|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
Consensus Building: Clarifications for the Critics
Judith E. Innes
University of California, USA jinnes{at}berkeley.edu
Many critiques of consensus building have been uninformed about the nature of this practice or the theory on which it was built, though there is extensive literature on both. It is grounded in the theory and practice of interest-based negotiation and mediation. It is not grounded in Habermas’ concept of communicative rationality, though theorists have found useful illumination in his ideas. Claims are often made about pathologies of consensus building based on cases where the conditions for authentic dialogue recognized by both practitioners and theoreticians were not met. Documentation of cases shows that when these conditions are met, many desirable outcomes occur. The article examines the various critiques, including the claims that external power differentials are deterministic, that lowest common denominator solutions are the outcomes, that valuable tensions are lost in the process, and that agreements are fleeting at best. It shows how and why each of these is not borne out by experience. Consensus building is time consuming and requires skill and training. It is only appropriate in situations of uncertainty and controversy where all stakeholders have incentives to come to the table and mutual reciprocity in their interests.
Key Words: authentic dialogue • collaboration • communicative rationality • consensus building • power
Planning Theory, Vol. 3, No. 1,
5-20 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/1473095204042315
 CiteULike  Complore  Connotea  Del.icio.us  Digg  Reddit  Technorati  Twitter What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
|
|
 
K. Umemoto and H. Igarashi
Deliberative Planning in a Multicultural Milieu
Journal of Planning Education and Research,
September 1, 2009;
29(1):
39 - 53.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Deyle and C. Schively Slotterback
Group Learning in Participatory Planning Processes: An Exploratory Quasiexperimental Analysis of Local Mitigation Planning in Florida
Journal of Planning Education and Research,
September 1, 2009;
29(1):
23 - 38.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. D. Hopkins and E.R. Alexander
Introduction to Symposium: Planning in Complex Multiorganizational Systems
Journal of Planning Education and Research,
June 1, 2009;
28(4):
470 - 475.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
N. Kaza and L. Hopkins
In What Circumstances Should Plans Be Public?
Journal of Planning Education and Research,
June 1, 2009;
28(4):
491 - 502.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Irazabal
Realizing Planning's Emancipatory Promise: Learning From Regime Theory To Strengthen Communicative Action
Planning Theory,
May 1, 2009;
8(2):
115 - 139.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Purcell
Resisting Neoliberalization: Communicative Planning or Counter-Hegemonic Movements?
Planning Theory,
May 1, 2009;
8(2):
140 - 165.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
F. Miraftab
Insurgent Planning: Situating Radical Planning in the Global South
Planning Theory,
February 1, 2009;
8(1):
32 - 50.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Simeonova and A. van der Valk
The Need for a Communicative Approach to Improve Environmental Policy Integration in Urban Land Use Planning
Journal of Planning Literature,
February 1, 2009;
23(3):
241 - 261.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Hibbard, M. B. Lane, and K. Rasmussen
The Split Personality of Planning: Indigenous Peoples and Planning for Land and Resource Management
Journal of Planning Literature,
November 1, 2008;
23(2):
136 - 151.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Agger and K. Lofgren
Democratic Assessment of Collaborative Planning Processes
Planning Theory,
July 1, 2008;
7(2):
145 - 164.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. A. Throgmorton
Inventing the Greatest: Crafting Louisville's Future Out of story and Clay
Planning Theory,
November 1, 2007;
6(3):
237 - 262.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Brand and F. Gaffikin
Collaborative Planning in an Uncollaborative World
Planning Theory,
November 1, 2007;
6(3):
282 - 313.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
H. Thomas
From Radicalism to Reformism
Planning Theory,
November 1, 2007;
6(3):
332 - 335.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
D. L. McKoy and J. M. Vincent
Engaging Schools in Urban Revitalization: The Y-PLAN (Youth--Plan, Learn, Act, Now!)
Journal of Planning Education and Research,
June 1, 2007;
26(4):
389 - 403.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Y. Rydin
Re-Examining the Role of Knowledge Within Planning Theory
Planning Theory,
March 1, 2007;
6(1):
52 - 68.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
P. J. Maginn
Towards more effective community participation in urban regeneration: the potential of collaborative planning and applied ethnography
Qualitative Research,
February 1, 2007;
7(1):
25 - 43.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
T. Sager
The Logic of Critical Communicative Planning: Transaction Cost Alteration
Planning Theory,
November 1, 2006;
5(3):
223 - 254.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
V. Watson
Deep Difference: Diversity, Planning and Ethics
Planning Theory,
March 1, 2006;
5(1):
31 - 50.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Hillier
Straddling the Post-Structuralist Abyss: Between Transcendence and Immanence?
Planning Theory,
November 1, 2005;
4(3):
271 - 299.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Neuman
Notes on the Uses and Scope of City Planning Theory
Planning Theory,
July 1, 2005;
4(2):
123 - 145.
[Abstract]
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
A. Faludi
The Impact of a Planning Philosophy
Planning Theory,
November 1, 2004;
3(3):
225 - 236.
[PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
