.
38.
Mandelbaum, Seymour
, Mazza, Luigi and Burchell, Robert W. (eds) (1996) Explorations in Planning Theory. New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research.
39.
Marris, Peter
(1996) The Politics of Uncertainty, Attachment in Private and Public Life. New York: Routledge.
40.
Menand, Louis
(2001) The Metaphysical Club: A Story of Ideas in America. New York: Ferrar, Straus & Giroux.
41.
Meyerson, Martin
and Banfield, Edward (1955) Politics, Planning and the Public Interest. NewYork: Free Press.
42.
Nijkamp, Peter
and Artuso, Luisa (1997) ‘Methodology and Application of Sustainable Environmental Concepts for the Built Environment’, in P.S. Brandon, P.S. Lombardi and V. Bentivegna (eds) Evaluation of the Built Environment for Sustainability, pp. 435-450. London: Chapman and Hall.
43.
Sandercock, Leonie
(1998) Towards Cosmopolis: Planning for Multicultural Cities. New York: Wiley.
44.
Schon, Donald
(1983) The Reflective Practitioner: How Professionals Think in Action. New York: Basic Books.
45.
Scott, James C.
(1998) Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition have Failed. Princeton, NJ: Yale University Press.
46.
Stegman, Michael A.
and Luger, Michael I. (1993) ‘Issues in the Design of Locally Sponsored Home Ownership Programs’, Journal of the American Planning Association59(4): 417-434.
47.
Stone, I.F.
(1988) The Trial of Socrates. Boston, MA: Little, Brown & Co.
48.
Talen, Emily
(1996) ‘After the Plans: Methods to Evaluate the Implementation Success of Plans’, Journal of Planning Education and Research16(2): 79-92.
49.
Throgmorton, James A.
(1996) Planning as Persuasive Storytelling: The Rhetorical Construction of Chicago’s Electric Future. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
50.
Toulmin, Stephen
(2001) Return to Reason. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
51.
Verma, Niraj
(1998) Similarities, Connections and Systems. New York: Lexington.
