Thesis by Anne Hofhuis

IN TRAN SITION

IN TRANSITION The role of international planning in divided communities

Karien Hofhuis - M.Sc. Thesis

Challenge the future

SpatialPlanning &Strategy

Challenge the future

Full heading

sps SpatialPlanning

Department of Urbanism Faculty of Architecture Delft University of Technology

&Strategy SpatialPlanning &Strategy Date: 17.05.2012

Simple heading

In support of: MSc 3 Urbanism P5 REPORT AR3U012 Graduation Studio Complex Cities AR3U100 Student ID 4121082 Mentors: Verena Balz Prof. Vincent Nadin

black and white

sps SpatialPlanning &Strategy

Challenge the future

sps SpatialPlanning&Strategy Chair SPS | Department of Urbanism | Julianalaan 134 | 2628BL Delft | The Netherlands

Extended heading

| T: +31 (15) 27 83885 | Email: spatialplanning@tudelft.nl

one colour

Acknowledgements. This thesis spans the course of one year, during which much was learned, and many experiences gained. At times it was a difficult process, but more often it was a journey of discovering new information and being able to slowly form a story with this information. The support of my mentors Verena Balz and Prof Vincent Nadin is appreciated most of all. I felt a high sense of involvement on their part and a dedication to the structure of my research. I would also like to thank those whom I have spoken to during the course of my research. The following people have all made a valuable contribution to my thesis: Dr. Brendan Murtagh (reader at Queenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s university Belfast), Mark Hackett (co-director of Forum for an alternative Belfast), Arthur Acheson (Architect and member of the Belfast Ministerial Advice Group MAG), Gavin Rafferty (Lecturer at Ulster University in Belfast), Diana Fitzsimons (partner at the Belfast office of planning consultancy Turley Associates), and Dr Frank Gaffikin (Professor in Spatial Planning at Queenâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s University Belfast). Some people I spoke to early on in the process also contributed to the direction of my research interest. They are Ernst Moor (Urban Planner), Wouter van Stiphout (Professor Design and Politics at Delft University of Technology), and Gert Breugem (Urban Planner for the municipality of Almere), I would like to thank them as well for taking the time to speak with me. Lastly I would like to thank the people who experienced most of this process with me; my boyfriend Tobias Kaserer, my parents Jos and Riette Hofhuis, and lastly my friends Wieke Villerius and Ani Skachokova.

Delft, June 2012,

Karien Hofhuis

â&#x20AC;&#x153;During WWI, Civilians made up fewer than 5 percent of all casualties, today, 75 percent or more of those killed or wounded in war are noncombatants.â&#x20AC;? (Global SePreface. curity, 2011) The definition of conflict has shifted. War is now urban, creating contested cities and dividing communities. The role of planning in these areas has also taken on many personas. Local planning is often left unable to navigate the sensitive ethnic conflict. These typical stages of divided cities cumulate in international planning forces intervening in the conflict. The problem: With the increase in conflict, and simultaneously the involvement of international forces, a new perspective on planning roles must be recognized. There has been little research into the spatial affect of these roles to date, heightening the necessity of the research Question: What has been the role and performance of international planning in affecting the conditions of ethnically divided communities? This thesis will analyse the role of the international planning professional in two ethnically divided cities using case studies, mapping and literature studies and attempt to develop an understanding of the international planning role in contested communities, as well as a critical perspective on their performance.

(Abu-Nimer, 2001, p.685)

Without a doubt the end of the Cold War made it easier for NGOs to operate; there has been an increase of resources, a growing professionalism and more employment opportunities within the (Musaro, 2011, p.19) NGO community.

9 Thesis structure 11 0.1 Problem Statement 0.2 Research Questions

Contents.

Relevance The Context

1.1 Current trends 1.1.1 Globalization 1.1.2 Population shifting 1.1.3 Mixed cities 1.2 Contested Space 1.3 Conflict 1.3.1 Types of Conflict 1.3.2 Ethnic conflict 1.4 Divided Communities 1.4.1 The process of division 1.4.2 Community Structures in division

The approaches of Planning in conflict

2.1 The history of conflict planning 2.2 How government responds to division 2.2.1 The role of communities in planning reconciliation 2.3 The Methodology of Conflict Planning 2.3.1 Analysing the conflict from a planning perspective 2.3.2 Approaches of the Planner in conflict 2.3.3 Conflict planning conclusions

11 11

15 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 18 18 19 19 21 21 21 22 22 22 22 24

Instruments of the international organization

27 3.1 International Planning Organizations 27 3.1.1 The problems faced by local planning authorities 27 3.1.2 Umbrella terms 27 3.1.3 Classifying international organizations 28 3.1.4 The history of International Planning Organizations 28 3.1.5 The structure of international planning networks 28 3.2 The goals of international organizations 28 3.3 Instruments of International organizations 30 3.4 The application of the theoretical framework 33

The current execution of International Planning in Conflict 4.1 Criteria for selection of cases

4.2 4.3 4.4

4.5 4.6 4.7

4.1.1 Case selection Belfast 4.1.2 Case selection Jerusalem 4.1.3 Case study research questions 4.1.4 Structure of the case studies Belfast community liveability Plan actor analysis The Belfast international planning system 4.4.1 Structure of the International Planning system 4.4.2 Goals of the International Planning system 4.4.3 Instruments of the International Planning system 4.4.4 Critique of International Planning 4.4.5 Role of international planning 4.4.6 Performance of international planning Jerusalem community liveability Plan actor analysis The Jerusalem international planning system 4.7.1 Structure of International Planning 4.7.2 Goals of the International Planning system 4.7.3 Instruments of the International Planning system 4.7.4 Critique of International Planning 4.7.5 Role of the International Planning 4.7.6 Performance of International Planning

Conclusions

5.1 Aim and method 5.2 Conclusions 5.2.1 The role of international planning 5.5.2 The Performance of international planning 5.6 Final conclusions

35 35 36 36 37 37 59 75 101 102 102 103 104 105 105 107 141 155 155 157 157 158 159 159 161 161 163 163 165 166

Reflection

169

Appendix

171

Literature

175

00.

Thesis structure 0.1 Problem Statement

0.2 Research Questions

The problem

Main research question

What has been the role and performance of international planning in affecting the increased throughout the last decades, so has their condition of ethnically divided communipower and influence. Do we lack understanding of ties? As the amount of international organizations have

the planning effect of these international bodies? What has their effect been on communities and livability issues? How do they function and what is their role? What are the effects of this type international planning? Due to this increase in power, there has been some criticism and theoretical debate about the affect of international organizations and how they function as a general body. What is missing from this theory is a critical look on the planning influence these organizations have. When looking toward literature on development aid, we can see that a great deal of critique already exists on this branch of international organizations. There is great concern with the manner in which international work is executed and whether or not the beneficiaries are the inhabitants of the community or the image of the organization itself. This thesis has five components; The context of contested space and divided cities, Literature research concerning general conflict planning and International organizations, a set of two case studies examining the current execution of international planning, and a critical set of conclusions concerning the role and performance of international planning.

Sub research questions What constitutes the context of a divided community, and how should international conflict planning be carried out here according to literature? Formation of Theoretical Framework Case study research questions How did the conflict emerge, and what has been the Spatial impact in communities? Which local and international actors contribute to the current development interventions? What has been the role of International planning in this conflict? What has been the Performance of International Planning, particularly in their concrete spatial effects on communities?? Research The next page shows the basic structure of the thesis divided into its five components.

Component 1

Context The ethnically divided community

Research Topics

Current pressure processes in city development Contested space Conflict The process of division

Divided communities Component 2

Theory 01 Theorhetical: How should they behave

Component 3

Theory 02 Functional: How would they like to behave?

Component 4

Case Studies Execution: How do they behave?

Research Topics

The history of conflict planning How government responds to division The methodology of conflict planning Research Topics

International Organizations - Who are they? Umbrella terms structures

International Organizations - what do they do? Goals & Instruments

Research Topics

Criteria for selection of the case studies Community spatial impact Plan - actor analysis Structure, goals, and instruments of the international planning system The role and performance of international planning

Component 5

Conclusions

Conclusions on the role and performance of international planning

Relevance.

“Because they provide assistance and protect the rights of civilians caught in the throes of internal conflicts, they are worthy of analytical attention” (Weiss, 1996, p.437)

To date, the academic literature on conflicts has concentrated on the elite‐level, Track One diplomacy and the struggle between the parties, with little attention being given to the equally important community‐based Track Two initiatives, that are essential to building and sustaining peace processes. (Cochrane, 2007)

01.

The Context 1.1 Current trends

The following sections explain the current development processes which can facilitate the creation of contested space, or in some cases place additional pressure on already contested territories. 1.1.1 Globalization

Cities are part of a global and regional network. Places are constantly looking to internationalize, and are in turn influenced by international forces. As we rapidly move toward an urbanized world, where more than 50% of people will be living in urbanity by 2030, it is essential to recognize the rapid acceleration and connectivity of urbanity. This basic process contributes to a sequence of responsive developments. The combination of these processes places pressure on the formation of contested space. 1.1.2 Population shifting

Rapid population increase also leads to rapid expansion developments. Suddenly cities must accommodate large numbers of people in a shorter period of time. This form of development is often linked with the creation of unliveable, or unsustainable communities. Native citizens are not the only contributor to this type of development, but this can also happen with the shifting of immigrant or refugee populations. In some cases this can produce fragmented developments and communities, but also (in extreme cases) informal settlements. Often these developments do not form the basis for a healthy and livable community, but rather a fractured society with increased tensions and polarization between classes and cultures. 1.1.3 Mixed cities

The increased connectivity of places and the resulting shifting of populations is highly influential in providing the basis for conflict. As cities become more mixed, added pressure is placed on the relationships between its citizens. The need for cultural expression is one of many factors which becomes increasingly important in these mixed cities. In many cases, this multiculturalism works as an added benefit for the city, but in some cases, if resources are not allocated equally , it can lead to conflict. Citizens begin to form soft boundaries within the city through, for example, architectural styles, political preferences, and territorial demarcation in a number of ways. Contested space is born. 1.2 Contested Space Adj.1. Contested - disputed or made the object of contention or competition (The Free Dictionary by Farlex, 2011) In the context of cities, contested refers to the multiple opposing claims to territory. This phenomena can happen on many scales, between countries, regions, cities, and on the smallest scale between communities. Among many results of

territorial disputes, I am choosing to focus on the condition of ethnic and cultural division because this is most often the leading factor in the most intense and persistent type of community division. The community is of greatest interest due to the intensity of the conflict on this scale. Communities form the direct link to violations of basic human rights issues, and consequently are often the instigator of international involvement. 1.3 Conflict The following section explains how contested space can lead to extreme forms of conflict. 1.3.1 Types of Conflict

Gaffikin and Morrisey (2011) bring up a number of types of spatial conflicts which correspond to the development processes mentioned in the previous section. The following classifications are partially inspired by their arguments, as well as other literature on conflicted cities. Each conflict is also classified according to its scope. Intrastate conflict refers to an issue within the city or state itself, where as Interstate refers to a conflict which crosses political boundaries. The stars indicate the likeliness of violence within this conflict, the maximum being five stars. Political conflict The reason behind the conflict is political. The ideologies of a government can impose a certain manner of thinking or division amongst its inhabitants, forcibly creating different classes and spatially dividing their own city. Political conflict can also represent separatist movements between states, or disagreements between countries. Due to the frequency of war in the past centuries, boundaries have been drawn and changed many times. [inter and intra-state conflict] *** Economic conflict The increased polarization of rich and poor in contemporary society is only increasing. Gated communities, ghettoes, slums, and global economic processes continue to sustain this division. The southern hemisphere is experiencing the highest need to address this issue, as here the contrast between rich city and poor slums is extreme. [ intra-state conflict] ** Language conflict As addressed in discussing political conflict, border changes and migrating populations contribute to an automatic creation of differences. At times, the different languages used by these population will be reflected directly in space through signage, architecture, and of course through the classification of space as belonging to one group or the other. [intra-state conflict] * Ethnic conflict Ethnic conflict refers to the differences in culture and religion between communities. This is often not directly related to politics, but permeates it.

The small scale at which it takes place (intracommunity) gives it higher chances of erupting in violence. Inhabitants are personally confronted with it daily. [intra-state conflict] ***** 1.3.2 Ethnic conflict

The most extreme form I refer to is the physically divided city. The building of walls goes back centuries, many lessons were respectively learned, and many walls have been torn down. Yet today walls continue to be seen as a necessary option in cities like Belfast,Nicosia, Beirut, Jerusalem, and Mostar.

When we look toward current conflicted areas, we can see that the type of conflict does not often fit under only one of the categories above, but under two or more. Although, If ethnic conflict is present, the conflict is far more likely to lead to socio-spatial fragmentation and violence. Two thirds of all violent conflicts contain an ethnic aspect. (Gaffikin and Morrisey, 2011)

The number of these cities is increasing, producing a class of city in which it is the norm to live behind walls. Calame and Charlesworth (2009) have expressed their concern for Montreal, Monrovia, Dagestan, Washington,Baghdad, Dili, Bunia, Novi Sad and more to be heading towards division. This means we must learn to understand the process of division in order to support their spatial rehabilitation.

Ethnic conflict is an intra-state conflict on the smallest scale: community. Ethnicity automatically permeates all aspects of local government, and neutrality in conflict is almost unattainable. These are the reasons ethnic conflict can quickly permeate all scales of the city, as well as form complex territorial boundaries within it.

The figure below illustrates the growth in wall construction over time. Not only the abundance in the last decade is noticeable, but also the type of wall changes from being a historical defence wall between states, to a dividing wall inside cities.

Since my interest lies with the role of international planning, whose own interests are often in the liveability of people and communities, ethnic conflict provides the best grounds for investigation. Unlike other conflicts, ethnic conflict is so deeply rooted in the individual citizens, that reconciliation is a long process. This aspect also leads to the need for international involvement. Gaffikin and Morrisey (2011) speak about the difficulty of working in places with ethnic conflict, addressing the depth at which ethnic conflict is rooted. â&#x20AC;&#x153;In societies marked by deeply competing identities, places hold particular symbolic significance, and their fabric, meanings and identities become acutely politicized. Where these reflect themselves in violent conflict, their formulation and re-configuration become entrapped in strategies of protection and survival.â&#x20AC;? (Gaffikin and Morrisey, 2011, p.130). 1.4 Divided Communities Every city has encountered some form of mild division, as this is a global result of migration. Division can range from slums to ghettos to physical walls and violence. Choosing to understand the extreme form of an ethnically divided city will also provide the tools to work within cities with milder forms of division.

Fig.1.4.1 Divided cities (Calame & Charlesworth, 2009)

The great wall of China 70BC-2012 Hadrians Wall 130-2012 Roman Wall 271-2012 Bejing City Walls 1215-2005 Kowloon Walled City 1668-1993 Berlin Wall 1945-1990 Jerusalem Wall 1948 - 2012 Belfast peace walls 1969 - 2012 Beirut Green Line 1975-1991 Mostar partition line 1992-1995 Nicosia Green line 1963-2008 Interstate Defense Walls Intrastate City Division

Fig.1.4.2 Wall construction through time; Abundancy and Type

1.4.1 The process of division

1.4.2 Community Structures in division

Although each ethnically divided city is quite different, there are still some similarities in the process of the conflict. These phases lead to an incremental and predictable set of steps leading to the divided city, and towards eventual peace building. The following list shows the processes of division: (Calame and Charlesworth, 2009)

There are a number of different community structures which result from the processes of division and the development actions taking during the conflict. The conflicted community is often already a strong body. Once the ethnicity of this body is threatened, the bond and power of this community increases. This explains why the division is most tense within the community, and why the community also goes through the most changes due to the conflict.

Allocating preferentials Ethnic groups have unequal access to resources. Clustering occurs as members of minority groups start to group, a sense of well being is found in cultural enclaves. Political up-scaling Ethnic clusters begin to serve as a visual representation of a larger political issue of nationality, religion, etc. The conflict also starts to facilitate and benefit new positions, “Local political entrepreneurs flourish, foreign mediators prove indispensable, cultural traditions are rejuvenated, paramilitary groups gain prominence, intragroup conflicts are muted, smugglers acquire steady patronage, and formerly ordinary neighbourhoods earn infamy.” (Calame and Charlesworth, 2009, p.211) The conflict which began between civilian groups, infiltrates all levels of governance and begins to gain political power. Boundary etching Once urban terrain has become political terrain, lines have to be drawn. The form of the city plays a big role in ‘naturally’ suggesting where divisions should be. Infrastructure, water, edges of neighbourhoods are already natural boundaries. Concretizing When walls become permanent, they are usually built hastily and for security reasons. Since they are quite expensive to maintain and have a negative image they are said to be ‘temporary’ but often take on a more permanent life. Consolidating The persistence of walls is usually a sign of weak governance. Retrograde urban development results, forms of sprawl begin taking over, shared space is no longer seen as necessary and multiple centralities begin to form in the need for self sufficiency. The city becomes filled with dead ends and cul de sacs (safety measure). Unifying but not integrating Barriers are removed, but social barriers persist. This is the stage which provides the most suitable arena for planning.

The following chart will explain the effect of division on community structure.

Profile

Description

Cause

Rapid periphery Development

Emptying communities in the conflict zone compensated with immense construction at the periphery, usually not well planned or facilitated.

Population migration at height of the conflict

Refugee

Tend to stay for longer and morph into unsatisfactory communities

Intense conflict forcing displacement

Isolated communities

Separated naturally by walls for protection or Strategically planned in order to suppress one another or enforce control.

Inability to live mixed, sense of security

Self sustaining communities

The communities have no relation with one another or a central city

Separated from shopping and business necessities

Examples

Introduction - Although a fairly recent subject of literature, ‘conflict planning’ is covered extensively. International planning influence in conflict, however, is a fairly untouched subject in the realm of urban planning. This two following components of the thesis attempt to give shape to the role of the international planner by using two research directions; What does literature say about the role of the planner in conflict, and what is known about the history, structure, roles, goals and instruments of international planning? By looking at these two parallel stories; the perception of how the conflict planner should act, and the manner in which international organizations work, a better understanding can be formed of the relationships between the two, and how international planning fits into general conflict planning theory. The goal of this portion of the thesis is not to make any conclusions, but to gain a better understanding of ‘how things work’ and ‘how things should work’ within international conflict planning. The first being an understanding of the composition of the international organization, and the second being the arguments found in literature concerning general conflict planning theory. The first half of this portion will discuss general conflict planning theory using the works of Gaffikin and Morrisey (2011), Calame and Charlesworth (2009), John Forrester (1994), Bent Flyvberg (2006), Kai Vockler (2010) and Brian Murtagh (2010). Spatial planner and Belfast professor Frank Gaffikin has produced the most focused and extensive literature on realistic current conflict planning theory. The theories of John Calame, an American historical preservationist, correlate with those of Gaffikin, but also differ in their optimism and analytical tactics. These two theorists, whom are the most current publishers on conflict planning, will therefore be taken as the two main streams of literature on conflict planning theory for this thesis. The second half will focus on a historical understanding of the formation of international organization, the classifications of these organizations, their composition and perceived roles. By using an analysis of multiple sociological and political theories concerning general international aid development in conflicted territory, more critical conclusions can be made about the organization as a planning influence.

02.

