Brooks Planning Theory

Planning Theory for Practitioners

Planning Theory for practitioners by Michael P. Brooks, FAICP, Brooks argues about some of the flaws in past planning theories. communicative in the early 1980s, advocacy emerged in mid-1960s to 1970s, rational dominated the post- World War II years and incrementalism late 1950s to early 1960s. In the book Brooks proposes policies and ideas to try to close the bridge between planning theories and planning practice. Brooks presents a great deal of arguments and policies that support his argument of planning. Planning theory for practitioners is divided into five parts the introduction, foundation of planning, alternative paradigms for public planning, towards a more practical strategy, and effective planning

185). I agree with this to some extent, however I disagree with him when he says that political savvy is a set of skills that planners can learn that “political Savvy is anonymous with professionals” (pg. 187). He puts a lot power in politics while at the same time arguing planners do not necessarily have to become politicians to learn the skills to be political savvy. He weighs political involvement in the planning process high. This I think may create a gap not only between planners and politicians, but between the public as well. If a planner becomes too involved in politics, they may be forced into choosing a side and take a

Brooks states, “Advocates planner bypasses the lack of universally agreed upon public interest by concentrating on the values of subunit of the larger community” (pg. 109). My questions is, why is it wrong to plan this way. He stated that within the same communities and neighborhoods, people do not share or have the same value when it comes to planning. Therefore, I think it will be more effective for planners to concentrate on subunits values of a large community because it is easier. In addition, communities and neighborhoods will have their own particular interest advocacy group representing them.

I disagree with Brooks when he criticizes the incrementalism theory for flavoring only people that possess a lot of political power while it does a disservice to people with no political power and the people with political power will use their power to block policies that favor the powerless. There is some truth that to a certain extent. however, people with less political power coming together possess great social power collective than one citizen or business with great political power. In addition can cause change due to their larger in