Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
Autonomy of the source of distortion
Socially ad hoc
Socially systematic/
Structural
2
Information inequalities resulting
from legitimate division of labour
1
Idiosyncratic personal traits
affecting communication
Inevitable
distortions
Random noise
Transmission/content losses
across organisational boudaries
(cognitive limits)
(division of labour)
3
Wilful unresponsiveness
4
Monopolistic distortions of
exchange
Socially
unnecessary
distortions
Interpersonal deception
Monopolistic creation of needs
Interpersonal bargaining
behaviour; e.g. bluffing
Ideological rationalisation of
class or power structure
(interpersonal manipulation)
(structural legitimation)
Figure 2.1
Bounded rationality refined: communicative distortions as bounds to the rationality of action
Source: Forester (1989: 34)
In Forester's typology, random inevitable distortions ('type 1') are the result of
unintentional personal communication limits (cognitive limits). Information is incom-
plete, the definition of the problem is ambiguous and human ability to define and
comprehend the full range of possible alternatives is limited. Structurally unavoid-
able distortions in communication ('type 2') occur through for example inequalities
caused by 'legitimate divisions of labor' or through the 'transmission/content losses
that occur across organisational boundaries'. Both 'type 1' and 'type 2' distortions
correspond to formal rational analyses of decision-making and the concentration on
largely human, organisational and technical factors affecting the role of information.
Types 3 and 4 correspond to the work of theorists who have adopted a polit-
ical analysis of decision-making. The 'interpersonal deception' and 'interpersonal
bargaining behaviour' of 'type 3' corresponds to a pluralist analysis of decision-
making. The systematically avoidable distortions of 'type 4' are rooted in political
and economic structures and perpetuate their power biases. This analysis there-
fore corresponds to the political economy and critical analysis of decision-making.
According to Forester, information is used for structural legitimation in two distinct
ways in planning. First, it is used for the 'ideological rationalization of class or
power structure', i.e. for the explicit legitimisation of decisions that reinforce the
existing structures of power. Second, Forester, drawing on Lukes (1974), suggests