The approaches of Planning in conflict

The following portion will discuss literature concerning the role of conflict planning as a slight deviation from ‘regular’ planning. 2.1 The history of conflict planning In order to understand the application of present approaches in conflict zones, one must also be aware of past strategies utilized by planning professionals. Gaffikin (2011) points out significant shifts in spatial planning approaches since 1945. These range from Traditional top down land use planning to advocacy planning in the 60’s, to participatory planning of the last decades. Gaffikin also mentions a method he terms ‘knowledge coproduction for participatory planning’, which seems to be his first attempt at manipulating an existing strategy to fit the circumstance of conflict. In knowledge co-production, the planner establishes equitable partnerships between experts and activists and allows for debate. No one person has superior knowledge. Conflict planning has not been debated for an extensive period of time. John Forrester was one of the first theorists to begin analysing conflict situations from a spatial perspective in the 1960’s. This is actually quite shocking since planning has unknowingly been used as a conflict tool for centuries. We can see this in the strategic planning of fortifications and settlements still being used today in Israel. What can be observed about the history of conflict planning is that the power of planning changes during the history of a conflict. Israeli planners are experiencing a state of conflict which makes it extremely difficult to work in a equitable manner. 2.2

How government responds to division

The growth of a divided city can either be organic or it can be planned. For example the development can be a logical reaction to avoiding or solving the conflict, or it can be the opposite, such as in Jerusalem, where careful thought is given to development, and planning is used as a long term planning force in creating an Israeli state. This can easily be traced back to the planning of the natural landscape and the deliberate isolation of Palestinian communities. The reactions of government to the context of a divided city greatly influence the role local planners take. It also informs the role individual conflict planners should take, as will be discussed later. Building walls In cities like Belfast, Nicosia, and Mostar, walls are built to provide protection for communities from one another. In some cases like Jerusalem, the government is misrepresentative of the total population, and building walls becomes a mechanism of territorial takeover.

Sustaining the division Government can intentionally sustain a conflict, such as in Jerusalem, but it can also unintentionally sustain division. - Governments feel unable to deal with the sensitive conflict and hereby focus development in other areas. - Governments indirectly deal with the conflict in addressing housing renewal, but do not address the community structure itself. - Governments develop infrastructure plans which further fracture the city. The same fear of incapability felt by planners in the face of conflict, is also felt by governing bodies. “Municipal governments hoping to preserve public trust may fear that their neutrality will be compromised if they intervene, leaving them unable to do much more than react to the most severe consequences of the problem… In Belfast the refusal of the municipal government to acknowledge the need for ethnically homogeneous public housing estates forces it to mitigate chronic disputes that do not officially exist...Catholics living in crowded neighbourhoods often assume that vacancies in protestant neighbourhoods demonstrate the political allegiance of the city government to the united kingdom, while Protestants assume that their claims to urban territory are being undermined by the municipality’s accommodation of a growing catholic population.” (Calame and Charlesworth, 2009, p.165) Gaffikin (2011) also mentions the manners in which governmental planning will need to adjust post conflict in order to facilitate development. ‘Reconciliation happens on the ground’ therefore politicians need to work through the levels, conflict zones should be competitive, the image of the city becomes a matter of importance, as well as self-reliance. “Sustainable regeneration is dependent on getting three things right- hardware (the appropriate physical infrastructure), software (education/training, business formation/attraction and social inclusion) and heartware (a culture characterized by energy, enterprise, co-operation and the desire to get things done). This suggests that the role of the public sector should be redefined from provider to enabler, broker and entrepreneur, and be complemented by a vibrant civil society.” (Gaffikin and Morrisey, 2009, p.139) There are of course many other reactions to conflict and division, but the first statement represents most governments in divided cities. Governments avoid the impact zone and focus elsewhere. This leads to sustained division in the existing area, and also furthers division with new developments. By not addressing the issue, the new developments will house residents escaping the impact zone, carrying their animosity with them. The community has not been addressed, and more unliveable communities are created.

The spatial - The relational geographies that attend the conflict.

2.2.1 The role of communities in planning reconciliation

Communities have a high influence in the process toward reconciliation. The transition to reconciliation is far more difficult in an ethic conflict than any other conflict. The division between communities cannot be removed by removing the walls, it will persist and needs external intervention to help the move toward reconciliation. This can be an extremely difficult process if inhabitants are not open to it. Of course there are manners of working through planning to create more shared space and better communities in a variety of top down ways, but Murtagh and Ellis (2010) point out the need for intra and intercommunity participation. The planner must have the skills to manage knowledge, facilitate democratic discussion and aid communities in making progress from within and across divisions. When dealing with the community, literature often reasons that participation and mediation are the only manners to create sustainable reconciliation.

Although Gaffikin classifies four frameworks, they actually serve as one larger framework composed of the four vital contributors to conflict. Within this framework we can place the analytical tools of Brendan Murtagh (2010):

When cultural groups remain segregated, their experience of one another is also based on second hand information, and often gives a very shallow portrayal. Identity and community provide a sense of security and communal strength, but often in opposition to another group. Traditional participatory planning does not function in this context given the strong opposition between groups and The focus of power Stakeholder power difficulty to agree on a common goal. Therefore a new variation of planning needs to be developed in order to deal with these types of communities. Economic

- Identifying the focus of power and how power is point to work by economic, paramilitary, political community and state actors. -An understanding the ethno-religious drivers of spatial change -Identifying strife pressure points -Mapping the landscapes of stakeholder power -Territorial mapping including hard and soft boundaries -Understanding demographic structure, housing markets, labour markets and the interplay between them. -Mapping disconnections from labour markets and housing markets -Structures and networks; what is possible and where are the gaps? (Murtagh and Ellis, 2010, p.579)

Economic

Placing each tool under one framework is nearly impossible. The context of an ethnic conflict is far too complex to justify a simple step by step analyStructure and networks sis. Although these four frameworks are interwoven in a peaceful context as well, in a conflict context the linkages are far more extreme. Especially the influence of culture and politics is far greater due to the ethnic conflict. The radar diagrams be2.3 The MethodologyEthno-religious of Conflict Planning drivers labor & Housing markets Demographic structure low illustrate Disconnects where the focus of conflict planning The following section looks toward methods of should lie. analysis and planning used by conflict planning theorists. The first step to working in a conflict zone is to understand the conflict as thoroughly Pressure points Boundaries Economic Economic as possible, especially in the case of an external planner. General planning methods function differently in conflict, and so the analytical approach Spatial Political Spatial Political should as well. Spatial

Political

Spatial

Political

Spatial

Political

Cultural

Economic

Spatial

Political

Spatial

Political

Cultural

Economic

Spatial

Political

Spatial

Cultural

Spatial

Political

Cultural

Political

Cultural

Cities are complex, conflict is complex. This is the primary reason the context must be extremely well understood before being able to place the role of the planner within it. Gaffikin (2011) asserts four frameworks for analysing the conflict in a planning scenario: The political - Addressing the basis of legitimacy, and including arguments about governance and about pluralist democracy offers the most effective instrument for securing consensus and compromise between protagonists. The Economic - Examining the material basis for class and power inequities seen to underpin the fissures. The cultural - Emphasizing the way rival norms, traditions, and claims of ethnic groups determine mutual antagonism.

2.3.1 Analysing the conflict from a planning perspective

Cultural

Planning

Cultural

Conflict Planning

Fig.2.3.1 Radar diagrams illustrating the focus on conflict planning. 2.3.2 Approaches of the Planner in conflict

The following paragraphs will explain the various planning acceptances which will prepare the planner for working within a conflict. Acceptance #1: Planning has a moral obligation to conflict resolution Calame (2009) returns to the basic issue of whether or not the planner feels they have a role to play in the first place. Planners in Belfast have been avoiding segregated neighbourhoods, but in doing this they are not producing anything of relevance on a regional scale. In reaction to this, Calame also asserts the moral obligation of planners to address conflict scenarios.

Acceptance #2: Mediation and Political Watch dogging In addressing the role of the professional, (Calame and Charlesworth, 2009, p.196) state; “Some of the most successful architects and urban planners active in divided cities do not gauge their success in terms of physical projects and sites. They confront the political processes that gave rise to the conflict or the political obstacles standing in the way of reconciliation. Their aim is not to mend and their engagement is not contingent upon political settlements. Their interventions address the costs of partition and the burdens of walls on those residents who are forced to negotiate them regularly. Firmly committed to the social development needs of divided city residents, they help policy makers to prioritize political alternatives by developing and applying sound criteria for development. They act as advocates for good ideas, watchdogs for bad ones.” According to theorists, the conflict planners primary role is to make sure development is focused on the right target group and is executed in a sustainable manner in order to produce a reconciliated city. Not only Calame and Gaffikin are advocates of this position, but Kai Vockler (2010) also suggests a simple set of steps each planner should keep in mind when starting any intervention or mediation: -Where: Where is the space? Where are spaces that are not disputed and controversial, but ‘neutral? -What: Is it possible to create a new space, which will open up new perspectives? -Why: Who needs it? Who will profit from it? Who are the partners involved in the process? Is it in the interest of the public welfare? These theories coincide with those of Bent Flyvberg (2006) who also asserts the need to define the beneficiary group, for this will reveal the true effect of the strategy. Acceptance #3: Planning in conflict cannot be neutral “Space is not neutral. Accordingly, neither is the position of the architect or planner” (Vockler, 2010, p.4). One conception surrounding the planning profession is that it should remain neutral, something which is unattainable working as a local conflict planning professional. John Forester (1994) explains the difficulty of remaining neutral in conflict zones. Even if this is the planners intention and perception of what has happened, in reality this is almost never the case. Inhabitants, participants, bureaucrats, and planners all bring a personal history of losses, grudges, and more to the planning process. “With every decision,program, or resolution that they must publicly explain or justify, planners will face a further choice: to pretend that no one loses and to ignore their losses, or to acknowledge respectfully and sensitively the losers and their losses in the specific case at hand. Believing all too often that greater benefits would just cancel out any losses, planners have often failed, it seems, to acknowledge articulately the downsides of public decisions; so despite being well meaning, they have instead fueled suspicion, resentment, and even contempt.”(Forester, 1994, p.155).

Calame (2009) mentions public welfare is not as easy to determine as in a non-conflict context. The common good is not definable, neutrality is not attainable, and work can only be productive when these conditions are accepted. So is it really a necessity to work in a neutral manner, or is it ignorant to assume that one can? What is certain is that local powers face an even larger hurdle in remaining neutral, as they are already seen by the public as partial and personally vested in the conflict. So if anyone has a chance, it would be an external force of perceived neutrality. Acceptance #4: Participatory processes are essential Participatory processes resonate throughout conflict planning literature. Calame (2009) mentions some degrees of participation approaches corresponding to the stability of the government. He asserts the importance of working with the government if at all possible as this is, according to him, the most influential and effective way of changing the spatial situation. The ideal manner would be though centralized planning (based on a well functioning government), followed by collaborative planning, and subsequently through privatization (based on a failed government). In places such as Mostar, Beirut, and Jerusalem, private investment of, for example UNESCO, has geared the process towards restructuring. The government does hold a large amount of influence in how planning can be carried out, but in any case collaborative processes between levels of government and the private sector are necessary. Participatory planning is gaining influence in the world of planning systems. A major shift from top down planning to a bottom up structure is taking place in large parts of the world. Planning is more focused on sustainable design and community cohesion. These ideals can be addressed effectively with participatory planning in by mediating between government plans and a cohesive peaceful community. When we attempt to apply these same tactics to an unrestful divided community, the process becomes far more complicated. Participatory planning is in essence a political tool, which means “notions of interest and community are politically shaped. Not only by planners imaginations, but by who speaks and who does not, who attend meetings and who does not, which interests have articulate and effective advocates and which do not.” (Forester, 1994). So really participatory planning is not as simple as consulting the public. It is a process in which the planner must be extremely careful as to what conclusions he derives from it. When applied in conflicted communities, the process cannot really be seen as mediating neutrally, for the complexity of the conflict will always lead the planner to have to ‘choose a side’ in the eyes of the inhabitants. So why do we choose such a complex and draining system if the outcome is less than expected? Forester (1994) is certainly not opposed to this method, rather he believes that city planners should advocate for both developers and residents in order to help them through the complex issues

of developing a divided city. Perhaps the approach just needs to be tweaked. Forester (1994) states that we must be more critical of the ‘self serving doctrine of the neutrality of the mediator’ and also states we must understand the different disciplines which are necessary in the participative process. We must be selective in our participation and understand what it takes to mediate in a political manner rather than an emotional one. Most importantly, we must differentiate between ‘dealmaking’ and learning from one another. This last thought seems fairly consistent with Gaffikins thoughts about ‘knowledge co-production’ as a more appropriate manner of participatory planning. 2.3.3 Conflict planning conclusions

At the heart of the matter lies the need for acceptance of the conflict, and the realization that planning can form a solution, but not in the traditional technical sense. The solution is not predictable and therefore should be understood as potentially damaging as well. The culture for participation needs to be established together with government, and long term support will be an effect of this. Planning cannot be neutral, for the cost of this will be irrelevance. Most of all, the involved actors need to be unified concerning their history, intentions and which path of development the city should follow.

Social developments reconciliation Spatial strategy

Regeneration

] ] ] ]

Planning has influence Inter-disciplinary Cross boundary Multi leveled

mediator politician activist planner

Mediation Role

Technical planning Predictive Planning traditional Participatory planning

general planning approaches work differently in conflict

Neutrality will be compromised To not accept this invites irrelevance

Realistic not neutral accepting innovative flexible

Neutrality is unattainable

Fig.2.3.2 Understanding planning in contested space. Based on theories from Gaffikin and Morrisey (2011) and Calame and Charlesworth (2009).

3.1 International Planning Organizations Who are they? Barnett and Finnemore (1999) put forward ideas about the power of international organizations. They assert that not enough research has been done on what exactly is being done by these bodies and how it is being done.

3.1.1 The problems faced by local planning authorities

Often the key to successful planning in a conflicted city is linked to the government in place. In many conflicted cities we see that the stages of good governance vary. In Jerusalem, the Israeli government claims to uphold human rights and equality, but yet has not been allocating resources equally. Any governmental planning executed here is not representative of the total population. A city like Belfast offers more opportunity because the government is working towards a recovering and united city. However, even at this stage difficulties arise. The planners working within these governments either face opposition from the government (Jerusalem) or from the communities themselves (Belfast). Local Planners are often seen by communities as biased with a history of failure and therefore face difficulty in executing any manner of participative planning or mediation. Because the situation is so difficult, planners often choose not to interfere in areas of intense conflict and focus their skills on more neutral developments or top down manners of planning. This leaves the communities in the same state of deprivation and without a manner to progress spatially. International planning can break up these existing structures and influence communities directly and indirectly. But what gives International planning the capabilities to enter such a power system? The next section will offer an explanation of the umbrella terms used by organizations to get involved. 3.1.2 Umbrella terms

International planning intervention often occurs on the basis of a set of umbrella terms. Due to a clear lack of governmental capabilities and unacceptable deprivation in communities, organizations involve themselves in conflict. Below follow a selection of these involvement techniques, or ‘umbrella terms’.

Basic Social Needs Basic needs

Planning

Prosperity rights

Economic Needs

This section aims to give light to the structure, components and methods of an international organization. The literature used is a selection of various disciplinarians ranging from sociologists to political scientists because little critical documentation exists about international planning specifically. The goal of this research is to form an understanding of the structures, goals, and instruments of international organizations.

The diagram below is the ‘right to the city’ diagram produced by UNHabitat. It shows attention to the unique situation of the divided city, and how liveability is interrelated rather than hierarchical. This diagram is internationally recognized and gives international organizations a manner to justify their involvement and quickly diagnose communities.

Political Rights

03.

Instruments of the international organization

Livability / Human rights advocacy / Peace building/ community development: International organizations utilize the concept of human rights advocacy to involve themselves in the conflict. This is why we see such a large amount of involvement in cultural and ethnic conflict areas. NGOs and specifically IO’s keep their problem description as vague as possible in order to draw more support and enable more branches of action.

Fig.3.1.1 The right to the city diagram, UNHabitat The concept of livability is not partial to international organizations only. Conflict planning theorist John Calame (2009) mentions the ‘urban contract’ which has been utilized in history to represent the agreements between citizens and the city, in which the city should provide certain provisions and safety standards. According to Lownsborough and beunderman (2007) planning for better livability can happen through the shaping of new spaces, spaces of exchange, production, services, activity, participation, and more. What this theory suggests is the lack of program in conflicted communities, and by returning these varied public spaces to the community, we will be creating a more interactive and livable condition for the inhabitants on a long term basis. Taking this into consideration, it would suggest the planners role in creating inclusive and participative space is acting somewhere between the basic needs of citizens and the political needs of inclusion and freedom. The diagram above illustrates where this position would be. IO/NGO: The world bank defines NGOs as “Private organizations that pursue activities to relieve suffering, promote the interests of the poor, protect the environment, provide basic social services, or undertake community development”(World Bank, n.d.) The definition provided here uses an extremely broad set of terms, hereby giving organizations power to involve themselves in a broader set of issues. Umbrella terms give accessibility to a conflict. The diagram below illustrates the disconnect between local planning and communities, and the

Regarded as incapable

GOV

International Planning

Mediation / Participation

Communities

Mediation / Participation

Local Planning

proximity and ease at which local planning can and does take over this task.

Commercial / Business focus Tourism / Image New developments

Livability concern

GOV

Regarded as incapable

Funding / Policy an intrastate conflictIOrather than interstate, governments also felt more comfortable letting NGOs Implementation/ Small scale initiatives NGOcommunity deal with these ‘smaller’ issues. Today NGOs have interwoven themselves with governGrassroots Community ment and have a great deal of influence in shaping decisions.

3.1.5 The structure of international planning networks

With an understanding of the historical growth and power of international organizations, the next section will discuss the structures of the international planning system.

Within the planning system of local and international actors, multiple relationships are possible. Implementation/ Small scale initiatives NGO These configurations ultimately have very differGOV The network 3.1.3 Classifying international organizations ent results in the types of instruments the interwhich International Grassroots Grassroots Community IO International organization is a very broad term. In national actor will use. The decision to position Planning responds to NGO order to understand which actors influence plan- oneself within a system in a certain way also has a ning we must first clarify the composition of all great deal of affect on the results and performance the different types of plan actors. For this thesis, of International interventions. Below are a few diagrams illusPlanning I will be referring to non-governmental groups trating possible relationships between actors in an (NGO), international organizations (IO), govern- international planning system. ment, and grassroots as the international planning network. The international component of this being the cooperation between NGOs and IO’s. Funding / Policy IO by various Fig.3.1.2 Ability to interfere actors

GOV

Grassroots

IO NGO GOV Grassroots

IO NGO

The network which International Planning responds to

GOV-1

Grassroots NGO

Fig.3.1.3 The international planning network GOV

NGO

GOV-2

IO International Planning

Grassroots

Fig.3.1.4 Structures of International Planning systems

GOV

Grassroots Grassroots 3.1.4 IOThe history of International Planning IO Organizations NGO NGO

Since I will be looking at two types of planning categories; international organizations and nonGOV-1 GOV-2 governmental organizations, it is also necessary to Grassroots IO understand their formation and history. NGO The chart on the next page shows the growth history of the international organization. Here we see the main reason for their existence is peace keeping. When one organization fell apart due to extreme war, another body picked up with improved policies. The UN and the EU which are the major international powers in Europe to date are an offspring of major human rights injustices during and after WWII. Human rights, whether political, social, or basic survival needs are the major concern of this type of organization. This is also the reason they often play a role in areas of conflict with livability issues. The NGO organization changes more often during history. Their origin is also linked to human rights. The first NGOs formed after the slave trade was abolished. They role of NGOs changes from humanitarian, to aid development, and eventually towards activists and policy oriented groups. Through the years NGOs slowly gained power, beginning as hesitant non-political actors to political activists. As the type of conflicts changed to

3.2 The goals of international organizations The goals of international organizations vary according to its own ideals, as well as their status as NGO or IO. General goals range from peace building to the establishment of norms (Sutton, 2009). In the diagram below we see that different actors have different roles in the phases of peace building.

Negotiations Cease-fire Conflict end

Phase I Peacebuilding

Track I

Phase III Peacebuilding peacebuilding forms a bridge from peacekeeping to peacemaking. (Fischer, 1993)

Track II

Phase II Peacebuilding

IO’s [funding] Symbolic leaders Focus on problem solving participation

NGO’s

Communities Activists Basic needs

Fig.3.2.1 Based on Lederach’s model of conflict transformation (Lederach, 1995)

Origin and Growth

1800

1810

International Organizations

1820 1830 1840

The concert of Europe(1815-1914) the power balance lasting from napoleon till WWI acted by manner of an international conference to make decisions about threats to the European Nations and peace keeping. Supports the congress of Vienna, whose role was to establish stability after the Napoleonic wars. The league of nations(1919-1939)established after WWI. WWII ends the league and the UN later takes over some of its principles Established in 1945 between victors of WWII. All countries are member. 5 principle organs: the general assembly, the security council (US,UK,Russia,France,China), International justice court, the economic and social council, the secretariat.

