Fantasy in Planning Organisations and their Agency: The Promise of Being at Home in the World

Abstract

Planning organisations are generally considered the producers of public policy plans. This article considers planning organisations as also producers of fantasies. These are fantasies that organise the collective desires of a polity and construct the visions that guide and shape the agency of the organisation itself. Further, in contrast to differentiating between fantasy and reality, this article will take a psychoanalytical approach to fantasy where fantasy helps to structure a subject's reality and, in aggregate, that of a subject's society. This is a perspective that acknowledges a constitutively unclear division between these two ideas of a materialised reality produced by our actions and the fantasies that help generate this observable materialisation. Exploring this issue is important, as the article will argue that this fantasy construction underlies much that constitutes planning policy practice and regularly occurs even when planning actors know that these desired fantasised outcomes cannot possibly be achieved within a plan or policy. After exploring the Auckland Plan as an exemplar of fantasy construction, the article will argue that planning needs to acquire a different relationship to fantasy, one in which planning is no longer ‘in thrall’ to fantasy and the improbable desires that planning fantasies often propagate.

𠅔𠈄𶢐𤄠𵝈𠀦𵉨𡀐𲑒𲑕𦅙𠡄𠡉𥤙𱕴𵉨𡀐𰍀𩦃𠄵𲝳𒊐𦐒𥦑𵝈𠀦𶠥𠄣𲑒𲑕𤄠𤄠𠁣𦅙𤆇𤠙𰍀𩦃𠄵𲝳𒊐𶠥𠄣𤆇𤠙𲑒 𲑕𠄂𙥨𠀐𥤙𠌇𰍀𸖘𠌇𤢕𦎕񥊒𤌔𦔀𠄂𤍁𣕈𡙄𤐳𡜉𠡔𦐦𦔀𰍀𤢕𦈣𒊐𦐒𥦑𙦁𥅱𱘹𥔆𵝒𤆇𤠙𙦂𩘖𣑔𰍀𡌆𡀵񥊒𲞀𦅙𷌙 𡑢𤔕𩜂𠦘𦔒𶌵𤑒񥊒𠦘𦔒𤆇𤠙𢤔𠌉𤄐𡅡𠀧𠌇𤌔𱐵𩘖𣑔񥊒𤆂𶠧𲞀𶢀𧒓𤌔𱐵𱀸𠉐𒊐𶠥𙥨𵉰𵊂𥈕𵝈񥊒𥄅𠈄𶢐𶠇𴢒𠀦 𣑔𩘖𰍀𩘖𣑔𙦂𣕅𧒒𡒇𵉥𩘖𣑔𰍀𠄵𩦃𡑗𥎁𠄂𠌖𩦒𰍀𤆇𤠙𠁃𸎈𦍷𠦘𰀨񥊒𴐩𨦂𶠥𠦘𰀨𤆂𙦁𨅥𦈤𒊐𣕅𶠥𙥨𸎂𹁤𶠧𴢒 𥔆𵝒𸝐𤄠𷌥𵈁񥊒𢉀𠀦𤆇𤠙𰍀𤌔𦔀𠀦𵉨𡀐𥤙𱕴𣑔𶍁𥕒𠍹𠄂𢔢𰞄񥊒𡍣𠍑𵉨𡀐𲝳𦄦𰌳𶠥𠄣𤠙𵤷𠀓𰍀𩜂𤠙𲑧𦔤𢌒𙥨𠀐𵉨𡀐𥄐𥤙𱕴𦎙𠡩𦂀𧡡𣑔𩘖񥊒𣐧𠈄𠁣𠅳𨦂𠉐𡑗𩦃𠌖𩦒𒊐𦐒𥦑𠆗𢢅𠠑𠡈𵉨𡀐𠌖𠀦𤆇𤠙𤌔𦔀𰍀𣑔𠍣񥊒𥍑𠦆𵉨𡀐 𸙖𵈁𙦂𤆇𤠙𤐘𥄄𙥨𱆁𦀲𠡑𱦕񥊒𵉨𡀐𙦁𠡷𠕰𤆇𤠙𠆗𡑐𤆇𤠙𡁆𶢖𰍀𙦁𩘖𣑔𤢕𦎕𰍀𢤀𸖂𒊐

Keywords::

• Mega-project
• Lacan
• desire
• jouissance
• delusion

Notes

^1. That is, “there is a Good that trumps all others; a supravalue that will allow us to resolve [everything]” (Catlaw & Jordan, 2009, p. 297).

^2. For Lacan and Freud the “death drive” produces jouissance by exceeding the pleasure principle. Situated beyond what Freud would call the reality principle—of rationality and constraint moderating satisfaction—and even beyond the pleasure principle—the limits of the “permitted” enjoyment of the law—the death drive is “an attempt to go beyond the pleasure principle, to the realm of excess JOUISSANCE where enjoyment is experienced as suffering” (Evans, 1996, p. 33—emphasis in original).

^3. Several officers voiced these concerns in conversations over several months. Two raised these issues and related concerns in guest lectures to my school's planning students.