Urbanism & Planning End-Term

concepts and authors

Globalisation

Interconnectedness between people, cities and states which results in economic integration, free trade, change in consumption, investments, production chains. It creates global interdependencies and growing international law.

Neoliberalism

Liberalism but focused on the increase of free global trade and market. Power held privately because they believe they can solve social issues better than the government. Pressure towards deregulation and focus on personal responsibility instead of welfare.

Saskia Sassen

‘The impact of technologies and globalisation on cities‘

• globalisation disperses and concentrates 

  • disperses because of telecommunication (production + manufacturing - to areas with cheaper costs, logistics, data collection)

  • concentrates because certain professions (lawyers, tech, finance) ‘cluster‘ in ‘global cities‘ because of functionality

• clusters of professionals - make decision that affect global wages, rates, sales

• global cities drive urbanisation as there is a special urban reward for innovative professionals 

• CHANGE: need for new city models, rich cities are only rich because of the few, there are large income gaps/inequality 

Manuel Castells

Power shift from governments to global city networks

• ‘informational cities with network society - computer age’

• new - JIT production, telecommunication, tracking/transport technology

• space of places: geographical domain - physical architecture, houses, shops, landscape

• space of flows: virtual domain - movement of people, money, information

  • flows meet in cities - ‘touch points’ (valuable)

• Everything is built to support the space of flows

  • airports - attract imports of goods and people

• important to have multiple flows to prevent interdependencies

  • flows of people from tourism and flows of capital from oil production

Peter Taylor

‘Global city network‘

• analysed the global city hierarchy

  • that grew beacuse of computer industry and communication which increased economic globalisation

  • power concentrated in knowledge hubs of information flows to provide face-to-face contacts

• global cities are sites of ‘service-economy activity’ connected by a network of external relations

• Based on that, he created the global hierarchy of global cities (NYC, London...)

Jeniffer Robinson

‘world cities or world of ordinary cities‘

• disagrees with the ranking of global cities and highlights the need for analysis of ‘ordinary cities‘

  • ranking inspires developing cities to invest towards becoming a global city - increases inequalities, slums, poverty (should focus on education, health care, housing)

  • puts cities off the map and makes them irrelevant

• all cities are - ordinary, dynamic, diverse, world arenas for social and economic life

• highlights importance of post-colonial urban study: one that focuses on how post colonized cities develop and questions the pre set ways of European development - praises individual development - different from what Europe defined it as 

GaWC

Based on Peter Taylor, the GaWC - visualises economic globalisation by looking at the network of global cities

• It measures the connectivity of cities

• It visualises how many stops it takes to invest from city A to city B

• Investments happen through city to a company

• The less, stops the more connectivity

• Global companies are the wires → they connect cities.

• Cities are the hubs → they host the firms and make the network possible.

• GaWC measures how well each hub (city) is connected through those wires (firms)

Sassen vs Castells vs GaWC

1. Sassen → focuses on power concentration in cities and how that affects global flows

2. Castells → focuses on global flows and how it influences cities

3. GaWC → a measuring tool of interconectedeness of cities into the global hierarchy via different firms 

= cities are interfaces where flows meet and interact - some cities experience that more than others

Trickle down economy

The belief that if the government improves conditions for the rich it will eventually benefits everyone else as well.

• the government lowers taxes and market regulations

• rich and companies have more money to invest

• this later results in more job opportunities and higher wages

• The economic opportunity/benefit trickles down from the top to bottom

Inter-urban competition

The artificially created belief that cities need to compete with each other in order to maintain or improve their position on the global hierarchy of cities

• cities want to attract flows in form of

  • talent/knowledge: students, expats, young workers, innovative proffesionals

  • people: tourists, affluent internationals willing to spend money, affluent tennants, homeowners, educated individuals

  • flagship: events, mega events, HQ’s, stores

  • finance: banks, investors, companies, trade flows, government projects and investments

• in order to improve their economic stability, visability and attractivness

• to attract the flows they compete in:

  • changing the physical infrastructure, improving rankings (green, eco, safe, wealthy, healthy)

