Journal of Planning Literature

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Register here to gain access to SAGE's 500+ Journals Online

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Talen, E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Journal of Planning Literature, Vol. 10, No. 3, 248-259 (1996)
DOI: 10.1177/088541229601000302

Do Plans Get Implemented? A Review of Evaluation in Planning

Emily Talen

Regional Research Institute, West Virginia University

The planning community has shown a curious lack of interest in developing methods to evaluate how successfully plans are implemented. Evaluation in planning has centered primarily on methods of comparing the impacts of alternative proposed plans. The methodological problems with evaluating implementation success are many, but they are not insurmountable. A typology of planning evaluation is offered here. The need to establish a separate, distinctive form of planning evaluation focused exclusively on evaluating the implementation success of plans is discussed. This call to develop and refine methods to evaluate plan implementation success coincides with the call by many theorists to develop better theories of planning based on a keener understanding of the realities of planning practice.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
H. A. Goldstein and J. Carmin
Compact, Diffuse, or Would-be Discipline?: Assessing Cohesion in Planning Scholarship, 1963-2002
Journal of Planning Education and Research, September 1, 2006; 26(1): 66 - 79.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Planning TheoryHome page
E. M. Hamin
Reading (Conservation Subdivision) Plans
Planning Theory, July 1, 2006; 5(2): 147 - 172.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
R. K. Norton
Local Commitment to State-Mandated Planning in Coastal North Carolina
Journal of Planning Education and Research, December 1, 2005; 25(2): 149 - 171.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
S. D. Brody
Are We Learning to Make Better Plans?: A Longitudinal Analysis of Plan Quality Associated with Natural Hazards
Journal of Planning Education and Research, December 1, 2003; 23(2): 191 - 201.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
R. Pendall
Municipal Plans, State Mandates, and Property Rights: Lessons from Maine
Journal of Planning Education and Research, December 1, 2001; 21(2): 154 - 165.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
J. Weitz
Growing SmartSM: Coming to a Classroom Near You?
Journal of Planning Education and Research, September 1, 2001; 21(1): 84 - 91.
[Abstract] [PDF]


Home page
Journal of Planning Education and ResearchHome page
L. D. Hopkins
Planning as Science: Engaging Disagreement
Journal of Planning Education and Research, June 1, 2001; 20(4): 399 - 406.
[Abstract] [PDF]