brief overview of research proposal - welcome to mile 3/session 3.2 dr s...informal settlements 1.8...
TRANSCRIPT
The Research Question and Focus of the Presentation
The Overall Research Question: How does exploring planning knowledges within the Metropolitan Municipality of eThekwini (Durban, South Africa), reveal the roles, uses and construction of land use planning knowledge, as a focal point for theorizing and transforming practice, within the context of multiple knowledge actors and knowledges? How practical knowledge, lived experiences, and the multiplicity of stakeholders can expand, confront and change planning knowledge used in practice, within the context of an African City
Presenter : ST Moonsammy
Research Design, Methodology
Institutional Ethnography
Study of a practice a ‘sub-culture’, focus on the institution and its members
Participant observation, daily work environment , importance of work knowledge and social relations
Informant Interviews and Focus Groups
56 qualitative interviews
Focus Groups
Nonprobability Sampling: Resident Interviews (168)
Qualitative questionnaire to voice community opinions and experiences (English and isiZulu)
4 development activists stories
Participants drawn from Six Sizakala Centres
Review of Documentation
IDPs, SDFs, TPS, Legislation , Minutes , SOPs
Municipal Planning Functions Strategic Spatial Planning IDP-
SDFS, Local Area Plans) Regulatory/Land Use Management (TPS) Sector Inclusions
Environmental Plans Infrastructure Requirements
Parking Standards Architectural Perspectives
Planning theory is plural and not context independent
Practice is complex – multiple ideas considered as a guide to challenge and make sense of planning practice revealed
Communicative and Deliberative Planning Theory
Institutionalism as an Analytical lens
Culturization of Planning
Phronesis – practical, common knowledge about living, sharing, making and use space
Rationality and Power, Rationality and Politics, Politics and Professionals (no theory for power)
Planning ‘Theory’ / Thoughts Selected for the Research
Theory and Practice in the Context of African Urbanism : Problematization; Travels and Assimilation of Planning; Gray Spaces
What Guides and Directs Planning Practice on a Daily Basis : Planning Legislation, Bureaucratic Ethics, Institutional culture, planning culture
Planning’s epistemology, coding and assumptions
Shift to society and not plans;
Flexible society requires flexible planning knowledge;
Shift to urban codes, simple legislation, tacit knowledge and multiple knowledge actors and points of coordination
Works with : spontaneity, reciprocity, innovation , more deliberation & self – regulation
Key ideas used
Land use planning knowledges directs planning (SDFs - UDL, TPS, d’moss, parking standards – some sectors matter)
The power of planning knowledge - it compels appeal authorities to ensure compliance first before reason
The knowledge in use and re (used) comes from the past – uncritically used
The role and (in) credibility of planning consultants
Political knowledge matters more than any other knowledge, the political in planning is everywhere
Emerging Insights from the Empirical Data The All Importance of Planning Knowledges Revealed
Social Relations and Unintended Consequences uncovered in the (Re) development of Land Use Planning Knowledge for Practice
Territorial Jealousy, Personalities and Alliances - Social Production of Land Use Planning Knowledge for Practice
The Generation of Land Use Planning Knowledge/s - Views from the Inside There is no real discussion about a philosophy in what we trying to do –
philosophy of assimilation !
There is nothing wrong with the land use planning knowledge /s we created and in use
We have the qualification, experience and legal mandate to construct this knowledge - do you recognize job reservation
Democracy in practice, participation at its minimum, symptoms of a weak and fragmented institution
The majority of councillors lack the time, capacity and fear the technical in planning
The role/s of research, teaching and planning organizations – absent
Missed Opportunities in the (Re) Development of Land Use Planning Knowledge/s
Dominant Storylines Emerge
It’s a time to organize communities across geography, class and race
Constitutionally compliant but constitutionally unprogressive
A fight for basics to engage - gate keeping, political and professional (public & private)
Places are changing, acknowledge and work with this
Profession out of touch with realities and lacks innovation
Different lived experiences but converging on new practices for municipal planning
‘neighbourly fit’, dealing with ‘public bads’ as collectively prioritized, public and private space as one, the social, urban management, solutions, responsibilities, less hardship, grey is acceptable
Emerging Insights from the Empirical Data Multiple Stakeholder Experiences and Expectations
Flexibility and tolerances: high levels of tolerances for mixed uses
