ABSTRACT
In the past urban planning was seen as the exercise of state control over the development of cities and other territorial collectivities by administrative and political institutions. Planning attempted to serve the public or general interest as it wrestled with private interests that competed in the political process. As one crisis after another rocked cities worldwide in the 1960s, and again in the 1970s as part of the global restructuring of the economy, government groped for a way to satisfy the increasingly atomized and well-organized interests. Some cities worsened their plight and others improved. In desperation cities found that by engaging a broader set of actors in their policy making and problem solving, that is, by sharing power, they were able to more flexibly adapt to fluid and emerging conditions. They began to shift from government to governance. Efforts at finding a political consensus among interests via critical communicative discourse and conflict resolution and negotiation processes became central.
