Page 1 of 3 Next  Ayon Kumar Tarafdar PhD Fellow, Department of Urban Planning, Norwegian University of Science and Technology (NTNU) Ayon.K.Tarafdar@ntnu.no The notion of urban planning is well established in terms of theories, action and profession. However, there has been a long debate on whether ‘development’, which is an outcome of planning, leads to a better living ‘environment’ or otherwise. While development is advocated by most, so that the quality of life rises, there are others that keep environment at the core and support restricted growth. Some believe that when the motive of development is economic proliferation and market adaptation, the priority of environmental standards take a backseat. In developing economies, this apprehension gets a shade darker, since there is a larger impetus to perform and grow, thereby raising the chances of a compromise with environment. In this backdrop, the paper, while acknowledging the concern and reality of imminent urbanisation, shall briefly trace the significance of planning in modern times, and bring out possible directions of planning approach for better living environment. The relation between planning and environment becomes critical when we understand the role of ‘Information’ as the basis of this synergy. Information in such context essentially deals with a vast mesh of socio-economic data and maps. Hence it is interesting to observe how the lack of or the abundance of spatial data - can lead to skewed planning affecting the local environment. Urbanisation and the Environment Urban growth and change In contemporary times, the phenomenon of urbanisation is indispensable and expected. Urban areas grow in area and population everyday, calling for more resources, better living spaces, and improved administration. In 1950, only 28 percent of the world population was urban. Today, more than 45 percent of the world stays in urban areas (UNCHS Habitat, 2001). By 2008, more than half will be living in urban areas, and it is expected that by 2030, this figure will cross 60 percent (World Bank, 2005). Urban areas change in its structure and morphology in varied manner, owing to natural growth as well as the socio-economic aspirations of the cities. There are various viewpoints behind the phenomenon of urban growth and change. The basic cause is the element of ‘migration’ from rural to urban areas (Bairoch, 1982). Another reason is the natural ‘sprawl of the urban limits’ to accommodate the city aspirations and growing population. With the rise of global networks of capital, the race between cities to compete has coupled with actions to cope with its own growth. Resultantly, cities have become more complex as an entity. In this backdrop, the position of environment becomes an element of criticality, concern, and debate. Cities are considered to be areas of the greatest environmental transformation, where virtually all effects of ecological modification derived from development come together (Burgess, Carmona and Kolstee, 1997). Rise of Environmental Consciousness On an historical account, the first written arguments that were environmentally conscious with respect to planning can be found 150 years back in America and Europe. It can be said that there were broadly two groups. The ‘transcendentalists’ of the United States, who were the first group, were alarmed at the American industrial revolution and economy. The other group, which were the ‘anarchists’, were tender towards industrial and urban growth. Based in Europe, these theorists in the mid nineteenth century, believed in balanced simple livelihoods that should participate for optimum material progress. They advocated that inventions related to technology and industries should be designed primarily for good of communal life and individual spirit, rather than for direct profit (Ward, 1974). Modern environmentalism was reborn in the 1960s (O’Riordan & Turner, 1983). The first significant initiatives towards modern environmentalism started with the publishing of ‘The Limits to Growth’, in 1972. This was a book commissioned by the Club of Rome. The two most critical conclusions of this report took the world by storm. One conclusion outlined that if the growth trends of the 1970s for population, industrialization, pollution, food production, and resource depletion continue unchanged; the ‘limits to growth’ on this planet would be reached within one hundred years. The most probable result will be a sudden and uncontrollable decline in population and industrial capacity. Secondly, it stated that it is possible to alter these trends and establish ecological stability for the future (Pestel, 1972). For this, a ‘World3’ model was explained. The report set forth a large number of discussions and research agendas by nations and multinational firms. A few important happenings of the 1970s that record these concerns were - the Stockholm Declaration (1972), the UN Environment Programme getting established (1972), the launch of LandSAT satellite, the Ramsar Convention (1973), and the conduction of the first World Climate Conference (1979). Scientists and policy makers agreed upon the need to take environment seriously and understand its relation with urban planning. For many developing countries, the 1980s are often termed as the lost decade. Urban expansion and development issues faced critical challenges in this decade. As urban populations grew, cities found their physical infrastructure stressed and unable to cope with the demand. The most significant development of the decade was the formation of World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) also known as the Brundtland Commission, in 1983. “Our Common Future”, the Commission’s final report, pointed out the need to have sustainable development as a growth strategy and defined sustainable development as ‘development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs’, making it part of the environment lexicon (WCED 1987).
Page 1 of 3
Next |