1850 1860 1870 1880 1890 1900 Concert of Europe

1910

WWI

1920 League of Nations

1930

United Nations (UN) EU established

1940

WWII

Human rights injustices Increase in IO’s

1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020

Fig.3.1.5 The history of International organizations. By Author Origin and Growth of

Conflict Concerned NGO’s Maintaining neutrality was a vital component of the organization, then under the assumption that interaction with politics would jeapardize their power.

Slave Trade Abolished Birth of NGO’s

Humanitarian / Non political Neutral

1800 1810 1820 1830 1840 1850

Red Cross (1864)

1860

Aid development / Non political Neutral

1870

1st large NGO’s surface

1880 1890 1900 1910

WWI

1920 1930

WWII

1940 Conflicts changes from interstate to intrastate. This was of less concern to governments, whom then felt relatively comfortable letting NGO’s take over the job of intrastate security and well being.

Post war reconstruction / Non political Neutral

Amnesty International (1961) Activists / Political Partisan

1950 1960 1980

Policy Oriented / Political Partisan

1990 2000

because their power has increased, NGO’s start facing far more criticism.

NGO’s become more radical

1970

2010 2020

Fig.3.1.6 The history of non-governmental planning organizations. By Author

NGO’s partner with Governments, businesses, etc. Cold war end NGO involvement in substate conflict Governmental role

POWER Increase

The different goals are described in detail below: Goal #1: Peacebuilding There are three phases to peace building which correspond to involvement by specific international and local actors. (Please refer to Lederach pyramid for reference) Phase I Peacebuilding corresponds to the moment of ceasefires and an official political end to the conflict. This is often complemented by level one political, sometimes international, forces. Phase II Peacebuilding responds to the lowest level of actors, the third party grassroots, community and NGO sector. Most often these are the first to be established post-conflict. Phase III Peacebuilding is the involvement of the larger international community. The awareness created by level 3 NGOs and the relative stability of a conflict provide the practical basis for financial investment. Goal #2: The establishment of norms “IOs (1) classify the world, creating categories of actors and action; (2) fix meanings in the social world; and (3) articulate and diffuse new norms, principles, and actors around the globe.” (Barnett and Finnemore, 1999, p.710) The establishment of norms is one of the main reasons and goals for IO involvement. Desires for livability and community peacebuilding are heavily linked to an international understanding of norms and basic rights. The goal of establishing norms also has a strong function in enabling other local processes. “Naming or labelling the social context establishes the parameters, the very boundaries, of acceptable action.” (Barnett and Finnemore, 1999, p.711) meaning that eventual planning intervention is hinged on the proper use of structure. “States structure and use formal organizations to create and implement community values and norms and to assist in the enforcement of international commitments... They consciously use IO’s to …create information, ideas, norms, and expectations; to carry out and encourage specific activities; to legitimate or de legitimize particular ideas and practices; and to enhance their capacities and power.” (Abbott and Snidal, 1998, p.8, p.23) The goal of establishing norms can be negative if executed poorly. “Normalization strategies around the globe operate with images and concepts, however, despite all the good intentions, these strategies disregard the realities of these cities. Ideas and concepts such as ‘freedom and democracy’ are exported.” (Vockler, 2010, p.3) The vast number of large organizations coupled with the power they have gained allows them to work in a careless manner, imposing ideas on the subject city. Conflict planning theory does not support this approach in any manner, as it focuses heavily on understanding the conflict and the culture before intervening. This is exactly why some people like Kai Vockler

(2010) feel that it is “necessary to create a context for planning in crisis situations, and make sure that the goals of the plan reflect the local situation and are suitably appropriate.” (Vockler, 2010, p.3) 3.3 Instruments of International organizations According to peace building literature, International organizations and NGOs use a typical set of instruments in conflict. These include the strengths of centrality & independence, neutrality, mediation, advocacy and awareness, capacity building, and participation. Investigating the actual use of these instruments within the case studies will give a better explanation of what precisely they entail, and which are the most commonly used. Centrality and independence International organizations have aspects which local regimes or states cannot provide, the first being centrality. Centrality means a focus on ‘bridging the gap’ (Vockler, 2010) which in turn means the organization fulfils the role and projects the local government cannot for political or organisational reasons. In most divided contexts, There are two states, two systems and two interests at work. The lack of cohesion between the two makes it almost impossible to have a single planning goal, one which is necessary for the healthy and livable development of such a city. This decentralized structure allows for a new centrality to encapsulate the common interests of both states. “Independence means the ability to act with a degree of autonomy within defined spheres. It often entails the capacity to operate as a neutral in managing interstate disputes and conflicts….Participation by even a partially autonomous, neutral actor can increase efficiency and affect the legitimacy of individual and collective actions. This provides even powerful states with incentives to grant IOs substantial independence.” (Abbott and Snidal, 1998, p.5) Neutrality The most important strength of the international organization is that they are often the only representative of community interests (Abbott and Snidal, 1998) They are also the only actor whom can represent interests from both sides equally. It is very important that not just minority groups receive support, but all sides are helped towards rehabilitation together. (Demichelis, 1998) A certain safeguarding of neutrality is necessary for the international organization to be successful in any intervention. Although the conflict often presents itself with a more deprived group versus a more prosperous group, a respectful neutrality in addressing and incorporating desires from both sides must be upheld. The most fundamental aspect of neutrality is that it creates a trusting relationship between communities and organizations. One which often cannot be maintained between communities and local government. Mediation Because of the international organizations strength to remain neutral, they are also one of the few actors to be able to mediate between groups.

This includes not only ethnic groups, but also between actors of the planning network. Advocacy and Awareness One of the main instruments used specifically by non-governmental organizations is advocacy and awareness. Often, these types of organizations do not have the financial means for large interventions, so their tool of raising awareness is very valuable in influencing both local plan-actors, and directing international focus. Capacity Building Capacity building is also one of the instruments often exercised simultaneously to advocacy and awareness. These two are the two complementary instruments of the non-governmental organization. Because NGOs are often the closest link to communities and grassroots, they are able to work directly with them to build capacity, whilst using the knowledge gained here to direct attention and awareness of governance and international bodies towards these communities. Larger international organizations also utilize capacity building as one of their main goals and instruments. In a conflict situation where governance has failed repetitively it becomes increasingly important to support small scale community initiatives with knowledge, expertise, and financial backing. Participation The instrument of participation is the most important instrument available to international organizations. All of the other instruments gain their strengths from the use of participation. “Any mediation process which ignores and sidelines the people with an interest in the conflict and their representatives cannot achieve a just solution of conflict because it is imposed, rather than crafted by stakeholders” (Achankeng, 2009, p.62) This sentiment is shared by conflict planning theory, as it is instrumental to long term sustainable reconciliation “Reconstruction aid should try to bridge ethnic dividing lines by focusing on projects that integrate local firms and municipal official on both sides of the ethnic divide” (Demichelis, 1998, p.1) Demichelis (1998) goes on to illustrate the importance of working to strengthen communities rather than political leaders, so that they can establish partnerships and solutions.

3.4 The application of the theoretical framework The diagram below shows the two components of theory explained in the last sections, including the conclusions from both. The findings concern the approaches defined by conflict planning theorists as being the proper manner of engaging planning in conflict. The second portion of theory discusses literature available on the intentions and instruments of international organizations. This represents how the organizations themselves, and their critics, see their capabilities. These two sections do not speak directly to the role of international planner, but rather to the approaches and instruments that can be expected of such an organization in a conflict setting. The case studies will allow us to see how international planning is executed in current conflict situations. The practical and more spatial research of the case studies provide additional information which can then be compared to the theoretical knowledge. The combination of all of these components will determine the conclusions about the role and performance of international planner.

Approaches of Planning in conflict

Theory 01 Theorhetical: How should they behave

Accept Planning role, Mediation, neutrality is unattainable, participatory strategies.

Based on theories by Frank Gaffikin(2011), Brendan Murtagh (2010) , and John Calame (2009)

Instruments of the international organization

Theory 02 Functional: How would they like to behave?

Centrality & Independance, Neutrality, Mediation, Advocacy and Awareness, Capacity building, Participation. Role and Performance

Case studies Functional: How do they behave?

Based on theories by Kai Vockler (2010), Michael Barnett (1999) , Rebecca sutton (2009), Julia Demichelis (1998), and Kenneth Abbott (1998)

04.

The current execution of International Planning in Conflict

4.1 Criteria for selection of cases Each case was selected based on minimal presence of an ethnic conflict. The cases selected are actually more complex and deal with political and religious conflicts as well. The cases of Belfast and Jerusalem are both dealing with a conflict which, at its roots, is ethnic and has had extreme affects on the state of some communities. The cases do vary greatly in their stages of transition to post conflict cities. This is a conscious decision due to the interest in discovering the functionality of international organizations under different administrative conditions.

Fig.4.1.1 Stability continuum (Bollens, 2007, p.14)

2km

4.1.1 Case selection Belfast

4.1.2 Case selection Jerusalem

Belfast was chosen as the first case study due to the emphasis on community conflict. This is not a case of simple division but of complex fragmentation. The centre of Belfast is not the impact zone, but rather the communities of catholic Irish nationalists versus protestant British unionists. Belfast was an industrial city, like so many others, but experienced a huge decline in this industry which led to low socioeconomic standing. Conditions which are still of concern in many neighbourhoods. The conflict is complex and dealing with close proximity issues. The peace lines are not extremely large and both sides are residential, leading to a unavoidable contact as people must also navigate the city through different opposing areas. The Patterns of discrimination are still evident, and discussions with residents show the community conflict has not improved. Healthy living conditions are low within the neighbourhoods and migration of populations lead to continued territorial disputes.

Jerusalem was chosen because it shares similarities with Belfast, but the conflict is at a completely different phase and scale than Belfast is currently in. Belfast is in the post-conflict stage with support from an equal government and a willingness toward unification. Jerusalem is also a city where planning has played a much more deliberate role in the conflict. The binding factor between the two cities is the concern with liveability. Both governments claim to be upholding and acting on these concerns, but in reality are either acting in a very passive or actively destructive manner. Taking a snapshot of these two cities in connection with international planning will allow a very different interpretation of how these organizations are functioning, as the complete structure of the international planning network will also differ greatly.

4.1.3 Case study research questions

4.1.4 Structure of the case studies

The research questions used for the case studies follow below.

Community Analysis using time lines, current and historic maps, and data to determine the community liveability issues and pinpoint the How did the conflict emerge, and what has been [1] areas of worst deprivation. the Spatial impact in communities? Which local and international actors contribute to Plan- actor analysis discussing who the actors [2] are and what their actions have been. This the current development interventions? is followed by an explanation of the overall What has been the role of International planning structure, goals, and instruments used by the in this conflict? international actors. What has been the Performance of International [3] The last questions will be answered through Planning, particularly in their concrete spatial efthe referral to the previous actor analysis and fects on communities? existing critique of international planning in the specific case. Discussing the performance of International Planning will also involve comparing their interventions to liveability issues.

Phase#6 / Unifying, but not integrating 1998 - Good friday agreement

1967 / First City 1973 / Planning becomes Plan.Dep. centralized to England

2011 1969 Decline due to ‘The troubles’

2009- Forum for an alternative Belfast 2008- URBACT open cities

Industrial Decline 1960

2007- EU PEACE III Program

1964

1911

Peacebuilding

1983 - New Irland Forum 1992- Opsalh commission

Level 2

Level 1

Peacebuilding

1996- Human rights organizations call for a bill

1870

2004-Metropolitan area plan 2003- People and Place

The time line above shows all the relevant occurrences in the history of the conflict.

2000- EU PEACE II program

1998- Making Belfast Work

Government

Since 1108AD, the entirety of Northern Ireland has been contested territory, with conflicting claims from the native Irish and the invading English Protestants.

Peacebuilding gains momentum 2000- Economic investment of companies 1986- International fund for Ireland 1950- American pressure on conflict resolution Community groups form based on basic needs

Healthy cities Belfast Building Initiative Belfast EU PEACE program EU URBAN program

48% Protestant 47% Catholic

de-Centralized planning returns

Civil rights movement

1998199619951994-

Distribution

Funding NGO’s

1995- Titanic Quarter

Catholic Nationalists vs Protestant Unionists

International Planning

1988- Interaction Belfast

Conflict

1989- Laganside Corporation

268,232 [stagnating]

1970- Motorway proposals

Capitol of Northern Ireland Population

1964- Expansion Plan

Conflict phase 1: Allocating preferentials The Irish conflict began in 1108AD, when the English army attempted invading Ireland. Since this time, many rebellions have taken place. A constant back and forth followed including the 11 years war and the battle of Boyne in the 1600s where the Irish attempted to regain supremacy. Belfast Most of these attempts failed, corporation and English supremacy reigned. The tension between Catholic Irish natives and the ruling English Protestants resulted in an independence war. This war was successful for the Irish and meant a succession of changes would occur. Northern Ireland was recognized as such, and was given their own devolved government from England.

1982 - Housing renewal

2000 /

270 000

BRO- Belfast Regeneration Office established 1998- Regeneration

Peacebuilding 1994- America supports Good Friday agreement as mediator Level 3

1900 - British Town Planning

1791

1994 - Paramilitary ceasefire

1993 - Peace Process

280 000

310 000

Decline

Government Planning

1600

/ Consolidating

/ Concretizing

1970 - Special powers act Phase#4 Peace walls constructed 1973-NI constitution act / Speacial powers act abolished Paramilitary murals Phase#5 1972 - Bloody Sunday

Phase#3 / Boundary etching

Phase#2 / Political up-scaling IRA formed

Mural painting to commemorate Battle of Boyne

1916- Easter rising batte

Industrial Era

420 000

4.2 Belfast community liveability

2007 / Permanent Power Sharing Government Established

Troubles

1919-21 Irish war of independance

Rapid growth

1998 / 2002 / NI executive Direct Rule established

1973 / England takes back direct rule and joins EU

1921 / Northern Ireland government formed as devolved from UK

2001- brief gov. suspensions 2000- brief gov. suspensions

1641-1653 Eleven years war 1690-Battle of Boyne Port town

1921- NI establised

British Rule

English supremacy

Conflict Process of division Population

1888- City Status granted

Governance

1800 - Act of Union with England

1613 - Charter of Incorporation

Britain promotes protestant settlement to control Rebels in Northern Ireland Violence Ensues

Phase#1 / Allocating preferentials

Phase#6 / Unifying, but not integrating

/ Consolidating Newtownabbey

Lisburn

North Down

Northern Ireland

-10%

(+20.7%)

(+7.66%)

1998 - Good friday agreement

Castlereagh

1994 - Paramilitary ceasefire

/ Concretizing

1970 - Special powers act Phase#4 Peace walls constructed 1973-NI constitution act / Speacial powers act abolished Paramilitary murals Phase#5 1972 - Bloody Sunday

Phase#3 / Boundary etching

Phase#2 / Political up-scaling IRA formed

Mural painting to commemorate Battle of Boyne

1916- Easter rising batte

Carrickfergus

-5%

(+8.73%)

(+13.6%)

(+7.62%)

(+10.38%)

10%

15%

20%

Fig.4.2.1 Population densities 1991–2008 (NISRA, 2010)

1998 / 2002 / 1973 / England takes back direct rule NI executive Direct Rule Planning for expansion established and joins EU

1921 / Northern Ireland government formed as devolved from UK

2007 / Permanent Power Sharing Governm

“Suburban expansion was perceived to be eviTroubles dence of people continuing to be drawn to the city from the rural hinterland, butProcess was, in fact, an ac1993 - Peace 280long-established 000 310celeration 000 of the drift of people and jobs away from the crowded inner city.”(Boal, 19732006, / Planning becomes p.145) 2000 / de-Centralized planning returns

1919-21 Irish war of independance Industrial Era

420 000 Decline

1967 / First City Plan.Dep. centralized to England

declining, planners continued to plan for expansion.

Peacebuilding

Population decline and Conflict Belfast is an industrial city, thriving mostly on the enterprise Harland and Wolff, responsible for the ship building industry. However, this flourishing of industry began declining shortly after the second world war. The declining industry lowered the economic status of many residents and quickly heightened the pressure on the conflict. The culmination of events resulted in the start of the troubles in 1969. Level 2

Peacebuilding

Level 1

2004-Metropolitan area plan 2003- People and Place

1998- Making Belfast Work

1995- Titanic Quarter

1989- Laganside Corporation

1970- Motorway proposals

BRO- Belfast Regeneration Office established 1982 - Housing renewal 1998- Regeneration Even though the population of inner Belfast was

Peacebuilding 1994- America supports Good Friday agreement as mediator Level 3

1900 - British Town Planning 1964- Expansion Plan

1996- Human rights organizations call for a bill

2009- Forum for an alternative Belfast 2008- URBACT open cities

2007- EU PEACE III Program

2000- EU PEACE II program

Healthy cities Belfast Building Initiative Belfast EU PEACE program EU URBAN program

1988- Interaction Belfast

1998199619951994-

Conflict phase 2: Political upscaling The question of housing and employment has been one of the driving factors of conflict between the two communities. The general perception was that Catholics did not get the same housing opportunities as Protestants, and subsequently lived in much smaller houses with inadequate plumb- In 1951 Belfast had reached its peak in population ing, heating, etc. Key to the scenario is the general and the decline of the inner city became very apinequality in employment and family size. Catho- parent. Plans in the 1960’s already expressed that lics typically raised larger families under poorer much of the housing needed to be replaced, yet it Peacebuilding gains momentum Civil rights movement International Planning conditions and with lower wages. The architec- took a long time for2000that typeinvestment of planning Economic of companies to be exFunding 1986- International fund for Ireland ture of NGO’s housing also reflects the1950ethnicity of the Instead, planning focused on British new American pressure on conflictecuted. resolution groups form based on basic needs community, resulting in a highly segregated com-Community town planning up until 1964. Suburban sprawl position. This is a problem which is very difficult was stopped with the ‘Matthew plan’ and replaced to overcome, as catholics do not want to inhabit by targeted development in towns around the typically protestant homes and vice versa. The edge of Belfast. The pressure from the heightening groups generally prefer the separation and there- conflict in the inner city made it easier to execute fore future mixing would be difficult with these the planning of new towns such as Craigavon in a architectural styles playing a role. top down manner instead of dealing with the real problems of traffic, downgraded housing and fragParamilitary groups mentation. The war of independence cleared the way for a change in government, and simultaneously made the Irish republican army an official paramilitary group, adding to the fragmentation. With the introduction of a Northern Ireland government came the political up-scaling of the conflict. Although this government had been appointed, the majority of members were still Protestant and English, hereby continuing the sentiments of suppression amongst Catholics. 1983 - New Irland Forum 1992- Opsalh commission

ration

(-8.4%)

2001- brief gov. suspensions 2000- brief gov. suspensions

1921- NI establised

1888- City Status granted

British Rule

Belfast

270 000

High density Low density Vacant areas

Fig.4.2.2 Population decline (CAIN, 2012)

500 m

Fig.4.2.3 Vacancy map 2012 based on maps by FORUM (Hackett, 2010)

5 km

Fig.4.2.4 1964 Expansion Plan (Ordinance Survey of Northern Ireland, in BOAL, 2006.)

Phase#6 / Unifying, but not integrating 1994 - Paramilitary ceasefire

1998 - Good friday agreement

/ Consolidating

/ Concretizing

Phase#3 / Boundary etching

1970 - Special powers act Phase#4 Peace walls constructed 1973-NI constitution act / Speacial powers act abolished Paramilitary murals Phase#5 1972 - Bloody Sunday

2001- brief gov. suspensions 2000- brief gov. suspensions

Population shifting Residents living in areas of conflict rapidly began moving as the tension between communities grew. No less than 60 000 people vacated the area. This contributed to the inner city vacancy issues still occurring, but also ensured the people who stayed behind were of the most deprived class, with a 2007 / lower income and less possibility to relocate. The Permanent Power Sharing Government Established deprivation felt by these communities still exists today.

