The New Urban Profession: Entering Age of Uncertainty: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 3 by Bruce Ren and Version 2 by Bruce Ren.

The context of urbanism is changing rapidly. The context for working in the field of urban design and planning is influenced by the pace of change; uncertainty; and massive transitions. The urban professional, however, is still used to planning for small changes and repeating traditional approaches. In this paper, we have investigated major future tasks and problems that require rethinking the skills required from people working in the urban arena. By conducting in-depth conversation with leading thinkers in the field, the tension between idealism and the urgency to act versus realism and the trust in current systems dominated by economic laws is present. This results in the conclusion that a different skillset is required in order to face future complexities and to be able to connect design creativity with process sensitivity in short- and long-term periods and at small and large scales. 

  • transformation
  • urban planning
  • urban design
  • urban professional
  • urgency

1. Introduction

Urbanization has, amongst many other factors, an impact on nature and health [1], avian diversity [2] and biodiversity in general [3]; groundwater quality [4]; soil [5]; prices and affordability of housing [6]; energy consumption [7]; land-use change and climate [8]; the regional climate [9]; and urban heat impact [10]. Global urban land expansion [11][12] has significant climate impacts [13]; it influences deforestation [14], biodiversity [15] health, such as increasing obesity [16] and mental health issues [17]. Climate variability and change can exert profound stresses on urban environments, which are sensitive to heat waves, droughts and changes in the frequency and magnitude of flash floods [18]. At the same time, urban areas are centers of wealth, human population and built infrastructure and are, therefore, considered to be ‘first responders’ to climate change [19]. Moreover, cities are the fundamental units for climate change mitigation and adaptation [20].
Currently, with over 50% of the global population living in cities [21], a number that is expected to rise to 70% in 2050 [22], these impacts deserve attention from urban professionals. Additionally, future problems, such as climate impacts [23][24]; social unrest [25][26] and migration [27][28][29]; increased inequality [30][31][32]; and the limitations of natural resources [33][34][35], i.e., the limits to growth [36][37][38], potentially accelerate the need for urban responses. Thus far, the urban professional, being an urban planner or designer or an urbanist, is confronted with an enormity of subjects, complexities and uncertainties, which makes it a next to impossible task. The question raised is as follows: what can the urban professional act on in order to deliver a distinguished contribution to creating urban environments that are providing a sustainable, resilient and healthy place for people to live in?

2. Urban Planning, Urban Design and Urbanism

In order to understand urban responses to social, ecological or economic developments in the city, the core attributes of professions active in the urban realm need to be comprehended. A “profession” is a special form of community of persons who share the same special type of occupation, whose practitioners assume responsibility for the affairs of others and provide services that are indispensable for the public good [39]. Urban planning, urban design and urbanism each have their own viewpoints on their own profession.

2.1. Urban Planning

There is a saying of the following: ‘(Urban) planning is not politics, but it is in politics’ [40]. Politics is primarily concerned with resource distribution, and the role of planning and planners is, inter alia, to provide a reasoned, rational and socially sensitive contribution to political decision making [41]. The nature of planning as a profession comprehends the promotion of general welfare in the public interest, submerging any personal interests to the interests of the client; it is intellectual and varied in character, discrete and just and requires an advanced type of knowledge [42]. The planner fosters awareness; promotes public involvement; and establishes and maintains clear ethical standards [41]. ‘Planning with/for people’ enhances the ‘quality of life’ for ‘all’ in the ‘built environment’ [43]. Planning must consider not only the interests of the current generation but also the wellbeing of future generations, and it is inherently related to some form of ‘common good’ [44] (p. 465), which includes cities, towns and their regional surrounding and is aimed at both economic and social goals [45]. Therefore, planning considers the big picture, involves the entire community and looks ahead [46]. However, ‘the public image of the planner depicts him as an artist; as the master planner who intuitively prepares the best plans for the community. Planners, through their professional organizations, try to maintain an image of comprehensiveness. Neither explains why the plans prepared by the urban planner fail to gain real social commitment. What urban planners do and why they do it becomes more understandable when they are seen as governmental functionaries.’ [47].
“The master-economist must possess a rare combination of gifts. He must be mathematician, historian, statesman, philosopher—in some degree. He must understand symbols and speak in words. He must contemplate the particular, in terms of the general, and touch abstract and concrete in the same flight of thought. He must study the present in the light of the past for the purposes of the future. No part of man’s nature or his institutions must be entirely outside his regard. He must be purposeful and disinterested in a simultaneous mood, as aloof and incorruptible as an artist, yet sometimes as near to earth as a politician.”
—John Maynard Keynes

