LKYSPP Semester I AY2015/2016
PP5153 Urban Development Policy and Planning in Asia
Professor Mike Douglass
Wednesday 2-‐5 p.m.
OVERVIEW. This course covers contemporary urban development policy and planning issues, practices and experiences in Asia at the city, regional and global scale. It is organized in 4 parts, each of which invites critical thinking on goals, explanations of causes of development issues, policy options and applications in planning and implementation.
Part I. Development policy and planning are explored through the lens of the United Nations Millennium Development Goals. How are the goals defined and measured? What are the urban dimensions of the MDGs? How are gaps between MDG goals their real world achievements explained?
Part II. The livability of cities in a global age explores 3 dimensions: personal well-‐being (including livelihoods and human capital), the environment (including the quality of environmental services), and social life (including social capital, lifeworlds, public space, the public sphere). Competing concepts of livable cities are compared. Livable city programs in Asia, including Singapore, are reviewed.
Part III. Decentralization, Democratization and the Rise of Progressive Cities in Asia. The concept of progressive cities is introduced to focus on the rise of civil society in the public sphere, democratization, grassroots participation and local government as a public policy realm for human and planetary flourishing. Emphasis is given to inclusion, distributive justice, conviviality and the Earth’s biosphere.
Part IV. Global Climate Change and Disaster Governance are given special attention in light of Asia’s rapid urban transition, global climate change and increasing numbers and impacts of environmental disasters. How does urbanization change ecology-‐society relations in the city and countryside? Why has urban flooding become chronic? What are the new risks and vulnerabilities? What is being done and should be done?
ORGANIZATION & GRADING. The class combines lectures by the instructor and, from Week 3, student-‐led seminars on pre-‐selected topics. Assignments will consist of 2 short (8 page) “position papers” presentations (20% each) and a term paper (60% of the final grade). One position paper may be expanded for the term paper. Students will also give comments on presenters’ position papers.
1. Written assignments: 2 seminar papers (20% each; 40% of total grade).
2. Weekly reflections on course readings (not required on week presenting a seminar) (20% of total grade)
3. Final paper (40% of total grade).
EXPECTED LEARNING OUTCOMES: (1) to gain the ability to critically assess the progress of cities; (2) to understand major urban and regional planning issues in Asia, (3) to be able to link knowledge to action through the application of theory to policies, planning and implementation, (4) to deepen knowledge of each student’s specific area of interest, and (5) to gain the ability to work through debates on issues, concepts and explanations of problems to develop policy tools and each student’s own policy positions.
CO U R S E R EA D I N G S (Available online in IVLE PP5153 Workbin)
I. URBANIZATION AND CITIES IN ASIA: OVERVIEW OF POLICY AND PLANNING ISSUES
Week 1 (10-‐14 August) – Module Synopsis
Week2 (17-‐21 August) – Development Goals and Urbanization in Asia
• Sustainable Development Goals (MDGs) [2 page table of goals, targets, indicators].
• Laurence Chandy, Geoffrey Gertz (2011), “With Little Notice, Globalization Reduced Poverty,” Yale Global Online.
• Clive Gabay (2013), “The MDG Legacy: Social, Cultural and Spatial Engineering.” International NGO Training and Research
Centre Briefing Paper 36.
• ODI (2011), “After 2015: Progress and Challenges for Development.” (ODI, U.K.)
• Malcolm Langford (2010), “A Poverty of Rights: Six Ways to Fix the MDGs,” IDS Bulletin, 41:1, 83-‐91.
• UNDP (2015), The Millennium Development Goals Report 2015 (New York: UNDP). Download at http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/2015_MDG_Report/pdf/MDG%202015%20rev%20%28July%201%29.pdf
• UNESCAP (United Nations Economic an
c ) (2012), The State of Asian Cities
2010/11(Bangkok). Download at www.rrojasdatabank.info/citiesasia1011.pdf.
• UNESCAP (2013), Combating Urban Poverty and Income Inequality in Asia and the Pacific. Download at muntr.org/v5/wp-‐
Week 3 (24-‐28 August) – Livable City
II. LIVABLE CITIES
• Mike Douglass 2013), Livable Cities as Public Cities – The Challenge of City-‐making in a Global Age in Asia.
