DRIE Central Luncheon, June 2011
Presenter: Michael Dudley, Research Associate, Institute of Urban Studies, University of Winnipeg
How many recent natural disasters that have befallen
metropolitan areas in the past several years (forest fires, floods and earthquakes) aren't so much "natural" but are instead the result of (or
exacerbated by) poor planning decisions in the past, such as building on flood plains and other vulnerable locations, but that our "psychology of
previous investment" prevents us from altering our building patterns? As well, our rigid, centralized "big pipes" approach to city building,
infrastructure and commodities makes our cities vulnerable to shocks and
system breakdowns, such as those associated with energy prices and availability. The presentation will argue for the incorporation of resilience principles in urban planning, which in many ways will mean a return to historical practices and forms.
2. The Evolving Nature of Disaster
Planning and Crisis: a Problematic
Relationship
A New Narrative: From Sustainability to
Resilience
A “New Urban Operating System”
Planning for Resilience
6. Japan Prepared for Disaster – but not to
Respond?
“Japan’s Full — and Perplexing — Recovery Needs” by Edward J.
Blakeley
Reputation for disaster preparedness
Unable to respond effectively
Strongly hierarchical, insular and
conformist society
…Decentralized, spontaneous response
Lack of flexibility and adaptability
7. Creativity+Timothy Hamilton [flickr]
Nature of disaster risk
must be continually be
redefined with changes to
urbanization and socio-
economic conditions
(Mitchell 1999)
Bekbek 75, flickr
8. The Evolving Nature of Disaster
Increasingly urban: uncontrolled,
inappropriate and conventional
Governance: Incommensurate with
growing demands
Political Economy: Economic crisis,
decline of the State
9. Seven Attributes of Crisis
Situations (Alterman 2002)
High degree of uncertainty and dependence
on exogenous variables
High degree of change
High magnitude of risks and perceived
threats
System wide and complex anticipated
impacts
10. Seven Attributes of Crisis
Situations (Alterman 2002)
Low degree of knowledge and
understanding; existing solutions
inadequate
Challenge to the “symbolic” level [goals,
norms and values]; low degree of goal
consensus
Urgency; high cost to delay
11. Pt 2: Urban planning and crisis:
A problematic relationship
14. Rational Process Planning
Assess Alternative Plan Scenarios
Select the Preferred Alternative
Implement the Plan
Monitor, Evaluate and Revise the
Implementation
Identify New Problems and Begin the Process
again
15. Five questions of urban planning
What is the justification of planning?
What values are incorporated within planning?
What ethical dilemmas do planners face?
How can planning be effective within a mixed
economy?
Style of planning: what do planners do?
16. Who Does Planning?
City and County Planners
City Council members
Board of Supervisors
Redevelopment Agencies
Federal Department of Housing and Urban
Development
Local Non-profit Organizations
International Organizations
Community Activists
Community Business Leaders
17. Where does Planning Occur in the
Development Process?
Home & Community Development
Neighborhood Revitalization Planning
Economic Development Planning
Response to Economic, Political and
External Activities.
Land Use Decision Making
General Overall Change in Local and
World Activities.
18. Assumptions of Rational Planning
Only Facts Exist
No values (subjective belief systems)
All variables exist within an interconnected and
closed system (no unforeseeable variables)
A Rational-Deductive sequence of events
If ‘A’ happens, then ‘B’ will follow
No need for political strategies
Not suited for crisis or unforeseen events
19. What is the Justification of
Planning?
It is possible to rationally plan for the
future by analyzing and integrating as
many variables as possible
Planning is primarily technical,
professional and apolitical
There is a unitary public interest; The goals
of planning are universally shared
20. What is the Justification of
Planning?
