Understanding and Explaining the Interaction of the Social-Communicative Aspects of Urban Planning and the Key Criteria of Sustainable Development

Document Type : Research Paper


1 School of Urban Planning. University of Tehran. Iran

2 Department of Urban and Regional Planning, Faculty of Art and Architecture, Tarbiat modarres University, Tehran, Iran


Since the 70s and especially the 90s, social and communicative dimensions have been emphasized in both procedural planning approaches and sustainable development studies. Despite the emphasis on the importance of linking the social-communicative dimensions of planning and the components of sustainable development, there is no attention to the way of linking these issues in the planning literature. As a result, it seems, the gap between the substantive and procedural aspects of planning can be resolved by the interaction between the procedural aspects of new planning approaches on the one hand and the substantive goals of sustainable development on the other hand.
The main question in this study is: what relationship can be established between the social-communicative dimensions in the new planning approaches and sustainable development criteria? In order to answer this question, first, the basics of new planning approaches have been collected, and then, using the qualitative content analysis method, the social and communicative dimensions of these approaches have been understood. In the next step, the content analysis of the key components of sustainable development theories and guidelines was done, and finally, the explanation of the conceptual relationship and interaction of the results of the first and second steps was deduced using the qualitative meta-synthesis method. The findings show that the new planning approaches, with the essence of communication, participation, and Pragmatism as a procedure, have a good capacity to implement the criteria of sustainable development as the substantive goal of urban planning.


