"Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning": Horst Rittel and Melvin Webber

Partial Excerpts (antilibrary)

1973

ABSTRACT

The search for scientific bases for confronting problems of social policy is bound to fail, because of  the nature of these problems. They are "wicked" problems, whereas science has developed to deal  with "tame" problems. Policy problems cannot be definitively described. Moreover, in a pluralistic  society there is nothing like the undisputable public good; there is no objective definition of equity;  policies that respond to social problems cannot be meaningfully correct or false; and it makes no  sense to talk about "optimal solutions" to social probIems unless severe qualifications are imposed  first. Even worse, there are no "solutions" in the sense of definitive and objective answers.

This is a modification of a paper presented to the Panel on Policy Sciences, American Association  for the Advancement of Science, Boston, December 1969.

III. Planning Problems are Wicked Problems

As distinguished from problems in the natural sciences, which are definable and  separable and may have solutions that are findable, the proNems of governmental  planning--and especially those of social or policy planning--are ill-defined; and they  rely upon elusive political judgment for resolution. (Not "solution." Social problems  are never solved. At best they are only re-solved--over and over again.)

The problems that scientists and engineers have usually focused upon are mostly  "tame" or "benign" ones

the mission is clear. It is clear, in turn, whether or  not the problems have been solved.

Wicked problems, in contrast, have neither of these clarifying traits; and they  include nearly all public policy issues

There are at least ten distinguishing properties of planning-type problems, i.e.  wicked ones, that planners had better be alert to and which we shall comment upon  in turn.

1. There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem

1. There is no definitive formulation of a wicked problem