2.2. Urban Design

The following has been said of urban design: ‘The researchers know what urban design is not. It is not architecture, not even big architecture. It is not land use policy, sign controls, and street lighting districts. It is also not merely sensitivity to design in the drafting of public policy, nor respect for the urban fabric in which architectural designs are wrapped. The researchers also know that it is not strictly Utopian or procedural, and that it is not necessarily a plan for downtown, however architectonic, nor a subdivision regulation no matter how particular’ [48] (p. 67). Urban design is the art of making places in an urban context, which involves designing groups of buildings and the spaces and landscapes between them and to further improve the creation of frameworks for successful development [49]. City beautification was the fundamental purpose of urban design at the time it was introduced as a separate profession. Over time, the scope and objectives of urban design have changed, and urban design currently plays a vital role in city development. Today, urban design functions at the crossroads of architecture, landscape architecture and city planning. It has become a collaborative discipline functioning with other disciplines to create three-dimensional forms and spaces for people that function effectively [50]. Urban design is the art of three-dimensional city design at a scale larger than a single building, and the urban designer acts as a ‘fixer, coordinator, or stimulator rather than a detached observer churning out observations or reports’ who is concerned with the total built form, i.e., the production of acceptable townscape. The scope of urban design is primarily the area on the edge of architecture and planning. The urban designer is responsible for the three-dimensional form of the city at the local planning level as both a designer, i.e., a person who engages in a specific creative act that produces a design, and as a controller/negotiator who ensures that an adequate design evolves [51], providing a ‘physical design direction to urban growth, conservation, and change.’ [52] (p. 12). In addition, quality of life, the public realm and process are seen as significant aspects of the ‘thresholds of scale’ whereby interrelationships of building site, neighborhoods and districts; the city; metro regions; and ‘corridors’ are building blocks of design intervention [53]. Therefore, urban design seeks to enhance the life of the city and its inhabitants in socio-economic and environmental terms [54].

2.3. Urbanism

The following has been said about urbanism: ‘Urbanism is about what happens inside cities, the form and function of cities, and how cities relate to the rural. It often refers to the study of how inhabitants of urban or urbanizing areas interact with the social and built environments of cities. The concept of urbanism is linked to the professions associated with the physical and social design and management of urban structures and communities’ [55].

2.4. Flaws

Cities have been variously defined and analyzed by population density; geographic size; integrated economies with a diversity of goods and services; the proliferation of specific building types or changes in urban form such as high-rise buildings; high population recreational spaces such as stadiums and theatres; new forms of government and urban governance; or the increasing detachment of a population from directly providing their own food and energy needs [56][57][58][59][60][61][62].
Cities might also be defined by what they produce, such as housing wealth or inequality; or the forms of pollution, noise, water and food shortages; and other issues and inequalities that are somewhat unique to urban environments [55]. While urban planning is seen as predominantly two-dimensional, works for/with the community and is strongly linked to the government, urban design is focuses on the three-dimensional, total urban form declared ‘artistic,’ and urbanism links urban form and function, thus linking the two and three dimensions of urban development.
No matter how cities and/or the roles of their urban professions are defined, it is a common subject for discussion, sometimes even raising questions with respect to whether it should exist at all, as some forecast the endgame of the planning system and its ideals that founded the planning movement [63]. There is, in fact, a great deal of uncertainty and confusion over what this role is and what it is likely to be in the future. The perceived role of the planner remains in a state of flux [64]. The ‘broader civil society consensus around the need for planning has fragmented, and many people are simply unclear about what the system is for’ [65] (p. 23). Additionally, a lack of transparency extends the gap between the planners and the planned, as well as between different forms, sectors, spatial scales or types of ‘planner’ [66], resulting in mistrust in the planning system, the decisions it produces and the motivations of its central actors [67]. In the transition from the “narrower” world of spatial thinking to the broader world of process and policy formulation, the work of planners became more abstract, less approachable and, ironically, more distant from public expectations about what a plan is or what planners can do. Planning is also often accused of being reactive to real estate or political interests [68]. Subsequently, the serial impacts of pluralism, liberalism, globalization, risk and rights-based claims have acted in combination to erode an already weak trust in planning and planners [69].
Even more, 25 years ago, Koolhaas already argued that urbanism is dead: ‘In spite of its early promise, urbanism has been unable to invent and implement at the scale demanded by its apocalyptic demographics. How to explain the paradox that urbanism has disappeared when urbanization everywhere-after decades of constant acceleration-is on its way to establish a definitive global “triumph” of the urban condition? Now the researchers are left with a world without urbanism, only architecture. The neatness of architecture is its seduction; it exploits and exhausts the potentials that can be generated finally only by urbanism, and that only the specific imagination of urbanism can invent and renew. The death of urbanism-our refuge in the parasitic security of architecture-creates an immanent disaster: more and more, substance is grafted on starving roots. Redefined, urbanism will not only, or mostly, be a profession, but a way of thinking, an ideology: to accept what exists. The researchers were making sandcastles. Now the researchers swim in the sea that swept them away. To survive, urbanism will have to imagine a new newness. What if the researchers simply declare that there is no crisis-redefine the researchers relationship with the city not as its makers but as its mere subjects, as its supporters? More than ever, the city is all the researchers have’ [70].
Given these views on the eroded expressiveness, role and even power of the urban professional, how then can they operate and respond with any form of confidence when confronted with the changes currently underway? When entering the age of uncertainty, this calls for a redefinition, maybe rehabilitation, of the urban profession(s).

2.5. Global Problems

The urbanized world is and will be confronted with an accelerated and complex set of problems at the global level, which will impact the urban environment and society in every location. The main issues with which the life in cities will experience are in the fields of climate, biodiversity, health and equity.

