AICP Code Of Ethics Case Study

318 Words2 Pages

Planning is transforming socially, but to achieve change it has to bring together, politicians, planners, and residents (Sandercock, 2004). Citizen’s opinions and rights should be taken into consideration. It is the number one rule in the planning process for participants. It says, “recognize the rights of citizens to participate in planning decisions” (Ethical, n.d.). Cities cannot progress unless they change their ways of doing things. To find out how a city is actually doing it has to see itself from an outside prospective. They will most of the time see that what they though was normal is actually something they grew accustomed to. A way that can lead to planners being progressive is to use a therapeutic approach. This approach involves “the “whole person” to be present in negotiations and deliberations, but being prepared to acknowledge and deal with the powerful emotions that underpin many planning issues” (Sandercock, 2004). …show more content…

First and foremost, they are both conscious of the rights of the citizens. Everything that planners do has to be within the rights of citizens. Both do not allow favors to be accepted by the planner and they should only advocate for a client if the goals are not illegal and do not interfere with the citizen’s wellbeing (Ethical, n.d.). Nonetheless, they do differ in certain ways. The Ethical Principles in Planning does not mention any consequences for a planner that does not follow these rules, but the AICP Code of Ethics does. The Ethical Principles in Planning does not mention anything about taking another planner position elsewhere, but the AICP Code of Ethics does and the circumstances in which you can take another planner job. The AICP code of ethics is about what a certified AICP planner should not do and what to do if they are violating the code (AICP,

Open Document