New evidence from Brazil indicates that the regulation of land use and building standards can reinforce other factors that contribute to informal and irregular urban land occupation. The magnitude and persistence of informality in Latin American cities cannot be fully explained by poverty rates (which are declining), insufficient public investment in social housing or urban infrastructure (which is expanding), or even government tolerance of certain opportunistic practices on the part of informal developers and occupants (The Economist 2007). While these factors are undoubtedly important, inappropriate land use and building regulation also seems to play a role in the resilience of the problem. It can be argued as a corollary that an alternative regulatory framework may help to alleviate informality in urban land markets.
Data from global satellite imagery and new technologies for processing digital maps are facilitating the study of urban expansion on a global scale. The Lincoln Institute of Land Policy’s most recent policy focus report, Making Room for a Planet of Cities, by Shlomo Angel and his colleagues, demonstrates this new capability. It analyzes the spatial structure of cities using four complementary data sets: Landsat satellite images for 3,646 global cities with a population over 100,000 in 2000; a detailed stratified sample of 120 of these cities with data from 1990 and 2000; geo-coded census tract data for 20 U.S. cities from 1910 to 2000; and data drawn from digitized historic maps for 30 representative world cities from 1800 to 2000.
Metrics of urban spatial structure based on these data sets measure a city’s built-up area (containing buildings and impervious surfaces) and the city footprint (the built-up area plus open spaces surrounded by or within 100 meters of built-up area). Available population data allow the calculation of population densities for these areas.
The population and area measures produce comparable urban built-up area average densities in 2000 that range in the sample of 120 global cities from 555 persons per hectare in Dhaka, Bangladesh to only 15.7 in Tacoma, Washington. Urban built-up area average densities vary systematically across country groups, ranging from 25 persons per hectare in land-rich developed countries (United States, Canada, and Australia); to 50 in other developed countries (Europe and Japan); and 130 in developing countries. Analysis of built-up area densities across cities supports the predictions of urban theory: for example, higher incomes and land availability are associated with lower densities; and larger city populations are associated with higher densities.
Urban average densities have declined in the three data sets with time series data: they fell at 2.0 percent per year for built-up area density in the 120 global cities from 1990 to 2000; at 1.9 percent per year for census tract density in the 20 U.S. cities from 1910 to 2000; and at 1.5 percent per year in the 30 representative cities from 1800 to 2000. In this 30-city sample, densities typically peaked around 1900 and declined since then. A U.S. exception is Los Angeles, where average census tract densities have increased since 1940 and now exceed those of New York City. The average census tract density in several other U.S. cities has leveled off since 1990, albeit at low levels around 20 persons per hectare.
In terms of fragmentation, the average city footprint density is half of the built-up area average density, implying that a typical city has as much land in its urbanized open spaces as in its built-up areas. In 2000, urbanized open space as a share of built-up area ranged from a low around 0.4 (São Paulo, Brazil) to a high around 1.8 (Zhengzhou, China). The proportion of urbanized open space across cities decreased somewhat from 1990 to 2000. Although fragmentation values did not differ between developed and developing countries, fragmentation in Chinese cities is particularly high, with much land remaining under cultivation within their city footprints.
Demographic forecasts indicate that the world’s urban population will double from 3 billion in 2000 to 6 billion in 2050, with nearly all such growth occurring in developing countries. This implies a doubling of urban built-up areas in the unlikely event that urban population densities will remain constant. If densities decline by 1 percent annually (half the historic rate), city built-up area will triple, and a 2 percent annual decline will increase built-up area five-fold.
Containment strategies that may be appropriate in the United States and other low-density developed countries are likely to fail in developing countries where city populations are expected to grow several-fold over the next few decades. These cities need to prepare for their future expansion by realistically projecting their built-up areas and allocating land for both open spaces and rights-of-way for the arterial road networks and other infrastructure that will be needed to support urban growth.
Infrastructure, defined to include transport, telecommunication, electric power, water, and sanitation, is high on the agenda of both industrial and developing countries. In the United States, concern has been mounting about insufficient maintenance and the resulting decline in the quality of infrastructure facilities and services, especially in transport. Additional investments in infrastructure have also figured heavily in proposals to stimulate demand, employment, and economic growth. In developing countries, infrastructure’s challenges relate more to increasing capacity to provide services to both existing urban residents and the two billion new urban residents projected to arrive by 2050. The Lincoln Institute’s seventh annual land policy conference, held in early June 2012, addressed many aspects of infrastructure including investment, maintenance, and its externalities.
Economic aspects.
Empirical work carried out over the past 25 years on the macroeconomic returns to infrastructure investment have produced a wide range of outcomes–from negative returns to those above 30 percent annually. A careful survey of more recent studies indicates that infrastructure investment in transport, power, and telecom is likely to have positive macroeconomic effects and raise productivity.
At the same time, many countries allocate only modest sums to infrastructure maintenance, even though a broad consensus of opinion and empirical evidence indicate that the returns to maintenance–particularly transport–are very high. Inadequate maintenance may result from donor preferences to fund new capacity in developing countries, but maintenance shortfalls are also common in developed countries, suggesting that other institutional factors are likely to be important.
Networked infrastructure normally is subject to scale economies, and some networks are natural monopolies. Such infrastructure must be subject to economic regulation to prevent firms from engaging in monopoly pricing. While the need for regulation is most apparent when infrastructure is provided by private firms, regulatory oversight is often necessary when provision is by a public enterprise.
Spatial aspects.
Infrastructure has a strong influence on spatial development patterns and can be used to direct growth and–along with zoning and other incentives–to encourage more dense and compact development patterns. While only a few studies are available, however, empirical work indicates that the cost of redeveloping brownfield sites exceeds the cost of greenfield development including the costs of new infrastructure service.
The de-industrialization of cities has been going on for a long time, but recently some cities, such as San Jose, California, have stopped supporting the conversion of industrial or office space to residential or commercial use. They seek to maintain appropriate space for employment when economic growth returns so that they can compete for new firms and encourage local job creation.
Externalities.
Metropolitan areas produce about three-quarters of global anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions annually, with a large share coming from transport and electric power. The replacement of aging systems and installation of new capacity provide a major opportunity to switch to more energy- and emission-efficient systems in urban areas. System management also can be improved with congestion tolls, parking fees, and transit expansion; by ensuring that tariffs cover the costs of water and electric power; and by promoting green buildings.
Relocating households in the path of infrastructure expansion involves a large number of people displaced by new roads or the widening of existing roads, the location of new facilities such as power plants, and reservoirs that flood broad areas behind dams. Estimates indicate that between 10 and 23 million persons are resettled involuntarily in developing countries each year, and that the majority of relocations are related to infrastructure. Some of these involuntary resettlements meet the safeguard standards promulgated by the World Bank or other standards such as the Equator Principles, but most resettlement is subject to only national or provincial policies.
These topics and many others–including the impacts on infrastructure of mega-events such as the Olympics, the taxation of utilities, the locational effects of congestion tolls, the variation in quality of infrastructure services, and the remarkable impacts of mobile telephony in Africa–will be covered in the conference proceedings that will be available as a printed volume in May 2013 and later as an eBook.
Stephanie Pollack, subdirectora del Centro Dukakis de Política Urbana y Regional de la Universidad Northeastern, detectó una curiosa anomalía cuando analizó los resultados de una encuesta sobre las necesidades de transporte público de los residentes de bajos ingresos en Massachusetts. La encuesta pedía que se indicara el principal modo de transporte, y daba las opciones tradicionales, como tomar el tren o el autobús. Pero no había ninguna casilla para marcar lo que resultó ser el modo más común de transporte: docenas de encuestados respondieron “el automóvil de otra persona”.
Para Pollack, este descubrimiento subrayó la dificultad de diseñar sistemas de transporte acordes con las necesidades de la población, así como la necesidad de contar con mejores maneras para medir y hacer participar a la gente para poder suplir las verdaderas necesidades de transporte público de los usuarios. Como parte de un proyecto llamado The Toll of Transportation (La carga del transporte), el Centro Dukakis trató de determinar cómo llegan los residentes adonde tienen que ir en ciudades como Lynn, Worcester, Springfield y East Boston. Pero la categoría “automóvil de otra persona” no formaba parte de ninguna lista de datos estándar de transporte. “Medimos la equidad en educación y en sanidad, pero no en transporte”, dijo Pollack a los escritores y editores reunidos para el Foro periodístico sobre el suelo y el entorno edificado, realizado del 28 al 29 de marzo de 2014 en Cambridge, Massachusetts. “No tenemos el concepto de cómo debería ser un sistema de transporte ‘justo’”.
El tema del foro fue la infraestructura: para quién es, cómo planificarla y pagarla, y por qué necesitamos inversiones más inteligentes en los entornos urbanos del siglo XXI. Esta fue la séptima edición de esta reunión para periodistas de dos días de duración, patrocinada por el Instituto Lincoln, la Fundación Nieman de Periodismo de la Universidad Harvard, y la Escuela de Posgrado de Diseño (Graduate School of Design o GSD) de la Universidad Harvard.
