Planning
Theory
http://plt.sagepub.com/
Learning Radical Planning: The Power of Collective Action
Victoria A. Beard
Planning Theory 2003 2: 13
DOI: 10.1177/1473095203002001004
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://plt.sagepub.com/content/2/1/13
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/2/1/13.refs.html
>> Version of Record - Mar 1, 2003
What is This?
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
04 Beard (jr/t)
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 13
Article
Copyright © 2003 SAGE Publications
(London, Thousand Oaks, CA and New Delhi)
Vol 2(1): 13–35
[1473-0952(200303)2:1;13–35;033102]
www.sagepublications.com
LEARNING RADICAL PLANNING: THE
POWER OF COLLECTIVE ACTION
Victoria A. Beard
University of Wisconsin-Madison, USA
Abstract This article examines how citizens in authoritarian political
contexts learn radical planning for social transformation. After identifying a series of gaps in the radical planning literature, the article uses
a longitudinal study (1994–2001) of collective action in an urban settlement in Indonesia as a heuristic device to develop a more nuanced
model of radical planning. The study illustrates how cumulative
participation in state-directed planning, community-based planning,
and covert planning over time resulted in a sense of collective agency
that served as a foundation for demanding political reform at a
moment when state control was weakened.
Keywords citizen participation, collective action, community-based
planning, Indonesia, radical planning, social transformation
Introduction
Current descriptions of radical planning fail to explain how social transformation occurs in authoritarian contexts because they do not address how
citizens in these environments acquire the skills, experience, and political
consciousness necessary to bring about significant social and political
change.1 This results in an inadequate theorization of the process of
13
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
04 Beard (jr/t)
14
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 14
Planning Theory 2(1)
planning for social transformation in localities where social activism is met
with violent retribution and where it is common for citizens to fear the most
mundane forms of public and political participation.2 Planning for social
transformation does exist in these contexts; however, to understand how it
begins and unfolds, we must look to more minor, seemingly insignificant
acts that precede radical planning.
This article contributes to our understanding of how citizens learn to
engage in radical planning. It demonstrates how social learning in restrictive political environments occurs incrementally and current descriptions of
radical planning have ignored these initial steps because they are not overtly
radical. The central argument is that in authoritarian political contexts,
citizens learn the skills necessary to partake in radical planning by first
participating in state-sponsored programs, which can eventually lead to
more innovative, locally driven community-based planning. Over time these
efforts prepare citizens to engage in covert planning that, although seeking
significant structural change, intentionally operates beyond the purview of
the authoritarian state (Beard, 2002). Finally, the accumulation of these
experiences prepares the community for radical or insurgent planning at a
moment when the repressive state is weakened (Tarrow, 1998).
The article first substantiates the conceptualization of planning as social
transformation. It then reviews the radical planning literature and identifies
a series of analytical gaps. To address the analytic weaknesses described, the
article analyzes a longitudinal study of collective action in Indonesia. The
study, conducted between 1994 and 2001, is used as a heuristic device to
elucidate a more nuanced model of radical planning than the literature
presently depicts. Specifically, three examples of local-level planning are
used to explain how the foundation for radical planning evolved in this
context. The first example illustrates the shift from participation in a
centrally orchestrated state program to community-based planning. In this
example, women volunteers implement a state-designed health care clinic
for mothers and children. Eventually, this experience and the community
support they gained led them to develop and implement a community-based
planning process for locally identified needs. The second example depicts
the shift from community-based planning to covert planning. Here the
community mobilizes behind a series of incremental physical improvements
that transform its physical appearance from an informal to a formal residential settlement. Their efforts evolve into covert planning when they
come to view them in opposition to the State’s denial of repeated requests
for land tenure. The third example illustrates the move from covert to
radical planning when a community youth group plans and develops a
library. As in the previous examples, on the surface the library appears to
complement a facet of State policy; however, when the economic and
political crisis occurs in Indonesia and the State is weakened, the youth
group uses the library as a forum to demand political reform. Together the
three examples demonstrate how marginalized communities in an
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
04 Beard (jr/t)
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 15
Beard Learning radical planning
authoritarian political context move from conventional participation in
government programs to community-based planning in pursuit of selfidentified needs, to covert planning for social transformation, and when a
window of opportunity opens, to more overt, radical and insurgent political
action.
Planning as social transformation
In order to follow the arguments presented here, the reader must accept a
broad conceptualization of the ‘terrain of planning theory’ and what constitutes legitimate planning practice. Building on John Friedmann’s work
(1987), planning as used here refers to the deliberate transfer of knowledge
to action in the public domain for the purposes of moving towards a shared
vision of the ‘good society’.3 Adopting a broader conceptualization allows
Friedmann (1987) to view planning as a continuum that ranges from societal
guidance at one end, to social transformation at the other. This was a
turning point for the discipline, because it expanded our realm of inquiry
beyond the work of the professional planning practitioner working for the
state. It justified the inclusion of community organizers, activists, and
everyday citizens as ‘planners’ working either in collaboration with, opposition to, or completely beyond the purview of state-sanctioned, formal
planning processes. It is worth noting that a growing body of work and
scholarship operationalizes this broader conceptualization of planning, thus
contributing to our understanding of planning as social transformation.4
However, the literature has not yet addressed how planning as social transformation evolves in restrictive political environments.
Friedmann describes planning theory in terms of four broad traditions:
social reform, policy analysis, social learning and social mobilization. Each
of these traditions links knowledge to action, and falls along a continuum
of overlapping constructs that can be divided into two broad forms of
planning: planning as societal guidance and planning as social transformation (Friedmann, 1987: 75).5 Friedmann describes the fundamental differences between these two forms of planning:
The operative terms in these definitions are societal guidance and social
transformation. Whereas the former is articulated through the state, and is
concerned chiefly with systematic change, the latter focuses on the political
practices of system transformation. Planners engaged in these two practices are
necessarily in conflict. It is conflict between the interests of a bureaucratic state
and the interest of the political community. . . . The pressure for system-wide
transformation is intensified when, in the course of a system-wide crisis, the
legitimate authority of the state declines, and the state itself is so weakened that
it can no longer successfully repress the radical practices of the political
community. (Friedmann, 1987: 38–9)6
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
15
04 Beard (jr/t)
16
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 16
Planning Theory 2(1)
In practice, planning as societal guidance operates as ‘conventional
planning’ conducted by a professionally trained practitioner. In contrast,
planning as social transformation is most fully represented by the fourth
tradition in planning thought – social mobilization, which draws on three
oppositional currents: social anarchism, historical materialism, and utopianism (Friedmann, 1987: 225). According to Friedmann, planning as social
transformation is radical planning.
