Dear Participants, 

I would like to use the opportunity to also direct your attension towards the question of adequate platforms, programmes, initiatives to realise sustainable spatial development. 

Please share with us your view points and experiences..

Issue Paper 8 re-states that spatial planning should be a participative, flexible and continuous process rather than the implementation of a rigid blue print. Does that mean the “master planning approach” is obsolete?

yES,I DO AGREE.

But we have infront of us the technologies.We see 24 series,of CTU,where setellities are used,while delhi is over looked by two setellites,we see in USA

not less than 7 setellities over looking dense or spread cities.We are using UAV for all purposes.

Using CISCO or alternate technologies,we sit in board rooms,and interact simultaneously with 12 people.

Technolog is available.The planners,the managers are unwilling to use it.In a department people have destroyed bio-metric system

beacuse they are habituated to come late.

That is general observation,but we can fastly get feed back on each of the required parameters of a city.

We can know water supply,Drains clogging,cleaning,houses seggregatin,all very cheaply,we allow others to learn and teach us.

Master Planning Approach has been wrongly interpreted by vested interests in deveolped as well as developing countries as RIGID BLUE PRINT and a DEVELOPMENT CONTROL RULE, not DEVELOPMENT GUIDENCE / GUIDELINES for development management.

Master Planning Approach is still relavent as its going to provide a resilient city rigidity of stone and flexibility of a tree at the same time..

A resiliant City master plan follows a systemic approach, its a transperant system, has evolved over time and has the ability to evolve in the future..

A resiliant city has Inventory of neighborhood assets, liability, population and their interactive connections, that is benchmarked and the indicators are monitored

The DEVELOPMENT CONTROL RULES (Read DEVELOPMENT GUIDENCE / GUIDELINES for resiliant city)  promotes (1) Compact Densification; (2) Scaling; (3) Fine Grain Diversity…

The Resiliant City Master Plan allows Functional Flexibility – It means cities, urban forms can easily adapt (with limited investment needs) to a redistribution of urban functions. A resilient urban form must have flexibility to get a third dimension without disturbing the availability and hierarchy of facilities, amenities and quality of life.   For exmple Community re-densification initiatives not limited to policy like Transferable Development Rights (TDR), issued in addition to normal Floor Area Ratio, increases the Community Global FAR, orotects cultural or historical heritage, increasing the number of in-habitants, reducing per capita cost of utility distribution and increased access to utility.

The Expected Outcome of a Resiliant City Master Plan  are

1. Highly Connected Network – Implies full spectrum of streets of various lengths, width and spans adapted to different speeds and to different flows. When some connections are cut, others are created to compensate for the cuts and maintain the urban system in operation. Social networks as well as street networks show characteristics such as a high level of clustering. These are complex evolved street patterns with node and its intersection with another street as a link.

2. Synergy High density and mixed use is key strategic assets of urban areas that help to use energy more efficiently through synergy approaches resting upon energy systems integration and compact energy-efficient housing.  Another type of synergy is though neighborhood development initiatives like (i) solid waste to energy projects; (ii) effluent treatment plant treated water used for flushing the surface water drainage system and street cleaning during dry months; (iii) using the treated effluent, rich in nutrients for hydroponics food, grown in rooftop green houses.  The power factor of a micro-grid catering to the need of a dense and diversified development tends to be at unity, leading to its optimal use and capacity enhancement. Cascading and recycling energy flows according to their quality (electricity, mechanical, thermal) improves the stability and the resilience to unexpected events of flood, drought, storm, peak load, etc.

3.  Greening, Water Recycling  & Urban Rural Integration – Water recycling and grey water use, improving runoff management and developing new/alternative water sources; storage facilities and autonomously powered water management and treatment infrastructure.  City’s green infrastructure reduces GHG emissions, as they are carbon sink. Green’s also enhance pedestrian and cycling environment, regulating energy consumption, enabling environmentally sustainable nutrient recycling and local food production. Greens of different hierarchy spatially distributed throughout the urban environs, improves resilience through flood mitigation, erosion control, and maintaining water availability.

If we are interested in a RESILIENT CITY & FUTURE PROOF CITY, Master Planning Approach is still relavent..

• SMART URBAN RETROFIT SLIDE SHARE QR CODE.png
  

I completely agree with ANIRBAN CHOUDHURY . 

I agree that Master planning approach has been wrongly interpreted and wrongly implemented by many agencies. The nature of a Master plan, unlike that of an executive project, intrinsically is a a set of broad and organized guidelines, and it calls for constant adaptation and resiliency. It is able to guide participatory discussions, input and contributions from people and civil society, it’s a powerful tool regional governments can use to empower local government in the conduction of development with local and constatnly updated input.

Vera,

Obrigado pelo seu comentário. Citamos você em nossa matéria, 6 melhores idéias dos diálogos urbanos, aqui: https://citiscope.org//habitatIII/news/2015/08/6-great-ideas-habitat-iii-urban-dialogues

Att,

Gregory Scruggs

Citiscope correspondent, Habitat III

“BREAKING Explore the #SDGs#100Indicators and a Monitoring Framework” by CCCRdg on LinkedInhttps://www.linkedin.com/pulse/breaking-explore-sdgs-100indicators-monitoring-carl-emerson-dam‬‪#‎NewUrbanAgenda‬‬‪#‎UrbanSDG‬

I also like to add a comment,in terms of each country economy,that developing or looking after their own mega or crowded cities is not the only key point,in urbanisation.

It is creating new cities,where life can thrive much better,and new places at least 50 to 100 KM away from these crowded places.

The generations definitely wants their monies used with proper care,for uniform development of any given country.

This is an important point. Mega cities will continue to grow but it will be the medium and smaller cities that will grow even more rapidly. Attention needs to be placed on them more than the usual mega-cities. With training and good advice these new growth poles can become attractions for their better quality of life than the already polluted metas. national and state entities need a stronger policy for decentralizing investment into medium sized cites. The issue of connectivity and outreach infrastructure is critical. Time has come for innovation in the urban investment sector!

In deed small urban centres with fewer than half a million inhabitants are expected to account for 45 per cent of the expected increase in the world urban population according to UN DESA. Small and intermediate towns will also play a role in creating urban rural linkages. The big question is how to boost public and private investments in these towns, that are often facing challenges in poor planning and infrastructre

Planning an integrated Grid managemnt system for electricity,water,transport from day one has to be done.Add professionals,by election[reservation] or by nomination part of development board.

Set the maximum parameters for area,for popuation count,demarcating the open spaces.May be Phoneix[USA,AZ],and Rastanura,Damam,etc  could be examples.

Dear colleagues,

I am chair of the academic committee for the Future of Places forum, a partnership of UN-Habitat, Project for Public Spaces and Ax:son Johnson Foundation of Stockholm. I would like to share several key conclusions and key messages that emerged from our forum. (There will be a separate “Key Messages” document which will be longer, so this will be a synthesis from a necessarily personal perspective.)

 First, may I concur with my colleagues who have expressed concern about the dominance of any number of specialized agendas, including (for example) the focus on climate adaptation. I say this as someone who works in the field of climate change, but also one who is aware of the old saying, “to a carpenter with a hammer, every problem looks like a nail.” Climate change adaptation and mitigation, as grave as they are, must be part of a more comprehensive “systems” view of cities. The same is true of other agendas related to social equity, economic issues or ecological impacts.

 The research is making clear, however, that all these issues are indeed interconnected, and can be addressed as part of a more comprehensive understanding of cities as dynamical systems. This is a hopeful way forward, past the “silos” that leave us fragmented and ineffective. I hope it is a core understanding behind Habitat III.

 However, to say that cities are dynamical systems is not to say that they are random or chaotic systems that behave, as it were, magically. They have a clear spatial structure, generated by a clear set of rules and processes. This structure is built around the common spaces where people move, gather and interact, that is, public space systems (streets, squares, parks et al., and their adjoining private spaces). It follows that we need to understand and support this structure of public spaces, or if you like, human places. That has been the main focus of our forum.

 Here are a few key agenda points that have emerged from the Future of Places forum.

 1. The research is demonstrating the fundamental importance of public space systems within cities, as the essential “connective matrix” on which healthy, prosperous cities must grow.

 2. These public space systems must be well-connected, open and functional. This implies specific geometries and scales, built primarily upon the scale of human beings, their limitations, and their needs for contact, exchange, recreation, and human development opportunity.

 3. To the extent these systems are degraded, limited, exclusive and/or privatized, the city will under-perform, economically, environmentally and socially. Higher economic performance can then only be achieved with a higher injection of natural resources, typically at an unsustainable level.

 4. Much of the current rapid urbanization is indeed unsustainable, and potentially catastrophic for humanity in its rate of depletion of resources, destruction of ecosystems, and other impacts.

 5. It is not a coincidence that much of the current rapid urbanization includes large areas of severely degraded, limited, fragmented, privatized and/or deficient public space systems.

6. Yet it is also the case that, if we can understand and harness the dynamics of cities and their public space systems, urbanization can be a powerful agent for equitable human development with lowered environmental impacts, even the capacity for regeneration.

 7. However, to achieve these goals, major reforms will be required in the global “operating system for growth” – in the laws, rules, standards, models, incentives and disincentives that shape the generation of urban structures. Crucially, urban development must support a process of co-creation at many scales, involving and coordinating the multi-layered actions of residents, small and large business owners, civil society and governments.

 8. This work constitutes the two-part urgent agenda ahead – the understanding of the nature of cities and their public space systems, and the development and application tools and resources needed to make the changes necessary to achieve their potential.

Sincerely,

Michael Mehaffy

Chair, Academic Committee

Future of Places forum

Dear Colleagues ,

To facilitate access , I am attaching the two main files mentioned in my previous suggestion :

1- What development do we want?

2- Lecture Values, Systemic Planning, and Management and Public Ministry,

I hope that the documents, which are public domain, can contribute in some way.

Rodrigo Schoeller de Moraes,

Public Prosecutor,

Manager Strategic Projects of the Public Prosecutors Office/Public Ministry. 

E-mail: rsmoraes@mp.rs.gov.br

rodrigoschoeller.blogspot.com.br

Phones:         

                + 55 51 9628-4254      

                + 55 51 3295-1050    

• Lecture Values, Systemic Planning and Management and Public Ministry – Rodrigo Schoeller.ppt
  
• Article Rodrigo Schoeller- What development do we want-3.doc
  

Two points here:

1.

Habitat III in any case should confirm the elements of rights driven approach achieved in Habitat II, –  and not become a business fair for the technocratic adaptation of the cities to climate change.

We have the serious concern that the “new urban agenda”  may put a strong focus on the restructuring of cities in view of climate changes, but might not seek sufficiently for solutions which combine that focus with the big social and economic questions like poverty and inequality, homelessness and insecurity of tenure, discrimination and social exclusion, expropriation and expulsion.

We fear that climate adaption could become a pretext for anti-social legislations, urban transformations and profitable business strategies. Elements of the New Urban Agenda arguing for the need of restructuring the cities for climate adaptation might be misused by governments to justify evictions.

