SavedAdd your journal

Journals / A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 1

Urban planning approaches in divided cities

Gizem CANER
Fulin BÖLEN
Pages
139–156
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Hence, incorporation of ‘difference’ as a prominent feature of the city to its plans is not addressed as it should be in these special cases

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This paper provides a comparative analysis of planning approaches in divided cities in order to investigate the role of planning in alleviating or exacerbating urban division in these societies.
📊
Key Findings & Data:It analyses four urban areas—Berlin, Beirut, Belfast, Jerusalem—either of which has experienced or still experiences extreme divisions related to nationality, ethnicity, religion, and/or culture.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Hence, incorporation of ‘difference’ as a prominent feature of the city to its plans is not addressed as it should be in these special cases
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

This paper provides a comparative analysis of planning approaches in divided cities in order to investigate the role of planning in alleviating or exacerbating urban division in these societies. It analyses four urban areas—Berlin, Beirut, Belfast, Jerusalem—either of which has experienced or still experiences extreme divisions related to nationality, ethnicity, religion, and/or culture. Each case study is investigated in terms of planning approaches before division and after reunification (if applicable). The relation between division and planning is reciprocal: planning effects, and is effected by urban division. Therefore, it is generally assumed that traditional planning approaches are insufficient and that the recognized engagement methods of planners in the planning process are ineffective to overcome the problems posed by divided cities. Theoretically, a variety of urban scholars have proposed different perspectives on this challenge. In analysing the role of planning in divided cities, both the role of planners, and planning interventions are evaluated within the light of related literature.The case studies indicate that even though different planning approaches have different consequences on the ground, there is a universal trend in harmony with the rest of the world in reshaping these cities. This conclusion draws another one; the contemporary planning interventions in divided cities do not address the root causes of division. Hence, incorporation of ‘difference’ as a prominent feature of the city to its plans is not addressed as it should be in these special cases

🔖

Cite This Article

CANER, G., BÖLEN, F. (2016). Urban planning approaches in divided cities. A|Z ITU Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, Cilt: 13 - Sayı: 1, 139–156. https://ajindex.com/articles/146203

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (9)

  1. Amin, A. (2002), Ethnicity and the Multicultural City: Living with Diversity. Environment and Planning A, Vol. 34, No. 6, 959—80. Amin, A., Graham, S. (1997), The Ordinary City. Transactions of the In- stitute of British Geographers, Vol. 22, No. 4, 411—429. Benvenisti, M. (1986), Conflicts and Contradictions. Villard Books, New York Benvenisti, M. (1987), The Peace Process and Intercommunal Strife. Journal of Palestine Studies, Vol. 17, No. 1, 3-11.
  2. Boal, F. W. (1994), Encapsulation: Urban Dimensions of National Con- flict. In Dunn, S. (Ed.), Managing Di- vided Cities. Keele University Press, UK, 30-40.
  3. Boal, F. W. (1996), Integration and Division: sharing and segregating in Belfast. Planning Practice and Research, Vol. 11, No. 2, 151-159.
  4. Bollens, S. A. (1998), Urban Policy in Ethnically Polarized Societies. Inter- national Political Science Review, Vol. 19, No. 2, 187-215.
  5. Bollens, S. A. (2001), Role of Public Policy in Deeply Divided Cities: Bel- fast, Jerusalem, and Johannesburg. In Sisk, T., Koryakov, I. (Ed.), Democracy at the Local Level: The International IDEA Handbook on Participation, Representation, Conflict Management, and Governance, Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, Stockholm, 82-89
  6. Bollens, S.A. (2002), Managing Ur- ban Ethnic Conflict. In Hambleton R., Savitch, H. V., Stewart M. (Ed.), Globalism and Local Democracy: Challenge and Change in Europe and North America. Palgrave MacMillan, New York, 108-124.
  7. Bollens, S. A. (2007), Comparative Research on Contested Cities: Lenses and Scaffoldings. Working Paper No. 17, Crisis States Research Centre, London. Bollens, S. A. (2009), Intervening in Politically Turbulent Cities: Spaces, Buildings, and Boundaries. Journal of Urban Technology, Vol. 16, No. 2, 79- 107. Brand, R, Gaffikin, F., Morrisson, M., Perry, D. (2008), Changing the Contested City. CU2 Contested Cities- Urban Universities Report, Queen’s University, Belfast. Calame, J., Charlesworth, E. (2009), Divided Cities: Belfast, Beirut, Jerusa- lem, Mostar, and Nicosia. University of Pennsylvania Press,
  8. Philadelphia Chami, Y. (2013), Beirut: From Cit y of Capital to Capital Cit y. Projective School, Architectural Association Grad- uate School. Retrieved from: http:// projectivecities.aaschoo1.ac.uk/port— folio/ yasmina-el-chami-beirut-from- city-of-capital-to-capital-city/ (date retrieved: 11.04.2014)
  9. Chiodelli, F., (2012), The Jerusalem Master Plan: Planning into the Con- flict. Jerusalem QuarferlJ, vol. 51, 5—20. Chiodelli,