Hola, deberías mirar los planes de desarrollo y ordenación territorial, esos los estudios que se realizan por los gobiernos de diferentes lugares,... Es obvio que incluso dentro de una misma ciudad al cambiar de barrio, se modifica los resultados...

Urban & Regional Planning always focus on localized context for plan making process.Despite generalized theories, planning process always requires modifications and flexibilities for incorporating diversified local communities' need & aspiration while implementing.

The only study I found so far on this topic is the PhD thesis of Alex Lehnerer, Grand Urban Rules. It compares the planning systems of several different countries all around the world and tries to see what instruments they use, how they work, how efficient they are and what are the factors and contexts affecting their implementation.

Also, an older study, from the begining of the 2000s, is the EU compendium on spatial planning. It is a short version of urban planning "manuals" from 13 west European countries. You can find those for free on the internet. There you can see exactly the differences in their urban planning system and the contexts in which each of them is applied, as well as the strenghts and weaknesses of them.

Hope you will find those materials useful. Have a nice day!

Thank you for your reply! These are very useful.

Hello Saleh, one illuminating article I know on the subject of different planning contexts or what has been variously articulated as 'cultures of planning' or 'planning cultures' is John Friedmann's (2005) article in Progress in Planning, titled "Globalisation and the emerging cultures of planning" (attached for your personal use). I hope it helps you get a grip on the subject.

Most countries have adopted statutory planning systems which reflect their political ideologies and priorities, their socio-economic conditions and problems, and land ownership issues etc. ISOCARP has published reviews of the planning systems adopted in over 150 countries. There is less agreement about the nature and role of planning theory, hjowever, which may explain why it does not play a major role in the exercise of day-to-day e control over development?

This is indeed a conceptually challenging question. A fit-all planning model or theory is elusive. Context should guide the model. Such a model is determined by several considerations (historical, political, geographical, economical, societal....). Brief, planning is dictated by a set of principles that is common to all the planning models and to their underlying objectives: the progress of human wellbeing through an efficient allocation of resources across the territory. I advise Saleh Rochani to consult the bibliograhy of the great planning geographer Akin L. Mabogunje.

Yes. Because as we all knows planning is always based on a general planning principles but these general principles are customized to local contexts as the plans are going to be implemented at the local level i.e. depending on the types of plans. Therefore; we are focusing on the universal planning principle at large and bring it to the local context because the end user of the plans are the community.

I don't know about studies, though I have followed (and profited from) Victor Udemezue Onyebueke's suggestion, and have read the Friedmann article he so kindly provides and would recommend it also.

But as to the second part of your question, "Do we have different theoretical and practical principles in different societies?"; the answer is obviously 'yes'(!), but the implicit question is 'can those different principles be classified, and if so how? '

My answer to that question is again, yes; and to point you in the direction of an important distinction in planning regimes: that between urban planning via land-use zoning; and and urban planning via physical development control.

The essential difference between land-use zoning (as practised in North America) and physical development control (as practised in the UK - and if I read Friedmann's article correctly - in Russia & China also) is this: under land-use zoning, planners don't concern themselves with what a building looks like, so long as what goes on inside the building is the same as what goes on inside the building next door; under physical development control, planners don't concern themselves too much with what goes on inside a building, so long as it looks like the building next door.

In practice, the distinctions are not quite as clear cut (externalities such as noise & nuisance do impose a degree of zoning considerations in physical development control), but all else being equal...

Nonetheless, in my particular field of interest, these differences in the principles governing urban planning explain, to my mind at least, why gentrification in N. America tends to take place district by district (as areas get re-zoned from, say, 'light industrial' to 'residential multi-occupancy'); while in the UK, gentrification tends to take place property by property: since, so far as UK urban planners are concerned, whether a given property houses multiple tenants, a single family or offices (or even all 3 together, on different floors in the one building), is of less consequence than whether its facade matches those of the rest of the street.

In N. America on the other hand, under land-use zoning, the planners' principal concern would be precisely that of ensuring that a given property does conform with the land-use ordinances for that zone and does house either multiple tenants, a single family or offices (while studying for my Master's at UBC in Vancouver, Canada, I shared a single-family residence with 4 other graduate students - as we were not a single family, our living at that address placed us in violation of local zoning ordinances; so consequently, we had no tenants' rights!).

By contrast, the progress of gentrification across an inner-city neighbourhood in the UK can often be tracked simply by walking the streets and counting the number of doorbells per property - the fewer the number of doorbells/property, the less the degree of multi-occupation and so, the more gentrified the area!

there is indeed a field of planning studies dealing with analysisng and comparing how planning works in the different countries and regions of the world. Such field developed in Europe since the 1980s, and later on enlarged its scope to the global context.

It encompasses contribution dealing with territorial governance and spatial planning systems, other about legal families, or planning cultures, or practices.

For an overview I suggest you have a look at the results of the ESPON COMPASS proejct, and of the ESPON TANGO project:

https://www.researchgate.net/project/ESPON-COMPASS-Comparative-Analysis-of-Territorial-Governance-and-Spatial-Planning-Systems-in-Europe

https://www.researchgate.net/project/ESPON-TANGO-Territorial-Approaches-for-New-Governance