Advertisement

Standing on the Shoulders of Giants—Reviving Ecological Approaches in Planning Traditions

  • Carlo RegaEmail author
Chapter
Part of the Cities and Nature book series (CITIES)

Abstract

In this chapter, we present the purpose of this book: contributing to a refoundation of spatial planning theories and practices on ecological basis, or framing planning into the paradigm of ecological rationality. We purposely use the term refoundation because deeply ecological thinking has been present in the planning tradition since its inception—thanks to the contribution of prominent scholars and polymath thinkers—but has largely been lost or disregarded in what developed as mainstream theory and practice. We, therefore, start by reviving the contributions of scholars such as Patrick Geddes, Lewis Mumford, Ian McHarg and others, who developed the ecological foundation of planning and elaborate in particular on Mumford’s engagement with historical materialism and other Marxian concepts. We will also discuss the need to advance ecological planning theorization in light of the more recent development of the ecological crisis and the new tools and knowledge we have at disposal. The chapter concludes by presenting an outline of the book.

Keywords

Patrick Geddes Lewis Mumford Ian McHarg Historical materialism Mega-machine, metabolism 

References

  1. Agroecology Europe (2019) Our understanding of agroecology. http://agroecology-europe.org/our-approach/our-understanding-of-agroecology/
  2. Altieri MA (2018) Agroecology: the science of sustainable agriculture. CRC PressGoogle Scholar
  3. Batty M, Marshall S (2009) The evolution of cities: Geddes, Abercrombie and the new physicalism. Town Plan Rev 80(6):551–574.  https://doi.org/10.3828/tpr.2009.12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bedoya-Perales N, Pumi G, Mujica A, Talamini E, Domingos Padula A (2018) Quinoa expansion in Peru and its implications for land use management. Sustainability 10(2):532CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chisholm A (1972) Philosophers of the earth: conversations with ecologists. Sidgwick and Jackson, LondonGoogle Scholar
  6. Conference of Ministers responsible for Regional Planning (CEMAT) Resolution No. 2 on the European regional/spatial planning charter (Torremolinos Charter). 6th European conference of ministers responsible for regional planning (CEMAT) (Torremolinos, Spain: 19–20 May 1983) on “Prospects of development and of spatial planning in maritime regions”Google Scholar
  7. Costanza R, D’Arge R, De Groot R, Farber S, Grasso M, Hannon B, Van Den Belt M (1997) The value of the world’s ecosystem services and natural capital. Nature 387(6630):253–260.  https://doi.org/10.1038/387253a0CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Crowe PR, Foley K (2017) Exploring urban resilience in practice: a century of vacant sites mapping in Dublin, Edinburgh and Philadelphia. J Urban Des 22 (2):208–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Dramstad W, Olson JD, Forman RT (1996) Landscape ecology principles in landscape architecture and land-use planning. Island Press, Wasgington, DCGoogle Scholar
  10. Eisenman TS, Murray T (2017) An integral lens on Patrick Geddes. Landsc Urban Plan 166:43–54.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.05.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Engels F (1887) The Condition of the Working-Class in England in 1844. Leipzig: 1845. Trans. London: 1887Google Scholar
  12. Engels F (1890) Letter to J Bloch. Available at: https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1890/letters/90_09_21.htm
  13. Foley JA, DeFries R, Asner GP, Barford C, Bonan G, Carpenter SR, Chapin FS, Coe MT, Daily GC, Gibbs HK, Helkowski JH, Holloway T, Howard EA, Kucharik CJ, Monfreda C, Patz JA, Prentice IC, Ramankutty N, Snyder PK (2005) Global consequences of land use. Science 309(5734):570–574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fjord Levy S (2011) Grounding landscape urbanism. Scenario 01: Landscape Urbanism. https://scenariojournal.com/article/grounding-landscape-urbanism/
  15. Geddes P, Thompson JA (1889) The Evolution of Sex. London: Walter ScottGoogle Scholar
  16. Glikson A (1971) The ecological basis of planning. Springer, DordrechtCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Green A (2006) Matter and psyche: Lewis Mumford’s appropriation of Marx and Jung in his appraisal of the condition of man in technological civilization. History Human Sci 19(3):33–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Greenreport.it (2019) L’urbanistica come mezzo per una transizione ecologica e solidale in Italia. Interview to Silvia Viviani by Luca Aterini. http://www.greenreport.it/news/economia-ecologica/lurbanistica-come-mezzo-per-una-transizione-ecologica-e-solidale-in-italia/
