This paper was published in: Urban Law and Policy, Vol. 3, No. 1, 1980, pp. 41-58

Decision-Making in Urban Plan Implementation: Does the Dog Wage the Tail, or the Tail Wag the Dog?

Rachelle Alterman

This paper reports on an empirical study that measures and analyses the effect of implementation decisions of a legally-binding urban plan. Has the plan been fulfilling its role of directing decisions or has it in fact wound up “chasing” after them through a series of ad hoc amendments?

The case-study is set in Israel where the statutory planning system and the ample tools of implementation have been the envy off planners in other Western countries. The findings show that making planning mandatory, centralizing decision-making and replenishing its kit of tools – oft-recommended remedies to implementation ailments – may still not suffice to ensure that plans be implemented. Without the awareness and willingness on the part of the decision-makers in the public agency to have the plan fulfil its role of guiding decisions, even a seemingly “waterproof” system could be turned upside down.