  • enacting policies: lowering taxes to attract companies and investors

• they believe this will result in trickle down economy and spin off - but they don’t actively help it

competition

when something or someone has 2 or more options to stay or happen somwhere

• a mega event or intelectuals choosing to happen or reside somwhere - competition to attract them

Urban entrepreneurship

• result of the neoliberalism movement

• switch from government to governance - decision can be negotioated between public-private partneship

• city is now a enterpise not a society and everything is a business deal

• belief: attracts flows and skims of milk

• problems: no active efforts to skim the milk

R. Florida

‘The city as Innovation machine’

• the modern version of the working class = ‘the creative class‘ that drives innovation, globalisation, urbanisation

• Cities provide a dense, creative, urban, energetic environment that is required for the ‘stimulation of mind‘

  • Creative people require this environment as it enables constant exchange of ideas, energies, and collaboration

• Cities = engines for innovation

• 2 groups within the creative class:

  • super creative core: engineers, scientists, artists, poets, professors, analysts, designers, scientists, writers = direct creation of NEW ideas - direct creative knowledge

  • creative professionals: tech, finance, healthcare providers, industry workers = problem solvers that think independently and apply creative knowldege

Madanipour

‘Social exclusion, space, and time‘

• talks about how groups of residents are excluded from economic, political and cultural processes

• WHY recently?

  • neoliberalism

  • globaisation

• HOW recently:

  • economic exclusion: minorities trapped in low wage jobs because of bad education and inability to market themselves

  • political exclusion: minorities can’t vote or be in political offices

• minorities:

  • gender, age, disability, physical appearance, culture, language, identity, belief, wealth, race, ethnicity

• WHAT enforces that:

  • borders, signs, walls, codes (law)

Disadvantaged groups don’t have a valuable time - they are not an asset to the modern world, they lack purpose = lose belonging and hope

• How to SOLVE:

  • access to jobs, education, housing, livable wage, decision making, transport

Porter

‘The competitive advantage of the inner city‘

• main issue in the USA: economic distress in the innner-city neighborhoods (poverty, unemployment, high rents, low investment)

  • what role should government, private sector, non-profits play in job creation, revitalization, economic development?

• liberals - greatest good for greatest number of people

• marxist - govt owns all and decides all

• neoliberals (Porter!) - private entrapranours will cater to the social needs better than the government

  • create businesses - jobs, higher wages - trickle down economy

He suggests 4 advantages to inner city locations (for firms, investment) :

• strategic location - to transport, customers

• demand - built in customer base due to dense population

• possible integration with regional jobs - links people to better opportunities and career paths

• ready to work labour force - people that are underemployed are motivated to get more income

  • Firms that can use all 4 are able to make profits without government help

  • Cities should make inner city land available for private investment

Stone

‘reflections on regime politics: from governing coalition to urban political order‘

• comments on the needs for citizen participation and power in the hands of the elites

• ‘regime’ - political and economical elites govern

• that’s why it’s important to realise the agenda behind a policy

He focused on the inner workings of political regimes - collations that shape different agendas of policies

• redevelopment, anti-poverty funding is amost gone

NEED for - citizen participation - local actor coallitions with state actors

Urban politics over time:

1. redevelopment period: hollowing out of CBD, growth of suburbs funded by federal govts.

2. modern era: creative class moves back into CBD

3 layers of city politics:

1. Elites: wealthy, developers, business leaders = influence the agendas of policies

2. Middle class = small changes

3. Marginal groups (minorities) = usually disadvantaged

Governance

Process of coordinating actors, social groups and institutions to attain particular goals, discussed and defined collectively in fragmented, uncertain environments

History of planning

1950

• rational, technocratic, scientifically based

1960-70

• top-down state intervention, questioning of planning and policy relationship

1980-90

• administrative technical planning - aimed at societal challenges, collective decision, still very political

Political state acting planner had the most power, now they are an actor in a large complex group

Empirical meaning of governance

The shift from government (top-down state implemented decisions) to governance (set of actors that decide on a goal and make a decision)

shift to personal responsibility as individuals - responsible to their own well being

WHY:

• neoliberalism

  • free market, trade, deregulation, private actors provide better, spin of, trcikle down

