Journal of Planning Education and Research

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tewdwr-Jones, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Planning Education and Research, Vol. 18, No. 3, 244-256 (1999)
DOI: 10.1177/0739456X9901800306
© 1999 Association of Collegiate Schools of Planning

Discretion, Flexibility, and Certainty in British Planning: Emerging Ideological Conflicts and Inherent Political Tensions

Mark Tewdwr-Jones

In Britain, as the nature of the state's involvement in the spatial planning process changed to reflect political concerns (such as the need for employment-generating development or concern for the environment), so have the methods employed by the government to secure consistency, certainty, and continuity in policy execution. A desire to create more certain conditions for developers, the public, and investors through greater use of plans has both decreased discretionary decision making and shifted it from some parts of the spatial planning process to others. Since certainty has formed the underlying tenet to statutory changes to the planning system after 1990 and has found policy expression through national planning guidance, British planning could now be at the juncture of an unhappy ideological conflict between the discretionary nature of British planning and the more certain, less pragmatic forms of spatial planning. In this paper, I suggest that the changing political context of planning in the 1980s and 1990s has led to an ideological conflict in the operation of spatial planning, which involves issues related to administrative law, professionalism, and flexibility and certainty.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Planning TheoryHome page
M. Gunder
Ideologies of Certainty in a Risky Reality: Beyond the Hauntology of Planning
Planning Theory, July 1, 2008; 7(2): 186 - 206.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Planning TheoryHome page
P. Booth
The control of Discretion: Planning and the Common-Law tradition
Planning Theory, July 1, 2007; 6(2): 127 - 145.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Planning TheoryHome page
S. Moroni
Planning, liberty and the rule of law
Planning Theory, July 1, 2007; 6(2): 146 - 163.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Planning TheoryHome page
N. Alfasi and J. Portugali
Planning rules for a self-planned city
Planning Theory, July 1, 2007; 6(2): 164 - 182.
[Abstract] [PDF]