2.5.1. Climate Change

The following has been said about climate change: ‘The scale of recent changes across the climate system are unprecedented and human-induced climate change is already affecting many weather and climate extremes in every region across the globe. Global surface temperature will continue to increase until at least the mid-century, global warming of 1.5 °C and 2 °C will be exceeded during the 21st century. Many changes in the climate system become larger in direct relation to increasing global warming. They include increases in the frequency and intensity of hot extremes, marine heatwaves, and heavy precipitation, agricultural and ecological droughts in some regions, and proportion of intense tropical cyclones, as well as reductions in Arctic Sea ice, snow cover and permafrost. Many changes due to past and future greenhouse gas emissions are irreversible for centuries to millennia, especially changes in the ocean, ice sheets and global sea level’ [24].
A concrete manifestation of this is the potential break down of an ice shelf at the bottom of the Thwaites glacier within five years. This could result in sliding of the glacier into the ocean, potentially accelerating sea level rise up to 0.5 m [71][72][73][74], which could take a while to effectuate but is irreversible. In the meantime, damage resulting from natural disasters (which are partly caused by climate change) continues to grow and was, in 2021, 24% higher than the year before [75]. The total damage worldwide was EUR 221 billion, of which less than half was/could be insured.

2.5.2. Biodiversity

Climate change impacts and biodiversity loss are two of the most important challenges and risks for human societies. Climate change exacerbates risks to biodiversity and natural and managed habitats. At the same time, natural and managed ecosystems and their biodiversity play a key role in the fluxes of greenhouse gases, as well as in supporting climate adaptation. Nature’s contributions to attenuating climate change, partly provided by the underpinning biodiversity, are at risk from ecosystem degradation resulting from progressive climate change and human activities. In fact, ecosystem degradation through land-use changes and other impacts on natural carbon stocks and sequestration is a major contributor to cumulative carbon-emissions and, therefore, an additional driver of climate change. Therefore, treating climate, biodiversity and human society as coupled systems is a key to successful outcomes from policy interventions, and transformative change in the governance of socio-ecological systems can help create climate and biodiversity resilient development pathways [76].

2.5.3. Health

In 2021, the world is overwhelmed by an ongoing global health crisis, which has made little progress to protect its population from the simultaneously aggravated health impacts of climate change. Climate-sensitive infectious diseases are of increasing global concern, and the environmental suitability for the transmission of all infectious diseases is increasing. High temperatures resulted in extreme heat-related health impacts, affecting the emotional and physical wellbeing of populations around the world and resulted in more frequent extreme weather events and increased wildfire exposure; moreover, it has profound effects on food and water security. Measures to curb emissions have been grossly inadequate, contributing to millions of deaths [77][78]. Climate action aligned with Paris Agreement targets could save millions of lives due to improvements in air quality, diet and physical activity, among other benefits [79]. The health co-benefits from climate change actions offer strong arguments for transformative change and can be gained across many sectors, including energy generation, transport, food and agriculture, housing and buildings, industry and waste management [80][81]. Many of the same actions that reduce greenhouse gas emissions also improve air quality [82], while other measures—such as facilitating walking and cycling—improve health through increased physical activity, resulting in reductions in respiratory diseases, cardiovascular diseases, some cancers, diabetes and obesity [83], and urban green spaces facilitate climate mitigation and adaptation while also offering health co-benefits, such as reduced exposure to air pollution, local cooling effects, stress relief and increased recreational space for social interaction and physical activity [84][85]. A shift to more nutritious plant-based diets [86] could reduce global emissions significantly; ensure a more resilient food system; and avoid up to 5.1 million diet-related deaths a year by 2050 [87].

2.5.4. Equity

The New Urban Agenda [88] incorporates a new recognition of the correlation between good urbanization and development. It underlines the linkages between good urbanization and job creation, livelihood opportunities and improved quality of life. This implies a vision of cities for all, referring to the equal use and enjoyment of cities and human settlements; seeking to promote inclusivity and ensure that all inhabitants of present and future generations without discrimination of any kind; inhabiting and producing just, safe, healthy, accessible, affordable, resilient and sustainable cities and human settlements to foster prosperity and quality of life for all. The New Urban Agenda is guided by the following interlinked principles:
  • Leave no one behind by ending poverty in all its forms and dimensions;
  • Ensure sustainable and inclusive urban economies;
  • Ensure environmental sustainability.

2.6. Urgency

In conclusion, the signs are clear, climate change, biodiversity loss, health impact and increasing inequality show that the urgency to create a fair and livable planet is high. This century will be the era of saving the planet’s climate [89]. Will governments act to stop this disaster from becoming worse [90]? The need is high, and the pace at which changes occur only accelerates. In the next 100 years, the researchers will experience many changes that have happened in the last 1000 years [91], implying that processes of change take place ten-fold faster on average. Warnings and making plans for upcoming risks and change are often blown into the wind. Illustrative in this context is the work of Johan van Veen, who in the decades prior to the last major flood in The Netherlands (1953) warned and, based on scientific investigations, predicted that the country will face a severe risk and experience a major flood. His advice was trivialized, and he was counteracted upon until the 1 February 1953, three days after he presented his plans for the Deltaworks to the Minister of Transport, Public Works and Water Management [92][93]. This points at the need for making advanced plans. Indeed, there is a need for raising awareness and to conceive a new story, a story that is not afraid of envisioning a new landscape [94]. The question, however, is whether this urgency is sincerely felt and whether the researchers will value novel thinking and create the anticipative plans that are needed to turn the serious problems of the future to the researchers advantage?

