What Principles Should Urban Planners Follow

Case Study: Ethics in Urban Planning

INTRODUCTION TO WACHS (1989) ARTICLE

The article "When Planners Lie with Numbers" by Martin Wachs discusses the conflict that planners typically face when confronted with data: on the one hand they must be scientists who deal carefully with data; on the other hand, they must be advocates because planning so often involves politics. This conflicted approach to data means that planners are tasked with adjusting data to fit political aims at times. The problem with this, of course, is that ethical principles surrounding the use of data and statistics in the field of planning would have it that all data be dealt with honestly and apolitically. The reality is that planning cannot and does not take place outside of politics. And that is why, as Wachs (1989) explains, the very code of ethics used by planners is “seems to embody the conflict” (p. 477). The author argues that planners must adhere to ethical principles, such as honesty, fairness, and impartiality, when using data and statistics in their work. Misuse of data and statistics can lead to incorrect decisions, false conclusions, and a loss of public trust and confidence in the planning profession. The author also highlights the importance of transparency and critical evaluation in the use of data and statistics. He emphasizes the need for planners to be trained in ethical data use, for institutions to develop policies and procedures to ensure ethical data use, and for planners to be vigilant in evaluating data and to be transparent about their methods and conclusions.

DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS USING ETHICS IN DATA USE AS CITED BY THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PLANNERS

The American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) is a professional organization for planners and is the largest planning organization in North America. The AICP Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct outlines the ethical principles that planners must adhere to in their professional practice. It has three main parts: principles, rules of conduct, and enforcement. The first two parts concern this topic here. The AICP (2021) states that the code focuses specifically on “defining the aspirational principles for all those who participate in the planning process, whether as planners, as advisory bodies, or as decision-makers (Section A); second, defining the rules of practice and behavior to which all members of the American Institute of Certified Planners are held accountable (Section B).” The code emphasizes the importance of honesty, fairness, objectivity, and impartiality in the use of data and statistics in planning. Planners are expected to use data in a transparent manner and to avoid distorting or manipulating data to advance their own interests. AICP does not define “data”—though for the purposes of this paper data may be defined as any information including statistics, studies, surveys, or other forms of quantified evidence used to inform decision making related to planning activities. What AICP does do is frame the way in which planners might use data. This framework approach consists of condemning conflicts of interest, improper influence, abuse of position, and honoring honesty and fair dealing (AICP Code of Ethics, 2021). According to the AICP code of ethics, planners must always strive for accuracy and objectivity when utilizing data. It should be noted that this should in theory apply to all forms of data, including statistical, economic, environmental, and social data. In addition, the code states that planners should not knowingly make false or misleading statements when using data. This would therefore theoretically include any attempt to manipulate or distort data to support a particular outcome.

However, as Wachs (1989) points out, and as other researchers like Lauria and Long (2019) have shown, it is one thing to state these principles and rules in writing—and quite another thing to actually ensure that they are adequate in the real world. Wachs (1989) for instance gives two examples of real world cases that put the code to test: first, “a public opinion survey is done regarding a new real estate development, and the planner is urged to publicize results that are favorable to the project, while remaining silent about those that are critical of it” (p. 477). The second real world case is this: A benefit-cost study shows that the costs of dredging a harbor will exceed the economic benefits of the project, so indirect benefits are enumerated that are large enough to result in an excess of benefits over costs. This project has long been favored by the governor” (Wachs, 1989, p. 477). In both examples, the planner is pushed and pulled between getting politicians or businessmen what they want by cherry-picking the data—or rather by being selective about how it is communicated. The AICP states first and foremost in Section B that “We shall not deliberately fail to provide adequate, timely, clear and accurate information on planning issues” (AICP Code of Ethics, 2021). Do the planners in either of the cases mentioned by Wachs fail in this duty? Do they fail by withholding information? Or can they claim that the data they do publish is accurate—even though it is not all the data. Are planners obliged to publish or act on all the data? These are problems identified by Wachs that the code itself fails to adequately address.

The Bible, however, is clear on what approach an honest Christian should take when acting ethically with data. Acts 20:28 states, “Pay careful attention to yourselves and to all the flock, in which the Holy Spirit has made you overseers, to care for the church of God, which he obtained with his own blood.” If one is to pay attention to all the flock, then it stands to reason that one should pay heed to all the data and not be selective or cherry pick it in order to please one stakeholder. All stakeholders are important because all are part of or are potentially part of the flock of the elect. The AICP suggests all this but never really explicitly says as much in its code, which is why Wachs’ essay is critical of it.

DESCRIPTIVE ETHICAL ISSUES INVOLVED IN MISUSING STATISTICS, METHODS, AND DATA

When planners misuse statistics, statistical methods, and data, it can lead to a number of ethical issues. The most obvious is the potential for inaccurate or misleading results. For example, if a planner deliberately misrepresents data, it can lead to wrong or distorted conclusions. Thus, using statistics selectively, or selectively reporting data, is unethical because it can lead to an incomplete and misleading picture of the situation at hand. Stakeholders deserve to know the situation as it truly is—not as someone else wishes it was so as to justify taking action that would benefit himself or someone else (Fung, 2016). In such cases, the use of statistics can be used to manipulate public opinion and advance the interests of certain groups at the expense of others. That is Wachs’ (1989) point in drawing attention to the problem of conflicts of interest in the field of planning: the planning is surrounded by them day and night and can hardly be expected to avoid getting wrapped up in them. This can result in poor decision making and policies that are detrimental to the public or that are good and beneficial—that is what further complicates the issue. But, overall, the misuse of data can lead to a lack of trust in the planning process. If the public perceives that planners are manipulating data to suit their agenda, they may be less likely to participate in the planning process, which can lead to inadequate public input and to a destabilizing effect (Campbell & Marshall, 1998).