2.

Habitat III should include a clear statement in favour of the urgent need to democratically control the use of urban land and to provide sufficient land for social housing purposes in city centres, close to job opportunities and to social, cultural and recreational facilities. Commuity land trusts are one good solution.

See more in the Greman NOG statement at

https://www.forumue.de/statement-of-the-german-forum-on-environment-devel…

Dear Colleagues,

Here the Huairou Commission’s consolidated responses on Spatial Development.

• Spatial Development Responses.xlsx
  

This response is submitted by the NCD Alliance, a global network of 2,000 civil society organisations in 170 countries working towards a world free of preventable suffering and death from non-communicable diseases (NCDs):

The NCD Alliance is grateful for the opportunity to participate in these urban dialogues. Ensuring access to green open spaces and encouraging active transport on foot and by bicycle (through provision of safe walking and cycle lanes) offer environmental and health benefits. Vegetation in green spaces combats CO2 levels, offers a positive environment for physical activity, and promotes both mental wellbeing and social cohesion. Facilitating active transport offers sustainable alternatives to motorised transport and simultaneously promotes health.

Detailed comments on Issue Paper 11 on public spaces are attached.

• NCD Alliance Response_Issue Paper 11 Public Space.pdf
  

How can governments and their partners ensure sustainable urbanization in the context of the urban-rural continuum?

Urbanisation is happening due to natural increase, movement of people from rural to urban areas and movement of people from urban to urban areas. The expansion of towns is gradually encoraching common spaces and agricultural land. Villages are becoming unsustainable and difficult places to live. Farmers are being marginalised on consumtion of resources for want of infrastructure justice.

The real challenge is to retain the profile of rural areas as rural and also mantain the urban characteristic of urban areas. At the same time it is also possible to develop rural areas in a way that they are able to afford urban services and urban areas get a respite by providing spaces with rural characteristics.

This practice has been named as Providing Urban Amenities in Rural Areas (PURA).  It woill not only help in arresting migration but also provide better living for urban and rural population.

Greetings to the fellow participants in the Urban Dialogues discussion on Spatial Development! Firstly, many thanks to Sebastian Lange and Seongho Kim for co-moderating this discussion, as well as to the other contributors whose submissions have been both stimulating and worthwhile. 

I am making this submission on behalf of the International Council on Monuments and Sites (ICOMOS). ICOMOS is an international, NGO that focuses on cultural heritage. For over 50 years, ICOMOS has promoted the conservation, enhancement and use of monuments, buildings, ensembles of buildings and sites. We are pleased to have this opportunity to participate in this discussion on “Which spatial development strategies and policies are most effective to create equitable, compact, connected, and socially inclusive cities in different contexts?” and to contribute to the eventual adoption of the New Urban Agenda.

Our comments today are informed by a series of ICOMOS initiatives and actions over many years in order to promote a development process that incorporates tangible and intangible cultural heritage as a vital aspect of sustainability, and gives a human face to development.

One of the most comprehensive efforts to address the role of cultural heritage in development to date is the ICOMOS Symposium entitled “Heritage, a driver of development” held in Paris in 2011. This meeting was held in anticipation of the UN Conference on Sustainable Development (the Rio+20 Conference) and attended by nearly 1,200 heritage experts from over 100 countries.  The meeting resulted in a doctrinal text in heritage known as the “Declaration of Paris on Heritage as a Driver of Development” (the “Paris Declaration”). It begins from the premises that heritage is a fragile, crucial and non-renewable resource that must be conserved for the benefit of current and future generations.  It follows that heritage – with its value for identity, and as a repository of historical, cultural and social memory, preserved through its authenticity, integrity and ‘sense of place’ – forms a crucial aspect of the development process.  The Symposium concluded that the key roles heritage has to play in the context of sustainable development relate to social cohesion, well-being, creativity, economic appeal, and promoting understanding between communities. 

In order to explore how cultural heritage informs spatial development strategies and policies that effectively create equitable, compact, connected, and socially inclusive cities, the idea of “heritage” must be understood in its broader, modern sense.  The term should not be exclusively associated with “extraordinary” sites such as Historic Monuments or World Heritage sites – even though such sites retain their exceptional iconic status – but rather to all cultural landscapes, historic cities, and sites of memory.  Moreover, contemporary practice extends the concept of heritage beyond “tangible heritage,” to the intangible dimensions of heritage as well. This means the entirety of the capital of knowledge derived from the development and experience of human practices, and from the spatial, social and cultural constructions linked to it.  In a word, “memory.” 

Thusly understood, the lesson of cultural heritage is that, under all kinds of spatial development strategies, city development should take place at a regional level while fully considering traditional and historical settlement and planning patterns in order to promote social equity, compactness and inclusiveness. For this reason, we think the issue paper on urban and spatial planning and design would benefit from greater attention to the lessons to be learned from traditional settlement patterns in urban planning.

Nowadays, as more and more people abandon small towns and the countryside, migrating to large conurbations, urban development has been alternating between authoritarian policies and anarchic planning that have already had serious, even catastrophic results, in particular:

– The disruption of spatial scale and the loss of landmarks;

– The breakdown of social relationships, loss of communal solidarity, concerns over security, extremist and violent demonstrations;

– An imbalance between the city – where most concerns now focus and where most development projects take place – and the countryside, where the issue is no longer merely rural decline, but rather the complete socioeconomic and cultural collapse of forgotten population;

– The squandering of space, which is a non-renewable resource, and in particular the loss of farmland, resulting from both extensive urban encroachment and land being left to lie fallow.

Taking account of these, it is vital to return to a more balanced form of spatial development. This will be achieved at regional development level. This is where lessons from our heritage, associated with best participatory practice, will again be valued as a framework for new spatial development: continuation of time-honored boundaries, retention of traditional plot sizes and settlement patterns. The reinvigoration of secondary urban centers (small and medium-size towns), and the revival of and development of methods of energy production (small-scale solar and hydroelectric power stations) and means of transport (by land, rail, water), will reestablish an essential balance in the urban-rural relationships, ensuring social cohesion, equity, inclusiveness and sustainable development of the population and its activities.

There is an enormous diversity of practical approaches and solution that designed to leverage traditional settlement patterns and planning methods in service of making cities more inclusive and equitable based on our previous conferences. We would like to highlight the following: 

First, traditional settlement patterns are not only a key element for the revitalization of historical core areas of cities and towns but are also of great importance to the urbanization of the world, for their capacity to inform and guide new spatial development.   In order to leverage this accumulated wisdom, the following elements should be included in over-arching spatial development strategies:  

• Promote and revive the value of historical settlement patterns, landscape forms and traditional building techniques, while protecting the integrity of the historical urban fabric in new spatial development and redevelopment.
• Expand the use and availability of fiscal tools, such as tax incentives, to attract investment both in core historic areas and the surrounding areas. These economic development strategies and financial tools will provide a framework for revitalization and development of the city.
• Walkability and compactness of urban areas are enhanced in dense historic cities. Promote design guidelines that maintain and preserve the inner historic city, especially in providing walkable neighborhoods that can serve as a model for the spatial development of outlying neighborhoods.
• Promote the integration of new development within the traditional street, public space, architectural elements and cultural heritage patterns.
• Use rules, regulations and financial incentives to discourage urban sprawl in the rural countryside and encourage the revitalization and reuse of existing infrastructure.
• Consider the historical urban-regional linkages when adapting historic and traditional settlements to other areas. 

Second, there is a vital role of historical and traditional settlement patterns and planning models in promoting social equity, cohesion and inclusion. 

• Historic towns, districts, and the historic parts of the cities are valuable for their uniqueness and sense of place. It helps to attract tourism, employment and local investment, fostering the spatial development of the city.
• Traditional settlements, with their lasting cultural identity and socio-economic traditions, raise the awareness and pride of citizens in local history and culture no matter where they originate or how they may be adapted.
• The mix of public and private spaces found in traditional settlements and plans engenders social cohesiveness and interaction by providing common spaces for diverse groups to interact.
• Historical and traditional settlement patterns are by nature functionally and socially mixed, supporting a wide range of complementary activities, and embody multiple social and cultural values. Historic cities were vibrant, convivial, inspiring and have proved to be supremely adaptable to incremental and harmonious change.
• Public spaces that may be historic parks or plazas be in historic parts of towns, or adjacent to historic monuments provide opportunities for continuity of use and significance while supporting new ones. These public spaces offer something meaningful and attractive to the citizens to get involved in the city culture and to participate in public activities among diverse members of the community.
• Culture based livelihoods have the potential for small and micro enterprises empowering local communities and contributing to poverty alleviation.
• Enables people to draw on and build on local and knowledge for their livelihoods and problem solving rather than privileging external education and knowledge alone. They offer a diversity of solutions to a wide range of problems.

Traditional settlement patterns and plans build sense of belonging and of identity of local communities, and it promotes compactness, social cohesion, inclusion and equity. The strategy of adapting traditional and historical patterns while establishing a balance in the regional level is a key element for inclusive and spatial development and poverty alleviation, for improving the livability and sustainability of urban areas, as well as for the new spatial development of surrounding areas. 

A recurring theme in these matters in the need for human scale.  This concern is sometimes confused with a rejection of density.  Traditional settlement patterns and historic cities, however, often yield among the densest settlement patterns.  The notion of human scale relates more to the existence of multiple relationships and bonds between people and between people and natural; human capital that stimulates cooperative/synergistic capacity and thus new value creation. De-industrialization in some places, rapid urbanization in others, combined with globalization, can lead to a culture that is indifferent to long-term sustainability and to the common interest. This occurs when urbanization is allowed to be destructive to local ecologies, natural resources including land and water bodies, and cultural resources including built heritage, building crafts, traditional knowledge and creative industries. In the urban context, this crisis can be referred to as the “de-humanizing” city.  It is fueled by planning that is alternatingly autocratic and anarchic, and development patterns that promote social and spatial segregation and social fragmentation. This social fragmentation fundamentally contradicts the project of the city, that is the project of human beings living together

Dear all, please find attached responses to issue papers 8,9,10,11 – with a particular focus on gender – from members of the Huairou Commission Network.

• Spatial Development Responses.xlsx
  

Esteemed Colleagues:

I am a public prosecutor and manager of strategic projects of the Public Ministry/Public Prosecutor’s Office in the state of Rio Grande do Sul – Brazil.

               In Brazil, the Public Ministry/Public Prosecutor’s Office has very broad constitutional powers, prioritizing, and often fostering, cooperation networks, in order to serve, not only the consequences of society’s problems, but also the causes.

In the search for effectiveness, sustainability, equity and peace, internal and external, and taking into account the causes of the growing disregard for nature and dignity (own and others) are systemic, ie, arising from interdependent relationships between various components of Environment, believed to be important for the development of the methodology/action of Systemic Planning and Management (PGS). 

