Town Planning

The Reflexive Practitioner MODULE OUTLINE The Reflexive Practitioner is a Module which links planning practice, as an example of broader professional practice, to theoretical concepts of ethics and professionalism in a real-world context. In this module students learn about responsibility, about differences between reflection and reflexion, between morals and ethics, between the right and the good as applied in a variety of circumstances. By increasing our understanding of our own (and other actors') views on the ethics of different types of behaviour in different situations, we may be able to become better human beings and better professionals. Aims * to critically discuss ethics and their relation to planning practice; * to review ideas about responsibility, professional duty and professionalism, with particular regard to planning; * to review key issues affecting work in planning and architecture; * to critically review the ways in which planners contribute their knowledge, skills and values in different contexts; * to critically review the institutional roles in which planning is practised. Knowledge & Skills Outcomes * to develop an appreciation of the ethical dimensions of planning practice; * to develop a greater awareness and critical understanding of the importance of values in planning; * an ability to relate these issues to practice situations in planning; * an ability to write a critical and logical discussion on these issues. ASSESSMENT Students are required to prepare one assignment during the semester choosing one of the two questions below. The assignment should be prepared as an essay of a maximum of 2500 words. Q1: “Planners are a very odd bunch. Within a year or two of graduating from college they get sucked into an institutional value system that is arcanely masonic in the hold it has upon them. They are bound at every step by government guidance and development plan policies, their every action is liable to be vetted by their superiors and they are open to pressures from all sorts of vested interests. Being human, they have their likes and dislikes, but these sympathies can only be expressed through circuitous advice and perverse signals. Like a crab constricted by its carapace, they find it easier to walk sideways” (TLIO, 2001). a. Discuss the reality of the above contentions in the context of the literature on UK planners in practice (60% of marks). b. How might a consideration of ethics and values both shape, and help the individual planner to escape, the carapace referred to above? (40% of marks) Students must submit their assignment electronically via Blackboard AND submit 2 hard copies via the SAPL Office in the Architecture building before Noon on Monday 16th January 2012. Late work will be penalised according to University policy. You must also use the Turnitin software program to check your work for plagiarism. Please print out the Originality Report and attach it to the front page of your hard copy assignment. Referencing is important. One criterion in marking this assignment will be the accuracy of the referencing. Poor referencing will be subject to a maximum penalty of 10%. Assessment Criteria * understanding of relevant theories ) * ability to connect theory and practice ) * ability to make insightful, analytical comment ) 90% * construction of logical argument ) * evidence of theoretical reading ) * clarity of expression, use of English ) 10% and correct referencing NB this is an individual piece of work REFERENCES NB other references may be made available with each lecture. Abram, S., 2004, Personality and professionalism in a Norwegian district council, Planning Theory, 3, pp. 21-40 Campbell H. 2006 'Just planning: the art of situated ethical judgment', Journal of Planning Education & Research, 26: 92-106. Campbell,H., 2002, Planning: an idea of value, Town Planning Review 73(3). Campbell H & Marshall R 2002 'Utilitarianism's bad breath? A re-evaluation of the public interest justification for planning', Planning Theory, 1(2): 163-187. Campbell H & Marshall R. 2005 'Professionalism and planning in Britain', Town Planning Review, 76(2): 191-215. Campbell H. and Marshall R. 2006 'Towards justice in planning: a reappraisal', European Planning Studies, 14(2): 239-252. Campbell, H., Marshall, R. 2002 Values and Professional Identities in Planning Practice, in: Allmendinger, P., Tewdwr-Jones, M. (eds.) Planning Futures: New Directions for Planning Theory, London, Routledge, pp.65-92. Chalmers, A. F. (1996) What is this thing called science? Second edition, Milton Keynes: Open University Press. Davies,JG., 1972, The Evangelistic Bureaucrat, London: Tavistock. Davoudi S, Pendlebury J., 2010, Evolution of planning as an academic discipline, Town Planning Review, 81(6), 613-644 Durning,B., Carpenter., Glasson,J., and Butina Watson,G., 2010, The spiral of knowledge development: professional knowledge development in planning, Planning practice and research 25(4) 497-516. Evans, B., 1993, Why we no longer need a town planning profession, Planning Practice and Research, 8(1), 9-16 Forester,J., 1999, The