In this paper, the authors argue that despite growing attention to urban transformations, scholars often overlook challenges faced by endogenous actors (eg urban planners) who must act within non-ideal, real-world settings...
They argue that an ‘inside’ view of transformations (focused on judgment-in-practice) is needed to complement existing ‘outside’ views (focused on assessment). The feasibility of action (political, social, legal) comes into focus as a key concern.
Transformation pathways are recast as unfolding series of ‘fuzzy action moments’, with both possibilities and constraints. To a planner just dealing with the next thing on their plate, transformative action is discrete & opaque. Focus shifts from path-following to path-creation
Implications for bridging urban science and planning include:
1) Transformation pathways don’t emerge automatically but need ongoing work to push forward;
2) Many seemingly mundane actions (eg negotiation, persuasion) should be more highly valued in thinking on transformations
3) Transformation might not be glamorous and is unlikely to involve a single moment of radical reconfiguration;
4) Key opportunity is to ‘join-up’ multiple action moments, but sometimes may also require slowing down decision-making (eg to include unheard voices)
5) A focus on feasibility can help to engage with dynamic possibilities for action and enable savvier forms of action;
6) Scientists must sympathetically explore opportunities for urban action in real-world settings to help advance sustainability transformations.
Summary written by Dr James Patterson.
The full article is available on npj urban sustainability
Article: Finding feasible action towards urban transformations
Authors: James Patterson, Niko Soininen, Marcus Collier & Christopher M. Raymond
Published online: 28/06/2021