2.3. Civil Society, Planning, and Power Relations.
Governing a city is not the concern of the city council alone.
Good governance should involve members of the LG, CSOs and other social actors
in order to preserve the right of the least advantaged communities. This
section aims to define the concept of `civil society' in relation
to urban planning and to analyse the power relation between
planning and politics.
2.3.1. What is `Civil Society'?
First of all, it is important to note that there is not only one
definition of civil society. For the
purpose of this research, the most illustrating definition
of this concept is the one by the
London School of economics (LSE) Centre for Civil Society, which
states that:
«Civil society refers to the arena of uncorked
collective action around shared interests,
purposes and values. In theory, its institutional
forms are distinct from those of the state, family and
market, though in practice, the boundaries between state, civil society,
family and market are often complex, blurred and negotiated. Civil
society commonly embraces a diversity of spaces, actors and
institutional forms, varying in their degree of formality, autonomy and
power. Civil societies are often populated by organisations such as registered
charities, development non-governmental organisations, community
groups, women's organisations, faith-based organisations, professional
associations, trade unions, self-help groups, social
movements, business associations, coalitions and advocacy groups».
(LSE cited in Wikipedia, 2006).
This definition portrays CSOs as an ensemble of
organisations (outside of the state and market structures) representing
the interests of residents and promoting some values such as democracy and
human rights. The CSOs have some common features, such as autonomy, and appear
as a counter-power to state institutions in the interest of people,
particularly the least advantaged (including FMs).
From a planning perspective, my understanding of civil
society is based on Marris (1998), Douglass and Friedmann (1998) who
attempt to define this concept in a way relevant to planners,
insisting on the fact that these organisations are vehicles of social
justice for all, particularly for those marginalised groups such as
FMs. According to Marris, for instance, civil society represents «a
way of thinking about power and the state». He demonstrates that
non-governmental organisations (NGOs) can mobilise people and governments on
both local and global scales by setting agendas, challenging governments,
monitoring the implementation of policies and carrying out research. To
do so, CSOs employ the skills associated with the profession of urban
planning, namely, applying knowledge to action, defining issues,
mobilising participation and reconciling conflicts, evaluating the
potential impact of policies and their performance, and designing a
framework for collaboration (Marris, 1998:12). Friedmann (1998) considers
civil society as a way of «thinking about power and the
state» and seeking to address the social needs of all those
residing in cities (Friedmann, 1998: 20). This justifies my preference for
CSOs as advocacy groups that may
facilitate greater social justice for FMs, as I will show in
Chapter Four of this report.
Friedmann also portrays civil society as «a collective actor
in the public domain, particularly
in the urban domain, which is the domain of planning»
(Friedmann, 1998: 29). CSOs may act efficiently for `social
transformation' by facilitating greater social inclusion, self-
development, and «a form of social justice that acknowledges the
different priorities of different groups» (Friedmann, 1998: 34). In
other words, the politics of civil society «aims at
the removal of artificial obstacles that limit each person's
chance to development her or his innate abilities to the fullest possible
extent» (ibid, 1998). Through this statement, Friedmann emphasises the
emancipatory character of the politics of CSOs, and he clearly describes the
transformative role of those organisations in the promotion of a more inclusive
city.
Marris and Friedmann portray an image of a civil
society capable of questioning and challenging state institutions, via
social transformation possibilities. The question that then arises from
this perspective concerns the relationship between planning and CSOs. In
other words, how can planners interact with members of CSOs towards social
transformation?
| 