This is because this methodology/action allows, from the focus priority chosen and emphasizing the family context, vision and resource integration, multidisciplinary and cross-disciplinary. Focus priority can be established, for example, in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in the thematic topics for the New Urban Agenda (social cohesion and equity, urban frameworks, spatial development, urban economy and urban ecology and environment), and, more specifically, in a flooding, in the construction of a hydroelectric plant, in the health of vulnerable populations, (native Brazilians, homeless people, people affected by ecological catastrophes), in the improvement in the quality of life of the population of certain slum and etc. Thus, one can establish what to do, and who, where and when / why and how to map and integrate all these components. Therefore, it is important to be perceived a common mission, to be implemented with the assistance of the physiological, psychological (safety, belonging and self-esteem) and self-fulfillment, generating commensurate impacts on the three pillars of sustainability (economic, social – health, education, citizenship and security – and the environment) and through cooperation networks. Thus, public effects are produced by adding value to sustainable activities.

            This common mission, envisioned as public purpose, requires and favors the formation of cooperation networks for systemic action, allowing the integration of the three sectors (public, private and civil society) and the whole community. This context favors democracy, participatory and representative, providing Harmonic and Sustainable Development (DHS), the consciousness of unity and survival of all living beings.

Increasingly, it requires the cooperation of every part. However, sometimes, when making planning and management of public policy, we do not see the importance of integration, too, with the Justice System. In case of ineffectiveness of public policy (often due to a linear actuation – not realizing the interconnections), the Justice System undoubtedly will intervene, directly affecting the course of development that we want (something that can be evidenced by example, the “judicialization of health”). In the state of Rio Grande do Sul, the state judiciary fostered Systemic Planning and Management action in all municipalities. In Brazil, the National Judicial Forum for Monitoring and Resolution of demands in Health Care and the National Health Forum under the National Council of the Public Ministry are giving support for Systemic Planning and Management action.

The Systemic Planning and Management action has achieved many positive results. Therefore, we are building, with the National Confederation of Municipalities, the document: Systemic Planning and Management action focusing on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and HABITAT III. HOW implement the ODS in the local community and in the context of the HABITAT III.

We believe that this document can contribute to implementation of ODS and for the preparation of New Urban Agenda. The document will be available at the following address: rodrigoschoeller.blogspot.com.br, in early September (including an English version).

            Further information can be obtained in the following materials – at the same address and:

1- What development do we want? – (an English version can be found on the link)

quedesenvolvimentoqueremos.webnode.com/news/que-desenvolvimento-queremos-/

2- A Map On The Way  (an English version can be found on the link)

rodrigoschoeller.blogspot.com.br/2012/01/um-mapa-no-caminho-map-on-way-english.html

3-  Lecture Values, Systemic Planning, and Management and Public Ministry

rodrigoschoeller.blogspot.com.br/2010/10/pgs-lecture-values-systemic-planning.html

4- Lecture at the World Conference about Development of Cities

rodrigoschoeller.blogspot.com.br/2010/10/pgs-lecture-at-world-conference-about_26.html

5-  La Gestion and PGS

rodrigoschoeller.blogspot.com.br/2010/10/pgs-la-gestion-e-pgs_26.html

6-  Primer on PGS action focusing on Health, 2015 version.

pgsistemicos.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/otimizacao-da-rede-de-fornecimento-de.html

I hope that the documents, which are public domain, can contribute in some way.

Rodrigo Schoeller de Moraes,

Public Prosecutor,

Manager Strategic Projects of the Public Prosecutors Office/Public Ministry. 

E-mail: rsmoraes@mp.rs.gov.br

rodrigoschoeller.blogspot.com.br

Phones:         

                + 55 51 9628-4254      

                + 55 51 3295-1050    

Esteemed Colleagues:

I am a public prosecutor and manager of strategic projects of the Public Ministry/Public Prosecutor’s Office in the state of Rio Grande do Sul – Brazil.

               In Brazil, the Public Ministry/Public Prosecutor’s Office has very broad constitutional powers, prioritizing, and often fostering, cooperation networks, in order to serve, not only the consequences of society’s problems, but also the causes.

In the search for effectiveness, sustainability, equity and peace, internal and external, and taking into account the causes of the growing disregard for nature and dignity (own and others) are systemic, ie, arising from interdependent relationships between various components of Environment, believed to be important for the development of the methodology/action of Systemic Planning and Management (PGS). 

This is because this methodology/action allows, from the focus priority chosen and emphasizing the family context, vision and resource integration, multidisciplinary and cross-disciplinary. Focus priority can be established, for example, in the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in the thematic topics for the New Urban Agenda (social cohesion and equity, urban frameworks, spatial development, urban economy and urban ecology and environment), and, more specifically, in a flooding, in the construction of a hydroelectric plant, in the health of vulnerable populations, (native Brazilians, homeless people, people affected by ecological catastrophes), in the improvement in the quality of life of the population of certain slum and etc. Thus, one can establish what to do, and who, where and when / why and how to map and integrate all these components. Therefore, it is important to be perceived a common mission, to be implemented with the assistance of the physiological, psychological (safety, belonging and self-esteem) and self-fulfillment, generating commensurate impacts on the three pillars of sustainability (economic, social – health, education, citizenship and security – and the environment) and through cooperation networks. Thus, public effects are produced by adding value to sustainable activities.

            This common mission, envisioned as public purpose, requires and favors the formation of cooperation networks for systemic action, allowing the integration of the three sectors (public, private and civil society) and the whole community. This context favors democracy, participatory and representative, providing Harmonic and Sustainable Development (DHS), the consciousness of unity and survival of all living beings.

Increasingly, it requires the cooperation of every part. However, sometimes, when making planning and management of public policy, we do not see the importance of integration, too, with the Justice System. In case of ineffectiveness of public policy (often due to a linear actuation – not realizing the interconnections), the Justice System undoubtedly will intervene, directly affecting the course of development that we want (something that can be evidenced by example, the “judicialization of health”). In the state of Rio Grande do Sul, the state judiciary fostered Systemic Planning and Management action in all municipalities. In Brazil, the National Judicial Forum for Monitoring and Resolution of demands in Health Care and the National Health Forum under the National Council of the Public Ministry are giving support for Systemic Planning and Management action.

The Systemic Planning and Management action has achieved many positive results. Therefore, we are building, with the National Confederation of Municipalities, the document: Systemic Planning and Management action focusing on Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) and HABITAT III. HOW implement the ODS in the local community and in the context of the HABITAT III.

We believe that this document can contribute to implementation of ODS and for the preparation of New Urban Agenda. The document will be available at the following address: rodrigoschoeller.blogspot.com.br, in early September (including an English version).

            Further information can be obtained in the following materials – at the same address and:

1- What development do we want? – (an English version can be found on the link)

quedesenvolvimentoqueremos.webnode.com/news/que-desenvolvimento-queremos-/

2- A Map On The Way  (an English version can be found on the link)

rodrigoschoeller.blogspot.com.br/2012/01/um-mapa-no-caminho-map-on-way-english.html

3-  Lecture Values, Systemic Planning, and Management and Public Ministry

rodrigoschoeller.blogspot.com.br/2010/10/pgs-lecture-values-systemic-planning.html

4- Lecture at the World Conference about Development of Cities

rodrigoschoeller.blogspot.com.br/2010/10/pgs-lecture-at-world-conference-about_26.html

5-  La Gestion and PGS

rodrigoschoeller.blogspot.com.br/2010/10/pgs-la-gestion-e-pgs_26.html

6-  Primer on PGS action focusing on Health, 2015 version.

pgsistemicos.blogspot.com.br/2013/01/otimizacao-da-rede-de-fornecimento-de.html

I hope that the documents, which are public domain, can contribute in some way.

Rodrigo Schoeller de Moraes,

Public Prosecutor,

Manager Strategic Projects of the Public Prosecutors Office/Public Ministry. 

E-mail: rsmoraes@mp.rs.gov.br

rodrigoschoeller.blogspot.com.br

Phones:         

                + 55 51 9628-4254      

                + 55 51 3295-1050    

Comments, OVERVIEW Issue Paper 1, 6, 11 and 17
Youth conclusions and inclusion and resilience in the New Urban Agenda based on three years project with placemaking and climate change coverage. Why?  The youth is our future and their need for protective shelter in a changing climate, first and foremost. This requires multidisciplinary climate action across multilevel jurisdictional boundaries…

Dear the Habitat III Secretariat, 
Sponsor, Support and Share this International call for a Monthly Car-Free Work-Day Planet proposal.
Let´s make this a global #AirQuality reality!

Thank you for organising Habitat III and UrbanDialouges

Cheeers
/Carl
CCCRdg 

• Comments Habitat III Issue Paper 1-6-11-17 PrepCom3 Secure Urban Public Space – Climate Change Centre Reading (CCCRdg).pdf
  

Comments, OVERVIEW Issue Papers 8, 11, 17 and 21
Connecting communities
Facilitating connectivity and net carbon mobility through the improvement of transportation networks and communication between urban and rural areas to allow universal benefit and access to quality public spaces / places, which tend to be concentrated in urban areas due to population density and economies of scale…

Dear the Habitat III Secretariat, 
Sponsor, Support and Share this International call for a Monthly Car-Free Work-Day Planet proposal.
Let´s make this a global #AirQuality reality!

Thank you for organising Habitat III and UrbanDialouges

Cheeers
/Carl
CCCRdg 

• Comments Habitat III Issue Paper 8-11-17-21 PrepCom3 Transport and climate change – Climate Change Centre Reading (CCCRdg).pdf
  

One important aspect on spatial development is reorientation of political economy to recognize impotance of planning and accordingly ensure that planning is followed by occupation and urbanisation – not the other way round.

Mushrooming growth of illegal land development and occupation leave a little space for systemetic planning.

Financing is another issue which makes it difficult to implement redevelopment /insitu development/resettlement.We should devise suitable instrumrnts  and mechanism to tap value addition of land as a result of infrastucture and urban setting.

Finally,this is important agenda for HabitatIII to ensure mainstreaming of existing areas.

Prof. Pandey has made an important point that the pace of development requires that planners and formal sector developers create more agile tools ones that will allow for growth to be better organized. The energy of the informal sector developers and families needs to be brought ingot the system to make any plan work. Action plans and program specs are a wat=y to do that. laying out parameters for others to build on is a new skill that cities will nerd to develop.

Upon hearing this opportunity to contribute to the urban dialogues, World Vision International’s Centre for Expertise in Urban Programming invited some of the organisation’s thematic experts to respond to the issue papers and dialogue questions. This response represents the amalgamation of multiple individuals’ feedback.

Firstly, public space is a vital component of a prosperous city, and the state of public space is directly related to the quality of life for city residents. At the recent Future of Places Urban Thinkers Campus in Stockholm during a session on children’s well-being in relation to public space, World Vision shared a panel discussion with Stanford University and several Europe-based NGOs to present evidence about the need for genuine participation of children to shape public spaces.

