PROGRAM
Metropolitan planning is complex especially in countries experiencing rapid urbanisation and fast economic growth.
The program aims to equip participants with urban management and planning knowledge to understand the complex metropolitan planning issues in fast developing countries. This will also help them to apply the knowledge in design and project planning of neighborhood or a city. This program consists of innovative online and face-to-face lectures on urban planning and management, fieldwork visits in Iskandar and other development corridors as well as in the established global city of Kuala Lumpur PUTRAJAYA CYBERJAYA
Learning outcomes
At the end of the course participants are expected to be able
a) to explain the concept of urban management and metropolitan planning issues
b) to discuss current dynamics in fast developing metropolises as well as to apply methodologies and theories in similar case studies.
c) to explain potential problems and challenges in emerging transnational metropolises
Program outline
a) Face to face and online lectures covering the following topics: transit space, multiculturalism, urban safety, sustainability, urban development, urban management, and transnational urban regions in Asia ;
b) Fieldworks and learning excursions;
c) Interviews with main urban stakeholders (planning departments, agencies, NGOs, etc.);
d) Mini-research project assignment to be handled during the summer school;
e) Final presentation and assessment.
Admission requirements
Open to post-graduate and PhD students from urban studies disciplines.
Duration
3 weeks (1 week online course + 2 weeks face-to-face course).
Class size: 15-20 participants
Credit value: 3 UTM credits
Location: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia - Skudai (http://www.utm.my/)
SEMINARS
1. Strait Transnational Mega-City Region (Agatino Rizzo, UTM)
While Johor Bahru benefits substantially from being the next door neighbour of Singapore, as evidenced from the huge volumes of daily transit across the international border,Singapore-KL rivalry risks to erode much of the financial and social capital of Johor. Whether JB is the Iskandar City, competing against Singapore for the benefit of KL leadership, or is the GTCity, relying on Singapore for much of its economy, JB will in any case be affected by “foreign”, volatile globalpowers with very little opportunities to self-determine its own future/identity.
It is imperative, then, to find ways to pull JB out from such a lose-lose situation without sacrificing the positive effects that may come out of its relationship to either KL or Singapore.To this effect, we hypothesize that the present “polycentric development” (Scott, 2001; Hall, 2006) can be strengthened through “capacity building” (Douglass, 2001) of regional and central governments.
In this latter view Singapore and JB is no longer understood with centre/hinterland model (say Growth Triangle) but as an emerging transnational mega-city region of some 7 million inhabitants competing worldwide to attract foreign investments and knowledgeable workers.
2. Transit Space (Agatino Rizzo, UTM)
The Oxford dictionary defines ‘transit’ as either “carrying of people or things from one place to another” or “an act of passing through or across a place”. If the first stresses the logistical meaning of moving people and goods from A to B, the second has deeper social implications.
Our target is to investigate the socio-cultural-infrastructural qualities of Iskandar Transit space in the wider frame of the STUR. The transit space is that public/semi-public urban space overlapping transport infrastructures and systematically allowing people (inhabitants, city users, commuters, businessmen, and transnational migrants) to flow from one place to another within an urban region.
In spatial terms, elements of a transit space include: motorways, toll plazas, bus stops, bus terminals, parking lots, petrol stations, sidewalks, railways, railway stations, and so on. In social terms, the transit space can be defined in terms of practices implying the social construction of urban space in terms of communities involved, key stakeholders and institutional governance, the symbolic context of space (displays, dynamic billboards, graffiti, tags, etc.), gender struggles, ethnic diversity, and class struggles.
As such, studying the transit space means not only investigating logistical aspects of current and planned transport infrastructures (roads, highways, rail, etc.), but the whole socio-spatial system (activities, urban form, landscape, social geography, etc.) along it.
3. Globalisation and Localisation Strategies: Responding to or Pushing for Globalisation (Shahed Khan, Curtin)
Cities do not merely transform in response to effects of globalization as an external factor, they also tend to employ deliberate political strategies to adopt the globalization phenomenon. “Cities change not only as a result of the requirements of global or local capital but also as a result of state policy at the local and national level” (Feagin and Smith, 1987:17 in Machimura ). Machimura observes that “Strategies for future urban growth have taken a more similar form among competing cities.” A common pursuit of global status by cities results in the “delocalization of urban policy” in favour of “similar policy packages for ‘world city’ and ‘global city’ status”. These point to the global effects that could cause sameness or ‘placelessness’ in cities. To what extent does this happen? Conversely, to what extent is the local impact of the presence and operations of global economic players shaped by the local context of the individual city?
