Rupture or continuity? Modern and postmodern planning in Toronto

The literature on the transition to postmodernism, postfordism and particip atory planning stresses the value of the economic and planning process shif ts that have occurred in the late 1960s and early 1970s. This paper compare s two periods of planning and urban development in Toronto: one running fro m 1959 to 1962, at the height of modernism, fordism and expert-driven plann ing, and the other, from 1989 to 1992, set within the postmodern, postfordi st and participatory planning era. In line with expectations arising from t he literature, the study reveals stark distinctions between the two periods . It documents the breaking up of the modern consensus around the progress ideology into a postmodern constellation of values. As a result, the range of issues debated on the planning scene was much broader over the second pe riod than over the first. Overall, however, results point to a mixture of c ontinuity and change between the two periods and thus diverge from this lit erature's strong emphasis on transition. Contrary to expectations, citizen mobilization was pervasive in both periods, although there were major diffe rences in the nature of activism and in the issues that were raised. Over t he first period most activism originated from ratepayer organizations dedic ated to the protection of single-family-home neighbourhoods from encroachme nts, whereas the second period featured, along with such associations, advo cacy groups championing environmental and social causes. The two periods ar e also distinguished by different planning implementation capacities. Where as in the first period, planning had the means to implement its visions, th is was no longer the case in the second period. In the late 1980s and early 1990s, planning was thus incapable of aligning urban development with its environmental and social ideals, which meant that, by default, planning pra ctice over the second period proceeded pretty much according to land-use an d transportation principles evolved in the early postwar decades. In sum, d istinctions between the two periods were far more evident in the discourse than in the implementation sphere.