Progress in Planning最新文献

Academic and political debates about the extent to which planning influences the volume, type, location and affordability of new housing have not gained as much prominence in Portugal as in England, where planning obligations are aimed at providing new affordable housing, as well as a mix of housing tenures. Yet, in England, the use of Section 106 in planning agreements to secure affordable housing as a proportion of new developments has received mixed reactions: at times considered a successful public value-capture tool while, at others, as a neoliberal policy that is not generating the expected results.

The purpose of this research, which is based on literature reviews and semi-structured interviews with government advisors, local officials, and academics, is to investigate why and how planning for affordable housing has been used in England and not in Portugal. The data shows that divergence in the adoption of planning obligations for affordable housing is the result of different but interdependent causes: path dependency (a concept which suggests that past events influence present and future ones), ideology (values, beliefs and a general political orientation regarding how society ought to be and how to improve it), and planning cultures (collective social practices with their specific roots, legal traditions, ethos, etc.).

The remarkable growth of new towns in China in the past two decades has amazed the world. How shall we make sense of these mushrooming megaprojects, which profoundly reshape the social and economic landscape not only within China but also globally? Successive reports of epic failures – with many projects evolving into ghost towns – further obscure the picture. Existing literature has been useful in highlighting the political-economic logic behind China’s new town frenzy, attributing the latter to China’s marketization, decentralization, and globalization. These accounts, however, focus mostly on the recent past. Lacking a truly longitudinal approach, they tend to lose sight of the underlying links between the socialist past and the postsocialist present. This paper offers a relatively holistic historical review of China’s three new town movements since 1949. While problematizing these historical processes, the paper draws insights from the theory of new state spaces, viewing new town development as a distinctive spatial strategy and project of the state to facilitate accumulation, social regulation, and state-building during specific historical periods. Based on such theoretical constructs, the paper reveals the historical trajectory and patterns of China’s new town movements in the past seven decades.

There has been growing interest in the expansion of global investment in urban areas, and the financialisation of urban development, both of which bring new business logics into the production of the built environment and shape urban outcomes. At the same time, mega urban projects have continued and spread as a significant format of urban expansion and renewal, often strongly linked to transnational investors and developers. Nonetheless, the distinctive regulatory and political contexts within which transnational actors must bring such projects to fruition matter greatly to outcomes, with territorialised governance arrangements both shaping and being shaped by transnational dynamics. However, there has been little systematic comparative consideration of these diverse regulatory contexts in their own right, rather than as contributors to wider circulating processes such as neoliberalisation. As a result, the implications of different regulatory regimes for urban outcomes have not been effectively assessed. In this paper we therefore broaden the discussion from globalised processes of “financialisation” to consider three large-scale urban development projects from the perspective of their distinctive “business models”, including their place in achieving wider strategic objectives at national and metropolitan scales, their agile and often bespoke institutional configurations, and their different forms of financing, taxation and land value capture. Our cases are Lingang, Shanghai (one of nine planned satellite cities), the Corridors of Freedom project in Johannesburg (a linear transport oriented development seeking to integrate the racially divided city), and Old Oak and Park Royal in north-west London (under a mayoral development corporation, associated with significant new metropolitan and national transport investments). We observe that the business models adopted, notably in relation to financial calculations and income streams associated with the developments, are a result of strongly path dependent formats of governance and income generation in each case. However we want to move beyond seeing these as residual, as contingent and contextual to wider accounts of urban development focussed on globalised financial flows and calculations. Using a comparative approach we initiate a systematic analytical conversation about the implications of different business models for the form and socio-economic potential of mega-urban development projects.