Troubles

war of independance

1993 - Peace Process

420 000

280 000

310 000

Decline

1967 / First City 1973 / Planning becomes Plan.Dep. centralized to England 1982 - Housing renewal

Peacebuilding

Level 2 1983 - New Irland Forum 1992- Opsalh commission

de-Centralized planning returns

2004-Metropolitan area plan 2003- People and Place

Peacebuilding

270 000

BRO- Belfast Regeneration Office established 1998- Regeneration 1998- Making Belfast Work

1995- Titanic Quarter

1989- Laganside Corporation

1970- Motorway proposals

1964- Expansion Plan

Level 1

2000 /

Peacebuilding 1994- America supports Good Friday agreement as mediator Level 3

ning

al Planning

as territory belonging to one group or another. Many murals act as an entrance to the community, but also depict violent images and phrases, hereby making sure the visitor does not feel too comfortable.

1998 / 2002 / NI executive Direct Rule established

1973 / England takes back direct rule and joins EU

1921 / Northern Ireland government formed as devolved from UK

1996- Human rights organizations call for a bill

Murals The painting of murals in Belfast began early in the 20th century. This type of expression was used to demarcate space, but also to commemorate historical conflicts and events which happened in Belfast. During the period of the troubles many more murals were painted in areas where walls were prominent. The murals also depict struggles from other places, such as Jerusalem, with whom the inhabitants feel some sort of camaraderie. These types of spatial interventions made sure that space was recognized

2009- Forum for an alternative Belfast 2008- URBACT open cities

2007- EU PEACE III Program

Healthy cities Belfast Building Initiative Belfast EU PEACE program EU URBAN program

2000- EU PEACE II program

1998199619951994-

1988- Interaction Belfast

Conflict Phase 3: Boundary Etching Infrastructure In the 1970â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s a naturalPeacebuilding process gains began; the introducmomentum Civil rights movement 2000- Economic investment of companies tion of motorways. Inforthe 1986- International fund Irelandcontext of the intense 1950- American pressure on conflict resolution conflict, Community this type of based intervention groups form on basic needs in the downtown was not received well and only helped to further damage community structures, continuing the shift of wealthier residents away from the inner area. This motorway plan still acts as a significant barrier for residents today.

Fig.4.2.5 Murals found in Belfast (Moore, 2011)

500 m Infrastructural Space

Fig.4.2.6. R.Travers Morganâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s 1969 urban motorway proposal (Building Design Partnership in Boal, 2006)

Fig.4.2.7. Large infrastructural barriers creating the Grey doughnut (Hackett, 2011)

2km

Protestant Catholic

Fig. 4.2.8 Population shifting of Protestants towards the periphery (Source, NINIS, 2010)

81 - 100 %

Catholic

42 - 60 % 0 - 20 %

2km Fig.4.2.9 Religious Distribution (CAIN web service & University of Ulster, 2011)

Phase#6 / Unifying, but not integrating 1994 - Paramilitary ceasefire

1998 - Good friday agreement

/ Consolidating

/ Concretizing

Phase#3 / Boundary etching

1970 - Special powers act Phase#4 Peace walls constructed 1973-NI constitution act / Speacial powers act abolished Paramilitary murals Phase#5 1972 - Bloody Sunday

2001- brief gov. suspensions 2000- brief gov. suspensions

1. An invisible divide between two communities

2. Verbal Abuse and more result communities cant get along.

3. Violent outbursts

4. Communities build their own walls

2007 / Permanent Power Sharing Government Established

Troubles

war of independance

1993 - Peace Process

420 000 Decline

1967 / First City 1973 / Planning becomes Plan.Dep. centralized to England 1982 - Housing renewal

Peacebuilding

Level 2

Peacebuilding 1994- America supports Good Friday agreement as mediator Level 3

1983 - New Irland Forum 1992- Opsalh commission

de-Centralized planning returns

2004-Metropolitan area plan 2003- People and Place

Peacebuilding

2000 /

6. Because people can still see each other barbed wire is placed to stop violence over the wall.

BRO- Belfast Regeneration Office established 1998- Regeneration 1998- Making Belfast Work

1995- Titanic Quarter

1989- Laganside Corporation

1970- Motorway proposals

1964- Expansion Plan

Level 1

5. Makeshift walls are 270 000 replaced with more permanent walls

280 000

310 000

ning

al Planning

1998 / 2002 / NI executive Direct Rule established

1973 / England takes back direct rule and joins EU

1921 / Northern Ireland government formed as devolved from UK

7. Residents attempt to trow things over the wall.

8. Wall is heightened to higher than the houses.

Fig.4.2.10 How the Peace Lines were erected

Peacebuilding gains momentum 2000- Economic investment of companies 1986- International fund for Ireland 1950- American pressure on conflict resolution Community groups form based on basic needs Civil rights movement

Healthy cities Belfast Building Initiative Belfast EU PEACE program EU URBAN program

The peace lines constructed in Belfast are the most physical embodiment of the conflict. They divide 14 districts and many communities of Catholic and Protestant residents from one another. Construction began informally by the residents themselves as a protective measure, and were eventually replaced by more permanent concrete walls by the British army in the 1970â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s. These walls mark the beginning of the troubles; the most intense period of the conflict which ended in 1998 with the good Friday agreement. 1996- Human rights organizations call for a

The walls still exist within the communities, and even more were built post conflict. This demonstrates the conflict at a local scale has not calmed down.

2009- Forum for an alternative Belfast 2008- URBACT open cities

2007- EU PEACE III Program

2000- EU PEACE II program

1998199619951994-

1988- Interaction Belfast

Conflict Phase 4: Concretizing

Fig.4.2.11 Peaceline (Damazer, 2009)

Fig.4.2.12 Peaceline (Damazer, 2009)

BALLYSILLAN

CLIFTONVILLE OLD PARK TIGER BAY

ARDOYNE LA GA ER RIV

SHANKILL

NEW LODGE

SHANKILL SPRINGMARTIN NEW BARNSLEY FALLS

SHORT STRAND

BALLYMURPHY

1km

Fig.4.2.13 Peace lines and the communities next to them.

Fig.4.2.14 The peace lines are localized in Inner North Belfast

Phase#6 / Unifying, but not integrating

/ Consolidating

1994 - Paramilitary ceasefire

1998 - Good friday agreement

/ Concretizing

Phase#3 / Boundary etching

1970 - Special powers act Phase#4 Peace walls constructed 1973-NI constitution act / Speacial powers act abolished Paramilitary murals Phase#5 1972 - Bloody Sunday

Business district

war of independance

420 000 Decline

1967 / First City Plan.Dep.

ning

Terrace housing [pre 1960]

Peacebuilding

Level 2

Peacebuilding 1994- America supports Good Friday agreement as mediator Level 3

Peacebuilding

Level 1

2004-Metropolitan area plan 2003- People and Place

1998- Making Belfast Work

1995- Titanic Quarter

1989- Laganside Corporation

1970- Motorway proposals

1964- Expansion Plan

[

cul-de-sac gated neighborhoods

Northern Ireland Assembly

1996- Human rights organizations call for a bill

2009- Forum for an alternative Belfast 2008- URBACT open cities

2007- EU PEACE III Program

2000- EU PEACE II program

Healthy cities Belfast Building Initiative Belfast EU PEACE program EU URBAN program

1988- Interaction Belfast

1998199619951994-

Conflict Phase 5: Consolidating Housing Renewal The problem of inadequate housing conditions was recognized by planners in the late 1960’s, but nothing was done about it until the 1980’s. The Northern Ireland housing executive then began massively redeveloping low rise housing. However, the issues of fragmentation were only reinforced. Measures of gains momentum Civil rights movement renewal taking place Peacebuilding at the height of the conflict 2000- Economic investment of companies 1986- International fund for Ireland meant tensions were high and people felt no de1950- American pressure on conflict resolution Community groups form based on basic needs sire for mixed neighbourhoods. Massive amounts of Belfast underwent urban renewal between 1960 and 2000, resulting in the entire structure of neighbourhoods changing along with it. The current structure of much of Belfast consists of Cul de Sac neighbourhoods. Mark Hackett of forum for an al- Fig.4.2.15 Imbalance of Types of Housing in Belfast ternative Belfast points out that this has actually (PLACE Built environment centre, 2006) 1983 - New Irland Forum 1992- Opsalh commission

al Planning

Current Housing Issues The image below shows the type of housing conditions found today. This housing reflects the conflict. Often one can find back yards to the street, many gates, an emphasis on vehicular traffic and lack of pedestrian space. Most importantly a lack of common space. “The link between housing allocation and trans1 fers and the most dis1 advantaged areas was identified by a number of the respondents. De‘churning’, Back yards facing the street mographic 1998 / 2002 / 2007 / 1973 / England with high turnover rates 2 Permanent Power Sharing Government Established takes back direct rule NI executive Direct Rule concentrated in deprived established and joins EU 2 housing estates exacerTroubles little focus on pedestrain movement bated efforts to maintain 2 1993 - Peace Process community solidarity, 280 000 270 000 310 000 activity and a positive image for the area and 1973 / Planning becomes 2000 / de-Centralized planning returns centralized to England created housing manageCar dominance BRO- Belfast Regeneration Office established 3 1982 - Housing renewal 1998- Regeneration ment problems. The need to make deprived neigh3 Lack of shared space bourhoods more popular 3 and viable residential choices was regarded as a priority if the conditions for long-term stability overuse of gating are to be created.” 2001- brief gov. suspensions 2000- brief gov. suspensions

1921 / Northern Ireland government formed as devolved from UK

resulted in much more public space square footage, but in context of a conflict, this unidentified leftover space only acts as an unsafe area.

Fig.4.2.16 Culde sac current housing with superimposed 1960’s structure on the right (Hackett, 2011)

1960

2000

Fig.4.2.17 Streets in North Belfast with City centre at right (Hackett, 2011)

500 m Old terrace housing. pre-1960

Fig.4.2.18 Belfast housing renewal strategy 1982 (NIHE, 2011)

Fig.4.2.19 Remaining terrace housing 2012 (Hackett, 2011)

Phase#6 / Unifying, but not integrating 1998 - Good friday agreement

/ Consolidating

1994 - Paramilitary ceasefire

2001- brief gov. suspensions 2000- brief gov. suspensions

1970 - Special powers act Phase#4 Peace walls constructed 1973-NI constitution act / Speacial powers act abolished Paramilitary murals Phase#5 1972 - Bloody Sunday

/ Concretizing

1998 / 2002 / NI executive Direct Rule established

1973 / England takes back direct rule and joins EU

2007 / Permanent Power Sharing Government Established

Troubles 1993 - Peace Process

280 000

310 000

1967 / First City 1973 / Planning becomes Plan.Dep. centralized to England 1982 - Housing renewal

Peacebuilding

Peacebuilding 1994- America supports Good Friday agreement as mediator Level 3

Level 2

de-Centralized planning returns

2004-Metropolitan area plan 2003- People and Place

Peacebuilding

Issues which were present for many decades, have unintentionally been intensified by the lack of government action.

1996- Human rights organizations call for a

2009- Forum for an alternative Belfast 2008- URBACT open cities

2007- EU PEACE III Program

2000- EU PEACE II program

Healthy cities Belfast Building Initiative Belfast EU PEACE program EU URBAN program

1988- Interaction Belfast

1998199619951994-

Conflict Phase 6: Unifying but not Integrating End of the conflict The IRA called a ceasefire in 1994, around the same time that the peace process began and in 1998 the good Friday agreement was signed, officially ending the intense period of the troubles. These measPeacebuilding gains momentum ent Economicindicate investment of companies ures 2000should a road to recovery, yet for 1986- International fund for Ireland ressure on conflict resolution residents this is difficult. The conflict in Belfast is Community groups form based on basic needs extremely complex because it is embodied in the communities. Most residents do not feel that the animosity of communities has changed since the official end of the conflict. 1983 - New Irland Forum 1992- Opsalh commission

267 500

BRO- Belfast Regeneration Office established 1998- Regeneration 1998- Making Belfast Work

1995- Titanic Quarter

1989- Laganside Corporation

1970- Motorway proposals Level 1

2000 /

270 000

At the end of the conflict, Belfast is left with many deaths attributed to the violence. Deaths which have been spatially immortalized in the city. The conflict is visible in memorials and murals. It shows the intense fragmentation and the areas which have been most affected. People living in these areas are generally impoverished and unable to leave. Employment is low and the population in inner north Belfast has been left deprived and living in neglected areas. Planning has not addressed the spatial structure of these communities during most of Belfastâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s history.

Fig.4.2.20 The segregation ratchet (Boal, 2006)

2km Fig.4.2.21 The aftermath of the conflict. Areas suffering deaths attributed to the conflict. (CAIN, 2011)

Protestant / Loyalist Catholic / Republican Other memorials deaths

Fig.4.2.22 The aftermath of the conflict. Locations of memorials and murals. (CAIN, 2011)

“It’s like a ghost town at the minute at night”

- Belfast Resident

500 m Dangerous streets

Fig.4.2.23 Dangerous streets (Hackett, 2011)

23% unemployment 20% 15% 10% 5% 2km

Fig.4.2.24 Areas of high unemployment (NINIS, 2010)

Highly Deprived

Low Deprivation

Fig.4.2.25 Levels of deprivation (NINIS, 2010) Government measurement system unknown.

Lagan River

Recreational Green Water Inner City Inner Neighborhoods

2km Fig.4.2.26 Lack of accessible green areas/ shared space in the inner neighbourhoods.

Fig.4.2.27 Tangential bus transport system. Lack of radial connections connecting neighbourhoods.

Inner Neighborhoods Degree of pressure

2km

Most deprived communities Peacelines Infrastructural barriers

Polarization of neighborhoods Unsafe streets, not pedestrian friendly New knowledge economy does not support employment for the deprived Vacancy in the inner neighborhoods

Insufficient Transportation options ( no radial connection between communities) Infrastructural Barriers Lack of Shared space Continuing construction of closed gated neighborhoods

riving Change

gional Development Strategy NI rtment for regional development)

Community spatial impact The northern communities of Belfast are currently experiencing the most difficulty re habilitating after the conflict. Not only were these areas hit the worst during the conflict, they are also not able to profit from the peace process today. The community issues listed above, as well as the maps shown on the previous pages demonstrate the aftermath of this particular conflict and government actions or inaction taken as a response. Transportation, for example, is still focused mainly on the car and the bus system which works in a tangential manner, connecting neighbourhoods with the centre, but leaving them fragmented from one another. The lack of shared space is another issue of great importance for the communities. Even within a single identity community, there is no space for recreation, gathering, or any shared public function. The random edges of public space remaining has been gated on all sides. The next pages will define the specific plan actors involved in sustaining or changing this type of development.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;The places that suffered most in the conflict, benefitted least from the peaceâ&#x20AC;? (Belfast planning professional, 2012)

formed as devolved from UK

established

and joins EU

Troubles

1919-21 Irish war of independance Industrial Era

1993 - Peace Process

420 000

280 000

310 000

Decline

1967 / First City 1973 / Planning becomes Plan.Dep. centralized to England 1982 - Housing renewal

Level 2 1983 - New Irland Forum 1992- Opsalh commission

Peacebuilding

Level 1

2004-Metropolitan area plan 2003- People and Place

Funding NGOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s

1998- Making Belfast Work

International Planning

1995- Titanic Quarter

1989- Laganside Corporation

1970- Motorway proposals

1964- Expansion Plan

rporation

de-Centralized planning returns

BRO- Belfast Regeneration Office established 1998- Regeneration

Peacebuilding 1994- America supports Good Friday agreement as mediator Level 3

1900 - British Town Planning

2000 /

270 000

1996- Human rights organizations call for a bill

2009- Forum for an alternative Belfast 2008- URBACT open cities

2007- EU PEACE III Program

Healthy cities Belfast Building Initiative Belfast EU PEACE program EU URBAN program

2000- EU PEACE II program

1998199619951994-

1988- Interaction Belfast

4.3 Plan actor analysis The government in Belfast has experienced a great deal of fluctuation following the years after the peace agreement. This unsteady form of governing, going back and forth from direct English rule to a devolved government, made it difficult for planning to be executed in a cohesive manner. This type of structure supported the localized perception that planning does not have a role to play in the conflict. A perception which indirectly invited international involvement. Belfast was largely able to move towards peace because of international pressure. This pressure, mostly from America and global civil rights movements, culminated in the creation of the fund for Northern Ireland. This charity organization was the first to direct funds towards the rebuilding of Northern Ireland communities. The political pressure from track one peace building actors acted as a catalyst securing a situation in which stable peace building could happen. Rapidly, NGOs, research organizations and community groups began popping up.

This network of International funding, NGOs and grassroots organizations will be explored first individually, and then as a network in order to see what kind of influence the groups have on one another, and ultimately what affect this international planning network has had on the liveability issues discovered in the previous section. The liveability issues found within the conflict analysis are physical urban issues which are still present in the community, despite 25 years of International Involvement. This makes it crucial to understand how these programs and funds were executed. Why is physical change low, and what positive aspects, if any, came out of international involvement? What is the performance of international planning?

NI Office of the First Minister [programs for improvement]

Department of the Environment DOE Planning

[Zoning, technical]

Department for Social Development DSD Urban Renewal

[focused on communities] [no planners involved]

Department of Culture, Art, and Leisure DCAL Ministerial Advisory Group

MAG

Northern Ireland arts council

Belfast Metropolitan Area Plan BMAP [not approved]

5 partnership boards

[overseeing 5 areas of renewal in Belfast]

15 urban regeneration offices

Belfast city council Belfast development committee

NIHE Northern Ireland Housing Assembly

Plan-Actor I: Government The Belfast government has experienced a great deal of fluctuation in its power capabilities over the last few decades. Due to the conflict, England took back direct rule multiple times. The result being the constant restructuring of a Northern Ireland government once it was reinstated. Structure of planning in Northern Ireland Planning in Belfast is carried out at the level of the Northern Ireland government departments. The actual planning department falls under the department of the environment, and is mainly focused on land use planning, not on spatial planning. This means that the resulting plans are of a very technical nature, focusing on large gestures and zoning. This worked fairly well for the city of Belfast up until 1969. Unexpectedly, Belfast continued making spatial plans in the form of large initiatives oriented towards improving the overall situation. â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Making Belfast workâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; was the first of its kind to start up in 1988. This initiative, coming out of the planning department of the environment was meant to improve the social, economic and environmental circumstances of deprived communities and functioned quite well. It became an entity on its own, and focused on a set of 32 wards which needed immediate attention. Later, many more documents surfaced recognizing the spatial situation of the neighbourhoods. The development of the titanic quarter and laganside were the two main planning projects happening during the troubles. These were relatively feasible to execute because they were not located in the most troubled areas. The most recent spatial plan to come out of the department for the environment is the Belfast metropolitan area plan. Although this plan has not yet been fully approved, it does show the future vision and focus of the Northern Ireland government. The importance of tourism, periphery access, and a revitalized business centre are the main concerns. Although the plan is not in motion, these concerns are visible in the physical changes and projects that have already happened in Belfast. The department for social development is the branch focusing on regenerating deprived neighbourhoods. They state to be working in a partici-

patory manner, delegating power to local regeneration offices whom are composed of a variety of stakeholders and community representatives. However, none of the government officers are planners. The department of Culture, Arts and Leisure plays a role in supporting MAG, an advisory group concerning themselves with the future development of the city. The Northern Ireland arts council also falls under this department. This council is the link of government funding towards public initiatives in arts, architecture and planning. The Belfast city council also supports these public initiatives, but does not involve itself directly in planning, other than through a critical committee acting as surveillance over the plans made at a higher governmental level. Operational responsibility for the regeneration of social housing has, since 2007, been run by the Northern Ireland housing executive instead of the department for social development.

Fig.4.3.1 Belfast Metropolitan Area Plan (NI Government, 2011)

2km Fig.4.3.2 Page from Titanic Quarter promotion booklet (Herbert, 2007) Titanic Quarter Initiated in 1995 as a redevelopment of a former harbour into a thriving centre of leisure, employment, tourism and residences. So far, only the titanic museum, and Odysey arena have been built, with funds having run out (at the moment) for the development of a metro system and residences in this area. More than 70 million went into the titanic museum, of which 10% was private, and the rest public funds. The governmental belief is that this type of tourism oriented development is necessary for Belfast. The area is the location of former industry mostly employing protestant workers. This means the territory has a protestant heritage, and will need to be executed with care to ensure it will remain mixed.