To Serve the “Public Interest” (or “Public
Good”) -- this is the Legal justification for
Planning
Social Equity = Fair access and distribution
of public goods -- this is the Principal moral
justification guiding public/governmental
actions
21. Ethical Dilemmas in Planning
Planning is inherently distributional
Planning is inherently political
Planning as a profession cannot adopt a cohesive
political philosophy, but planners as individuals
do
22. Dominant Paradigm
Comprehensive / Rational model of problem solving
Sense of scientific “detachment” and unaffected
objectivity
Non-political
Efficiency: e.g., circulation of people and
commodities
Normative middle-class aspirations
23. Rational Process Planning
Basic Steps:
Identify a Problem
Identify a Goal
Collect Background Data
Identify a Means of Assessing Alternative Plan
Scenarios
Identify Alternative Plan Scenarios
25. “Wicked Problems”
(Rittel & Webber 1973)
Goals and objectives, as well as means to achieve
them, are often uncertain
“wicked problems”
concerned primarily with public issues
broadly defined groups/clients
diverse interests
26. “Wicked Problems”
(Rittel & Webber 1973)
There is no definitive problem formulation
Every problem is unique
Every problem a symptom of another
problem
Problems can be explained in numerous
ways; each explanation leads to different
approaches
27. “Wicked Problems”
(Rittel & Webber 1973)
No stopping rule
Solutions not right or wrong, but better or
worse
No ultimate test of solutions
Every attempt counts
Planner has no right to be wrong
31. Pt. 3: A new narrative: From
“Sustainability” to “Resilience”
32. Resilience
(Summarized in Dudley 2010)
self-organization
flexibility and adaptation through
redundancy
distribution of resources
the development of learning capacity
loosening of interconnections
33. Resilience vs. Sustainability
Andrew McMurray, “The Rhetoric of Resilience”
Alternatives 36: 2 1010, p. 22.
“Resilience implies action: to be resilient. Resilience
implies an inner toughness: the strength, as its
etymology tells us, to jump back to a previous
state. Sustainability, by contrast, suggests a
defensive posture, a desire to stay the same, to
resist change without the…ability to push back
against change and win out. Resilience also
connotes a measure of risk, while sustainability
suggests that systems are set: they simply need to
be cared for and so carried forward...”
34. Coast guard News [flickr]
Adrian DP [flickr]
ChrisGoldNY [flickr]
41. “A Paradise Built in Hell”
Solnit, 2009
Spirit of cooperation under crisis and
disaster situations
“Disaster utopias”
Over-reaction by panicked authorities
Contrast: “Slow-motion disaster” of
everyday life
45. Building with Natural Processes
Hough, “Cities and Natural Process” 2004
Process-oriented: dynamism, change over
time, rather than frozen
Economy of means
Connectedness – regional – watershed,
bioregion
Awareness of natural processes
Diversity
Development as environmental
enhancement
Make life-sustaining processes visible
55. Planning for Resilience
Anticipate discontinuity
Self-organization
Increased learning capacity
Adaptive strategies: Improvization and invention
Loosening of interconnections
Contingency: Procedures must always be open to
change
Renewed narrative of community, cooperation
and common purpose
Anticipate generosity and mutuality
58. Sources
Allmendinger, Philip (2002). Planning theory. New York : Palgrave, 2002.
Allmendinger, Philip (2001). Planning in postmodern times. New York : Routledge,.
Alterman, R. (2002). Planning in the Face of Crisis: Land and Housing Policies in Israel. London:
Routledge.
Boyer, M. Christine. (1986, c1983). Dreaming the rational city : the myth of American city
planning. Cambridge, Mass. : MIT Press,
Campbell, Scott & Fainstein, Susan (Eds). (2003). Readings in planning theory 2nd ed. Malden,
MA : Blackwell Pub.
Dudley, M. (2010). “Resilience.” In N. Cohen, (Ed). Green Society: Green Politics. Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE.
Hayden, D. & Warr, J. (2004). A Field Guide to Sprawl. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.
Jepson, Edward J., Jr. (2001). Sustainability and Planning: Diverse Concepts and Close Associations. Journal of
Planning Literature 15 (4). pp. 499-510.
Mandelbaum, Seymour J. Mazza, Luigi & Burchell, Robert W. (Eds) (1996). Explorations in
planning. New Brunswick, N.J. : Center for Urban Policy Research, Rutgers, the State
University of New Jersey.
McDonald, Geoffrey. (1996). Planning as sustainable development. Journal of Planning Education
& Research 15. Pp. 225-236.
Mitchell, J.K. (1999). Crucibles of Hazard: Mega-Cities and Disaster in Transition. Tokyo: UNU
Press.
Ritel, H. & M. Webber. (1973) “Dilemmas in a General Theory of Planning.” Policy Sciences 4, p.
155-169.
Sandercock, Leonie. (1998). Towards cosmopolis : planning for multicultural cities. Toronto : J.
Wiley.
Stein Jay M. (Ed) (2004). Classic readings in urban planning, 2nd ed.Chicago, Ill. : American
Planning Association.