• Urban Planning Advisory Team (UPAT) (2010), “Livable Cities in a Rapidly Urbanizing World.” (Singapore: International Society of City and Regional Planners (ISOCARP) For the Philips Center of Health and Well-‐being Singapore July 25-‐31.
• Khoo Teng Chye (2012), “The CLC Framework.” Urban Solutions. July 1. (Centre for Liveable Cities (CLC), Singapore). See also:
• EIU (Economist Intelligence Unit) (2012), “Benchmarking Global City Competitiveness” (London: The Economist).
• International Making Cities Liveable (2013), “The Value of Rankings and the Meaning of Livability”. http://www.livablecities.org/blog/value-‐rankings-‐and-‐meaning-‐livability.
Week 4 (August 31-‐4 September) – Lifeworlds: Neighborhoods and Public Spaces
• Matthias Wendt (2009), “The Importance of Death and Life of Great American Cities (1961) by Jane Jacobs to the Profession of Urban Planning,” New Visions for Public Affairs – Volume 1, 1-‐24.
• Lisa Peattie (1998), “Convivial Cities,” in Mike Douglass and John Friedmann, eds. (1998), Cities for Citizens: Planning and the Rise of Civil Society in a Global Age (London: John Wiley), 247-‐253.
• The bid-‐rent curve and urban land use under capitalist private property regimes.
• T. C. Chang and Shirlena Huang (2008), “Geographies of Everywhere and Nowhere – Place-‐(un)making in a World City,” IDPR,
• K. C. Ho and Mike Douglass (2008), “Globalisation and Liveable Cities – Experiences in Place-‐making in Pacific Asia,” IDPR,
• Su-‐Jan Yeo and Chye Kiang Heng (2013), “An (Extra)ordinary Night Out: Urban Informality, Social Sustainability and the Night-‐
time Economy,” Urban Studies.
Week 5 (7-‐11 September) – Poverty as Livelihood, Entitlements, Social Power
• Adam W. Parsons (2008)
e Mean?” Share The World's Resources.
• Vijayendra Rao and Michael Woolcock (2007), “Disciplinary Monopolies in Development Research: A Response to the
Research Evaluation Process.” (Wash., D.C.: World Bank).
• A.K Sen (1990), “Food, Economics, and Entitlements,” in Staatz, John & Carl Eicher, eds, Agricultural Development in the Third World (Johns Hopkins Univ. Press) 189-‐205.
• Martha Nussbaum (2003), “Capabilities as Fundamental Entitlements: Sen and Social Justice,” Feminist Economics, 9:2-‐3, 33-‐
• Iris Young (2004), “Five Faces of Oppression,” in Oppression, Privilege, & Resistance edited by Lisa Heldke and Peg O’Connor
(published by McGraw Hill in Boston).
• John Friedmann (1992), “Rethinking the Economy: the Whole-‐Economy Model,” Empowerment; the Politics of Alternative
Development (Basil Blackwell), 37-‐71.
• Po-‐Fen Tai (2013), “Gender Matters in Social Polarisation: Comparing Singapore, Hong Kong and Taipei,” Urban Studies, 50:6.
III. DECENTRALIZATION, DEMOCRATIZATION AND PROGRESSIVE CITIES IN ASIA
Week 6 (14-‐18 September) – Local Goverment and the Rise of Progressive Cities
• Mike Douglass and Myungrae Cho (2015), “Making a Progressive City – The Seoul Experience. International Symposium on the Rise of Progressive Cities East and West, Paris Sorbonne University, May 11-‐12.
• John Friedmann (2004), “Models of Civil Society: Latin America and China” (University of British Columbia).
• Mike Douglass and Henry Mochida, Dancing in the Park – Hanoi at Its Millennium. Available on Vimeo:
http://vimeo.com/47438619 and YouTube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-‐lvnXU3Epp0.
• David Harvey (2008), “The Right to the City,” New Left Review, 53, 23-‐40.
