graded2.docx

THE HISTORICAL CONTEXT OF URBAN PLANNING IN AMERICA 1
American Urban Planning 10

Case Study 1: The Historical Context of Urban Planning in America

Briana M. Turner
Helms School of Government, Liberty University
Dr. McGinnis
PADM 708-B01

American Urban Planning

American urban planning focuses on designing and regulating space that analyzes the physical form, economic factors, and social factors regarding the urban environment. Although urban planning usually revolves upon engineering and architecture, it also plays a crucial part in social and political issues that bring a consensus to the community. Through the American Urban Planning Association, the American government is responsible for using the different forms of urban planning to help solve the issues that affect the community. For instance, this paper discusses how the other planners dealing with radical and advocacy planning perform their responsibility concerning urban planning in America.

Advocacy Planning Theory

Paul Davidoff introduced advocacy planning theory due to the following groups: political parties, special groups such as the team against the caste system, and Ad-hoc society. According to Davidoff, each group consists of its own needs, represented through plural plan preparation. And through this, public participation is achieved; therefore, the public feels incorporated in the day-day activities. Advocacy planning does not consider value-neutrality; instead, it is guided by the people’s ideologies. The theory ensures that public interests are not defined but rather areare constructed through political processes. Meaning, before any decision is prepared, there must be a representation of all the groups involved, possibly throughthrough plural plans.
The planners have the task of being advocates responsible for helping the people prepare plans, and there must match that of the people. Planners are given a chance to endorse the methods they believe can work and benefit all the parties involved(involved (Friedmann, 2020). According to advocacy planning, the planners are responsible for helping the clients articulate their thoughts so they will understand. The planners can defend their plans by noting down the strengths and weaknesses of their groups. Doing this will help the groups gain approval from political support, which will be helpful in financing and implementing the procedures. The planners are responsible for making the clients aware of the institution involved in the planning process. Advocacy planning ensures that the clients and the different groups are revealed why specific suggestions were approved and why they left them.

Weakness of Advocacy Theory

Slow moves face advocacy theory during its implementation because it requires collaboration with the different groups. The slow motions make the theory fail in fitting in reality. This is because the planners must ensure that they conduct campaigns to reach a consensus with all the groups involved. To accomplish this, time will be spent trying to convince the public to come to terms with their plans. This exercise will result in slowness in the progress of the activities plans delaying all the activities.
A restrictive challenge faces the theory because while planning, the different groups are involved, and hence all of them consist of different opinions. The groups may contain distinct tactics which may not rhyme with the other groups, and so are their ideas. These tactics and views may lead to a particular following while the other group disagrees. This led the planners to be restricted from following since all the group’s tactics are authentic.
Also, the theory is faced with the challenge of in-fighting among the parties involved in search of individual satisfaction (Isaksson & Hagbert, 2020). The fights may continue and lead to disagreements which will tear apart the group. If the group is not torn apart, it will result in the members acting according to their political interests rather than serving for the good of society.
The theory also does not address the issue with the human dimension, which is concerned with paying attention to personal and spiritual concepts and their impact on the community (Couch, 2016). It has weak strategies of supporting social-developmental programs within the community and does not focus on enhancing the dignity and self-help of individuals.
The theory also does not address the substantive idea responsible for enhancing and promoting the social process, which results in a change in society. It focuses on making an informed judgment, which might give the wrong conclusion regarding a particular plan that might disadvantage the community.

Problems of Advocacy Planning

Advocacy planning faces a cross-cultural communication problem that poses a challenge to the planners, resulting in a lack of trust and confidence in the clients. Different planners noted different difficulties according to studies, especially in places where people living in poor and overcrowded conditions inconvenienced interaction with people (Cullingworth et al., 2014). They experienced problems establishing communication with different groups since there was a significant disparity that slowed down their work. Some planners adopt various strategies to bridge the communication gap by hiring planners from each community involved to establish and connect with the community.
Advocacy also faces a problem associated with power because the planners are encountered with difficulties developing the ability to help them make a difference in society. The planners should create and gain strength from the local community to help them deliver their agendas. However, this becomes a problem because developing such power and gaining trust is difficult, leading to delays. The planners also encountered a problem from the national level in trying to source resources such as finances since the government may fail to be cooperative.

Solutions to Advocacy Planning Theory

Advocacy planners should develop strategies that will help them bridge the gap that comes with intercultural differences. For instance, planners should ensure that they source for conversant people with diverse cultural practices, which will help them accomplish their projects. It is also essential for advocacy planners to ensure that they have advanced skills to help them in their profession. By doing this, the planners will be able to get the attention of different institutions that require people with skills to help address the client’s plans.