2.7. National Confrontations

These global problems impact every region in a different manner and are of great concern. In The Netherlands, for instance, global problems impact energy, food, biodiversity, climate adaptation and housing agendas:
-The pace of carbon emission reduction needs to be doubled to reach the reduction target for 2030 in order to reduce emissions by 49% compared to the level of 1990 [95]. The reductions realized by end-users, renewable heat and fuel and the reduction in energy demand are all behind schedule. The energy transition, although on its way, lacks the impact required.
-The Dutch food system in its current form is not maintainable. Food is essential for life, but the way it is produced causes environmental and climate problems. The amount of land and resources used threaten biodiversity and is unhealthy, and overconsumption of food increases obesity and other food-related diseases [96].
-The deposition of nitrogen has profound impacts on biodiversity and the quality of nature and prevents building activities. Not everything is possible anywhere [97]. Moreover, there are stealthy effects of nitrogen on nature and health [98], and reducing deposition is surrounded with doubts about its execution [99].
-The country needs to adapt to the local impacts of climate change, such as fast change in climatic conditions; effects on sea level rise; larger differences between high and low water levels in rivers; and increased probability of droughts. Specific weather conditions occur over prolonged periods (dry, hot, cold and wet), and urban areas will face extreme precipitation events, heat and rainfall [100].
-The country has a shortage of affordable and quality of housing. In the period 2021–2034, the total amount of households increases with 849.000, a growth rate of 10.5% [101]. Moreover, the Delta Commissioner has announced that a large part of the current housing development areas is in highly risky areas, and it can be questioned whether these houses should be built in these areas and, if so, with what fundamental adaptations [102].
All these problems urge for integrated planning, based on the water, soil and ecological systems. As space is scarce, this requires innovative spatial concepts in which different land uses need to be combined; sectoral approaches are abandoned; and a mix of land use is unavoidable [103]. Several attempts to unify large questions in coherent plans for the country have been presented. NL2120 proposes a long-term vision for The Netherlands, taking ecological and water systems as the point of departure [104]. NatureRich Netherlands proposes to transform the country to reserve 50% of its area for nature in a budget-neutral manner while simultaneously solving the agricultural transition, overcoming the nitrogen problem and realizing enough attractive and affordable housing [105]. NL2121-A land with a plan [106] advocates for a research-by-design approach to find solutions for the battle for space in the century of big transitions [91].