deliberative practitioner, Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press. Gunder,M. and Hillier,J., 2007, Problematising responsibility in planning theory and practice: On seeing the middle of the string? Progress in Planning Volume 68, Issue 2 pp.57-96 Harris,N., and Thomas,H., 2011, Clients, Customers and Consumers: A Framework for Exploring the User-Experience of the Planning Service, Planning Theory and practice, 12(2). Healey,P., 2010, Making Better Places, Macmillan. Esp. chapter 8. Healey P. 2009 ‘In search of the “strategic” in spatial strategy making', Planning Theory and Practice, 10(4): 439-457. Healey, P. 1985 The Professionalization of Planning in Britain, Town Planning Review, 56(4), 492-507 Hendler, S. (ed.) (1995) Planning Ethics. New Brunswick: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers, State University of New Jersey. Hillier, J (2002); Shadows of power: an allegory of prudence in land-use planning, London: Routledge. Howe, E. (1994) Acting on Ethics in City Planning. New Brunswick: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers, State University of New Jersey. Howe, E. and Kaufman, J. (1979) ‘The Ethics of Contemporary American Planners', Journal of the American Planning Association 45: 243–55. Lo Piccolo, Francesco et al. (2008) ‘Research ethics in planning: a framework for discussion', Planning Theory, Vol. 7 (1). Hendler S. 2005 'Towards a feminist Code of Planning Ethics', Planning Theory & Practice, 6(1): 53-69 Hillier J. 2002, Shadows of power: an allegory of prudence in land-use planning, Routledge. Esp. Chapter 10. Inch.A, 2010, Culture Change as Identity Regulation: The Micro-Politics of Producing Spatial Planners in England', Planning Theory & Practice, 11:3, 359 - 374 Kitchen,T., 2006, Skills for Planning Practice, Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan Lipsky, M. 1980 Street Level Bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the Individual in Public Service, New York, Russell Sage Foundation Lissandrello,E., and Grin,J., 2011Reflexive Planning as Design and Work: Lessons from the Port of Amsterdam, Planning Theory & Practice Vol. 12, Iss. 2. Lovering,J., 2010, Will the Recession Prove to be a Turning Point in Planning and Urban Development Thinking? International Planning Studies 15(3) 227-143. Lo Piccolo F. & Thomas H. (eds) 2009 Ethics and Planning Research, Ashgate, Farnham. MacDonald,KM., 1995, The sociology of the professions, Sage. Owens S. and Cowell.R, 2009, Land and Limits, 2nd edition, Routledge. Esp chapters 1 and 8. Ray N. 2005 Architecture and its ethical dilemmas, Routledge, London. Reade, E. 1987 British Town and Country Planning, Milton Keynes, Open University Press RIBA 2005a Code of Professional Conduct, RIBA, London. RIBA 2005b Code of Professional Conduct, Guidance Note no. 1: Integrity, Conflicts of Interest, Confidentiality & Privacy, Corruption & Bribery, RIBA, London. Royal Town Planning Institute, Conduct of Membership/ Code of Professional Conduct. RTPI, London. RTPI, 2007, Shaping and delivering tomorrows places, London: RTPI. Rydin,Y., 2010, The Purpose of Planning, Bristol: Polity Press. Chapters 1 and 8. Rydin,Y., 2007, Re-examining the role of knowledge within planning theory, Planning Theory 6(1) pp52-68. Sandercock L. 2003 Cosmopolis II: Mongrel Cities, Continuum, London Schon D 1983 The Reflective Practitioner. Basic Books, New York. Spector T. 2001 The Ethical Architect, Princeton University Press, New York Steele, W. 2009 'Australian urban planners: Hybrid roles and professional dilemmas?', Urban Policy and Research, 27(2): 191-205 Swain, C., Tait, M. 2007 The Crisis of Trust and Planning, Planning Theory and Practice, 8(2), pp.227-245 Tait M & Campbell H. 2000 'The politics of communication between planning officers and politicians: the exercise of power through discourse', Environment & Planning A, 32: 489-506. Taylor,N., 1999, Social not just physical? in Greed,C., (ed) Social Town Planning: London: Routledge. Pp29-43. Taylor,N., 1992, Professional ethics in town planning: what is a code of conduct for?, Town Planning Review, 63(3). TewdwrJones,M., 2002, Personal dynamics, distinctive frames and communicative planning, in Allmendinger,P., and TewdwrJones,M.,(eds.) Planning Futures, Routledge Thomas,H., 1999, Planning and the planning profession, in Social Town Planning, Greed,C., ed, Routledge: London p. 15-28 Thomas H & Healey P (ed) 1991 Dilemmas of Planning Practice. Avebury, Aldershot Thomas H (ed) 1994 Values and Planning. Avebury, Aldershot Thompson, D. F. (1987) Political Ethics and Public Office, Harvard: Harvard University Press. Wachs, M. (1982) ‘Ethical Dilemmas in Forecasting for Public Policy', Public Administration Review 42: 562–7. Wachs, M. (ed.) (1985) Ethics in Planning. New Brunswick: Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers, State University of New Jersey. Williams, M. May, T. (1996) Introduction to the Philosophy of Social Research, London: UCL Press. Good web link: the epistemological research guide http://www(dot)ucs(dot)louisiana(dot)edu/~kak7409/EpistemologicalResearch.htm