When Sandercock first introduced the therapeutic imagination, it was for “when the parties involved have been at odds for generations, or come from disparate cultural traditions, or where there is a history of marginalization” (1). These may seem like extreme circumstances, but Sandercock was writing about our increasingly multicultural and heterogenous world. Can planners continue to act under the assumption that the community is free of conflict and trauma? Or that conflict and trauma do not interact with the world of planning? Sandercock claims that “all parties in planning disputes have stories” (1). Until those stories are heard, can the community move forward?
Erfan also focusses on a broader set of stories than those just found in situations of extreme loss or conflict. They point to Peter Marris and how the process of community change causes trauma. “There is a parallel between the stories of personal loss and grief, and collective loss and grief brought on by social change” (2). If planners are often stewards of change in communities, do they not then have a responsibility to the trauma that change triggers in the public? Erfan thus recommends that planners: increase their understanding of the experience of grief, create space for that grief where they can, and employ therapeutic planning to process that grief (2). In their view, therapeutic planning should be something that all planners are aware of and understand but is a process that is administered by specialized therapeutic practitioners.
The reason for this separation between planners is that therapeutic planning requires a specialized set of skills around trauma and conflict management that take a significant effort to master. However, does this distinction also separate therapeutic planning from planning as a whole? Sandercock & Atilli also touch upon this tension. They ask “are we overstepping our professional boundaries by even using the term therapeutic planning and trespassing in the realm of psychologists” (3). What these authors are really asking is if there is room in planning’s professional identity for therapeutic planning? Are the values and skills of planning so outside the realm of the caring professions that embracing therapeutic planning is something better suited to another discipline?
Erfan also focusses on a broader set of stories than those just found in situations of extreme loss or conflict. They point to Peter Marris and how the process of community change causes trauma. “There is a parallel between the stories of personal loss and grief, and collective loss and grief brought on by social change” (2). If planners are often stewards of change in communities, do they not then have a responsibility to the trauma that change triggers in the public? Erfan thus recommends that planners: increase their understanding of the experience of grief, create space for that grief where they can, and employ therapeutic planning to process that grief (2). In their view, therapeutic planning should be something that all planners are aware of and understand but is a process that is administered by specialized therapeutic practitioners.
The reason for this separation between planners is that therapeutic planning requires a specialized set of skills around trauma and conflict management that take a significant effort to master. However, does this distinction also separate therapeutic planning from planning as a whole? Sandercock & Atilli also touch upon this tension. They ask “are we overstepping our professional boundaries by even using the term therapeutic planning and trespassing in the realm of psychologists” (3). What these authors are really asking is if there is room in planning’s professional identity for therapeutic planning? Are the values and skills of planning so outside the realm of the caring professions that embracing therapeutic planning is something better suited to another discipline?
1. Sandercock L. (2003). Cosmopolis 2: Mongrel cities of the 21st century. London: Continuum.
2. Erfan, A. (2017). Confronting collective traumas: An exploration of therapeutic planning. Planning Theory & Practice, 18(1), 34-50.
3. Sandercock, L., & Attili, G. (2014). Changing the Lens. Journal of Planning Education and Research,34(1), 19-29.
2. Erfan, A. (2017). Confronting collective traumas: An exploration of therapeutic planning. Planning Theory & Practice, 18(1), 34-50.
3. Sandercock, L., & Attili, G. (2014). Changing the Lens. Journal of Planning Education and Research,34(1), 19-29.