Economic activities are not conceived in vacuum, they require social interaction within the urban setting. While economic globalization forces tend to transform social and urban conditions, the reverse should also be true, that is, the social and urban structures could affect the shape of global influence on the city. It may be hypothesized, therefore, that the existing social, cultural and spatial structures of the individual city determine the extent and nature of transformation attributed to globalization phenomenon.
The specific questions that are raised include:
· While cities in similar classification according to their global city status are subjected to similar global economic forces, do these economic forces produce the same results?
· To what extent are these results similar and/ or dissimilar from city to city?
· What roles do social and economic forces play in shaping of the urban form and urban systems by global forces?
· What roles do the existing built and natural environment play in shaping the impact of globalization on urban form?
The above questions may help us examine broader questions regarding the nature of Globalisation, such as:
· Is globalization the key to greater wealth or greater disparities?
· Is globalization the recipe for ‘sameness’ or ‘uniqueness’?
· What is the nature of relationship between ‘globalisation’ and ‘localisation’ – and how could governments best deal with the two?
4. Planning in Malaysia (Ho Chin Siong, UTM)
This is an introductive seminar on malaysian planning concepts from independence to date. Cultural, economic, and political issues in Malaysia will be unfolded and provide the ground to understand Malaysian planning laws and urbanisation.
Reference list
a) GOTTDIENER M., HUTCHINSON R. (2006) The new urban sociology, third edition, Westview Press, USA.
b) TAYLOR, N. (2001), Urban Planning Theory Since 1945. London: Sage Pub.
c) BALCHIN, P. et al. (2000) Urban economics: a global perspective. Palgrave, Houndmills (UK).
d) SANDERCOCK, L. (1998). "The Difference that Theory Makes." In Towards Cosmopolis: Planning for Multicultural Cities, chapter 4. New York: John Wiley & Sons (In Packet).
e) KNOX, P. (1995) Urban geography: an introduction. Longman group Limited, Harlow
f) UN-HABITAT (2009) Global Report on Human Settlements 2009: Planning Sustainable Cities. Abridged Edition. Chapter 7: Planning and Informality, pp. 47-54.
g) MACGREGOR, S. (1995) "Deconstructing the Man Made City: Feminist Critiques of Planning Thought and Action." In Change of Plans: Towards a Non-Sexist Sustainable City, edited by Margrit Eichelr. Toronto: Garamond Press (In Packet).
h) MÄNTYSALO, R. (2005) Approaches to Participation in Urban Planning Theories.
i) SMITH, M.P. (2001) Transnational urbanism. Locating globalization. Blackwell publishing: UK.
j) CASTELLS, M. 1996. The Rise of the Network Society. Blackwell, UK.
k) LINDBLOM, C. (1959) "The Science of ‘Muddling Through’." Public Administration Review 19: 79-88 (In Campbell and Fainstein, pp. 288-304).
l) GALANAKIS, M. (2008) Space Unjust, Taik Press, Helsinki
m) VENOLIA, J. (2001) Write Right!: A Desktop Digest of Punctuation, Grammar, and Style. Ten Speed Press
SEMINARS
1. Strait Transnational Mega-City Region (Agatino Rizzo, UTM)
It is imperative, then, to find ways to pull JB out from such a lose-lose situation without sacrificing the positive effects that may come out of its relationship to either KL or Singapore.To this effect, we hypothesize that the present “polycentric development” (Scott, 2001; Hall, 2006) can be strengthened through “capacity building” (Douglass, 2001) of regional and central governments.
In this latter view Singapore and JB is no longer understood with centre/hinterland model (say Growth Triangle) but as an emerging transnational mega-city region of some 7 million inhabitants competing worldwide to attract foreign investments and knowledgeable workers.
2. Transit Space (Agatino Rizzo, UTM)
The Oxford dictionary defines ‘transit’ as either “carrying of people or things from one place to another” or “an act of passing through or across a place”. If the first stresses the logistical meaning of moving people and goods from A to B, the second has deeper social implications.
Our target is to investigate the socio-cultural-infrastructural qualities of Iskandar Transit space in the wider frame of the STUR. The transit space is that public/semi-public urban space overlapping transport infrastructures and systematically allowing people (inhabitants, city users, commuters, businessmen, and transnational migrants) to flow from one place to another within an urban region.
