Critical pragmatism
From Geography
KolarAparna (Talk | contribs) |
KolarAparna (Talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Forester gives central place to the real world obstacles of planning. He is particularly concerned about the power relations and positions of actors involved in the planning process. Drawing on Habermas's [[critical theory of communicative action]], critical pragmatism gives central significance to social critique instead of selfless behaviour (as might be implied of ideal speech-act) or consensus-orientated communicative planning. Critical pragmatism lays emphasis on questioning and shaping attention in order to reveal and counteract argumentation in which the speaker depends on holding the controlling position in power relations. Acknowledging that every actor in the planning process uses different types of power, it is then argued that the planner should play an active role in separating the factual and substantive meaning of arguments from the power-ridden connotations because of social positions of interlocuters (Sager,2006). | Forester gives central place to the real world obstacles of planning. He is particularly concerned about the power relations and positions of actors involved in the planning process. Drawing on Habermas's [[critical theory of communicative action]], critical pragmatism gives central significance to social critique instead of selfless behaviour (as might be implied of ideal speech-act) or consensus-orientated communicative planning. Critical pragmatism lays emphasis on questioning and shaping attention in order to reveal and counteract argumentation in which the speaker depends on holding the controlling position in power relations. Acknowledging that every actor in the planning process uses different types of power, it is then argued that the planner should play an active role in separating the factual and substantive meaning of arguments from the power-ridden connotations because of social positions of interlocuters (Sager,2006). | ||
| - | Critical | + | Critical pragmatism according to Forester is an analytic approach that allows us to examine planning practice and learn from it rather than providing recipes of best practice. It is aimed to encourage critical, pragmatic judgement in planning. (Forester, 1999) |
====Practical implications==== | ====Practical implications==== | ||
Revision as of 13:24, 11 October 2011
Contents |
Contextual understanding
Critical pragmatism is an approach to planning and public policy developed by John Forester. The core ideas of this approach is to view planning as the restructuring of communication between stakeholders with divergent and conflicting interests and large inequalities in power and influence. The planner is a hands-on professional who facilitates inclusive, participatory forms of collective action rather than instrumentalist and a rational decision maker (Wagenaar, 2011). His book "Critical Theory, Public Policy, and Planning Practice" explicitly states the concept of critical pragmatism.
Pragmatism in the Forester sense is theorizing that is grounded in real-world experiences (in this case that of planning). Forester gives central place to the real world obstacles of planning. He is particularly concerned about the power relations and positions of actors involved in the planning process. Drawing on Habermas's critical theory of communicative action, critical pragmatism gives central significance to social critique instead of selfless behaviour (as might be implied of ideal speech-act) or consensus-orientated communicative planning. Critical pragmatism lays emphasis on questioning and shaping attention in order to reveal and counteract argumentation in which the speaker depends on holding the controlling position in power relations. Acknowledging that every actor in the planning process uses different types of power, it is then argued that the planner should play an active role in separating the factual and substantive meaning of arguments from the power-ridden connotations because of social positions of interlocuters (Sager,2006).
Critical pragmatism according to Forester is an analytic approach that allows us to examine planning practice and learn from it rather than providing recipes of best practice. It is aimed to encourage critical, pragmatic judgement in planning. (Forester, 1999)
Practical implications
Critical pragmatism can be used to address dead-locked or conflicting situations in communication and mediation within democratic, decision-making projects, that involve multiple actors with divergent solutions, suggestions and arguments to a shared issue.
References
- Forester, John. (1993). Critical Theory, Public policy and Planning practice: Toward a critical pragmatism. State University of New York, USA.
- Forester, John. (1999).The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging participatory planning processes. MIT. USA.
- Sager, Tore. (2006). The Logic of Critical Communicative Planning: Transaction cost alteration. Norwegian University of Science and Technology. Norway.
- Wagenaar, Hendrik. (2011). "A Beckon to the Makings, Workings and Doings of Human Beings": The Critical Pragmatism of John Forester. Public Administrative Review. Leiden University. Leiden.
Contributors
- page created by Kolar Aparna--KolarAparna 10:36, 11 October 2011 (CEST)
