000			01757nab a2200265 4500
003			OSt
005			20220801193521.0
007			cr aa aaaaa
008			220719b |||||||| |||| 00| 0 eng d
100			_aTaylor, Zack _949051
245			_aPathways to legitimacy/
260			_bSage, _c2019.
300			_aVol 18, Issue 2, 2019 : (214-236 p.).
520			_aPlanners are centrally concerned with the legitimacy of planning institutions and practices. In a democratic society, governments depend on the voluntary compliance of external actors for the implementation of their policies. Planning theorists have largely focused on the inclusiveness and quality of deliberation in goal-setting. This article expands this focus using Scharpf’s and Schmidt’s distinction between three domains of legitimation—input, throughput, and output—each of which affords a distinct pathway to legitimacy. These legitimation processes are examined through a comparison of the postwar development of American regional planning institutions in Minneapolis–St Paul, Minnesota, and Portland, Oregon. The input-throughput-output distinction can be used to interpret the operation and impacts of historical planning activities, or prospectively to evaluate the potential impacts of institutional reforms.
650			_acollaborative planning, _949052
650			_ainstitutional design, _949053
650			_alegitimacy, _949054
650			_anew institutionalism, _949055
650			_a planning history, _949056
650			_a regional planning, _948853
650			_a regionalism _949057
773	0		_08831 _916470 _dLondon Sage Publications Ltd. 2002 _tPlanning theory _x1473-0952
856			_uhttps://doi.org/10.1177/1473095218806929
942			_2ddc _cART
999			_c12396 _d12396