«CSAAR (7: 2010: Amman) Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development \ Edited by Steffen Lehmann, Husam Al Waer, Jamal AI-Qawasmi. Amman: The Center ...»
To create suecessful cities, planners need to relinquish so me of their control and give it to the public. There needs to be a collaborative network between the users, the government and the planners. The public concerns, needs and values need to be ineorporated into governmentaI and eorporate decision making. They should be able to see their decisions in the design process and be able to see how they influenced this design. It should communicate their interest and facilitate the people who are directly affected (Creighton, 2005).
The influenee of power in the design process is primarily exerted by people who have an influence within the project team or have a controlling power over a projeet such as head and senior directors, expert designers, commissioning cIients, regulators, investors, etc.... Figure 4 attempts to show the relationship between the level of citizen involvement and empowerment. The less information given to the participant the weaker the empowerment, this means that the empowerment level is directly related to the amount of information given. However, relinquishing all the control and handing it to the publie is a high risk process, as the amount of information given is very eomplex and the risk eould lead to negative impacts on the social and environmental issues. This is why the paper suggested that some of the control needs to be relinquished and citizen involvement should be considered. Ihis gives eitizens the necessary Hisham Moustafa, Husam AIWaer & Tamer Gado empowerment that they crave and yet the risk that is involved with partnering tbe citizens could be avoided.
Figure 5: Citizen Empowerment Modified from (Newman and Jennings, 2007, P. 162) Participation in decision making helps peop1e to appreciate the comp1exities of issues and feel a sense of ownership toward tbe outcome. rt encourages people to take responsibility and care for their human community. Empowerment is about making people to make more control of their day to day lives and have the ability to make decisions about their surroundings. This Issue IS important because It is a human right, but also because the sustainability issue i8 far too difficuIt and complex and to resolve it needs many different views as possible in a creative strategie conversation (Newman and Jennings, 2007, p. 157).
3 Sustainable, Intelligent, Liveable or Ecological Why Bother?
The vagueness and the misinterpretation of Sustainable city definition created many versions and many other concepts to benefit the city itself. What is evident from table 2 is tbat the most idealistic is Herbert Girardet's definition of the sustainable city which combines all the aspects needed in a city. This means it covers economic, social and environmental aspects of the city, however, as it is an idealistic approach, many cities started to incorporate sub categories to the sustainab1e city concept. The ones mentioned in this paper are; (a) Intelligent, (b) Liveable and (c) Ecological eities.
Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 463 Table 5 shows a comparison between all four concepts mentioned before. It shows what each concepts main purpose of existence. It proves that each philosophy has its own priorities and goals and as do all cities. lt shows that each concept concentrates mainly on one aspect with minor neglect to the remainder.
For example, the intelligent dty focuses greatly on economy and sodal aspects and neglects the environmental aspect, while the ecological city focuses greatly on the environmental aspect and gives minor importance to the sodal and economic aspect. Finally the Liveable city, focuses on the people, how they live their lives and their connection to the environment and gives no consideration to the economic aspects.
Intelligent cities or Intel-Cities focus on serving the human society. Cities are collective tools whose features emerge rather than carefully planned. Intelligent cities is a new concept an emergent of the 21 sI century instead of the construction ofthat act as an intermediary between mankind's physical conditions and nature, it attempts to make spaces and collective tools that increase mankind's intellectual capacity and improve city usage between it8 dtizens, in order to leam, innovate and reach new limits (Kom ninos, 2008), thereby its neglect to the environment.
"Cities are more than just wires and cables, smart offices, trendy bars and luxury hotels, and the vast number of people who live in cities deserve more than just these things. Because the smart city label can work to ideologically mask the nature of some of the underlying changes in cities, it may be a partial impediment toward progressive urban change." Robert G. Hollands (Hollands, 2008, p. 316).
Ecological Cities or Eco-Cities aims to create cities that are coherent with nature. It needs people to think of a city as a living system, this means it needs to be built on a basically three dimensional, integral, complex models, not flat, random, and in large areas uniform and simple. It aims the city to be compact and should be designed for a population of living things rather than the automobile (Register, 2006). This proves that cities main concem is the environrnental aspect with very litde or no recognition to the remaining.
Liveable Cities is a city that contributes to physical, social and mental weIl being and personal development of all its inhabitants. lt concentrates on the quality of urban spaces that offer and reflect cultural and hallowed enrichment (Timmer and Seymoar, 2005). However, the liveable city isn 't a sustainable city as it only concentrates on the wellbeing of its residents, it doesn't care about the city surroundings and the amount ofwaste it produces.
Tablc 4: The Comparison oftht: rour city concepts J;:.
Table 6 attempted to show how the challenges of the city, mentioned in seetion 1, and how each philosophy aUempts to answer the problems of the city.
