To my understanding, "Micro Planning" is a small area planning with specific purpose(s) , such as science park, or Industrial tech. park, or residential development project. There should be lots of cases can be found on line. For example the Purdue Research Park (the US) at: http://purdueresearchpark.com/businessprofiles  

or NewTown project in Taiwan:

http://www.cpami.gov.tw/chinese/filesys/depplanfile/43_d9a338213619f17ad168a7950820863f.pdf

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%96%B0%E5%B8%82%E9%8E%AE

On the other hand, the National Planning focus on the land use control, to protect the land from not proper used, including the sensitive land, nature resources, and culture heritage, etc. So that, the human development can be limited within a reasonable scale of land use (the city scale).

To my understanding, "Micro Planning" is a small area planning with specific purpose(s) , such as science park, or Industrial tech. park, or residential development project. There should be lots of cases can be found on line. For example the Purdue Research Park (the US) at: http://purdueresearchpark.com/businessprofiles  

or NewTown project in Taiwan:

http://www.cpami.gov.tw/chinese/filesys/depplanfile/43_d9a338213619f17ad168a7950820863f.pdf

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%96%B0%E5%B8%82%E9%8E%AE

On the other hand, the National Planning focus on the land use control, to protect the land from not proper used, including the sensitive land, nature resources, and culture heritage, etc. So that, the human development can be limited within a reasonable scale of land use (the city scale).

To my understanding, "Micro Planning" is a small area planning with specific purpose(s) , such as science park, or Industrial tech. park, or residential development project. There should be lots of cases can be found on line. For example the Purdue Research Park (the US) at: http://purdueresearchpark.com/businessprofiles  

or NewTown project in Taiwan:

http://www.cpami.gov.tw/chinese/filesys/depplanfile/43_d9a338213619f17ad168a7950820863f.pdf

https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%96%B0%E5%B8%82%E9%8E%AE

On the other hand, the National Planning focus on the land use control, to protect the land from not proper used, including the sensitive land, nature resources, and culture heritage, etc. So that, the human development can be limited within a reasonable scale of land use (the city scale).

I have a different notion of what micro planning is. To my mind, it requires community involvement without being driven by supposed experts or any top-down process, regardless of the scale. So if the community is a political entity, a city, a state, a province, or country, then elections can be examples of micro planning. Candidates for elective office may present their priorities for the allocation of public resources, and the voters express their views by voting. Formal voting may exist without being tied to the government sector such as in a condominium association, or among the directors  of a business, or even within some families. One of my papers reflects how community involvement can proceed without any action by experts and without any formal voting such as we typically think of voting. The issue that I have framed is zoning where zones can be smaller than a political jurisdiction or could even overlap political jurisdictions.

Peter F. Colwell ·

Tender Mercies: Efficient and Equitable Land Use Change

Real Estate Economics 12/1997; 25(4):525-537.

Dear Amitabh Shukla,

Thanks for your interesting question. Reading through the earlier answers, I would 'pitch my tent' more with Dr Peter F. Colwell. Micro planning, or micro-level planning, in the sense you used it in you question applies to grassroot or community evaluation or intervention.

But while you go ahead looking for 'success stories of "Micro Planning" at a large level or within a National Planning', I'd caution that you watch out for undue semanticism. One of the weaknesses of disciplinary specialisation (as against cross-disciplinarity) is the poliferation and duplication of terminologies to the extent that we have so many overlapping concepts. In other words, we have unquantifiable cases of 'new wines in old bottles'!To tickle you fancy a little on this subject, I attached an article on the proliferation of the term 'urbanism' by Jonathan Barnett.

What, if I may ask, is the difference between 'micro planning' as a newfangled concept and Action Area Planning in the old master planning tradition?

I wish you success, Amitabh, in your enquiry!

Thanks for the correction by Peter's response. I agree with the concept of micro planning to have the community participation on the planning process and come to a compromise plan. However, it works well on condition that community is a mature democracy society or a small-scale community, such as family. In a society like Taiwan, elections are not rational. So that, the final plan could take much longer (less efficient) to get compromised or even not exist. Planners, or the community governments, in this case, will then be needed to be involved in the process to provide "professional" guidelines to help on the communicating. In fact, it is a two-way learning both the community and planners.         

Dear Amitabh

A challenge you will face is that the word "planning" in English has several meanings.

Planning can be conducted at a range of scales, from the scale of a single paddock or field to a nation or even the entire earth. Obviously "micro" implies small, local scale, but planning at these different scales changes its nature. Planning at the scale of a single field or property or reserve is usually conducted for the purpose of management, and operational activity including capital works and maintenance. Planning at the scale of a county or district or municipal area is often conducted for the purpose of land use determination, and such as regulation of development. Planning at the national level is commonly conducted for infrastructure provision or budgetary purposes. It doesn't make sense to talk about operational management planning at the national scale.

Expressed in another way, the axis of scale and the axis of purpose are different variables. They overlap up to a point, but need to be considered as independent variables.

