{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02564102564102564, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.288135593220339, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
What Should Planners Do to Address Unethical Political Pressure?

Abstract This paper presents the case study of three planners who risked their jobs to oppose unethical political pressures in Kathmandu Valley, Nepal. It attempts to understand what was done by these planners to address those pressures and what lessons could we learn from their experiences. This research found that in a hostile political environment where unethical political pressure is strong, and voicing is of little help, unique actions of procedural planning (exit, deny-exit-and-expose, and defend), deontological in nature, may have to be adopted. If that is not adequate one should also consider de-communicating or manipulative actions, teleological in approach.