The Nature of Planning—Conflict and Disputes

Land use planning (规划) is a process concerned with the determination of land uses, the general objectives of which are set out in legislation or in some document of legal or accepted standing. The nature of this process will depend in part on the objectives which it is to serve. The broad objective of the UK system is to regulate the development and use of land in the public interest.
Politics, conflict, and dispute are at the centre of land use planning. Conflict arises because of the competing demands for the use of land, because of the externality effects that arise when the use of land changes, and because of the uneven distribution of costs and benefits which results from development. If there were no conflicts, there should be no need for planning. Indeed, planning might usefully be defined as the process by which government resolves disputes about land use.
Alternative arise at every level of planning—from the highest (supranational) level to the lowest (site) level. The planning system is the machinery by which these levels of choice are managed—from plan-making to development control. Though planning systems vary among countries, they can all be analyzed in these terms. The processes involved encompass the determination of objectives, policy-making, consultation and participation, formal dispute resolution,development control, implementation, and the evaluation of outcomes.
The explicit function of the processes is to ensure that a wide variety of interests at stake are considered and that outcomes are in the general “public interest”. In reality there are very many interests that might be served. Four main groups of participants are politicians serving various levels of government, the development industry, landowners, and “the public”. The latter is highly diverse group which is achieving an increased role (not always meaningfully) by way of pressure group and public involvement. Governments usually argue that a reasonable balance is being achieved between the different interests. Critics argue that intervention through land use planning serves to maintain the dominance of particular interests. Evaluations of planning suggests that those with a property interest are more influential and get more out of the planning system, but organized interest groups and even some individuals have had success in individual cases,so the outcomes are by no means certain.
One of the reasons for the increased importance attached to planning process, and public involvement in them (apart from questions of democracy), lies in the belief that they are effective in reducing the scope for later conflict. The clearer and firmer the policy, and the wider its support, the less room there is for arguing about its application and implementation. Thus for the managers of the system efficiency is increased. But there are limits to this: there is no way that conflict can be planning away.
A central problem for the planning system is to devise a means for predicting likely future changes that may impact on the system. In fact, this is extremely difficult, and past attempts have demonstrated that there is a severe limit to prediction. This is one of the reasons why discretion (慎重) has to be built into the processes: without this, it is difficult to take account of changing circumstances. A second, more immediate reason for discretion is the impossibility of devising a process which can be applied automatically to the enormous variety of circumstances that come to light when action is being taken. Plans and other policy documents provide a reference point for what has been agreed through the planning process, and against which proposals will be measured. Professional research and analysis, together with opportunities for consultation, public participation, and formal objection and adoption by political representatives, give such documents legitimacy. But they cannot be blueprints (设计图). The implementation of a plan always differs from what is anticipated.