Pollock compartió también con los participantes su investigación sobre el desarrollo orientado al transporte público (transit-oriented development o TOD), una política que se fomenta cada vez más en las ciudades por medio de reformas de zonificación e incentivos económicos. Los datos revelaron algunos resultados problemáticos sobre el uso y la equidad del transporte público. Los residentes de ingresos más altos que se mudan a zonas TOD (que se convierten rápidamente en lugares caros para vivir) en general no usan transporte público, mientras que los residentes que sí lo usan tienen que residir más lejos de las estaciones, en barrios económicamente más asequibles. Este desplazamiento aumenta el costo y la complejidad de sus viajes para ir al trabajo y volver. Además, en un tercio de las zonas TOD estudiadas, el uso del transporte público se redujo después de haberse introducido el desarrollo.
En otra presentación, Judith Grant Long, profesora asociada de Planificación Urbana en GSD, analizó megaeventos, como la Copa del Mundo y las Olimpiadas, que inducen a las ciudades a invertir miles de millones de dólares en infraestructura. Hay poca evidencia de un retorno positivo a la inversión en términos de puestos de trabajo permanente, ingresos o incluso la imagen de la ciudad, indicó Long. El Comité Olímpico Internacional podría ayudar a las ciudades a planificar mejor y organizar juegos “del tamaño correcto”, sugirió. Barcelona, Roma, Tokio, Múnich, Montreal y Londres han podido transformar con cierto éxito las villas olímpicas en áreas de uso a largo plazo que benefician a un sector más amplio de la población una vez que se acaban los juegos.
Las sociedades público-privadas, la construcción y operación privada de rutas y los sistemas de peaje han sido innovaciones recientes para el financiamiento de infraestructura, dijo José A. Gómez-Ibáñez, profesor de GSD y de la Escuela Kennedy de Harvard. Pero se puede decir que desde que se completó el sistema de rutas interestatales en los EE.UU., el papel del gobierno federal no ha sido claro. El desafío estriba en demostrarle al público quién se beneficiará de los proyectos, para poder justificar su financiamiento.
Los gobiernos deberán ser más inteligentes y enfocar bien el objetivo al construir futuros sistemas de transporte y otros tipos de infraestructura, sobre todo cuando las áreas metropolitanas tratan de aumentar su resiliencia en vista de los impactos inevitables del cambio climático, declararon varios ponentes.
Rich Cavallaro, presidente de Skanska USA Civil Inc., citó la calificación de D+ (en una escala de A a F) en el último “boletín de calificaciones” de infraestructura emitido por la Sociedad Americana de Ingenieros Civiles. Dicho grupo estima que el país tendrá que gastar 1,6 billones de dólares más de lo que indican los planes actualmente para poder contar con una infraestructura de nivel aceptable en todos los sectores. En contraste con proyectos inmensamente caros, como esclusas similares a las del río Támesis en el Reino Unido, Cavallaro se inclina por tomar medidas más asequibles, como equipar a los túneles del metro con tapones inflables gigantes, elevar las rejas de ventilación y subestaciones eléctricas, y diseñar los garajes de estacionamiento e instalaciones similares para que se puedan inundarse y limpiarse después, cuando las aguas retrocedan.
Varios países realizan una mejor tarea de coordinación y recuperación en casos de desastres, según las encuestas realizadas por Robert B. Olshansky, profesor de Planificación Urbana y Regional de la Universidad de Illinois en Urbana-Champaign, y Laurie A. Johnson, presidenta de Laurie Johnson Consulting|Research. La construcción de resiliencia a largo plazo como parte de este proceso fue objeto de un reciente informe del Instituto Lincoln, titulado Lecciones de Sandy.
Susannah C. Drake, presidenta de dlandstudio pllc, describió enfoques creativos, como el rediseño de la protección de la costa en el sur de Manhattan y el sellado de trazados subterráneos que pasan debajo de barrios urbanos. La nación no puede simplemente reconstruir lo que existía antes de un desastre, sobre todo ahora que los avances en tecnología han abaratado el costo de infraestruc-tura, en comparación con las inversiones masivas que se realizaron en el New Deal. Marcus M. Quigley, presidente de Geosyntec Consultants, exploró el uso de tecnología inteligente y controles dinámicos para transformar la construcción de grandes obras de infraestructura. “Podemos cambiar la manera de construir la infraestructura para que actúe a nuestro favor”, dijo. “Cada vez que repavimentamos una calle o acera, estamos perdiendo una oportunidad”.
También se habló sobre el lado negativo de la infraestructura inteligente. Ryan Ellis, fellow posdoctoral de investigación en el Centro Belfer de Ciencias y Asuntos Internacionales de la Escuela Kennedy de Harvard, abordó el complejo problema de seguridad e infraestructura, revelando el submundo de ciberataques, vulnerabilidades y “días cero”. Los hackers espían el correo electrónico continuamente y podrían sabotear nuestra red eléctrica, el control del tráfico aéreo y los sistemas financieros. La clave, dijo Ellis, está en “diseñar ahora teniendo en cuenta la seguridad”, porque “es difícil incorporar la seguridad después”. Y añadió que los planificadores involucrados en construir ciudades inteligentes deben tener muy presente el tema de la seguridad.
El impacto interconectado de la urbanización global requiere un marco más amplio para la infraestructura urbana que exceda las áreas metropolitanas individuales, dijo Neil Brenner, profesor de Teoría Urbana en GSD. “Tenemos que actualizar nuestro mapa cognitivo de la urbanización”, dijo. Pierre Bélanger, profesor asociado de Arquitectura del Paisaje de GSD, predijo que trabajar con la naturaleza -incluso dejando que ciertas áreas abandonadas vuelvan a su estado silvestre- podría eclipsar el enfoque tradicional de controlar el agua y canalizar los arroyos.
El liderazgo político es la clave para reinventar y diseñar nueva infraestructura en el entorno urbano, dijo la arquitecta paisajista Margie Ruddick. Afortunadamente, los alcaldes son algunos de los líderes más innovadores para abordar estos tipos de desafíos, dijo David Gergen, analista senior de CNN y director del Centro de Liderazgo Público en la Escuela Kennedy de Harvard. Es raro que un alcalde llegue a ser presidente, pero resuelven problemas prácticos importantes, dijo Gergen, que fue el orador invitado en la velada nocturna tradicional del foro en la Casa Walter Lippmann de la Fundación Nieman. “Es en las ciudades donde se están llevando a cabo los experimentos”, dijo.
Janette Sadik-Khan, ex comisionada de la Ciudad de Nueva York y en la actualidad miembro de Bloomberg Associates, también se refirió a las dificultades políticas de transformar el paisaje urbano. Hizo notar que las ciclovías, el programa de bicicletas compartidas y los espacios peatonales en Times Square provocaron la oposición por parte de automovilistas, dueños de negocios y otros que consideraban estas iniciativas poco prácticas y “vagamente francesas”. Sin embargo, muchos comerciantes han reportado desde entonces un gran aumento de su actividad debido a un mayor trán-sito de peatones, y que las sillas portátiles de las áreas peatonales están continuamente ocupadas.
“Cuando se ofrecen más opciones, la gente vota con sus pies, con sus asientos y con los candados de sus bicicletas”, expresó. “Los neoyorquinos han modificado las expectativas respecto a sus calles”.
El foro incluye tradicionalmente dos sesiones dedicadas a la “práctica del arte”. Brian McGrory, editor de The Boston Globe, describió los esfuerzos para integrar un periodismo “ardientemente relevante” en un modelo de negocio digital que sea sostenible. The Globe tiene más lectores que nunca, expresó. Inga Saffron, crítico de arquitectura de The Philadelphia Inquirer, ganadora del Premio Pulitzer poco después del foro, junto con el crítico de arquitectura Blair Kamin del Chicago Tribune, Jerold Kayden de GSD y Gregory K. Ingram y Armando Carbonell, ambos del Instituto Lincoln, mantuvieron un coloquio sobre la interacción entre periodistas y fuentes expertas.
Varios participantes de los 40 periodistas y fellows de Nieman publicaron notas sobre el foro, incluyendo Roger K. Lewis del Washington Post, Tim Bryant del St. Louis Post-Dispatch, Christopher Swope de Citiscope y Josh Stephens de Planetizen.
Anthony Flint es fellow y director de relaciones públicas en el Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, y autor de Wrestling with Moses: How Jane Jacobs Took on New York’s Master Builder and Transformed the American City (Luchando con Moisés: Cómo Jane Jacobs se enfrentó al Jefe de Construcciones de Nueva York y transformó la ciudad norteamericana) (Random House, 2011). Fue fellow Loeb en 2000–2001.
