POLITICS, PLANNING, AND CAPITALISM: NATIONAL ECONOMIC PLANNING IN FRANCE AND BRITAIN

Abstract. This study examines explanations for the success or failure of planning efforts of the 1945 British Labour Government and the French Government ofthe Fourth Republic. Most conventional views of British postwar planning depict it as hopelessly weak and disorganized while French planningisseen as reasonably well-armed and effectively organized. However, these views reflect excessive attention on purely administrative as well as political-cultural explanations and tend to ignore the critical underlying role of domestic politics and power. The French planning effort was only one element of a broader, relatively uncoordinated collaborative process. carried on among bureaucratic state elites and large industry, which effectively accelerated industrial investment and economic growth. Its success hinged on the inability of organized labour effectively to defend its wage interests within the political structure. In the British case, manipulation of capital markets was only marginally productive given the power and autonomy of the finance sector while the alternative attempt to plan through manpower direction failed due to the ability of organized labour to defend its wage interests in the face of chronic inflation. In each case. the structure of political power was most important in determining the success of the divergent technical approaches to planning.     

NATIONAL SETTINGS AND PUBLIC ENTERPRISE: AUSTRALIA AND ISRAEL

Abstract: There are sharp differences between the public enterprises of Australia and Israel. Australia relies on the structure of statutory authorities for enterprises of the Commonwealth and the States; managers express a narrow view of what is permitted to them; and tend to spend their careers within single firms. "Public" enterprise in Israel reflects a complex amalgam of three public sectors, with Arms owned wholly or in part by the State, the labour federation, and institutions of the international Jewish community. Israel emphasizes the more flexible structure of public sector holdings in limited liability companies. Entrepreneurialism is more apparent in the public enterprises of Israel than Australia, but problems of service delivery are also more apparent in Israel. This article relates national differences in enterprise traits of control by government, styles of management, career patterns and service delivery to the national settings of government structure, economics, and political culture.     

THE FEDERAL PRINCIPLE AND NATIONAL PLANNING

I am pleased to be able to speak today to this conference of the Royal Institute of Public Administration. Your conference comes at a time of renewed interest in federalism. In the past year or so there has been an upsurge of new studies and assessments of federalism in the universities and in the press. New life has been breathed into a subject which for so long has seemed dead in spirit, if not in die flesh.     

URBAN PLANNING,POLICY AND MANAGEMENT*

Abstract: This paper deals with some important sources of confusion in discussions of urban issues. The first part distinguishes urban planning as a “future oriented” activity, from urban management which is primarily concerned with resource allocation. (The nature of urban development — interdependence and long life — makes a long-term perspective important.) When urban management aims to implement a plan the two are complementary. Urban policy covers a broader range of issues. The second part distinguishes four levels of debate about urban issues: ideological, political, operational and technical. Frequently debates in urban studies are not coherent because the participants are arguing at different levels and therefore make different assumptions about what is given and what can be varied. It is argued that the various levels form a hierarchy so that debates at any level need to assume particular positions with respect to higher level questions. Ideological issues include individual versus collective perspective, capitalist versus socialist, the appropriate role of markets and governments and the relative weight given to equity and efficiency criteria. The examples of political issues discussed are rationality versus group pressure as explanations of government behaviour, and whether planning is mainly a political or a professional activity. Operational issues include the appropriate level of government for carrying out urban functions and the role of statutory planning and other policy measures. Technical issues focus on predicting the effects of policy measures and external changes on cities. The different levels are illustrated by a discussion of policy towards inner city areas.