Technical Papers
Feb 13, 2015

Participatory Landscape: Better Scenario for Poor Egyptian Urban Settings in Existing and New City Districts—Case of Monshaet Nasser and 6th October City

Publication: Journal of Urban Planning and Development
Volume 142, Issue 1

Abstract

Participatory landscape approaches are currently being positioned as the essential basis for sustainable landscape development. However, with the current democratic transform and the consequent decentralization of the spatial planning policy in Egypt, no practices have been conducted in this field. Accordingly, there is a vital need for coherent and integrated approaches for the practical application of participatory landscape. This paper represents one of a series of research papers targeting this aim. It focuses on poor urban settings in existing informal areas and in new cities’ districts, represented by the case studies of Monashaet Nasser and the sixth district in the 6th of October city, respectively, which are used to carry out the questionnaires, followed by a statistical analysis and illustrative causal loop diagrams. The questionnaire integrates measuring local residents’ willingness and participation methods together with the practitioners’ recommendations for their degree of involvement as compared with the other stakeholders, with the functional, environmental, aesthetical, economic, maintainability, and sociability quality aspects of the landscape that would be achieved. The tests undertaken in this research were carried out through a statistical analysis using the statistical package for social sciences (SPSS) program, followed by an illustrative analysis for the results represented by the causal loop diagrams, which show a clear representation for the roles of each of the residents and stakeholders in the process. The results illustrate the fact that although the two case studies were from the same economic level, there were variations among most of the findings concerning the local residents’ participation method. They indicated that the local residents in existing poor urban settings prefer to participate with their effort only, whereas those living in the poor new cities’ districts are willing to participate with their money, time, and effort. Moreover, it was found that the landscape aspects that would be positively affected are the maintainability aspects for the existing area and the sociability aspects for the relatively new district, with traces of negative effects on the functional and aesthetical landscape qualities. This highlights the challenges for the decision makers when constructing their implementation plans, to achieve the balance among all roles of stakeholders to avoid any negative effects and overcome the distrust landscape problems that have been compositely formed upon past participatory experiences, especially in existing poor settings.

Get full access to this article

View all available purchase options and get full access to this article.