• globalisation

  • policy dependant on international laws, inter-urban competition, external factors

• technology and telecommunications

  • information is now transparent, citizen participation, new power coallitions between actors

• complexity of modern issues

  • too much for one institution

redistributive planning

planning that aims to redistribute wealth, resources, power, and opportunities through policies and plans

• lost its power once private-public partnerships started to focus on lucrative causes

Analytical meaning of governance

A lens that looks at a phenomenon through:

1. analyzing the actors at play

2. what’s their role and relationship with on another

3. what are the institutions that affect the place

• helps us understand all the factors that can affect a policy, plan, change or idea to revitalize, affect or improve a place

institutions

the games actors must play by

formal:

• zoning laws, policies, plans, environmental limits, building codes, simcity requirenments for health

informal:

• state traditions, customs, interaction between neighbors, communication style, norms, local leaders

How to revitalise a neighborhood

Empirical meaning:

• understand that there has been a shift from government to governance - from top-down state decision making to complex group of actors at different levels (state, market, civil society)

Analytical meaning:

1. analyse the actors

2. whats their relationship

3. what are the norms of that specific place and also the state

actors

state: municipality, politicians, state planners, government

market: private investors, wealthy property owners, developers, business owners

civil society: neighborhood associations, citizens community groups

• relationships

  • does government grant market actors, do civil society actors communicate with state/market actors…

History of citizen participation

then: issue → decision by state →  ifromation/consultation of citizens → lawsuits/court cases/protests

now: issue → participation → alternatives → implementation of collective decisoon

3 waves of citizen participation

1. 1970’s 1st wave top-down governanance with centralised responsibility: citizens wanted to be informed not just accept a pre-determined outcome

2. 1990’s 2nd wave co-governance with shared responsibility: citizens wanted particiaption on decision making so a collation with the municipality

3. 2000’s 3rd wave self-governance with decentralised responsibility: citizens initiatives - citizens decise and government facilitates

These three do not replace each other - all are still in use

Benefits of citizen participation

• sense of ownership

• local and expert knowledge mix

• empowerment of communities

• inclusiveness during decision making

• broadly supported ideas

drawbacks of citizen participation

• time/money consuming

• participation fatigue

• path is still predetermined - officials allow specific people in on specific issues only

implications of citizen participation for public planners

top down governance:

• how to generate broad support

• how to implement efficiently

co-governance

• how to create suitable partnerships

• how to distribute decision making and responsibilities

self-governance

• how to select fair representation

• who solves conflict

• how to create synergies between policies and citizen decisions

other general challenges:

• local vs public interest

• making information and communication accessible and understandable to all

• making solutions inclusive and representative for everyone who is active

• establishing trust

Arnstein’s ladder of citizen participation

conceptualizes citizen participation in planning, normative view

non participation:

• a way to control/cure/fix citizens - creating a committee to make them listen to an official

• no participation

1. manipulation

   • teaching citizens about the plan

2. therapy

   • adjusting citizens views and their behavior on an issue

tokenism:

• giving minimal effort to something - given a voice but no guarantee it will be heard

1. informing

   • one way flow information (leaflet/website)

2. consultation

   • authorities ask for opinions through surveys - can be ignored

3. placation

   • citizens given seat on advisory or board committees

citizen power:

1. partnership

   • power shared between citizen and panner through joint committees

2. delegated power

   • citizens given majority seats in a decision committee

   • participatory planning

   • citizens vote and decide and state facilitates

3. citizen control

   • citizens decide and have control of the budget 

critiques of Arnstein’s ladder 

• there is no level zero

• it is a linear model - it suggest a limited range of participation - mosaic would maybe represent it better

Davidoff

‘Advocacy and pluralism in planning‘

• suggests that not all citizen groups are fairly represented during decision making

The poor/minorities should be represented by ‘advocates‘:

The structure of planning now is:

1. planning staff develops a plan for welfare of the whole community…?