Holyoke, una ciudad de alrededor de 40.000 habitantes en el oeste de Massachusetts, fue una de las primeras comunidades industriales planificadas del país. A partir de finales de la década de 1840, inversores de Boston transformaron lo que había sido hasta entonces un área agrícola en un pueblo industrial impulsado por molinos de agua, aprovechando la ventaja de su ubicación geográfica cerca del Río Connecticut. Los inversores querían fabricar textiles de algodón. Pero con el tiempo la ciudad construyó un elaborado sistema de canales para permitir la instalación de más y más molinos, y comenzó a ser conocida también por la producción de seda, lana y papel. En aquel período, Holyoke se convirtió en la “Ciudad del Papel”, por los molinos de agua dedicados a su fabricación.
Con el desarrollo de los molinos, la ciudad prosperó. Con la abundancia de trabajo, la ciudad atrajo olas sucesivas de inmigrantes irlandeses, franco-canadienses, alemanes, polacos, judíos, italianos y puertorriqueños para trabajar en los molinos, quienes crearon pequeñas empresas, formaron familias y construyeron una ciudad que llegó a tener 63.000 habitantes en 1917 (McLaughlin Green 1939).
Después, todo comenzó a desmoronarse… lentamente. Desde su auge en la década de 1920, la industria local se fue reduciendo gradualmente cuando las empresas y los puestos de trabajo se mudaron al extranjero o migraron al Sur y al Oeste para estar más cerca de la materia prima y de mano de obra más barata. En el censo del 2000, la población de Holyoke se había reducido a menos de 40.000 habitantes. Como otras pequeñas ciudades industriales del país, se convirtió en un símbolo en vías de extinción del pasado industrial de los EE.UU., y la otrora próspera Ciudad del Papel luchaba por conservar su nivel económico.
Afortunadamente, a Holyoke le tocó la lotería en 2009, cuando fue seleccionada para albergar lo que hoy se conoce como el Centro Informático Verde de Alta Prestación de Massachusetts (Massachusetts Green High Performance Computing Center, MGHPCC) un complejo de supercomputadoras respetuoso con el medio ambiente para promover —según la denominación que le dieron los funcionarios estatales— la “economía innovadora” de Massachusetts. La energía hidráulica fue, una vez más, la clave del éxito para la ciudad. La ubicación de Holyoke sobre el río Connecticut ofrecía acceso a energía hidroeléctrica de bajo costo, y el río y los múltiples canales de la ciudad ofrecían agua para refrigeración, una ventaja importante para las supercomputadoras. “Holyoke ha tenido problemas para sobrevivir después de haber perdido su base industrial”, dice Kathleen Anderson, presidente de la Cámara de Comercio del Gran Holyoke. “Teníamos una infraestructura envejecida que necesitaba reutilizarse para otros fines, perdimos puestos de empleo y las condiciones demográficas cambiaron. Holyoke ha tenido que pensar creativamente y reconocer los activos que teníamos. Tanto el talento humano como la decisión de construir la represa y su energía hidroéctrica han sido esenciales para nuestro renacimiento”.
Cuando inauguramos el centro informático en 2012, representó un primer paso importante para mejorar el destino de Holyoke, pero ello no fue suficiente para restaurar su vitalidad. La ciudad emprendió un esfuerzo de planificación que dio como resultado un plan de renovación de 20 años para revitalizar y volver a desarrollar el área donde se encuentra el MGHPCC, en el centro de la ciudad. Un paso importante en la ejecución del plan fue la creación del Distrito de Innovación de Holyoke, una inversión del estado por medio de la Asociación Tecnológica de Massachusetts (Massachusetts Technology Collaborative) que reunió a funcionarios locales, líderes empresariales y organizaciones comunitarias para estimular el desarrollo económico local y regional. “La instalación del centro informático en Holyoke desencadenó nuestro proceso de planificación alrededor del Distrito de Innovación de Holyoke. Nosotros decimos que el Distrito de Innovación nació del centro informático”, dijo Marcos Marrero, director de planificación y desarrollo económico de Holyoke y copresidente del Distrito de Innovación de Holyoke, en una entrevista en septiembre (Desmarais 2015) aparecida en el periódico Bay State Banner.
Liderazgo, colaboración, resurgimiento
Fue entonces cuando entró en escena el Banco de la Reserva Federal de Boston. Desde 2008, el personal de investigación del banco había estado estudiando las viejas ciudades industriales similares a Holyoke, como parte del esfuerzo para ayudar a revitalizar otra ciudad de Massachusetts: Springfield. Como Holyoke, Springfield había visto días mejores. El banco realizó un estudio de dos años en colaboración con Springfield para analizar los desafíos que se presentaban para la cuarta ciudad más grande del estado, que seguía decayendo aun cuando el gobierno estatal y las organizaciones sin fines de lucro habían invertido millones de dólares en obras de revitalización.
Una parte del estudio trató de aportar lecciones para Springfield a partir de los destinos de otras 25 pequeñas ciudades industriales del noreste, medio oeste y sur septentrional de los EE.UU. Los economistas de la Reserva Federal de Boston descubrieron que algunas de estas ciudades pudieron mantener o recuperar su estabilidad económica, medida según su nivel de ingreso, tasas de pobreza, cantidad de población y vitalidad económica. Los investigadores las denominaron «ciudades renacientes», y buscaron aspectos comunes que pudieran explicar la razón de su éxito. Encontraron que todas estas ciudades habían enfrentado los mismo desafíos: pobreza, cambio del perfil racial y étnico y pérdida de su base industrial. Pero estaban tratando de superar estos desafíos y compartían un elemento clave del éxito: liderazgo sostenido y colaboración entre empresas, gobierno, organizaciones sin fines de lucro y grupos comunitarios. “Una y otra vez, nuestro análisis de la historia de las ciudades renacientes identificó el elemento de liderazgo por parte de instituciones o individuos clave, junto con la colaboración entre los diversos grupos que compartían su interés en el desarrollo económico”, escribieron los investigadores del banco en un informe de 2009 (Kodrzycki y Muñoz 2009).
Los investigadores también notaron que el origen del liderazgo local variaba de un lugar a otro. En New Haven, Connecticut, las universidades locales trabajaron con funcionarios gubernamentales y la industria privada con el objeto de brindar capacitación laboral y financiamiento para atraer compañías. En Providence, una fundación sin fines de lucro trabajó con ejecutivos empresariales para desarrollar ideas y llegar a un consenso sobre proyectos de desarrollo inmobiliario en el centro. En Evansville, Indiana, un alcalde inició el proceso de recuperación en la década de 1960, proceso que tuvo continuidad gracias a una agresiva campaña de desarrollo económico liderada por la Cámara de Comercio local. A pesar de sus diferencias, todos estos esfuerzos de revitalización económica se prolongaron durante décadas, y precisaron de un liderazgo sólido y continuado.
Todos estos esfuerzos también contaron con la colaboración activa de numerosos grupos e individuos. Según la investigación de la Reserva Federal, “la colaboración fue un elemento necesario porque la transformación económica es compleja y porque los agentes externos, como los gobiernos nacionales y estatales, las fundaciones y las empresas que son una fuente potencial de financiamiento y fuente de trabajo, requieren frecuentemente una evidencia de la colaboración conjunta para contribuir al desarrollo de una ciudad”.
A la altura del desafío
Estas conclusiones llevaron a la Reserva Federal de Boston a preguntarse qué se podría hacer para ayudar a construir la infraestructura cívica sólida que era fundamental para el resurgimiento. Esto llevó a la formación de Working Cities Challenge (Desafíos para Ciudades en Funcionamiento), una organización creada por el banco con la ayuda de Living Cities, una asociación de 22 fundaciones, instituciones financieras y otros miembros, con sede en Nueva York.
El Desafío consistió en una competencia entre las antiguas ciudades industriales pequeñas de Massachusetts. En la primavera de 2013, 20 comunidades solicitaron participar. De estas 20, seis ciudades fueron seleccionadas para recibir un total de US$1,8 millones en subvenciones para financiar proyectos de liderazgo y colaboración. Entre ellas se encontraba Holyoke, junto con Chelsea, Fitchburg, Lawrence, Salem y Somerville. El objetivo era simple: ayudar a salvar estas ciudades de Massachusetts que luchaban por sobrevivir, respaldando el desarrollo de las herramientas necesarias para ayudarse a sí mismas. Este programa fue un hito importante e inusual para un banco de la Reserva Federal. Los bancos son más conocidos por sus investigaciones económicas que por organizar programas concretos. No obstante, la iniciativa fue un reflejo del compromiso del presidente de la Reserva Federal de Boston, Eric Rosengren, para aplicar las investigaciones económicas del banco al mundo real, y para mejorar las comunidades de Nueva Inglaterra. Y el concepto se puede extender, con la posibilidad de impulsar a ciudades y pueblos en todo el país que han tenido problemas con las realidades económicas del siglo XXI.
Tamar Kotelchuck, directora de Working Cities Challenge, dice que las investigaciones del banco sobre las ciudades renacientes le enseñaron que hasta las ciudades con muchos problemas pueden mejorar. “Con base en lo que aprendimos del estudio de ciudades renacientes, nos comunicamos con Living Cities (Ciudades Vivas) y se nos ocurrió la idea de una competencia para otorgar financiamiento multianual con objeto de incentivar el liderazgo y la colaboración”, dijo.
