Speaker
Description
While global crises directly affect planning practices by increasing political, economic, and spatial uncertainties, they also create opportunities to strengthen solidarity and generate new organizational models. Crises not only expose the fragility of existing systems but also underscore the need to rethink and restructure them. In this context, it is critical to examine how the planning paradigm evolves in response to crises.
In post-crisis reconstruction processes, planning is shifting from a narrow focus on physical arrangements to a more comprehensive approach that integrates social, economic, and environmental dynamics. For instance, the "Build Back Better" principle of the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction provides a perspective aimed at fostering more resilient and sustainable structures and communities in the aftermath of crises.
The challenges of post-crisis planning, such as navigating uncertainties and ensuring inclusivity, are often amplified in rapid implementation processes. For example, the 2023 Hatay earthquake in Turkey has illustrated some of these difficulties, particularly in balancing the urgency of recovery with the need for legitimate and participatory processes. While the rapid pace of planning aimed to address immediate needs, critiques have emerged regarding the lack of adequate public involvement. This example underscores the broader tension between acting quickly in times of crisis and fostering democratic engagement and inclusivity in planning.
This study explores how planning responds to crises and how its paradigm shifts over time. While crises heighten spatial and managerial uncertainties, they also foster solidarity and encourage the development of alternative organizational models. Within this framework, the paper discusses the impact of crises on planning processes and identifies the transformations required to establish a more resilient, inclusive, and equitable planning approach for the future.
In conclusion, the transformation of the planning paradigm in response to crises extends beyond delivering better spatial solutions; it necessitates the adoption of holistic approaches grounded in the principles of social justice, participation, and sustainability. This paper aims to assess the transformative potential of planning in light of the challenges and opportunities presented by crises and to propose new perspectives on this evolution.
References
Davoudi, S., & Brooks, E. (2021). The Routledge Handbook of Planning for Health and Phillips, B.B. (2009) Disaster Recovery. New York: Auerbach Publications. doi: 10.4324/9781420074215.
Fiaschi, F. (2021) ‘Thinking About Post-disaster Reconstruction in Europe: Functionalist and Identity Approaches’, in Post-Disaster Reconstruction and Change: Communities' Perspectives. Cham: Springer, pp. 23–45. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-77356-4_2.
Johnson, L.A. and Olshansky, R.B. (2016) After Great Disasters: How Six Countries Managed Community Recovery. Cambridge, MA: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. Policy Focus Report/Code PF041. ISBN 978-1-55844-358-7.
| Keywords | Post-Crisis Reconstruction, Community Participation, citizen engagement, planning paradigm |
|---|---|
| Best Congress Paper Award | No |
