Search

Rationality Types in Evaluation Techniques

The Planning Balance Sheet and the Goals Achievement Matrix

Authors

Abstract

There is a strong tradition among planners to conceive of their task as one of inserting rationality into public debate and decision-making. The article examines how Morris Hill and Nathaniel Lichfield tried to develop the goals achievement matrix and the
community impact evaluation (the planning balance sheet), respectively, as rational ex ante evaluation techniques for transport and land-use planning. Special attention is given to the ways in which they modify the economic rationality of the cost-benefit
analysis. Furthermore, the techniques are assessed against the need for economic efficiency achieved by instrumental (means-end) rationality, dialogue and participation achieved by communicative rationality, and non-cycling planning
recommendations achieved by consistency (transitivity).

Downloads

  • Abstract viewed - 161 times

Publication Facts

Metric
This article
Other articles
Peer reviewers 
0
2.4

Reviewer profiles  N/A

Author statements

Author statements
This article
Other articles
Data availability 
N/A
16%
External funding 
N/A
32%
Competing interests 
N/A
11%
Metric
This journal
Other journals
Articles accepted 
51%
33%
Days to publication 
36
145

Indexed in

Editor & editorial board
profiles
Society 
N/A
Publisher 
Politecnico di Torino OJS
Authors

Tore Sager - NTNU (Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim)

How to Cite
Sager, T. (2021). Rationality Types in Evaluation Techniques: The Planning Balance Sheet and the Goals Achievement Matrix. European Journal of Spatial Development, 1(2), 1–30. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5121870