Titanic Quarter

City Centre

250m Fig.4.3.3 City centre Lagan in 1900 (Proni and Ordinance Survey of Northern Ireland in Boal, 2006)

Queens University

Fig.4.3.4 Lagan Concept plan 1987 (Shepheard, Epstein, and Hunter (London) and building Design Partnership (Belfast), 2006) in Boal, 2006)

2km

Deprivation Action

Fig.4.3.5 The golden triangle of investment

Laganside The concept plan for the river was created many years before, but the means for execution only appeared in 1989. The plan was very ambitious, attempting to recreate the riverside on six different locations, but with an overall scheme. The plan needed wide infrastructural changes; a new weir, new bridges, etc. This meant there was room for only one management body to make sure these large changes were executed. In 1989 the laganside corporation was formed. This private corporation was given all the land and developments rights to be able to execute this regeneration plan.

City Centre The city centre is being developed as another neutral zone in which everyone can feel safe and religion does not factor in. Queens University The southern part of the city around the university has always been a fairly mixed area of middle and upper class residents. With increasing investment from the knowledge industry, this area continues to develop and thrive. The infrastructural barriers present in the north side of the city, are not an issue here, and the university is well connected to the centre. However, the knowledge industry does not favour the lower class living in the north, indirectly producing a new division of social class and access to economic prosperity. A personal interview led to the conclusion of the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Golden Triangle of investmentâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;.

Ligoniel

/ upper Ardoyne Crumlin-Ardoyne Inner North Belfast

Greater Shankhill Falls Clonard Upper Springfield Outer west belfast

Inner East Belfast Tullycarnet Inner South belfast South West Belfast Andersonstown

Colin Rathcoole

2km

Fig.4.3.6 Urban regeneration areas (NI Government, 2011)

Fig.4.3.7 Social housing properties (NIHE)

Neighbourhood renewal Neighbourhood renewal is expressed as an necessity in most government documents. The Belfast metropolitan area plan refers to it as an urban renaissance, the Northern Ireland government as neighbourhood renewal, and the department for social development refers to it as housing and neighbourhood regeneration. All of these different government actors have an influence on the communities, but the main one is most certainly the department for social development. In the past, housing and regeneration had been handled almost solely by the Northern Ireland housing executive (NIHE). This resulted in the physical regeneration of housing only. Although some of the new periphery developments constructed in the 60’s and 70’s were piloted to be mixed areas, they have gravitated one way or another. Today, the NIHE still has its properties with sole rights to their development. These properties also happen to be localized in the most deprived areas, but the NIHE proclaims it mostly follows the plans of the government in regeneration. All Other housing and neighbourhood regeneration is tackled by The department for social development. The documents and policies produced by the department of social development speak of an attention to various processes of renewal. A more sustainable long term strategy is put forward named ‘People and Place’, also focusing on the participation with communities and a bottom up strategy of planning renewal.

Fig.4.3.8 Neighbourhood renewal strategy document (NI government, department for social development, 2011)

Deprivation Action

2km

Fig.4.3.9 Location of deprived communities and present development

Plan-Actor II: International Funding Programs With planning, as well as governance, denying its role in addressing deprived communities, as well as the communities themselves lacking trust and cooperation with governance, a new strategy arose early on in the troubles. International forces, especially the EU, stepped in to direct development.

American pressure was one of the most influential Track one initiatives of the peace building process. In 1986 the International fund for Ireland was the first financial stimulation supporting this. Later, the EU set up the structural funds composed of a set of Europe wide regeneration programmes. The funds consist of three tracks. The Building sustainable prosperity program (BSP) is delivered almost solely through government departments. The goal of this branch is a broad support for the general welfare of the city and its development. The more well known branch of the structural funds are the PEACE initiatives. There have been three so far, and another is expected. These are oriented towards supporting grassroot and third party sector initiatives. The third branch is composed of a set of community initiatives being far more specific in nature. The Interreg programs are oriented towards cross border cooperation on and EU regional level. Equal is intended to protect equality and discrimination rights, and leader+ focuses on the development of rural communities. The branches of relevance for this research are the URBAN I and II programs. The Urban I and II programs began around the same time as the Peace programs, 1994/95, but the Urban programs were a place based approach focused only on the most deprived communities. A consequence of the peace programs not focusing enough on division. The following pages will describe the strategy of these different initiatives.

Fig.4.3.10 The EU structural funds for Ireland Breakdown (European Union Structural Funds, n.d.)

URBAN II EU PEACE

70% of our administration comes from the EU (Belfast Planning Professional, 2012)

INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR NI

Goals

753 million 2006 - 2010 promote economic/social advance Sharing this space strategy encourage reconciliation Support programmes and projects which aim to facilitate the sharing of educational experiences among young people on a cross-sectoral basis.

Implementors

1986- 2012

Department of education Government IFI board

60 million EU funds to IFI

International Fund for Northern Ireland The IFI has been the longest running fund for peace building in Northern Ireland. The latest strategic document to appear is the â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;Sharing this spaceâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; strategy. It incorporates a large focus on youth and education, and funding is largely implemented through the department of education. The primary portion of the program is to build foundations for community based regeneration. It is oriented towards the building of capacity within these communities and towards economic growth from within.

Fig.4.3.11 IFI strategy (IFI, 2010)

supporting physical infrastructure

Governm

delivered through government departments

PEACE II

PEACE III

1995-1999

2000-2006

2007-2013

500 million

675 million

225 million

Application process

social inclusion economic development employment urban and rural regeneration cross border relations

Economic renewal Social integration, inclusion and reconciliation Locally based regeneration Outward and forward-looking Cross-border relations

Reconciling communities Shared public space technical assistance cross border relations

Inter - community relations Education Safety/ security Culture / Economy

Grassroots NGO’s Local strategy partnerships

Government NGO’s Local strategy partnerships

Adress history of the conflict Government more involved

2011 riots

PEACE I

Adjustments

Implementors

Goals

PEACE IV

Non state actors must be moreinvolved Inter community on forefront

Community focus

Broad peacebuilding targets

EU Peace The EU peace programs took place in three phases of 5-7 years each, beginning in 1995. The goal remained the same throughout; “To reinforce progress towards a peaceful and stable society and to promote reconciliation.” The total funds allotted to Northern Ireland so far range somewhere around 1,5 Billion.

60 million EU funds toThe IFI program ‘addresses’ all of the liveability issues present in deprived communities in Belfast. As with most large international programs, the EU peace program is focused on sharing knowledge, capacity building, and transferring values and policies, rather than deliberate physical interventions. The goals are quite broad, and therefore also difficult to measure.

Fig.4.3.12 The goals of the EU peace III plan (PEACE IIIEU Programme for Peace and Reconciliation 2007 – 2013 Northern Ireland and the Border Region of Ireland Operational Programme, 2007)

The programs have changed slightly in each phase, due to reflections on previous phases. The goals were quite large in the first stages of peace building and have now moved to a smaller scale. Cross border relations has been redefined to community relations. Also, the role of government has changed slightly within each phase. As the local government began adjusting their own policies as a response, the EU also allowed more funds to be channelled through government programmes. Recently, the occurrence of another riot between communities has prompted Belfast city council to begin applying for a fourth phase of funding. Although significant changes have been made in policies, processes, and partnerships, inter-community social bonds continue to be an issue.

INTERREG II

INTERREG IIIA

1994-1999

2000-2006

76 million

159 million

179 million

Implementors

Goals

1991-1993

2011 riots

INTERREG

INTERREG IVA 2007-2013 256 million

cross regional border cooperation tourism economic improvement integrated local development supporting physical infrastructure

delivered through government departments

INTERREG The INTERREG initiatives happened alongside the PEACE initiatives. The goal setting is fairly similar, but INTERREG is focused on an even larger area than the peace initiatives. INTERREG focuses on cross regional border activities, but mainly on economic growth. The interesting aspect of INTERREG is that the first two phases were carried out in a centralized 60 million funds to IFI manner, and through government. The EU opposite trajectory of the PEACE program. Later on, INTERREG would join the methods of the PEACE programs by letting local partnerships distribute the funds.

Government departments work alongside partnerships set up

PLACE BASED INITIATIVES URBAN

URBAN II

Rural development

1994-1999

2000-2006

13 million

17 million

Implementors

Goals

LEADER+

Developing physical and social resources; Developing the potential of people Improving connections

North belfast Partnership Paired with ‘making Belfast work’ policy

URBAN I & II The URBAN initiatives were the only place based EU programs executed in Belfast’s most 60 million EU funds todeprived IFI communities. The EU urban program had two goals: - Develop physical and social resources - Developing the potential of people A vision of the extended goal setting can be seen in the figure to the right. The total funds available were around 17 million, which, in retrospect is actually quite small compared to the costs of the titanic museum. The North Belfast partnership was responsible for delivering the program. Within this partnership local politicians, community representatives and researchers were combined to startup a participative program. By incorporating locals into the mix, the hope was to build their capacity and simultaneously create new connections. It was agreed that 5 big projects would lead this goal. One of the main goals of the project was to introduce a new MANNER in which to do urban regeneration. By acting by example and using a bottom up approach, the hope was that this approach would then be adopted in long term governance. Process, partnership and capacity are key words used often in the urban program. This urban area based program was the first program oriented towards urban interventions. Up until this time, the EU has only involved itself in infrastructural projects. This same program was applied over the 15 member states (at that time) of the EU.

Importance of Process

Catalyst for long lasting urban change

Address seclusion and disconnection

Partnership Area Based Initiative (ABI)

Capacity Building

Fig.4.3.13 The goals of the URBAN program

Deprivation Action

2km

Fig.4.3.14 Location of deprived communities and International Planning Focus

Plan actor III: NGOs There are many research groups, non-governmental organizations, planning institutions and voluntary groups attempting to influence the situation in Belfast.

The third party sector in Belfast is acting through advocacy and awareness in an attempt to steer governance in a new direction with planning. This is being done through workshops, public events, symposia, publications, and more. There are many partnerships with government agencies, such as the arts council, university research support, and amongst NGOs. There is little doubt that awareness is working, as networks between public, private and voluntary sectors are strong. Many of the organizations also receive funding from government and EU programs. This sector also has a link to the small scale initiatives; the grassroots community sector. Organizations such as Interaction Belfast have grown out of community groups.

Fig.4.3.13 Snapshot from the Interaction Belfast Site (Interaction, 2012)

However, the growth of these groups from community groups to planning organizations is the only link with the community. Most of the third party sector does not physically intervene or participate with the deprived communities. They exercise participation through public events, creating platforms for discussion, and outreach programs. What organizations such as PLACE and FORUM (two of the most influential NGOs) do manage to do is direct attention away from the ongoing central developments and towards the communities. Most opinions (Personal interviews, 2012) of these types of third party collaborators are positive, and the work is believed to be necessary. On the next two pages, some images are shown of the various modes of communication used by these organizations to direct attention towards urban change.

Institute for conflict research PLACE FORUM CU2

Donegall pass

Building Initiative Belfast Community relations council Belfast conflict resolution consortium Interaction Belfast Royal Town planning institute Intercomm

Fig.4.3.14 Various images of awareness (FORUM/PLACE, 2012)

Deprivation Action

2km

Fig.4.3.15 Location of deprived communities and NGO focus

Plan actor IV: Community grassroot organizations There is a largely untapped potential in community groups that has not been addressed in Belfast. The map on the right shows the location of various community groups. Illustrating Ligoniel and Suffolk Lenadoon as examples of areas where these groups have been able to make substantial spatial change happen. Community cohesion is strong in Belfast, and many of the groups shown here are reactions against government actions of regeneration. There is a desire to regenerate from within, and in many cases when development from the grassroots level occurs, it is more effective than actual international planning alone. Hence why it is so important for the local planning community to embrace the capacity of groups present in Belfast, rather than formulating new partnerships. With funding going to these community groups they are able to plan small portions of their own development. Ligoniel In 1974, This village at the base of the mountains was almost completely destroyed as part of a redevelopment. It was continuing to fall apart and faced more demolition in the last 10 years. Due to the threats of impending ‘urban regeneration’ which the communities feared in distrust of the government, a group formed to try and re establish Ligoniel. Together with a member of the voluntary sector, Planner Arthur Acheson, they were able to establish themselves with more management capabilities over their smaller ward, instead of as part of a large ‘regeneration’ area. These measures allowed for a stronger partnership, with people who were involved for the long term. This resulted in the ability to get funds for physical projects such as reclaiming abandoned buildings for community use and improving environmental sites and access routes to them. Ligoniel was also one of the first to receive Habitat for Humanity sponsorship. Working together with a neighbouring protestant community, both areas received new housing simultaneously.

Ligoniel

Suffolk Lenadoon

Suffolk Lennadoon This group formed when mothers from both sides of the divide decided they needed to get a set of traffic lights on the main road through their community, for the safety of the children. This small practical need worked as a catalyst for other things to happen. The communities began to realize they could achieve more if they worked together. The group is now quite large and run by professional managers. The international fund for Ireland has been backing the community and economic investment has entered the space in the form of stores and franchises.

These communities are developing spatially, yet “you don’t see a planner anywhere near these things. Philanthropists and investors are involved.” (Belfast Planning Professional, 2012)

Fig.4.3.16 Media snapshot (Belfast Telegraph, 2011)

Ligoniel

Suffolk Lennadoon

Deprivation Action

2km

Fig.4.3.17 Location of deprived communities and Community groups

100

101

Level 1: Funding bodies

NI Office of the First Minister [programs for improvement]

Department of the Environment DOE Planning

Department for Social Development DSD

Department of Culture, Art, and Leisure DCAL Ministerial Advisory Group

Urban Renewal

[Zoning, technical]

[focused on communities] [no planners involved]

MAG

Northern Ireland arts council

Belfast Metropolitan Area Plan BMAP [not approved]

5 partnership boards

[overseeing 5 areas of renewal in Belfast]

Private Planning Firms

15 urban regeneration offices

Belfast city council Belfast development committee

NIHE Northern Ireland Housing Assembly

Level 2: Third Party Planning

Limited relations Level 3: Community Groups

4.4 The Belfast international planning system

The practice of partnerships Above is a revised diagram of how international planning is wound into the existing governmental structure. The existing planning system is practicing in an extremely fractured manner. Therefore, the formation of partnerships amongst government and non-governmental groups is one of the main benefits international planning could bring to the context. Although participation struggled, the foundations for community groups were built. Groups such as the Ashton trust focusing on the social economy in New Lodge. The next section will offer critique of the local government, and explain the role of International planning as a network of funding, government, NGOs and community groups. Plan-Actor 1: Government Critique Current government planning does focus on communities, but this focus is based within the department of social development. Therefore, no planners are involved in the policy creation or implementation there of. The actual planning department falls within the environment department and is of a more technical nature. Large zoning plans and commercial developments are the only projects currently thriving in Belfast. Neighbourhood renewal is the responsibility of the department of social development and the NIHE. They have chosen to divide Belfast into 5 partnership areas, subdivided into 15 regeneration offices. It is difficult to comprehend why the scale of regeneration would be enlarged to these areas containing multiple communities, as this would also be much more complex to execute and foster participation amongst the communities.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Its the software of the city that is not doing well, and the resulting hardware is the visible outcome of bad geography.â&#x20AC;? (Private Belfast Planner, 2012)

The reality of the regeneration offices is that they are not physically present in the communities. The commitment to the policy and its statements is lacking. Occasionally consultants are sent into the areas to speak with the community, but there is no constant, no way for the community to develop trust in a local body or support system. A trust which is highly necessary to build, since statistics prove Belfast residents are hesitant to support government and vote. The abundance of documents being produced by government, like the ones mentioned, adds to the general confusion and lack of cohesion amongst departments. However, the positive aspect of this being that the government is slowly recognizing and responding to problems through publishing these documents. Words like shared city, healthy city, integrated space, people and place, and most recently shared space, are steps in the right direction. Many of these documents mirror initiatives and proclamations made by international planning, acting as evidence that the partnership with international funds such as EU peace are necessary.

102 GOV

Regarded as incapable

Funding / Policy

NGO

Implementation/ Small scale initiatives

Grassroots

Community

GOV

The network which International Planning responds to

Grassroots

IO NGO International Planning

GOV

GOV Grassroots

GOV-1

Grassroots

IO NGO

NGO

GOV-2 Grassroots

IO NGO

Fig.4.4.1 Structure of different actors

Fig.4.4.2 Lack of government involvement in addressing the conflict through its regeneration strategies. (Fitzfudd and Williams, 2007, p.15)

4.4.1 Structure of the International Planning system

4.4.2 Goals of the International Planning system

In the case of Belfast, international planning influence takes place in conjunction with government. The EU structural funds and International Fund for Ireland were able to create a connection between all stakeholders. Their initial intention was to support the third sector of NGOs and grassroots, but with time, NGOs whom normally would be hesitant to work with government, have accepted funding directly from government and international organizations. This allows connections from the track one peacebuilders to the lowest grassroots movement to form.

International financial involvement only began once a peace agreement had been made. There were many issues of liveability in Belfast previous to this, but in this case, track one initiatives only placed pressure for change by withholding funding. Local capacity building One of the main issues in Belfast is the local unacceptance of planning as having a role in the conflict. This perception supports current regeneration strategies being placed under social development. The general negligence of the government in dealing with deprived communities meant International planning could bring capacity building and knowledge transfer to the foreground of their strategies. Inter community reconciliation In addressing communities, the main goal of International organizations was to mediate cross border contact, and ultimately reconciliation. Of course the social and economic status of communities was brought to the foreground as well. Most liveability issues within Belfastâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most critical areas were expressed as concerns of the International programs. Improvement of the built environment Most program documents express a general concern with the urban environment. Especially in deprived communities, vacancy, shared space, health care and education facilities, and infrastructural barriers are expressed as a large problem.

103

Transfer of knowledge centrality

GOV

through funding Grassroots IO participationmediation

NGO awareness

Capacity building

4.4.3 Instruments of the International Planning system

The above diagram illustrates the different instruments utilized by International organizations in creating planning change. They will be explained in detail below: Transfer of knowledge EU programs implemented participative strategies to work within communities. This bottom up manner of working provided new perspectives for government to observe. By directing funds through partnerships set up by government, international organizations were able to steer the direction of government policy. Neutrality and mediation By working in a participative manner, communities experienced higher levels of inter community contact. International organizations had greater power in these situations, as the general perception by communities of government was poor. Simultaneously a network of peace building actors was created by including multiple representatives from government, grassroots, and others in every strategy. The partnerships created through this allowed for a society with greater peace building capabilities. Centrality Due to the instability of the government throughout the last decade, international organizations were able to provide a point of stability and centrality. Awareness Awareness of urban issues came to the surface mostly through the financial support of NGOs. Participation through funding Community programs focused largely on the capacity of the community to create change. Grassroot initiatives could apply for funds to improve their community. NGOs received financial support to continue their advocacy and participation with communities.

International funding also benefitted conflict related research. This was one of the manners in which international planning could make government more aware of the present situation.

The EU utilized local Northern Ireland research centres to review phases of their programs. The choice to utilize an external, and local, critic for the programs illustrates the dedication to successful peacebuilding in a local context, rather than a global context.