Señala que el banco decidió comenzar con un programa piloto en Massachusetts, concentrándose en ciudades pequeñas y medianas. El objetivo eran ciudades de entre 35.000 y 250.000 habitantes que compartían determinados aspectos económicos y demográficos, como una gran cantidad de familias pobres y una baja mediana de ingresos. “Estas ciudades ya habían formado una coalición para apoyar sus intereses con la ayuda de MassINC, una ONG de expertos”, dice Kotelchuck. “Se hacían llamar Gateway Cities (Ciudades-Portal), y habían estado colaborando para resolver problemas económicos y políticos comunes desde hacía varios años. Aprendieron que el trabajo conjunto les daba cierta cantidad de poder que cada ciudad por separado no tenía”, dice (Forman et. al. 2007).
Working Cities adoptó una metodología original para ayudar a estas ciudades, según Andrew Reschovsky, fellow del Instituto Lincoln. “Lo original de la iniciativa de Working Cities es que, a diferencia de muchas otras estrategias de desarrollo económico urbano, se enfoca en mejorar el bienestar económico de los residentes de bajos ingresos que viven actualmente en cada ciudad”.
Los bancos de la Reserva Federal no pueden usar fondos propios para otorgar subvenciones, pero una serie de socios dispuestos a ayudar se ofrecieron a apoyar a Working Cities. Kotelchuck dice que, como parte de la iniciativa, la Reserva Federal se encargó del diseño e implementación del modelo, en conjunto con un comité directivo, proporcionando asistencia técnica y ayudando a los equipos a capacitarse mediante la asistencia de expertos, redes de contactos y buenas prácticas. Estas subvenciones son financiadas por varios donantes, como el gobierno estatal; Living Cities; Massachusetts Competitive Partnership (Asociación Competitiva de Massachusetts), asociación de los 16 empleadores más grandes del estado que se concentra en el crecimiento económico; y MassDevelopment, la agencia de desarrollo estatal.
Kotelchuck dice que cuando el banco y sus socios organizaron la primera competencia en 2013, dieron libertad a las ciudades para proponer cómo se usarían los fondos de la subvención. “No dijimos a las ciudades en qué tenían que trabajar”, dice. “El Desafío está diseñado para ayudar a construir colaboración sobre temas importantes a nivel local”. Sin embargo, un requisito importante para que un proyecto obtuviera éxito era que generara una colaboración entre el sector privado, el gobierno y otros grupos locales. “Buscamos proyectos que promovieran un cambio sistémico”, dice. “Nuestra meta fue ayudar a los líderes locales a solucionar problemas en sus propias ciudades”.
Un jurado independiente evaluó las propuestas de las ciudades en base a los criterios establecidos por Working Cities Challenge: colaboración, participación de la comunidad y el uso de pruebas concretas para medir el progreso. Los proyectos tenían que concretarse en una contribución duradera para mejorar las vidas de los residentes de bajos ingresos.
En enero de 2014 se anunciaron los premios de las primeras subvenciones. De las seis ciudades seleccionadas, cuatro recibieron subvenciones multianuales y dos recibieron subvenciones en forma de capital semilla. Todas las ciudades estaban combatiendo una alta tasa de desempleo, bajo desempeño estudiantil y un futuro incierto. No obstante, dice Kotelchuck: “Todas las ciudades ganadoras tenían propuestas distintivas. No había dos propuestas iguales. Todas abordaban necesidades locales específicas, tal como esperábamos”, dijo.
Por ejemplo, Fitchburg, situada en la región central del norte de Massachusetts, recibió una subvención de US$400.000 durante tres años para su Iniciativa eCarenomics, un esfuerzo para desarrollar medidas comunes para la salud y bienestar vecinal, con el objetivo de mejorar una parte de la ciudad. Chelsea obtuvo una subvención de tres años para su Iniciativa Shurtleff-Bellingham, diseñada para reducir la pobreza y las tasas de movilidad en un 30 por ciento en su barrio más problemático. Salem recibió una subvención de capital semilla de US$100.000 destinada a su plan para alinear los indicadores económicos de uno de sus barrios de bajos ingresos con el resto de la ciudad, enfocándose en el desarrollo económico, el desarrollo de pequeñas empresas, el desarrollo de la fuerza de trabajo y el desarrollo de liderazgo. Somerville también recibió una subvención de capital semilla de US$100.000 dirigido a un programa de capacitación laboral para jóvenes de 18 a 24 años de edad que no estaban estudiando en la escuela.
El premio más cuantioso, una subvención de US$700.000 durante tres años, fue otorgado a Lawrence, en el noreste del estado, para la Lawrence Working Families Initiative (Iniciativa de Familias Trabajadoras de Lawrence), cuyo objetivo era crear un Centro de Recursos Familiares para aumentar los ingresos de los padres de estudiantes de escuelas locales en un 15 por ciento en un periodo de 10 años. La iniciativa está liderada por la organización Lawrence Community Works y el sistema escolar local, con respaldo de varios empleadores y organizaciones sin fines de lucro de la zona. “El sistema escolar de Lawrence había entrado en quiebra en 2011”, explicó Kotelchuck, así que era lógico concentrarse en las familias y las escuelas.
La ciudad también tenía características económicas que se ajustaban al modelo de Working Cities. La mediana de ingresos de la unidad familiar era la mitad que la mediana estatal, y su tasa de pobreza era casi el triple de la tasa estatal. “El 70 por ciento de la población de la ciudad es ciento hispana, y la tasa de desempleo era alta”, dice Kotelchuck. Muchos de los problemas de la ciudad se trasladaban a las escuelas. “El objetivo del Centro de Recursos Familiares es ayudar a las familias de todas las formas posibles. Brinda capacitación en temas financieros, apoyo en casos de crisis y otros servicios para fortalecer a las familias”, dice.
Además del centro familiar, una gran parte de la iniciativa está enfocado en lo que Kotelchuck llama “participación auténtica de los padres” en las escuelas. La iniciativa creó círculos de educación comunitaria, donde padres, maestros y estudiantes trabajan en problemas escolares específicos. “El objetivo es que los padres se comprometan y participen en el sistema escolar”, dice. Hasta ahora, el programa ha reclutado a 400 padres, ha contratado a un entrenador familiar y ha conseguido trabajo a más de 30 padres, según Kotelchuck.
Holyoke recibió el premio de una subvención de US$250.000 durante tres años que se está usando para implementar el programa de estimulación de potencial y acceso a recursos de conocimientos (Stimulating Potential, Accessing Resource Knowledge, SPARK). Este “centro de iniciativas comerciales y emprendimientos sociales” en el centro de la ciudad se propone aumentar la cantidad de empresas, sobre todo entre los residentes de la ciudad, incluyendo la población latina, que asciende al 60 por ciento del total. El equipo de proyecto que creó el programa se compone de representantes de la ciudad, la cámara de comercio, la biblioteca pública de Holyoke, un centro integral de empleo llamado CareerPoint y la organización local sin fines de lucro Nuestras Raíces.
El programa SPARK se “propone identificar, reclutar y estimular a los residentes y las organizaciones de Holyoke que tienen la ‘chispa’ o el deseo de convertir sus proyectos innovadores o propuestas de negocios de idea en realidad, poniendo énfasis en una metodología comunitaria integral de emprendimiento, aprendizaje individual y capacitación de liderazgo”, de acuerdo con la ciudad. En definitiva, está diseñado para ayudar a empresarios potenciales a elaborar planes de negocios para poner en práctica sus ideas.
Otro objetivo es incorporar a miembros de la comunidad del centro de Holyoke al Distrito de Innovación que la ciudad ha creado alrededor del centro de supercomputadoras. “La ciudad tiene un gran centro de datos “, dice Kotelchuck. “Pero ese hecho por sí mismo no necesariamente va a ayudar a las personas de bajos ingresos de Holyoke. La cuestión que SPARK trata de resolver es cómo aprovechar los recursos de la población inmigrante de Holyoke y conseguir que la gente se beneficie del desarrollo del Distrito de Innovación y sus alrededores.
Los funcionarios municipales están de acuerdo. “El premio de esta subvención es una buena noticia más para el futuro del Distrito de Innovación de la ciudad”, dijo el alcalde Alex Morse cuando se anunció. “Hemos hecho un gran esfuerzo para que Holyoke pueda competir en la economía moderna, para lo cual hace falta estimular proyectos innovadores y emprendimientos comerciales. Con la colaboración de algunas de las mejores organizaciones y líderes comunitarios de Holyoke, este financiamiento nos permitirá ayudar a los residentes locales a poner en práctica sus ideas innovadoras.
