Christopher Silver

Neighborhood Planning in Historical Perspective

Abstract Some studies of the recent neighborhood planning movement suggest that its origins can be traced to the reform fervor of the 1960s. In fact, the idea of “neighborhood” and of planning its character has been an enduring component of American social thought for at least the past 100 years. An examination of the roots of the contemporary neighborhood movement reveals its complicated and somewhat contradictory lineage. This article suggests that we must measure the recent successes of the neighborhood movement not merely in terms of a two-decade struggle but in light of nearly 100 years of planning and reform activity.

Do the donors have it right? Decentralization and changing local governance in Indonesia

Indonesia has initiated an ambitious decentralization program since 1999 spurred on by the international donor community (earlier decentralization measures were more like “deconcentration” under strong central control). This paper examines the degree to which Laws 22/1999 and 25/1999 are working. Local government employment has been expanded (not fully offset by a decline in central government employment) and training has been provided. Many functions have been transferred to the local level, but this was not matched by adequate funding transfers. Those localities that fare best have revenues available from their own natural resources. The results, therefore, are very mixed, and it is much too early to determine whether decentralization is a success.

Planning and decentralization : contested spaces for public action in the global south

In the last two decades the concept of state decentralization has been used to justify contradictory processes and decisions. While advocates stress decentralization of state responsibilities and decision making so that inclusive decision making and participatory planning can advance democratization, critics view state decentralization as a Trojan horse that brings the power of private sector interests into public decision making. The critique points to the outright privatization of public utilities as well as the invasion of the public sector partnerships with private corporations.1. Introduction: Situating Contested Notions of Decentralized Planning in the Global South Victoria A. Beard, Faranak Miraftab, Christopher Silver Part 1: Decentralization: Contexts-Outcomes 2. Decentralization and Entrepreneurial Planning Faranak Miraftab 3. Decentralization, Privatization and Countervailing Popular Pressure: South African Water Commodification and Decommodification Patrick Bond 4. Decentralized Planning and Metropolitan Growth: Poverty and Wealth in Buenos Aires Suburbs Nora Libertun de Duren 5. New Spaces New Contests: Appropriating Decentralization for Political Change in Bolivia Benjamin Kohl and Linda Farthing Part 2: The Challenges of Fiscal and Administrative Decentralization 6. The Evolution of Subnational Development Planning Under Decentralization Reforms in Kenya and Uganda Paul Smoke 7. Decentralization in Vietnams Water Sector: Community Level Privatization in the Mekong Delta James H. Spencer 8. Decentralization and Local Democracy in Chile: Two Active Communities and Two Models of Local Governance Anny Rivera-Ottenberger Part 3: The Role of Non-State Participants in Decentralization 9. Community-Driven Devlopment and Elite Capture: Microcredit and Community Board Participation in Indonesia Victoria A. Beard, Menno Pradhan, Vijayendra Rao, Randi S. Cartmill, Rivayani 10. University-Community Partnership: Institutionalizing Empowered and Participatory Planning in Indonesia Christopher Silver and Tubagus Furqon Sofhani 11. En(gendering) Effective Decentralization, the Experience of Women in Panchayati Raj in India Kajri Misra and Neema Kudva 12. Decentralization and Social Capital in Urban Thailand Amrita Daniere and Lois M. Takahashi 13. Decentralization and the Struggle for Participation in Local Politics and Planning: Lessons from Naga City, the Philippines Gavin Shatkin 14. Conclusion: Making Sense of Decentralized Planning in the Global South Christopher Silver, Victoria A. Beard and Faranak Miraftab

The racial origins of zoning: Southern cities from 1910–40

This article argues that the desire to regulate black residential patterns constituted a major objective of the early zoning and planning movement in the United States, particularly in the South between 1910–40. Throughout the early 1900s, the racial zoning movement enjoyed widespread endorsement by the emerging national planning contingent, and was not merely the brainchild of misguided southern urban leaders out of touch with the mainstream of reformism. Even after the US Supreme Court declared racial zoning unconstitutional in 1917, planners and public officials persisted in their efforts to find a legally defensible way to regulate residences by race. The most prevalent practice was to regulate residential locations indirectly through ‘racially‐informed’ comprehensive planning, including zoning, capital improvements, public housing siting, road construction, the location of segregated schools, parks and other public facilities, and through slum clearance.