Integration or diversity (race, cultural, religion and age ) less of an issue
Low levels of awareness of TPS (less than 30%)
Levels of control (council moderate control) and moderate role/s for neighbours in planning matters
Addressing conflicts, traditional methods used in planning inadequate and ineffective
meetings, local councilors, community groups, mediation and conflict resolution
Notions of compliance and illegality: overwhelming support for ‘compliance’
Prioritized and limited ‘public bads’
Social problems and pollution
Gender
Male (60.1%)
Female (39.9%)
Age
18 - 24 (8.3%)
35 – 54 years 62.5%)
>65 years (1.8%)
Historical racial categorization
African (54.8%)
Indians (34.5%)
Whites (8.3%)
Coloured (1.8%)
Income
R1-1000 (13.1%)
R1001- 5 000 (48.8%)
R5 001-10 000 (7.1% )
R10 001- 15 000(7.7%)
undisclosed (12.5%)
Education Tertiary (26.8%)
Secondary (57.7%)
Primary(11.3%)
No schooling (3.6%)
No response (0.6%)
Resident Interviews : socio-demographic
Employment Percent
Formal sector 29.2
Unemployed 23.8
Self-employed 23.2
Informal sector 12.5
Pensioner 7.7
Student 3.6
Location (approx. 87%) Percent
KwaMashu; Ntuzuma; Inanda 19.0
Phoenix 17.3
Umlazi 16.1
Chatsworth 12.5
Hammasdale; Welbedacht 7.7
Umhlanga; Umhloti 7.1
Pinetown; New Germany;
Westville; Queensburgh 7.1
Managing Conflicts : Mechanisms /Options Percent
Mediation and Conflict Resolution
Local councillor and ward committee (14.9%)
46.6
Community Meetings 32.1
Court and Enforcement Proceedings 22.6
Communication notices 5.4
Don’t know 4.2
13
`Negative Land Use for Place Making ` Percent
Socially problematic facilities e.g. - clubs, casinos, gambling premises, music venues, taverns
& shebeens 60.6
Industry generating pollution- e.g. factories, truck yards, workshops 17.8
Public uses that create nuisances, health and safety concerns such as military uses, sewerage
plants, unmanaged parks, unmanaged environmental areas, public transport facilities 4.2
Non-residential uses 3.6
Religious uses 3.0
Uses that generate noise 1.8
Shops and business uses 1.8
Livestock 1.8
Informal settlements 1.8
Informal trading and hawking &unregistered Businesses 1.2
No response 1.2
Traffic generating uses, uses that cannot cater for parking on site .6
Poorly designed areas not in use .6
14
A Local Version of Communicative Planning Theory (CPT) in the (Re) Development of Land Use Planning Knowledge Emerges
Nuances many critics of CPT including Lauria and Wagner‘s (2006) study
Emerging Principles for Land Use Planning Knowledge/s
Property : local knowledge expands on the functional, financial and social value and use of property;
Simple and generic rules for property; society is flexible and development is flexible; planning should be flexible
Local areas and the city remain close to community interests and passion
Civil society : Social capital may be underdeveloped, unorganized, but it is always present and wanting to be engaged;
Planning should capacitate and enable civil society engagement;
Conflicts: are prevalent and consensus requires work - discussion, debate, negotiation and mediation;
Planning knowledges : created thorough Discussion and Debate as “Mini Constitutions”
Multiple Role/s for Planners: break down the technical, capacitate, expand and share power of knowledge development and planning practice, be advocates, also be experts
Contributions to the Planning Thoughts and Theory
Emerging Conceptual Ideas for the (Re) Development of Land Use
Planning Knowledge for Practice
Knowledge and space is socially constructed with or without planning and planners
Theorists /ideas and empirical findings (simple urban codes, flexible society and planning, simple legislation), expanding/multiple points of coordination, moving away from control towards reciprocity, multiple knowledges and actors and involvement in planning
Four Interdependent pillars
Social and society informing knowledge and practice ( capable of being caring and flexible); mutual benefits, not everything needs to be controlled, practical, collaboration for coordination
Simple and Basic Code
Simple Legislation
Matured profession and Institutions (expands concept of power, knowledge, society, policy making )
Fig 10.4 Theoretical Land Use Planning Framework Source: Author, influenced by Halleux et al. 2012, p. 890.
Social construction of Planning Outcomes
Social Knowledge Social Experiences Social Evaluation and Mitigation
Basic Planning Code – ‘Super
Code’ Prioritize public
bads Protect private
and public property
boundaries Promote
neighbourliness Promote
opportunity Applicable across land markets and
types of tenure
Simple Planning Legislation -Context
Specific
Compliance is affordable
Compliance is achievable
Benefits outweigh costs
Diversification promoted
Mediation as part of compliance
Professional and Institutional
Approach Politically engaged
and community engaged policy development Adaptive and
flexible planning systems
Participatory and collaborative approach to
planning Reflective and research based
planning practice
Thank You!