Together, globalisation and urbanisation are accelerating the densification of cities while disruptive technologies such as micro-mobility and ride-hailing are transforming urban mobility. Amidst this change, urban planning officials and practitioners typically remain constrained to the same urban footprint, left to grapple with earlier car-oriented development, and yet must accommodate a growing population and variety of travel modes operating within the same space. Further, they must operate alongside government officials whose re-election could depend upon appeasing suburban residents that are unable or unwilling to relocate along active transport corridors, near public transit nodes, or forgo the flexibility and comfort of private automobiles. As a result, private automobiles can become necessary for traversing urban forms already enlarged by parking, driveways, roads, highways, and flyovers. Likewise, alternatives such as public and active transport can become impractical and dangerous within urban forms that are fragmented by congestion or fast traffic. Given that urban mobility research typically focuses on keeping our pre-existing modal choices moving rather than the side-effects, daily commutes have remained unchanged for decades, and planners are better equipped to continually accommodate rather than influence our modal choices. This volume of Progress in Planning aims to strengthen the evidence base for influencing modal choice by developing a comparative framework of urban mobility, and by examining how parking policy has influenced modal choice within the three largest Australian cities: Brisbane, Sydney, and Melbourne. In addition, it provides reproducible methods for estimating parking supply using land use audits, parking demand using a population census, and geo-statistical modelling for determining whether and where parking policy can explain more sustainable modal choices. As such, this volume sets a research agenda for metropolitan-scale examination and coordination of transport and land use planning for sustainable rather than temporary urban mobility.

Urban heritage is the category of heritage that most directly concerns the environment of each and every person. Conservation or the integration of the built historic environment in city planning is typically viewed as a desirable undertaking, and policies to this effect are established as an integral element of planning in many countries. Our paper investigates the complexities at play between conservation planning structures, their applications and how these vary between contexts. It asks: how does conservation compare between planning systems of the North and South and what does this suggest about heritage value? Based on a survey of conservation planning systems in 5 countries, focusing on 5 city case-studies, this paper studies conservation’s position within planning in current urban policy in different contexts. Our paper analyses how different planning systems have adopted and integrated urban heritage definitions and accordingly, how zoning techniques, governance levels and planning constraints have resulted in quite varied conservation planning outcomes not only between the North and South but between European examples alone. In exploring contexts where the desirability of conserving and enhancing the historic environment is overlooked, overturned or simply ignored despite the existence of conservation policies, this paper also explores the limitations regulation has in pinning down heritage values.

The article discusses futures in housing development by applying the approaches from ‘future studies’ to design two explorative scenarios reflecting alternative strategies for achieving sustainable and just housing development. The main aim is to develop scenarios that can achieve a specific normative goal: a future housing development that is both environmentally sustainable and socially just. Two scenarios are built – ecological modernisation and degrowth – that reflect different degrees of societal change, ranging from conventional to radical. The scenarios are applied to the two selected cases of the Milan and Oslo regions, drawing on the statistics of the contextual housing system and the document analysis on planning and housing. We further discuss how the specific scenarios can take place and which challenges will be encountered.

Following decades of urban decline in many European cities, there is now an abundant literature identifying a process of reurbanisation, which has now also reached many secondary cities, including those in post-industrialised regions. Reurbanisation is an umbrella concept involving several related but distinct processes, though has its roots in spatial cycle models that consider reurbanisation to be a specific stage in the development of urban regions. Most of the emerging reurbanisation debate, however, is primarily concerned with processes in and impacts on the urban core while suburbia (the ring) is notably absent from much of this discussion. This is all the more surprising since part and parcel of many definitions of reurbanisation is the relationship between the core and the ring. This paper seeks to fill this gap, looking at four highly developed countries in Northwest Europe from a comparative perspective: England, France, Germany and the Netherlands. Far from being uniform, reurbanisation differs substantially between the countries in terms of temporal and spatial patterns due to differences in policy responses in both the urban core and suburbia.

The paper analyses the plurality of urban informal practices that characterize contemporary Italy in the sphere of housing, focusing on its complex connections with a variety of public institutions (e.g. laws, regulations, policies and practices). The paper discusses five cases of urban informality in Italy: the squatting of public housing in Milan; Roma camps in Rome; the borgate romane (large unauthorised neighbourhoods in the capital, which were built in the 1960s and 1970s and which have subsequently undergone a long and complex process of regularization); unauthorised construction, by the middle class, of second homes in coastal areas of Southern Italy; illegal subdivision of agricultural land as a standard mechanism for urban expansion in Casal di Principe, Naples.