For the purposes of the arguments presented here, planning as social
transformation can be understood as efforts that occur on a variety of scales
to transform the social, political, and economic structures that create and
maintain the status quo. To date the most well known examples of radical
planning have occurred at the community-level (Friedmann, 1987; Peattie,
1968; Sandercock, 1998a). However, planning as social transformation is
possible at higher operational scales; for example, when a bureaucrat
(Needleman and Needleman, 1974), political party (Abers, 2000) and/or
state (Rangan, 1999) deliberately sets out to transform the character of
social and political life within their sphere of influence.
It should be noted that while a ‘continuum’ is useful for explaining the
difference between planning as societal guidance and planning as social
transformation and the relationship to the various traditions in planning
thought, the metaphor has its limitations. Friedmann (1987: 391) notes that
there is an ‘epistemological break’ between planning as societal guidance
and planning as social transformation. In other words, what have typically
been considered valid knowledge in planning as societal guidance (e.g.
scientific and technical knowledge) and planning as social transformation
(e.g. indigenous, subjective, experience-based knowledge) are so different
that they do not logically lie on the same continuum. Although the sources
of knowledge are different, if the continuum is defined as the link between
knowledge (broadly defined) and action in the public domain, the metaphor
remains conceptually useful.
Perspectives on radical planning
Radical planning is not what most would consider mainstream planning
practice, although its roots extend back to the 18th century and its history
is as long as the social reform tradition (Friedmann, 1987). A number of
writers have laid the conceptual foundation for radical planning practice.
Although not a comprehensive treatment of the literature, the next section
offers a critical overview of different visions, models and methods of radical
planning, and highlights important analytical gaps in our understanding of
how it evolves and how it is practiced. This overview is useful for highlighting analytical weaknesses in the radical planning model as it presently
exists.
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
04 Beard (jr/t)
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 17
Beard Learning radical planning
A normative model of radical planning
Building on the social mobilization tradition in planning thought, Friedmann (1987) develops one of the most comprehensive articulations of
radical planning. The normative aim of his radical planning model is ‘the
emancipation of humanity from social oppression’, and most of Friedmann’s examples concern oppression by the state and inequality generated
by the market. In simple terms, radical planning begins with a critique of
the present situation and then provides an operational response to that
critique (Friedmann, 1987: 303).
In this model, planners help the community find practical solutions,
understand institutional constraints, and provide the ‘intelligence’ necessary to develop successful strategies (Friedmann, 1987: 304). Appropriate
knowledge is not, however, the radical planner’s monopoly; rather, it is
obtained through an overlapping and intertwined process in which theory,
strategy, vision, and action inform each other in social learning (Friedmann,
1987: 302).7 Friedmann warns that the radical planner must guard against
the tendency for power and information to be consolidated in a small
decision-making elite, by ensuring the broad participation of community
members.
For a successful relationship between the radical planner and the
community, the planner has to be close to the community and the action.
According to Friedmann, the planner is a mediator of radical practice. Thus
the planner must be committed to the immediate practice she or he is
engaged in as well as the larger goal of human emancipation. At the same
time, the planner ‘must maintain critical distance from the group’s practice’
(Friedmann, 1987: 404). In short, the radical planner must walk the thin line
between standing apart from the group’s practice and being consumed by
it.
An important distinction between radical planning and other forms of
bottom-up planning, such as community-based planning, is its oppositional
element. Friedmann points out that ‘conflict strategies’ can take a variety of
forms: nonviolent or violent, reform or revolution, or political or extrapolitical struggle (Friedmann, 1987: 287). In recent years, the work of
several authors has continued to support the oppositional element in radical
planning, albeit from differing perspectives. Sandercock (1998a) provides a
series of micro case studies of how radical planning, or what she terms insurgent planning, operates under different conditions and contexts. Rangan
(1999) argues against an implied opposition to the state, and asserts that the
state is capable of radical planning. Harvey (1999, 2000) contends that for
broad structural change to be realized, radical planning must occur at
multiple operational scales. Each of these authors maintains the importance
of the oppositional element in radical planning.
Friedmann explains in detail how radical planning operates. His starting
point is the household economy and the need to equalize access to different
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
17
04 Beard (jr/t)
18
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 18
Planning Theory 2(1)
bases of social power (Friedmann, 1987: 396). Radical planning employs a
combined strategy of household and community de-linking, collective selfempowerment, and self-reliance. It is important to note that Friedmann
assumes that a marginalized and/or oppressed community would nonetheless have access to a sufficient amount of economic, political, and social
capital to initiate this strategy. However, it is unclear from his normative
model what mechanisms or experiences enable a community to arrive at this
crucial starting point.
Friedmann’s description is useful in sharply distinguishing radical
planning from other modes of bottom-up or community-based planning. He
defines: (1) the ultimate aim of the radical planning project, (2) the role of
the planning practitioner, and (3) appropriate forms of knowledge and
action. There are significant gaps, however, in Friedmann’s model. For
instance, one gets little sense of how a repressed community will gain the
skills, experience, and power to initiate a radical planning process. Neither
is it clear how this normative model will work in those socio-political
contexts that admonish political activism as ‘subversive’ or destabilizing,
nor where there exists a pervasive sense of fear of violent retribution.
Methods in radical planning practice
Leavitt’s (1994) work outside formal planning and regulatory frameworks
to further social transformation illuminates how action research might be
useful to radical planners. In 1964, Leavitt moved to a poor community in
Newark to work with a multiracial anti-poverty movement. As part of her
work, she initially lived with poor families and observed their hardships
directly. Through this experience and her research in which she visited
community members in their homes, she recognized that the community
needed help with its ‘everyday needs’, which municipal plans ignored
(Leavitt, 1994). Leavitt’s detailed knowledge of local conditions came
principally from her informal observation and spending time in community
members’ homes.
Leavitt’s story is interesting because it demonstrates a new type of
planning that occurs outside formal, institutionalized planning processes,
and because she reduces the distinction between activism, research, and
theory – thus creating possibilities for cross-fertilization and mutual
learning. However, her methods are not markedly different from those used
in other forms of community-based planning or advocacy planning. Leavitt
worked on behalf of an oppressed group of local residents focusing on such
‘everyday needs’ as access to recreation facilities and safer intersections. It
should be noted that Leavitt’s work implies that the community in which
she worked lacked the skills, resources, or the political consciousness to
engage directly in radical planning. Eventually, there was a rebellion in
Newark, although Leavitt’s account reveals little about the sequence of
events or the preparatory processes leading up to it. The reader is left to
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
04 Beard (jr/t)
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 19
Beard Learning radical planning
wonder what key community experiences, skills, and conditions prepared
its members to undertake insurgent action.
‘A thousand tiny empowerments’
In Toward Cosmopolis, Sandercock (1998a) provides a series of empirical
examples of how radical planners work towards social transformation.
