Cities and Complexity: Making Intergovernmental Decisions. (Book Reviews).

Kumar, Sandeep

Christensen, Karen Stromme.

Cities and Complexity: Making Intergovernmental Decisions.

Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 1999.

177 pp.

ISBN: 0-7619-1165-0.

$24.50 U.S.

The book Cities and Complexity evolved from the author's experience at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Federal Regional Council, and research at the University of California, Berkeley. The book successfully untangles the complicated intergovernmental system in the U.S. and suggests ways in which planners could take effective actions within the system on behalf of the public good. The book strives to answer two main questions: 1. How does the intergovernmental system shape planning outcomes?; and, 2. How can planners be effective within the complex governmental system? While answering these questions, it argues that the government's delusion of being certain of the solution of every problem yields premature results. The flawed intergovernmental dynamics lead to proliferation of mismatched programs and, hence, dwindling public trust in the government. As a way of solution, it suggests preserving and adjusting, as the need may be, the strengths of federalism to equip planners for fut ure uncertainties.

The book is divided into nine chapters. The chapters can be clustered under four broad sections -- introduction, background, analysis, and conclusion. Chapter 1 belongs to the introductory section. Chapters 2, 3, 4, and 5 serve as background. Chapters 6 and 7 fall under the analysis section, followed by Chapters 8 and 9 as part of the concluding section. The author begins the book by describing how planning, which by its very nature tries to eliminate uncertainty, is entangled in the uncertainty and complexity of the intergovernmental system. She then provides a backdrop for the later sections by exploring the theories about the government system, its structural and hierarchical dimensions, and interactions among various entities within the system. The emphasis here is placed on the three prevailing theories -- dual federalism, multi-centered federalism, and functional federalism. The section highlights the intricate interdependent nature of the public institutions which have a number of overlapping, contradi ctory, and incompatible goals. It explains how dynamics within the government agencies result in a multitude of unnecessary and futile programs. In the analysis section, the author examines the dynamics of the intergovernmental system further and argues that there are discrepancies between expectations of government and its actual performance.

In the concluding chapters, the author presents strategies to vary planning processes and public policies so that they work effectively within uncertain conditions. As a way to cope with the challenges that uncertainty poses, she promotes the strengths of federalism but proposes some fine-tuning. In the end, she suggests ways to address uncertainty by introducing changes to everyday planning and management practice.

Although the book is very well-written and structured, the last chapter about changes to everyday planning practice does not seem to be fully explored and appears detached from the rest of the book. For the most part, the book is about the structure and dynamics of the governmental organizations and recommends different forms of policy, planning, and organization appropriate to every distinct set of problem conditions. In the last chapter, the discussion abruptly shifts from the macro to the micro level. The recommendations in this chapter are made at individual planner's everyday activities without laying down any background or analysis in advance. To understand the interconnections between the system of authority and how planners think and work within the system, numerous studies have been carried out by looking at the daily practice of planners through their communicative acts. The most cited among them are the works of Healey (1992) in her article "A Planner's Day," Forester (1989) in his book Planning in the face of power, and limes (1995) in her article on "Planning as Communicative Action." Perhaps, these works should have been explored in detail before suggesting any changes to planners' daily work.

On the whole, this book provides an excellent insight into how the U.S. intergovernmental system functions. It is a must-read for planning students, practitioners, and policy makers to understand the complex myriad layers of government agencies. Having worked at almost all the levels of government in the U.S., I can very well relate to the intricate and rather chaotic nature of the government agencies. It is perhaps needless to mention here that the government system and the nature of urban planning practice in Canada differ in many respects from that of the U.S.. Unlike the U.S., there is very little Canadian federal presence in urban planning affairs except perhaps providing monies for mortgages and mortgage insurance, leaving the matter solely to the provinces to handle (Goldberg and Mercer 1986). It will, therefore, be much more interesting for Canadian planners and policymakers to lay their hands on a book written on the same lines as that of Christensen's but on the Canadian intergovernmental system wit h an emphasis on urban planning.

References

Forester, John. 1989. Planning in the face of power. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Goldberg, Michael and John Mercer. 1986. The Myth of North American City: Continentalism Challenged. Vancouver: University of British Columbia Press.

Healey, Patsy. 1992. "A Planner's Day." Journal of the American Planning Association 58 (2, Winter).

Innes, Judith. 1995. "Planning Theory's Emerging Paradigm: Communicative Action and Interactive Practice." Journal of Planning Education and Research 14(3): 183-189.