• Meredith L. Weiss (2014), “New Media, New Activism: Trends and Trajectories in Malaysia, Singapore and Indonesia,” IDPR,
• Mike Douglass (2014), “After the Revolution: from Insurgencies to Social Projects to Recover the Public City in East and
Southeast Asia,” IDPR, 36:1, 13-‐30.
• Dressel, Björn and Michael Wesley (2014), “Asian States in Crisis,” Strategic Analysis, 38:4, 449–463, • Anthony M. Orum
(2009), “Public Man and Public Space in Shanghai Today,” City & Community, 8:4, 369-‐389.
Recess (Sep 21-‐25)
Week 7 (28 September-‐3 October) – The City at the Grassroots in a Global Economy
• John Friedmann (2009), “Neighborhood by Neighborhood: Reclaiming Our Cities”.
• Tore Sager (2011), “Neo-‐liberal Urban Planning Policies: A Literature Survey 1990–2010,” Progress in Planning, 76, 147–199.
• T. C. Chang and Shirlena Huang (2011), “Reclaiming the City: Waterfront Development in Singapore,” Urban Studies, 48:10,
• David Pinder (2005), “Arts of Urban Exploration,” Cultural Geography, 12, 383-‐411.
• T. C. Chang and Peggy Teo (2009), “The Shophouse Hotel: Vernacular Heritage in a Creative City,” Urban Studies, 46:2, 341-‐
• Lily Kong (2011), “From Precarious Labor to Precarious Economy? Planning for Precarity in Singapore’s Creative Economy,”
City, Culture and Society, 2, 55–64.
• K.C. Ho (2009), “The Neighbourhood in the Creative Economy: Policy, Practice and Place in Singapore ”, Urban Studies,
IV. THE URBAN ECOLOGY, CLIMATE CHANGE AND DISASTER GOVERNANCE
Week 8 (5-‐9 October) – Urban Form, Ecology and Sustainable Development
• Peter Marcuse (1998), “Sustainability Is Not Enough,” Environment and Urbanization 10:2, 103-‐111.
• Jonas Rabinovitch (1992), “Curitiba: towards Sustainable Urban Development,” Environment and Urbanization, 4:2, 62-‐73.
• Federico Caprotti (2014), “Eco-‐urbanism and the Eco-‐city, or, Denying the Right to the City?” Antipode, Vol. 00 No. 0, 1–19.
• Jim Yardley (2007), “Beneath Booming Cities, China’s Future Is Drying Up,” The New York Times, Sep. 28.
• Mike Douglass (2010), “Globalization, Mega-‐projects and the Environment: Urban Form and Water in Jakarta,” Environment and Urbanization, 1:1, 45–65.
• Tan Yigitcanlar and S.H. Lee, (2013) “Korean Ubiquitous-‐eco-‐city: A Smart-‐sustainable Urban Form or a Branding Hoax?
Technological Forecasting and Social Change.
• Michael Neuman (2005), “The Compact City Fallacy,” Journal of Planning Education and Research, 25, 11-‐26.
Week 9 (12-‐16 October) – Global Climate Change and Urbanization
• Glenn Fieldman (2011), “Neoliberalism, the Production of Vulnerability and the Hobbled State: Systemic Barriers to Climate
Adaptation,” Climate and Development, 3, 159-‐174.
• Harriet Bulkeley, et al. (2013), “Climate Justice and Global Cities: Mapping the Emerging Discourses,” Global Environmental
Change, 23, 914–925.
• Hughes, Caroline (2011) “Soldiers, Monks, Borders: Violence and Contestation in the Greater Mekong Sub-‐region,” Journal of
Contemporary Asia, 41: 2, 181-‐205.
• Michael Goldman (2005), How ‘‘Water for All!’’ Policy Became Hegemonic: The power of the World Bank and its
Transnational Policy Networks,” Geoforum, 38, 786–800.
• Mike Douglass (2010), “Cross-‐Border Water Governance in Asia,” in Shabbir Cheema, ed., Cross-‐Border Governance in Asia and the Pacific (Tokyo: United Nations University Press, forthcoming).
