Phronetic planning research
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Phronetic planning research is phronetic social science employed in the specific study of urban planning. Phronetic social science is an approach to the study of social phenomena based on a contemporary interpretation of the classical Greek concept phronesis, variously translated as practical judgment, common sense, or prudence. Phronetic planning researchers study urban policy and planning with a focus on values and power. Researchers ask and answer the following four value-rational questions for specific instances of urban policy and planning:
- Where are we going?
- Is this development desirable?
- Who gains and who loses, and by which mechanisms of power?
- What, if anything, should we do about it?
By asking and answering these questions phronetic planning researchers seek to contribute to public deliberation and social action in the field of urban planning. Action is seen, not as separate from knowledge, but as its purpose. Phronetic planning researchers deliberately seek out areas of research where their work is particularly likely to make a difference to practical policy and planning.
Phronetic planning research was first developed by Bent Flyvbjerg in his studies of rationality and power in urban policy and planning (Flyvbjerg 1998). The theory and method of the approach is described in Flyvbjerg (2001, 2002, 2004) and employed again in studies of megaproject development in Flyvbjerg, Bruzelius, and Rothengatter (2003).
In addition to planning research, the phronetic approach has also been used in political science (Schram and Caterino 2006, Flyvbjerg 2004), management research (Cicmil 2003, Flyvbjerg 2006), geography (Basu 2002, 2004), health (Frank 2004), education (Halverson 2004), and other research areas.
[edit] Sources and further reading
Rajashree Ranu Basu, The Geography of Neighbourhood Based Collective Action: A Flyvbjergian Perspective on School Closings in Toronto. Ph.D. dissertation. Toronto: University of Toronto, Graduate Department of Geography, 2002.
Rajashree Ranu Basu, "A Flyvbjergian perspective of Public Elementary School Closures in Toronto: A Question of ‘Rationality’ or ‘Power’?" Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, Volume 22, 2004, pp. 423-251.
Svetlana Cicmil, Knowledge, Interaction, and Project Work: From Instrumental Rationality to Practical Wisdom. Ph.D. dissertation. Bristol: Bristol Business School , University of the West of England, 2003.
Bent Flyvbjerg, Rationality and Power: Democracy in Practice. University of Chicago Press, 1998. [1]
Bent Flyvbjerg, Making Social Science Matter: Why Social Inquiry Fails and How It Can Succeed Again (Cambridge University Press, 2001) [2]
Bent Flyvbjerg, "Bringing Power to Planning Research: One Researcher's Praxis Story." Journal of Planning Education and Research, vol. 21, no. 4, Summer 2002, pp. 353-366. [3]
Bent Flyvbjerg, "Phronetic Planning Research: Theoretical and Methodological Reflections." Planning Theory and Practice, vol. 5, no. 3, September 2004, pp. 283-306. [4]
Bent Flyvbjerg, "A Perestroikan Straw Man Answers Back: David Laitin and Phronetic Political Science." Politics and Society, vol. 32, no. 3, September 2004, pp. 389-416. [5]
Bent Flyvbjerg, "Making Organization Research Matter: Power, Values, and Phronesis." In Stewart R. Clegg, Cynthia Hardy, Thomas B. Lawrence, and Walter R. Nord, eds., The Sage Handbook of Organization Studies. Second Edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, July 2006. [6]
Bent Flyvbjerg, Nils Bruzelius, and Werner Rothengatter, Megaprojects and Risk: An Anatomy of Ambition (Cambridge University Press, 2003). [7]
Arthur W. Frank, "Asking the Right Question about Pain: Narrative and Phronesis." Literature and Medicine, vol. 23, No. 2, Fall 2004, pp. 209-225.
Clifford Geertz, "Empowering Aristotle." Science, vol. 293, July 6, 2001, p. 53. [8]
Richard Halverson, "Accessing, Documenting and Communicating Practical Wisdom: The Phronesis of School Leadership Practice." American Journal of Education, vol. 111, no. 1, November 2004, pp. 90-121.
Schram, Sanford F. and Brian Caterino, 2006 eds. Making Political Science Matter: Debating Knowledge, Research, and Method. New York: New York University Press. [9]