There is another axis which is governance. Governance (meaning the institutions of government can be centralised or decentralised. Self-government at the local level (decentralised government) has the advantage that decisions about the community are made by the people most affected and who know most about conditions on the ground. But it has the disadvantage that it can be subject to undue influence from local people of power. Also, it cannot adequately deal with matters of strategic national importance. A nation consists of more than a collection of villages.

I agree with Yen-Jong Chen's response. Using my terminology, his micro planning of a technology park or similar is what I have called local-scale operational management planning. His national planning for land use control is what I have called regulatory development control. In countries with two levels of government, or small countries, This would be conducted by the national government for the reasons that he has given. In countries with three levels of government, this is more commonly conducted at the state or provincial level rather than the national.

I also agree with Peter Colwell's answer. In my terminology, his response is about centralisation / decentralisation of decision-making, rather than land-use planning which is the subject of Yen-Jong Chen's response.

I also agree with Victor's response. Some authors engage in unnecessary semantic "splitting of hairs" and establish new terms for minor variations.This is a particular trap in English because terms like planning, strategy and management have a range of meanings.

In summary, I recommend that you clarify your forms of planning according to the following axes or variables:

• purpose (e.g. budgeting, corporate strategy, land  allocation / tenure reform, regulation / development control, operational management)
• scale
• conducted by whom
• for which client (e.g. landowner, public authority).

Well . Thanks for providing very invaluable insights on the issue.

I admire all contributions & every body has tried to explain & convince.

I admit ( as even I had doubt at the time of putting this question / query ) that my query& its intention  has not well understood

Let me try to explain it.

My question was related with " meaning , definition , term , terminology of Micro Planning " which is well defined.

I was / am trying to gather the info about the use of Model/s of Micro Planning at  al large level in any country or province.

It may be in any specified area such as in the field of irrigation , or power generation , or in SSIs , irrigation , etc.,etc.  Or the micro planning model/s have been used in more then one fields !!

I For example , though  have less info's about it , but I heard to some extent in past China has made some experiment of using micro planning models at large scale ( pls dont correlate it with area or large area , I mean in many places & areas and for which I am using the term at Lange Level ) 

So , I would be happy to know about such experiences if scholars would be able to make me aware about it .

Well . Thanks for providing very invaluable insights on the issue.

I admire all contributions & every body has tried to explain & convince.

I admit ( as even I had doubt at the time of putting this question / query ) that my query& its intention  has not well understood

Let me try to explain it.

My question was NOT related with " meaning , definition , term , terminology of Micro Planning " which is well defined.

I was / am trying to gather the info about the use of Model/s of Micro Planning at  a large level in any country or province.

It may be in any specified area such as in the field of irrigation , or power generation , or in SSIs , irrigation , etc.,etc.  Or the micro planning model/s have been used in more then one fields !!

For example , though I  have less info's about it , but I heard  , to some extent in past China has made some experiment of using micro planning models at large scale ( pls dont correlate it with area or large area , I mean in many places & areas within a country or in a particular province / Region  and for which I am using the term at Lange Level ) 

So , I would be happy to know about such experiences if scholars would be able to make me aware about it .

I am sure, the experts may through the light on my query. 

What are the success stories of "Micro Planning" at a large level or within a National Planning? - ResearchGate. Available from: https://www.researchgate.net/post/What_are_the_success_stories_of_Micro_Planning_at_a_large_level_or_within_a_National_Planning#view=568e39b67c192006d18b457c [accessed Jan 7, 2016].

Dear Amitabh

I recommend that you look at the Murray Darling Basin plan. The area covered was very large, >1000 miles, covering parts of several States. It dealt with some matters of fine details such as on-farm water efficiency and water trading. It is fair to say that is has been successful. It has however been controversial. Many irrigators have been vocal opponents, but that is to be expected because some of their allocations were reduced to restore environmental flows in the river system. In my opinion, the provisions relating to water trading place rather too much faith in markets to resolve issues that are multidimensional, not just economic, but at least they have had the benefit of forcing everybody to place more value upon water in this dry climate.

http://mdba.gov.au/basin-plan

Another Australian example is planning for regional natural resource management.

There are 56 regional catchment bodies in Australia, some semi-government with rating and regulatory powers; in other States they are community non-profit corporations with no statutory powers at all. Each of them previously developed a plan for the purpose of guiding expenditure of State and Commonwealth funds on natural resource management projects such as landcare, treeplanting, erosion control, land resource mapping, engagement with Indigenous communities and fencing of water frontages.

These plans were partly successful. They forced the people involved to collect information about the natural resources in their region (land, vegetation, wildlife, water, etc). They also obliged the people to determine priorities for spending scarce public funds. However, in the past five years or so, enthusiasm by the Commonwealth for this form of planning faded and it reduced funding for back-office operations such as planning, mapping and education, preferring to fund on-ground works directly. In my view this was an appalling backward step in policy. Now most of these plans have disappeared off the bodies' websites.

I note that some of the bodies have re-commenced their planning and I will include a link to a draft plan for region that I know something about, of sparsely populated semi-arid woodland used mainly for grazing.

There has always been a wide diversity of formats in the plans for the 56 regions, but there are largely common elements in the subjects covered.

http://www.southwestnrm.org.au/publications/regionalplan