Hi, At the expense of sounding biased, I think its pretty exciting to be a part of the urban planning, both its practice and its study as a discipline. I am an engineer by training and my graduate education in planning has incredibly expanded my worldview. On the theoretical side, the reconciliation of post-structuralist (post-modern) tradition within planning has been contentious and the concern, I think, hasn't yet subsided. How does the discipline, as a modernist project, conform to the demands of contingency, fluidity, polyvocality advanced by the post-structuralist movement, is the main question in the discipline.nTo put it simply
...more
Hi, At the expense of sounding biased, I think its pretty exciting to be a part of the urban planning, both its practice and its study as a discipline. I am an engineer by training and my graduate education in planning has incredibly expanded my worldview. On the theoretical side, the reconciliation of post-structuralist (post-modern) tradition within planning has been contentious and the concern, I think, hasn't yet subsided. How does the discipline, as a modernist project, conform to the demands of contingency, fluidity, polyvocality advanced by the post-structuralist movement, is the main question in the discipline.nTo put it simply, the demands placed by the 'real world' (ground-up participation, collaboration, adaptive governance, diversity in policy and plan making, salience of projects while maintaining plurality in process and outcomes etc.). Are pretty complex (note: not complicated) for them to be comprehended within a discipline designed to be reductionist in nature (segregation of planning departments, roles and responsibilities, capital-centric-evaluation tools like benefits-cost analysis etc., ).nHow can the top-down governance structure inject participative models of engagement? How can spatial and temporal dependencies evident in real world outcomes of policies and plans give way to a more adaptive approach? This dovetails into the practical side of planning. Issues like climate change, resource depletion challenges, environmental degradation, loss of biodiversity, ecological challenge and loss of ecosystem services etc., are extremely important issues that gain amplified focus in planning, simply because it is here that man and his environment become the main thesis, the main challenge or object of the discipline.given these theoretical and practical aspects, planning evolution is rife, in meanings ascribed as to what the discipline should be about and what roles should planners assume. One can stay current by considering how major planning associations (APA, ACSP etc.). Shape the discourse and what comes off their position on aforementioned questions. How do major planning consultancies in US and in European countries approach the discipline in their work (is it stuck in neoliberal ideologies or conducive for other traditions like communicative and new urbanist projects).note: Admittedly, my attempt in answering this question has been from a generalist theoretical perspective. All the best.
less
