Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Applying interdisciplinary models to design, planning, and policy-making

  • Feature Articles
  • Published:
Knowledge, Technology and Policy

Abstract

The difficulty of handling complex problems has spawned challenges to the traditional paradigm of technical rationality in design, planning, and policy making. One of the most frequently proposed solutions is an interdisciplinary approach, though few writers have described the operational dynamics of such an approach. A global model of interdisciplinary problem-solving is presented based on the premise that the unity of the interdisciplinary approach derives from the creation of an intermediary process that relies on common language, shared information, a mutual sense of stakeholding, and the resolution of disciplinary differences. The theoretical underpinning of this approach is the conceptualization of interdisciplinary problem-solving as a communicative process that requires attention to the rhetorical and political dynamics of working with competing interests, practices, and disciplines. The practice portion is a composite picture of effective models, skills, activities, strategies, and techniques employed by actuals interdisciplinary teams. This global model offers a way of both theoretically and practically visualizing Th. K. van Lohuizen's ideal of achieving unity of town planning, an ideal that has profound implications for the organization of both professional practice and training.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Alexander, E.R. (1984). After rationality, what? A review of responses to paradigm breakdown.Journal of the American Planning Association, 50(1), 62–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ansoff, H.I. (1975). Managing strategic surprise by response to weak signals.California Management Review, 18,(1), 21–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Baldwin, R. (1975).Portraits of complexity: Applications of systems methodologies to societal problems. Columbia: Battelle.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkin, M., & Clarke, M. (1988). SYNTHESIS—A synthetic spatial information system for urban and regional analysis: Methods and examples.Environmental and Planning Administration, 20,(12), 1645–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Burchell, R., & Hughes, J. (1979). Planning theory in the 1980's—A search for future directions. In R. Burchell & G. Sternlieb (Eds.),Planning Theory in the 1980's (pp. xvii-liii). New Brunswick, NJ: Center for Urban Policy Research.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cassell, E.J. (1977). How does interdisciplinary work get done. In H. T. Englehardt & D. Callahan (Eds.),Knowledge, value, and belief (pp. 355–61). New York: Hastings Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkoway, B. (1986). Building citizen support for planning at the community level. In M.J. Dluhy & K. Chen (Eds.),Interdisciplinary planning: A perspective for the future (pp. 136–151). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, K., & Mathes, J.C. (1986). Clarifying complex public policy issues: A social decision analysis contributions. In M. J. Dluhy & K. Chen (Eds.),Interdisciplinary planning: A perspective for the future (pp. 83–104). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cockhead, P., & Masters, R. (1984). Forecasting in Grampian: Three dimensions of integration.Town Planning Review, 55, (4), 473–488.

    Google Scholar 

  • Delbecq, Al, & Van de Ven, A. (1971) A group process model for problem identification and program planning.The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 7 (4), 466–492.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • deWachter, M. (1982). Interdisciplinary bioethics: But where do we start? A reflection on epochè as method.”Journal of Medicine and Philosophy, 7(3), 275–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Diesing, P. (1962).Reason in society Urbana, Illinois: University of Illinois Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dluhy, M. (1986). Introduction: Planning perspectives. In M. J. Dluhy & K. Chen (Eds.),Interdisciplinary planning: A perspective for the future (pp. xiii-xvii). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dluhy, M.J., & Chen, K. (Eds.). (1986)Interdisciplinary planning: A perspective for the future. New Brunswick, New Jersey: Rutgers—The State University of New York.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forester, J. (1980). Critical theory and planning practice.Journal of the American Planning, Association, 46,(3), 275–286.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forester, J. (1989). Critical theory, public policy, and planning practice. Unpublished manuscript.