The session explored diverse examples of community-driven solutions and the inclusion of children’s voices in planning safe and healthy public spaces for children. These strategies are instrumental in changing the perception of children’s role in shaping liveable cities – a role which has traditionally been non-existent. There were three key findings which emerged and are relevant to these discussions:

1. Knowledge: Children and youth are experts of their local communities and public space. This group should be considered as the knowledge bearers of the city to enhance city planning and policy making.
2. Participation to influence policy: Children and youth as users of information and communications technology (ICT) could be a resource to influence transformation and change in their communities and city policy.
3. Ownership: Consider children and youth as active participants in the management, maintenance and delivery of public space in their neighbourhoods and city.

The session concluded by observing that when given the appropriate space and tools, children are able to actively advocate for the city they need – their right to playgrounds, green and clean spaces for better quality of life, street lights for safety, social inclusion and equity to ensure peaceful neighbourhoods in the city. This is fundamental to create a positive environment for the future leaders and citizens of the city.

Secondly, accountability and access to city planning information for children and youth is essential for their meaningful participation. A first requirement is for city planners to intentionally gather inputs and reflections from children and youth. But even more meaningful would be the development of a continued relationship between children’s groups, community groups, NGOs and government planning agencies. This would require governments to be transparent about how they have used children’s opinions in the city planning process

Finally, as an international NGO working in both mega-cities, secondary cities, regional towns and peri-urban contexts, we understand that smaller and less developed areas provide opportunities to avoid past mistakes made in planning today’s mega-cities. Therefore, we support, the investment into critical planning tools, and the provision of suitable basic services into secondary cities, regional towns and peri-urban contexts. Beginning to engage communities, NGOs, government and multi-lateral donors in the planning process is critical. It is critical that organisations such as ICLEI invest in the strengthening of institutional arrangements for urban planning in smaller urban contexts, the implementation and enforcement of planning tools and environmental protection.

1- For the cities which are highly populated, it is very important that they must be polution free. To ensure that the citizens are having a healthy life, administration must shift the manufacturing plants and other factories must be out of the cities. This will divide the living and work load of the specific place. In many populated areas, there are factories and living areas, both which is harmful and dangerous for the human life. It is better to plan the infrastructure through which we could shift the offices and factories to one place and residential areas at the other end. This would be some new kind of urban development that we couldl offer the developing societies. Even in the developed ones, this could be applied too.

2- In the rulral areas, where life is still not up to that standard. The governments can partner up with the private companies and introduced the developing methods like sanitation, health, education & better living. These projects can get done with the help of private institutions through offering them tenders and grants. Government needs to be vigilant about completion of the projects. This urbanization is essential for the rural areas so that we could give them access to the key needs of daily life. 

3- In China, now builders are taking onto building the skyscrappers by keeping in mind that they have to be strong and big enough to fulfill the living needs of the people. Due to the increasing population &  migrants coming into the urban cities, they are creating buildings which are offering home, offices, shopping, hang out areas and much more at the single place. Means, you do not have to go out, get exposed to the pollution, and as we can sense that there would be no travel, so you do not need any cars too. This seems pretty positive to the social life and for the citizens, it is very economical too on many accounts. People wil get to meet each other in one building and they do not need to go in different directions for living and working.

This idea sounds socialy and economically viable for the new urban structure of the cities.
They will save so much space as well as the need for seperate housing colonies will be reduced.

4- With all the presented ideas, there are so many people who will not get agreed to whatever the government decides or what they try to do to make the public’s life easier. There will always be protests and argues in return of every project. Thus, the government has to plan each project with absolute concentration by keeping the public ineterst in mind.

Maintaining the ecosystem must be the priority as for the general public., these parks and landscapes are very important things. Along with the spatial development, do not forget that for people, the agriculture, enviornment, energy, etc are important too. So, developing them is very much important too.

INDUSTRIAL RESTRUCTURING: All organizations or companies should not be concentrated in big cities. Europe and Sub-Sahara Africa companies tend to centralize their core activities in economically strong cities and regions. This tendency leads to development in big region while other areas are under-developed.

Industrial restructuring will help to bring about spatial and equitable development. Manufacturing companies that consume high level of energy in production and those that emit high waste and bi-products should be established in regions that are close to their source of raw materials. Doing this, their bi-products would be disposed or recycled easily. Oil companies and refineries should also be established in undeveloped areas.

Developed regions are mostly the prime target in case of war, strike or insurgency. Also there will be a heavy pressure on the existing infrastructure in the advanced areas. For this reason, spatial development should be encouraged.

An approach to industrial restructuring will encourage the location of industries and business organization in the economically shy regions. The United Nations and governments can stimulate this by providing social amenities to the under-developed regions

There is tendency of mass production in the economically strong region which triggers precipitate decline in the lower region. Worse still, the pressures on the existing resources in the advanced regions put them in a pitiable state of over population, high cost of living and insecurity. Spatial restructuring will reduce the tendency of rural-urban migration. Industrial restructuring will enhance equitable spatial development. 

Ageing urban populations and the role of public and green spaces

Public and green spaces play a vital role in ensuring strong, cohesive and inclusive communities. Within the context of rapidly ageing populations, the role these spaces play in protecting and promoting our rights in our older age must be recognised.

24% of today’s urban residents are already aged over 50. The % of people aged over 60 living in urban areas has increased rapidly from 29% to 47% over the last 30 years with over 500 million already living in the world’s cities.

The New Urban Agenda must recognise this reality, but also needs to move away from seeing older people as another homogenous vulnerable group. Instead we need to understand the ageing process as one that will impact all of us, and that the heterogeneity of the ageing experience requires a range of responses to ensure that we enjoy the benefits of urbanisation, throughout our lives and into our older age.

Responding to an ageing urban population should be recognised as a key driver for change and universal access to appropriately designed public and green spaces seen as key for protecting and promoting our rights throughout our lives and into our old age, encouraging physical activity, resilience and social connectedness.

In terms of specific suggestions to respond to this reality with reference to the Public Space issue paper:

• Public and green spaces must be accessible and appropriate for people throughout their lives and into their older age following the highest standards of universal design – proposed laws and regulations should enshrine a right for us all throughout our lives and into our older age, to have universal access to adequate public and green spaces
• Public and green spaces need to be designed and conceived of in a way that supports intergenerational use, bringing different parts of the community together and combating isolation, negative stereotypes and strengthening social connectedness
• Accessible and high quality public and green spaces should provide connections between key community assets and services to support residents who don’t have access to private transport, strengthening community cohesion, social connectedness and our resilience in both sudden and slow onset disasters
• The WHO recommendation that city residents live within a 15 minute walk of a green space discriminates against older people as sometimes our gait speed reduces as we age. Other considerations including resting points and public access to wash/rest rooms are needed to ensure that in our older age, that green spaces intended for our use are genuinely accessible.
• Recognise that more high quality public and green spaces will play an important role in encouraging physical activity, maintaining our physical and mental functioning capacity and mitigating against increasing levels of non-communicable diseases which currently kill 38 million people a year, especially within a context of ageing urban populations
• Ongoing maintenance to ensure the quality and accessibility of public and green spaces is essential – poorly maintained pavements and paths can become barriers to access in our older age, reducing our physical activity and social connectedness
• Clear targets for the scale and frequency of public and green spaces are required to ensure that density is sustainable and its benefits are not squandered

More broadly I would agree with the need for standardised indicators around the quality, quantity and frequency of public and green spaces, alongside improved legal frameworks protecting public space and its ongoing maintenance – vital to ensure our cities public and green spaces are adequate and protect and promote our rights throughout our lives. 

Question 1. Which spatial development strategies and policies are most effective to create equitable, compact, connected, and socially inclusive cities in different contexts?

Question 2. How can governments and their partners ensure sustainable urbanization in the context of the urban-rural continuum?

Question 3. How can cities create public space that adds value and quality to urban social and economic life?

 Question 4. What are the challenges in managing urban land for equitable and sustainable development?

 ANSWERS

1. We need to have a Resiliant City Master Plan, refer to my earlier post RELEVANCE OF MASTER PLANNING APPROACH. 
2. We also need to have a TRANSPARENT and ACCESSIBLE Governace mechanism, possible with use of IoT & IoE.
3. There is also need to make the Cost of OWNING / RENTING  a house affordable and also to Create PARKS & BUILT OPEN SPACES.  This can be achieved by removing shackes of URBAN LAND CEILING and RENT CONTROL that makes the cost of land beyond reach and makes renewal of housing stock unceonomical….
4. There after urban redensification process using TDR and introducing Green TDR ( Refer my earlier posting) would become incentive for PPP in SUSTAIABLE URBANISM.     For example –     In Mumbai TDR is avaiable for heritage structure. Suppose you own a ART DECO Bunglow in South Mumbai, built by your Great Grand Father that has Consumed an FAR of 1.2. As on date the allowable Plot FAR is 2.5 and you are broke, you sell the FAR (2.5 – 1.2 = 1.3) in the market as TDR…………..A realtor interested in Gentrification of a Slum gets a plot FAR of 4 provided he has redevelopment conscent from more than 3/4th of slum dwellers and legally promices to provide& maintain for 20 years a serviced apartment of 230 SFT/House Hold. The available FAR for slum plot is 2.5 and the realtor buys TDR from market to develop new housing stock consuming allowable FAR of 4. The realtor sells the balace housing stock ( what remains after providing all the slum dwellers serviced apartments of 230 SFT/HH) at the market price, recovers costs and makes profit..Today there are few slums in plots with complicated land documents, rest have gentrified…….Similarly, in mumbai if you own a vacant land and the master plan reserves it for Parks & open spaces, the land owner gets TDR for encashing the market value of the land…..In almost all the metropolitan cities in india other than Mumbai, there is provisions for keeping aside 10 % of land area (plot size > 10 Acre) for Civic Amenity including parks & open spaces. These CA sites ( with adequate access from public roads) are formally / legally handed over to Urban Local Body even before granting of Commencement approval..I have seen in a SEVEN Star hotel owned by ITC WELCOME GROUP in Chennai having a accessible and well maintained public park covering 1/3rd of the property frontage..The Hotel management has developed it and also maintains the park, that has enhanced its frontage and acts as a interface between public & private spaces (porous boundary)…
5. Once the housing market becomes really free and matures, diversified HOUSING STOCK will evolve responding to demand….
6. We need to create a entry and exit barrier that allows only credible private player with long term business objectives only Partner with Public Sector. 

Participatory,inter active,and collabaerative,systems in use,with the huge data net work we are developing is a must for cities,Governments,and citizens are key for governance.But education is also key to sucess,as much the right legal frame work,with proper disposal,and some executives having the Judicial power in their duties.

Appointment of local arae citizen charters and hearing them,and posting on web the deelopment is imperative to susstain development.

The key is changing mind set,invoking climate changes in to polic,seggregation of areas with Green,avioding GHG,in city life,finding generic medicines,Doctors,hospitals who work for others and listing them,as much we find different colleges,and schools who can contribute for orderly development ‘education’.

There has to be a public commitment to maintaining and sustaining.  It is one thing to plan and execute new developments throughout emerging urban areas.  It is quite another to maintain and sustain them.

Throughout my travels, like many of you, I have witnessed many very well developed projects that were never maintained; and, commitments to build off of these projects and energize further community development just simply fall apart. 