From these cases emerges a complex picture of hybrid institutions that shape and govern housing informalities. These hybrid institutions are composed of multifaceted networks of actors, policies, practices and rules that exist in tension with each other and contribute to favouring and shaping the production of informal space in different ways (e.g. through their action, inaction and structural features). Against the backdrop of this varied institutional framework, a selective tolerance driven mainly by politically-mediated interests emerges as the distinctive feature of the public approach to housing informality in Italy.

The paper aims to develop an innovative research approach to informal housing in Italy by overcoming traditional boundaries between research ‘objects’ and by looking at political uses and forms of institutionalisation that are deployed across housing informalities. By doing so, it also contributes to the literature which analyses informality through the lenses of state theory. Simultaneously, it represents a call for international research to investigate the similarities in the patterns of housing informality – and their multifaceted politics – in Mediterranean welfare states.

The aim of the article is to analyse and reflect upon the process and outcome of a potential clash between urban biodiversity and road transport interests in the Swedish city of Örebro, as a case of planning in the face of conflict. Combining an application of multilevel governance theory with negotiation planning and narrative method, it examines the siting of a huge warehouse and “logistics centre” at the edge of a Natura 2000 site on the outskirts of the city. Despite the city’s ambitious environmental goals and sustainability profile, the local authority decided to offer the company a site adjacent to a wetland area intended for preserving and developing biodiversity. After an intervention by the central state County Administrative Board [länsstyrelsen], the local authority had to implement certain security measures, and also reserve an additional, large natural land area to compensate for the threats to the Natura 2000 site. Before the final decision was made, a series of negotiations occurred between the involved actors, mainly the local authority, the multinational Sonepar Group/Elektroskandia and the County Administrative Board, and the case is a fruitful target for a multifaceted analysis illuminating the tension between the goals of preserving urban biodiversity and promoting road transport and urban growth. It also offers an inside view of the negotiation and planning process. The key issue is how the siting of a potentially hazardous, transport intensive national warehouse in a city renowned for its high environmental-protection profile was possible. Considering Sweden’s high-profile regarding sustainability, the selected case also offers food for reflection on the potentials and barriers of implementing ecological modernization more generally. The lessons learned from an examination of the local authority’s attempt to harmonize such diverse policy priorities as urban biodiversity and intensive road transport for economic growth, on a site adjacent to a Natura 2000 wetlands area, may help enable urban planners and scholars to find creative policy solutions, avoid causing damage to biodiversity, and increase ecosystem values in terms of residents’ and other visitors’ experience and understanding of nature. However, at the end of the article we address the question of whether our empirical conclusion is not “too good to be true”, and raise concerns regarding the intricate relationship between sustainability and resilience; the systemic power exerted by the global Sonepar Group/Elektroskandia; and the potentials and limits of public negotiation planning.

Places of concentrated poverty are typically described in terms of their deficit, not simply in financial terms, but in their social and cultural resources as well. This characterization extends to informal settlements that exist along the U.S.-Mexico border known as colonias, rural and peri-urban communities lacking basic infrastructure like electricity, running water, and paved roads. Drawing on one case study of a colonia in the state of Arizona, we renew attention to these communities showing how the lack of infrastructure and public services complicate everyday tasks for residents, compromising their wellbeing and life prospects. We also call attention to the allure of colonias in a context of rising inequality, highlighting their promise as viable communities where families can raise families and prosper or retire with dignity. By showing how kin and fictive kin ties propel the settlement process and provide the organizational and cultural structure to these communities, we challenge common depictions of colonias lacking a sense of community and social capital. We find social capital in colonias is best represented through “bonding ties” that provide essential forms of social support, the kind of help that allows the poor to “get by” or cope. We distinguish this from social capital that is garnered via “bridging ties,” to individuals with resources or in positions of influence that can create opportunities for social mobility. The tenacity of colonia residents and their practices of mutual support makes these communities resilient, but the absence of “social leverage ties,” those able and willing to broker complex bureaucratic and political processes, sustains ill conditions in colonias. Colonia residents have set root in these communities worthy of public policy concern and ought to be folded into the larger conversation of poverty concentration, segregation and housing needs in the United States. We call on urban planners, other street-level bureaucrats, and policymakers to work with these communities to bridge and broker grass root efforts.