2. it is reviewed and modified by a planning commission (that does not favor any interest group)

3. then reviewed by city council

He want the commissioners in commission to advocate for a specific community - make it less objective

• his view on decision making is:

  • commissioner as advocate for his client

  • different interest as evidence in court

  • and the decision process should be like a fair judge deciding on a fair outcome

however - profit focused wealthy conservatives also use advocates → would again create gaps in representation

Forester

‘planning in face of conflict‘

• talks about his learned experience of planning

Failed plan: planner is skilled, does not need citizen input, drawn up scientific/simplistic plans

Good plan: citizen participation, empirical plans, experience based, communication with stakeholders

Good planner: understands that it is a frustrating process, confidence in own professional skill, empathetic, communicative, sensitive to various interests, knowing limits to own power

4 main roles of planners:

• rule enforcers

  • ensures legal compliance with law/rules/policy

• negotiators+mediators

  • face-to-face communication with different stakeholders and interest to come to a fair conclusion

• resource people

  • specialised experts on different themes to advise on relevant issues - environmentalist on green development

• shuttle diplomats 

  • communicates as a messanger when direct communication is not possible (trust issue, conflict, hostility)

Forester v Davidoff

Forester:

• planner serves for public interest

• need for skill for conflict solving

• rule enforcer, negotiator/mediator, resource people, shuttle diplomat

Davidoff

• planner is a advocate for specific group (the voiceless)

• conflict is a good addition to planning process

Livability

The extent to which the living environment dovetails with the conditions and needs that residents place on it. These two need to reamin in sync with each other

Analytical understanding: helps us understand relationship between observable factors and how they affect the livability

Normative understanding: helps us provide judgement based on norms of whether a factor is good, bad, or how it should be (health, safety, decision, making

History of liveability

Before: one simple clear need - need for city walls to provide safe livable space

Now: holistic set of extensive requirements: health, safety, accessibility, proximity

Measuring liveability

Objective measurements:

• measurable standards ensured by policies, laws, basic human needs

  • green areas, amenities, safety, health, work, services…

• Measurement of the characteristics of a living environment

  • number of benches, bus stops//

• Aim: to measure and regulate effectiveness of policies

• indicator centered

Subjective measurements:

• what does one think of the place

• if one sees a crowded area:

  • inclusiveness, loneliness, satisfaction, disturbance - what do they feel in a certain area

• Measurement of needs, concerns, satisfaction, happiness of residents

• aim: discovering whether people think that their living environment is suitable

• experience centered

What affects liveability

Life course

• each age group, generation and individual might perceive livability differently

  • different needs and requirements

  • elderly - accessibility, parents - safety, teens - variety

• city/village born: different priorities

Development

• the same age group might have different needs 30 years from now and had different needs 30 years ago

• development of technology, need for proximity, public transport, higher demand, consumerism

Risks of livability

• too vague and inclusive = sometimes there needs to be a set goal

• need for mixed method approach

• always perceived differently

Ruth 2014

‘Livability for all? Conceptual limits and practical implications‘

• citizens have the right to live in a livable space

Livability is made out of 2 elements

• needs and wants of residents

• physical environment

Difference between sustainability and livability:

• Sustainability:

  • less tangible, no guidelines, less laws - broad principle

• Livability

  • institutions and individuals can be held for (objective) livability

  • laws and regulations that ensure this

consumption and migration reshapes societies - and changes the perceived livability:

• need for new infrastructure and institutions

• contrast in age groups means different demands

• young professionals are the desired age group - their standards for livability are prioritized (they generate income to support tax and livability)

How to solve changing demand?

• keep up diversity and variety on population, infrastructure, amenities, institutions

Cycle of how: Environmental conditions constrain livability

• climate events/disasters are more frequent because of high population growth

• this leads to pressure on resources, regeneration, infrastructure, protection from disasters → decreases livability (safety)

• cities contribute to climate change

• Globalisation → one disaster at one location affects other cities too

• investment toward disaster mitigation mitigation - money could be spent elsewhere (improving livability)

Need for: better planning for NOW and FUTURE, citizen participation, cities must adapt, reliance on back up systems, there is strength in diversity

Neighborhoods

• places for fostering livability and better society

• Geographically bound unit in which residents share proximity and the circumstance with that proximity

