Shadows of power: an allegory of prudence in land-use planning

364 Pages·2002·2.14 MB·English

by  Jean Hillier

SHADOWS OF POWER
AN ALLEGORY OF PRUDENCE IN
LAND-USE PLANNING
The RTPI Library Series
Editors: Cliff Hague, Heriot Watt University, Edinburgh, Scotland
Robin Boyle, Wayne State University, Michigan, USA
Robert Upton, RTPI, London, UK
Published in conjunction with The Royal Town Planning Institute, this series of leading-
edge texts looks at all aspects of spatial planning theory and practice from a
comparative and international perspective.
Planning in Postmodern Times
Philip Allmendinger
The Making of the European Spatial Development Perspective
Andreas Faludi and Bas Waterhout
Planning for Crime Prevention
Richard Schneider and Ted Kitchen
The Planning Polity
Mark Tewdwr-Jones
Shadows of Power: an Allegory of Prudence in Land-use Planning
Jean Hillier
Forthcoming:
Sustainability, Development and Spatial Planning in Europe
Vincent Nadin, Caroline Brow n and Stefanie Dühr
Planning and Place Identity
Cliff Hague and Paul Jenkins
Public Values and Private Interests
Heather Campbell and Robert Marshall
Urban Planning and Cultural Identity
William J.V. Neill
SHADOWS OF POWER
AN ALLEGORY OF PRUDENCE IN
LAND-USE PLANNING
JEAN HILLIER
First published 2002
by Routledge, 11 New Fetter Lane, London EC4P 4EE
Simultaneously published in the USA and Canada by Routledge, 29 West 35th Street, New York, NY 10001
Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor and Francis Group
This edition published in the Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2003.
© 2002 Jean Hillier
All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or
by an electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying
and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing
from the publishers.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library
Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data
A catalog record for this book has been requested
ISBN 0-203-16729-5 Master e-book ISBN

ISBN 0-203-26212-3 (Adobe eReader Format)
ISBN 0-415-25631-3 (PB)
ISBN 0-415-25630-5 (HB)
For Tejo
An Allegory of Prudence, Titian © The National Gallery, London
CONTENTS
Preface ix
Acknowledgements xiv
Figures xvii
Tables xviii
PART 1: INTO THE SHADOWS 1
01 Shadows of power: an allegory of prudence in land-use planning 3
PART 2: SHADOW TALK: CONVERSATIONS WITH
HABERMAS AND FOUCAULT 23
02 A conversation with Jürgen Habermas 25
03 Discussing Michel Foucault 47
04 Putting it all together: developing the foundations of a new
theoretical framework 63
PART 3: CHIAROSCURO PRACTICE: THE SHADES AND
LIGHTS OF PLANNING 79
05 Shadow magics 81
06 Tenebrism in the North East Corridor 99
07 Sfumatoin the forests 133

PART 4: SHADOW NEGOTIATIONS 165
08 The shadow of experience: the habitus 167
09 Negotiating the gap 177
10 Planners as missionaries or chameleons? 193
PART 5: OUT FROM THE SHADOWS 219
11 Associating with shadows 221
12 On slippery ice: beyond consensus 251
PART 6: SHADOW PLAY 273
13 ‘Coming events cast their shadows before’ 275
Bibliography 295
End notes 333
Index 341

PREFACE
‘Il me regarde en me donnant à voir le tableau.’ This phrase encapsulates my feel-
ings about land-use planning decision-making practice, and about this volume in
particular. Literally translated the phrase means ‘it looks at me by offering the picture
for my view’. Yet the French verb, ‘regarder’ can be translated as either ‘to look at’ or
‘to concern’. In this book I both am concerned with, and by, the picture of local plan-
ning decision-making practice and I also offer a picture of planning theory and
practice for the view of readers.
Some ten years ago, a recent arrival in Australia, I found myself in a position of
having reached an agreement with someone regarding action on a particular issue.
Some weeks later, the ‘boss’ took me severely to task for a lack of action. Referring
to my notes of the action agreement, I pointed out to the ‘boss’ the agreed roles of
each person. I was more than taken aback, therefore, when the other individual
(senior to myself) was then brought into the conversation only to deny all knowledge
of any such agreement and rationalise our original meeting in an entirely different
way. The ‘boss’ sided with my senior.
I relate this incident because it started me thinking about what is ‘truth’, its
contingency, the ability to persuade others of something, and the role of power and
status in influencing decision outcomes. I was still pondering these issues when I
attended the 1991 AESOP/ACSP conference in Oxford and heard John Forester
present a paper on planning as communication and on Habermasian systematic dis-
tortion of communication. I was inspired.
As a result, I began to listen to planning practice rather than simply look at it.
One of my particular concerns is that planning theory should be grounded in prac-
tice and vice versa. Talking with practitioners leads me to believe that much of what
takes place in everyday practice is as yet untheorised: the power-plays of elected
members on planning committees who overturn officer recommendations in front of
a packed public gallery just before a local election, the tactics which officers may
use to achieve policy decisions in the cause of social justice or market facilitation
and so on. Talking with practitioners also suggests that consensus is rarely reached
over the messy issues in planning where deep-rooted values and emotions are
involved.
Taking these together, I have explored theories of consensus-building and
attempted to relate them to the actually existing worlds of planning practice. I have
uncovered what seem to be perfectly ‘normal’ tactics of lobbying influential people,