An Experiment in the Internationalization of Planning Education The NEURUS Program

This article describes a new multi-institutional program in international planning education and exchange—the Network for European-U.S. Regional and Urban Studies—within the broader context of the continuing internationalization of graduate-level professional planning curricula. Using student exit interviews and an institutional survey, the outcomes and impacts of this program on participating students, on the departments involved, and on the partner universities are assessed. Program experiences to date in terms of lessons for planning education in an increasingly integrated world economy are highlighted.

Revitalizing the Urban South Neighborhood Preservation and Planning Since the 1920s

Abstract The urban South affords an exemplary case of historic preservation contributing directly to the broader processes of planning and revitalization. Since the 1920s, proponents of neighborhood preservation vied with downtown commercial interests in guiding planning efforts in many southern cities. From the 1920s to 1950, the preservation and planning movements overlapped significantly. They followed independent strategies as historic preservation gained an institutional base in the 1950s and 1960s and then merged into a more broadly based movement aimed at conserving the residential base of the center city in the 1970s and 1980s. Preservationists devised techniques of neighborhood conservation that later became the mainstay of neighborhood improvement programs in southern cities. While neighborhood preservationists were often ancillary to the planning mainstream, plagued by charges of elitism and devoid of broad-based political support, they were key backers of city planning in the South. In conjunc...

Urban Planning in the New South

Historiography of urban planning in the South has been hindered by the erroneous assumption that the region did not take the city development process seriously until the post-World War II period. Recent additions to the urban literature of the New South suggest, however, that its planning legacy can be traced back to the early I 900s and that it was a tremendously fertile groundfor prominent national planning consultants. Although distinctive regional traits influenced the planning style in southern cities, New South urban planning conformed to the mainstream of the emerging profession. In many respects, particularly over the past three decades, the South has been an innovator in planning, although planning history literature has yet to address carefully many of these emerging trends.

John Nolen: Planner for the New South

John Nolens three decades of planning consultation to many southern cities, beginning with his role as advisor to the Charlotte, North Carolina, Park and Tree Commission in 1905, illustrate how planning was a continuing influence throughout the heyday of the New South movement. Yet Nolens planning in southern cities also offers a window into the broader American urban planning process at a time when public institutions had not yet established a dominant role in regulating urban development. Nolens work speaks directly to the current-day dilemma of planning as a visionary art or as a rational policy process. His planning model for cities reflected the unique melding of these conflicting crosscurrents in planning theory and was a model that appealed to the urban aspirations of the New South. By examining Nolens southern planning practice in two cities where he had a long association—Charlotte and Roanoke, Virginia—it is possible to assess the strengths and weaknesses of the guided decentralization model that he offered to the region during its formative urban development era.

Envisioning the Future of Planning and Planning Education

Seeking to chart future trends, this chapter examines historical aspects in the discipline’s development, practitioners’ viewpoints, opinions from planning educators, and contributions from this forward looking Part of the book to develop and substantiate a vision of future planning curricula and educational approaches. While results from a survey of leading planning educators broadly reconfirm stalwart values of the planning field (“the pillars of planning”), some suggestions were posited in regards to more explicit integration of education for post-sustainability, resilience, and ecosystems concepts. Furthermore, interdisciplinary, diversity, pluralism, and the fields’ long-standing experience of participatory working should be turned into a virtue to bolsters the field’s academic standing given trajectories that promote university-community engagement, partnership and collaborative working with industry, government and society.

The Origins of Planning Education: Overview

Planning education in the early twentieth century developed in response to the need for professionals in architecture, landscape architecture, engineering, public health, and law to understand and address the unique challenges of rapidly growing cities and regions. It was in the United States and the United Kingdom that the first standalone planning education programs flourished prior to World War II. Former colonial nations expanded planning education initially on the model provided by the West, often because their leading educators were products of the Anglo-American system. The proliferation of planning education programs in Eastern Europe, sections of Asia and Africa and especially in China since the end of 1980s owes to increased global engagements coupled with continuing challenges of urbanization. Throughout the twentieth century, transnational exchanges of ideas and strategies have helped to shape the global planning education movement.