References

  1. Cox, D.T.; Shanahan, D.F.; Hudson, H.L.; Fuller, R.A.; Gaston, K.J. The impact of urbanisation on nature dose and the implications for human health. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2018, 179, 72–80.
  2. Sol, D.; Trisos, C.; Múrria, C.; Jeliazkov, A.; González-Lagos, C.; Pigot, A.L.; Ricotta, C.; Swan, C.M.; Tobias, J.A.; Pavoine, S. The worldwide impact of urbanisation on avian functional diversity. Ecol. Lett. 2020, 23, 962–972.
  3. Concepción, E.D.; Moretti, M.; Altermatt, F.; Nobis, M.P.; Obrist, M.K. Impacts of urbanisation on biodiversity: The role of species mobility, degree of specialisation and spatial scale. Oikos 2015, 124, 1571–1582.
  4. Morris, B.L.; Lawrence, A.R.; Stuart, M.E. The Impact of Urbanisation on Groundwater Quality; Project Summary Report; British Geological Survey: Nottingham, UK, 1994.
  5. Doichinova, V.; Zhiyanski, M.; Hursthouse, A. Impact of urbanisation on soil characteristics. Environ. Chem. Lett. 2006, 3, 160–163.
  6. Van Doorn, L.; Arnold, A.; Rapoport, E. In the age of cities: The impact of urbanisation on house prices and affordability. In Hot Property. The Housing Market in Major Cities; Nijskens, R., Lohuis, M., Hilbers, P., Heeringa, W., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 3–13.
  7. Zhao, P.; Zhang, M. The impact of urbanisation on energy consumption: A 30-year review in China. Urban Clim. 2018, 24, 940–953.
  8. Kalnay, E.; Cai, M. Impact of urbanization and land-use change on climate. Nature 2003, 423, 528–531.
  9. Grawe, D.; Thompson, H.L.; Salmond, J.A.; Cai, X.M.; Schlünzen, K.H. Modelling the impact of urbanisation on regional climate in the Greater London Area. Int. J. Climatol. 2013, 33, 2388–2401.
  10. Shastri, H.; Ghosh, S. Urbanisation and surface urban heat island intensity (SUHII). In Climate Change Signals and Response; Chandra Venkataraman, C., Mishra, T., Ghosh, S., Karmakar, S., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2019; pp. 73–90.
  11. Seto, K.C.; Fragkias, M.; Güneralp, B.; Reilly, M.K. A meta-analysis of global urban land expansion. PLoS ONE 2011, 6, e23777.
  12. Güneralp, B.; Reba, M.; Hales, B.U.; Wentz, E.A.; Seto, K.C. Trends in urban land expansion, density, and land transitions from 1970 to 2010: A global synthesis. Environ. Res. Lett. 2020, 15, 044015.
  13. Seto, K.C.; Shepherd, J.M. Global urban land-use trends and climate impacts. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 2009, 1, 89–95.
  14. DeFries, R.S.; Rudel, T.; Uriarte, M.; Hansen, M. Deforestation driven by urban population growth and agricultural trade in the twenty-first century. Nat. Geosci. 2010, 3, 178–181.
  15. McDonald, R.I.; Marcotullio, P.J.; Güneralp, B. Urbanization and global trends in biodiversity and ecosystem services. In Urbanization, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services: Challenges and Opportunities; Elmqvist, T., Fragkias, M., Goodness, J., Güneralp, B., Marcotullio, P.J., McDonald, R.I., Parnell, S., Schewenius, M., Sendstad, M., Seto, K.C., et al., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 2013; pp. 31–52.
  16. Das, S.K.; Chisti, M.J.; Huq, S.; Malek, M.A.; Vanderlee, L.; Salam, M.A.; Ahmed, T.; Faruque, A.S.G.; Al Mamun, A. Changing trend of overweight and obesity and their associated factors in an urban population of Bangladesh. Food Nutr. Sci. 2013, 4, 678–689.
  17. Ventriglio, A.; Torales, J.; Castaldelli-Maia, J.M.; De Berardis, D.; Bhugra, D. Urbanization and emerging mental health issues. CNS Spectr. 2021, 26, 43–50.
  18. Rosenzweig, C.; Solecki, W.D.; Hammer, S.A.; Mehrotra, S. Climate Change and Cities. First Assessesment Report of the Urban Climate Change Research Network; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2011.
  19. Rosenzweig, C.; Solecki, W.; Hammer, S.A.; Mehrotra, S. Cities lead the way in climate-change action. Nature 2010, 467, 909–911.
  20. Georgescu, M.; Morefield, P.E.; Bierwagen, B.G.; Weaver, C.P. Urban adaptation can roll back warming of emerging megapolitan regions. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2014, 111, 2909–2914.
  21. Grimm, N.B.; Faeth, S.H.; Golubiewski, N.E.; Redman, C.L.; Wu, J.; Bai, X.; Briggs, J.M. Global change and the ecology of cities. Science 2008, 319, 756–760.
  22. United Nations. World Urbanization Prospects: The 2014 Revision, Highlight; Department of Economic and Social Affairs, Population Division, United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2014.
  23. Clark, W.C. Scales of climate impacts. Clim. Chang. 1985, 7, 5–27.
  24. Masson-Delmotte, V.; Zhai, P.; Pirani, A.; Connors, S.L.; Péan, C.; Berger, S.; Caud, N.; Chen, Y.; Goldfarb, L.; Gomis, M.I.; et al. (Eds.) IPCC Summary for Policymakers. In Climate Change 2021: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2021; In Press.
  25. Ponticelli, J.; Voth, H.J. Austerity and anarchy: Budget cuts and social unrest in Europe, 1919–2008. J. Comp. Econ. 2020, 48, 1–19.
  26. Rosenfeld, R.; Lopez, E. Pandemic, social unrest, and crime in US cities. Fed. Sentencing Report. 2020, 33, 72–82.