According to her account, radical planning has emerged in response to a
wide variety of injustices and oppression, including but not limited to
racism, environmental degradation, gender discrimination, inequality,
homophobia, and social and economic exclusion. As she describes it:
Radical practice emerged from experiences with and a critique of existing
unequal relations and distributions of power, opportunity, and resources. The
goal of these practices is to work for structural transformation of systematic
inequalities and, in the process to empower those who have been systematically
disempowered. (Sandercock, 1998a: 97–8)
Sandercock, like Friedmann, suggests that the focus of radical planning will
depend, in any given context, on the character of oppression being endured
and on the accompanying critique of the circumstances that maintain that
oppression (1998a: 98). Despite the diverse range of oppressions that radical
planning might address, much of Sandercock’s theorizing focuses on injustices related to ‘difference’.
In theoretically positioning radical planning vis-a-vis alternative modes
of planning practice, Sandercock (1998a: 99) stipulates that it does not ‘lie
on a logical continuum with rational planning for societal guidance’. Her
view is that radical planning requires an epistemological break with what
planners thought and did in the past (Sandercock, 1998a: 99). Yet in another
statement she acknowledges a relationship between planning for societal
guidance and planning for social transformation ‘. . . there is an unresolved,
and unresolvable tension between the transformative and repressive powers
of state-directed planning practices, and their mirror image, the transformative and also repressive potential of the local, the grassroots, the insurgent’ (Sandercock, 1998a: 102). That acknowledgement implies that
planning as societal guidance and planning as social transformation do lie
at opposite ends of a continuum. However, as Sandercock notes, both state
and local actors have the potential to engage in planning as societal
guidance and/or planning as social transformation.
Sandercock argues that radical planning does not necessarily begin with
grand, overt acts, but instead with smaller actions or what she calls ‘a
thousand tiny empowerments’. However, her work never addresses how a
group or community moves from being oppressed, lacking resources, and a
general state of powerlessness to becoming empowered. Even more
perplexing is how a community in an authoritarian context would move
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
19
04 Beard (jr/t)
20
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 20
Planning Theory 2(1)
towards empowerment, let alone engage in radical or insurgent planning for
social transformation.
Analytical shortcomings and unanswered
questions
This critical overview of the radical planning literature identifies some
significant analytical shortcomings and unanswered questions, particularly
in relation to how citizens learn to engage in radical planning. Below, the
gaps in the literature are summarized to show how analysis of the empirical data can contribute to a more nuanced understanding of radical
planning:
1. Previous explanations of radical planning provide no insight into how
this type of practice begins. How does a politically oppressed group
learn the skills and gain the experience and confidence to organize
against a more powerful repressive force?
2. How does a community engage in radical planning in extremely
restrictive socio-political environments? For example, many countries
have laws forbidding unauthorized meetings, critical public statements,
and collective action. How do citizens overcome their fear of violent
retribution in order to come together and partake in radical planning?
3. In general, previous perspectives fail to articulate a coherent theoretical
model situating radical planning vis-a-vis other modes of planning.
What is the relationship between radical planning and other modes of
planning (e.g. rational–comprehensive, community-based, and
collaborative planning)?
In what follows, a longitudinal study is used as a heuristic device to
address those questions and develop a fuller and more coherent understanding of radical planning and its relationship to other modes of planning
practice.
The study: from participation to radical planning
The three examples of community-level collective action analyzed below
are drawn from a longitudinal study of an urban informal settlement in
Indonesia.8 The case study community is located on the edge of a river and
like the other communities along the river, it is inhabited by generations of
poor migrants that settled here because the steep banks provided access to
vacant land where they could construct inexpensive housing and maintain
close proximity to the city’s economic center. The communities along the
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
04 Beard (jr/t)
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 21
Beard Learning radical planning
river were developed outside (and sometimes in spite of) formal planning
and regulatory frameworks, and their high-density unregulated housing,
combined with their lack of official land tenure status and periodic flooding,
created limited social and political spaces available for residents to engage
in planning for social transformation. Data for this study were collected in
a series of three intervals, 1994, 1997, and 2001, thus spanning what is
considered the pre-crisis, crisis, and post-crisis periods in Indonesia.9 In
total, approximately 27 months were spent in the field. Research methods
included direct observation, in-depth interviews (n=200), oral histories
(n=50), and community meetings (between 5 and 10 meetings per month).
A household census (N=275) was conducted of a single community to
gather information on household structure, education, employment,
consumption, land tenure, access to services, and participation in
community-level organizations.
It is important to note that when the researcher began this study she set
out to answer questions related to the capacity of community-based
organizations to alleviate poverty and not to address the question of how
residents learn radical planning in an authoritarian context. Serendipitously
the research spanned both periods of economic prosperity and crisis, as well
as a period of tremendous social and political change in Indonesia. As a
result, much of the data analyzed in this article came from field observations
and informal conversations that emerged from relationships of trust
between the researcher and respondents. These relationships allowed
respondents to discuss the fear and repression they felt when the Suharto
regime was in power and how this climate was slowly changing in the postSuharto period.10 In many ways the longitudinal research strategy and use
of ethnographic methods facilitated the telling of a different story, and,
possibly, a more interesting and important story than the researcher initially
sought.
Community-level planning in Indonesia
The urban political–administrative structure in Indonesia creates a unique
set of organizational relationships and spaces that define how local residents
engage in planning and collective action at the community level.11 Some
knowledge of this structure is important for understanding the institutional
possibilities and constraints faced by community-based organizations. For
administrative purposes, cities are subdivided into districts and smaller subdistricts, where mayors usually appoint district and sub-district leaders, who
are civil servants. Each sub-district is further subdivided into two smaller
groups of households. The larger of the two units is referred to as Rukun
Warga (RW) and the smaller unit is referred to as Rukun Tetangga (RT)
and local residents govern both of these units. Many communities elect their
RW and RT leaders who are unpaid volunteers.12 The examples of collective action described in this article are based on a case study of a single RW.
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
21
04 Beard (jr/t)
22
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 22
Planning Theory 2(1)
In RWs and RTs, men and women usually conduct separate monthly
meetings, in which they select their leaders, carry on routine dialogue, and
identify community-level problems as well as strategies for action. Despite
the transformative potential of these fora, their vertical organization and
the unidirectional, top-to-bottom flow of information effectively precludes
spaces in which public dialogue with neighboring communities (e.g.
geographically adjacent RWs) might take place (let alone radical planning).
During the New Order period this vertical administrative structure served
a number of important functions.13 Specifically, it was extremely effective
in marshalling volunteer labor to implement the State’s development programs, providing surveillance of community-level activities, and preventing
geographically adjoining communities from mobilizing in support of collective demands on the State. This study will show how residents learned to
manipulate this state-imposed structure, and how they ultimately used the
limited spaces permitted for public dialogue and collective action, to pursue
increasingly radical action for transformative ends.
