Suchergebnisse

Evaluation is a critical stage in urban and regional planning and development. The full impacts of well-intentioned initiatives are rarely anticipated, and evaluation of alternative proposals is essential for informed debate and decision. Evaluation in planning has become even more important with the new paradigm attempting to integrate economic efficiency with equity, sustainability and social responsibility. The craft of pre-development evaluation has long been influenced by Nathaniel Lichfield, and in his honour, this book brings together prominent researchers and practitioners to discuss evaluation in planning: its conceptual foundations and subsequent development, its strengths and persisting dilemmas, its best practices and their potential for improving future planning and development. These chapters trace evaluation in planning from its historical origin to current applications. Part One - History and Theory - reviews the evolution of evaluation theory and practice, discusses some critical concepts behind plan- and project-evaluation including utilitarianism, rationality, and the public interest, and concludes with critical assessments of some evaluation methods: benefit-cost analysis, and performance-based plan evaluation. Part Two contains a selection of best-practice application: multi-criteria decision support methods for evaluating cultural assets and regional development policies, feasibility testing for sustainability planning, impact evaluation for large-scale transportation projects, and dynamic planning for community impact assessment. The final integrating chapter notes some current problems, and offers directions for future development in evaluation research and practice.

The futility of defining planning suggests that there is no planning as a recognizable practice. Sociology of knowledge definitions imply three kinds of planning practices: (1) Generic "planning"—what people do when they are planning; (2) Knowledge-centered "something" (e.g., spatial) planning; and (3) Real planning practiced in specific contexts, from metro-regional planning for Jakarta to transportation planning for the Trans-Europe Network, and enacted in general contexts, for example, informal- or Southern planning. Planning theories are linked to different practices: generic "planning" theories and "something" (e.g., regional, community, environmental, or Southern) planning theories. Selected topics illustrate the "planning" theory discourse and spatial planning theories are briefly reviewed. Three generations of planning practice studies are reviewed: the first, a-theoretical; the second, the "practice movement," who studied practice for their own theorizing; and the third, informed by practice theories. Five books about planning show how their planning theorist authors understand planning practice. While recognizing planning as diverse practices, they hardly apply "planning" theory to planning practices. "Planning" theories are divorced from enacted planning practices, "something" (e.g., spatial) planning theories include constructive adaptations of "planning" theories and paradigms, but knowledge about real planning practices is limited. Implications from these conclusions are drawn for planning theory, education, and practices.

ABSTRACTThe Pressman–Wildavsky model of implementation finds a paradox in the success of any federal programs, based on their low probability of approval. Bowen relaxed this model's independence assumption to improve implementation. Here the model is reexamined: a. its sensitivity is tested; b. the empirical base for the probability range is reviewed; and c. its fit with implementation processes in general is checked. The conclusions are (1) the model's 'proof' depends on its assumptions and computations, (2) there is no empirical basis for the probability estimates, and (3) the model only fits one special case of implementation processes. Better models can be developed, and successful implementation may require organizational interdependencies.

The independence assumption of the J. L. Pressman-A. Wildavsky model of implementation Implementation, Berkeley Calif: U of California Press, 1984) is modified in order to improve the likelihood of implementation. After testing the model's a priori probability estimates, & its isomorphism with other implementation processes, it is suggested that the Pressman-Wildavsky paradox, which argues for a low rate of success for federal programs, based on low approval probability, depends on the model's assumptions & computations. Organizational & instutitional interdependencies are cited as areas for future research. 2 Tables, 19 References. Modified AA

In the last three decades, "informal" housing and invasion neighborhoods have made up the bulk of urban development in the major cities of Latin America. Statistics are presented that show that informal housing is the major contribution addressing the growing housing deficit of less developed countries. However, public policy has barely shifted from active opposition to acceptance or benign neglect. To constructively respond to the "informal" settlement process it is necessary to understand its complexity. There are three types of "invasion": 1) the "Communal" or classic spontaneous invasion; 2) the "organized" invasion stimulated by politicians, the church, or other activists; 3) clandestine developments: unauthorized sale of unzoned and unserviced land. Current policy responses are evaluated: sites-and-services, land regulation, subminimum development, legalization and upgrading, planning and administration. These all include planning as a common characteristic, which adds to the costs of the developed neighborhood and its housing, extends implementation time and makes the housing provided inaccessible to the really poor. A policy limiting planning regulation to serviced and developed areas is proposed, including a trust to internalized and distribute the value increment from informally or clandestinely developed land. ; En las últimas tres décadas, la vivienda "informal" y los barrios formados por invasión han constituido la mayor parte del desarrollo urbano en las ciudades más grandes de América Latina. Se presentan estadísticas que muestran que la vivienda informal es la contribución más importante al creciente déficit de viviendas de los países menos desarrollados. Sin embargo, la política estatal apenas ha pasado de la oposición activa a la aceptación o tolerancia. Para encontrar una respuesta constructiva al proceso de asentamiento "informal", es necesario comprender su complejidad. Se dan tres tipos de "invasión": 1) la invasión todo esto incluye la planificación como una característica común, lo cual ...

Implementation studies appearing since 1973 show a disappointing lack of convergence that may be due to different, often implicit, conceptualizations of implementation. They range from "classical" linear models linking policy or statute with execution to "circular, " "adaptive, " or "evolutionary" concepts that envisage a more dynamic interaction between the making and implementation of policy. It is suggested that the wide range of possible situations calls for a contingent theory linking policy to implementation. Such a theory demands a conceptual model that is abstract enough to accommodate diversity and to recognize that failure to implement policies or programs is not an aberration. A model is presented that meets these specifications: the Policy-Program-Implementation Process (PPIP) model, which can serve as a conceptual framework for developing contingent theories of policy implementation in the future.