  27. Guild, E. Security and Migration in the 21st Century; Polity Press: Cambridge, UK, 2009.
  28. Massey, D.S. Patterns and processes of international migration in the 21st century. In Proceedings of the Conference on African Migration in Comparative Perspective, Johannesburg, South Africa, 4–7 June 2003; Volume 4, pp. 1–41.
  29. Münz, R. Demography and Migration: An Outlook for the 21st Century; Migration Policy Institute: Washington, DC, USA, 2013.
  30. Bergh, A.; Nilsson, T. Do liberalization and globalization increase income inequality? Eur. J. Political Econ. 2010, 26, 488–505.
  31. Connell, R. Why do market ‘reforms’ persistently increase inequality? Discourse Stud. Cult. Politics Educ. 2013, 34, 279–285.
  32. Lindsey, B.; Teles, S.M. The Captured Economy: How the Powerful Enrich Themselves, Slow Down Growth, and Increase Inequality; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2017.
  33. De Vries, F.P.; Van Keulen, H.; Rabbinge, R. Natural resources and limits of food production in 2040. In Eco-Regional Approaches for Sustainable Land Use and Food Production; Bouma, J., Kuyvenhoven, A., Bouman, B.A.M., Luyten, J.C., Zandstra, H.G., Eds.; Springer: Dordrecht, The Netherlands, 1995; pp. 65–87.
  34. Dias, R.A.; Mattos, C.R.; Balestieri, J.A. The limits of human development and the use of energy and natural resources. Energy Policy 2006, 34, 1026–1031.
  35. Pimentel, D.; Bailey, O.; Kim, P.; Mullaney, E.; Calabrese, J.; Walman, L.; Yao, X. Will limits of the earth’s resources control human numbers? Environ. Dev. Sustain. 1999, 1, 19–39.
  36. Meadows, D.H.; Meadows, D.L.; Randers, J.; Behrens, W. Club of Rome. In The Limits to Growth: A Report for the Club of Rome’s Project on the Predicament of Mankind; Universe Books: New York, NY, USA, 1972.
  37. Meadows, D.; Randers, J. The Limits to Growth: The 30-Year Update; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2012.
  38. Turner, G.M. A comparison of The Limits to Growth with 30 years of reality. Glob. Environ. Chang. 2008, 18, 397–411.
  39. Kultgen, J.H. Ethics and Professionalism; University of Pennsylvania Press: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 1988.
  40. Dyckman, J.W. Planning and decision theory. J. Am. Inst. Plan. 1961, 27, 335–345.
  41. Muller, J. The planning profession. S. Afr. Plan. J. 1997, 42, 54–56.
  42. Howard, J.T. Planning is a profession. J. Am. Inst. Plan. 1954, 20, 58–59.
  43. Carmon, N. The Profession of Urban Planning and its Societal Mandate. In Policy, Planning and People: Promoting Justice in Urban Development; Carmon, N., Fainstein, S., Eds.; Penn Press: Philadelphia, PA, USA, 2013.
  44. Friedmann, J. The good city: In defense of utopian thinking. Int. J. Urban Reg. Res. 2000, 24, 460–472.
  45. Barca, F.; An Agenda for a Reformed Cohesion Policy. A Place-Based Approach to Meeting European Union Challenges and Expectations. Independent Report. 2009. Available online: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/regi/dv/barca_report_/barca_report_en.pdf (accessed on 29 December 2021).
  46. Bowen, C. (Undated) What Is Planning? American Planning Association. Available online: https://www.planning.org/educators/whatisplanning/ (accessed on 30 December 2021).
  47. Barr, D.A. The Professional Urban Planner. J. Am. Inst. Plan. 1972, 38, 155–159.
  48. Kreditor, A. Urban design: A victim of American academic tastes. Center 1990, 6, 64–71.
  49. Urban Design Group. What Is Urban Design? 2011. Available online: http://www.udg.org.uk/about/what-is-urban-design (accessed on 12 January 2022).
  50. Dias, N.; Curwell, S.; Bichard, E. The Current approach of Urban Design and its Implications for Sustainable Urban Development. Procedia Econ. Financ. 2014, 18, 497–504.
  51. Floyd, J. Urban design... a new profession? Built Environ. Q. 1978, 4, 73–77.
  52. Barnett, J. An Introduction to Urban Design; Harper & Row: New York, NY, USA, 1982.
  53. Schurch, T.W. Reconsidering urban design: Thoughts about its definition and status as a field or profession. J. Urban Des. 1999, 4, 5–28.
  54. Wall, E.; Waterman, T. Basics Landscape Architecture 01: Urban Design; AVA Publishing: Lausanne, Switzerland, 2010.
  55. Rogers, D. Understanding urbanism. In Understanding Urbanism; Rogers, D., Keane, A., Alizadeh, T., Nelson, J., Eds.; Palgrave McMilllan: London, UK, 2020.
  56. Brenner, N.; Schmid, C. The urban age in question. In Implosions/Explosions: Towards a Study of Planetary Urbanization; Brenner, N., Ed.; Jovis: Berlin, Germany, 2014; pp. 310–337.
  57. Bounds, M. Urban Social Theory: City, Self, and Society. Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2004.
  58. Engels, F. The Condition of the Working Class in England; The English Edition Published in 1887 in New York. 1845. Available online: www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/download/pdf/condition-working-class-england.pdf (accessed on 4 January 2022).
