Urban Planning

Response Paper: Three Models of decision Making and The Rational Model

Camilo Lopez FAU School of Urban and Regional Planning URP 6101 Planning Process and skills October 27,2014

The intend of this paper is to exhibit an understanding on the complex subject of decision-making. In the past, several prominent intellectuals and theorists in a variety of professions have touched in the way in which the planning profession comes about to a solution. Derived from philosophical, mathematical, and social elements that have shaped the human thought in recent times. All of these proponents advocate for their intuitively values, principles, and shaped characters in the process of decision making.

In this paper a concise explanation, tabulation and model figure of the rational model, bounded rationality, advocacy planning, social learning, and critical theory models will be conducted.

Rational Model Rational planning model for decision-making is rational in itself. It makes sense to conform with certain criteria based on personal beliefs. In planning, rational model is organized on a series of logically systematic steps that embodies identification of a problem (circumstances), identification of an evaluating criteria for that specific problem (tactic), generation of a variety of alternatives that could possibly solve the problem (options), choosing the optimal alternative for the specific problem and monitor its success. The whole rational process is of great sympathy with the rational mind in a theoretical context. It is positive to elaborate a goal oriented sequence of events in timeframe that would tell the planner what's next and will aid to organize thoughts. However, the idea of coming to a finite optimal solution is highly improbable due to the fact of complex interrelations of human actions.

In rational thought the process of making decisions embodies the act of favoring logically sound decisions: Therefore, it does not matter whether or not they are good or bad as long as they are "sound".

Bounded Rationality In response to limitations in the vague process of rational modeling, that assures the existence of an optimal solution above all, bounded rationality came about to simplify the process. In bounded rationality the general thought is concerned with the assimilation that there is no such thing as a finite truth (optimal solution). Instead decision-makers consider fewer options and choose an alternative (option/solution) that perhaps is not the "best" overall but is the best within a particular situation.

Bounded rationality can be thought of as a patch work process in which band aids are placed on external injuries for temporarily pain relief, while the internal disease keeps growing. In most cases decisions are limited to what the planner have at hand or know. Satisficing techniques are well accustomed to be incorporated within bounded rationalities due to the fact that it is the conformist approach to decision 2|P a g e

making, in addition to incrementalism: adoption of small solutions as problems arise. In bounded rationality planner's work as agency agents from a top-bottom approach in which decisions are made from the technical perspective.

Advocacy Planning As a result the advocacy planner is one of strong values and ethical principles that focused on particular cause. Different from the rational and bounded rationality models here the planner represents a group in the political debate to pass on specific solutions. Planning theorist Paul Davidoff suggested that decision making should be carried out by planners advocating special interest groups. Planners as advocates in which strong believes and convictions will generate debates that would bring up the best of both sides: therefore a better solution could be assessed. The advocacy seeks to eliminate inequalities of minority and suppressed groups by providing them with a voice in the political scene. The subject of distributive justice as explained by Davidoff have not yet being settled. Justice favors only some privilege groups: the ones in power since they hold control of the system. Therefore, the advocacy planner should be an "activist" that fights for the less favored. Even though in reality most planners especially those coming out of school may be shock by the ethical positions of their employers and with no alternative of employment they might be faced with a moral dilemma. The question here is, what do you do?, take it as it is or do something about it.

Social Learning In social learning the planner advocates for community betterment by a process of cognitive analysis.

The focus centers on assimilation of urban processes based on behavioral patterns. In contrast to the rational that creates alternatives on theoretical history, the social planner observes social interaction and behavior of its community. The process of social planning consist of a behavioral process of attention to the community interactions, retention of those interactions, production of mental conclusions or assumptions, and then providing an outlook of what was seen (the action). There is no final solution in social learning, all is a process as we move. It is the act of making decisions based on what we learned from a previous one. In practice John Friedman categorized the process in four stages: action, strategy, reality and values which begins and ends with an action. It is based on a closed loop strategy that moves from the mental process to generate problem and intentions, then in the actual experience to generate actual change in action, strategy, theory, and values, and then back to the mental process. The basic approach of a social leaner is to learn by doing.

3|P a g e

Critical Theory Critical theory on the other hand is the process in which the planner (professional) with its respectful knowledge and understanding of the field, challenges policies and processes to better inform the public forum. In history the idea of critical theory emerges from a Marxist Frankfurt School of Thought perspective in which by intrinsic human nature the established system is flaw. The critical planner challenges all previously accepted standards in every aspect of public policy and decision-making. It is a radical approach at discontent with general thought. In comparison with the rational model the critical planner acts as an agency agent. The planner observes policy making processes and foresees complications of misinformation that could occurred. As a result the planner critically analysis what is being intended to better the outcome under the umbrella of liberal advocacy. As mentioned by John Forester the critical planner is a progressive planner that foresees complications and therefore changes the course of actions. The progressive planner is one that advocates for the "betterment" of wellinformed planning actions.

In summary all conventional and unconventional theories that have emerged in planning decision-making and practice from a progressive method. From a systematic ordered rational approach to convenience and effectiveness approach, to a directed specialized approach by group representation to an observational approach on human behavior and interaction, to a radical thinker. We all strive for the "betterment" of human settlements based on our values and principles. The question of a right or wrong solution is always to be at debate due to the fact that there is no finite truth: therefore we should strive for solutions that advance human integrity.

4|P a g e

Tabulation of Ideas Model

Bottom-Up

RT

Top-Down

Implementation Method

Parties involved

yes

process of eliminating

Technicians, planning

alternative Technicians,

professionals, experts,

for an optimal solution by an

government officials

agency BT

AP

yes

yes

process of eliminating selective

Technicians, planning

alternatives, for the most

professionals, experts,

convenient solution

government officials

process of representing a

Individuals, groups,

particular group, cause, and/or

organizations, unions,

organization in the political sphere planners, activists for a representative solution SL

yes

Cognitive analysis of human

Planner, sociologist,

interactions, processing of felt

psychologist, observant,

needs and wants, and action for

and public observed

a scientific solution CT

yes

Challenge policy decisions, look

Analysts, technicians,

at both sides, avoid

citizens, planners

misinformation, and respond for a non-bias solution RT rational theory BR bounded rationality AP advocacy Planning SL social learning CT critical theory

5|P a g e

Model Figures Figure 1. Rational Model

Figure 2. Advocacy Planning

6|P a g e

Figure 3. Social Learning

Figure 4. Critical Theory

7|P a g e