  • Frey, G. (1973). Methodological problems of interdisciplinary discussions.RATIO, 15(2), 161–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Friedmann, J. (1973).Retracking America: A theory of transactive planning. Garden City, NY: Anchor Press/Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J. (1987).The theory of communicative action. V.II. Lifeworld and system: A critique of functionalist reason, (trs. by Thomas McCarthy). Boston: Beacon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. (1986). Steering the path between ambiguity and overload: Planning as strategic social process. In M. J. Dluhy & K. Chen (Eds.),INterdisciplinary planning: A perspective for the future (pp. 107–123). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. (1985). Managing complexity through consensus mapping: Technology for the structuring of group decisions.Academy of Management Review, 10(3) 587–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hursh, B., Haas, P., & Moore, M. (1983). An interdisciplinary model to implement general education.Journal of Higher Education 54, 42–59.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kane, J., Vertinsky, I., & Thompson, W. (1973). KSIM: A methodology for interactive resource simulation.Water Resources Research, 9, 65–80.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J.T. (1990a).Interdisciplinarity: History, theory, and practice. Detroit: Wayne State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, J. T. (1990b). Interdisciplinary resources: A bibliographic reflection.Issues in Integrative Studies (in press).

  • Kochen, M., & Barr, C. (1986). How rational can planning be: Toward an information processing model of planning. In M.J. Dluhy & K. Chen (Eds.),Interdisciplinary planning: A perspective for the future (pp. 29–47). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mason, R.O., & Mitroff, I. (1981).Challenging strategic planning assumptions New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCorcle, T. (1982). Critical issues in the functioning of interdisciplinary groups.Small Group Behavior, 13, 291–310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murray, T. (1983). Partial knowledge.Ethics, The Social Sciences, and Policy Sciences (pp. 305–331). New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newton, G. (1990). POINT: The bridge between knowledge and wisdom. Washington, DC: Institute of Applied Research and Empirical Decision Making.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ortolano, L., & Perman, C.D. (1987). A planner's introduction to expert systems.Journal of the Planning Association, 53(1), 98–103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Radford, K. (1977).Complex decision problems: An integrated strategy for their resolution. Reston: Reston Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rittle, H.W.J., & Webber, M.M. (1973). Dilemmas in a general theory of planning.Policy Sciences, 4, 167–69.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothman, J., & Hugentobler, M. (1986). Planning theory and planning practice: Roles and attitudes of planners. In M.J. Dluhy & K. Chen (Eds.),Interdisciplinary planning: A perspective for the future (pp. 3–26). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanoff, H., (1973).Integrating user needs in environmental design. (NIH Contract #71-1102). Washington DC: Center for Studies of Child and Family Mental Health.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D.A. (1987).Educating the reflective practitioner: Toward a new design for teaching and learning in the professions. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schön, D.A. (1983).The reflective practitioners: How professionals think in action New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulte, R. (1979). The act of translation: From interpretation to interdisciplinary thinking.Translation Review, 3–8.

  • Sharp, J.M. (1983). A method for peer group appraisal and interpretation of data developed in interdisciplinary research programs. In S.R. Epton, R.L. Payne, & A.W. Pearson (Eds.),Managing Interdisciplinary Research (pp. 211–19). Chichester: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stone, A.R. (1969). The interdisciplinary research team.Journal of Applied Behavioral Science, 5(3), 351–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Lohuizen, C.W.W. (1984, June).The knowledge household and policy making. Framework paper for the International Workshop on Utilization-Focused Research and Planning, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.

  • Van Lohuizen, Th.K. (1948, February). The unity of town planning. Address upon taking office as Professor Extraordinary for Town Planning Research in the Delft Technological University.

  • Vasu, M.L. (1979).Politics and planning. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Warfield, J.N. (1976).Societal systems: Planning, policy, and complexity. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weiss, C. (1983). Ideology, interests, and information: The basis of policy positions. InEthics, the social sciences, and policy analysis (pp. 213–245). New York: Plenum Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • White, I.L. (1975) Interdisciplinarity. In S.R. Arnstein & A.N. Christakis (Eds.),Perspective on technology assessment (pp. 87–96). Jerusalem: Science and Technology Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. humanities division, Wayne State University, 48202, Detroit, Michigan

    Julie Thompson Klein (a professor)

Authors
  1. Julie Thompson Klein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Klein, J.T. Applying interdisciplinary models to design, planning, and policy-making. Know Techn Pol 3, 29–55 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02736654

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02736654

Keywords

Search

Navigation