Without the will of individuals within communities to demand a change for what is socially and customarily acceptable to attract more growth diversity the success of any new urban developments will be stifled.       

I would like to add a short paper that addresses issues related to question #3, however  it would be worthy sending if there is someone in your team who reads  Portughese, for it hasn’t been trasnlated from Portuguese yet. Is it worht sending it? 

Many thanks for contributing to Urban Dialogue. You can post a summary of the paper so that other people can read it. There is a function for translating various languages in this website.

The Urban Poor constituent group of the Future of Places network gathered for a drafting session 26 June 2015 during the Urban Thinkers Campus “Public Space in the New Urban Agenda” and proposed the following recommendations for the Habitat III Issue Paper 11 on Public Space (see attachment).

• FoP Urban Poor recommendations Habitat III Issue Paper Public Space.docx
  

The Government constituent group of the Future of Places network gathered for a drafting session 30 June 2015 during the Urban Thinkers Campus “Public Space in the New Urban Agenda” and proposed the following recommendations for the Habitat III Issue Paper 11 on Public Space (see attachment).

• FoP Government recommendations Habitat III Issue Paper Public Space.doc
  

The Private Sector constituent group of the Future of Places network gathered for a drafting session 30 June 2015 during the Urban Thinkers Campus “Public Space in the New Urban Agenda” and proposed the following recommendations for the Habitat III Issue Paper 11 on Public Space (see attachment).

• FoP Private Sector recommendations Habitat III Issue Paper Public Space.docx
  

The Professionals constituent group of the Future of Places network gathered for a drafting session 30 June 2015 during the Urban Thinkers Campus “Public Space in the New Urban Agenda” and proposed the following recommendations for the Habitat III Issue Paper 11 on Public Space (see attachment).

• FoP Professionals recommendations Habitat III Issue Paper Public Space.docx
  

The Civil Society constituent group of the Future of Places network gathered for a drafting session 30 June 2015 during the Urban Thinkers Campus “Public Space in the New Urban Agenda” and proposed the following recommendations for the Habitat III Issue Paper 11 on Public Space (see attachment).

• FoP Civil Society recommendations Habitat III Issue Paper Public Space.docx
  

Proposal for resiliant Bangalore – GREEN TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHT (G-TDR)

The Resiliant City Master Plan allows Functional Flexibility – It means cities, urban forms can easily adapt (with limited investment needs) to a redistribution of urban functions. 

A resilient urban form must have flexibility to get a third dimension without disturbing the availability and hierarchy of facilities, amenities and quality of life.   For exmple Community re-densification initiatives not limited to policy like Transferable Development Rights (TDR), issued in addition to normal Floor Area Ratio, increases the Community Global FAR, orotects cultural or historical heritage, increasing the number of in-habitants, reducing per capita cost of utility distribution and increased access to utility.

OBJECTIVE is to promote use of Solar Power without subsidy with extended participation of Energy, Revenue and Urban Development Department of Govt of Karnataka. These solar parks developed within 50 Km from the perimeter of BESCOM command area but grid linked through National Transmission Line backbone of Power Grid Corporation of India.

TARGET SEGMENT HT Consumers of Bangalore Development Authority (BDA) or Local Planning authorities within Bangalore, distributed power by Bangalore Electric Supply Corporation (BESCOM).  BDA & Bangalore Metropolitan Region Development Authority (BMRDA) area also has large demand for TDR. Ideal stake holder mix includes but not limited to HT consumers of BESCOM in  BDA & BMRDA.

OUTCOME of the  G TDR initiative will be increase the urban density, optimize per capita utilization of urban infrastructure and provide incentive to project developers to go for conventional energy bundled with minimum 40 % renewable energy, i.e. Energy Security, price stability.

G-TDR USER are Developer or owner of commercial & residential property in proposed clusters and growth nodes of BMRDA or in designated growth corridors of BDA like Urban Redevelopment Zones; Ca-Mixed Residential Area and other uses where additional FAR is allowed, gets an opportunity to use GREEN TDR. It is similar to Development Right Certificate (DRC) referred in City Dev. Plan 2015.

G-TDR CONSUMED / PROJECT will be between 0.125 (12.50 %) to 0.25 (25.00 % – minimum DRC allowable for ZONE B of BDA)  i.e. the FAR shall not exceed 3.5 ( 350.00 %) in any case.

G-TDR APPLICATION CASE STUDY – How it’s going to work ? 

• LEED GOLD rated commercial building on 1.2 Ha land, abutting BDA Mutation Corridor  Road ROW > 30 M. FAR allowable is 3.25 & Ground Coverage is 40%. Gross rentable / saleable area is 0.47 Man SFT.  The Connected Load for the building is 4.91 MW and the Demand Load of the building is 6.138 MW (6.819 MVA @ 0.9 PF & 0.8 LF). Total Power consumption will be 43.012 MU/Year. 
• Annual daytime power consumption for the builing will be 17.20 MU/Yrs (40 % of annual total) for 9.6 Hrs avg  annual day lighting in Bangalore, to be met through generation of a PV Power Plant. Its observed that a 13.17 MWp PV Power Plant (Gross Plant size assuming 10 % loss of energy due to degradation) at 16.57 % Capacity Utilization Factor generates  1.45 MU/Year/MWp, i.e. 17.20 MU/Yrs.
• If we assume Project Cost (EPCC +  Land + Evacuation infrastructure) @ Rs 7.5 Cr/MWp comes to around Rs 98.75 Cr; O & M Cost @ 14 Lakh/Year escalating at 6.7 % PA over 10 year period (tenure of plant debt) will be 25.11 Cr.
• G-TDR of around 0.25 or 25% would generate enough revenue to provide for 123.86 Cr over 10 year period. 

Execution Process

• The real estate project developer develops 13.17 MWp Grid linked PV Power Plant and gets additional FAR of 0.25 or 25.00 %.
• The power plant injects power to the grid and real estate project uses the power by just paying the required wheeling charges.
• The real-estate project or the power plant developer gets 90 % of the Carbon Credits in the 1st year and BDA gets the balance carbon credit.
• The carbon credit share of BDA becomes 20% in the 2nd year; 30 % in the 3rd year; 40 % in the 4th year and 50 % for the 5th year to the life of the project 25 to 30 years.
• In existing buildings and areas where new buildings cannot consume all the additional FAR, the balance will be treated as Transferable Development Rights (TDR).

SMARTCITY Investment Trust (SMIT) will also play the role of a regulator, established in Public Private Partnership.  Benchmark capital and O & M Cost finalized by SMIT is used for computation of G-TDR and size of PV Power Plant.  Technical due diligence of probable locations along with load flow analysis of KPTCL GSS / MUSS within BESCOM command are will be done by SMIT. Thre will be a common Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) for  real-estate project PV power plant development. SMIT’s Dev. Mgmt. role will be limited to 

• Technical due diligence & PV Power Plant Cost finalization;
• Investment in the Solar PV field development excluding cost of energy storage systems; 
• Secure & enforce tariff payment through enforceable and assignable power purchase agreement with either real-estate project consumers or building facility Management Company (depending on customers’ requirements & tenancy tenures).

Implementation Process – I have been trying since 2013 to get the idea GREEN TDR implemented. Its very simple​ to implement​

• The Urban Development Dept has to talk to Energy Department and agree with empowering BDA or setting up an organization to administer TDR.
• Issue a Govt Order ( GO ), saying that Green TDR is another source of TDR. 
• A real estate project developer desirous procuring TDR within permissible limits ( for example, Total FAR including TDR is 4 within 150 m of metro station perimeters) would have to develop a grid linked PV power plant to take care of projects day time power requirements. 
• The Developer  applies​ for Green TDR after meeting conditions precedent for establishing PV Power Plant. 
• The Green TDR issuing authority checks whether the real estate developer has developed the grid linked solar plant ( of required capacity) to avail the TDR.
• Once the Solar Plant is established, the Real Estate project SPV is issued the TDR.
• Real estate market of bangalore is still vibrant in this country. Today to increase the affordability of projects most of the developers are looking for TDR. There is a vibrant market for TDR.
• Real estate market is a more matured business and utility like DG, STP, WTP e.t.c are part of project capital cost. The solar project being part of a real estate project gets non recourse funding. In karnataka its difficult to get project Debt for standalone grid linked PV Power Plant till the land is converted, on the other hand real estate FDI Funds/ ReIT (under sebi guidelines) can go for conditional disbursement of funds for utility (captive consumption ) of projects.
• With the use of Green TDR, Bangalore becomes dense & resilient (objective of BBMP Structure Plan 2031) and promotes consumption of Green power without spending money on directly subsidising solar power plant. Development of 2 GW Solar park in Pavagada Taluka, Tumkur Dist ( BESCOM Command area) also benefits from Green TDR.

Proposal of GREEN TRANSFER OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHT (G-TDR) can become an UNIVERSAL RESILIANT CITY MASTER PLANNING tool. 

Thanks everyone for valuable suggestions and keeping the subject engaged over a week or so. I still believes that a city without proper public space or some say open space accesiable to all will always suffer to achieve its goal of Inclusive Sustainable Development in this world of urbanisation where the driver is often the Real Estate than the people. So Post HABITAT 3 must find a solution to it or we might end up consuming all short agricultural land after the open space for concrete jungle inviting questions on our food security or equity. I would be happy if we focus this in remaining days of our debate. Thanks everyone for getting involve in this subject.

The Academic constituent group of the Future of Places network gathered for a drafting session 30 June 2015 and would like to propose the following recommendations for the Habitat III Issue Paper 11 on Public Space (see attachment).

• FoP Academia recommendations Habitat III Issue Paper Public Space.docx
  

Kesseler’s comments need wider recognition on urban policies in the light of fact that agriculture will ultimately hold 15-20 percent workforce-urbanisation has to expand across regions and a balanced development within the region is inevitable.Accordingly suitable norms and standards for infrastructure need to be evolved for different regions.

Good evening Professor K K Pandey. Thans for your posting and contribution. If I add some comments for balanced development from a national perspective, national spatial strategies including infrastructure can work as the basis of regional and local plans, and collaborative framework and governance between all tiers of governments need to be established effectively for full implementation of these plans. Could you explain your ideas on norms and standards for infrastructure more?

Equitible spatial development requires an expanded definition of urban infrastructure. All too ofter infrastructure relates to filling service delivery to areas underserved. For future urban growht to reflect sustainable resilient urban economic development the definition of urban infrastructure needs to look out towards its surrounding region. This means roads, airports, ports, river transport  that addresses icity connectivity as well as the basic services that capture attention and resources.

El 1 y 2 de julio, en Quito, y el 22 de julio en Guayaquil, Ecuador, se reunió la sociedad civil con cerca de 250 personas en total, para producir los documentos que se adjuntan a continuación, y que constituyen una base para la construcción de la Nueva Agenda Urbana.