References

Abdel Aty, A., and Gammaz, S. (2012). “Assessment for international organizations’ role in historical districts rehabilitation: Case of Darb Alahmar.” J. Urban Plann. Dev., 138(3), 215–226.
Abdelhalim, K. (2010). Participatory upgrading of informal areas: A decision-makers’ guide for action, PDP (Participatory Development Programme in Urban Areas in Egypt), Egypt.
Azerrad, J. M., and Nilon, C. H. (2006). “An evaluation of agency conservation guidelines to better address planning efforts by local government.” J. Landscape Urban Plann., 77(3), 255–262.
Bills, N., and Gross, D. (2005). “Sustaining multifunctional agricultural landscapes: Comparing stakeholder perspectives in New York (U.S.) and England (U.K.).” J. Land Use Policy, 22(4), 313–321.
Brody, S. D., Highfield, W., and Carrasco, V. (2004). “Measuring the collective planning capabilities of local jurisdictions to manage ecological systems in southern Florida.” J. Landscape Urban Plann., 69(1), 33–50.
Ezrahi, Y. (1980). “Utopian and pragmatic rationalism: The political context of scientific advice. Minerva: A review of science.” J. Learn Policy, 18(1), 111–131.
FAO (Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations). (1999). “Cultivation our futures.” FAO/Netherlands Conf. on the Multifunctional Character of Agriculture and Land, Maastricht, Netherlands.
Geertman, S., and Stillwell, J. (2004). “Planning support systems: An inventory of current practice.” J. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst., 28(4), 291–310.
Haines-Young, R. (2000). “Sustainable development and sustainable landscapes: Defining a new paradigm for landscape ecology.” Fennia, 178(1), 7–14.
Heilig, G. K. (2003). “Multi-functionality of landscapes and ecosystem services with respect to rural development.” Sustainable development of multifunctional landscapes, K. Helming and H. Wiggering, eds., Springer, Heidelberg Berlin.
Hein, L., van Koppen, K., de Groot, R. S., and van Ierland, E. C. (2006). “Spatial scales, stakeholders and the valuation of ecosystem services.” J. Ecol. Econ., 57(2), 209–228.
Hisschemöller, M., and Hoppe, R. (1995). “Coping with intractable controversies: The case for problem structuring in policy design and analysis.” Knowl. Technol. Policy, 8(4), 40–60.
Hisschemöller, M., Tol, R. S. J., and Vellinga, P. (2001). “The relevance of participatory approaches in integrated environmental assessment.” Integr. Asses., 2(2), 57–72.
Hollander, G. M. (2004). “Agricultural trade liberalization, multi-functionality, and sugar in the south Florida landscape.” Geoforum, 35(3), 299–312.
Horlick-Jones, T., and Sime, J. (2004). “Living on the border: Knowledge, risk and transdisciplinarity. Futures, 36(4), 441–456.
International Association for Public Participation. (2004). IAP2 International website, Australisia, 〈https://www.iap2.org.au/sitebuilder/resources/knowledge/asset/files/36/iap2spectrum.pdf〉 (Apr. 2014).
Jackson, L. L. (2008). “Who ‘designs’ the agricultural landscape?” J. Landscape, 27(1), 23–40.
Jones, M. (2007). “The European landscape convention and the question of public participation.” J. Landscape Res., 32(5), 613–633.
Larcher, F., Novelli, S., Gullino, P., and Devecchi, M. (2013). “Planning rural landscapes: A participatory approach to analyse future scenarios in Monferrato Astigiano, Piedmont, Italy.” J. Landscape Res., 38(6), 707–728.
Lee, B., Jang, T., Wang, W., and Namgung, M. (2009). “Design criteria for an urban sidewalk landscape considering emotional perception.” J. Urban Plann. Dev., 135(4), 133–140.
Lu, L. (2003). “The strategy of watershed management and public participation.” Watershed management, C. M. A. Ports and D. Renetzky, eds., ASCE, Reston, VA, 231–242.
Matsuoka, R. H., and Kaplan, R. (2008). “People needs in the urban landscape: Analysis of landscape and urban planning contributions.” J. Landscape Urban Plann., 84(1), 7–19.
Meyer, B. C., and Grabaum, R. (2008). “MULBO—Model framework for multi criteria landscape assessment and optimization: A support system for spatial land use decisions.” J. Landscape Res., 33(2), 155–179.
Mohebbi, M., and Mohebbi, Z. (2010). “Simplest way to reach the most complicated goal: In the urban planning, questions are ours and answers are the natives’s.” J. Urban Plann. Dev., 136(2), 154.
Munŏz-Erickson, T. A., Aquilar-Gonzáles, B., and Sisk, T. D. (2007). “Linking ecosystem health indicators and collaborative management: A systematic framework to evaluate ecologica and social outcomes.” Ecol. Soc., 12(2), 6.
Nie, N., et al. (1975). SPSS: Statistical package for the social sciences, McGraw-Hill, New York, 276–374.
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development). (2001). Multi functionality: Towards an analytical framework, Paris.
Ozcevik, O., Beygo, C., and Akcakaya, I. (2010). “Building capacity through collaborative local action: Case of Matra REGIMA within Zeytinburnu regeneration scheme.” J. Urban Plann. Dev., 136(2), 169–175.
Patterson, T. (1984). “Public participation in railroad relocation.” J. Urban Plann. Dev., 110(1), 9–21.
Perrings, C., et al. (2011). “The biodiversity and ecosystem services science–policy interface.” J. Sci., 331(6021), 1139–1140.
Pinto-Correia, T., Gustavsson, R., and Pirnat, J., (2006). “Bridging the gap between centrally defined policies and local decisions—towards more sensitive and creative rural landscape management.” J. Landscape Ecol., 21(3), 333–346.
Rogers, A. (1995). Taking actions, an environmental guide for you and your community, UNEP, Colocraft, Hongkong.
Ryan, R. L., et al. (2006). “Understanding opportunities and challenges for collaborative greenway planning in New England.” Landscape Urban Plann., 76(1), 172–191.
Sanders, E., and Stappers, P. (2008). “Co-creation and the new landscapes of design, co-design.” Int. J. Co Creation Des. Arts, 4(1), 5–18.
Schreiber, K., et al. (2004). Higher density plans: Tools for community engagements, MTI.
Stephenson, J. (2008). “The cultural values model: An integrated approach to values in landscapes.” J. Landscape Urban Plann., 84(1–4), 127–139.
Stermann, J. (2000).” Business dynamics: Systems thinking and modeling for a complex world, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Tam, C., Zeng, S., and Tong, T. (2009). “Conflict analysis in public engagement program of urban planning in Hong Kong.” J. Urban Plann. Dev., 135(2), 51–55.
Termorshuizen, J. W., and Opdam, P. (2009). “Landscape services as a bridge between landscape ecology and sustainable development.” Landscape Ecol., 24(8), 1037–1052.
Tress, G., Tress, B., and Fry, G. (2005). “Clarifying integrative research concepts in landscape ecology.” Landscape Ecol., 20(4), 479–493.
Turk, S., and Altes, W. (2011). “Potential application of land readjustment method in urban renewal: Analysis for Turkey.” J. Urban Plann. Dev., 137(1), 7–19.
Vejre, H., et al. (2007). “Multifunctional agriculture and multifunctional landscapes–land use as an interface.” Multifunctional land use: Meeting future demands for landscape goods and services, U. Mander, K. Helming, and H. Wiggering, eds., Springer, Heidelberg, Berlin, 93–104.
Verburg, P. H., Schot, P. P., Dijst, M. J., and Veldkamp, A. (2004). “Land use change modelling: Current practice and research priorities.” Geo J., 61(4), 309–324.
Wallbaum, H., Krank, S., and Teloh, R. (2011). “Prioritizing sustainability criteria in urban planning processes: Methodology application.” J. Urban Plann. Dev., 137(1), 20–28.
Wayne, A., and Donn, L. (1992). American urban architecture: Catalysts in the designing of cities, University of California Press, CA.
Wilson, G. A. (2004). “The Australian landcare movement: Towards ‘post-productivist’ rural governance?” J. Rural Stud., 20(4), 461–484.
Wilson, J., and Lindsey, G. (2005). “Socioeconomic correlates and environmental impacts of urban development in a central Indiana landscape.” J. Urban Plann. Dev., 131(3), 159–169.
Yau, Y. (2012). “Multi-criteria decision making for homeowners’ participation in building maintenance.” J. Urban Plann. Dev., 138(2), 110–120.
Zhao, J., Wang, R., Cai, Y., and Luo, P. (2013). “Effects of visual indicators on landscape preferences.” J. Urban Plann. Dev., 139(1), 70–78.
Zhu, Y. (2001). Multivariable system identification for process control, Elsevier.