  19. Goist PD (1974) Patrick Geddes and the city. J Am Plan Assoc 40(1):31–37.  https://doi.org/10.1080/01944367408977444CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Guha R (1991) Lewis Mumford: the forgotten American environmentalist: an essay in rehabilitation. Capitalism Nat Social 2(3):67–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Hall, PG (1998, 2002). Cities of tomorrow, 3rd edn. Blackwell Publishing, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  22. Hysler-Rubin N (2009) The changing appreciation of Patrick Geddes: a case study in planning history. Plan Perspect 24(3):349–366CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hysler-Rubin N (2013) The celebration, condemnation and reinterpretation of the Geddes plan, 1925: the dynamic planning history of Tel Aviv. Urban Hist 40(1):114–135.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0963926812000661CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. IPBES (2019) Summary for policymakers of the global assessment report on biodiversity and ecosystem services of the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services. https://www.ipbes.net/news/ipbes-global-assessment-summary-policymakers-pdf
  25. Khan N (2011) Geddes in India: town planning, plant sentience, and cooperative evolution. Environ Plan D: Soc Space 29(5):840–856.  https://doi.org/10.1068/d5610CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Kropotkin P (1899) Fields, factories, and workshops: or industry combined with agriculture, and brainwork with manual work, 1st edn. Boston: 1899. Revised Ed. London: 1919Google Scholar
  27. Law A (2005) The ghost of Patrick Geddes: civics as applied sociology. Sociol Res Online 10(2).  https://doi.org/10.5153/sro.1092CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lyle JT (1996) Regenerative design for sustainable development. WileyGoogle Scholar
  29. Martínez-Alier J (1987) Ecological economics: energy, economics, society. Basil Blackwell, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  30. Martínez-Alier J, Muradian R (2015) (eds) Handbook of ecological economics. Edward Elgar Publishing.  https://doi.org/10.4337/9781783471416
  31. Marx K (1990, original ed. 1867) Capital: Vol. 1 Penguin, LondonGoogle Scholar
  32. McHarg IL (1969) Design with nature. New York: American Museum of Natural HistoryGoogle Scholar
  33. Metternicht G (2018) Land use and spatial planning—enabling sustainable management of land resources. Springer briefs in earth sciences. Springer Nature, Switzerland, 116 pGoogle Scholar
  34. Mumford L (1934) Technics and civilization. Harcourt Brace, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  35. Mumford L (1938) The culture of cities. Harcourt, Brace and companyGoogle Scholar
  36. Mumford L (1961) The city in history: Its origins, its transformations, and its prospects (Vol. 67). Houghton Mifflin HarcourtGoogle Scholar
  37. Mumford L (1965) Technics and the nature of man. Nature 208(5014):923–928CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mumford L (1970). The Myth of the Machine II - The Pentagon of Power, New York, NY, Harcourt BraceGoogle Scholar
  39. Moore JW (2016) The rise of cheap nature. In: Moore JW (ed) Anthropocene or Capitalocene? PM Press, Oakland, pp 78–115Google Scholar
  40. O'Gorman TE, Hill IE (2013) Burke, Mumford, and the Poetics of Technology: Marxism’s Influence on Burke’s Critique of Techno-logology. In Burke in the Archives: Using the Past to Transform the Future of Burkean Studies. University of South Carolina PressGoogle Scholar
  41. Reynolds S (2004) ‘Patrick Geddes’s French connections in academic and political life: networking from 1878 to the 1900s’. In: Fowle F, Thomson B (eds) Patrick Geddes: the French connection. White Cockade Publishing and The Scottish Society for Art History, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  42. Shoshkes E (2017) Jaqueline Tyrwhitt translates Patrick Geddes for post world war two planning. Landsc Urban Plan 166:15–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2016.09.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Smith N (1984) Uneven development: nature, capital and the production of space. The University of Georgia Press, AthensGoogle Scholar
  44. Welter VM (2017) Commentary on “thinking organic, acting civic: the paradox of planning for cities in evolution” by Michael Batty and Stephen Marshall, and “Jaqueline Tyrwhitt translates Patrick Geddes for post world war two planning” by Ellen Shoshkes. Landsc Urban Plan 166:25–26.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.06.020CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Wezel A, Bellon S, Doré T, Francis C, Vallod D, David C (2009) Agroecology as a science, a movement and a practice: a review. Agron Sustain Dev 29(4):503–515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Woudstra J (2018) Designing the garden of Geddes: the master gardener and the profession of landscape architecture. Landsc Urban Plan 178:198–207.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2018.05.023CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Young RF (2017) “Free cities and regions”—Patrick Geddes’s theory of planning. Landsc Urban Plan 166:27–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Young RF, Clavel P (2017) Planning living cities: Patrick Geddes’ legacy in the new millennium. Landsc Urban Plan 166:1–3.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.07.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.ITERAS - Research Centre for Sustainability and Territorial InnovationBariItaly

Personalised recommendations