CITE

• DesarrolloEspacial.pdf
  

Urbanisastion taking place much faster than what most demographers or urban planners may have imagined but it is also equal that most cities in this part of the world are also witnessing a reduction in public space. Which i feel is a bad for citizens as a reduction in public space has its own bad effect in cities. Such as leading to rise in crimes, health issues, disparity and so on. So i feel cities must ensure let their be equal growth in Public Space comapring withe urban population and second we must set a yardstick for each city to provide public space wihtin  a walking distance free from any financial fees by users.

Urban Planning in Post Habitat III must look at my veiwes and find solutions restoring public space in a city.

Dear Piyush Rout, As urbanization proceeds, low proportions of public space are created and secured. Therefore, the role of legislation, regulation and enforcement can be a key mechanism to secure the provision. In addition, many people are mentioning the importance of tools or indicators for assessing either the quantity or quality of public space. If you know good examples of these tools already studied or implemented, can you share with us?

Mr. Seongho Kim; thank you for your contribution. I deeply share your concern on assessing the quality of open spaces. Because this asks for identifying and evaluating  the performance of public spaces and for defining what is to be considered “good”, I am currently developing a research on variables that may worldwide be of aid on building indicators as guidelines and tools for desiging and assessing public spaces favorable to interactions between people. I particularly focus on positive interactions among people who are socially, ethnically, culturally and economically diverse, because this is one positive aspect of a worldwide profile of many cities. The research is Pretty much in line with the thoughts of Professor Richard Sennett. This research is currently in progress within the Urban Development program of the Federal University of Pernambuco, Brazil. If you wish, I would be glad to share some material once they become available.

Factors leading to dichotomy   are (i) regional imbalance in the levels of urbanisation-this covers lack of basic social and economic  infrastucture in rural areas (ii) Concentration of economic activities among mega cities and metro towns  -Eastern and northern China and western and southern India are classic examples of regional imbalance as compared to other parts in respective country (iii) Low productivity also promotes rural urban divide as surplus labour tends to move to productive zones and human settlements in the respective area remain deprived from a systemetic development initiative.

In my perspective,  sustainable and integrated  spatial development strategies and policies which mainstream different aspects of urban development challenges  are most effective to create equitable, compact, connected, and socially inclusive cities in different contexts. However, previous and current spatial development strategies and policies were/are fragmented, reductionist, and not inclusive.

I do also feel that governments and their partners may ensure sustainable urbanization in the context of the urban-rural continuum through participatory urban development planning like integrated urban watershed planning and management. This may enable the stakeholders to address transboundry issues like flooding in a more sustainable manner.

I do feel also that  cities can create public space that adds value and quality to urban social and economic life through proper urban planning and management whereby livable public spaces may be created and managed. This is not given due attention in cities and towns of least developed countries as poverty reduction, and employment generation are the priority urban development challenges. However, this must be considered as one aspect of urban poverty and future urban development endeavor in least developed countries must deal with it.

Last but not least, I dare to mention corruption of many forms and unaffordable building regulations as the two major challenges  in managing urban land for equitable and sustainable development. For instance, many of the citizens in list developed countries may not be able to comply with the building requirements due to their financial capacity. What financial support mechanism must be available to deal with such challenges? Should they move to other locations where building requirements are stringent? should they be allowed to develop their land according to their financial capacity? Many of the urban land management processes in least developed countries are also full of corruption and redtapes. I hope there must be sustainable urban strategies and policies to deal with corruption in urban land use planning and management.

Hi, many thanks for this contribution to the debate. 

I wanted to pick up one of the issues that you have raised and instigate a little, if you allow me. 

You say that no due attention is given to the creation and management of liveable public spaces in many cities of developing countries, and this is mainly because development priorities are more on poverty reduction and employment generation. You conclude (and I concur), that public space developement must be considered as one aspect of urban poverty (reduction) and future urban development endeavor in least developed countries must deal with it.

We argue that liveable and safe public spaces (that include green spaces and parks, but also lively streets, and walkable and safe neighbourhoods developed at a “human scale”) can be a significant factor in unlocking the economic potential of cities. In other words they are not a surplus luxury, but rather a functional prerequisite for economic urban prosperity.

On the other hand, public spaces are often minimised in favour of (developers’) profit maximisation and the maximisation of returns to investment, but to the miss-benefit of inhabitants and a functioning urban fabric.

What do you say?

Thanks for your posting. I agree with your points. Urban legislation and regulations are central elements in determining sustainable urban development outcomes. As you pointed out, to prevent corruption and red tapes in urban land management processes, urban land regulations need to be prepared to provide efficiency and transparency in land management, and consider the most vulnerable groups. In addition, regulations of buildable rights and building codes need to allow for a diversity of affordable and locally appropriate building options. If the problems persist, the urban regulation systems need to be assessed.

PUBLIC SPACES & LIVELIHOODS

Public spaces have distinct roles in a given settlement. Therefore, they should be approached from different perspectives. I would like to contribute from a labour perspective.

– First, highlight key linkages between public spaces and livelihoods,

– And second, give examples of policies and actions to support those who work in public areas.  

To start with a broad perspective, public spaces play an important role in the local economy, with implications for workers. For example, roads are one type of public space, and are vital for connecting living and working areas. The quality of the road system, in terms of comfort, safety, accessibility, has an impact on the standard of living and also on the productivity of workers.

There are also public places which are important for the social protection of workers, such as health centres, hospitals, and facilities for the provision of utilities.

Therefore, the good planning and management of places such as the ones just mentioned have an important impact in the world of labour.

At the same time, there are large numbers of people who actually use public spaces as workplaces.

Street vendors constitute one large group. Other examples are:

.  waste pickers and recyclers,

. local transportation workers,

. vendors in public markets,

. urban farmers who use public land for cultivation,

. And many times also service providers. It is common to see open areas in developing countries with hairdressers, typists, entertainers, and other professionals.

Like in the case of workers and entrepreneurs who operate in private areas, it is also important to understand the needs of those who use public areas as workplaces. And many of them are poor, operate informally and have no other option of place to work than a public area.

Many of those working in such areas face challenges, which may be related to harassment, occupational or environmental health, lack of safety, as well as to lack of proper skills and business training. Those working in the informal sector are particularly vulnerable, and need support to move to the mainstream of the economy. 

There are good cases of how different actors have contributed to improve the working conditions of those who operate in public spaces. For example, local authorities which regulated street vendors, making them legal. Also, own-account workers gaining ground through organizing in associations, like garbage pickers and recyclers in Colombia and Brazil. Or provision of training by NGOs.  

The latest International Labour Conference, in June 2015, approved a Recommendation on the Transition from the Informal to the Formal Economy. It suggests an integrated approach, involving actions in different tears of government, as well as workers and employers organizations, including cooperatives.

This also entails the promotion of local development strategies, with specific reference to regulating the access for use of public space for subsistence livelihoods.

In addition, the recommendation includes specific measures to support small enterprises, many of which again operate in public spaces.

To give now the example of a practical initiative, the ILO has been working together with the United Cities and Local Governments (UCLG) to promote cooperation among municipalities, with particular attention to public markets and street vendors.

Workshops were implemented in different parts of the world, such as Morocco, Colombia, Mozambique and Spain. Direct city-to-city cooperation has also been promoted. For example in Durban and Maputo, on the training of public market vendors. We would like to create a network to expand such cooperation.

To conclude, I would like to note that, usually; policy-making with a focus on working conditions and the provision of a safe and healthy workplace is separated from policy-making with a focus on spatial planning and management.

But when the public space is the workplace, then the two sets of policies meet.

. This is where occupational health meets environmental health, and, in general, primary health care.

. This is where public safety meets workers’ safety.

. This is where Sustainable Development Goal 8 (about Decent Work), meets Goal 11 (about human settlements).

For a video presentation on the above: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hdqb9iqo1ys

Thank you for this post, Mr. Werna!

I really value your contribution especially because this is a so very present – and often neglected- reality along most of major local and feeder roads and streets in Brazilian urban centers, especially in Recife, Northeast Brazil, where I live. Street vendors are allowed, most of which are legal, and they significantly contribute to attracting people and livelyhood in these streets, which are used by private vehicles, public transportation system and pedestrians. Local vendors attract economic and social life in the neighborhoods  where these streets are located. When street vendors occur in squares and parks, they also attract users for longer periods of time, with positive consequences for the safety, social and economic vitality of these spaces.

There is , however, a persitent gap in loacl legislation reflecting who and how can stablish their commercial venue in these public areas. I know city government has adopted various modes of participation. I do not know them well enough to describe them here, but would like to highlight the need to focus on this aspect during these discussions as well.

Thank you.

Dear Ed, 

very interesting point, indeed..

Dear Ed Werna, Many thanks for your valuable post. It is a very good point and we absolutely need coordinated approach.  There is growing attention to public space and it deserves priority attention because it serves all urban residents, particularly the ones most in need. Public spaces must be seen also as multi-functional areas for social interaction, economic exchange and cultural expression among a wide diversity of people.  Additional information on UN-Habitat Global Program on Public Space can be found at https://www.urbangateway.org/publicspace

The contribution made by the colleague from the Universidad Nacional de Rio Negro Argentina on the presence of government or lack of it in rural areas and how it leads to dichotomy between urban and rural areas is interesting. I view presence of government for instance in terms of distribution of government administrative centres across the territory as opposed to their concentration in primate cities. I would also view presence of government also in terms of the amount of budgetary and infrastructure investment to small and intermediate cities. I think it calls for decentralisation of functions.

Small and Medium towns hold the key to a balance regional growth.We can not divert the flow of migrants from mega and metro cities unless adequate policies and progeammes are placed to stimulate eonomic growth of small and medium towns.Countries like India does not need a high City Primacy Ratio.

In a larger interset of equitable growth we have to develop small and medium towns as service centres which are eqipped with suitavle economic activity which is also linked with agro-based manufacturing and busines activities.Therefore dispersal of economic activities needs to be planned.Further,housing and infrastructure development is equally important .It is observed that one direct employment in housing created 8 indirect employments in the economy as a whole.

Similarly,economic rate of return on investment in infrastructure in urban context is fairly high.Therefore,small and medium towns in the context of competitive edge and productivity should be given due imporance in the HABITAT III.

Many thanks for contribution to the dialogues. I know that some of fast developing countries are suffering from the polarization between urban and rural areas causing high population concentration in the capital region while leaving local areas with stagnation. In addition, many countries recognize the importance of balanced growth and are carrying out a balanced growth strategy. If you know successful cases of balanced growth policies or strategies, could you share good examples or documents on those?  

Week three of this dialogue has come. Thanks so much for the interest and participation so far. As moderators, we would like to present a set of questions to steer up the discussion.

Here is a first question related to the complex of urban-rural linkages and territorial planning: 

What factors promote the dichotomy between urban and rural areas as opposed to promoting urban rural linkages?

Akram Salam , Kabul-Afghanistan

July 22, 2015  11:30PM

I am agree with all responses, in addition to the given responses I would like to raise one more factor which is security, in our country rural areas are not secure compare to big cities and this is one of the main reasons that people are moving from villages to urban communities to safe their life.    