Kotelchuck dice que muchas ciudades tratan de atraer a profesionales jóvenes y enfocarse en trabajos de alta tecnología. Ven que otras ciudades han implementado y copiado este modelo con éxito, pero otras no. “Si no ayudamos a los residentes de bajos ingresos”, dice, “simplemente estaremos moviendo la pobreza de un lugar a otro, y eso no ayuda a nadie. La iniciativa Working Cities ayuda a la gente en el lugar donde vive. Ayuda a gente que de otra manera no tendría trabajo”.
“Muchas ciudades persiguen la estrategia de moda más llamativa para revitalizarse, pero al final no es la tendencia más novedosa lo que revitaliza una ciudad”, dice. “Son los efectos de muchas ideas a lo largo del tiempo, y sólo ocurre en aquellas ciudades que cuentan con participación y colaboración comunitaria. Nuestra recomendación es observar lo que uno tiene y construir sistemáticamente a partir de ello”.
Al supervisar el progreso del Desafío, comenta, ha notado diferencias en la manera en que las ciudades piensan sobre su futuro. “Algunas ciudades dicen: Tenemos muchísimos problemas, por favor dennos dinero”, continúa. “Pero otras dicen: Tenemos estos recursos. Tenemos cierta energía. Lo que necesitamos es ayuda para descubrir nuestro potencial”. Dice que las iniciativas de revitalización requerirán una década de esfuerzo o más. El objetivo de la Reserva Federal es proporcionar un adelanto de tres años para este esfuerzo.
También puede generar un interés más amplio en la revitalización de las ciudades. Recientemente, Holyoke SPARK recibió US$56.000 adicionales de Massachusetts Growth Capital Corp, una agencia cuasi pública que da apoyo a pequeñas empresas, para que el programa pueda ofrecer más clases, dar asesoramiento a los emprendedores y respaldar un programa de préstamos para microempresas para aquellos que reúnan las condiciones. También recibió este año financiamiento adicional de subvenciones en bloque para el desarrollo comunitario de la ciudad.
Signos de progreso
La Reserva Federal y sus socios están satisfechos con los resultados del proyecto hasta ahora, dice Kotelchuck. Y el banco anunció recientemente una segunda y tercera tanda de subvenciones para ciudades de Massachusetts y Rhode Island. Con el tiempo, ella cree que esta idea se podría difundir a otros distritos de la Reserva Federal. “Para la Reserva Federal es un modelo nuevo de involucrase en estas comunidades. Otras Reservas Federales están demostrando interés, y nos encantaría que esta idea prendiera en otros distritos”. Rosengren, el presidente del banco, dice que la Reserva Federal de Boston piensa expandir el programa, al menos a otros estados de Nueva Inglaterra.
El programa Working Cities tiene un gran potencial para extenderse más allá de la región. Hay pequeñas ciudades y pueblos en todo el país que han sido golpeados por el cambio de fortuna económica en las décadas recientes. Merecen una oportunidad de convertirse también en ciudades renacientes, y es gratificante ver como una organización como la Reserva Federal de Boston está invirtiendo su inteligencia y su influencia para mejorar el futuro. No hay una sola solución, no hay garantía de éxito, pero Working Cities Challenge demuestra que con tiempo, compromiso, esfuerzo y un poco de dinero se pueden conseguir buenos resultados.
Este es un punto que Reschovsky, del Instituto Lincoln, también subraya: “Aun cuando todas las ciudades involucradas actualmente en Working Cities necesitan más recursos económicos y fiscales, la clave para el éxito de la iniciativa será la combinación de recursos adicionales y el desarrollo y promoción de organizaciones sin fines de lucro, gobiernos, empresas e instituciones sociales.”
Eso parece, efectivamente, lo que está ocurriendo en Holyoke. Últimamente ha generado también algo de reconocimiento a nivel nacional. En el número de febrero de la revista Popular Mechanics, los editores nombraron las 14 mejores ciudades en marcha del país, expresando que querían identificar “la próxima ola de ciudades que están construyendo un ecosistema que convierta a los innovadores en emprendedores”. La lista incluye ciudades pequeñas a lo largo del país. Holyoke apareció en el sexto puesto (Popular Mechanics 2015).
Inevitablemente, la principal ventaja de la ciudad es lo que ya sabemos. “Tenemos energía barata”, escribió el alcalde Morse al describir la innovación aportada por Holyoke para la revista. “En el borde oriental de la ciudad, el río Connecticut tiene una caída de 17 metros en su avance hacia el sur. Cuando se fundó la ciudad en 1850, el río impulsó las ruedas de los molinos de papel; hoy genera energía barata y limpia”. También mencionó las viejas fábricas de ladrillo que se construyeron para la industria papelera, signos del pasado industrial que se han transformado en «atractivos espacios industriales de trabajo”.
“Holyoke ha vuelto a su punto de partida”, dice Anderson, de la Cámara de Comercio. “Nuestros antecesores construyeron un sistema de canales para utilizar la energía del río, y ahora estamos utilizando energía verde para alimentar una economía nueva”.
Billy Hamilton is vicecanciller ejecutivo y director financiero del Sistema Universitario de Texas A&M. Fue contralor adjunto de cuentas públicas del estado de Texas durante 16 años. Desde 2007, escribe una columna semanal para State Tax Notes.
Fotografía: Jeffrey Byrnes
Referencias
Desmarais, Martin. 2015. “The Holyoke Innovation District Finds Creative Solutions to Revitalizing the City.” The Bay State Banner. 10 de septiembre, 2015. baystatebanner.com/news/2015/sep/10/holyoke-innovation-district-finds-creative-solutio/?page=3
Forman, Benjamin, David Warren, Eric McLean-Shinaman, John Schneider, Mark Muro y Rebecca Sohmer. 2007. Reconnecting Massachusetts Gateway Cities: Lessons Learned and an Agenda for Renewal. The Brookings Institution and MassINC. Febrero. www.brookings.edu/research/reports/2007/02/regionsandstates-muro
Kodrzycki, Yolanda y Ana Patricia Muñoz. 2009. “Lessons from Resurgent Cities.” Federal Reserve Bank of Boston. 2009 Annual Report. www.bostonfed.org/about/ar/ar2009/lessons-from-resurgent-cities.pdf
McLaughlin Green, Constance. 1939. Holyoke, Massachusetts: A Case History of the Industrial Revolution in America. New Haven, Connecticut: Yale University Press.
Popular Mechanics. 2015. “The 14 Best Startup Cities in America.” Popular Mechanics. Febrero. www.popular mechanics.com/culture/advertorial/g1859/the-14-best-startup-cities-in-america
The Sun Belt grew at spectacular rates in the late twentieth century, and among western U.S. cities Phoenix and its metropolitan region led the pack. The Census Bureau reports that between 1990 and 2000 Maricopa County was the fastest growing county in the nation at 44.8 percent, increasing from 2,122,101 to 3,072,149 people. The county is the fourth largest in the nation in terms of total population. During the 1990s, the city of Phoenix topped one million people and became the sixth largest U.S. city. Its spatial expanse has eclipsed that of the city of Los Angeles. According to the Phoenix Planning Department’s data, the region is growing by about 63,000 residents per year and requires about 23,000 new housing units to meet the demand. Statewide, the population is growing by more than 2,000 residents per week, and the number of people in the state is expected to double in the next 20 years.
The weather, relatively affordable housing and abundant jobs attract a diverse array of newcomers, but increased population has numerous social and environmental consequences. Debate rages about the impacts of growth locally and nationally: Is it good? Is it deleterious? Can it be sustained? At what cost? Who benefits? Who suffers?
A group of Arizona State University (ASU) faculty has recognized that these phenomena represent an opportunity for both research and public service in this fast-growing urban environmental laboratory. Furthermore, knowledge gleaned from such inquiries could lead to smarter growth and more livable places in the future. This notion provides the intellectual foundation for a project named Greater Phoenix 2100 (GP 2100), which seeks to provide data and analysis to the region’s decision makers to help them make wise choices about the future.
Greater Phoenix 2100 Workshops
The Lincoln Institute helped ASU launch GP 2100 through workshops in April 2001 that brought together ASU faculty and staff, community leaders, national participants from institutions such as the Los Alamos National Laboratory and the National Research Council, and four distinguished speakers who stimulated debate and discussion. The panelists were ecologist and author Dan Botkin, professor emeritus of the University of California-Santa Barbara; Michael Crow, an authority on science policy and executive vice provost at Columbia University; political scientist Helen Ingram, formerly director of the Arizona Water Resources Research Center and now professor of human ecology at the University of California-Irvine; and Bob Yaro, executive director of the Regional Plan Association.
They observed that for the Phoenix metropolitan region to continue to prosper, three overlapping spheres of influence must be considered: the creation of knowledge capital, the enhancement of social capital, and the preservation of natural capital.
The GP 2100 workshop panelists and other participants suggested that ASU should become the convener for discussions on growth, as well as the data bank for computer-stored geographical information about these intersecting, mutually dependent spheres. As a result, ASU should create various scenarios for the future in a “Sim Phoenix” format and a “Decision Theater” that would be a physical and a virtual place where academic and community leaders could probe the consequences of possible actions.
