Sustainable Urban Planning

Development-focused providers have got into the habit of plunging into
project assignments on an ‘action’ basis: writing down, if called upon, their atti-
tudinal approach afterthe general form and context of their proposals have been
agreed! Such a wrapping of ‘theory’ around reports and position papers afterthe
key decisions have been settled is improper, hardly reflecting reliability account-
ability and legitimacy. It would be reasonable also to assert that most experienced
local government practitioners handle much of their day-to-day workload with

Knowledge Power Outcomes 51

Traditional Radical

operational operational

practice practice

OUTCOMES Low variety Complex (variety)

ANTICIPATED Logical (step-by-step) Creative (multi-phase)

Technological Humanist

Will be done Agreed to do

About decisions About values

Target-led Goal-led

Attainments Alternatives

Lineal Multiplex

Structural Procedural

‘What’ to think ‘How’ to think

DESCRIPTIVE Rational (one answer) Radical (several answers)

CHARACTERISTICS Top-down Bottom-up and top-down

Received Grounded

Coarse-grained Fine-grained

Extrapolates Invents and improvises

Pessimistic Optimistic

Normative Varietal

Deterministic Probalistic

Specific and rigid Considers alternatives

Computes answers Thinks alternatives

Reductionist Responsive

For ‘me’ For ‘us’

Specific Generalist

Conventional Interactive

‘Masculine’ ‘Feminine’

TECHNOLOGIES Problem-solving Potential-realizing

INVOLVED Sieve technique Heuristic discovery

One way through Several ways around

Component analysis Factor analysis

Computor analysis Cerebral prognosis

Programmed Non-lineal

Mechanical Creative

Remove-replace Mitigate-ameliorate

Sorting Sensing

Extrapolating Improvising

Consultation Negotiation

Figure 2.3 Configuration of traditional and radical theories