本文從美國規劃學者P.Clavel對進步式規割的定義出發，探討進步規劃師在囡家體制內實現民主規劃的機會與限制。我的主妥論點為:雖然規劃師的專業角色問題在六0年代的辯護式規劃模型與七0年代的激進式規劃模型被逐步釐清，但左派理論家們在批評體制內規割的限制之餘卻未曾提出一個具體可行的行動建議。進步式規劃針對這個缺憾提出體制內改革與新專業主義，強調在理論上對立的概念必須在實踐中整合，而懷有改革理念的規釗師也不應放棄在國家既有，膛制內找尋空間的機會。我以為進步式視會模型在實踐指導上且在較激進式規量的模型向前遂了一步，但為了防範進步規劃師淪為在體制內單打獨門的游擊隊的危險，體制內改革必須與社會運動併行，而視劃模型的創新也必須以社會整體的進步為基礎。

In this paper I review the opportunities and constraints of the model of progressive planning in both theoretical and practical terms. I also propose a preliminary modification of the model.

My major argument is that progressive planners， defined as those who share with the radicals of the criticisms of the established planning institutions and proces;;es but have taken a more pragmatic approach by accepting the possibility of reform within the system， especially in the local government， have distinguished themselves from advocacy planners by recoguizing the unbalanced power structure embedded in the so-called pluralistic model. The progressive planners have also concentrated on the issue of practice， which has been one of the uncompleted tasks of the radical planners. However， individual progressive planners in the local government can be volnexable without a broader base at the grass root level. Innovations in planning models can not be fully achieved without innovations in social processes.