Databases and Audiences
Still in its early stages, ASU’s GP 2100 seeks to coordinate federal, state and academic information programs relating to the environment of the region. The project will be linked with similar studies in other metropolitan areas and global city regions (Simmonds and Hack 2000). GP 2100 will answer questions that people care about by providing objective, scientifically based information using state-of-the-art forecasting and decision tools and theories. Coupled with the Central Arizona/Phoenix Long-Term Ecological Research Project (CAP LTER) supported by the National Science Foundation, GP 2100 has the potential to launch a network of similar undertakings nationally and internationally.
GP 2100 will develop and present a wide variety of scientific and technical data on the past, present and possible futures of the Phoenix metropolitan region. The project builds on the premise that knowledge can be used to create better lives for future generations. GP 2100 will provide learning and research experiences to six major groups of people.
Goals and Benefits
The goal of GP 2100 is to make the best possible scientific and technical information available in ways that will enable wise, knowledge-based decision-making that can shape the region during the next 100 years. This time frame presents a purposefully longer-term view of the metropolitan region than has previously been developed. While short-term visioning is limited by immediate considerations, a century-long perspective requires the incorporation of mutigenerational concerns and changes in technology. A 100-year time frame also allows for evaluation of impacts of such geologically common events as droughts, major floods and gradual climate changes. In short, GP 2100 will be a strong scientific resource for consideration of the region’s long-term prospects and for creating the kind of future its residents want.
Two types of benefits will flow from the project. The first relates to the future quality of life in the region. An underlying assumption of GP 2100 is that better information will lead to wiser decision-making that will, in turn, result in healthier, more livable communities. Metropolitan Phoenix is expected to double from 3 to 6 million people in the next 20 or 30 years. Meanwhile, the global population will increase from 6 to 9 billion people and will become more urban. Such growth poses many challenges relating to land use, transportation, open space, biodiviersity, urban design, recreation, employment, equity, air quality, water quality and quantity, and the overall quality of life of city regions. The GP 2100 effort will be beneficial to those who are addressing these concerns in Phoenix by providing a prototype of how science-based tools and a regional perspective can better inform long-term decision-making. By viewing the Phoenix region as an urban environmental laboratory, the lessons learned will have implications for the broader scientific and policy communities.
GP 2100 will also be an asset for ASU researchers and students, who will have the opportunity to collaborate in multidisciplinary teams and will have access to state-of-the-art GIS and visualization technologies. New and emerging theories in urban and landscape ecology, decision science, land use and environmental modeling, and biocomplexity will be explored.
Special Features
Several linked products are envisioned to flow from GP 2100. Existing data can be coalesced into a dynamic warehouse of continuously updated regional information. Such a data repository can be presented to the public through an Urban eAtlas, which will be made available in electronic and more conventional forms to provide documentation of existing conditions and enable the construction of future scenarios. The digital version will be available on-line so it may be continuously accessed and updated.
The data archives and Urban eAtlas will contribute to a third major product: Sim Phoenix, an interactive computer game that can help researchers, citizens and decision makers visualize the consequences of “what if” scenarios. Sim Phoenix is a step toward the creation of an even more ambitious visualization project: a Decision Theater where local leaders, citizens, students and researchers can explore future options for the region. The Decision Theater will be a physical space in which scientific data, group dynamics and interactive computer technology are used to develop simulations of the region’s futures and considerations of their consequences. The simulations and their representations will evolve with new computational and representational technologies as well as with new scientific information.
GP 2100 will complement and augment existing long-term monitoring activities being conducted at ASU, such as the CAP LTER project, one of only two such urban LTER sites in the nation. Launching a satellite in cooperation with NASA is one monitoring possibility. This “Phoenix-Sat” would pass over the region twice daily, enabling diurnal measurements of such dynamic parameters as traffic, air quality, soil moisture and construction. It is possible that the Phoenix-Sat could be part of a larger international remote-sensing program for urban resource monitoring. Tools such as the data archives, Urban eAtlas, Sim Phoenix, the Decision Theater and Phoenix-Sat will enable scholars and decision makers alike to probe the major issues that metropolitan areas like Phoenix will face in the coming century. As a result, problems may be foreseen and avoided and opportunities pursued with vigor.
Faculty in the life, physical and social sciences at Arizona State University are currently compiling a comprehensive suite of information about the region. Planners, policy analysts and educators also could identify a series of key response variables and parameters for a Decision Theater. Computer scientists could program this complex information so that it can be displayed in both two- and three-dimensional formats, as well as animated views illustrating changes through time. The data could be automatically updated from dynamic government and university databases, from hundreds of sensors throughout the metropolitan region, and from orbiting satellites.
In this first-of-its-kind Decision Theater, high quality audio and visual presentation systems will include a 180-degree screen, which provides an immersive, synthetic environment along with comfortable ergonomics. This arrangement enables decision makers and researchers to come together to explore, debate and analyze options for the future. The Decision Theater is capable of high-resolution stereoscopic viewing using shuttered glasses. A visitor can have her or his viewing position tracked (”head-tracking”), giving the impression of truly walking within the data and data results, pondering the possible landscapes of the future from different angles. It could be associated with an innovative Planetary Imaging Faculty set up jointly by ASU and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, as well as dance and visual representation projects from ASU’s Institute for Studies in the Arts. While real-time interaction with data and models in the Decision Theater is engrossing, a comparably rich on-line experience is also possible through the use of web-based multimedia, text, data download and upload, and modeling tools. The virtual Decision Theater allows a participant to interact with a Sim Phoenix-like game.
How will the Decision Theater be implemented? Four interactive parameters appear especially crucial for modeling the future: water availability, air quality, open space and land use. ASU and its community and government partners already possess an enormous storehouse of data on these parameters, but the challenge is to combine the data in meaningful ways. To this end, the Greater Phoenix 2100 team, in conjunction with the Arizona Department of Water Resources and the U.S. Geological Survey, is now developing a water availability prototype that would use the hydrologic cycle to model regional water availability using factors of precipitation, supply, evaporation and demand to illustrate water futures both graphically and spatially.
A Model for Other Metropolitan Regions
Generations of citizens and scholars will benefit from Greater Phoenix 2100. The project will result in products that will help community and business leaders make wiser decisions. It will assist local, state, and federal officials in planning and designing programs and policies. The project will aid teachers and students in their understanding of natural and social processes. Greater Phoenix 2100 presents uniquely complex targets for technological, scientific and policy analysis advancements. It will produce and facilitate interaction with massive, typically disparate, datasets. Because its major components are easily transferable to other urban regions, the project can provide a model for other places interested in pursuing similar initiatives. In this century, some two-thirds of the world’s population will live in urban areas. Greater Phoenix 2100 has far-reaching implications concerning the application of knowledge capital to regional and urban decision-making in order to maximize social capital while maintaining the natural capital of the metropolitan region.
Frederick Steiner, an internationally recognized expert on environmental planning, is dean of the School of Architecture at the University of Texas at Austin. He was formerly professor and director of the School of Planning and Landscape Architecture at Arizona State University.
Reference
Simmonds, Roger and Gary Hack, editors. 2000. Global City Regions: Their Emerging Forms. London: Spon Press.
An apparent paradox exists in developing countries between a more progressive definition of property rights and current trends toward privatization. On one hand, most proposals and programs of urban management have required the adoption of a socially oriented approach to property rights, which guarantees broader scope for state intervention in controlling the process of land use and development. This is particularly the case with land regularization programs. On the other hand, the widespread adoption of liberalization policies and privatization schemes has reinforced a traditional, individualistic approach to property rights, thus undermining progressive attempts to discipline the use and development of urban property. Are these trends mutually exclusive or can they be reconciled to some extent?
Two related workshops for policymakers, urban managers and academics were held in Johannesburg, South Africa, in late July to address this paradox. The Sixth “Law and Urban Space” Workshop was cosponsored by the International Research Group on Law and Urban Space (IRGLUS) and the University of the Witwatersrand’s Centre for Applied Legal Studies (CALS). The Lincoln Institute supported that workshop and also sponsored a seminar on “Security of Land Tenure in South Africa, Sub-Saharan Countries, Brazil and India.”
The Conceptual Framework for Law and Urban Space
IRGLUS, a Working Group of the Research Committee on Sociology of Law of the International Sociological Association (ISA), seeks to discuss critically the legal dimension of the urbanization process, thus promoting a long-needed dialogue between legal studies and urban environmental studies. Most urban studies have reduced law-including legal provisions, judicial decisions and the overall legal culture-to its instrumental dimension. Law is dismissed by some as if it were just a political instrument of social discrimination and political exclusion. It is taken for granted by others as if it were merely a technical, unproblematic instrument that can provide immediate solutions to escalating urban and environmental problems.
Among urban scholars and professionals alike, there is little understanding of the reasons for the growing illegal practices identified in urban areas, particularly those concerning the use and development of land. Existing data suggests that if both access to land and construction patterns are taken into account between 40 and 70 percent of the population in the major cities in developing countries are somehow disobeying the prevailing legal provisions. And this figure is not confined to low-income land users.
