Sustainability

Sustainability and planning are inextricably linked. Jepson shows that both take place at the local and regional levels, that effective public interventions are the ones occurring nearest to ecosystems, that global problems vary locally so that responses require local policies, that political responsiveness is highest at the local level, and that sustainability and planning can only be conducted and achieved by people who are directly and personally involved in policy formulation. Jepson goes on affirming that both sustainability and planning seek to reconcile the three Es (environment, economics, and equity). Hopwood highlights that sustainability and planning not only combine growing concerns about a range of environmental issues with socio-economic issues but also aim the same objective – to implement ideas based on the principle of social justice since the current pattern of growth damaged the environment and resulted in more poverty. Hopwood also affirms that the incorporation of sustainable development in planning has the potential to address fundamental challenges for humanity, now and into the future.

Sustainability features many definitions. Jepson sees in definitional variety and vagueness an opportunity for sustainability become a unifying force enabling opposing camps to find common ground. For example, from a biological standpoint and concepts of “carrying capacity” and “feedback flows”, sustainability is “the ability of systems to maintain or maximize themselves over time” and, from a geopolitical perspective, the Brundtland Commission agreed that sustainability is “the development which meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs.” Jepson provides two other definitions for sustainability as a strategy for planners: a principle “that results in the enhancement of human quality of life and the simultaneous minimization of negative environmental impacts” and “an integration of ecological and economic issues of the Earth’s life-support systems.” Hopwood also presents definitions for sustainability by citing other authors. According to Haughton, the five principles of sustainability are futurity (inter-generational equity), social justice (intra-generational equity), transfrontier responsibility (geographical equity), procedural equity (people treated open and fairly), and interspecies equity (the importance of biodiversity). O’Riordan, in turn, categorizes sustainability based on environmental commitment degree. The extremes degrees are “strong ecocentric”, which tends towards social and economic equity as well as redistribution, and “strong technocentric”, which supports economic and political status quo. Berke also defines sustainability in terms of development by saying that “sustainable development augments the scope of the green community vision and ideals by focusing on the ways to build economically vital, socially equitable communities that function compatibly with the natural environment.”

Planners face many challenges to achieve sustainability. Jepson warns that, in order to implement sustainable initiatives, planners must be concerned about integration and how to produce more coherent and complete public policy, establish a productive process by effective communication, ponder on values – what is right and wrong -, and focus on institutions to create a cooperative and integrated approach. Hopwood cites Marcuse to highlight that sustainability and social justice do not necessarily go hand in hand. Sustainability can create injustice and social justice can also lead to environmental damage. Berke remembers that planners have to reframe their work to anticipate and accommodate the needs of current and future generations in ways that balance the three Es and link local actions to global concerns. Berke points out that planners’ roadmap to achieve such objective is through improving inequitable living conditions associated with race and poverty, maintaining the quality of built environments, preserving valuable natural areas, working on landscapes, and creating plans that effectively mitigate the adverse impacts that local communities impose on global climate conditions, which is caused by limited time horizons and narrow interest of group perspectives. In this process, planners face political resistance, especially from parties entrenched in the status quo.

Planners approach sustainability on different ways. According to Jepson, it is important that planners deal with sustainability through concepts of land use and community development to integrate the three Es. By doing so, sustainability helps planning to reduce the amount of land consumed for development as well as automobile dependency, increase attachment to place, and encourage social diversity. The use of sustainability as a conceptual context for planning (theories, goals, objectives, and strategy), argues Jepson, also leads to integration and balance, understanding of the dynamics and effects of private property rights movements, understanding how court decisions weaken the legal basis for land use control and zoning, establishing an effective participatory process and models, developing a consistent commitment among stakeholders, and guiding decisions based on scientific findings. Berke also points out that planners considering green communities dispersion in urban forms result in human health, natural systems, spiritual renewal, livability, and fair share. The methodology to create green communities is amplifying sustainable planning through grassroots participatory design and planning, integrating agriculture into planning process creating cities that are more socially and economically sustainable, promoting more inclusive and participatory local decision-making by encouraging citizen engagement and buy-in, distributing scientific information on landscape ecology to local governments that are mandated to prepare comprehensive plans, deriving a community-based profiling technique to be used for formulating customized planning policies in renewable energy sources, specifying emission reduction targets and timeline monitoring programs, establishing policies aimed at adaptation to climate change and education, building assessment systems affecting sustainability issues, and applying greenhouse gas estimates and inventory model to a sub-urban university campus. Berke affirms that these are processes aimed at strengthening and mobilizing social networks to support green community initiatives.

European cities could be used as models for sustainable planning. Beatley affirms that the European Union is the most serious region in the world in terms of integrating planning and sustainability. The main reasons for this approach are the presence of vigorous green politics, participation of EU-sponsored information sharing, and hundreds of local projects. As a result of this planning, many EU cities are compact, walkable, energy-efficient, green communities, and economically viable. The EU has achieved such development by restricting sprawl, building new areas adjacent to the existing city core, fostering urban development, promoting industrial reuse, creating an extensive greenbelt and regional open space structure, strengthening ecological networks within and between urban centers, establishing closed-loop urban metabolism (waste represents inputs), and creating incentive programs to reduce energy consumption by allowing schools to keep a certain percentage of the savings. The consequences of these policies were more efficient public transit and energy systems, facilitated pedestrian spaces, and private property sharing programs.

Jepson, E. "Sustainability and Planning".
Hopwood, B. "Sustainable development", 2005
Berke, P. "The evolution of green community planning", 2008
Beatley, T. "Planning for sustainability", 2003.