For whom do NH matter

Residents: future opportunities for children, individual well being

property owners/local businesses: return on investment

Governments: provide housing stock, way to provide services, provide competition (attracts residents)

housing association: housing affordability and livability

Why NH matter to residents

Socio-cultural:

• neighborhood as an extended family

• support with pets, garden, groceries

• establishes good norms

• government don’t need to invest into social programs/support

Socio-physical:

• physical environment support identity 

• street design

• physical places shape behaviors and norms 

• creates belonging and community

Socio-economical:

• good neighborhood can provide status, pride and employment

• real estate prices go up as neighborhood becomes more desirable

• they want enough services and amenities

NH not relevant to all

children: NH is their whole childhood, need for friends, accessibility, amenities and safety

minorities: can’t travel far, need for amenities, support and community

Boundaries of NH

Administrative:

• geographical, objective, calculated

• allows for data collection, no overlapping

Perceived:

• subjective, perceived, socio-spatial

• some people might perceive their neighborhood smaller than it is

Talen 2017

• advocated for new urbanism

Planned neighborhood unit

• blueprint planned neighborhood for a self-containing community 

• build towards the center of neighborhood 

• walkable and safe

• focused on children and women (men go work elsewhere), education, commerce and security

• eye-to-eye democracy - control within the neighborhood - municipality in the neighborhood

Not applicable today:

• morally challenging: creates segregation, limits spontaneity 

• practically challenging: different needs, and levels of community engagement

• neighborhoods can’t sustain themselves only with they own population

Conclusion:

• neighborhoods are in a physical dimension (streets, amenities) and social dimension (people, interactions)

• new models need to prevent exclusion, gentrification, sameness

• new models need diversity, some control, strong neighborhood

The neighborhood effect

• belief that the neighborhood can determine opportunities, behaviors and obstructions of an individual

• through the physical environment, societal norms, and societal structures

Example of how neighborhood can enhance quality of life

1. physical environment: school being accessible by public transport, safe route, libraries

2. norms: lots of people being educated around you, driving kids to school, lots of role models

3. societal structure: lots of funding and resources funding the school (by government or neighborhood), allocation of good teachers

= this can improve the chances of a child being educated

reasons for NH renewal 

Socio-economic:

• high unemployment

• affluent neighborhood seperation

• low economic activity

Physio-economic:

• outdated and insufficient housing stock and economic 

• limited accesibility

Socio-cultural

• lack of belonging and community 

• loneliness

• high seggregation

• high crime

Place making by Friedman 2010:

Task for planners:

• need to make places human again

• good place is conductive to attachment

• we need to connect ourselves with others

• need to understand place form an inside out - how do people feel in the environment around them

how to do that:

• interact with residents

• each neighborhood is different (beliefs, values, needs, criteria)

• people have right to the city

Placelessness

due to competition for infrastructure, people and production, places look the same

• sense of place is missing because of profit focus (desolation, lack of human connection)

• poeple are being effectively warehoused

William Whyte

Lizarding: people dunbathing on flat areas

Cockroaching: people waling along walls

• what attracts people the most, are the people

• why are some public places - parks more successful than others?

  • movable chairs, food vendors, sittable places, open relationship to the street, sunlight

  • lots of women = good park (women more critical towards their surrounding)

Jan Gehl

‘Life between buildings‘:

• good space in between buildings = increases interactions

• ‘Copenhaginize‘ a place/street = good place (pedestrian only street example)

• planner should enhance voluntary time spent outside

• observed interactions at ordniray places

Designs should:

1. assemble not disperse

• shopping malls, narrower streets - people interact when walk by

2. integrate not segregate

• should not seperate into minorities (school campus inside the city center example)

3. open up not close in

• public buildings with windows near streets

• modern spaces created too spread out, large areas that minimize contact and destroy street life/interactions

Placemaking

• is planning for people not architecture or buildings

  • it is a planning process turned upside-down, from top-bottom to bottom - top

• focusing on social aspects

  • belonging, attachment, inclusiveness, community

Place making critiques

• ill-defined term (livability) - used as a buzzword

• not always pro-community, can be a cover up for profit incentives (Amstel station cafe example)