The Bible makes it clear that principles are there to be acted on not avoided: Colossians 3:5 tells us, “Put to death therefore what is earthly in you: sexual immorality, impurity, passion, evil desire, and covetousness, which is idolatry.” If a planner does not plan in accordance with this biblical principle, he will likely look for ways to get around the rules and principles of the AICP Code of Ethics too. Thus, the proper foundation for any planner is going to be one that is shaped by the biblical principles that every Christian should strive to live by day in and day out. That is the true ethical framework that matters and that all other ethical codes must ultimately hinge upon. Describing the data is part of his job and he must do it honestly regardless of how it impacts friends or neighbors. The purpose is to describe the truth as it is understood by survey and so on.

ANALYTICAL ETHICAL ISSUES INVOLVED IN MISUSING STATISTICS, METHODS, AND DATA

When analyzing data, the planner must also be honest and have integrity: analysis has to be conducted with rigor or it is liable to faultiness. Faulty analysis leads to a misrepresentation of reality—and the planner must represent reality as faithfully and honestly as possible. As John 17:17 states, “Sanctify them in the truth; your word is truth.” Yet Wachs (1989) points out that the AICP Code is inadequate when it comes to providing guidance on ethical analysis: “After reviewing our code and comparing it with those of other professions, I find it to be relatively silent on standards of technical analysis and reporting, data management and analysis, and statistical and mathematical modeling. This omission is serious, given the growing use of computers in planning and the increasingly analytical nature of work done by planners” (p. 478). Analysis is not an issue to be silent on when it comes to ethics in planning.

The ethical issues that occur when statistics, statistical methods, and data are misused—i.e., analyzed poorly—stem from a lack of objectivity and impartiality (Klosterman, 1980). When data is manipulated, it can lead to incorrect decisions, false conclusions, and ultimately harm to individuals and communities. The manipulation of data also undermines public trust and confidence in the planning profession and the institutions that rely on it. Plus, when the use of statistics and data that is not representative of the full picture is commonplace it can perpetuate and reinforce existing biases and inequalities. For example, if a planner is manipulating data by not analyzing it appropriately, and conclusions of this so-called analysis end up favoring one project over another, it could lead to what appears to the public being a decision made on political or personal grounds rather than based on the merits of each project. Analysis has an important role to play in the use of data, methods and statistics.

As Klosterman (1978) has pointed out, some have argued for this reason that planners should be value-free—i.e., not beholden to any outside influences or set of values that might impinge upon them some implicit bias. Yet how realistic is this? Beliefs are frameworks—today they are called biases; but the reality is that they are frameworks, creating a point of view. Some agree with points of view and others disagree. Those in disagreement tend to call them biases. When they line up, they are acceptable. But this is a very subjective approach to analysis, and the planner must be objective.

That is why the biblical perspective is so important, for it offers the most objective framework on earth. It is the perspective and point of view that God Himself wants all people to use when approaching anything. When it comes to analysis, it is the perspective that planners should have—not the values-free perspective. God did not preach a values-free doctrine when He walked the earth. He preached very specific values—such as the Golden Rule. He was very clear and precise, and this precision and clarity is needed in analysis.

PRESCRIPTIVE ETHICAL ISSUES INVOLVED IN MISUSING STATISTICS, METHODS, AND DATA

When making recommendations based on data, planners should follow a number of ethical principles to ensure that their recommendations are fair, impartial, and based on accurate information. Some of the key ethical principles that planners should follow include objectivity, transparency, accuracy, and representativeness. Planners should strive to be impartial and unbiased when analyzing and interpreting data, and should not allow personal beliefs or values to influence their recommendations. They should be transparent about their methods and sources of data, and should provide clear and complete explanations of their findings and recommendations.

They should also ensure that the data they use is accurate and reliable, and should take steps to correct any errors or inaccuracies they discover. Furthermore, planners should ensure that the data they use is representative of the full picture, and should avoid using data that is biased or selective. They are ultimately responsible for the accuracy and reliability of the data they use, and should take steps to ensure that their recommendations are based on sound and valid data.

Additionally, it is also important for the public to be informed about the planning process and to be involved in the decision-making process. This allows the public to hold planners accountable and to ensure that decisions are being made with the best interests of the public in mind.

Thus, to address the ethical issues associated with the misuse of statistics, statistical methods, and data, there are several steps that can be taken. First, planners must be trained in ethical data use and must be held accountable for adhering to ethical principles. Second, institutions and organizations must develop policies and procedures to ensure that data is collected and used in a transparent and impartial manner. Third, planners must be vigilant in critically evaluating data and must be transparent about their methods and conclusions. Finally, institutions and organizations must provide resources and support for planners who encounter ethical dilemmas and must encourage open and honest communication about ethical issues (Klosterman, 1980).