104

4.4.4 Critique of International Planning

Peace building is a long term process In addressing the EU Urban programs, critique was received about the time span available for this project. As it was the first place based approach oriented towards participation, it needed to build up the potential for participation first. This was naively regarded as being a simple process, the result being a quick spending of funds due to time delays. A personal interviewee (2012) reflected that perhaps the EU did not realize the stage of the deprivation and division still present in the communities at that time. Even to date, it is extremely difficult the execute a participative planning strategy in inner north Belfast. Not that it is impossible, but the approach needs to be carefully planned and executed in order to prevent the competitive culture of “If he gets a community centre, I want one as well, on my side of the wall” User friendliness versus administrative complexity The complexity of the program in regards to administration created a barrier for deprived communities to make an appeal. However, because this complexity was not mirrored in the monitoring stages, funds were also allocated to community groups who perhaps should not have gotten them. The EU structural funds as a whole were difficult to comprehend by applicant groups. Multiple programs were running at the same time, making it complex to determine where to apply for funds. Recognition of the historical context of the conflict Recognition of the past is important for communities to move towards reconciliation, and most international programs did little to address the underlying problems. Understanding peace building and reconciliation is an important element of regenerating communities. The scale of community intervention matters One Belfast planner (Personal Interview, 2012) believes the issue also lies in the creation of boundaries. The large areas designated for regeneration often contain more neighbourhoods and more than one ward. This makes it much more difficult to harness the energy of the people within. The interviewee used the term ‘urban villages’ as being a more sustainable way to move forward and create new strong communities. Monitoring and Evaluating is crucial “Monitoring and evaluation was not strong in most member states” (Carpenter, 2006, p.2153) This sentiment is supported by an interviewee whom participated in the execution of the programme for inner north Belfast. Planning for better communities requires more than design At times there is also a naïveté in the impact of physical change. Urban design, or physical change is not a complete strategy, and not a sustainable one either. We can see this in the results of the analytical graph below. This demonstrates the perceived success of the URBAN programmes, and places emphasis on the physical change as being the main outcome of the programs on a European level. The report, however, leaves out a complete analysis of the exact form this physical change takes. Other critical literature argues the real

physical change resulting from URBAN I and II is added sets of community centres, day cares etc, but not in the overall connectivity and structure of neighbourhoods. Whilst this is where the social and physical barriers to reconciliation lie.

Fig.4.4.3 The effects of URBAN (percentage of programmes with impacts) (Carpenter, 2006)

Conventional mechanism of participation don’t always work. International organizations are all of the opinion that a top down strategy will not be a sustainable strategy, yet in many programs, for example the URBAN programs, the perception towards a participative strategy was underestimated. In some cases segregation was reinforced. One Belfast planner (Interview, 2012) talks about various forms that can be used. The most direct form of giving decisive power to the community resulted in little inter community relations. To build up any type of productive participation oriented towards reconciliation, there needs to be a more precise approach, perhaps participation through consultation.

The URBAN program received limited financial support, “Coupled with this was a focus on neighbourhoods with weak local economies, and so it comes as little surprise that URBAN had limited potential to instigate fundamental shifts in economic circumstances.”(Carpenter, 2006, p.2152 )

4.4.5 The role of international planning

4.4.6 The performance of international planning

Local planners are wary of the influence planning could have on deprived communities. Throughout the history of Belfast, planning has been technocratic and planners have not felt their task involved addressing social-economic issues of deprivation.

The graph below illustrates the relative amounts of physical spatial community change by different plan-actors in Belfast. It is clear that Civil society, free of local planning involvement, has made the largest amount of spatial changes.

Regardless of the lack of a planning role, International influence has attempted to impart a sense of responsibility towards these communities through leading by example (establishing norms). The EU programs utilized tools of participation in the most deprived communities. Tools and knowledge which can now be recognized in local policy documents. New networks have been created because of the involvement of international organizations. They have been able to provide a link between government and NGOs, fulfilling a role of constant mediation between local actors and communities. Because communities perceive these external programs as having more neutrality than their local government, they are more willing to accept their interference. The most important role of international planning has been to open new perspectives about the future of the city and planning, through supporting NGO exhibitions and research, by exercising different tools, and through creating new networks between previously unconnected actors.

â&#x20AC;&#x153;The European Union became a more significant political and economic force. From the standpoint of Northern Ireland, the EU offered the prospect of a political space, a kind of umbrella under which it was safe to explore alternative examples and possibilities of sovereignty, autonomy, identity, and allegiance. The EU also provided both funding perceived to be independent of the British and Irish governments, and a more universal set of standards against which to interpret events at home.â&#x20AC;?(Fitzduff and Williams, 2007, p.14)

Fig.4.4.4 Concrete Initiatives by different actors (Fitzfudd and Williams, 2007, p.16) The energy inherent within communities is one factor which International planning schemes have attempted to support with funding, but government has not dealt with in an extensive manner. Often deprived areas were approached with participatory strategies, but were not executed within existing community structures. New community groups were formed to complete the task of mediation and participation. At times these groups even rebelled against the structure of the programs. The exercising of participation had too many assumptions about the functionality of the process. This meant little results came from it due to resistance from communities, barriers of complexity in applying for funds, time restrictions, assumptions of a desire for change, and not to mention a negligence of the history of the conflict in producing a solution. The forced creation of new groups did have some advantage, as they gained some appreciation of the capacity they would have as a group. Some did go on to continue their connections in making small changes to their living environment, and even gaining some economic investment. International planning has had effect on a long term basis, as the general perception of the role of planning has evolved. Government and planning are recognizing that structural changes will need to happen, and planning needs to come to a more permanent prominent position within regeneration of communities.

105

106

Town and country planning

Phase#6 / Unifying, but not integrating

Phase#4 / Concretizing

Phase#5 / Consolidating

Al-Aqsa Intifida 2000 - Camp david summit 2001 - Mitchell report 2002 - Operation defensive shield 2003 - Israel begins building wall around Jerusalem Geneva Accords

1993/5- Oslo Accords

1987 - First intifida

1982/3 - Invasion of Lebanon

1978 - Camp David accords 1979 - Israel- Egypt treaty of peace

Peacebuilding

Level 3

Peacebuilding

Level 2

Peacebuilding

Track I

1966- Jordanian Planning System

2005 - Jerusalem 2020 Masterplan 2005 - National Parks Plan 2000 - Jerusalem transportation masterplan 2007- Decolonizing architecture 2004- Ir Amim 2002- UNESCO civil societies programme 2002- FAST Foundation for achieving seamless territory 2000 - Arab centre for alternative planning 1999 - BIMKOM planners for planning rights 1998 - IPPC International Peace and cooperation centre 1997- Israeli committee against house demolitions

Track One peacebuilding International Funding NGO

1994- Ir Shalem established

International Planning

1989- B’Tselem

Fig.4.5.1 Development of Jerusalem (Shoshan, 2010, p.280)

East

1916- British pressure on conflict resolution

1990- Applied research institute - Jerusalem

West

AHLC

1978- Peace Now

The Time line above shows all the relevant occurrences in the history of the ongoing conflict.

1994- Jerusalem Masterplan (rejected)

Israeli Ministry of Interior Palestinian National Authority

In 1915 when the British moved into Palestine, an agreement titled the ‘McMahon- Hussein Agreement’ was signed promising the return of Turkish land to the Palestinians following the end of WWI. However, in 1917, the Balfour declaration expressed the support of the British for a Jewish national home in Palestine. Jerusalem has always been contested territory due to the religious symbolism of the area for both Palestinians and Jewish settlers. However, the conflict arose when the balance of these populations began shifting dramatically in the beginning of the 20th century.

1980- Jewish Settlement of East Jerusalem 1967- Jerusalem extends boundary to include east Jerusalem ( now municipal boundary) 1995- E1 plan Palestine 2015 Master Plan 1994- Creation of Palestinian Ministry of Planning

Government

1976 - Land expropriation and demolitions begin

1903- JNF begins purchasing land in Palestine

Conflict Phase 1: Allocating Preferentials

208 700 / 448 800

1970 - Israeli Centralized Planning

Brittish Regional Outline Plans

1980- strict zoning laws applied

35.5% Palestinian 64.5 % Israeli

114 800 / 292 300

1975 - Gilo construction begins

Distribution

Six day war: Israel captures old city 1970- War of attrition

65 100 / 99 400

1965 - Shu’fat refugee camp established

Catholic Nationalists vs Protestant Unionists

1956-1967 Suez crisis

Israeli State

31 000 / 30 000

8000 / 3000

1950 - Jerusalem Outline Plan

Conflict

1973- Yom Kippur War 1974/5 - Egyptian Israeli disengagement

Phase#3 / Boundary etching

Palestine

Jerusalem has been in the hands and jurisdiction of many different rulers and therefore the development of the city has been extremely dependent on external forces, the most recent being the Turkish Ottomon empire, Britain, the UN, Jordan, and currently the Israeli state.

719,900

Israeli Occupation Israeli state rule of control Jerusalem Peace negotiations

Government Planning

Population

1948 Arab-Israel War 1949 - Ceasefire line (green line) Israel takes all ofwest Jerusalem

Jordanian Rule

British Rule 1916-1949

1987- proclamation independent palestinian state

Ottoman Turkish Rule 1516-1916

4.5 Jerusalem community liveability

1948- Israeli declaration of Independance 1947- UN partition plan

1917 - Balfour Declaration

1915- McMahon-Hussein Agreement

East jerusalem West Jerusalem Conflict Process of division Population

Phase#2 / Political up-scaling

107 Phase#1 / Allocating preferentials

107

108

Phase#6 / Unifying, but not integrating

Phase#4 / Concretizing

Phase#5 / Consolidating

Al-Aqsa Intifida 2000 - Camp david summit 2001 - Mitchell report 2002 - Operation defensive shield 2003 - Israel begins building wall around Jerusalem Geneva Accords

1993/5- Oslo Accords

1987 - First intifida

1982/3 - Invasion of Lebanon

1978 - Camp David accords 1979 - Israel- Egypt treaty of peace

Six day war: Israel captures old city 1970- War of attrition

1956-1967 Suez crisis

1973- Yom Kippur War 1974/5 - Egyptian Israeli disengagement

Phase#3 / Boundary etching

1948 Arab-Israel War 1949 - Ceasefire line (green line) Israel takes all ofwest Jerusalem

Phase#2 / Political up-scaling

Phase#1 / Allocating preferentials

1987- proclamation independent palestinian state

1948- Israeli declaration of Independance 1947- UN partition plan

1917 - Balfour Declaration

1915- McMahon-Hussein Agreement

Jordanian Rule

British Rule 1916-1949

109

Israeli Occupation Israeli state rule of control Jerusalem Peace negotiations

Israeli State

114 800 / 292 300

65 100 / 99 400

1970 - Israeli Centralized Planning

Brittish Regional Outline Plans Town and country planning

1976 - Land expropriation and demolitions begin

1980- Jewish Settlement of East Jerusalem 1967- Jerusalem extends boundary to include east Jerusalem ( now municipal boundary)

Peacebuilding

Level 2

Peacebuilding

Track I

2005 - Jerusalem 2020 Masterplan 2005 - National Parks Plan 2000 - Jerusalem transportation masterplan

1994- Jerusalem Masterplan (rejected)

1995- E1 plan Palestine 2015 Master Plan 1994- Creation of Palestinian Ministry of Planning

1980- strict zoning laws applied

At the time of British rule Jerusalem had not developed largely beyond the old city centre. Almost the entire morphology of the city took place during a time of conflict and planning forces were therefore also quite internationalized from the beginning. The first experience of master planning came from the British.

1975 - Gilo construction begins

1965 - Shuâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;fat refugee camp established

1950 - Jerusalem Outline Plan

Conflict Phase 2: Political Upscaling

1966- Jordanian Planning System

1903- JNF begins purchasing land in Palestine

1916- British pressure on conflict resolution

208 700 / 448 800

Level 3

31 000 / 30 000

tempt to continually search for peace agreements and territorial division into a two state solution. The result being eventual departure of British rule from Israel/ Palestine, leaving the responsibility of peacekeeping to the United Nations. AHLC

Ad Hoc Liaison Committee formed to oversee funding United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East 1949- UN involvement 1973- American pressure on conflict resolution International Funding 2007- Decolonizing architecture 2004- Ir Amim 2002- UNESCO civil societies programme 2002- FAST Foundation for achieving seamless territory 2000 - Arab centre for alternative planning 1999 - BIMKOM planners for planning rights 1998 - IPPC International Peace and cooperation centre 1997- Israeli committee against house demolitions

1994- Ir Shalem established

1989- Bâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Tselem

1990- Applied research institute - Jerusalem

Heightened Conflict The continued support of a Jewish state by the British brought about aggravation and increasing tension amongst Palestinian residents. Jewish residents also felt a lack of support in the British at-

1978- Peace Now

British Town planning WithinInternational the ofPlanning a decade three more master Trackspace One peacebuilding International Funding plans were prepared. In 1919 Sir Patrick Geddes NGO submitted a plan establishing more open green area in the western/developing side of the city. Later plans by Charles Ashbee (1922) and Clifford Holliday (1926) placed a greater emphasis on neighbourhood planning and established building criteria according to zoning. The city developed mostly on the western edges during this period.

110

111

500m Fig.4.5.2 1919 Scheme by Sir Patrick Geddes (Sharon, n.d.)

Fig.4.5.4 1944 Henry Kendall Scheme (Sharon, n.d.)

Fig.4.5.3 1930 British Mandatory Scheme (Sharon, n.d.)

112

Jordanian Rule

British Rule 1916-1949

Phase#6 / Unifying, but not integrating

Phase#5 / Consolidating

Phase#4 / Concretizing

Al-Aqsa Intifida 2000 - Camp david summit 2001 - Mitchell report 2002 - Operation defensive shield 2003 - Israel begins building wall around Jerusalem Geneva Accords

The beginnings of Jewish Settlement Planning Jewish Settlement can be traced back to the early 1900’s when the Jewish National Fund (JNF) began purchasing land in Israel. The creation of new laws allowed easier occupation of land, i.e. the abandoned areas law (1948), absentees property law (1950), land acquisition law (1953) and more. However, it is not until 1950 when the first spatial plans were made to colonize the territory. The plans were made in a very technocratic manner, utilizing zoning techniques to plan residential areas, create new industrial centres and regulate rural agricultural and water resources in the larger region. Landscaping was also used as a technique to divide the land and claim territory. New plant species were introduced to symbolize a Jewish nation.

1993/5- Oslo Accords

1987 - First intifida

1982/3 - Invasion of Lebanon

1978 - Camp David accords 1979 - Israel- Egypt treaty of peace

Six day war: Israel captures old city 1970- War of attrition

1956-1967 Suez crisis

1973- Yom Kippur War 1974/5 - Egyptian Israeli disengagement

Phase#3 / Boundary etching

1948 Arab-Israel War 1949 - Ceasefire line (green line) Israel takes all ofwest Jerusalem

Phase#2 / Political up-scaling

1948- Israeli declaration of Independance 1947- UN partition plan

1917 - Balfour Declaration

1915- McMahon-Hussein Agreement

1987- proclamation independent palestinian state

Phase#1 / Allocating preferentials

in 1965, still exists in the Jerusalem Municipal region.

Israeli Occupation

Israeli state rule of control Jerusalem

New towns Along with many other settlement types, the earlier agricultural Israeli Statesettlements such as the Kibbuts, the 1950’s brought with it a new 114 800 / 292 300 and the 208 Moshav, 700 / 448 800 type of settlement; the new town. A total of 22 new towns were created to spread the Jewish popula1970 - Israeli Centralized Planning 1976 - Land expropriation andtion demolitions andbegin isolate the Palestinian population. These 1980- Jewish Settlement of Eastsmall Jerusalem were very towns placed in areas of political 1967- Jerusalem extends boundary to includerather east Jerusalem municipal boundary) advantage than ( now geographical advantage. The result today being high unemployment rates and isolation issues. One of these was developed on the north western edge of Jerusalem.

Brittish Regional Outline Plans Town and country planning

1903- JNF begins purchasing land in Palestine

Peacebuilding

Level 2

Peacebuilding

Track I

2005 - Jerusalem 2020 Masterplan 2005 - National Parks Plan 2000 - Jerusalem transportation masterplan

1994- Jerusalem Masterplan (rejected)

1995- E1 plan Palestine 2015 Master Plan 1994- Creation of Palestinian Ministry of Planning

1975 - Gilo construction begins

1980- strict zoning laws applied

1965 - Shu’fat refugee camp established

1950 - Jerusalem Outline Plan

All of these planning implementations remained executed under the British regional outline plans planning system, a system which asserted the need for public consultation during the planning process. Towards the end of the 1960’s a brief switch was made to the Jordanian planning system whilst the east of Jerusalem was still under Jordanian Rule. Peacebuilding

65 100 / 99 400

Level 3

31 000 / 30 000

1966- Jordanian Planning System

Peace negotiations

Due to the occupation and war, large numbers of populations shifted, moving to either sides of the city, neighbouring Arab countries, or refugee camps. One of these camps, Shufat, established

2007- Decolonizing architecture 2004- Ir Amim 2002- UNESCO civil societies programme 2002- FAST Foundation for achieving seamless territory 2000 - Arab centre for alternative planning 1999 - BIMKOM planners for planning rights 1998 - IPPC International Peace and cooperation centre 1997- Israeli committee against house demolitions

A final Cease fire line was drawn along these boundaries. This line is still referred to today in Jerusalem’s territorial division and goes by the name of the green line.

1989- B’Tselem

This war only lasted a year, with the result being a larger occupation of land by the Israelis. In the case of Jerusalem, the city expanded into the eastern and the old city.

1990- Applied research institute - Jerusalem

1978- Peace Now

Track One peacebuilding International Funding NGO

1994- Ir Shalem established

Conflict Phase 3: Boundary etching The UN Partition plan of 1947 was the first formal agreement to be implemented on Israel Palestine. It divided territory between the two populations and left some areas to international law, such as AHLC the centre of Jerusalem. However, this was not Ad Hoc Liaison fully accepted by the Israelis, whom then declared Committee independence and began to forcefully take land formed to oversee funding 1916- British pressure on conflict resolution United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East they believed was theirs. spawned the first 1949- This UN involvement 1973- American pressure on conflict resolution ArabPlanning Israel war. International Funding International

Fig.4.5.5 New town Typology. (Shoshan, 2010. p.161)

113

114

115

2km Fig.4.5.6 Proposed boundaries of Jerusalem as an international city belonging to UN (Jerusalem as â&#x20AC;&#x153;Corpus Separatumâ&#x20AC;? under the UN Partition Plan, 2012)

Fig.4.5.7 Land ownership after the war (1948). Still seen as the last UN boundary drawn. (Sadaka, 2012)

116

117

Palestinian Neighborhoods Jewish Neighborhoods Arab christian British security areas Muslim Jewish Jerusalem Municipal Boundary Jerusalem Metropolitan West Jerusalem

5km

Fig.4.5.8 Jerusalem 1947 (Tukan, 2002, p.38)

1918

Fig.4.5.9 Settlement Patterns (Based on maps by Shoshan, 2010, p.283)

2007

118

119

N f.l.t.r. Planned distribution of Jewish Population, rural centres, industrial centres and transfer of water resources.

500m Fig.4.5.10 1950 Masterplan for Israel. (Sharon, n.d.)

Fig.4.5.11 1950 Masterplan for Israel (Waltz and Zschiesche, 1986)

120

121

Destroyed Palestinian Neighborhood Refugee Camp

2km

Jerusalem Municipal Boundary Jerusalem Metropolitan West Jerusalem Green Line Wall built Wall Planned

Fig.4.5.12 location of destroyed neighborhoods and refugee camps in 2012.

Fig.4.5.13 Palestinian refugee camps (Shoshan, 2010, p.93)

122

Israeli Occupation Israeli state rule of control Jerusalem Peace negotiations

Israeli State

114 800 / 292 300

65 100 / 99 400

1970 - Israeli Centralized Planning

Brittish Regional Outline Plans Town and country planning

1976 - Land expropriation and demolitions begin

Area A: Palestinian control Area B: Palestinian Civil control, Israeli Security Area C: Israeli control Almost the entirety of Jerusalem is designated as Area C, despite the fact that it remains a mixed city. East Jerusalem is undefined. The resulting Palestinians still living in Jerusalem have very little power over the development of their communities and are restricted to a certain area despite their growing populations. This results in illegal construction, followed by demolition.