Few studies have asked why this phenomenon of urban illegality has happened, why it matters and what can be done about it. Most observers fail to see the apparent divide between the so-called legal and illegal cities as an intricate web in which there are intimate though contradictory relationships between the official and the unofficial rules, and between the formal and the informal urban land markets.
The combination of the lack of an efficient official housing policy in most developing countries and the actions of largely uncontrolled market forces does not provide adequate housing solutions for the vast majority of the urban population. Far from being restricted to the urban poor, urban illegality needs to be addressed with urgency, given its grave social, political, economic and environmental consequences to the overall urban structure and society.
However, if urban illegality is but a reflection of the powerful combination of land markets and political systems, it is also the result of the often elitist and exclusionary nature of the legal system prevailing in many developing countries. Both the adoption of legal instruments, which do not reflect the existing social realities affecting access to urban land and housing, and the lack of proper legal regulation have had a most perverse role in aggravating, if not determining, the process of socio-spatial segregation.
Definitions of Property Rights
One the most significant problems affecting urban management in this context is that, despite the existence of rhetorical provisions, urban environmental policies frequently lack legal support in the basic provisions of the legal system in force, especially those of a constitutional nature. The central issue to be addressed in this regard is property rights, specifically urban real property. Indeed, in many countries the progressive, socially oriented assumptions of urban policies, implying as they do a broad scope for state action, are frequently at odds with the constitutional definition of property rights.
Several presentations in the IRGLUS/CALS Workshop discussed how the traditional approach to individual property rights prevailing in many developing countries, typical of classical liberalism, has long favored economic exchange values to the total detriment of the principle of the social function of property. Many significant attempts at promoting land use planning and control, including the legal protection of the environment and historical-cultural heritage, have been undermined by a dominant judicial interpretation that significantly reduces the scope for state intervention in the domain of individual property rights. Attempts to promote land regularization have also been frequently opposed by both landowners and conservative courts, even in situations where the land occupation has been consolidated for a long time.
Whereas the excessive, speculative hoarding of privately owned urban land has been tacitly encouraged, the effective implementation of a long-claimed social housing policy has been rendered more difficult due to the need to compensate the owners of vacant land at full market prices. In many countries, the individual property rights system inherited as a result of colonial rule often fails to take into account traditional customary values in the definition of property rights. Since these countries have largely failed to reform the foundations of legal-political liberalism, the discussion of so-called neo-liberalism is a false question in this context.
The Workshop participants placed special emphasis on the legal-political conditions for the recognition of security of tenure. It was noted that agents as diverse as social movements, NGOs and international finance organizations have increasingly made use of different though complementary humanitarian, ethical, sociopolitical and, more recently, economic arguments to justify the need to adopt public policies on this matter. Legal arguments also need to be adopted, including long-standing provisions of international law and the fundamental principles of the rule of law concerning housing and human rights, so that a new, socially oriented and environmentally friendly approach to property rights is recognized.
Much of the discussion focused on whether security of tenure can only and/or necessarily be achieved through the recognition of individual property rights. In fact, the analysis of several experiences suggested that the mere attribution of property rights does not entail, per se, the achievement of the main goal of most regularization programs-that is, the full integration of illegal areas and communities into the broader urban structure and society. The general consensus was that a wide range of legal-political options should be considered, from the transfer of individual ownership to some forms of leasehold and/or rent control to more innovative forms, still unexplored, of collective ownership or occupation with varying degrees of state control.
It was argued that the recognition of urban land tenure rights has to take place within the broader, integrated and multi-sectoral scope of city (and land use) planning, and not as an isolated policy, to prevent distortions in the land market and thus minimize the risk of evicting the traditional occupants. Examples from case studies in Brazil, India and South Africa have shown that, whatever the solution adopted in a particular case, it will only work properly if it is the result of a democratic and transparent decision-making process that effectively incorporates the affected communities.
Above all, it was accepted that the redefinition of property rights, and therefore the recognition of security of tenure, needs to be promoted within a broader context in which urban reform and law reform are reconciled. Law reform is a direct function of urban governance. It requires new strategies of urban management based upon new relations between the state (especially at the local level) and society; renewed intergovernmental relations; and the adoption of new forms of partnership between the public and the private sectors within a clearly defined legal-political framework.
Law reform fundamentally requires the renovation of the overall decision-making process to combine traditional mechanisms of representative democracy and new forms of direct participation. Indeed, many municipalities in several countries have recently introduced new mechanisms to allow the participation of urban dwellers in several stages of the decision-making process affecting urban management. Examples are at the executive level through the creation of committees, commissions, etc., or the legislative level through popular referendums or by recognizing individual and/or collective initiatives in the law-making process, as well as the formulation of popular amendments to proposed bills. A most interesting and promising experience is that of the “participatory budgeting” adopted in several Brazilian cities, in which community-based organizations participate in the formulation of the local investment budgets.
Finally, the need to promote a comprehensive legal reform and judicial review can no longer be neglected, especially in order to promote the recognition of collective rights, to broaden collective access to courts and to guarantee law enforcement. India and Brazil, for instance, have already incorporated the notion of collective rights in their legal systems to some extent, thus enabling the judicial defense of so-called “diffuse interests” in environmental and urban matters by both individuals and NGOs.
In other words, urban reform and the recognition of security of tenure are not to be attained merely through law, but through a political process that supports the recognition of the long-claimed “right to the city” not only as a political notion, but as a legal one, too. There is a fundamental role to be played in this process by lawyers, judges and prosecutors for the government. However, the collective action of NGOs, social movements, national and international organizations, and individuals within and without the state apparatus is of utmost importance to guarantee both the enactment of socially oriented laws and, more importantly, their enforcement.
If these are truly democratic times, the age of rights has to be also the age of the enforcement of rights, and especially of collective rights. It is only through a participatory process that law can become an important political arena to promote spatial integration, social justice and sustainable development.
Edesio Fernandes is a lawyer and a research fellow at the Institute of Commonwealth Studies of the University of London. He is coordinator of IRGLUS-International Research Group on Law and Urban Space and coeditor (with Ann Varley) of Illegal Cities: Law and Urban Change in Developing Countries (Zed Books, London and New York, 1998).
Cuba is a striking country. Its historic capital city of Havana boasts 400 years of architectural heritage. Many areas are in a state of sad decay but some represent very creative approaches to preservation and economic development. Because of the focus on rural development after the 1959 revolution, Cuba did not experience the same kind of popular migration from the countryside to the cities as did other parts of Latin America. What modern redevelopment did occur happened largely outside the historic core of Havana. The good news is that the city’s architectural heritage is still standing; the bad news is that it is just barely standing.
Architects and planners in Cuba are struggling with the basic tasks of improving infrastructure and housing while encouraging economic development appropriate to their socialist vision. They are developing models of neighborhood transformation through local organizing and self-help programs, and are creating models of “value capture” in the process of historic preservation and tourism development.
Through connections with the Group for the Integrated Development of the Capital (Grupo para el Desarrollo Integral de la Capital, GDIC), nine environmental design professionals traveled to Cuba in June to explore the issues of decay and innovation in the built and natural environment. The team included nine of the eleven 1997-98 Loeb Fellows from the Harvard University Graduate School of Design.
The Loeb Fellowship in Advanced Environmental Studies was established in 1970 through the generosity of Harvard alumnus John L. Loeb. The Fellowship annually awards ten to twelve leaders in the design and environmental professions with support for a year of independent study at Harvard University. A recent tradition of the Fellowship program is for the Fellows to take a trip together at the end of the academic year, to solidify their ties developed over the year, explore a new environment together, and share their knowledge and expertise with others.
The Loeb Fellows who traveled to Cuba have a variety of interests that together represent a cross-section of the environmental design professions:
The Fellows were hosted in Havana by GDIC, which was created in 1987 as a small, interdisciplinary team of experts advising the city government on urban policies. “The group intended since its very beginning to promote a new model for the built environment that would be less imposing, more decentralized and participatory, ecologically sound and economically feasible-in short, holistically sustainable,” according to Mario Coyula, an architect, planner and vice-president of GDIC. He and his GDIC colleagues put together a series of informative seminars and tours for the Fellows in Havana, and made arrangements for them to visit planners and designers in the cities of Las Terrazas, Matanzas, and Trinidad.
Several foundations and groups lent support to the project: the Arca Foundation, the William Reynolds Foundation, the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, the Loeb Fellowship Alumni Association, and the Harvard University Graduate School of Design Loeb Fellowship Program. Each Loeb Fellow will write an essay on a relevant area of research and its relationship to conditions in Cuba. These papers will be compiled and made available to GDIC, Harvard University and potentially to others through publication in a journal or special report.
Peter Pollock is director of community planning for the city of Boulder, Colorado. In 1997-98 he was a Loeb Fellow at Harvard and a visiting fellow at the Lincoln Institute.