Creo que una de las variables que establece la dicotomia entre el ambito rural y el urbano o la ciudad es la mayor o menor presencia del Estado, es decir cuanta presencia privada o del estado influyen en la conformaciòn del territorio-

En la ciudad la presencia del estado y de la sociedad tiene una mayor influencia sobre la cosntruccion del espacio, mientras que el espacio rural  pertenece al ambito privado donde las reglas dependen del privado o de aquellos pequeños grupos que establecen sus propias reglas.El problema es la concepcion del espacio y en funcion de esto como se establecen las necesidades a cubrir. Historicamente el espacio rural esta relacionado a las actividades de produccion agricola y de cria de animales, donde porciones pequeñas de poblacion se autogestionan, y la ciudad por el contrario es el fulcro de las sociedades modernas y contemporaneas. El desequilibrio que se desarrolla a partir de los procesos de globalizacion pone de manifiesto la existencia de “otra sociedad” que no puede acceder a los beneficios de la CIUDAD, Creo que esta concepciòn hitorica es la que no pemite poder avanzar en la construccion de otros paradigmas que nos permitan construir sociedades mas justtas respetando las culturas de cada una de las partes.

Good evening.. Thanks for your contribution to the dialogues. It is an important point. Could you explain more about state presence and share good examples ?

The Urban pattern, level of provided services, infrastructure and generated job opportunities in the light of potentials secured by the urban economy….etc.

Do not you think that we might think from the other way around and we should focus more on principles for better urbanization…  – I would like to raise the point that spatial development strategies and policies that can create equitable, compact, connected, and socially inclusive cities have to reflect and secure good quality of life, generate job opportunities, secure access to public services, provide public security…etc. to satisfy city’s habitats; as long as they are daffier completely from place to another. For instance securing affective traffic management and public transportation, in Tokyo and Los Anglos both are ranked high at series of parameters in terms of liveability, income, sustainability… the number of people who take the public transport to get to work is 78% in Los Anglos the other way around 80% taking cars for the same purpose according to the latest statistics. In the same sense you can see that Shanghai almost ranked the same level with Boston as in terms of powerful urban economic, which reflects successful development policies, where both utilized completely different urban pattern. 

Yes, this is true.

One of the most interesting aspects that came out of the set of issue papers referenced here is that cities that are equitable, compact, connected and socially inclusive are also characterised by good quality of life, economic prosperity, access to public services and public security at the same time. If some aspects on the first set of attributes are missing, it will inevitably impact on the other set of attributes.

There are cities that are economically successful, like for instance Johannesburg. But the City tries very, very hard to overcome legacy of inequality and urban fragmentation. We claim that improving on these fronts will also amplify the economic prosperity of Jo’burg even further.

L.A. is type-defining example of urban sprawl in the context of the 20th century spatial development. The city is economically successful, but it may very well be that the time spent in traffic is negatively impacting on live quality, not to mention the environmental footprint. L.A. is successful despite its lack of public transport and sprawl, not because of it. Tokyo has a remarkably powerful public transport infrastructure, without which the city would not function and could not generate wealth.

The point that I agree with you most is that spatial development needs to help to unlock economic potential and support (as one element of many) the creation of jobs. Spatial development, urban planning & design (to greater extent) determine competitiveness of cities. Bad urban planning is a development problem in the making, in the context of the 21 century urbanisation challenge.

Here I agree with Eugene: A strong, comprehensive and integrative urban vision is the starting point for successful urban growth/development. The common interest, in that sense, needs to prevail over particular interests. 

In my opinion, we should at all times give priortiy to principles because they shape results and impacts. But key practices or activities are what create the solid outcomes that lead to impacts. So, we cannot focus on one more than the other. Integrating and reconscilling is crucial.

I agree dear Sebastian and I would add to Eugene that planning has to secure Sustainable development via particulerlly an economic character that contributing to building a strong, responsive and competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is available in the right places and at the right time to support growth and innovation; and by identifying and coordinating development requirements, including the provision of infrastructure; as well as social position, where supporting strong, vibrant and healthy urban communities, by providing the supply of housing required and public service to meet the needs of sustainable development; and by creating a high quality built environment, with accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its health, social and cultural well-being.

Good afternoon, Dr.Bassem. Thanks for sharing your opinion. I also agree that good spatial planning can have multiple benefits and profound impact on shaping economically sustainable and socially integrated cities through land value increases, improved productivity and improved access across the city to public spaces,  public transport etc.  Of course local and context driven planning models are essential for local relevance.

Hi dear Seongho I agree with K K that rationally and theoretically speaking Small and Medium towns hold the key to a balance regional growth but not entirely could be considered as a fact since how can we explain the reality that City planners in south China have laid out an ambitious plan to merge together the nine small and medium cities that lie around the Pearl River Delta to create a 16,000 sq mile urban area that is 26 times larger geographically than Greater London, or twice the size of Wales. While, on the other hand in Egypt during the past 40 years he national government adopted ambitious new urban communities programme for small and medium new towns and statistics show that Egypt’s total infrastructure investment budget that was directed to the New Towns in the 1982-2010 period was approximately 22%; achieved only 1% of planned/targeted population, and the situation remains 96% of the republic’s total population lives on 4% of the total national area, while the remaining percentage spread on 96% of the total area with completely inequality urban structure in terms of city size.

Good evening Dr.Bassem Fahmy.. Thanks for your posting. This is an incisive analysis. Many fast developing and developed countries which are experiencing imbalanced territorial development develop the balanced growth strategies such as self-sufficient regional development and new town development, and there are still ongoing debates on new town development which causes a lot of costs. I think we need to search more various cases on implemented balanced growth strategies at national level in addition to China and Egypt cases, and we have to find critical factors which have impacts on success or failure of these strategies depending on the status of each country.

Buenos Dias y muchas gracias por abrir este espacio de discucion.

En cuanto a la primera pregunta, creo que es vital ponernos de acuerdo en la imagen de ciudad sostenible que cada uno de nosotros tenemos para poder desarrollarla en armonia. Estamos de acuerdo que la ciudad compacta que consume menos suelo y hace eficiente los servicios es mas sostenible. Pero nos impone una pregunta que es hasta donde puede crecer una ciudad para seguir siendo sostenible?, cual es numero de ciudadanos maximo que puede contener, y hablo de ciudadanos y no de habitantes, porque el ciudadano se construye a travez de su relacion con la ciudad y sus espacios publicos y no por vivir en una zona urbana de los bordes de la ciudad.

en America latina, y en especial en Argentina el crecimiento de la mancha urbana se debe no a la construccion de ciudad sino a la construccion de vivienda en suelo economico , sin servicios y sin tener en cuenta el espacio publico. Esto sucede tanto por parte de la inversion privada como por parte de la apropiacion ilegal de tierras construyendo espacios residenciales de forma casi medieval. La presencia del estado y de los tecnicos es esencial, pero con una concepcion espacial compartida.

Si bien necesitamos actuar con urgencia, estos procesos necesitan de tiempo para poner en comun lo que cada uno entiende que es la ciudad y lo que desea que ese espacio le brinde. a travez de espacios de participacion que deben ser propuestos tanto por parte del estado como de otras organizaciones no gubernamentales, a partir del conocimiento profundo del territorio y la ciudad que contiene, esa es informacion que producen las universidades, los centros de investigacion, los gobiernos, etc.

Algunas lineas de acciion

construccion de informacion de todo tipo bajo un concepto claro y comun, es decir entendiendo por ejemplo que la ciudad es una estructura compleja que en primer lugar pone en relacion dos sistemas, el ambiental y el antropico en un territorio mas amplio que los limites urbanos, cuyos habitantes deberian ser CIUDADANOS, y eso implica una cierte de relaciones de equidad a nivel fisico y virtual.

Detectar cuales son los recursos , en el territorio en el que se actua, mas que las problematicas, ya que este posicionamineto suele dar resultados mas positivos que trabajar sobre los problemas puntuales, si bien no hay que desconocerlos. y desarrollar estrategias para cada uno de ellos.

Establecer instancias de participacion como estas para que los ciudadanos puedan sobre la informacion cierta dar su opinion y plantear sus necesidades( cosa que se deberia verificar desde hace dos decadas)

Entender que la residencia puede construir espacio publico desde su enunciacion, que eso es una decision politica y debe ser planificada.

The question of how far (or big) a city can grow and still be characterized as sustainable is an important and difficult question. Also important is how the urbanization is taking place and what the “product” will look like, i.e. the city or urban fabric that results from the urbanisation. Certainly, cities then continue to develop and mature over time.

Being able to influence and shape this process, while its happening, towards a sustainable outcome is at the centre of the urbanization challenge, as far as spatial development is concerned, in my opinion.

To add: Independently of the question ‘how far cities can grow to be still sustainable’, they are likely to grow beyond any historic precedence in the course of this century, some figures for 2025 (that’s ten years from now, figures after Mike Davis 2006): Jakarta 24.9 M, Dhaka 25 M, Karachi 26.5 M, Shanghai 27 M, Bombay 33 M, Rio/Sao Paulo Extended Metropolitan Region over 37 M, Mexico City and environs 50 M (by mid 21 century), the Gulf of Guinea in West Africa with Lagos in its centre and 300 larger cities stretching over 600 km of coastline may include more than 60 M people in one large urban agglomeration by 2025.

This development is inevitably on it’s way. 

Yes dear Sebastian it might be necessary that contradiction will take place between the size of the city and livability in case of consistency of growing, as Cities are being for a thousand of years, more and more people are going to live in there. Quality of life, job opportunities, public services, cinema theatre academic services recreational activities….will remain core attractions and thus cities will remain growing. I agree with you particular mitigation measures have to be taken in consideration to secure sustainable development and if we do so I presume that large cities or city size do not necessarily mean negative living condition. In this sense one of the biggest challenge is the future professes – the prediction of the future. Different elements in this Infrastructure / Environmental impact/ Resources efficacy /Quality of life /Compact and Dens. Our role is to deal with future estimation in completely different manner with such elements and urban planning tools. I believe that one of the main tools is providing proper development ingredients is infrastructure, connectivity and public services which are placed on the top of these tools which pave the road for wealthy urban economy.

Good Afternoon! Many thanks to the colleagues from the Universidad de Rio Negro Argentina for sharing this perspective. I believe many cities around the World share a similar experience in the development of residential property in un-serviced areas, without due consideration of public space and in connection of illegal appropriation of lands.   

Public space is a very important factor to functioning urban fabrics as well as to liveable and prosperous cities. That brings me to the following question: Can you share with us some good city-wide approaches to public space from Latin America and / or Argentina? There must be some examples.. 

