Alternative Futures and Distributional Planning

Abstract

This paper contributes to the debate on urban planning methodology in three areas. It evaluates urban macro models, finding that by their very nature they cannot provide planners with answers to important classes of questions. Second, it reviews the expansion of concern in urban planning to encompass all contemporary problem areas and suggests that the tendency to “make everything endogeneous” is best constrained through the use of an “alternative futures” methodology. Third, it suggests that to avoid overly conjectural abstract planning, distributional cost-benefit studies which stress program diffusion effects and estimate needed compensatory side payments be used more extensively in conjunction with such “alternative futures” planning. Examples are drawn from the author's own work and the general literature to support the validity of the methodological approach advocated.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 3 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.