The Lincoln Institute is collaborating with the city of Cordoba, Argentina, on a major project to change approaches to and instruments used for physical planning in the city. Cordoba presents an especially interesting case because of its strategic location at the center of the core development area of Mercosur.
The first phase of the project was a three-day seminar held last April titled “Towards an Urban Integrated Management: Implementing a Strategic Plan for the City of Cordoba.” Its main aim was to bring together the principal “actors” in Cordoba to discuss and debate planning goals and instruments in the context of new developments in urban management.
The seminar included presentations by international experts and discussions among municipal officials, developers, business and commercial interests, non-governmental organizations and planning practitioners. The Institute played an important role in providing an open forum for the local participants to come together for the first time to discuss difficult planning and development issues and to begin the process of establishing new management policies and procedures.
Three principal themes emerged from the discussions. The first dealt with prioritizing land to be urbanized, with particular concern for equitable access to land, infrastructure, and housing for the popular sectors, as well as appropriate mechanisms to carry out integrated planning on a regional basis. The second theme addressed environmental and fiscal impacts of large commercial establishments on existing urban structures, historic districts and residential neighborhoods. The third theme focused on various actors and sectors involved in industrial development in Cordoba, with attention given to dispersal of industry, infrastructure limitations, and social and environmental costs.
In addition to giving the Cordovan participants a broad perspective on urban management issues in other cities, the seminar raised two important points: 1) that planning for development is not just about regulation or land use control, but that fiscal and taxation policies are equally important in affecting land values; and 2) that local officials must learn to assess benefits and costs of urban planning projects in order to deal effectively with private sector developers.
The seminar has already had specific impacts on collaborative commercial activities in the historic center and on improved management programs for providing new infrastructure and services while also reducing deficits. In addition, the program stimulated participants to develop an appreciation for the importance of long-term strategic planning in charting general directions for policy changes and in understanding the effects of particular kinds of development on the social and physical environment.
The Institute is continuing to work with municipal officials to help develop new management paradigms that can support more effective private/public collaborations and better analytical and planning techniques. Follow-up programs will assist policymakers and private developers (operating in both formal and informal markets) in better understanding the functioning of urban land markets and the consequences of policy changes for urban development.
The next course on “Land Market Behavior in Cordoba: Implications for the Urban Structure” will explore research on formal land markets in Cordoba, stressing the effects of economic policies and local government interventions. It will be followed by a regional seminar where experience will be shared with participants from at least three other countries. At the same time, the Institute and Cordoba officials are developing a training program directed to a broad spectrum of local and regional officials and developers, concentrating on general management, urban planning, and project preparation and implementation.
Douglas Keare is a visiting fellow of the Lincoln Institute. He has extensive experience in strategic planning for large cities in developing countries through previous research and project management at the World Bank and the Harvard Institute for International Development. Ricardo Vanella is director of the Department of Economic Development for the city of Cordoba.
A proud outpost of America’s Industrial Revolution, Johnstown, Pennsylvania, survived the Great Flood of 1889, when a 40-mph wave swept the city into the Conemaugh River. Johnstown rebuilt itself into a dynamic city teeming with factories and steel mills. Yet what the flood couldn’t kill, a changing economy nearly has.
In the space of a generation, Johnstown has hemorrhaged 40 percent of its population and seen its job base disintegrate–joining the growing ranks of U.S. industrial cities teetering on the brink of terminal illness. They are becoming places without purpose, experts say, ill-prepared for a new economic era except as recipients of transfer payments and warehouses for the poor, the aged, the infirm and, in big cities, the violently deviant. “Johnstown is a place where wealth has moved out, where there is no middle class and where the town frantically searches for a magic solution to stay alive,” said anthropologist Bruce Williams of the University of Pittsburgh at Johnstown.
As the Information Age unfolds, urban scholars see a disturbing new set of forces converging viselike on Johnstown and many U.S. cities. While the problems of a New York City or a Detroit command popular attention, smaller cities such as Johnstown–those with populations of 25,000 to 100,000–might be suffering most from wrenching economic changes. No longer are place and distance such vital factors. The new economy is driven by technological changes that allow those with means to live and work largely where they want. New suburbs are still the number one choice for both business and residential developers seeking large plots of cheap land.
Struggling for Relevance
Many old industrial cities, meanwhile, struggle for relevance. Their residents lack the training for–and access to–the modern work force. New offices and industries require less labor. Isolation and segregation of the urban poor feed a cycle of despair. Advantages such as a coast, river or rail line matter less. With dwindling public investment and little or no market for their services or products, scores of these older cities can’t nurse themselves back to health.
“If a city lacks the basics for economic viability, what does it have left except some type of massive support by the federal government?” said Dr. Irving Baker, a retired political scientist at Southern Methodist University. “Those cities . . . are expendable,” he said.
This phenomenon links aging central cities, decaying inner-ring suburbs and exploding Mexican border cities. One of every five U.S. cities larger than 25,000 people has a poverty rate greater than 20 percent–a prime symptom of urban decay, an analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data indicates. Dallas and other Sun Belt cities are repeating the trajectory of distressed Northern cities, where poverty rates soared and the concentration of poor worsened.
As the debate continues over Washington’s shifting budget role, some experts wonder whether one result might be disposable cities, like the 19th-century ghost towns that predated federal bailouts. Solutions seem elusive, the experts agree, because neither government-run urban renewal nor private enterprise alone appears equal to the task.
“I think we are in a struggle for America’s heart right now,” said Peter C. Goldmark, president of the Rockefeller Foundation, whose programs support efforts to revitalize communities. “Because I don’t think America can live if its cities are dying.” Neal Peirce, an urban affairs commentator and writer, noted: “As I see it, we have a civilization to defend. If we really come to the point of writing places off as cities and neighborhoods of no return, we have reached the point of giving up what made this country the civilization I think many of us really have much pride being in.”
Disturbing Trends in Distressed Cities
Analysis by The Dallas Morning News–based on more than 125 interviews, a review of hundreds of reports and creation of a computer-generated index of 148 distressed communities–documented a number of alarming urban trends:
The United States remains an urban nation. But of all urban dwellers, 60 percent now live in suburbs — not in the nation’s 522 central cities.
Concentrations of the poor are increasing in all cities, including Sun Belt cities. In 1968, 30 percent of the nation’s poor lived in cities. Now the figure is 42 percent.
Jobs are leaving cities in massive numbers and are not being replaced. About 70 percent of new jobs, most requiring extensive technical training, are being created outside cities. Although the number of poor Americans dropped in 1994 for the first time in four years, the gap between rich and poor continued to widen as low-skill, low-wage jobs disappeared, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.
Many older cities are burdened with foul physical sites created for a smokestack economy that no longer exists. Mayor Freeman Bosley said St. Louis’ dramatic population decline–a 50 percent loss since 1950–relates directly to his city’s inability to reclaim contaminated properties, known as brownfields. “Right now, there is no way the city of St. Louis can attract business to abandoned industrial sites,” he told a congressional panel recently. “The existing cleanup standards and related costs exceed the property’s value, and there are no compensating incentives.”
The revival of rural America comes at the expense of many cities. Following a decade of decline, three in four rural counties gained population between 1990 and 1994. Most of the gain was caused by migration from cities, not urban encroachment.
Few places have been able to reverse these trends once decline sets in. Said Brian Berry, an internationally recognized professor of urban geography at the University of Texas at Dallas: “To be blunt and brutal about it, there’s very little that policymakers can do [about these cities] short of bringing in the aspirins and making people feel a little better.”
The success stories of recent years have enjoyed some attractive geographic asset or been the target of a sustained intentional effort. Hoboken, New Jersey, once a rundown manufacturing hub, capitalized on its waterfront view of the Manhattan skyline. It is now a trendy suburb for young couples with children. Cleveland, Pittsburgh and St. Louis have stabilized after shedding population for decades. Yet even though each has poured tens of millions into successful downtown revitalization efforts, many neighborhoods remain deeply troubled.
Smaller cities such as Johnstown dominated The News’ list of distressed communities. “Small and medium-sized cities don’t have the great urban assets to draw on,” said David Rusk, former mayor of Albuquerque, New Mexico, and now an urban consultant in Washington, D.C. “They don’t have the legacy of parks, museums and recreational facilities that big cities have. And, most of all, they don’t have the old downtown core.”
What can be done to assist these communities? Gary Orfield, a professor of education and social policy at Harvard University, said, “If I were a mayor, my number one effort would be to try to help people to understand how serious these problems are and to convince the people in the rest of the society that if they don’t share in the solution, they are going to be sharing in a much, much more radical problem in the future.”
______________
Chris Kelley is urban affairs writer at The Dallas Morning News. This article is excerpted from a four-part series titled “Whither the Cities?” which ran December 3-6, 1995. A series reprint is available by calling The News at 1-800-431-0010, ext. 8472, or on the Internet at http://www.pic.net/tdmn/tdmn.html. Kelley participated in the Lincoln Institute’s 1995 Land Policy Forum for Journalists.