See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/275449993

Modern urban planning theories

Article  in  Planning Theory · July 2013

DOI: 10.1177/1473095212451042

CITATION READS

1 29,482

1 author:

Kang Cao
Zhejiang University
19 PUBLICATIONS   91 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

The traveling of planning innovation through different countries and regions. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Kang Cao on 17 February 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Planning Theory
http://plt.sagepub.com/

Modern urban planning theories

Kang Cao
Planning Theory 2013 12: 321
DOI: 10.1177/1473095212451042

The online version of this article can be found at:

http://plt.sagepub.com/content/12/3/321

Published by:

http://www.sagepublications.com

Additional services and information for Planning Theory can be found at:

Email Alerts: http://plt.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts

Subscriptions: http://plt.sagepub.com/subscriptions

Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav

Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav

Citations: http://plt.sagepub.com/content/12/3/321.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Jul 22, 2013

What is This?

Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at Zhengzhou University on August 12, 2013

451042 2013
PLT12310.1177/1473095212451042Book reviewsPlanning Theory

Planning Theory
12(3) 321­–328
Book reviews © The Author(s) 2013
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1473095212451042
plt.sagepub.com

Shiwen Sun
Modern urban planning theories Beijing: China Architecture and Building Press, 2007.
618pp. ¥128.00 (hbk) ISBN 978-7-112-07681-9

Reviewed by: Kang Cao, Zhejiang University, China

In Modern Urban Planning Theories, Shiwen Sun makes a laudable endeavour to depict
a grand picture of modern urban planning theory in a broad sense, its meaning, structure,
evolvement (perhaps in the form of the development of modern urban planning) and
principle aspects. This is the first book in simplified Chinese that contains ‘planning
theory’ in its title, and it still remains a small minority.
Modern Urban Planning Theories comprises five parts. In the first part, an introduc-
tion to modern urban planning theory, Sun expounds some fundamental concepts like
theory, urban planning, urban planning theory, modern, and legitimizes urban planning
as a social practice. In the very beginning of the introduction, a clear distinction between
theory of urban planning and theory in urban planning is made. In the Chinese context,
the author states, both ‘theory of urban planning’ and ‘theory in urban planning’ can be
simplified as ‘urban planning theory’ (p.3). Thus it is legitimate to illuminate both theo-
ries in a book named ‘urban planning theory’. In the context of this book, urban planning
theory is:

both theory on cities and theory on the planning of cities, and in this sense, urban planning
theory could be interpreted as ‘a generally, systematically rational cognition on the development
of cities and urban planning process; an intellectual configuration used to comprehend urban
development and planning process’ (p.16).

Sun further holds that urban planning theory, by its nature, might be classified into two
categories: one is positive theory, which is chiefly related to ‘theory in urban planning’;
the other one is normative theory, which is linked to ‘theory of urban planning’. This
kind of distinction actually repeats Faludi’s prominent and influential identification of
planning theory (Faludi, 1973) and there is a long list of contributions which follows his
typology of planning theory.
As Allmendinger (2002) has put it, typologies are important in helping to understand
often diverse influences, ideas and theories. Besides the above dichotomy in planning
theory taxonomy, trichotomy is also common in planning theory debate. Friedmann

Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at Zhengzhou University on August 12, 2013

