Three Institutional Limitations & Three Paradigmatic Escapes Yvonne Rydin Bartlett School of Planning University College London

Aim of the talk To highlight some of the limitations in how we talk about planning in the UK To suggest that these are connected to the way we conceptualise and theorise about planning To offer a broadened way of thinking about planning, and To propose an agenda for change as a result

Planning as a set of institutions, comprising… Objectives and Values Tools and Policy Instruments Processes of Engagement

The Three Limitations of our Institutional Understanding 1.An over-focus on plans and strategies and – despite years of research and practice-based knowledge – an assumption of policy implementation following formulation 2.A limited set of tools and instruments that leads to a reliance on growth promotion as a way to achieve policy goals and objectives 3.A bland acceptance of policy compromises or syntheses under banners such as “sustainable development” and a subsequent loss of a sense of planning as a social movement

Towards a broader theorisation of planning institutions Planning Institutions Social relations Discursive practices Materiality

Sets of Inter-related Processes…. Social relations of: Governing led by state organisations Markets as created by networks of social relations Communities as understood through varieties of social capital Discursive practice of: Framing of problems and solutions Social construction of concepts and understandings Materiality of: Built and natural environments Local and regional/national/global ecosystems

Recognising the co-construction of these dynamic sets of relations with planning institutions allows three paradigmatic escapes from… The determinism of political economy Instead economic (alongside political and social) processes are seen as socially generated rather than deterministic The failed promises of communicative action Instead discourses are seen as part of the co-construction of planning institutions The shadow of material determinism The ‘material turn’ deriving from STS offers a richer account of the role of the material including a renewed focus on local environments

The implications for the politics and practice of planning  Debate values  Broaden tools and instruments used  Recognise the equal value of all types of planning work  Know how social relations are constructed and find points of leverage  Keep talking but know how to make talk meaningful  Know your material environment, particularly locally – see planners as ‘beat officers’ again