Planning Theory

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Law-Yone, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Planning Theory, Vol. 6, No. 3, 315-326 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1473095207082038

Another planning theory? Rewriting the meta-narrative

Hubert Law-Yone

Israel Institute of Technology, hubert{at}tx.technion.ac.il

This essay proposes to frame the persistent scientific/literary genre known as `planning theory' as a peculiar meta-narrative whose ideological underpinnings are seldom faced even by its critics in the discursive field. Although self-referred to as theory, its consistent ignoring of the material and concrete in planning practice on the one hand, and the subservience to the political role of the state by unquestioned professionalism, makes its complicity with power obvious. This kind of theory or theorizing, in spite of its negation of practice as object for analysis, is therefore to be seen as praxis itself. The proposed re-evaluation of this meta-narrative restates past critiques and reviews the historical and material genealogy of planning as a spatial apparatus of the modern state. A critical deconstruction of the dominant discourse of planning suggests challenging its foundational traits: authoritarianism, hierarchy, anonymity and time/space absolutism. Finally, the essay calls for a re-imagining of planning as a counter-hegemonic project.

Key Words: counter-hegemony • meta-narrative • praxis • profession • state


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?