From participation to community-based planning:
developing a health care clinic
This example describes a subtle transformation among local women
activists and the community members that observed their efforts. This transformation started with the women’s participation in the implementation of
a Mother and Child Health Care Clinic that eventually led them to develop
a health care clinic for the elderly. This process is significant because it
demonstrates how these women moved from simply participating in
implementation of the State’s programs to a process of community-based
planning, pursuing their own agendas. However, their successful implementation of the State’s program was a key element in that transition, since it
generated experience, skills, and a strong foundation of community support
– important conditions for the women to move from participation to
community-based planning.
During the New Order period, many women throughout Indonesia
participated in community-based planning under a national program known
as the Women’s Family Welfare Organization (WFWO).14 The organization
provides, through the work of local women volunteers, micro-credit,
literacy tutoring, and birth control for low-income communities.15 At the
same time, however, the WFWO created formal, legitimate, and state-sanctioned spaces where women met, discussed issues of mutual concern, and
engaged in collective action, albeit at first simply to carry out the State’s
development agenda.
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
04 Beard (jr/t)
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 23
Beard Learning radical planning
Participation: mother and child health care clinic16
The WFWO has administered a Mother and Child Health Care Clinic
throughout Indonesia (including the case study community) since the early
1970s. It is part of a standardized, nationwide program under the National
Family Planning Program to reduce infant mortality rates and improve
reproductive health. The clinic provides basic health care services to
children under the age of five and their mothers. The clinic’s services include
monitoring the child’s height and weight, remedies to counteract dehydration, immunizations, vitamin and nutritional supplements, and, in some
communities, contraceptives. When such clinics are established, in most
communities volunteers receive training from the state.
Mobilization: the health care clinic for the elderly
The WFWO volunteers in the case study community established a health
care clinic for the elderly (Lansia – Lanjut Usia) in 1996. This clinic was
planned not by the State, but rather by two local activists: Mbah Kromo,
the oldest member of the community and the local midwife, and Ibu Wati,
a WFWO activist and professional nurse.17 These women used the skills
they had gained managing the state-designed Mother and Child Health
Care Clinic for more than two decades to plan their own health care clinic
for the elderly.18 The establishment of the health care clinic for the elderly
may appear to be an unimpressive example of community-based planning.
However, when understood in the context of fear that existed regarding
activism and the minimal amount of resources (time and money) that these
poor residents had to contribute to local initiatives, it should be viewed as
a more significant undertaking. Establishing the health care clinic for the
elderly gave these women activists and the broader community who
observed and contributed to this effort an important sense of collective
agency.
One of the first steps by those planning the clinic was to seek the approval
of the family planning field workers at the district office. Ibu Wati did so
because she was working as a nurse at the puskesmas (government health
care clinic), and she did not want her efforts in the community to appear
insubordinate. She was granted permission to organize the proposed clinic
for the elderly because the local puskesmas was not capable of providing
equivalent service. After Ibu Wati received approval from the district she
sought community support in compliance with the protocol of the
political–administrative structure. Within the community, Ibu Wati first
sought approval of the RW leader’s wife and the volunteers of the WFWO,
because those women represented each RT and would be giving their time
to set up and run the clinic. Finally, after the WFWO volunteers had agreed
to establish and carry out the program, the clinic was promoted to the entire
community.
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
23
04 Beard (jr/t)
24
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 24
Planning Theory 2(1)
The clinic provides the elderly with services, such as information about
their weight, blood pressure, preventive health care, which they had previously lacked because of prohibitive costs and (for some elderly) a lack of
mobility. The clinic is conducted once a month in a WFWO volunteer’s
home. Here a hot meal is served and volunteers record attendees’ weight
and blood pressure, fill prescriptions, distribute vitamin supplements, and
occasionally a doctor participates to answer questions and make referrals.
While the program is a community-based planning effort, since it is modeled
after the national Mother and Child Health Care Clinic, it is considered
complementary, not oppositional, to state policy. Its success is due to several
factors: Ibu Wati’s formal training as a nurse as well as her knowledge of
political–administrative protocol, the volunteers’ skills and experience from
working at the Mother and Child Health Care Clinic, and support from the
local government as well as the community. The Mother and Child Health
Care Clinic had given the participants in the WFWO a wide range of invaluable experiences and skills that later helped them mobilize and realize their
plan.
For the reader to fully understand the significance of the health care
clinic for the elderly, it needs to be considered in conjunction with the two
stories that follow. It is also important for the reader to understand that
most of the residents involved in these efforts were cognizant of each other’s
work. Not only must these three stories be understood together, but the
reader must never lose sight of the sense of fear and repression community
members felt when they began to mobilize and engage in collective action.
From community-based to covert planning: the
repaving effort
This example describes how the community’s efforts to improve its footpaths evolved over time into a conscious strategy to give the community at
least the outward appearance of a legal residential settlement and subtly
assert a collective land tenure claim. The community’s conscious decision
to conceal its opposition and tactical response to the State’s denial of
requests for land tenure epitomizes the shift from community-based
planning to covert planning.
The repaving effort needs to be understood in terms of a number of
important contextual factors, some of which include: socio-economic status,
residential history, and the relationship between the state and communities
located along the river. First, communities located along the river are
composed of primarily poor households and most do not enjoy legal land
tenure. In the study area, for instance, approximately 80 percent of residents
lacked legal land tenure. However, the community was relatively stable:
most households had been living in the area for an average of 22 years. A
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
04 Beard (jr/t)
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 25
Beard Learning radical planning
related contextual factor is the relationship between the State and
community. The State had long been ambivalent in its resolve to force residents to relocate away from the river. For instance, the state has consistently
pressured the less organized, poorer communities to relocate while it subsidized infrastructure development in seemingly more organized and affluent
communities. In the case study community the ambivalence of the State’s
policy was compounded by the occasional provision of legal land tenure for
some households while the majority of requests were denied with an option
to reapply. The State’s policy of granting a limited number of households
with land tenure while denying seemingly similar households in the same
community, providing some communities with tacit land tenure through
physical improvements while pressuring others to relocate, made it difficult
for residents to unite behind a radical challenge to the State’s land tenure
policies.19 Yet, two community-based organizations, one indigenous and the
other established by the State, gradually came to realize that their efforts to
physically improve the community could also serve as a collective, yet
subtle, assertion of a land tenure claim.