Main Subjects

Agger, B. (1991). Critical theory, poststructuralism, postmodernism: Their sociological relevance. Annual review of sociology, 17(1), 105-131.
Akenji, L., Bengtsson, M., Briggs, E., Chiu, A., Daconto, G., & Fadeeva, Z. (2015). Sustainable consumption and production. A Handbook for Policymakers (Global Edition).
Alexander E.R. (2001). The planner-Prince: interdependence, rationalities and post- comuunicative practice. Planning Theory and practice 2, 3:24-311.
Alexander, E. R. (1994). The non-Euclidean mode of planning what is it to be?. Journal of the American Planning Association, 60(3), 372-376.
Alexander, E. R. (2000). Rationality revisited: Planning paradigms in a post-postmodernist perspective. Journal of planning education and research, 19(3), 242-256.
Allmendinegr, P. (1998). Planning in Postmodern Times. London: Routledge.
Allmendinger, P. (2002). Post-Positivist landscape of planning theory. Cited in: Planning Futures: New directions for planning theory. London: Routledge.
Allmendinger, P., & Haughton, G. (2012). Post‐political spatial planning in England: a crisis of consensus?. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 37(1), 89-103.
Baker, S. (2015). Sustainable development. Routledge.
Bauman, Z. (1999). In search of Politics. Cambridge: Polity press.
Berelson, B. (1952). Content analysis in communication research. New York: Free Press.
Berke, P. R., & Conroy, M. M. (2000). Are we planning for sustainable development? An evaluation of 30 comprehensive plans. Journal of the American planning association, 66(1), 21-33.
Blaikie N. (1993). Approaches to social enquiry, Cambridge: Polity
Blaikie, N. (2007). Designing social research: The logic of anticipation. Polity.
Blowers, A. (1993). Planning for Sustainable Environment. London: Earthscan,
Brand, R. and Gaffikin F. (2007). Collaborative Planning in an Uncollaborative World. Journal of Planning Theory 6 (3): 282-313.
Brooks, D. (1994) Beyound Catch Phrases: What Does Sustainable Development Realy Mean?.
Campbell, S., & Fainstein, S. S. (2003). Readings in Planning Theory (Studies in Urban & Social Change).
Center of Excellence for Sustainable Development (1996)."Sustainable Development News". Springer.
Chai, N. (2009). Sustainability performance evaluation system in government: A balanced scorecard approach towards sustainable development. Springer Science & Business Media.
Cheng, Y. (2013). Collaborative planning in the network: Consensus seeking in urban planning issues on the Internet—the case of China. Planning Theory, 12(4), 351-368.
Creswell, J.W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design; choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage.
Creswell, J.W. 2003. Research Design: Qualitative and Qualitative and Mixed Methods Approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Dempsey, N., Bramley, G., Power, S., & Brown, C. (2011). The social dimension of sustainable development: Defining urban social sustainability. Sustainable development, 19(5), 289-300.
Dyball, R., & Keen, M. (Eds.). (2012). Social learning in environmental management: towards a sustainable future. Taylor & Francis.
Eckstein, B., & Throgmorton, J. A. (Eds.). (2003). Story and sustainability: Planning, practice, and possibility for American cities. MIT press.
Elliott, J. (2012). An introduction to sustainable development. Routledge.
Fainstein, S. S. (2014). The just city. International journal of urban Sciences, 18(1), 1-18.
Fischer, F., & Gottweis, H. (Eds.). (2012). The argumentative turn revisited: Public policy as communicative practice. Duke University Press.
Forester, J. (1989). Planning in the Face of Power. Berekeley: University of California press.
Forester, J. (1993). Critical Theory, Public Policy and Planning Practice. Albany: State University of New York Press.
Forester, J. (1999). The Deliberative Practitioner. Cambridge: MIT Press.
Forester, J. (2006). Challenges of deliberation and participation. Les ateliers de l'éthique, 1(2), 19-25.
Forester, J. (2012). On the Theory and Practice of Critical Pragmatism: Deliberative Practice and Creative Negotiations. Planning theory, 12(1): 5-22.
Forester, J. (2013). On the theory and practice of critical pragmatism: Deliberative practice and creative negotiations. Planning theory, 12(1), 5-22.
Forester, J. (2017). On the evolution of a critical pragmatism. Encounters with planning thought, 280-296.
Forester, J. (2020). Kindness, planners’ response to vulnerability, and an ethics of care in the time of Covid-19. Planning Theory & Practice, 21(2), 185-188.
Friedmann, J. (1987). Planning in the Public Domain. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Friedmann, J. (1993). Toward a Non- Euclidian mode of Planning. Jornal of APA: Automn 482-485.
Friedmann, J. (2003). Why do planning theory?. Planning theory, 2(1), 7-10.
Friedmann, J. (2011). Insurgencies: Essays in planning theory. Routledge.
Grieco, M. (2015). Social sustainability and urban mobility: shifting to a socially responsible pro-poor perspective. Social Responsibility Journal, 11(1), 82-97.
Grunkemeyer, W., & Moss, M. (2020). Key Concepts in Sustainable Development.
Habermass, J. (1984). The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol I. Reason and the rationalisaztion of society, Boston: Beacon Press.