Radical Planning THEORY

Radical planning theory is usually found in totalitarian communities where the public lacks the means to air their voices and concerns. According to the planners of this theory, they advocate that the radical movement should be adopted as a critical concern for helping in the community’s transformation. The idea has the responsibility of providing an understanding regarding how society learns to participate in radical planning. The planners are tasked with ensuring that society’s emancipation from oppression and discrimination is received due to market changes. The theory expects little intervention from the government while expecting maximum involvement from society.
The radical planning theory is constructed of two factors that enable people to understand how the marginalized in the society shift from conventional programs to community-based programs necessary for helping people identify their worth: the activism factor guided by ideas from society(society (Reece, 2018). This factor ensures that the planners focus on the necessity of personal growth to the community, cooperation, and freedom that must be achieved without interfering and manipulating the public. The factor ensures changes will happen in the future and are expected to occur at the local level due to the planner’s agreement with short and medium plans at the local level in the community.
The second factor deals with the social processes, such as the economic relationship of the public. Unlike the activism factor that focuses on short-term and local levels, the social methods focus on long-term strategies, and its results focus on national levels. The radical planners are responsible for ensuring the community’s collective action by acting as mediators and activists. The radical theory requires the planners to have good communicationeffective communication skills and be knowledgeable in leadership skills.

Weakness of Advocacy theory

Slow moves face advocacy theory during its implementation because it requires collaboration with the different groups. The slow motions make the theory fail in fitting in reality. This is because the planners must ensure that they conduct campaigns to reach a consensus with all the groups involved. To accomplish this, time will be spent trying to convince the public to come to terms with their plans. This exercise will result in slowness in the progress of the activities plans delaying all the activities.
A restrictive challenge faces the theory because while planning, the different groups are involved, and hence all of them consist of different opinions. The groups may contain distinct tactics which may not rhyme with the other groups, and so are their ideas. These tactics and views may lead to a particular following while the other group disagrees. This led the planners to be restricted from following since all the group’s tactics are authentic.
The theory is also faced with the challenge of in-fighting among the parties involved in search of individual satisfaction(Isaksson & Hagbert, 2020). The fights may continue and lead to disagreements which will tear apart the group. If the group is not torn apart, it will result in the members acting according to their political interests rather than serving for the good of society.
The theory also fails to address the issue with the human dimension, which is concerned with paying attention to personal and spiritual concepts and their impact on the community(Couch, 2016). It has weak strategies of supporting social-developmental programs within the community and fails to focus on enhancing the dignity and self-help of individuals.
The theory also fails to address the substantive idea responsible for enhancing and promoting the social process, which results in a change in society. It focuses on making an informed judgment, which might give the wrong conclusion regarding a particular plan that might disadvantage the community.

Weakness of radical Radical theoryTheory

The radical theory has a weakness in feasibility, making it fail todo not fit in reality, mainlyfit, mainly when translating complex issues into simple ones. Extreme planners tend to address the problem by searching for long-run results rather than short-term results. It argues that if the effectiveness is not feasible and visible, society is not educated in trying to recognize the system’s contradictions. The theory fails todoes not address decisive transformation, which involves educating the community about the importance of a plan.
Radical change is also confronted by the weakness of lack of public interest. It fails todoes not address the issue of conflicts that mainly occursoccurs between it and the advocacy theory. It also fails todoes not address distributive justice that is an essential factor in society(society (Houston et al., 2018). The radical approach fails todoes not address the question of; if disputes arise between groups connected with planning whether the result should be underplayed in favor of surveying for an agreement. Instead of answering this question, the theory focuses on promoting the group’s interests, creating several conflicts within the planners.

Problems of Advocacy planning

Advocacy planning faces a cross-cultural communication problem that poses a challenge to the planners, resulting in a lack of trust and confidence in the clients. Different planners noted different difficulties according to studies, especially in places where people living in poor and overcrowded conditions inconvenienced interaction with people(Cullingworth et al., 2014). They experienced problems establishing communication with different groups since there was a significant disparity that slowed down their work. Some planners adopt various strategies to bridge the communication gap by hiring planners from each community involved to establish and connect with the community.
Advocacy also faces a problem associated with power because the planners are encountered with difficulties developing the ability to help them make a difference in society. The planners should create and gain strength from the local community to help them deliver their agendas. However, this becomes a problem because developing such power and gaining trust is difficult, leading to delays. The planners also encountered a problem from the national level in trying to source resources such as finances since the government may fail to be cooperative.