In spatial terms, elements of a transit space include: motorways, toll plazas, bus stops, bus terminals, parking lots, petrol stations, sidewalks, railways, railway stations, and so on. In social terms, the transit space can be defined in terms of practices implying the social construction of urban space in terms of communities involved, key stakeholders and institutional governance, the symbolic context of space (displays, dynamic billboards, graffiti, tags, etc.), gender struggles, ethnic diversity, and class struggles.
As such, studying the transit space means not only investigating logistical aspects of current and planned transport infrastructures (roads, highways, rail, etc.), but the whole socio-spatial system (activities, urban form, landscape, social geography, etc.) along it.
3. Globalisation and Localisation Strategies: Responding to or Pushing for Globalisation (Shahed Khan, Curtin)
Cities do not merely transform in response to effects of globalization as an external factor, they also tend to employ deliberate political strategies to adopt the globalization phenomenon. “Cities change not only as a result of the requirements of global or local capital but also as a result of state policy at the local and national level” (Feagin and Smith, 1987:17 in Machimura ). Machimura observes that “Strategies for future urban growth have taken a more similar form among competing cities.” A common pursuit of global status by cities results in the “delocalization of urban policy” in favour of “similar policy packages for ‘world city’ and ‘global city’ status”. These point to the global effects that could cause sameness or ‘placelessness’ in cities. To what extent does this happen? Conversely, to what extent is the local impact of the presence and operations of global economic players shaped by the local context of the individual city?
Economic activities are not conceived in vacuum, they require social interaction within the urban setting. While economic globalization forces tend to transform social and urban conditions, the reverse should also be true, that is, the social and urban structures could affect the shape of global influence on the city. It may be hypothesized, therefore, that the existing social, cultural and spatial structures of the individual city determine the extent and nature of transformation attributed to globalization phenomenon.
The specific questions that are raised include:
· While cities in similar classification according to their global city status are subjected to similar global economic forces, do these economic forces produce the same results?
· To what extent are these results similar and/ or dissimilar from city to city?
· What roles do social and economic forces play in shaping of the urban form and urban systems by global forces?
· What roles do the existing built and natural environment play in shaping the impact of globalization on urban form?
The above questions may help us examine broader questions regarding the nature of Globalisation, such as:
· Is globalization the key to greater wealth or greater disparities?
· Is globalization the recipe for ‘sameness’ or ‘uniqueness’?
· What is the nature of relationship between ‘globalisation’ and ‘localisation’ – and how could governments best deal with the two?
4. Planning in Malaysia (Ho Chin Siong, UTM)
This is an introductive seminar on malaysian planning concepts from independence to date. Cultural, economic, and political issues in Malaysia will be unfolded and provide the ground to understand Malaysian planning laws and urbanisation.
Reference list
a) GOTTDIENER M., HUTCHINSON R. (2006) The new urban sociology, third edition, Westview Press, USA.
b) TAYLOR, N. (2001), Urban Planning Theory Since 1945. London: Sage Pub.
c) BALCHIN, P. et al. (2000) Urban economics: a global perspective. Palgrave, Houndmills (UK).
d) SANDERCOCK, L. (1998). "The Difference that Theory Makes." In Towards Cosmopolis: Planning for Multicultural Cities, chapter 4. New York: John Wiley & Sons (In Packet).
e) KNOX, P. (1995) Urban geography: an introduction. Longman group Limited, Harlow
f) UN-HABITAT (2009) Global Report on Human Settlements 2009: Planning Sustainable Cities. Abridged Edition. Chapter 7: Planning and Informality, pp. 47-54.
g) MACGREGOR, S. (1995) "Deconstructing the Man Made City: Feminist Critiques of Planning Thought and Action." In Change of Plans: Towards a Non-Sexist Sustainable City, edited by Margrit Eichelr. Toronto: Garamond Press (In Packet).
h) MÄNTYSALO, R. (2005) Approaches to Participation in Urban Planning Theories.
i) SMITH, M.P. (2001) Transnational urbanism. Locating globalization. Blackwell publishing: UK.
j) CASTELLS, M. 1996. The Rise of the Network Society. Blackwell, UK.
k) LINDBLOM, C. (1959) "The Science of ‘Muddling Through’." Public Administration Review 19: 79-88 (In Campbell and Fainstein, pp. 288-304).
l) GALANAKIS, M. (2008) Space Unjust, Taik Press, Helsinki
m) VENOLIA, J. (2001) Write Right!: A Desktop Digest of Punctuation, Grammar, and Style. Ten Speed Press
