Communicative Argumentation: A models of conventional rational planning process

Communicative argumentation is a social process which involves two or more individuals responding to one another’s clam and support for such a claim. Referring Patsey Healey, a retired professor at global urban research unit and also specialist in planning theory and process, communicative arguments maintain the level of places of urban regions and city neighborhoods  They have changed and start to show the future of planning. She also argues for a paradigm shift in the communicative aspects of planning theory and practice. In the second half of this century, two waves have swept across planning theory and process.  The first one is comprehensive rational planning process, methodological and institutional, which has brought the instrumental rationality and regional economics aligned to a management science which promoted strategic planning process based on modelling the dynamics of urban systems and managing them with strategies developed through comprehensive rational planning process. The second one is political economy of urban regions in the 1980’s, aggressively critical, which has provided the foundations for new ways of analyzing the complex layering of different economics dynamics in urban regions.

More briefly, Professor Healey has listed five ideas under different heading with the step by step models of conventional rational planning process in communicative argumentation. They are location and access: finding out suitable place or arenas for public discussion during policy making and setting up procedure of arenas and provide better access for community members; what style: selecting an inclusionary style and scope of the discussion; Sorting and Dissecting: sorts out different issues which arise in discussion through the argumentation and finds outs the common opinion; New discourse: exploring different story lines and checking who belongs in the story; Agree and Critique: political community get to agree on a strategy, and maintain that agreement over time while continually subjecting it to critique.

 By making communicative argument process as a social process in the field of planning we can definitely produce benefit out of it, to the community. Such as everyone would get chance for community participation, refreshing the old ideas, normative judgement, avoids marginalization, giving respect to people from different culture, language, society etc. In conclusion, Community or participation based argumentation process always ended up with consensus because they will focused on common issues and get different opinions from different participation and produce the common opinions after doing argumentation.