Peacebuilding

Level 2

2005 - Jerusalem 2020 Masterplan 2005 - National Parks Plan 2000 - Jerusalem transportation masterplan

1994- Jerusalem Masterplan (rejected)

1995- E1 plan Palestine 2015 Master Plan 1994- Creation of Palestinian Ministry of Planning

1980- strict zoning laws applied

1975 - Gilo construction begins

1965 - Shu’fat refugee camp established

1994- Ir Shalem established

1989- B’Tselem

1990- Applied research institute - Jerusalem

Centralized Planning The six day war at the end of the 1960’s resulted in the Israeli occupation of the Old city. In order to accommodate the end goal of a united Jerusalem, a new planning system was created by the Israeli AHLC Ad Hocto repopulation. Immediately plans were made Liaison store the Jewish quarter in the old city, Committee and strict formed to oversee funding zoning lawsRelief were applied toPalestine the Refugees area. inAtthethis time United Nations and Works Agency for Near East 1949- UN involvement settlement plans1973-and zoning to accelerate. American pressure began on conflict resolution International Many plans were made throughout the 70’s Funding and 80’s to settle the West Bank and east Jerusalem. Of course the Palestinian population did not accept this without recourse, and towards the end of the 80’s another violent outburst in the form of an intifada took place, followed by the Palestinian proclamation of independence. 1978- Peace Now

k One peacebuilding national Funding O

1950 - Jerusalem Outline Plan

national Planning

With this agreement came the imposing of three different zones with different levels of authority. The idea being that, with time, more powers could be transferred to a Palestinian government. A body which was weak and still needed to be built up with international support.

1980- Jewish Settlement of East Jerusalem 1967- Jerusalem extends boundary to include east Jerusalem ( now municipal boundary) 1966- Jordanian Planning System

gins purchasing land in Palestine

h pressure on conflict resolution

208 700 / 448 800

Oslo Accords The Oslo Accords signed between 1993 and 1995 were meant to be a final division of land and peace agreements. International mediation contributed to the final signing of this document. Israel also recognized the PLO (Palestinian liberation organization) as the official representative of the Palestinian people.

Level 3

30 000

Phase#6 / Unifying, but not integrati

Phase#4 / Concretizing

Phase#5 / Consolidating

Al-Aqsa Intifida 2000 - Camp david summit 2001 - Mitchell report 2002 - Operation defensive shield 2003 - Israel begins building wall around Jerusalem Geneva Accords

1993/5- Oslo Accords

1987 - First intifida

1982/3 - Invasion of Lebanon

1978 - Camp David accords 1979 - Israel- Egypt treaty of peace

Six day war: Israel captures old city 1970- War of attrition

1956-1967 Suez crisis

1973- Yom Kippur War 1974/5 - Egyptian Israeli disengagement

Phase#3 / Boundary etching

1948 Arab-Israel War 1949 - Ceasefire line (green line) Israel takes all ofwest Jerusalem

1987- proclamation independent palestinian state

1948- Israeli declaration of Independance 1947- UN partition plan

Jordanian Rule

British Rule 1916-1949

123

Fig.4.5.14 Typical Settlement Pattern (Shoshan, 2010, p.162)

Area A Area B Area C Jerusalem

10km

Fig.4.5.15 Political zones of The West Bank

124

125

250m Fig.4.5.16 1967 Plans for the Old city (Sharon, n.d.)

Fig.4.5.17 1967 Preservation Plans for the Old city (Sharon, n.d.)

126

127

Fig.4.5.18 Settlement Plans for the west Bank (Shoshan, 2010)

5km

128

Phase#6 / Unifying, but not integrating

Phase#4 / Concretizing

Phase#5 / Consolidating

Al-Aqsa Intifida 2000 - Camp david summit 2001 - Mitchell report 2002 - Operation defensive shield 2003 - Israel begins building wall around Jerusalem Geneva Accords

1993/5- Oslo Accords

1987 - First intifida

1982/3 - Invasion of Lebanon

1978 - Camp David accords 1979 - Israel- Egypt treaty of peace

Six day war: Israel captures old city 1970- War of attrition

1973- Yom Kippur War 1974/5 - Egyptian Israeli disengagement

Phase#3 / Boundary etching

1948 Arab-Israel War 1949 - Ceasefire line (green line) Israel takes all ofwest Jerusalem

1956-1967 Suez crisis

Israeli Occupation Israeli state rule of control Jerusalem Peace negotiations

Israeli State

65 100 / 99 400

114 800 / 292 300

1976 - Land expropriation and demolitions begin

Checkpoints An intricate system of checkpoints, surveillance towers and gates litter the road network as well as parts of the wall. The visually present military security creates an unpleasant atmosphere for communities on the exterior of the wall, not to mention the difficulties in efficiently passing through these spaces. Transport Jerusalem currently has two parallel bus networks, one for each population. In 2000 a plan was made for a light rail network which would effectively connect all of east and west Jerusalem. The first line has been implemented and is working well. The centre of Life Policy The Centre of Life Policy created in 1966 makes sure that Palestinian residency in Jerusalem can easily be taken away. If Palestinians are not able to prove Jerusalem as the practical centre of their life, in terms of residency, services, and work, their permits could be taken away. When the condition of the wall was implemented, many Palestinians feared their communities would be isolated and as a result individuals would lose their residency rights in Jerusalem. Many people migrated to the interior boundaries of the city, adding extra pressure to the already overpopulated neighbourhoods.

1980- Jewish Settlement of East Jerusalem 1967- Jerusalem extends boundary to include east Jerusalem ( now municipal boundary)

Peacebuilding

Level 3

Peacebuilding

Level 2

2005 - Jerusalem 2020 Masterplan 2005 - National Parks Plan 2000 - Jerusalem transportation masterplan

1994- Jerusalem Masterplan (rejected)

1995- E1 plan Palestine 2015 Master Plan 1994- Creation of Palestinian Ministry of Planning

1980- strict zoning laws applied

1975 - Gilo construction begins

1965 - Shu’fat refugee camp established

1950 - Jerusalem Outline Plan

1966- Jordanian Planning System

n Palestine

208 700 / 448 800

1970 - Israeli Centralized Planning

tline Plans

anning

Conflict Phases 4&5: Concretizing and consolidating A number of typical measures are used in Jerusalem to isolate and divideAHLC for the sake of ‘security’ Hoc of which infrastructure,Ad walls and militarizing of Liaison Committee space are the most prominent.

formed to oversee funding United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East 1949- UN involvement 1973- American pressure on conflict resolution International Funding 2007- Decolonizing architecture 2004- Ir Amim 2002- UNESCO civil societies programme 2002- FAST Foundation for achieving seamless territory 2000 - Arab centre for alternative planning 1999 - BIMKOM planners for planning rights 1998 - IPPC International Peace and cooperation centre 1997- Israeli committee against house demolitions

1994- Ir Shalem established

1989- B’Tselem

1978- Peace Now

The wall Israel began construction of the wall around Jerusalem in 2003. The claim states the wall is merely a safety measure against violent attacks from Palestinian areas. The wall effectively circles Israeli neighbourhoods and isolates Palestinian areas in the west Bank. 1990- Applied research institute - Jerusalem

1987- proclamation independent palestinian state

1948- Israeli declaration of Independance 1947- UN partition plan

Jordanian Rule

129

Roads and Tunnels A number of different typologies of roads are used in Jerusalem. Roads with walls in the centre to divide Palestinian and Israeli traffic, Large earth mounds next to roads, Israeli only roads, and highways and tunnels over and under Palestinian infrastructure. The opposing side to this is that Palestinian roads remain unkept and primitive.

Fig.4.5.19 Construction of the Wall (Shoshan, 2010, p.415)

130

131

Jerusalem Municipal Boundary Jerusalem Metropolitan West Jerusalem Green Line Wall built Wall Planned Palestinian neighborhoods Jewish Neighborhoods

Fig.4.5.20 The wall

West Jerusalem East Jerusalem

2km

132

133

Fig.4.5.22 Observation towers (Shoshan, 2010, p.418)

Checkpoints Gates Earth Mound Observation Tower

2km

Fig.4.5.21 Military occupation of space

Jerusalem Municipal Boundary Jerusalem Metropolitan West Jerusalem Green Line Wall built Wall Planned

Fig.4.5.23 Road Walls and mounds (Shoshan, 2010, p.419)

134

135

2km

Palestinian neighborhoods Tunnel under Palestinian territory Road Block Israeli road only Road wall Light rail Jerusalem Municipal Boundary Jerusalem Metropolitan West Jerusalem

Fig.4.5.23 Infrastructural barriers and light rail connections

Fig.4.5.24 The Jerusalem Transportation Masterplan (ROM tranport, 2000)

136

Income

Public Space

Employed

420 shekels / month

52%

960 shekels / month

Upkept infrastructure

Income

Strong industrial centres

33%

Good connection with greater area

Public Space

Centrally planned neighborhoods

Employed

Capitalist society

in a repetitive manner; single houses with back yards. Most development takes place in this Third World Society manner, therefore providing no culturally sensitive housing patterns for the other population. As both populations grow in size, they face separate issues. For the Jewish it is the international presMultiple localities sure not to build settlements in certain areas, and Neighborhoods for Palestinians it is the difficulty in expanding Weak connection their traditional villages. Master plans have been with greater area created for most Israeli areas, but not for some PalNo Industry estinian villages. In order to gain building permits, Weak Infrastructure a very long and expensive trajectory of creating a master plan and applying for the permit must be followed. Often these are rejected. The result is another type of typology: Illegal building and consequent demolitions.

Community spatial impact The conflict in Jerusalem is extreme not only due to the planning measures for settlement, but also because of the large cultural population changes. Today we face a Jerusalem which is almost entirely Jewish in the west and a mixture of scattered Palestinian villages and Jewish localities in the east. Atop of this is the extreme fragmentation of the eastern part due to infrastructure and the wall itself. The isolation experienced by communities ranges from proximity to an opposing culture, isolation due to infrastructure or walls, refugee status, or a combination of all of the above. It is an extremely complex system of divisions spanning far beyond a single concrete barrier. Typologies of deprived communities The traditional Palestinian community grows out of a clustering of houses. As families grow, they tend to build their homes around the original house to stay close to one another. This forms a system of courtyards which then responds to a linear arrangement of services and commercial functions. This type of construction has very few similarities with the modern western way of development utilized in new Jewish settlements. Often these are set up in a radial manner, atop hilltops, and

Fig.4.5.27 Composition of the Traditional Palestinian House (Ghadban, n.d.)

Fig.4.5.25 Construction and percentage of illegality (Margalit, 2006, p.28)

Fig.4.5.26 Illegal construction typology (Shoshan, 2010)

137

138

refugee camps are the other variety of typology in Jerusalem. The main camp, existent since the 1960â&#x20AC;&#x2122;s is Shuâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;afat refugee camp in the north east. Below are some examples of those typologies, as well as a map of the location. This map in particular shows the proximity, but also polar differences of Palestinian and Jewish neighbourhoods. One can see that in some areas both types of communities are isolated due to their entrapment alongside each other. The most deprived of the two types are most often the Palestinian enclaves, since there has been a deliberate movement to isolate with the construction of the walls.

Liveability issues vary in severity, but the following list gives an idea of the problems:

Fig.4.5.28 Refugee camp 1948, (Shoshan, 2010, p.143)

Fig.4.5.29 Refugee camp 2010, (Shoshan, 2010, p.144)

- Lack of public spaces in the east - Lack of industry, services, employment (East) - Low economic status in the east - Structural, physical, military barriers - Lack of growth possibility / lack of space - Lack of self control over development - Basic needs not met in some areas - Broken connections to hinterland and centre - Demolitions

Beit Hanina Pisgat Zeef

Reknes Shufat

Fig.4.5.30 Community typologies (Google. 2012)

Shufat refugee camp

500m

139

N Beit Liqya, Beit Surik Anata and Shu'afat Refugee Camp

Bir Nabala Giv’at Ze’ev

Al Walaja

Nkhalin

Al Eizariya, Abu Dis, As Sawahira Ash Sharqiya

Low

Degree of Pressure High

Isolated Enclave Jerusalem Municipal Boundary Jerusalem Metropolitan West Jerusalem Green Line Wall built Wall Planned

2km

Fig.4.5.31 Degrees of pressure

140

Al-Aqsa I 2000 - Camp dav 2001 - Mitchell r 2002 - Operation 2003 - Israel beg Geneva

1993/5- Oslo Acc

1987 - First intifid

1982/3 - Invasion

1978 - Camp Dav 1979 - Israel- Egy

Six day war: Isra 1970- War of attr

1973- Yom Kippur 1974/5 - Egyptian

1956-1967 Suez

1948 Arab-Israel 1949 - Ceasefire

alestinian state

ndependance partition plan

r Declaration

n Agreement

Israeli Occupation Israeli state rule of control Jerusalem Peace negotiations

Israeli State

65 100 / 99 400

114 800 / 292 300

1970 - Israeli Centralized Planning

Brittish Regional Outline Plans Town and country planning

1976 - Land expropriation and demolitions begin

1980- Jewish Settlement of East Jerusalem 1967- Jerusalem extends boundary to include east Jerusalem ( now municipal boundary)

Peacebuilding

Level 2

2005 - Jerusalem 2020 Masterplan 2005 - National Parks Plan 2000 - Jerusalem transportation masterplan

1994- Jerusalem Masterplan (rejected)

1995- E1 plan Palestine 2015 Master Plan 1994- Creation of Palestinian Ministry of Planning

1975 - Gilo construction begins

1980- strict zoning laws applied

1965 - Shuâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;fat refugee camp established

1950 - Jerusalem Outline Plan

1966- Jordanian Planning System

1903- JNF begins purchasing land in Palestine

Peacebuilding

208 700 / 448 800

Level 3

31 000 / 30 000

Track I

141

Jordanian Rule

British Rule 1916-1949

AHLC

1916- British pressure on conflict resolution

The governmental powers of planning lie primarily in the hands of Israeli authorities. The manner in which international organizations respond to this will determine their role and scope of possible effects. The next pages will frame the existing local and international actors. It will discuss the ongoing projects for each actor and their areas of intervention. This will show which actors are influencing the most deprived communities. The manner in which they relate to one another, their goals, and instruments will be explained in the section following the plan actor analysis.

Jerusalem has had one of the longest running involvements of international assistance, which seems only to be increasing in power, with little decrease in the conflict.

1989- Bâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Tselem

4.6 Plan actor analysis

1990- Applied research institute - Jerusalem

1978- Peace Now

Track One peacebuilding International Funding NGO

1994- Ir Shalem established

International Planning

142

143

National Planning Commission Israeli Ministry of Interior

Centralized top down Israeli Planning

developmental/initiative

procedural/regulative

develop and promote sustainable patterns of land use, roads, open spaces and forests

Planning and Building Law of 1965 Zoning & Spatial master plans

Quasi- Governmental

network uses ‘partisan mutual adjustment’ to speed up planning process. (Wari,2011)

Central Bureau of Statistics Israel Land Administration Jewish National Fund Purchasing body of Palestinian Land Ministry of industry Ministry of Housing and construction Ministry of finance & defence

Jerusalem local and district planning committees Area C

Area B Jordanian Planning Law [1966] As amended by military powers Palestinian District Planning committees Local Palestinian Planning committees

Planning and Building Law of 1965

Area A Palestinian Planning authority

Israeli settlements planning comittee

Plan-Actor I: Government Jerusalem, including the eastern undefined portion, is governed by the Israeli government. Structure of Planning The Israeli National Planning commission functions in a top down centralized manner. There are two branches. That of the procedural and regulative zoning branch, and that of sustainable development. These national branches create the master plans for the entire region as well as on a local city scale. Local and district planning committees then implement these plans. Conditions vary for east and west Jerusalem. The west, designated as Area C by the Oslo Accords, uses the planning and building Law set up by Israel in 1965. Area B Still incorporates the Jordanian Planning Law derived from the time of Jordanian rule. However, the Israeli government has adjusted this system so that no Palestinian representatives are acting on any scale of government. All of the plans executed in the area are being done through the Israeli settlements planning committee. Aside from these official planning bodies, a number of governmental and non-governmental bodies act to facilitate or influence planning. For example, the Jewish National Fund acquires land through international investment and the bureau for statistics has been accused of misrepresentation of population statistics. Aside from this, military and political goals also influence planning. This type of set up is what creates frustration for some planning officials working within government. Currently, planning is under the direction of an imbalanced government, with different goals than a non partisan planner might have. Master plan rejection The 1968 and 1994 master plans created by the Israeli department of planning were both rejected. These plans exhibited the desire of planners to plan a ‘compact’ city containing a better dispersal of functions. However, these ideas did not coincide with desires of politicians to disperse the Jewish population through residential development. This meant that no complete master plan, other than

the settlement strategies, were approved since the 1950 outline plan. In 2004, another Master plan was created and is currently not approved and only published in Hebrew, not Arabic. Many planning decisions are in reality political decisions imposed on planners. An interview based paper (Allegra and Rokem, 2011) shows governmental planners realize the lack of public space, amenities, services and industry lacking in east Jerusalem. They have also recognized the planning of settlements at times to be planned in politically strategic locations rather than geographical and beneficial for the community. The Palestinian Authority The Officially recognized government of Palestine is the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), but during the Oslo Accords, a body was set up on a five year interim to take responsibility of Area A and partially B. This body, The Palestinian Authority would be supported by international aid in order to create the potential for a stronger government and eventually control over more land. Today that period has still not ended, and the Palestinian governmental and planning infrastructure is still quite weak and dependent on international aid. So although this authority has no immediate power over east Jerusalem, it is important to mention their development as a result of international intervention, and their perhaps ‘intended’ future authority over some of Jerusalem.

144

1km Fig.4.6.1 Jerusalem masterplan

145

1km

500m

Fig.4.6.2 National Parks Scheme (Sharon, 2005) Jerusalem 2020 The current Master plan aims to implement a cohesive Jerusalem in this new peace building phase. However, many critics suggest population calculations are false and the plan will not sufficiently be able to accommodate the large Arab populations. No industry is being added to the eastern part. Tourism, however is of importance for development. Despite the critique, the plan is seen by planners as a compact planning strategy which finally does address other functions, a positive change since the many years of residential dispersal.

Part of the master plan is The concept for a national parks scheme. This entails a large amount of green zoning in the east of Jerusalem. Much of area zoned to be green is currently built up. The government offers no explanation as to the future of these urban areas.

146

The ring road Currently, national government has given approval for the northern and southern parts of a ring road to be built. This road should connect the suburbs and eastern part of Jerusalem with the centre. This should be a positive move of connectivity within the city, like the new light rail system. However, the wall cuts through a significant part of the ring road, and it currently connects neighbourhoods in the east to one another, but not to the centre.

Fig.4.6.3 Ring Road Jerusalem Plan (APJP, 2012)

E1 Plan The E1 plan is currently being executed. Infrastructure is being placed for the future expansion of Jerusalem. Once this development is finished, it will further separate Palestinian residents from the rest of the West Bank. Passage will be possible via one road directly through the development, but it has not yet been built. The wall will fully circle the development, enclosing it completely. These measures are currently seen as illegal, but are still being executed, not to mention the bedouin communities living there which are being demolished.

147

Palestinian neighborhoods Israeli zoning Zoned as green palestinian zoning Future settlements Jerusalem Municipal Boundary Jerusalem Metropolitan West Jerusalem Wall Wall Planned

2km

Fig.4.6.4 Government planning for future expansion

148

149

Plan-Actor II: International Funding Programs The main trend found in aid for Israel-Palestine in that the it is focused on Palestine. A triangle structure results, where three parties are involved separately rather than Aid being directed towards one geographical area.

d Ai

UNESCO

Israel

PA Low

Funding before the Oslo Accords Beginning in the 1970’s, the main donors to the Palestinians were the EU and the US, along with a number of Arab states. The competing nature of funding between the EU and the US called for a new structure post Oslo Accords. Funding after the Oslo Accords Palestine Officially began receiving International funding after the Oslo Accords. A great amount of this had to do with the support for a proper Palestinian authority setup. Today, Palestine is the number one recipient of International Aid. A large majority of the world has sponored the buildup of a palestinian nation.

Fig.4.6.5 Emergency Aid to Gaza 2009 (Wikipedia, 2009)

Degree of Pressure High

Area of work Jerusalem Municipal Boundary Jerusalem Metropolitan West Jerusalem Green Line

Fig.4.6.6 Focus of International organizations and deprived areas Funding by international organizations took place through the setup of an Ad Hoc Liaison committee who makes sure all international funding is distributed properly. Some funds still get deposited towards NGOs, but in much smaller quantities since the Oslo accords. The general conception by international organization is that they are not organized or large enough to manage some of the large political changes that need to occur. Some of the organizations, the largest being the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East, and UNESCO, are working on a more localized and direct scale.