Community-based planning: the Jumat Kliwon’s repaving effort
Jumat Kliwon is an indigenous, community-based organization that exists
outside of the RW/RT political administrative structure; it represents the
poorest members of the community who live closest to the river. The group
was started in the 1960s, when a flood damaged the houses in the two RTs
closest to the river and residents marshalled their collective resources to
undertake repairs. In the years since the group has continued to meet, partly
as a social organization, but also to provide services for its members. Many
of the services the group provides, such as repaving and flood protection,
would normally be provided by the State; however, these households are
unable to demand public services because of their precarious land tenure
status.
The repaving effort started in 1995 at a Jumat Kliwon meeting where
residents discussed the need to repave the footpaths with an absorbent
material that would reduce flooding and simultaneously replenish the
ground water supply for the wells on which most households depend for
water. In this discussion the group decided to purchase the tools for molding
its own bricks and begin repaving the network of footpaths in these two
RTs. This would be a long project. They also decided that each household
would contribute a small monthly fee to purchase materials and refreshments for the volunteers until the project was complete. The commitment
by residents of the lower RTs to pay a monthly fee and volunteer their labor
started as an innocuous effort to improve their physical environment;
however, over the two years this effort continued it evolved into covert challenge of the State’s denial of repeated requests for legal land tenure.
As a result of Jumat Kliwon’s flexible, informal leadership structure,
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
25
04 Beard (jr/t)
26
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 26
Planning Theory 2(1)
various community activists emerged during different stages of the project
to assume central roles in ensuring its success. Mas Mahmud, a young
unmarried man, was one: in the Jumat Kliwon forum, he took responsibility
for organizing the men into teams and also for devising a work schedule.
Beginning in 1995, these teams took turns working on Sundays, collecting
sand from the river, mixing it with cement, molding the bricks, and repaving
the footpaths.
The Jumat Kliwon group does not have a formal leader, but instead has
an ‘M.C.’ (Master of Ceremonies), Pak Darmo, who moderates the group’s
meetings. Pak Darmo noted that the main problem with the repaving
project was that the volunteer laborers were not always reliable, and so the
work progressed slowly. Pak Darmo believed this was not an insurmountable obstacle. He steered the group away from adopting punitive measures,
for fear that men might come to resent the project. Instead, he approached
residents individually at first seeking to re-instill their desire to physically
improve the community and later motivating them to obtain official land
tenure. After two years, the Jumat Kliwon group had paved approximately
80 percent of the footpaths in the lower RTs.
Covert planning: the RW’s repaving effort
After the Jumat Kliwon project had progressed, the community’s official
RW leaders decided to expand the repaving effort to the community’s main
arteries outside of the terrain of the two RTs represented by the Jumat
Kliwon group. In contrast to the Jumat Kliwon approach based on voluntary labor, the RW leaders in this area decided to buy the cement bricks and
to pay day laborers from outside the community to do the physical work.
To raise the necessary funds, the formal leaders announced that residents
would pay fees according to how many members were in each household,
and an additional amount if a household owned a motorbike. In this RW
plan, the residents of the lower RTs, who were already repaving their own
footpaths, still had to contribute to paving the community’s main arteries.20
Residents proved resistant to the RW plan. Part of the problem was that
the RW leaders, even though they represented local residents, completed
the plan without asking for input or support at RT-level meetings. The RW
leadership was unaware of residents’ dissatisfaction until after they had
used the community’s funds to buy materials, and the effort had proceeded
for a few months. Finally, the RW project broke down when residents
refused to contribute additional funds to buy new materials. Many households simply did not have the extra money to contribute to the project’s
continuation. Indeed, many would have preferred a plan that was less
expensive and that relied on volunteers for the labor.
After the repaving effort had stalled for several months, a select group
of community leaders, activists, and elders called a special night meeting
with the explicit goal of finding a solution. Here the discussion turned to the
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
04 Beard (jr/t)
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 27
Beard Learning radical planning
State’s repeated denial of requests for legal land tenure. The group also
discussed how the Jumat Kliwon group’s project had transformed the
appearance of the poorest segment of the community to that of a formal
settlement. It was ultimately decided that this community effort was too
important to be abandoned. The paving plan was scaled back, and a subtle
strategy toward gaining official land tenure was salvaged. Since these two
projects were completed: small numbers of residents continue to receive
legal land tenure on an ad hoc basis; there has been discussion that the State
might provide a retaining wall for flood protection; and no effort has been
made to relocate the community.
The example of the RW and Jumat Kliwon group illustrates how residents moved, over time, from community-based planning to covert
planning. The repaving project can be understood as an example of covert
planning because while it superficially complies with the State’s development agenda, in actuality it represents a gentle yet deliberate challenge of
the State’s policy and authority. For the time being, the community
succeeded in creating the aura of legal residential settlement and thus
reduced the propensity of the State to force relocation. In addition, through
their joint effort, residents have become increasingly united in their resolve
to remain in the community that they built together, thus making relocation
an increasingly unsavory political option.
In an authoritarian context, covert planning is an important intermediary
step between mobilizing in response to community needs that are
compatible with the state’s agenda and radical planning for more transformative purposes. Such planning exists intentionally beyond the purview
of the state, yet it provides residents experience in community organizing
and collective action, problem-solving skills, and a palpable sense of collective agency that might be used for more overtly radical action in the future.
The transition from covert to radical planning is illustrated in the next
example.
From covert to radical planning: the library
The same community’s efforts to develop a library illustrate how covert
planning in an authoritarian context over an extended time can lead to the
first steps of radical planning. The process of planning and establishing the
library was a social learning process, which prepared the local Youth Group
to embark on radical planning once the economic crisis had weakened the
State and created a window of opportunity.21
In 1994, the community’s Youth Group planned and established a library
that has since continuously served the community. The Youth Group first
brought its idea for a library to the adult RW meetings, which were attended
by RT leaders.22 The group was careful to garner support from RW and RT
leaders before publicly announcing the plan for the library, because they
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
27
04 Beard (jr/t)
28
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 28
Planning Theory 2(1)
knew that the community’s strict social hierarchy would require that
support be withheld from an idea that had not been sanctioned by the
formal leadership.23 Because the Youth Group demonstrated respect for
this hierarchy, the plan for the library was never perceived as potentially
insurgent, either by the community leadership or the State. As a result, even
in a period when state control over local organizing was particularly
restrictive, the crucial first steps in planning the library were allowed to
proceed.
