lfare. Planners used quantitative measures, enhanced by the development of computer techniques. The planners then used some of the data for projections and predictions. There was no guarantee, however, that the planners and the concerned public were applying the data to the same objectives. Effective planning in solving society's problems required more accurate goal definition.
John Baker has mentioned the use of the power structure in urban planning, one of the biggest areas of criticism. For example, if a major conglomerate has a plant in a city and is a large employer, the plant owners are going to exert considerable influence on planning. Thus, large industrial and financial interests have power. Some urban planners have objected to this power. They have been advocates of those who have been traditionally deprived of a place in the planning process and any significant decision making role in planning development. These advocacy planning proponents have thought that a very lopsided program often was imposed on the urban community.
Jane Jacobs has made a significant contribution in pointing out what is needed in this respect. She points out the need for diversity, not singularity centered around one particular group or class:
The main responsibility of city planning and design should be to develop insofar as public policy and action can do so cities that are congenial places for this great range of unofficial plans, ideas and opportunities to flourish, along with flourishing public enterprises. City districts will be economically and socially congenial places for diversity to generate itself and reach its best potential if the districts possess good mixtures of primary uses, frequent streets, a close-grained mingling of different ages in their buildings, and a high concentration of people.
Some of these ideas perhaps run counter to midd
...