Which spatial development strategies and policies are most effective to create equitable, compact, connected, and socially inclusive cities in different contexts? Under the various spatial development strategies, one that is yet to be tested is the “land use planning for tenure security”. This will imply using land use planning to as a strategy for reallocating and redistributing spatial activities in ways that are most effective in creating equitable, compact, connected, and socially inclusive cities; while strenthening the margins of tenure security improvements of people. Within urban planning and development contexts, such approach will lead to ‘killing several birds with one stone’. It will demand for integrating participation and land tenure security improvements into land use planning in slum upgrading, informal settlement formalization and general human settlement planning and development. Apart from the land use planning aspects, recognition of rights, ownerships, provileges and interests on land will be key here.

sensitization of tenure seurity thou

Thanks Sebastian for posting the GLTN link. Very vital for understanding the land use planning for tenure security (LUP4TS) concept under development by the GLTN.

I am attaching here a more detailed paper on the LUP4TS concept recently presented at the World Bank Land and Poverty Conference 2015. The document explains the concept and everything concerning it. It could well be used in urban planning and development when well adapted towards specific challenges.

• Chigbu_307.pdf
  

Dear Eugene, Many thanks for your post. I just wanted to share some additional information on the Webpage of the Global Land Tool Network on the Land Use Planning for Tenure Security tool: https://www.gltn.net/index.php/land-tools/gltn-land-tools/land-use-planni….

How can good governance of land contribute to sustainable urbanization? As governance is hinged on decision making, a key problem in urban governance is how to reconscile political, beaucratic (administrative) and professional decisions on issues relating to urban development an management. A starting point will be to have a clear idea of the relationship between urban governance and public administration within the context of a specific city. Next, separate political power from the public administration of cities by applying political decisions to political affairs and administrative decisions administrative affairs -meaning, political vision should align to administrative visions for sustainable urban development and management. Finally, it will be crucial to device and put a specific method for efficiency assessment (based on known criterion or criteria).

That’s an interesting point: Political vision should align to administrative vision. How specifically, at what points, do you see the main fault lines? 

As we already know, political vision changes with each incoming political leader and political party. On the other hand administrative vision is more of a system or institutions which lives beyond political tenures and programmes. Both political and administrative decision making are part of the governance (in this case, in the urban). In most developing countries, Mayors or Chairmen/Chairwomen of city councils come in with political agenda that are not in line with existing public administration (or urban management) visions, hence, there is always a distortion in the direction of city govenance. Why such an influence on public administration? Well, even though city councils and their administrators last beyond political tenures  (which Mayors and co are bound to), political decisions made by these short-time politicians are what drive urban policies and urban project/programme implementations. The implication is that within the overall governance system of the urban, careless political decisions distort what would ordinarily be a harmonious flow of governance. The assumption here is that urban public administration systems are focused towards imptoving urban areas. Of course, this is not always the case, but is more the case than political leaderships are.

Then one could conclude that different hierarchies within urban governments in some cities “successfully” block themselves and prohibit sustainable urban development.

The Issue Papers 8 and 10 are calling for the formulation and implementation of national urban and territorial policy frameworks that reassert the spatial dimension of policy making. The objective of such policies would be to achieve a balanced and inclusive urban rural development through a focus on territorial and spatial planning.

Do you think that National Urban Policies can be an effective instrument to overcome these difficulties you mention and to provide a consistent reference frame for a county’s urbanization challenge? Cities would in this way be provided with clear guidance and (most importantly) also with suitable implementation instruments by the national government. 

Obviously the hierarchical structures of most cities are impediments to sustainable urban development (SUD). Why? I think SUD depends largely on “good” urban governance as a pre-condition. On the other hand “Good governance” relies on flow of decisions made participatory. Hierarchies pose problems to participatory decision making. I totally agree with your supposed conclusion.

I do align with the formulation and implementation of national urban and territorial policy frameworks that reassert the spatial dimension of policy making to achieve a balanced and inclusive urban rural development through a focus on territorial and spatial planning. I researched this in my doctorate, but from a rural perspective. In my work I demonstrated that even in rural areas, there are “rural towns” or “centres” which provide opportunities for spatial interrelationships of different units leading to territorial linkages to cities. I provided an argument for Territorial rural development -which I defined as a for “improving rural living conditions, by wholly focusing on place-based functions and assets; in order to increase balanced distribution of resources and decrease inequality; with the aim of reducing social/cultural, economic and natural resource deprivations. ” -see the following document (my doctoral thesis) downloadable here (and also attached) https://mediatum.ub.tum.de/doc/1136728/1136728.pdf

The territorial development approach, as presented in my work can apply to urban areas too. The approach will have urban implications in three ways. (1) It will enable the development of spatial networking between urban spatial units and beyond into rural areas through peri-urban areas. (2) It will sensitize area-wide focus (territorial) in urban development programmes. (3) And also evoke the case for heritage protection. The last Chapter of the thesis provides details on all of these, taking a rural-urban rather than urban-rural perspective. The focus of the work is on Nigeria. There are a lot that can be derived from here.

Of course, all of these necessitates for a policy shift. (1) The approach poses a major conceptual challenge to local policymakers in general, as there is need to redefinition of rural/urban municipalities as territories of common good to all, rather than mere political and administrative boundaries. (2) It may call for a “clustering system” whereby spatial development in is viewed territorially leading to accumulation of subsector assets. And this is on the assumption that both the urban and rural are territories (social, economic, physical, political) rather a situation where the urban is classified differently from the rural. That is -do to the rural as you do to the urban with the aim of enabling development benefits that they can relate to in the same or different ways…

• Dr thesis.pdf
  

Urban rural continuum is an important aspect for balanced urban growth.Countries with sizable physical sprawl have to minimise city primacy ratio to ensure a sustainable and balanced growth of urban areas.

India has a mix of growth pattern.India has a diagonal divide wherein western side is relatively more urbanised than national average of 31.16% as per 2011 census.Middle and eastern India presents a typology of low urbanisation covering Bihar province with minimum level to most provinces registering below average. This divide also confirm that higher is the level of urbanisation -higher is per capita income.

On the whole India is now stated to have 40 percent population depending on cities and towns directly or indirectly.It is estimated that each year India will have 10 million surplus labour looking for job opportunities in the non farm sector.

A vast majority of Indian urban population is concentrated among  top 500 cities and towns.Remaining 7500 towns hold the key to promote a balance regional growth and also carryforward the economic development of provinces which fall below the average level of urbanisation.

In this context,SPATIAL DISTRIBUTION OF ECONOMIC ACTIVITIES is essential to have a balanced development and also prepare cities to operate as service centre to their rural hinterland.Therefore ruralurban continuum needs to be viewed in terms of expansion of non farm sector  in proximity (closer ) to  rural areas.

The idea od connectivity infrastructure requires that we rethink haw such investments are financed and how an who leads the process. Who inniciates an action is the one to determine how it is shaped. cities need to be in the lead for such. this means that cities need to have access to the domensticcapital market to bring in the resources required as they are needed not a lumpy oans from donors and bring in the discipline fiscal management requires to improve the performance of local governemnts. With all if the municipal finance progrgrams tha thave happend oner the ladt 50 years that cities are still trying to gain skills for good management is almost cirminal. The systems that are v=based on revolbi-vitn door management like commissionersand unelected officials a[need to be replaced with locally responsible individuals.To hear that the capacity of local government is not there, yet again, is also somehting that needs to stop for capcity to manage is there. It is the lack of opportunity and real responsibiity that is missing. If training is required then so be it, but let it be focused, contracted locally and funded by the center as its responsibility to manage urban growth. Resource retention at the local level needs to be addressed, instead of tacitly allowing the center to soak up resources and then give back, if they do, funds to improve cities. 

Dear Prof. Pandey, thank you for this post. You mention that in India the remaining (smaller) 7,500 towns hold the key to promote a balanced regional growth. You also promote a spatial distribution of economic activities and the expansion of services that (rural) towns and cities are to contribute to (their) corresponding rural hinterlands.

Now, in the international debate over the past years a lot of emphasis was given to the potential role of small, intermediate and secondary towns in the urbanization of the decades to come. In short they are predicted to absorb a large deal of the new urban population and will face the biggest challenge. I wanted to encourage you to expand a bit more on this role of secondary cities in promoting urban-rural linkages for the case of India? Many thanks!

Good day all!

On the debate concerning secondary towns. They sure provide buffer for increasing urban population. But there is a trend I have observed from my research (I have already posted a thesis work done from territorial rural perspective) in the Nigerian case. That is, small towns tend to absolve more of rural-to-urban migrants that urban dwellers existing. Current trends in urban population growth, seems to point to the fact that there are more urban dwellers being born in urban areas than rural people pushing towards the urban. I suppose this trend makes sense because if billions are living urban areas already, they sure are procreating in urban maternities, hence more population pressure caused by in-urban births. Most of these new urban populants may be less willingly to move away from their brith place into buffer towns due to culture differences. the question that arises then is, what measures are being put in place to provide “secondary cities” that are able to cater for those who are used to “primary cities” conditions? If their conditions are not met, there is a tendency that they most will stick to “primary cities”, leading to a “advanced slum conditions” and “mental urban slum living”.

Good evening, Uchendu.. That’s a good point. It is not easy to promote secondary cities to cater for those who are used to primary cities conditions and reduce dependence on primary cities? But, in my opinion, secondary cities which are well planned in proper location, which enjoy a degree of self-containment, social balance, and environment-friendly good public transport can be one of good solutions to accommodate growth associated with the development of mega cities and the outward movement of their populations. Key factors in planning sustainable secondary cities are to reduce the need to travel to primary cities by private car, by facilitating mixed-use development and by investing in public transport. Such policies and designs will help to sustain viable local services and employment. In addition, it is important to create a sense of community, meet sustainable density standards, and plan for the various type of housing and public green space which most people want.

I understand that one, among good practices promoting social inclusion, is to locate investments in portions of the city where there is a noticeable cultural transition of users, where  life and differences -among the space users- may occur the most lively, promoting people and groups to approach each other; usually such approach is facilitated by spatial qualities that propitiate one to overcome long stablished social fears linked to diversity of users race, social-economic status, and cultural practices. Places which elements organization lead people to almost “fatally” acknowledge each other’s presence. Such interactions are facilitated by extensive vsual transparency, i.e. passer-byers can see what’s going on, and users know they are seen by many; where entrance and exit to a space of collective use is unobstructed and well lit at night, where users safety is safeguarded majorly by other users. I have the impression these spaces are most successfully when used by short-stay users.

Such spaces may be developed under functional land markets investing in mixed use activities, including -besides traditional market driven uses- sportive, recreational cultural admission-fee free activities. Such helps to keep local land market value, social life and surveillance, and cultural enrichment, which I understand  strongly contributes towards the urban synergy so much necessary for livelihood and social sustainability in the city. Needless to say that transportation policies are a must tool intrinsec to these investments.

Vera Chamie

Hi Vera, 

Welcome to the Urban Dialogue Theme 3 “Spatial Development”. You are the first participant to post. I am very glad!

You are absolutely right, I believe, this would be good and comprehensive agenda for developing sustainable neighbourhoods.

Have you got any practical examples that you could share with us, where such a vision, or aspects of it, have been realised? Examples from the Global South are especially welcome..

Thank you for your comment, Sebastian.

I plan on gathering the information related to some sites and will post it whenever it becomes available.

That will be great. Many thanks!