a critical evaluation on the concept of justice in planning process
a critical evaluation on the concept of justice in planning process
a critical evaluation on the concept of justice in planning process
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
liberal state, today, emphasizes <strong>on</strong> probability <strong>of</strong> re-organizati<strong>on</strong> <strong>in</strong> all social <strong>in</strong>stituti<strong>on</strong>s<br />
with a need based approach toge<strong>the</strong>r with <strong>the</strong> emphasize which gives priority to<br />
equality. Such a c<strong>on</strong>siderati<strong>on</strong> accepts <strong>the</strong> necessity <strong>of</strong> reorganizati<strong>on</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> state and all<br />
social <strong>in</strong>stituti<strong>on</strong>s by accept<strong>in</strong>g <strong>the</strong> priority <strong>of</strong> equality. Sec<strong>on</strong>d propositi<strong>on</strong> <strong>on</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r<br />
hand <strong>in</strong>dicates to <strong>the</strong> changes seen today aga<strong>in</strong>st all critics. Approach presented by<br />
Nozick c<strong>on</strong>trarily with <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ory <strong>of</strong> Rawls seems to have an applicati<strong>on</strong> opportunity<br />
practically and not <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>ory when <strong>the</strong> prevail<strong>in</strong>g neo-liberal policies are c<strong>on</strong>sidered.<br />
Plann<strong>in</strong>g discipl<strong>in</strong>e when c<strong>on</strong>sidered as an activity which is an organiz<strong>in</strong>g tool<br />
<strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> state and limited by <strong>the</strong> liberal state, it can realize its activities by stay<strong>in</strong>g with<strong>in</strong><br />
<strong>the</strong> selected state form. In this c<strong>on</strong>text, limits determ<strong>in</strong>ed by “formal <strong>justice</strong>” will form<br />
<strong>the</strong> limits <strong>of</strong> plann<strong>in</strong>g discipl<strong>in</strong>e practices. On <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand, every k<strong>in</strong>d <strong>of</strong> urban<br />
plann<strong>in</strong>g activities realized with<strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong>se limits <strong>in</strong>formally and ethically will be open to<br />
questi<strong>on</strong><strong>in</strong>g and critics. In o<strong>the</strong>r words, priorities <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> state from and c<strong>on</strong>cepts <strong>of</strong><br />
freedom, equality, rights and <strong>in</strong>terests which are accepted with<strong>in</strong> this form and all<br />
organisati<strong>on</strong>s realized bas<strong>in</strong>g <strong>on</strong> <strong>the</strong>se priorities will also c<strong>on</strong>stitute <strong>the</strong> limits/limitati<strong>on</strong>s<br />
<strong>of</strong> plann<strong>in</strong>g discipl<strong>in</strong>e. These limits will come <strong>in</strong>to agenda as <strong>the</strong> determ<strong>in</strong>ants <strong>of</strong><br />
plann<strong>in</strong>g practices and pr<strong>in</strong>ciples <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong>se practices with <strong>the</strong>ir reflecti<strong>on</strong>s <strong>on</strong><br />
countrywide practices. In this frame, it is recognised that countrywide practices about<br />
how <strong>the</strong> nati<strong>on</strong>al policies and selecti<strong>on</strong>s are realized from <strong>the</strong> viewpo<strong>in</strong>t <strong>of</strong> “<strong>justice</strong>” <strong>in</strong><br />
general and “spatial” <strong>in</strong> private and how <strong>the</strong>y are c<strong>on</strong>sidered ga<strong>in</strong> importance.<br />
Justice and freedom approaches which develop <strong>in</strong> parallel with <strong>the</strong> development<br />
<strong>of</strong> modern liberal state followed a development pattern start<strong>in</strong>g from <strong>in</strong>dividual rights to<br />
social and ec<strong>on</strong>omic rights and <strong>in</strong> <strong>the</strong> last twenty years to “<strong>the</strong> rights <strong>of</strong> mutual support”.<br />
When <strong>in</strong> <strong>on</strong>e hand this development was realized <strong>on</strong> <strong>the</strong> o<strong>the</strong>r hand <strong>the</strong>y caused new<br />
arguments /approaches <strong>in</strong> plann<strong>in</strong>g discipl<strong>in</strong>e. When it is regarded that developments <strong>in</strong><br />
rights and freedoms are not synchr<strong>on</strong>ous and do not follow a l<strong>in</strong>ear development it is<br />
important to determ<strong>in</strong>e how <strong>the</strong>y are c<strong>on</strong>sidered with<strong>in</strong> practices <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> country.<br />
184