Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 556

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Information in Communicative Planning

Innes, Judith E.·1998·Journal of the American Planning Association

Abstract

What planners do most is talk and interact; it is through communicative practice that they influence public action. This paper contends that communicative planning requires a new concept of information and how it influences action—namely, a concept of communicative rationality, supplementing instrumental rationality. Drawing on the author's research on the role of information in policy processes, and on Habermas's views of communicative action and rationality, the paper makes three main points. First, information in communicative practice influences by becoming embedded in understandings, practices and institutions, rather than by being used as evidence. Second, the process by which the information is produced and agreed on is crucial and must include substantial debate among key players and a social process to develop shared meaning for the information. Third, many types of information count, other than “objective” information. A concluding note urges planning researchers and educators to put more emphasis on this broader concept of information in practice, and warns practitioners that being technically right is never enough to influence action.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/01944369808975956

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 556

Metadata

Authors
Innes, J. E.
Venue
Journal of the American Planning Association
Published
1998-03-31
Volume
64
Issue
1
Pages
52-63
ISSN
  • 0194-4363 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-0130
OpenAlex
W2025048865
Cited by
556
References
0
FWCI
86.19
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Information in Communicative Planning. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/01944369808975956
The paper
Innes, J. E. (1998). Information in Communicative Planning. Journal of the American Planning Association. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944369808975956

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.