Suchergebnisse

A critical review of the theory of planning, combined with some highlighting of the econ's of environment. The prevailing conception of planning is closely tied to the development of econ sci. The development of the modern theory of planning from the basic ideas of liberal econ's was supported by: (a) introduction of mathematical models into econ's; (b) the general theory of decisions; & (c) the amalgamation of rationalism & interventionism. In order to elaborate the SP implications of the traditional planning concept explicit reference is made to the general model of rational decision. However, it is stressed that planning problems are ill-structured & can be tackled by heuristic procedures, but not by formal models & mathematical techniques. The complexity of soc planning problems cannot be reduced to technical solutions. Another basic problem is the question of implementation. As long as we continue to adopt a separate-function model of COMM between experts & decision-makers aw shall perpetuate the situation of a growing amount of expert opinion in ever-thicker planning reports piled up on the shelves of public admin'ors. Finally, any control within a soc system must be directed towards a simultaneous transformation of instruments & of goals, & unless we find the proper approach to an integrated cluster of targets & instruments, there can be no control. The econ's of pollution is discussed. Technical solutions are more or less translated into econ terms, into cost-benefit calculations, & therefore policy recommendations derived from these hollow categories are proving inadequate to restore the environment & prevent its further destruction. If we are not ready to enter into a causal analysis of the problems of environmental decay, we shall not be able to develop long-term plans to prevent the self-destruction of mankind. A new strategy of planning is outlined which views planning as a process of problem-identification & problem-solving, of which the first phase requires interdisciplinary cooperation & the later phase is org'al problems with motivational & informational components. We need an analysis of the historical development of environmental decay to determine which processes have contributed to contamination, & an investigation into soc & econ systems, which by concentrating on the exploitation of the natural surroundings, by profit-oriented technical & econ progress, have created conditions of affluence & waste which raises the question of whether mankind will accelerate its own destruction for the sake of high rates of growth & profit. E. Weiman.

Contents are grouped under the headings: The nature of environmental threat; Society, personality, and environmental usufruct; The economics of common environmental property; Emerging environmental law; Organizing for environmental planning.

A philosopher asserts that area specialization is related to the generalizing approach of economics, political science, and sociology, and to the more traditional analyses of history and anthropology. He examines the meaning of policy-oriented or operational research. Finally Professor Olafson, of Harvard University, declares that the historical and environmental (geographic) sciences provide the best foundation for research, including interdisciplinary research.

An analysis of the history, causes, & heritages of US isolationism & its nat'l counterpart, expansionism. The history of isolationism is traced from pre-revolutionary times through the days of the founding fathers, the Monroe Doctrine, power politics, balance of power, territorial expansion & isolationism, the Spanish-Amer War, WWI, the return to 'normalcy,' Republican stewardship, the early New Deal, the peak of isolationism, & finally to WWII & its aftermath. The sociol'al or environmental factors of geography, economics, politics, nat'l & ethnic origins, religion, & educ are considered. It is concluded that US isolationism 'has never been more than pseudoisolationism.' During the 19th cent it functioned as the handmaiden of expansionism & was highly logical & successful. However, many misconceptions & the lack of understanding re the tendency of expansionism to make a policy of aloofness toward Europe unworkable made it dysfunctional during the 20th cent. I. Taviss.

The intimate relationship of problems of health and problems of the city forms the basis for a dynamic ecological approach to planning for physical and mental health in the city. Rational co-ordination is required in order to maximize the contributions of health professionals and city planners, who must work with and learn from experts in welfare, education, labor, business, architecture, economics, and related fields in their efforts to plan approaches which are generally acceptable and workable. The uncertainty which is a condition of urban complexity adds to the burden of responsi bility and does not excuse inaction. People need sunlight, heat, water, air, and food to live. They also need space, recrea tion, education, and protection from contagious diseases and other environmental hazards. In addition, there must be pro visions for human relationships and creative endeavor; politics, art, science; specialization and interdependence. These re quirements are not as susceptible to quantification as bricks, census tracts, or dollars, but it would be a grave error to persist in considering most what we can measure best. Public health services have altered the world's ecology, though the changes have not invariably been for the better. New conditions, many of which are malignant, will occur. However, a well-planned city will improve human health and growth. Total achieve ment of ideal conditions is unrealistic to expect, but particular diseases will yield more completely and more finally to the broad environmental approach than to a narrower one.—Ed.

Political scientists have approached the study of administrative organizations with widely divergent purposes and modes of analysis. The early studies in this field were suffused with a desire to improve administrative institutions. Attention was centred on the "problems" of administrative accountability, red tape and inertia, administrative efficiency, and the public's low estimation of government service. Emphasis in these early studies was placed on the description of formal institutions and arrangements, since these arrangements, rather than informal behavioural patterns, were amenable to reform. This approach still characterizes the great body of literature on "public administration" in all western countries.In the 1930s and 1940s some American political scientists began to focus their analysis on the "leadership" or "political" behaviour of top-level administrators. Rejecting the notion that public administration could be studied or taught apart from the general concerns of political science, this approach viewed administration as simply one phase in the political process. Emphasis was shifted from the internal aspects of administrative organizations to the environmental or "political" problems of these organizations. Emphasis was shifted from reform to value-free, neutral analysis. This "administrative politics" approach developed at the same time as the "behavioural revolution" in American political science and applied many aspects of that revolution to the study of public administration.