  59. Graham, S.; Hewitt, L. Getting off the ground: On the politics of urban verticality. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 2013, 37, 72–92.
  60. LeGates, R.T.; Stout, F. (Eds.) The City Reader, 5th ed.; Routledge: London, UK, 2011.
  61. Lefebvre, H. The Urban Revolution; University of Minnesota Press: Minneapolis, MN, USA, 2003.
  62. Mumford, L. The City in History; Harcourt: San Diego, CA, USA, 1961.
  63. Ellis, H.; The Fight for the Soul of the Planner. Town and Country Planning Association. 9 February 2020. Available online: www.tcpa.org.uk/blog/blog-the-fight-for-the-soul-of-the-planner-hugh-ellis (accessed on 29 December 2021).
  64. Poxon, J. Shaping the Planning Profession of the Future: The Role of Planning Education. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 2001, 28, 563–580.
  65. Raynsford Report. Planning 2020. Raynsford Review of Planning in England; Final Report; Town and Country Planning Association: London, UK, 2018.
  66. Parker, G.; Wargent, M.; Linovski, O.; Schoneboom, A.; Gunn, S.; Slade, D.; Odeleye, N.-D.; Maidment, C.; Shepherd, E.; Doak, J.; et al. The Future of the Planning Profession. Plan. Theory Pract. 2020, 21, 453–480.
  67. Grosvenor. Rebuilding Trust; Grosvenor Estates; Discussion Paper; London, UK, 2019.
  68. Kriege, A. The Planner as Urban Designer: Reforming Planning Education in the New Millennium. In The Profession of City Planning, Changes, Images and Challenges 1950–2000, 1st ed.; Rodwin, L., Sanyal, B., Eds.; Routledge: Abingdon, UK, 2000.
  69. Swain, C.; Tait, M. The crisis of trust and planning. Plan. Theory Pract. 2007, 8, 227–245.
  70. Koolhaas, R. Whatever happened to urbanism. In S, M, L, XL; Koolhaas, R., Mau, B., Eds.; Monacelli: New York, NY, USA, 1997; ISBN 978-1-885254-86-3.
  71. Pettit, E.C.; Wild, C.; Alley, K.; Muto, A.; Truffer, M.; Bevan, S.L.; Bassis, J.N.; Crawford, A.; Scambos, T.A.; Benn, D. Collapse of Thwaites Eastern Ice Shelf by intersecting fractures. In Proceedings of the AGU Fall Meeting, New Orleans, LA, USA, 13–17 December 2021; Available online: https://agu.confex.com/agu/fm21/meetingapp.cgi/Paper/978762 (accessed on 12 January 2022).
  72. McFall-Johnsen, M. Ice Shelf at Antarctica’s ‘Doomsday Glacier’ Won’t Last 5 Years, Scientists Warn. Business Insider, 15 December 2021. Available online: https://www.sciencealert.com/thwaites-glacier-s-protective-ice-shelf-will-shatter-in-the-next-five-years-says-scientists (accessed on 29 December 2021).
  73. Weisberger, M. Antarctica’s ‘Doomsday Glacier’ could meet its doom within 3 years. Live Science, 14 December 2021. Available online: https://www.livescience.com/agu-antarctica-thwaites-glacier-future (accessed on 19 December 2021).
  74. Bakker, M. Cruciale ijsplaat staat op barsten. De Volkskrant, 16 December 2021. Available online: https://www.volkskrant.nl/nieuws-achtergrond/cruciale-ijsplaat-op-antarctica-kan-binnen-5-jaar-versplinteren-mogelijk-grote-gevolgen-voor-zeespiegel~b8eafbc8/ (accessed on 17 December 2021).
  75. Swiss, R. Global Insured Catastrophe Losses Rise to USD 112 Billion in 2021, the Fourth Highest on Record, Swiss Re Institute Estimates. 2021. Available online: https://www.swissre.com/media/news-releases/nr-20211214-sigma-full-year-2021-preliminary-natcat-loss-estimates.html (accessed on 2 January 2022).
  76. Pörtner, H.O.; Scholes, R.J.; Agard, J.; Archer, E.; Arneth, A.; Bai, X.; Barnes, D.; Burrows, M.; Chan, L.; Cheung, W.L.; et al. IPBES-IPCC Co-Sponsored Workshop Report on Biodiversity and Climate Change; IPBES and IPCC: Bonn, Germany, 2021.
  77. Romanello, M.; McGushin, A.; Di Napoli, C.; Drummond, P.; Hughes, N.; Jamart, L.; Kennard, H.; Lampard, P.; Rodriguez, B.S.; Arnell, N.; et al. The 2021 report of the Lancet Countdown on health and climate change: Code red for a healthy future. Lancet 2021, 398, 1619–1662.
  78. Lancet Editorial. The climate emergency: A last chance to act? Lancet 2021, 398, 1541.
  79. Hamilton, I.; Kennard, H.; McGushin, A.; Höglund-Isaksson, L.; Kiesewetter, G.; Lott, M.; Milner, J.; Purohit, P.; Rafaj, P.; Sharma, R.; et al. The public health implications of the Paris Agreement: A modelling study. Lancet Planet. Health 2021, 5, e74–e83.
  80. WHO. COP24 Special Report: Health & Climate Change; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021; Available online: https://www.who.int/publications/i/item/cop24-special-report-health-climate-change (accessed on 19 January 2022).
  81. IISD. Health Co-Benefits from NDC Implementation in China; International Institute for Sustainable Development: Geneva, Switzerland, 2020; Available online: https://www.iisd.org/system/files/publications/health-ndc-implementation-china.pdf (accessed on 19 January 2022).
  82. Vandyck, T.; Keramidas, K.; Kitous, A.; Spadaro, J.V.; Van Dingenen, R.; Holland, M.; Saveyn, B. Air quality co-benefits for human health and agriculture counterbalance costs to meet Paris Agreement pledges. Nat. Commun. 2018, 9, 4939.