Habermass, J. (1987). The Theory of Communicative Action. Vol II. System and Lifeworld, Boston: Beacon Press.
Habermass, J.(1974). Theory of Practice. Boston: Beacon Press.
Harvey, D. (2019). City and justice: social movements in the city. In The Human Sustainable City (pp. 235-254). Routledge.
Harvey, D., & Perry, J. (Eds.). (2015). The future of heritage as climates change: Loss, adaptation and creativity. Routledge.
Healey, P. (2006). Transforming governance: Challenges of institutional adaptation and a new politics of space. European planning studies, 14(3), 299-320.
Healey, P., Cars, G., Madanipour, A., & De Magalhaes, C. (2017). Transforming governance, institutionalist analysis and institutional capacity. In Urban governance, institutional capacity and social milieux (pp. 6-28). Routledge.
Heally, P. (1997). Collaborative Planning: Shaping Places in Fragmeneted societies. Basingstoke: Macmillan.
Heally, P. (1998). Building institutional Capacities through Collaborative approaches to Urban Planning. Environment and Planning A, 30:1531---46.
Heally, P. (2003). Collaborative Planning in Persepevtive. Jornal of Planning Theory , London: 2 (2):101-123.
Heally, P. (2008). The Pragmatic Tradition in Planning Thought. Journal of Planning Education and Research 28:277-292.
Heally, P.(1992). Planning through debate. Town Planning review, 63, 2: 62-143.
Hillier, J. (2002). Shadows of Power: An allegory of Prudence in Land-Use Planning. London: Routledge.
Hillier, J. (2003). Agonizing over Consensus: Why Habermasian Ideals Cannot be Real. Jornal of Planning Theory 2 (1): 37-59.
Hillier, J., & Healey, P. (Eds.). (2010). The Ashgate research companion to planning theory: conceptual challenges for spatial planning. Ashgate Publishing, Ltd..
Hoch, C. (1996). A pragmatic inquiry about planning and power. Explorations in planning theory, 30-44.
Hoch, C. (2007). Pragmatic communicativ action theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 26(3): 272- 283.
Hoch, C. (2011). The planning research agenda: planning theory for practice. The Town Planning Review, 82(2), vii-xv.
Hoch, C. (2017). Pragmatism and plan-making. In Encounters in planning thought (pp. 315-332). Routledge.
Hoch, C.(1994). What palnners do. Chicago: APA.
Holden, M. (2008). Social learning in planning: Seattle's sustainable development codebooks. Progress in Planning, 69(1), 1-40.
Innes, J. & Booher, D. (2002). Network Power and Collaborative Planning: strategy for the information age. Paper presented at ACSP conference, Pasadena.
Innes, J. (1995). Planning Thoery's emerging paradigm: Communicative action and interactive Practice. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 14,3 183---9.
Innes, J. (1998). Information in Communicative Planning. APA, 64, 1: 52-63.
Innes, J. E., & Booher, D. E. (2018). Planning with complexity: An introduction to collaborative rationality for public policy. Routledge.
Krizek, K. J., & Power, J. (2018). A planners guide to sustainable development. Translated by Behzadfar, M & Habibi, K. Tehran: Tahan Publication (2nd Edition) [In Persian].
Lafferty, W. M., & Eckerberg, K. (Eds.). (2013). From the Earth Summit to Local Agenda 21: working towards sustainable development. Routledge.
Mccarthy, T. (1990). The critique of impure reason: Foucault and the Frankfurt school. Political Theory, 18(3): 437- 469.
Neuman, W.l. (1994). Social Research Methods: Qualitative and Quantitative Approaches. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Polk, M., & Knutsson, P. (2008). Participation, value rationality and mutual learning in transdisciplinary knowledge production for sustainable development. Environmental education research, 14(6), 643-653.
Redclift, Michael. 1987. "Sustainable Development:Exploring the Contradiction", London: Methuenn & Co., Ltd.
Rees, William E. 1996."Revisiting Carring Capacity: Areas Based Indicators of Sustainability", Population and Environment 17,no. 3:195-215.
Sadler, B.(1996). Environmental Protection and Resource Development: Convergence for Today.
Sandercock, L. (1998). The death of Modernist Planning. In cities for citixens: Planning and the rise of civil society in a global age, Chichester: Wiley, PP. 163- 184.
Schreier, M., 2012. Qualitative Content Analysis in Practice. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA .
Shrifzadegan, M. & Nedayi Toosi, S. (2015). Qualitative research Methods in developmental planning with an emphasis on urban and regional planning. Tehran: Shahid Beheshti university press [In Persian].
Stein, S. M., & Harper, T. L. (2012). Creativity and innovation: Divergence and convergence in pragmatic dialogical planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 32(1), 5-17.
Tewdwr-Jones, M. & Allmendinger P. (1998). Deconstructing Communicative Rationality: A critique of Habermassian Collaborative Planning. Environment and Planning Vol (30):1975-1989.
Wals, A. E., & Lenglet, F. (2016). Sustainability citizens: Collaborative and disruptive social learning. In Sustainability citizenship in cities (pp. 52-66). Routledge.
Westin, M. (2022). The framing of power in communicative planning theory: Analysing the work of John Forester, Patsy Healey and Judith Innes. Planning Theory, 21(2), 132-154.
Wismer, S. (1995). Sustainable Development and Urban Life.
World Commission on Environment and Development. 1987. "Our Common Future", New York: Oxford University Press.