322 Planning Theory 12(3)

(2003) has identified three kinds of planning theory, namely not only theory in planning
(theory 1) and theory of planning (theory 2), but also theory about planning (theory 3),
which is the theory based on empirical study or experience of practice. Tingwei Zhang
(2008) also recognizes three kinds of theory: normativetheory (planning values), proce-
dural theory (planning process) and institutional theory (planning institutions).
The author echoes this trichotomy in planning theory taxonomy by dividing urban
planning theory into three interrelated levels: philosophical, scientific and technological.
The scientific level, as the middle level, is considered by him as the most important level
in the urban planning theory debate, ‘the main body’. Theories in this level address the
abstraction of what urban planning concerns and its rational study. Theories in the philo-
sophical level synthesize and generalize those in the middle level, and uncover the true
nature of urban planning; while theories in the last level, the technological level, deduce
and specify middle-level theories and act as approaches and tools when urban planners
face practical problems. Sun further subdivides theories in scientific level into three
aspects: theories on cities; theories on urban development and every urban component
and its development; and theories about the implementation of urban planning.
The author also offers a sensible answer in three aspects to the question ‘why do plan-
ning?’ He argues that in the sense of economics, planning is a mechanism which helps
secure a long-term, efficient operation of the free market. The regulation and control of
real-estate markets by urban planning exemplifies the legitimacy of planning in practical
terms. Sun demonstrates from the perspective of epistemology whether it is possible and
feasible to ‘grow a plan’, as Edmund Bacon has put it.
The above detailed introduction of urban planning theory is followed by the main
body of the book: the formation and development of modern urban planning in the last
two centuries; theory on cities; theory on planning; and new dimensions and topics of
theory.
I admire Sun’s great efforts in composing such a hefty tome about planning theory. He
illuminates a crystal-clear structure or frame of urban planning theory and logically legit-
imizes urban planning in the context of the development of philosophy, natural science
and economics. However, judged by its contents, the book is more like an encyclopaedia
for planning practitioners, scholars and researchers than a research work. Fischler (2006)
has argued that ‘the distinction between planning history and planning theory is an unten-
able one, at least pedagogically speaking’, though whether to put a concise history of
modern western planning in such a ‘planning theory’ book is open to question. As the
first ‘planning theory’ book in Chinese, it is reasonable to introduce readers very briefly
a modern planning history as background information. But I believe that the proportion
of purely historical analysis in a theory book should be reduced; at least no more than
what it has taken, 160 pages.
While the author spends about another third of the book’s 618 pages elaborating urban
theory, or what he calls ‘theory on city’, the part entitled ‘Theory on Planning’ occupies
only 115 pages. Someone reading the contents of this part would be perplexed by those
chapters’ titles: ‘The Real Significance of Planning’; ‘The Role of Urban Planning’; ‘The
Type of Urban Planning’; ‘Policy Research of Urban Planning’; ‘Evaluation of Urban
Planning’. Although ‘the impossibility of a “general theory of planning” is an article of
faith among all right-thinking planning theorists’ (Alexander, 2003), there are still some

Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at Zhengzhou University on August 12, 2013

Book reviews 323

‘acknowledged’ planning theories that no planning theorist would ignore in reviewing

the development of modern planning theory. These theories, such as ‘comprehensive
rational planning’, ‘incremental planning’ (which mainly discusses Etzioni’s mixed-
scanning and Branch’s continuous city planning) and ‘advocacy planning and public
participation’, are subject to relatively limited discussion and only occupy Chapter 11,
Part 4 of the book, with the bewildering title, ‘The Type of Urban Planning’. To his
credit, the author endeavours to discuss planning theory since the beginning of the 21st
century against the background of globalization, knowledge economy, information soci-
ety, urban competitiveness, civil society and sustainable development. But the absence
of a general perception of the dynamics of current planning theory indicates that there is
a clear break between Chinese and the international circle of planning theory debate.
A final doubt is why ‘Chinese’ planning theory is not fully elaborated in this book. In
truth, the planning theory debate has gradually heated up in recent years in China. An
annual theory symposium is sponsored by Prof. Hok-Lin Leung and a biennial paper
competition called ‘Qiushi Theory Forum’ has been held by the journal City Planning
Review. The competition encourages the development of ‘a typically Chinese’ planning
theory from three origins: traditional Chinese philosophy, experiments of socialist
market economy and western positivist thoughts. Fostered by this and other stimuli,
some original theories are emerging. It is very regretable that all these attempts, efforts
and endeavours are hardly discussed in such a grand work.
I regard Shiwen Sun as one of a few erudite, rigorous and diligent Chinese planning
theorists and Modern Urban Planning Theories has won many plaudits since its publica-
tion. However, I believe that it would be much better if it could be condensed into a true
work of ‘planning theory’.

References
Alexander ER (2003) Response to ‘why do planning theory’. Planning Theory 2(3): 179–182.
Allmendinger P (2002) Planning Theory. Hampshire: Palgrave.
Faludi A (1973) Planning Theory. Oxford: Pergamon Press.
Fischler R (2006) Teaching history to planners. Journal of Planning History 5(4): 280–288.
Friedmann J (2003) Why do planning theory? Planning Theory 2(1): 7–10.
Zhang TW (2008) Planning theories and reform in transitional China. City Planning Review 32(3):
15–24 (in Chinese).

Abidin Kusno
The appearances of memory: Mnemonic practices of architecture and urban form in
Indonesia Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2010. 347pp. US$94.95 (hbk) ISBN: 978-
0-8223-4655-5; US$25.95 (pbk) ISBN: 978-0-8223-4647-0

Reviewed by: Christopher Silver, University of Florida, USA

The Appearances of Memory: Mneumonic Practices of Architecture and Urban Form in

Indonesia is a collection of essays that explores “the roles that architecture and urban
space play in the making and unmaking of a history still in formation,” namely the recent
history of Southeast Asian giant, Indonesia (p.4). Already recognized as one of the most

Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at Zhengzhou University on August 12, 2013

View publication stats