Cities and Urban Life Relevance of organization in urban planning Rajendra P Sharma [email protected]
Jul 17, 2015
Cities and Urban Life
Relevance of organization in urban planning
Rajendra P Sharma
.
G&S (2013): “Large cities provide unrivalled
work opportunities and cultural cultural experiences and yet…many find them
lonely and
unfriendly places.”
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-tLNOH8ulN5g/Tx8J1Lmw2cI/AAAAAAAAAE0/iILvFyVZe8s/s1600/megacities.jpg
To better “zoom in” please visit:
.Urban life is at once intensely social and hopelessly anonymous
Unlike those of rural, agrarian societies (across time and space), urban
dwellers frequently interact with strangers, or vague
acquaintancesacquaintances
.
G&S (2013): “In acity or town, think about the number of times
you interact everyday with people you
do not know…”
Urbanization and urbanism are synonymous with modernity, and as such were as hotly
debated by the classical social theorists as they are today.
A useful way of evaluating urban theories is to assess the way they handle the ‘four Cs of
urban experience’:
1- culture (the built environment, belief systems, cultural production)
2- consumption (of public and private goods and services)2- consumption (of public and private goods and services)
3- conflict (over resources and development plans)
4- community (the social life and make-up of populations)
A&G (2013):
The “metropolis” in classical social theory
• ‘metropolis’ (n) = mother city (Latin) � applies to all ‘central hub’ cities of
sizes variant according to the time in history (unlike the term ‘mega city’, or
‘megalopolis’ , which is widely used for cities strictly over 10 million)
still • Hence the “metropolis sociology” of theorists writing centuries ago is still
relevant despite the huge differences in size; the metropolis
still performs similar functions
Metropolis = mētēr (mother) + polis (city)
Ferdinand Tonnies (1887):Gemeinschaft and gesselschaft
• Study of effects of urbanization on social bonds and relations, and
community solidarity
Gemeinschaft“Community bonds”
• gemeinschaft= the pre-modern, rural/agrarian way of life; strong community
ties
• very personal and often lifelong relationships between neighbors/community• very personal and often lifelong relationships between neighbors/community
members
• “Sense of duty and commitment” between them
Tonnies grew up in rural Germany, and moved to the city as a young adult
Gesselschaft“Associational bonds”
• The modern, metropolitan way of life
• People bonding through “association”; which was often “short-lived,
transitory and instrumental” (A&G 2013)
• Ties based on short-term circumstance rather than the deep, holistic bonds
of the rural way of lifeof the rural way of life
• Modern urbanites could not depend on each other in the same way as rural
folk; and relationships are means-t0-ends rather than pure and holistic
.• Metropolitan individuals develop a
“blasé attitude”
• they are disinterested and bored despite what –in cities like Berlin,
London and Paris - was the pinnacle (^point) of human advancement
• Individuals “distance themselves from each other • Individuals “distance themselves from each other
emotionally and physically”; leading to what could be seen as
coldness, unfriendliness or impersonality
.
• City life is much more “fast-paced”
• G&S(2013): “Competition prevails • G&S(2013): “Competition prevails
over cooperation and social relationships appear flimsy and brittle”
Relevance of organization in urban planning
• Local clubs
• Religious groups
• Metropolis unit
• Non-Govt. organization• Non-Govt. organization
• User group and any organized group
Individual participation is almost impossible !!
Hence there is relevance of organization in urban planning !!
Organization involve in UP in Nepal
Municipal corporation
Government line ministry
I/NGOs, semi-govt. organization, clubs
User groupsUser groups
Bilateral agencies
Multi lateral organization
UN agencies