Problems of radical Radical planningPlanning

Radical planning is faced with a lack of provision of solid and coherent planning strategies by the national planning body. It possesseshas a problem since the body fails todoes not develop stable policies that address society’s issues. It also fails toRadical planning omits the development of develop future policies that will address radical planning, whichthat will help assist the community(community (Grooms & Frimpong Boamah, 2018). For instance, the planning body fails tolacks provide strong policies on ending social inequality, dividing society into groups of the haves and the have nots. This lack of coherent strategies affects radical planners since they lack a stable ground for working and implementing their plans.
Radical theory is faced by a lack of the necessary tools required to accomplish its set goals since the planners rely primarily on the outdated tools that weaken the process of radical planning to the community. For radical planners to succeed in their activities, they need to use improved and advanced tools and the bodies involved to ensure that the planners get the necessary resources they need. By providing such means, the planners will help society curb social inequalities and assist in economic growth. But faced with the problem of lack of good tools, the planners may not accomplish their responsibilities.
Also, rRadical theory is also facedinfluenced by democratic deficit during planning. As much as the planners want to be involved with the local communities, it may pose a challenge since it requires resources and time, which may be difficult. This is so because the pPlanners must mobilize the society to help them gain trust and ensure that they support the community to solves problems.

Solutions to Radical Planning Theory

Radical planning should be focusing not only on growth but also on the benefit of the community’s wellbeing. The planners need to understand that their purpose of ensuring the delivery of fairness is possible by promoting the collective wellbeing of the society. It is also essential for the body associated with radical planning to ensure that they provide the necessary tools to help accomplish the objectives of extreme planners. It is also vital to recognize the importance and benefits of planning regulations, which will help planners gain confidence with the community, making their work easier. It is also critical for the responsible bodies to ensure that the democratic deficit issue is addressed through national and regional development. The planning body will ensure that the radical planners act in the public’s interest rather than their interests.

Advocacy planners should develop strategies that will help them bridge the gap that comes with intercultural differences. For instance, planners should ensure that they source for conversant people with different cultural practices, which will help them accomplish their projects. It is also essential for advocacy planners to ensure that they have advanced skills to help them in their profession. By doing this, the planners will be able to get the attention of different institutions that require people with skills to help address the client’s plans.

Biblical Integration

As stated in the Bible, planning is spiritual and acceptable before the eyes of God since He initiated the process through Himself and the use of other people in the Bible.
According to the scripture, it advocates for people to plan for their lives since He is the principal planner. This is evident through the creation story, a plan since God created something for seven days each day. God’s creation of created a man, and a woman was a plan, since he wanted them to resemble his His image. For instance, the scriptures scripture in Genesis 1:26 (version?) saystates, ‘lets “let us make human beings in our image, to be like us. They will reign over the fish in the sea, the birds in the sky, the livestock, and the small animals that scurry along the ground.’ ” Genesis 1:26(Charlesworth & Pruszinski, n.d.). According to the Bible, All all this, according to the Bible, was a plan.
In consonance with the Bible, the people had plans, for instance, Moses’ encounter with God; he was given a plan of leading the people of Israel from slavery in Egypt, which is quoted in the book of Exodus. Also, in the book of Joshua, several plans are witnessed, such as the fall of Jericho. Later in the same book, Joshua decides to develop his plans without following God, Joshua 6 and 7.
Jesus’s ministry is considered a plan as seen in the book of Mathew, and He decided to choose men who He thought would help Him accomplish His mission after the resurrection, (Matthew 28;:19.,20 and Acts 1;:18).
The scripture supports planning as seen from the following scriptures; pProverbs 16:3.say, commit Commit your work to God, and all the plans that a human being has will be accomplished. (Proverbs 16.3). Also, proverbs 16.9 that a man’s heart plans his way, but God establishes his way, which is a clear indication that the Bible supports planning. The people need to ensure that prayer, work, and trial will help ensure that God’s plan is accomplished. Proverbs 16.3 says that people must allow God’s spirit to move through them, and by doing so, they will enable the same spirit to run through them and their plans.

References

Charlesworth, J. H., & Pruszinski, J. G. (n.d.). Cyprus Within the Biblical World.
Couch, C. (2016). Urban planning: An introduction (1st ed.). Macmillan International Higher Education.
Cullingworth, Barry, J., & Caves, Roger. (2014). Planning in the USA: policiesPolicies, issues, and processes (4th ed.). Planning and government. Publisher??
Friedmann, J. (2020). 10. The Mediations of Radical Planning. In Planning in the Public Domain (pp. 389–412). Princeton University Press.
Grooms, W., & Frimpong Boamah, E. (2018). Toward a political urban planning: Learning from growth machine and advocacy planning to “plannitize” urban politics. Planning Theory, 17(2), 213–233. URL??
Houston, D., Hillier, J., MacCallum, D., Steele, W., & Byrne, J. (2018). Make kin, not cities! Multispecies entanglements and ‘becoming-world’in planning theory. Planning Theory, 17(2), 190–212. URL??

Isaksson, K., & Hagbert, P. (2020). Institutional capacity to integrate ‘radical perspectives on sustainability in small municipalities: Experiences from Sweden. Environmental Innovation and Societal Transitions, 36, 83–93. URL??
Reece, J. W. (2018). In pursuit of a twenty-first-century just city: The evolution of equity planning theory and practice. Journal of Planning Literature, 33(3), 299–309. URL??