Planning styles in conflict: The metropolitan transportation commission

123Citations
Citations of this article
91Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

In a 5-year study of the San Francisco Bay Area Metropolitan Transportation Commission, we found four planning styles at work: technical/bureaucratic, political influence, social movement, and collaborative. Each involved differing assumptions about knowledge, participation, and the nature of a good plan. Players using one style were often mistrustful or contemptuous of those working in others. Regional actions—as opposed to packages of projects for parochial interests—were rare. The few regional initiatives emerged from collaborative planning and social movements. We argue that where diversity and interdependence of interests are high, collaboration is the most effective approach. Key barriers to collaboration included state and federal funding formulas, earmarking, and the substantial documentation required by state and federal regulations. © 2005 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Innes, J. E., & Gruber, J. (2005). Planning styles in conflict: The metropolitan transportation commission. Journal of the American Planning Association, 71(2), 177–188. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944360508976691

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free