Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning

The search for scientific bases for confronting problems of social policy is bound to fail, because of the nature of these problems. They are "wicked" problems, whereas science has developed to deal with "tame" problems. Policy problems cannot be definitively described. Moreover, in a pluralistic society there is nothing like the undisputable public good; there is no objective definition of equity; policies that respond to social problems cannot be meaningfully correct or false; and it makes no sense to talk about "optinaal solutions" to social probIems unless severe qualifications are imposed first. Even worse, there are no "solutions" in the sense of definitive and objective answers. George Bernard Shaw diagnosed the case several years ago; in more recent times popular protest may have already become a social movement . Shaw averred that "every profession is a conspiracy against the laity." The contemporary publics are responding as though they have made the same discovery. Few o f the modern professionals seem to be immune f rom the popular a t t a c k whether they be social workers, educators, housers, public health officials, policemen, city planners, highway engineers or physicians. Our restive clients have been telling us that they don ' t like the educational programs that schoolmen have been offering, the redevelopment projects urban renewal agencies have been proposing, the lawenforcement styles o f the police, the administrative behavior o f the welfare agencies, the locations o f the highways, and so on. In the courts, the streets, and the political campaigns, we've been hearing ever-louder public protests against the professions' diagnoses o f the clients' problems, against professionally designed governmental programs, against professionally certified standards for the public services. It does seem odd that this attack should be coming just when professionals in * This is a modification of a paper presented to the Panel on Policy Sciences, American Association for the Advancement of Science, Boston, December 1969.