In some countries, enthusiastic beginnings in the planning and management of national settlement systems (or urban growth, or regional development) have run against some intractable problems. This paper points to dilemmas for research under the rationalistic paradigm that has come to dominate orthodox thinking about the policy planning process, discusses the inconvenient nature of the urban system's time constants, reviews some problems of policy implementation, and suggests shifted research directions. In the face of general ignorance about policy outcomes and public values, the policy directions that now seem appropriate are less ambitious than those of a few years ago.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AllisonG. T., 1971, Essence of Decision: Explaining the Cuban Missile Crisis (Little Brown, Boston, Mass.).
2.
AucoinP.FrenchR., 1974, “Knowledge, Power and Public Policy”, Background Study Number 31, Science Council of Canada, Ottawa.
3.
Australia, 1974, Urban and Regional Development 1974–1975, Budget Paper number 8, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canbea.
4.
Australia, 1975, Population and Australia, A Demographic Analysis and Projection, First Report of the National Population Inquiry, Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra.
5.
BellD., 1974, The Coming of Post-Industrial Society (Heinemann, London).
6.
BellmanR., 1970, “Man, Society and the Computer”, Technical Report number 70–33, Department of Electrical Engineering, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California.
7.
BerryB. J. L., 1973, The Human Consequence of Urbanization (Macmillan, New York).
8.
BolanR. S., 1967, “Emerging views of planning”, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 33(4), 233–245.
9.
BorenJ. H., 1972, When In Doubt, Mumble: A Bureaucrat's Handbook (Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York).
10.
BourneL. S., 1975, “Frameworks for locational decision-making in national urban strategies”, in National Settlement Policies East and West, Ed. SwainH., CP-75-3, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.
11.
BrewerG. D., 1973, Politicians, Bureaucrats and the Consultant: A Critique of Urban Problem-Solving (Basic Books, New York).
12.
CameronG. C.WingoL., Eds, 1973, Cities, Regions and Public Policy (Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh).
13.
Canada, 1973, “Assessment of the Regional Development Incentives Program”, staff paper prepared for federal–provincial consultations on regional development policy, Department of Regional Economic Expansion, Ottawa.
14.
Canada, 1975, Immigration policy perspectives, Volume I of the Canadian Immigration and Population Study (The ‘Green Paper’), Department of Manpower and Immigration, Ottawa.
15.
ColemanJ. S., 1972, Policy Research in the Social Sciences (General Learning Press, Morristown, NJ).
16.
EllmanM., 1973, Planning Problems in the USSR: The Contribution of Mathematical Economics to their Solution, 1960–1972 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).
17.
EtzioniA., 1968, The Active Society: A Theory of Society and Political Processes (Free Press, New York).
18.
EtzioniA., 1971, “Policy research”, The American Sociologist, 6 (supplementary issue), 8–12.
19.
FriedmannJ., 1973, Retracking America: A Theory of Transactive Planning (Anchor Press-Doubleday, Garden City, NJ).
20.
FriedmannJ.HudsonB., 1974, “Knowledge and action: A guide to planning theory”, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, January, 2–16.
21.
FukudaT., 1974, Interview in Newsweek, European Edition, 21, January 1974, 48.
22.
GordonK., ed., 1968, Agenda for the Nation (Brookings Institution, Washington, DC).
23.
HalberstamD., 1972, The Best and the Brightest (Random House, New York).
24.
HallP., 1966, The World Cities (McGraw-Hill, New York).
25.
HallP.ThomasR.GraceyHDrewettR., 1973, The Containment of Urban England, 2 volumes (PEP-Allen and Unwin, London).
26.
HalperinM. H., 1974, Bureaucratic Politics and Foreign Policy (Brookings Institution, Washington DC).
27.
HansenN. M., 1974, Public Policy and Regional Economic Development: The Experience of Nine Western Countries (Ballinger, Cambridge, Mass.).
28.
HartleD. G., 1972a, “The objective of Government objectives”, Treasury Board Secretariat, Ottawa, mimeo.
29.
HartleD. G., 1972b, “A proposed system of program and policy evaluation”, Treasury Board Secretariat, Ottawa, mimeo.
30.
HitchC. J., 1960, “On the choices of objectives in systems studies”, P-1955, Rand Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif.
31.
Japan, 1969, New Comprehensive National Development Plan, revised edition, October 1972 (Economic Planning Agency, Tokyo).
32.
JohnstonL.ParlourJ. W., 1972, “On the status of a national urban growth policy for the United States”, Discussion Paper B.72.1, Ministry of State for Urban Affairs, Ottawa.
33.
KeeneyR. L.RaiffaH., 1975, Decision Analysis with Multiple Conflicting Objectives (John Wiley, New York).
34.
LeeD. B., 1973, “Requiem for large models”, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, May 1973, 163–178.
35.
LithwickN. H., 1971, Urban Canada: Problems and Prospects, Central Mortgage and Housing Corporation, Ottawa.
36.
LithwickN. H., 1972, “Political innovation: A case study”, Plan Canada, 12, 1.
37.
LoganM. I.MaherC. A.McKayJ.HumphreysJ., 1975, Urban and Regional Australia: Analysis and Policy Issues (Sorrett, Melbourne).
38.
LoganM. I.WilmothD., 1975, “Australian initiatives in urban and regional development”, in National Settlement Strategies East and West, Ed. SwainH., International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.
39.
MerlinP., 1969, Les Villes Nouvelles: Urbanisme Régional et Aménagement (Presses Universitaires, Paris).
40.
MoynihanD. P., ed., 1970, Toward a National Urban Policy (Basic Books, New York).
41.
RaiffaH., 1968, Decision Analysis: Introductory Lectures on Choices under Uncertainty (Addison-Wesley, Reading, Mass.).
42.
RittelH. W. J.WebberM. M., 1973, “Dilemmas in a general theory of planning”, Policy Sciences, 4, 155–169.
43.
RodwinL., 1970, Nations and Cities: A Comparison of Strategies for Urban Growth (Houghton Mifflin, Cambridge, Mass.).
44.
RondinelliD. A., 1973, “Urban planning as policy analysis: Management of urban change”, Journal of the American Institute of Planners, 39(1), 13–22.
45.
SchonD. A., 1971, Beyond the Stable State (Random House, New York).
46.
SimmieJ. M., 1974, Citizens in Conflict: A Sociology of Town Planning (Hutchinson, London).
47.
StvánJ., 1973, “Physical, socio-economic and environmental planning in countries of Eastern Europe”, Document D4-1973, National Swedish Institute for Building Research, Stockholm.
48.
SwainH., ed., 1975, National Settlement Policies East and West, CP-75-3, International Institute for Applied Systems Analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.
49.
SwainH., forthcoming, “An experiment in values: Lessons in research management from the Vancouver Urban Futures project”, International Institute for applied systems analysis, Laxenburg, Austria.
50.
TanakaK., 1973, Building a New Japan: A Plan for Remodelling the Japanese Archipelago (International Scholarly Book Service, Portland, Oregon).
51.
United States, 1970, “Housing and Urban Development Act of 1970”, Public Law 91-609, United States Ninety-First Congress (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC).
52.
United States, 1972, Population Distribution and Policy, Ed MazieS. M., Volume V of Commission on Population Growth and the American Future, Research Reports (US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC).
53.
WilliamsW., 1971, Social Policy Research and Analysis: The Experience of the Federal Agencies (Elsevier, New York).
54.
WingoL., 1972, “Issues in a national urban development strategy for the United States”, Urban Studies, 9 (reprinted in Cameron and Wingo, 1973, pages 3–27).