• every place is embedded in a city - a wider set of variable at play

  • focusing only at a specific place can cause harm

Project for public space ‘What is place making‘

• it is a process through which we shape physical realm to maximise share value

  • improving public to be more vibrant and active = increases social interaction

• place must be consistently upkept and it needs citizen participation

Good place making

• listening to resident’s needs and desires - visualizing them

• using local assets and potential to maximise wellbeing, health and happiness

The place diagram

• a diagram that helps evaluate a place

• the inner ring is key attributes of a place (access&linkages, comfort&image, sociability, uses and activities)

• the middle ring is intangible qualities (happiness, inclusiveness, friendly, green)

• the outer ring is measurable data (traffic, population, employment, crime, values..)

Perry

The neighborhood unit:

• how growth of automobile industry and cities affect the characteristics that make good neighborhoods

• individual feels more connected to a village/small city - it has culture and distinct spacial structure

Life cycle differences:

• younger people enjoy the individualism and anonymity offered by cities

• people with kids want to have a place to belong to 

“The Neighborhood unit“

• focus on the quality of primary school - parent interact, participate, children form connections - improves community

• streets are safe, walkable, crossable

• focus towards the center

• can be sustained by individuals

• stores are focused towards the edge of the neighborhood - accessible by residents but also passers (extra profit)

only focuses on wealthy families 

Brenner+Keil

‘From global cities to globalized urbanisation‘

• urbanisation rates are higher than ever before

  • driven by capitalism

  • creates exclusion, connection, inequalities

• urban studies used to focus on inner CBD now - global connections between urban regions

  • they select few essential cities to focus on - creates inequalities and leaves cities off the map

• Now writers return to ‘Ordinary‘ cities again to understand global cities

  • they have multiple/varied economic activities unlike global cities that focus on one sector

analyzing only global cities create inequalities, hierarchies and only gives one answer with no borader context

• need for cosmopolitan theories

Haarsted et al 2023

‘Freight logistics and the city’

• wanted to incorporate fright logistics into urban studies

• because the movement of goods shapes cities - they wouldn’t function without it

• movement of goods<movement of people in recogniton: people visibly shape cities

  • movement of goods is more so a private focus - not a lot of state interference

• people only notice logistics once something goes wrong - it thrives by being unrecognized

• logistics is similar to infrastructure

  • both is build and maintained because of constistent demand

logistics shapes cities

• airports in peripheral areas, not because of people but interconnectedness to wide roads - shipments and plane-car goods exchange

• harbours located away from cities to receive big shipments and then be transported

• storages in low income neighborhoods - less demand for clean air and noise pollution

social inequalities because of freight

• wealthy neighborhoods don’t want large storages around - pushed into low income suburbs

logistics - shape power hierarchies (data, flows), physical shape (roads, storages), human behaviour (demand, consumption), 

why infrastructure matters for mobility/accessibility

• roads and infrastructure allows for efficient mobility

  • bridges unlock and connect new areas

  • metro stations provide faster travel

• this then allows for improved accessibility to economical and social services/amenities

• with good planning and infrastructure it can attract future development - people/companies move around good infrastructure

transportation landuse feedback cycle

1. land use

2. where are the activities

3. whats the transportation

4. is it accessible

• if a transportation is build in form or translation

• it increases the accessibility of a place

• the land use around it starts to change as it attracts people

• there is inevitably growth in activities

• …this then needs more accessibility and transportation, some of these happen slower and some faster

mobility

• the ability to move easily and freely from point A to point B

• good mobility: lots of paths, bike paths

• bad mobility: lots of traffic and paths

measuring mobility

• distance per transport

• trips per mode

  • both can show prioritized/ preferred mode, can show demand, can show which mode might need reinvestment or revitalisation, shows improvement possibility

Micro drivers of change in mobility

• individual choices

Economical: rational choice making

• price, time, effort

Behavioral:

• personal beliefs (being green), social norms (biking in NL), emotion ($$ car status)

Geographical:

• destination and its values (education through university), principle of return

Macro drivers of change in mobility

• embedded in society

aging population: they might not travel as much, need something more accessible

personal preferences: working from home

Technology: online platform and schooters

Policies: green deal, UN goals

Planning for mobility VS accessibility

mobility:

• this improves the way we get from point A to point B

• building a new bus line so that it is easier to get to places

Accessibility

• this increases the chances of accessing a social or economical service

• moving amenities back/closer to neighborhoods

Transport based development (TOD)

• planning vision for planning urban development and cities around transport hubs

• this increases density

• increases diversity of land use

• increases accessibility and mobility

15 minute city concept

• planning vision based on everything - amenities being 15 minutes from each other

• also increases density and mixed land use

• designed for people to work, thrive and live without the need for travel

• use of digitalisation (e-commerce, e-health)

Critiques of 15 min. city concept:

• some people are just more reliable on cars - account for that

• costly to reconstruct

• planners would need more power for this to be realistic

calculated and perceived accessibility

calculated: how long it takes by xyz to reach A to B - distance based on mode - measurable by time and distance

perceived: what places do people perceive as accessible, by what mode, which road is the best for this, is it safe and easy to get there

Urban logistics

• moving and transporting of goods and services, from, to , within, through, out of urban areas

• vital for cities but a invisible layer of urban culture

impacts of urban logistics

air pollution, unsafe working conditions, inequalities, traffic, platform employment, battle over public space

socio-spatial dimensions of urban logistics: Spatial transitions are putting pressure on logistics

• housing development + densification + greening

  • creates higher demand because of more people but less accessibility for deliveries

socio-spatial dimensions of urban logistics: pressure of logistic facilities on space

urban space changes because of logistics

• logistics sprawl - storages spread and increase in size

• demand forces logistics to take over city center because people expect fast delivery 

• consumption has increased and so did the expectations

• large storage spaces also turned into small pick up boxes (2x pollution)

socio-spatial dimensions of urban logistics: platform economy can amplify social injustices

• platform workers

  • bad working conditions

  • uncertainty in fragile contracts

  • unpaid overtime

  • long and costly commutes

  • tight targets for delivery

  • no insurance

• new actors and power shift

  • logistics actors and companies hold lots of valuable data

  • they can shape flows, demand, consumption patterns  and push out local companies

sustainable urban logistics

• European green

• legislative action 

• zero-emission urban space (no cars in that area)

• zero emissions city logistics

measures fro sustainable logistics

policy frameworks, new delivery systems, reusing and multi using of storage hubs - parks, smaller/movable hubs, synergies with other functions

Calthorpe

‘Urbanism in the age of climate change‘

• what can urbanism do in terms of climate change:

  • renewable energy, conservation and restoration of habitat that absorbs carbon, resource stewardship

  • SO better planning of sustainable cities → need for more compact cities with better land use and transportation

Causes and consequences of climate change:

• consequences

  • heatwaves increase mortality for animals and humans

  • storms and sea levels need costly prevention

  • glaciers melt and increase water scarcity

  • droughts and rains increase food scarcity

  • ecosystems shift

  • relocation of people, wars, conflicts

• Causes

  • urbanisation lead to sprawl and higher use of cars

• Solutions:

  • UN goals

  • green deals

  • policies

  • investments into bike paths and increasing albedo

  • reduction of GHG

with holistic approach and varied specialist climate change can give opportunity to more:

• sustainable, livable, safe, walkable, compact, pedestrian friendly environments and built spaces

big cities are more green per capita than small cities

• more compact, less land, less energy and carbon, more walkable

Sustainability history

after WW2 - started to realize that climate change effects are not just regional but worldwide

the realisation of limits to our growt

Sustainable development

a way to upkeep:

• innovation growth

• decrease of inequalities

• improve welfare (food, health, education)

without exceeding our limits

• a way of development that meets the current needs and demand without refusing the future generations to meet theirs

environmental planning 

= way to achieve sustainable development

• improving current and FUTURE environmental conditions by using land more environmentally and sustainably 

• create compact cities, improve health and hygiene, separate functions, reduce and prevent pollution

Problems and solutions for sustainability and climate change

problems:

• air, noise, soil pollution

  • disease, less sleep - disease, no crops

• safety risks

  • death due to economic activity failure, exposure

Solutions:

1. compact cities

   • less car dependency

   • more walking

   • less land use

   • better heat and energy delivery

   • BUT it puts more people into an already polluted space

2. environmental policies

   • acts: noise, safety, nuclear, water/air/soil pollution

   • protects people from harmful human activity

3. environmental zoning

   • pollution takes up space

   • providing a safe buffer from certain risky dangerous activities or noise pollution

   • moving people away by a sage distance

4. reduction and prevention of pollution

   • sewages

   • waste management

   • sustainable mobility and transit modes

5. environmental standards

• quantitative: maximum noise frequency, air pollution, emitted GHG

• qualitative: water shouldn’t smell, fresh enough for salmon to survive

Energy transition

Fosil fuels

• coal, oil, gas

• below ground, invisible, shipped and transported everywhere

Renewables:

• hydro, solar, wind, tidal, bio mass, nuclear, geothermal

• visible underground

• take up space

Energu shapes physical space and it must be implemented into space as well as failry distributed among community = spatial planning issue

climate adaptation

• more space for rivers - carry materials during rains, less floods, more collection of water

• more coastal defenses

• green roofs

• increase albedo

• more water storage

• less dark asphalt roads

• living flexibly on water

Weniger

‘European space and spatial policy‘

In order to make effective policies and plans for the EU - planners and policy makes must understand that each place has different:

• economy, history, physical geography, culture, politics that have shaped the place

Factors that shape EU states

history/demographics/politics:

• WW2

  • trade disruption

  • economic fall

• Iron curtain

• EU

  • migration within this space from poorer to richer areas (after WW2 some states more developed than others)

• differences between communistic and democratic states

  • communistic: slower development

  • Eastern Europe + communistic states: lower GDP

• Commie countries: lower on the S curve than democratic with less participatory planning 

• regime = different political cultures

Differences in climates:

• some countries have more fertile land with comfortable climates - agricultural surplus

• those with Alps - less arable land

Angel

‘Making room for a planet of cities‘

• explores inevitable expansion of cities under globalism

• urges the need to plan for them systematically everywhere on the planet

  • do planning before areas develop!!

• extensive reaserch with big data on cities

why urban densities decline:

1. from mono centric city to suburbs and CBD - regional form

2. from regional form to housing and CBD decentralised

AIM:

• compactness = sustainable densities!

• focus on high crop yields

• government support where there is market failure - plan for this

• urbanisation and environmental sustainability = planned together

Batty

‘The smart city‘

• explores how the collection of data obtained through sensor in the city (phones, smart tech, energy, transport) shapes and controls functions of cities = calls it the scientific revolution

• using, collecting and generating large amounts of data to create algorithms to predict and prevent certain outcomes 

Types of data:

• longitudinal: collected at different times

• cross sectional: snapshot 

  • can be translated into patterns, algorithms, trends

these findings should be used to build better cities

Vale

‘Resilient cities‘

• clears up the cliche and confusion about resilience

Resilience for:

1. Efficient/full/fast recovery + urban planning to minimise damage 

2. theory and better understanding of cities

3. Analytic tool to create and evaluate policies 

How to resilience:

• Need for socio-environmental approach to resilience

• effective response to disasters - bouncing back 

  • flexible administrative structures that adapt quickly

  • good relationship with global government + local government + citizens

Types of policies/planning:

• reactive/restorative: popular, tangible, quick fix, just restoring old structures

• proactive/preventative: long-term improvement, ensures disasters have minimal effect, time and money costly

De Boeck

‘Spectral cities - building the city through an architecture of worlds ‘

Kishana example (In DRC):

• a city separated by history of collonisation

• developed as two cities during colonialism

  • La ville - modern, European style city (sky scrapers)

  • La Cite - communal, rural, peripheral city with indigenous tribes

• now:

  • high rise buildings - western idealism, progressive, modernism

  • unplanned collection of settlements - traditional African builds surrounding the CBD

an ordinary city (robinson) of post-collonioalism observed world wide

• Both areas are different in structure but connected through the collective ideals, beliefs, values and dreams of citizens - share a longing for abetter city that is not seperated or shaped by old external forces