The next step in getting the library established involved the community
leadership officially notifying the sub-district and district offices. The way
in which Mas Sigit, the youth group’s leader, amassed community and State
support exemplifies the concept of covert planning: he was assertive at the
community level about achieving the means for establishing the library, yet
he was prudent and savvy in interactions with the State. On the surface the
library was compatible with the State’s development agenda and the
eradication of illiteracy. Therefore the State never became cognizant of
the degree of social learning, political consciousness, and potential for
political praxis that resulted from planning, organizing, and maintaining the
library as well as access to the reading materials and opportunities for
discussions.24
In planning and setting up the library, the Youth Group met no opposition from State authorities because the library was never considered radical
or insurgent. On the contrary, it was considered compatible with the State’s
campaign to eradicate illiteracy. Herein lies a key to planning for social
transformation in an authoritarian context: the community-initiated plan
that ultimately empowered the Youth Group was conceived and executed
with a discursive strategy that intentionally emphasized its compatibility
with the State’s development agenda. When, however, the economic crisis
occurred in Indonesia in 1997 and the State’s control was weakened, the
Youth Group used the library to organize its members in public demonstrations demanding significant social and political reform. At that moment,
the Youth Group moved from covert to an incipient stage of radical
planning.
Some might find this seeming subtle shift to demonstrations in opposition to the State not to be particularly significant; however, that interpretation would miss the point. One needs to imagine hundreds of thousands
of community-based and covert planning efforts going on across Indonesia
for decades, to understand how a citizenry learns the skills and gains the
political consciousness to protest en masse against a punitive and authoritarian regime once a window of opportunity opens. To better understand
how planning for social transformation occurs in the context of an authoritarian state that wields extreme measures of control and maintains a sense
of fear among its populace, we must begin to recognize how, cumulatively,
modest efforts are capable of creating a sense of collective agency and the
social and political spaces for radical action.
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
04 Beard (jr/t)
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 29
Beard Learning radical planning
Conclusion: learning radical planning
Cumulatively, the examples presented here demonstrate how residents
moved from participating in state-directed planning (implementing the
Mother and Child Health Care Clinic) to community-based planning on
behalf of their own self-identified needs (providing a health care clinic for
the elderly) to covert planning (asserting a land tenure claim and establishing a library), and, finally, to radical planning for structural and political
reform (publicly demonstrating against the Suharto regime). In the first
example, the Mother and Child Health Care Clinic, residents learned how
to organize, work collectively, and redistribute resources. They then used
these skills to mobilize behind a self-identified need, a health care clinic for
the elderly. That experience gave these activists and other community
members a palpable sense of collective agency: that they had the ability to
identify local needs, conceptualize their own plans, and the power necessary to implement them. This proved to be an important turning point in
the social learning process. Residents applied this knowledge and experience to mobilize for a more controversial end, a land tenure claim, but they
did so covertly, purposefully avoiding direct confrontation with the State.
Throughout this process, residents were becoming increasingly savvy in
their interactions with state institutions and actors. They learned about the
power and limitations of their collective agency, and they used this knowledge to plan a library that eventually became a forum for openly challenging a repressive regime and demanding political reform. They had learned
radical planning.
The literature on radical planning does not explain how citizens engage
in radical planning for social transformation within authoritarian environments of the kind found throughout Southeast Asia and elsewhere. These
are political environments in which direct, overt confrontation is an
extremely dangerous way to initiate social and political change. The article
used a longitudinal study as a heuristic device to explore three questions:
1. How does a politically oppressed group learn the skills and gain the
experience and confidence to organize against a more powerful
repressive force? Earlier explanations of radical planning offer no
insight into how this type of practice begins. The present case
demonstrated how radical planning can begin with non-radical
participation in State-directed programs. Such experiences teach vital
skills that can be used to organize outside of, and even in opposition to,
the State. Participation in State programs taught residents about the
limitations of State structures and the power and possibilities of
mobilization. This conventional participation led in time to broader
community mobilization and to more deliberate forms of covert
planning, which in turn created a sense of community agency and
eventually contributed to a broader politicization.
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
29
04 Beard (jr/t)
30
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 30
Planning Theory 2(1)
2. How does a community engage in radical planning in extremely
restrictive socio-political environments? Radical planning first takes
covert or subtle forms. After experiencing success (albeit modest), the
tangible improvement of their organizational skills, and increased
confidence, residents begin to get a sense of their own agency and
become politically conscious. This is a crucial precursor to overt radical
action. This process can be accelerated when an opportunity presents
itself, as when an economic and/or political crisis occurs and/or a
repressive state is weakened.
3. What is the relationship between radical planning and other modes of
planning (e.g. rational–comprehensive, community-based, collaborative
planning)? A more complete and nuanced theoretical model would
view radical planning in relationship to other modes of planning
practice. For example, in the context of this study, radical planning was
an outgrowth of engaging in state-directed planning, community-based
planning, and covert planning over an extended period of time. It is
important, however, to recognize that the mode of planning practice a
community engages in moves constantly in different directions along a
continuum between societal guidance and social transformation. In a
healthy socio-political environment, all these modes would exist
simultaneously and a community would engage in different modes at
different times and under various circumstances. For example, even
though residents have gained the skills and consciousness necessary for
radical planning, that does not restrict them to using only this mode. A
savvy community would continue to move among various modes,
depending on the context and the desired outcome.
In summary, the present study demonstrated that radical planning is
possible in highly restrictive political environments, but that it is the
outcome of a social learning process that over an extended period creates a
powerful sense of collective agency and action.
Acknowledgements
The author would like to thank John Friedmann, Jack Huddleston, Ragui
Assaad, Jamie Peck and the three anonymous referees for their comments
on earlier versions of this article.
Notes
1. The foundational work on radical planning referred to here includes: Castells
(1983), Clavel (1983), Friedmann (1987, 1989), Grabow and Heskin (1973),
Heskin (1991), Leavitt (1994), and Leavitt and Saegert (1990). Importantly, all
of these authors discuss radical planning and/or radical action with the
assumption that democratic institutions are in place. As a result, they assume a
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
04 Beard (jr/t)
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 31
Beard Learning radical planning
level of civil and human rights and procedural processes associated with the
presence of a liberal–democratic state, or, at the very least, that institutions are
held accountable to these societal expectations.
2. Key references for alternative methods of challenging dominant power
configurations in repressive political contexts, include: Adas (1986, 1992),
Moertono (1963), Ong (1987), and Scott (1985, 1986, 1990).
3. The ‘good society’ is used to represent the need for planning to pursue a
normative goal. If planning is to be effective, it requires a clear
conceptualization and some consensus regarding its normative ends (e.g. a
more equitable, just or environmentally sustainable society).
4. Important references include: Abers (1998, 2000), Beard (1999, 2002),
Friedmann (1992), Friedmann and Douglass (1998), Harvey (1999, 2000),
Holston (1998), Kennedy (1998), Rangan (1999), Reardon (1998), and
Sandercock (1998a, 1998b, 1999).
5. Since Friedmann’s book was published more than 15 years ago a number of
important critiques and omissions have been noted. One omission is
Friedmann’s almost exclusive reliance on western male thinkers in the
description of the traditions in planning thought. For example, since its
publication, Moser (1993) and other authors have argued in favor of a separate
feminist tradition in planning thought.
