Centenary paper: <i>The evolution of planning as an academic discipline</i>

Simin Davoudi, John Pendlebury

Town Planning Review · 2010 · 96 citations · 18 references

Concepts

TL;DR

British planning education’s centenary exposes unresolved questions about its distinct disciplinary identity, as reforms have neglected epistemic aspects and clarity. The paper argues that while planning has become an academic discipline institutionally, its intellectual foundation remains ill‑defined, and it identifies space, integrative knowledge, and the knowledge‑action interface as key areas for future debate. A critical review of five evolutionary phases shows that ambiguity in planning knowledge threatens its status as a distinct academic discipline.

Abstract

As British planning education celebrates its centenary, there remain unresolved questions about its distinct disciplinary identity. This paper argues that although planning has evolved into an academic discipline in institutional terms, its intellectual underpinning has remained ill-defined. Periodic changes to planning education have neglected the epistemic aspects of the discipline and the clarification of its distinct identity. Based on a critical review of the evolution of the discipline, structured under five distinct phases, the paper concludes that ambiguity about the nature of planning knowledge may lead to the weakening of its position as a distinct academic discipline. Three key areas are identified as the focus for future debate: space as the discipline's substantive object of enquiry, the nature of integrative knowledge, and the interface between knowledge and action.

References

18