Where's
The Beef?
(A response to Carson and defense of the AICP designation)
by
Norman Krumholz, AICP President
Richard
Carson tells us that he is a planner and a member of APA "who
wants to be more than a planner"
but also "
a builder of community."
So does every planner reading this newsletter. Carson also tells us that some "larger
planning agencies are managed by people who are not AICP"
and that some agencies are actually managed by lawyers and "political
hacks."
No doubt this is true, but the news will not surprise many planners.
So
where's
the beef? The beef is in his
critique of the AICP designation as "such
a joke."
According to Carson, the AICP designation "actually
works against you as you advance"
and "limits
your ability to manage other professionals (i.e. engineers, building officials,
scientists) because you are stereotyped."
These statements are perfect nonsense for the following reasons:
1.
As planning issues become more regional and complex, AICP planners are becoming
increasingly diversified. More and more planners are moving out of traditional jobs in
local government and working outside of city hall for banks, developers,
foundations and non-profit community development corporations.
On a day-to-day basis, many AICP planners are involved in negotiating
environmental and NIMBY disputes, in acting as close advisors to their mayors
and city managers and in coordinating the work of many departments of government
including transportation, housing, social services and economic development.
To think of the work of these AICP planners as "stereotyped"
or rigidly confined is absurd.
2.
The desire for top-notch professionalism in planning, just as in other
professions, is not a new idea. It
goes back to l9l7 when the former American Institute of Planners was formed out
of the earlier American City Planning Institute.
So the idea of certification and professionalism which AICP now
represents has a long and distinguished history.
3.
Far from rejecting certification, planners are more interested.
The membership size of AICP has continued a steady growth since its
inception in APA, and the membership has never declined.
Almost half of all APA members are now AICP; record numbers are now
taking the exam; and it is likely that in 200l or 2002 a majority of APA members
will be AICP. Thus, in the judgment
of an overwhelming number of planners, submitting themselves to examination and
certification is a worthwhile thing to do.
These planners are neither misled nor foolish, but want to equip
themselves to the highest standard of their profession.
4.
Seeking certification by an objective organization and examination shows
others---the public at large, elected officials, and other professionals--that
the AICP planner has met certain minimum education and experience requirements.
This is more reliable and professional than a self-serving resume.
AICP is more than a certifying organization, but a leader in continued
professional education.
5.
AICP members must pledge to uphold a code of ethics and are subject to
discipline if they are found in violation of the code.
In my view, it is heartening to see that the planning profession is
willing to adopt and abide by a code that defines conflicts of interest,
responsibility to the public, and respect for human and environmental resources,
all the very best instincts of a democratic society.
Being an AICP member is more than just having a job in planning; it is a
pledge to respect democratic processes and a standard of excellence.
|