Collaborative the expectation of consensus building. According to Inness

Collaborative planning approach is the tool for questioning
the desired goals of the interested parties. 
This planning approach facilitates concerns on the proposed issue, with
the expectation of consensus building. According to Inness and Booher,
collaboration is most effective when: “(1) finding out what the public’s
preferences are so these can play a part in their decisions; (2) improving decisions
by incorporating citizens’ local knowledge into the calculus; (3) advancing
fairness and justice; (4) getting legitimacy for public decisions” (Innes &
Booher, 2004, pp.422-423). Therefore, the collaborative planning approach is most
effective when promoting inclusivity for community and consensus building. This
is an effective tool to reduce marginality in the planning process.

Often, collaborative planning is the haven for exchange of
dialogue between interested parties. John Forester argued that collaborative
planning helped planners move from a contentious argument to mediating the
differences. For instance, this is often seen in discussions on adaptation/mitigation
strategies for climate change, affordable housing, and local unwanted land uses,
such as landfills.  Most certainly, the collaborative
planning approach is most effective when addressing social vulnerability issues
that debate about equity and fairness. For example, the Trinity Plaza case presents a well demonstration of the
impact of the collaborative planning approach. It highlights the power of a
community being able to mobilize to advocate arguing that the displacement of
the residents would have great repercussions, leading to mental distress and
the destruction of a unified community. The demolition of this community could
have led to greater adverse challenges. Thus, the impact of collaboration gave
the community a voice of advocacy to overcome political barriers.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Recently, for my group analysis project of a planning paradigm,
I discovered that a collaborative planning approach is more likely to be
effective rather than a pragmatic rational planning approach. The 2016 South West DC
neighborhood plan’s civic engagement process emulates a collaborative planning
approach.  The purpose of this plan was
to protect the integrity and character of the neighborhood as they experience
an influx of rapid population growth. The civic engagement process entails community
meetings, advisory committee, focus groups, consultation with other agencies,
input from neighborhood groups, an extensive review of existing plans, online
engagement, and a thorough site and market analysis. This level of engagement
was critical to the plan because it enable collaboration amongst all the
stakeholders and assisted with getting to the “YES”.  The process included four community-large
meetings and visionary exercises.  As
pioneer experts, the DC planning department worked with the community and
facilitated the ideas between the community and stakeholders.  This civic engagement process yielded a high
level of participation from community stakeholders.  Successfully, during the sharing of dialogue
and knowledge, the city was able to come to a consensus that they wanted a plan
that would create a thriving, active environment that preserves and enhances
the Southwest neighborhood’s culture and character.

On the other hand,
the pragmatic rational planning approach has served as the tool for problem
solving in the public realm. In its early forms, it was often perceived as “planners
know best” planning approach because it offered a step by step planning process.
 This approach has “roughly four
classical elements: (1) goal-setting, (2) identification of policy
alternatives, (3) evaluation of means against ends, and (4) implementation of
policy. The process is not always undertaken in this sequence, and each stage
permits multiple iterations, feedback loops and elaboration of sub-processes” (Hudson,
Galloway, & Kaufman, 1979, p. 388). Since its genesis, this approach has
been most effective maximizing the desired ends of an alternative to a proposed
problem. Pragmatic rational planning is most effective in transportation studies
and determining sustainable elements that are necessary for healthy community
building.  For example, this approach can
be used to study the potential impacts of climate change in a area, such as
Miami. According to Brooks, “The Chicago Area Transportation Study and the
Penn-Jersey Study / were the most prominent examples; in each case, large sums
of money were expended to develop computerized mathematical models that could
predict the impact of alternative developments or of changes in a metropolitan
area’s land use and transportation systems” (Brooks, 2002, pp.87).  Therefore, pragmatic rational planning
approach is most effective when identifying alternatives to problem; however,
it fails at influencing decision making.

To conclude, it is
evident that the collaborative planning approach is significant in the process
of combating with social equity issues, for it encourages a paradigm shift from
the rational planning approach. For all stakeholders throughout the community,
should have an opportunity to be involved in the decision-making process.  To enable equity amongst the marginalized and
vulnerable communities, the collaborative approach ensures public participation
and the ability to build public capacity in the problem- solving process.  Collaboration is the key component for a
social change and it ensures consistency among the participating stakeholders.