Table 5 and 6 hoth look at the concept of the city future. Each philosophy discussed in both tables on a certain aspect of city design. This is due to the idealism that sustainability set for it8 cities. Each city concept never reaHy tackled the complete set of concerns for the city set in this paper. However, a combination of all three could tackle all the major concerns ofthe city.
4 The Integral City
The conclusion that originated from table 6 lead the author to introduce the concept ofthe integral City, as was mentioned in section 1, the city evolved from prehistoric times till what is seen today. This philosophy originated to eliminate the philosophy of total control that sustainability imposed. It attempted to create cities were people had an influential impact on the city and its use (Eil in, 2(06).
The philosophy of integralism in cities focuses greatly on the philosophy that cities are habitats created by and for people. It is important to explore it within of whole and living systems. It concentrates and gives and understanding of the intelligence of the human society. It follows the philosophy that the human condition is a never ending quest involving continuous adaptation and change.
The city focuses on 12 different forms of intelligence; (1) Ecosphere Intelligence; focuses on the location of places for the human city, (2) Emerging intelligence; sees the city a whole system rather than individualised ones, (3) Integral Intelligence; Evaluates the exiting and evolving patterns of the Human city, (4) Living lntelligence; understands that the city is an organism that lives and dies, (5) Inner Intelligence; concentrates on the conscious capacity of the Human city, Outer (6) Jntelligence; the embodiment of the right action in the human city, (7) Building Intelligence; the creation of structures that flex and flow in the city, (8) Story intelligence; understanding the historical progression of cities, spiritually and physically, (9) lnquiry intelligence; it focuses on releasing the potential of the human hive, (l0) Meshing Intelligence; The enabling of order and creativity in the human hive, (11) Navigating intelligence; the easy movement Figure 6: the integral city main principles within the city, and (12) Evolving Intelligence; imagining how the Sustainable Architecture and Urban Development 467 city will evolve (Harnilton, 2008). This is evident in figure 6.
The centre of thc eircle is the evolutionary intelligence, which is the core of the movement, the further along you go in the circle, the weaker the principles to the integral city philosophy it would be.
5 Discussions and Conclusion The paper attempted to investigate three major points. They are (a) understanding the complexity ofthe city metabolism, (b) Understanding how the vagueness and idealism of sustainability and sustainable city definitions lead to the emergence of many other eoncepts and whether these concepts attempt to improve the challenges of the city, and (c) Understanding how different Sustainable city indicators, who have the same final goal, reach their goals through different means.
The concept of sustainability is a relative concept and not an absolute seience. The vagueness of the term sustainability and their counterparts sustainability indicators have been an ongoing struggle for several years and were discussed in a variety of papers. The problems that affected the term sustainability were conveyed on the definition of sustainable cities and similarly to the sustainable city indicators. The concept of combining sustainability and thc city are relatively recent as StetTen Lehman stated in his papers and hence it is still an evolving concept.
The idealistic concept of sustainablc cities has bcen an evolving argument for the past several years. Many people still be\ieve that the concept of sustainable cities still exists and in thc Ettore Maria Mozzola' s paper states sustainable cities are possible with the current town planning transform. There are also people who argue that the use of sustainability indicators is un-accurate and un-just due to government manipulation and their huge complexity.
The reason this study was conducted was to understand that the definition for a sustainable city is very complex and this created many misinterpretations and concept. Each concept on its own has its own downfalls and the combination of all concepts together in the socio-ecological city will give a better and more direct understanding of the sustainable city. Another point that gives importance to the study is to understand that each country needs to have its own measuring tool to achieve its sustainable cities.
The study had many !imitations as the concepts that originated from the vagueness of the term sustainable cities were construed to three concepts and these concepts evolved in too many newer eoncepts. For example, the intelligent city evolved in to smart cities, digital cities, E-Cities, etc... and the sustainability indicators chosen were only two and there are more indicators available.
One subject that still remains to be explored is how the Integral city contributes to the enhancement of the city concerns. There also needs to be a more detailed mentioning of the remaining eoncepts for city futures. The Hisham Moustafa, Husam AlWaer & Tamer Gado increase 01' the number of SCls will give a more accurate assessment of whether or not there are differences between the indicators produced in different cities.
The findings 01' the paper show that; (a) The city is complex network 01' concems, impacts, outputs and responses. lt aimed to show that the city is not just a simple concept of just inputs and out puts, instead these complex systems needed to involved in this metabolism concept. (b) The paper also investigated the vagueness 01' the tenn sustainable city, which lead to evolvement of many concepts under its name. They are (a) Liveable, (b) Intelligent and (c) EcologicaL These concepts on their own failed to measure up to deal with all the challenges 01' the cities mentioned in this paper. Finally, (c) the paper also examined how different indicators, from different countries attempted to reach the same goal through different means and that was evident between the comparison that occurred between Melboume and CABE.
The city is a complex system and each city has its own goals and priorities, it cannot be just simplified into a set of mies and guidelines. The problem with the concept of the sustainable city is its wide generalization and idealism.