Information & Authors

Information

Published In

Go to Journal of Urban Planning and Development
Journal of Urban Planning and Development
Volume 142Issue 1March 2016

History

Received: Sep 9, 2014
Accepted: Jan 2, 2015
Published online: Feb 13, 2015
Discussion open until: Jul 13, 2015
Published in print: Mar 1, 2016

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Authors

Affiliations

Asmaa Abdel Aty Mohamed [email protected]
Associate Professor, Dept. of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo Univ., Cairo 11728, Egypt (corresponding author). E-mail: [email protected]
Professor of Landscape Architecture, Dept. of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo Univ., Cairo 12316, Egypt. E-mail: [email protected]
Ahmed Shalaby [email protected]
Associate Professor, Dept. of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Cairo Univ., Cairo 12316, Egypt. E-mail: [email protected]

Metrics & Citations

Metrics

Citations

Download citation

If you have the appropriate software installed, you can download article citation data to the citation manager of your choice. Simply select your manager software from the list below and click Download.

Cited by

View Options

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Get Access

Access content

Please select your options to get access

Log in/Register Log in via your institution (Shibboleth)
ASCE Members: Please log in to see member pricing

Purchase

Save for later Information on ASCE Library Cards
ASCE Library Cards let you download journal articles, proceedings papers, and available book chapters across the entire ASCE Library platform. ASCE Library Cards remain active for 24 months or until all downloads are used. Note: This content will be debited as one download at time of checkout.

Terms of Use: ASCE Library Cards are for individual, personal use only. Reselling, republishing, or forwarding the materials to libraries or reading rooms is prohibited.
ASCE Library Card (5 downloads)
$105.00
Add to cart
ASCE Library Card (20 downloads)
$280.00
Add to cart
Buy Single Article
$35.00
Add to cart

Media

Figures

Other

Tables

Share

Share

Copy the content Link

Share with email

Email a colleague

Share