Additional suggested readings
• Revi, et al, 2014. Towards transformative adaptation in cities: the IPCC’s Fifth Assessment. Environment & Urbanization. International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED). Vol 26(1): 11–28.
• David Satterthwaite (2013). The political underpinnings of cities’ accumulated resilience to climate change. Environment and
Urbanization. Vol 25(2): 1–11.
• Mike Douglass (2013), “The Urban Transition of Environmental Disaster Governance in Asia.” Singapore: Asia Research
Institute Working Paper Series No. 210.
Week 10 (19-‐23 October) – Disaster Governance and Resilience
• Kernaghan, S., and Silva, J. da, (2014), “Initiating and Sustaining Action: Experiences Building Resilience to Climate Change in
Asian Cities. Urban Climate, 7, 47–63
• Lebel, L., Manuta, J. B., Garden, P., (2011). “Institutional Traps and Vulnerability to Changes in Climate and Flood Regimes in
Thailand,” Regional Environment Change, 11:45–58
• Akhilesh Kumar Surjan, Rajib Shaw (2008). “‘Eco-‐city’ to ‘disaster-‐resilient eco-‐community’: a concerted approach in the coastal city of Puri, India,” Sustainability Science, 3:249–265
• Philip R. Berke , Ratana Chuenpagdee , Kungwan Juntarashote & Stephanie Chang (2008) Human-‐ecological Dimensions of
Disaster Resiliency in Thailand: Social Capital and Aid Delivery,” Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, 51:2,
• Yan Chang Suzanne Wilkinson Regan Potangaroa Erica Seville, (2012),"Resourcing for post-‐disaster reconstruction: a comparative study of Indonesia and China", Disaster Prevention and Management: An International Journal, Vol. 21 Iss 1 pp.
7 – 21.
• Rita Padawangi and Mike Douglass (2014), “Water, Water Everywhere: Toward Participatory Solutions to Chronic Urban Flooding in Jakarta,” International Workshop on Governing Flooding in Asia’s Urban Transition. Asia Research Institute, National University of Singapore. 20 January.
Additional suggested reading
• Olshansky, R., Hopkins, L., and Johnson, L. (2012). ”Disaster and Recovery: Processes Compressed in Time.” Nat. Hazards
Rev., 13(3), 173–178.
Week 11 (26-‐30 October) – Slums, Housing and the Environment
• Mike Davis (2004), “Planet of Slums, New Left Review, 26, 5-‐26.
• Hans Pruijt (2013), “The Logic of Urban Squatting,” International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37:1, 19–45.
• Somsook Boonyabancha (2005), “Baan Mankong: Going to Scale with “Slum” and Squatter Upgrading in Thailand,”
Environment & Urbanization, 17:1, 21-‐46.
• Mike Douglass, et al. (2002), “Urban Poverty and the Environment -‐-‐ Social Capital and State-‐Community Synergy in Seoul and Bangkok,” in Peter Evans, ed., Livable Cities? The Politics of Urban Livelihood and Sustainability (Berkeley: Univ. California Press), 31-‐66.
• Arif Hasan and Mansoor Raza (2011), “The evolution of the microcredit programme of the OPP's Orangi Charitable Trust, Karachi,” Environment and Urbanization, 23, 517-‐38.
• Dhakal Shobhakar (2002), “Comprehensive Kampung Improvement Program in Surabaya as a Model of Community
Participation,” Working paper, Urban Environmental Management Project, Institute for Global Environmental Strategies.
Week 12 (2-‐6 November) – Open Discussion Session and Poster Contest
Week 13 (November 11) – Presentation of final papers
NUS and the LKY School regard academic integrity as a very important value. To avoid giving the impression that you are passing off other people’s work as your own, you will need to acknowledge conscientiously the sources of information, ideas, and arguments used in any of your assignments. In order to understand what counts as plagiarism and why it is wrong, students at the LKY School had taken the NUS online module on Academic Culture during the Orientation Programme and formally acknowledged that they had understood the contents. Students who would like an introduction to the different referencing styles can refer to the following website, among others: https://www.citethisforme.com/guides. You will be required to submit all written assignments that are uploaded on IVLE for plagiarism check.