6. As the Indonesian case illustrates, Friedmann’s description of the concurrence
of ‘pressure for system-wide transformation’ and ‘state weakness’ is prophetic.
7. A number of authors have made the link between social learning and
emancipatory struggles (e.g. Alinsky, 1971; Piven and Cloward, 1979; Freire,
1970, 1972). However, far fewer authors, other than Friedmann (1973, 1987),
have applied these ideas to planning. This difference is a subtle but important
one, because the latter requires applying knowledge generated from praxis to a
deliberate and coordinated process to achieve change over an extended period.
8. This research, which was conducted during 1994–2001, was funded by a
number of different sources including the Graduate School at the University of
Wisconsin-Madison, the Centre for Human Settlements at the University of
British Columbia, the Ford Foundation and Northwest Regional Consortium
for Southeast Asian Studies, the US–Indonesian Society, and the Fulbright
Program.
9. The economic crisis began in Indonesia in late 1997 and it continued to
escalate and evolved into social and political crisis in 1998 (Emmerson, 1999;
Manning and Van Diermen, 2000). Some events marking this crisis period
include: widespread urban unrest, the killing of student demonstrators, attacks
against Indonesian ethnic Chinese, and ultimately the resignation of President
Suharto. Since the Indonesian currency (the Rupiah) was markedly more
stable in 2001 (compared to the height of the economic crisis in 1998) some
refer to the period following 2001 as the ‘post-crisis’ period. However, it is
unclear to what extent the crisis period is over given the continual outbreaks of
religious and ethnic violence.
10. For an analysis of the pervasive sense of fear and measures used to create and
maintain this environment during the Suharto period see Violence and the State
in Suharto’s Indonesia (Anderson, 2001).
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
31
04 Beard (jr/t)
32
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 32
Planning Theory 2(1)
11. This structure was firmly adhered to during Suharto’s presidency. However, in
1999 two laws, Law 22 and Law 25, were passed that decentralized power away
from the central government (Alm et al., 2001). These two laws were
implemented for the first time in January 2001. The decentralization legislation
was such an extreme break with the earlier system that there exists uncertainty
about the extent to which municipalities will continue to adhere to the
political–administrative structure. Some municipalities may create new
organizational structures, or, possibly, return to indigenous institutions.
12. For a history of this political–administrative structure and more detailed
description of its function see Sullivan (1992).
13. The ‘New Order’ refers to the political period beginning in March 1966, when
President Sukarno was forced to resign and was replaced by Suharto and his
military coalition (Anderson, 1983; Cribb, 1999; Liddle, 1999). This period
continued until 1998 when Suharto was forced to resign. The post-Suharto
period is sometimes referred to as Reformasi, or the Reform Period.
14. In Indonesia the Women’s Family Welfare Organization is known as the
Wanita PKK.
15. The program began as an indigenous women’s movement in the rural villages
of Central Java in 1964. In 1972 the state recognized the potential importance
of this organization in achieving its national development goals, and
standardized its agenda and activities and implemented the program
nationally. During the New Order period the WFWO was administered
nationwide from the highest national levels of government to the lowest
political–administrative units. The program has been more widely accepted on
Java than in the outer islands and more active in poorer communities. The
WFWO has been criticized by feminist activists and scholars within and outside
Indonesia because it recognizes women almost exclusively in their role as wives
and mothers responsible for family welfare. Although that is factually accurate,
in the study area the WFWO was broadly perceived by women as a positive
forum for them to engage in community development and governance.
16. The Indonesian name for the Mother and Child Health Care Clinic is Pos
Pelayanan Terpadu (Posyandu).
17. All names in the article are aliases.
18. In the community, the health care clinic for the elderly was occasionally
referred to as Posyandu Lansia, thus making a direct reference to the Mother
and Child Health Care Clinic that the clinic for the elderly was modeled after.
19. For an analysis of the problems created by the lack of residential security in an
urban community in Indonesia see Jellinek (1991).
20. It was argued that everyone in the community benefited from having the main
arteries paved, whereas only the residents closest to the river benefited from
having those footpaths paved.
21. For a discussion of the historical development and changing role of youth
groups in Indonesia, ranging from agents of social and political change to
instruments of the New Order, see Ryter (2001).
22. The Youth Group (Kelompok Pemuda) is another state-sanctioned, community
organization. Members of the Youth Group popularly elect their leader.
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
04 Beard (jr/t)
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 33
Beard Learning radical planning
23. For an ethnography of social hierarchy and life in a poor urban settlement on
Java see Guinness (1986).
24. Peattie’s work has also made a similar point, admittedly in a different cultural
and political context. She shows how barrio residents through participation in
community development activities began ‘to develop a new kind of politics’
(Peattie, 1968).
References
Abers, R. (1998) ‘Learning Democratic Practice: Distributing Government
Resources through Popular Participation in Porto Alegre, Brazil’, in
M. Douglass and J. Friedmann (eds) Cities for Citizens: Planning and the Rise of
Civil Society in a Global Age, pp. 39–65. Chichester: Wiley.
Abers, R.N. (2000) Inventing Local Democracy: Grassroots Politics in Brazil.
Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.
Adas, M. (1986) ‘From Footdragging to Flight: The Evasive History of Peasant
Avoidance Protest in South and Southeast Asia’, in J.C. Scott and B.J.T.
Kerkvliet (eds) Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance in South-east Asia,
pp. 64–86. London: Frank Cass.
Adas, M. (1992) ‘From Avoidance to Confrontation: Peasant Protest in Precolonial
and Colonial Southeast Asia’, in N.B. Dirks (ed.) Colonialism and Culture,
pp. 89–126. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.
Alinsky, S.D. (1971) Rules for Radicals: A Practical Primer for Realistic Radicals.
New York: Random House.
Alm, J., Aten, R.H. and Bahl, R. (2001) ‘Can Indonesia Decentralise Successfully?
Plans, Problems, Prospects’, Bulletin of Indonesian Economic Studies 37(1):
83–102.
Anderson, B.R.O’G. (1983) ‘Old State, New Society: Indonesia’s New Order in
Comparative Perspective’, Journal of Asian Studies 42(3): 477–96.
Anderson, B.R.O’G. (ed.) (2001) Violence and the State in Suharto’s Indonesia.
Ithaca, NY: Cornell Southeast Asian Program Publications.
Beard, V.A. (1999) ‘Navigating and Creating Spaces: An Indonesian Community’s
Struggle for Land Tenure’, Plurimondi 1(2): 127–45.
Beard, V.A. (2002) ‘Covert Planning for Social Transformation in Indonesia’,
Journal of Planning Education and Research 22(1): 15–25.