  83. Lee, I.-M.; Shiroma, E.J.; Lobelo, F.; Puska, P.; Blair, S.N.; Katzmarzyk, P.T. Lancet Physical Activity Series Working Group Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: An analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. Lancet 2012, 380, 219–229.
  84. Kardan, O.; Gozdyra, P.; Misic, B.; Moola, F.; Palmer, L.; Paus, T.; Berman, M.G. Neighborhood greenspace and health in a large urban center. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 11610.
  85. Gascon, M.; Triguero-Mas, M.; Martínez, D.; Dadvand, P.; Rojas-Rueda, D.; Plasència, A.; Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J. Residential green spaces and mortality: A systematic review. Environ. Int. 2016, 86, 60–67.
  86. WHO. COP26 Special Report on Climate Change and Health: The Health Argument for Climate Action; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2021.
  87. Springmann, M.; Charles, H.; Godfray, J.; Rayner, M.; Scarborough, P. Analysis and valuation of the health and climate change co-benefits of dietary change. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 2016, 113, 4146–4151.
  88. UN Habitat. New Urban Agenda; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2017; Available online: https://uploads.habitat3.org/hb3/NUA-English.pdf (accessed on 20 January 2022).
  89. Balci, E. Ons gejuich voor Max Verstappen is een vorm van cultureel verzet. De Volkskrant, 14 December 2021. Available online: https://www.volkskrant.nl/columns-opinie/ons-gejuich-voor-max-verstappen-is-een-vorm-van-cultureel-verzet~bc7fd5f5/?utm_source=link&utm_medium=app&utm_campaign=shared%20content&utm_content=free (accessed on 15 December 2021).
  90. Milman, O.; Witherspoon, A.; Liu, R.; Chang, A. The climate disaster is here. The Guardian, 14 October 2021. Available online: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/ng-interactive/2021/oct/14/climate-change-happening-now-stats-graphs-maps-cop26 (accessed on 29 December 2021).
  91. Rotmans, J.; Verheijden, M. Omarm de Chaos; De Geus: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021.
  92. Van Veen, J. Dredge, Drain, Reclaim. The Art of a Nation; Martinus Nijhoff: The Hague, The Netherlands, 1962.
  93. Van der Ham, W. Johan van Veen, meester van de zee. Grondlegger van het Deltaplan; Boom: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020.
  94. Roggema, R.; Chamski, R. (Eds.) FuureTalks; InHolland University of Applied Sciences: Alkmaar, The Netherlands, 2022; In Press.
  95. PBL. Klimaat- en Energieverkenning 2020; Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving: Den Haag, The Netherlands, 2020.
  96. Inspectie der Rijksfinanciën. Tenminste Houdbaar tot: Bewegen Naar een Duurzaam Voedselsysteem; Brede maatschappelijke heroverweging; Ministerie van Financiën: Den Haag, The Netherlands, 2020.
  97. Remkes, J.W.; Van Dijk, J.J.; Dijkgraaf, E.; Freriks, A.; Gerbrandy, G.J.; Maij, W.H.; Nijhof, A.G.; Post, E.; Rabbinge, R.; Scholten, M.C.T.; et al. Niet alles kan Overal. Eindadvies over Structurele Aanpak op Lange Termijn; Adviescollege Stikstofproblematiek: Amersfoort, The Netherlands, 2020.
  98. Erisman, J.W.; De Vries, W.; Van Donk, E.; Reumer, J.; Van den Broek, J.; Smit, A.; Kerklaan, J.; Van Schayck, P. (Eds.) Stikstof: De sluipende Effecten op Natuur en Gezondheid; Uitgeverij Lias: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2021.
  99. Tiktak, A.; Boezeman, D.; Van den Born, G.J.; Van Hinsberg, A. Quickscan van Twee Beleidspakketten voor het Vervolg van de Structurele Aanpak Stikstof; Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving: Den Haag, The Netherlands, 2021.
  100. KNMI. KNMI Klimaatsignaal’21: Hoe het Klimaat in Nederland snel Verandert; KNMI: De Bilt, The Netherlands, 2021.
  101. Groenemeijer, L.; Gopal, K.; Stuart-Fox, M.; Van Leeuwen, G.; Omtzigt, D. Vooruitzichten Bevolking, Huishoudens en Woningmarkt. Prognose en Scenario’s 2021–2035; ABF Research, Uitgevoerd in opdracht van het ministerie van BZK/DGBRW: Delft, The Netherlands, 2021.
  102. Booister, N.; Hekman, A.; Swinkels, R.; Wienhoven, M.; Hek, M.; Nillesen, A.L.; Ter Horst, W.; Van Alphen, J. Het Effect van Klimaatverandering op de Woningbouwopgave. Bouwstenendocument; Staf Deltacommissaris: Den Haag, The Netherlands, 2021.
  103. PBL. Grote Opgaven in een Beperkte Ruimte. Ruimtelijke Keuzes voor een Toekomstbestendige Leefomgeving; Planbureau voor de Leefomgeving: Den Haag, The Netherlands, 2021.
  104. Baptist, M.; van Hattum, T.; Reinhard, S.; van Buuren, M.; de Rooij, B.; Hu, X.; van Rooij, S.; Polman, N.; van den Burg, S.; Piet, G.; et al. A Nature-Based Future for The Netherlands in 2120; Wageningen University & Research: Wageningen, The Netherlands, 2019.
  105. Roggema, R.; Van Nispen, F.; Stratenus, I. Het Nieuwe Natuurrijke Nederland. 2021. Available online: https://natuurrijknederland.org/samenvatting/index.html (accessed on 2 December 2021).
  106. Kuiper Compagnons. NL2121—Een Land Met Een Plan. 2021. Available online: https://www.kuipercompagnons.nl/nl/projecten/nl_2121_land_met_een_plan/ (accessed on 3 January 2022).
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
ScholarVision Creations
Feedback