This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Campbell, H. Articles by Marshall, R. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                   What's this?

Utilitarianism’s Bad Breath? A Re-Evaluation of the Public Interest Justification for Planning

University of Sheffield, UK, h.j.campbell{at}sheffield.ac.uk

Robert Marshall

University of Sheffield, UK, r.j.marshall{at}sheffield.ac.uk

The legitimization of planning has, in the period since the Second World War, rested on the proposition that the state’s intervention in land and property development is necessary to safeguard the public interest against private and sectional interests. What constitutes the public interest has always been contentious but its value as a legitimizing concept has increasingly been called into question in the recent past for the reason that it cannot be given operational meaning either by those who make policy or by those who evaluate it. The purpose of this article is to explore the ‘public interest’ justification of planning and whether it has outlived its usefulness in an increasingly fragmented society. Following an introduction, the argument is presented in three stages. First, we explore the concept of ‘interests’ in the modern period. Second, we consider the way in which the ‘public interest’ has been regarded in the planning literature. Third, an evaluative framework is established which distinguishes deontological as well as consequentialist conceptualizations of the public interest through which we seek to demonstrate that it remains the pivot around which debates concerning the role and purpose of planning must revolve.

Key Words: common good • consequentialism • deontology • public interest • utilitarianism

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Roy Post-Liberalism: On the Ethico-Politics of Planning Planning Theory, March 1, 2008; 7(1): 92 - 102. [PDF]

				N. Alfasi and J. Portugali Planning rules for a self-planned city Planning Theory, July 1, 2007; 6(2): 164 - 182. [Abstract] [PDF]

				T. Sager The Logic of Critical Communicative Planning: Transaction Cost Alteration Planning Theory, November 1, 2006; 5(3): 223 - 254. [Abstract] [PDF]

				H. Campbell Just Planning: The Art of Situated Ethical Judgment Journal of Planning Education and Research, September 1, 2006; 26(1): 92 - 106. [Abstract] [PDF]

				V. Watson Deep Difference: Diversity, Planning and Ethics Planning Theory, March 1, 2006; 5(1): 31 - 50. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Moroni Towards a Reconstruction of the Public Interest Criterion Planning Theory, July 1, 2004; 3(2): 151 - 171. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. Gunder Shaping the Planner's Ego-Ideal: A Lacanian Interpretation of Planning Education Journal of Planning Education and Research, March 1, 2004; 23(3): 299 - 311. [Abstract] [PDF]