Castells, M. (1983) The City and the Grassroots: A Cross-Cultural Theory of Urban
Social Movements. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Clavel, P. (1983) Opposition Planning in Wales and Appalachia. Philadelphia, PA:
Temple University Press.
Cribb, R. (1999) ‘Nation: Making Indonesia’, in D.K. Emmerson (ed.) Indonesia
Beyond Suharto: Polity, Economy, Society and Transition, pp. 3–38. Armonk,
NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Emmerson, D.K. (ed.) (1999) Indonesia Beyond Suharto: Polity Economy Society
Transition. Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Freire, P. (1970) ‘Cultural Action for Freedom’, The Harvard Educational Review
Monograph Series No. 1. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Educational Review.
Freire, P. (1972) Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Herder and Herder.
Friedmann, J. (1973) Retracking America: A Theory of Transactive Planning.
Garden City, NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday.
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
33
04 Beard (jr/t)
34
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 34
Planning Theory 2(1)
Friedmann, J. (1987) Planning in the Public Domain: From Knowledge to Action.
Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Friedmann, J. (1989) ‘The Latin American Barrio Movement as a Social
Movement: Contribution to the Debate’, International Journal of Urban and
Regional Research 13(3): 501–10.
Friedmann, J. (1992) Empowerment: the Politics of Alternative Development.
Cambridge: Blackwell.
Friedmann, J. and Douglass, M. (1998) ‘Editors’ Introduction’, in M. Douglass and
J. Friedmann (eds) Cities for Citizens: Planning and the Rise of Civil Society in a
Global Age, pp. 1–6. Chichester: Wiley.
Grabow, S. and Heskin, A. (1973) ‘Foundations for a Radical Concept of
Planning’, Journal of the American Institute of Planners 39(2): 106–14.
Gregory, D. (1994) Geographical Imaginations. Cambridge: Blackwell.
Guinness, P. (1986) Harmony and Hierarchy in a Javanese Kampung. Oxford:
Oxford University Press.
Hartman, C.W. (2002) Between Eminence and Notoriety: Four Decades of Radical
Urban Planning. New Brunswick, NJ: CUPR Press.
Harvey, D. (1999) ‘Frontiers of Insurgent Planning’, Plurimondi 1(2): 269–86.
Harvey, D. (2000) Spaces of Hope. Berkeley: University of California Press.
Heskin, A. (1991) The Struggle for Community. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Holston, J. (1998) ‘Spaces of Insurgent Citizenship’, in L. Sandercock (ed.) Making
the Invisible Visible: A Multicultural Planning History. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Jellinek, L. (1991) The Wheel of Fortune: The History of a Poor Community in
Jakarta. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press.
Kennedy, M. (1998) ‘Remember Stonewall was a Riot: Understanding Gay and
Lesbian Experience in the City’, in L. Sandercock (ed.) Making the Invisible
Visible: A Multicultural Planning History, pp. 120–32. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
Leavitt, J. (1994) ‘Planning in the Age of Rebellion: Guidelines to Activist
Research and Applied Planning’, Planning Theory 10–11, 111–29.
Leavitt, J. and Saegert, S. (1990) From Abandonment to Hope: Community
Households in Harlem. New York: Columbia University Press.
Liddle, W. (1999) ‘Regime: The New Order’, in D.K. Emmerson (ed.) Indonesia
Beyond Suharto: Polity, Economy, Society and Transition, pp. 39–70. Armonk,
NY: M.E. Sharpe.
Manning, C. and Van Diermen, P. (eds) (2000) Indonesia in Transition: Social
Aspects of Reformasi and Crisis. Pasir Panjang, Singapore: Institute of
Southeast Asian Studies.
Moertono, S. (1963) State and Statecraft in Old Java: A Study of the Later Mataram
Period, 16th to 19th Century. Ithaca, NY: Modern Indonesian Project, Southeast
Asia Program, Department of Asian Studies, Cornell University.
Moser, C.O.N. (1993) Gender Planning and Development: Theory, Practice, and
Training. London: Routledge.
Needleman, M.L. and Needleman, C.E. (1974) Guerrillas in the Bureaucracy. New
York: Wiley.
Ong, A. (1987) Spirits of Resistance and Capitalist Discipline: Factory Women in
Malaysia. New York: State University of New York Press.
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
04 Beard (jr/t)
10/4/03
10:18 am
Page 35
Beard Learning radical planning
Peattie, L.R. (1968) The View from the Barrio. Ann Arbor: The University of
Michigan Press.
Piven, F.F. and Cloward, R.A. (1979) Poor People’s Movements: Why They
Succeed, How They Fail. New York: Vintage Books.
Rangan, H. (1999) ‘Bitter-Sweet Liaisons in a Contentious Democracy: Radical
Planning Through State Agency in Postcolonial India’, Plurimondi 1(2): 47–66.
Reardon, K.M. (1998) ‘Enhancing the Capacity of Community-Based
Organizations in East St. Louis’, Journal of Planning Education and Research
17(4): 323–33.
Ryter, L. (2001) ‘Pemuda Pancasila: The Last Loyalist Free Men of Suharto’s
Order?’, in B.R.O’G. Anderson (ed.) Violence and the State in Suharto’s
Indonesia, pp. 124–55. Ithaca, NY: Cornell Southeast Asian Program
Publications.
Sandercock, L. (1998a) Towards Cosmopolis: Planning for Multicultural Cities.
Chichester: Wiley.
Sandercock, L. (1998b) ‘Spaces of Insurgent Citizenship’, in L. Sandercock (ed.)
Making the Invisible Visible: A Multicultural Planning History. Berkeley:
University of California Press.
Sandercock, L. (1999) ‘Knowledge Practices: Towards an Epistemology of
Multiplicity of Insurgent Planning’, Plurimondi 1(2): 169–79.
Scott, J.C. (1985) Weapons of the Weak: Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance.
New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Scott, J.C. (1986) ‘Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance’, in J.C. Scott and B.J.T.
Kerkvliet (eds) Everyday Forms of Peasant Resistance in Southeast Asia,
pp. 5–35. London: Frank Cass.
Scott, J.C. (1990) Domination and the Arts of Resistance. New Haven, CT: Yale
University Press.
Sullivan, J. (1992) Local Government and Community in Java: An Urban CaseStudy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tarrow, S. (1998) Power in Movement. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Victoria A. Beard is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Urban and
Regional Planning at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Her research
interests include planning theory, community-based planning and poverty
alleviation. She is particularly interested in the interface between state
planning and community-level collective action and social movements.
Address: Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 925 Bascom Mall/Old Music Hall, Madison, WI 53706, USA.
[email: [email protected]]
Downloaded from plt.sagepub.com at MCGILL UNIVERSITY LIBRARY on April 14, 2014
35