INTERNATIONAL FUNDING FOR PALESTINE

Implementors

Involved

1970-1993

USAID EU ARAB LEAGUE UN

NGO’s

1994-1998

1999-2003

2008-2010

2.5 Billion

2 Billion

7.7 Billion

USAID EU WORLD BANK UNESCO UN ARAB LEAGUE

AHLC

Ad Hoc Liaison Committee

Funding lowered for NGO’s increased for PA

AHLC

Ad Hoc Liaison Committee

AHLC

Ad Hoc Liaison Committee

150

151

Plan actor III: NGOs The NGO sector is the most spatially active within communities in Jerusalem. It is also a very divided and internationalized system. NGOs typically do not function in a neutral manner, nor do IO’s. The main branches of Palestinian focused NGOs is the need for basic human living rights, as well as planning rights. There is also an abundance of Israeli NGOs, focusing on the same goals as the Palestinian NGOs. However, only some of these NGOs work on intercommunity relations or cross border initiatives. As most of their funding is derived from international donors, NGOs in Jerusalem are highly influenced by the focus of international funding. The organizations shown in the figure below will be explained on the next pages according to their primary concern.

Physical Change

Awareness

Low

Degree of Pressure High

Area of work Jerusalem Municipal Boundary Jerusalem Metropolitan West Jerusalem Green Line

Fig.4.6.7 Focus of NGO organizations and deprived areas

Local / International

NGO

Israeli

Palestinian Rights

Control

Peacebuilding

Basic Rights

NGO MONITOR

PEACE NOW IR AMIM IPPC

B’TSELEM RIWAQ

NGO Planning Rights

Right to the city BIMKOM ARAB CENTRE FOR ALTERNATIVE PLANNING FAST

Fig.4.6.8 Structure of NGO focus

INTERNATIONAL FUNDING FOR PALESTINE 1967-1971

1994-1998

1999-2003

2008-2010

2.5 Billion

2 Billion

7.7 Billion

USAID EU WORLD BANK UNESCO UN ARAB LEAGUE

USAID EU WORLD BA UNESCO UN ARAB LEAG

152

Right to the City The power of planning in Jerusalem is internationally recognized and is therefore also a large portion of the NGO agenda. Both Israeli and Palestinian NGOs exist challenging the current partisan system. BIMKOM is one of the largest organizations challenging planning discourse. One of the latest implementations has been the service of planning skills and assistance to deprived communities and grassroots organizations. One of the manners in which they work is to partner with communities to create plans in a participatory manner. These are then submitted to the legal planning system for approval. Often these are alternative proposals to existing zoning plans, like the village of Issawaya.

Fig.4.6.9 Issawaya Master Plan (BIMKOM, 2006)

Basic Rights The majority of NGOs focus on the basic rights of a perceivably deprived Palestinian population. Bâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Tselem is a human rights organization working on an international scale to promote the rights of Palestinians. The international aspect is of importance because Bâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Tselem hereby acts as an information and feedback tool for international donors. Their main tool is to empower the population through awareness, data collection, protests, appeals to government,and more. Riwaq is also concerned with the socioeconomic status of Palestinians, but chooses to pursue improvement through establishing heritage conservation areas. With funds directed towards these, it is easier to benefit the direct community. Also, by establishing, recognizing, and labelling Palestinian heritage, and in some cased working to preserve, it becomes much harder to be demolished.

Fig.4.6.10 Snapshot Annual report (RIWAQ, 2011)

153

Peacebuilding IR AMIN creates awareness through touring with international visitors, and by exposing actions taken by current government on an international scale. This type of awareness creation helps to halt projects like E1. Ir amin is an Israeli NGO, but fights for development to happen on a fair, commonly planned basis. They are extremely active in the media and in supporting / building civil society power. Physical change is happening more on the peripheries of Jerusalem. Because the city is still the most contested territory and most controlled area of Israel- Palestine, NGOs are having more success implementing changes and master plans in rural Palestinian villages. FAST is one of these international NGOs working on the village Ein Hawd to recreate a healthy community. Control As a response to the activity of NGOs, the government of Israel has taken some measure in hindering their work. Throughout time NGO activity has been quite turbulent due to occasional shut downs. One of the measure used for doing this is the NGO monitor. The organization was formed in Jerusalem after accusations of violations of human rights were directed at Israel. The group critically reviews activities of organizations such as BIMKOM and B’Tselem, publishing reports on the affects and funding procedures of these organizations. “NGO Monitor’s objective is to end the practice used by certain self-declared ‘humanitarian NGOs’ of exploiting the label ‘universal human rights values’ to promote politically and ideologically motivated agendas”(NGO Monitor, 2012) Fig.4.6.11 FAST project for Ein Hawd (FAST, n.d.)

154

Fund

IO 155

Palestine

Tense relationship

GOV

Israeli

GOV

Israel-Palestine is still divided. Physically and politically. This unstable platform makes non partisan intervention impossible.

NGO

Impl

Grassroots

Com

Lack of

Grassroots

IO NGO

NGO

Israeli

Planning Rights

Palestinian Rights

4.7 The Jerusalem international planning system International Advocacy In the case of Jerusalem, International funding does not have much direct affect on communities, other than directing geographical focus. Only some spatial interventions are being made by NGOs. Plan-Actor 1: Government Critique The political situation in Jerusalem is the leading factor for international involvement. Of course this goes hand in hand with the umbrella terms of ‘liveability’ and ‘community development.’ The international community responds to the need of the most deprived, which in this case is internationally recognized as being the Palestinian population. The repercussion of this is the perceived political alliance to one actor of the conflict. How organizations choose to execute their role comes with much critique from the Israeli government. This unbalanced scenario will be discussed in the following pages. Plan-Actor 4: Civil Society/Grassroots Palestinian residents living in East Jerusalem are somewhat trapped in their own status. To the rest of the West Bank they are viewed as wealthier since they have access to Jerusalem and some of the benefits of living there. But at the same time, they do not have all the rights Israeli citizens have. They are merely ‘residents’ and must exercise care not to lose this status with its privileges. This is also the main reason why little grassroots have popped out of the deprived communities. There is a general fear for status loss leading to a disorganized society. Atop this, Israeli government has taken measures to remove Palestinian power over many of the religious, common, and public spaces. These spatial changes affect the potential for civil society to gather.

4.7.1 Structure of International Planning

GOV The diagram above shows how international planning is incorporated into the civil and governmental structure of Israel-Palestine. In thisGrassroots case, there IO is a very strong bond of the international planning network with the Palestinian NGOgovernment, and an opposing tense relationship with the stronger power of the Israeli government. The NGO network is diverse, focusing on many aspects of PalestinianInternational suffering, and using a variety of methods to advocate and provide aid. The civil society secPlanning tor is extremely weak amongst Palestinians, making the bond between NGOs and grassroots of high importance.

T which Plann

Local NGOs working Internationally The unique aspect of NGOs in Israel-Palestine is that they are not just international non-governmental organizations working on a local scale with communities, but also local organizations working on an international GOV awareness scale for local communities.

Grassroots

IO derivative of the phase of the conThis is a direct flict. Because Jerusalem is not yet in a stable unitNGOinternational awareness ed and peaceful scenario, becomes a tool for further improvement. GOV-1

GOV-2 Grassroots

IO NGO

Fig.4.7.1 Structure of different actors

G IO

156

157

Goals

Local / International

Control

NGO

Israeli

Palestinian Rights

Peacebuilding

Basic Rights

PEACE NOW IR AMIM IPPC

B’TSELEM RIWAQ

NGO MONITOR Instruments

NGO

Research and mapping

NGO Planning Rights

Right to the city BIMKOM ARAB CENTRE FOR ALTERNATIVE PLANNING FAST Advocacy

Re-analyzing Data heritage led regeneration Physical Intervention

Critical Awareness

FUNDINGsystem FOR PALESTINE 4.7.2 Goals ofINTERNATIONAL the International Planning 4.7.3 Instruments of the International Planning system

The goals of the international planning system in The above diagram illustrates the different instru1999-2003 1967-1971 Jerusalem can be grouped into three categories: 1994-1998 ments utilized by International organizations in creating planning change. They will 2 Billion be explained 2.5 Billion Palestine support, in the form of Basic human in detail below: rights and Planning rights. Advocacy USAID USAID Peace building, in the form of equal opportunitiesEUDue to the lack of a strong civil EU society, advocacy for both populations. becomes the main instrument used BANK by InternaWORLD BANK WORLD tional planning. UNESCO UNESCO Israel Support, In the form of control over theUN UN non-governmental sector working with Palestin-ARAB Critical Awareness / reanalysing ARAB data LEAGUE LEAGUE ians. This is the only branch supported by the Awareness practices are focused on exposing the dominant Israeli government. realistic implications of government actions. Often government figures and data are not 100% AHLC The positive aspect of this branch of NGO work is AHLC accurate, providing work for organizations to exHoc Ad Hoc that it does raise the question of NGO evaluation. Adpose the real scenario. Liaison Liaison Because many of the NGOs are working with the Committee Committee most oppressed and weakest population, it is valu- Research and mapping able to address the tools used by NGOs. Many of the organizations not acting directly within communities, are choosing to practice awareness through extensive research and mapping. This instrument deserves its own category Funding lowered for NGO’sseparate increasedfrom for PA awareness because mapping of the spatial occupation is the main visual communicator of organizations on an international scale.

“We hope this will lead to an informed public debate on the role of humanitarian NGOs” (NGO monitor, n.d.)

The first two strands are the most common and are beginning to create connections amongst one another, but in the larger scope of the NGO sector, one can see that it remains divided in its goal setting.

Physical Intervention Physical intervention by international planning takes place separately from government actions. Final approval is sought through government, but the master planning is often a reaction to government plans, or lack there of. Heritage led regeneration Cultural heritage is one of the main concerns of planners as occupation and housing demolition continues. Heritage conservation is therefore an important tool in building a Palestinian spatial identity as well as strategically protecting areas. It may also be used to regenerate an area with physical security and give it economic social development potential.

2008-2010

7.7 Billion

USAID EU WORLD UNESCO UN ARAB LE

AHLC

Ad Hoc Liaison Committee

158

4.7.4 Critique of International Planning

Peacebuilding is a long term process In 1993, post Oslo, donors agreed to fund money towards the Palestinian Authority in order to strengthen and build up a proper governmental structure. This was one of the largest disappointments, as donors had not properly evaluated the existing structure. The creation of this new body conflicted with existing structures of governance, such as the Palestine Liberation Army, and also experienced a much longer term build up than was initially planned for.

Cohesion in intervention strategies is important “The decade since the Oslo peace process was launched in 1993 has seen the clear emergence of an international consensus around the idea of a two-state solution as the best option for peace in the middle east.” (Le More, 2005, p.981)

Competing Donors and directing funding properly In the very beginning of the peace process, donors experienced significant friction between competing bodies of the EU and US. With the entrance of more donors post-Oslo, system needed to be devised which would distribute all of the funds. This body soon recognized the need for another body on the ground at a local scale, since the connection between International funds and distribution to grassroots and NGOs was strained.

International funding structures at one point directed a large amount of funds towards direct aid and NGO support. However, with economic crisis inside of the PA structure, funds were redirected in the political direction. NGOs face a difficult struggle as they are subject to goal setting of International donors, but also to constant critique from Israeli policy and government.

International Planning will be slow if political power is not recognized. “Just as the legacies of the Israeli occupation determine the social and economic imperatives facing Palestinian planners, so too contemporary israeli policy has had profound effects onthe current process of development assistance” (Brynan, 1996, p.87) Due to fluctuations in political actions, international organizations have had to react accordingly, often delivering short time emergency aid. This type of turbulence keeps international planning grounded in sustaining basic needs rather than aiding future development. The donor groups consistently state their funds are supporting the ‘peace process’ in Israel-Palestine, a somewhat ignorant notion considering the real processes on the ground. The desire for a two state solution put forward by international funding does not match up with the actions of the Israeli government.

Donor structures interfere with NGO structures Simultaneously, preconceived agreements by the funding bodies about the right solution gave little freedom to NGOs.

Funding should not take over government responsibility The money contributed to the Jerusalem economy directly benefits the ruling government. Ignoring political responsibility in resolving the conflict results in the normalization of aid. “When under international humanitarian law, Israel, as the occupying power, should be responsible for delivering assistance and services to the Palestinian population.” (Le More, 2005, p.993). This is now a serious problem in Jerusalem, since so much aid has been directed towards the area for so long without much political change. Funding does not have to be neutral, but it should recognize all parties “The international community failed to put forward a plan to integrate fully the ‘Israeli’ factor into the peace implementation and Palestinian state-building equation.”(Le More, 2005,p.96) The unbalanced political planning nature of the conflict will need to addressed in total if any two state solution is to be achieved.

By labelling the conflict as an emergency situation, it takes away the understanding that it is not a special circumstance, but rather embedded in decades of political development. Conventional mechanism of participation don’t work. Inter community participation does not take place in Jerusalem. Participation with civil society is exercised in the form of one identity communities. Once again the participation taking place is only with Palestinian communities. Inter NGO participation is beginning to take place since many of these NGOs have a common goal of equal rights. Here we see in the case of Israel cross community methods are only taking place within organizations, rather than in civil society. UNESCO is one example of difficulty in participating with government. The organization itself has been critical of excavations and measures taken by the Israeli government, as likewise the government has not been happy with releasing control over some sites.

FUNDING

two state solution

PEACE

Financial power

NGO

Right to the city Basic Rights Peacebuilding

Control

DIVIDED Focused on Seperate Rights

Fig.4.7.2 Inconsistent goals of funding and NGO work.

4.7.5 Role of the International Planning

4.7.6 Performance of International Planning

The stage of conflict in which Jerusalem currently resides means any general approach or instrument by an external actor will function very differently. We see in Jerusalem an even stronger need to establish norms through a focus on Palestinian rights and livability in the sense of their position within the Jerusalem municipality.

The imbalance of planning measures and government action in Jerusalem produces international planning which is more focused on changing this system rather than physical interventions. In order to achieve an urgent upgrading of basic needs, international actors have had to respond primarily to the structure of planning within the local context in order to achieve the spatial changes necessary for the deprived communities.

International organizations have largely focused on directing funding towards the Palestinian authority and smaller amounts towards NGO initiatives. The de-centralized role they have chosen to take here creates tension with the Israeli government, hereby assuring the goal for a united Jerusalem will be difficult to achieve. International planning in Jerusalem is not neutral. Although the goal projected in unity and peace building, it is only being done through addressing one party. Advocacy and awareness is one of the aspects which transcends the international planning roles in Jerusalem more than in Belfast. Because in this case NGOs are often also working to make funding bodies aware of the real situation. These organizations are working closely with communities and often have different opinions on the process of intervention that should take place.

The small physical interventions which do take place are also attempting to influence the planning system in the form of master plans. Plans which are then submitted to government in an attempt to alter small parts of a larger zoning plan. The largest amount of work is being put into the arresting of large scale planning and spatial change, in order to give Palestinian deprived communities the room to develop. One of the greatest struggles being to preserve the remaining connections for Palestinian communities to Jerusalem and the greater west bank, and to prevent further isolation. Because Jerusalem does not have a strong Palestinian civil sector, the role of international organizations in building capacity becomes increasingly crucial. Most physical change comes from the grassroots actor, so they should be supported. We can see that NGOs are doing so by exercising participatory methods and forming master plans together with communities. New techniques, such as heritage conservation, are imparted as planning knowledge to communities in order to help them develop. Physical change is also difficult to achieve because the international planning network does not support full communication between all actors. With the largest local planning power not being included in the spectrum, little spatial change is seen. NGOs are affective in their practices, but still miss a link amongst one another and a better relation with donor bodies. However, steps are being made to improve this. UNESCO funded an initiative in 2002 named â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;civil societiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; in order to stimulate communication and dialogue between NGOs. Regardless, international planning is very difficult at this stage, leaving planning to have minimal developmental affect on communities.

159

160

161

05.

Conclusions

The following chapter will discuss my final conclusions. The conclusions are based on the findings of the case studies as well as a reflection on the theories of International planning researched previously. A short summary of the thesis aim, methodology, and research questions will precede the conclusions. 5.1 Aim and method Contested space, divided cities, and ethnic conflict amongst communities is currently at an all time high. Development aid has also grown along with this situation, to the extent that international involvement in conflict situations is considered the norm. Peace building, livability, emergency aid, development assistance, these terms are frequent staples of the International planning community vocabulary. The communities which motivate their interference are often the most deprived and weak. The presence of a third planning party to aid these communities is a positive aspect. However, this third party must also be held accountable for their performance, especially when the large power structure they embody is affecting the weak infrastructure of these communities. To pursue this aim, a set of guiding principles were followed, including an understanding of the spatial affects of conflict on communities. Which historical, political, cultural and spatial processes contribute to the current liveability issues in deprived communities? An analysis of the relations among different actors and finally the analysis of the spatial problems and actions taken by individual international plan-actors informed the conclusions on the performance of international planning. These aims led to the formulation of the following research questions:

The conclusions will reflect on the literature research derived from the sub-research question, as well as the more practical knowledge from the case study research. The case studies selected were Jerusalem and Belfast. Both cases exhibit similarities in the type of conflict, dealing mostly with an ethnic- political issue, playing out directly within communities. However, the study was not meant to be comparative, but an investigation into the different roles and performances reflected against two different stages of conflict. In section two and three conclusions were drawn concerning the approaches of planning in conflict, and the instruments used by International planners. These two components describe how international planning should behave and how the planners would like to behave. The final conclusions will address the main research question concerning the role and performance of international planning. The role of international planning can be regarded as how international planning does behave. This conclusion reflected against the theory will provide the complete profile of international planning.

Approaches of Planning in conflict

Theory 01 Theorhetical: How should they behave

Accept Planning role, Mediation, neutrality is unattainable, participatory strategies. Instruments of the international organization

Theory 02 Functional: How would they like to behave?

Centrality & Independance, Neutrality, Mediation, Advocacy and Awareness, Capacity building, Participation. Role and Performance

Main research question

What has been the role and performance of international planning in affecting the conditions of ethnically divided communities? Sub research questions What constitutes the context of a divided community, and how should international conflict planning be carried out here according to literature? Case study research questions How did the conflict emerge, and what has been the spatial impact in communities? Which local and international actors contribute to the current development interventions? What has been the role of International planning in this conflict? What has been the performance of international planning, particularly in their liveability affects on the communities?

Based on theorie Brendan Murtagh Calame (2009)

Case studies Functional: How do they behave?

Based on theories Michael Barnett (1 (2009), Julia Demi Kenneth Abbott (1

162

Research Question The Spatial affects of conflict in communities?

Conclusions Isolation

Physical barriers

Little Shared space

Deterioration of community structure

The role of International Planning in Conflict?

Evidence Infrastructure used to isolate lack of development in area further isolates physical barriers natural barriers enclaves inside walls grouping of communities isolating from one another waelthier class moves away: economic isolation isolation from access to centre and hinterland lack of routes to access spaces Transportation does not connect divided communities. Walls Millitary control and surveillance. Divided road networks. few pedestrian paths. no public or civic spaces few mixed functions left in neighborhoods new planning does not accomodate traditional living patterns Government planning ignores extremely divided spaces. demolition vacancy due to people fleeing the conflict little upkeep of public spaces

Implementation of Participatory methods Usage of community capacity Creation of awarness and advocacy are the MAIN tools Directs development through funding Helps structure government capacity Helps structure community capacity acts as a body in abscence of government Development of networks between actors in planning and civil society. Continued low socio-economic standing for communities Continued isolation in some cases. New forms of economic division rather than cultural difficulty in implementing shared space. difficulty executing inter community development physical change in communities IS happening, but not yet in the most deprived areas. naivite in affectiveness of participatory methods NOT ADRESSING UNDERLYING CAUSES OF CONFLICT

The Performance of International Planning in improving spatial and concrete community issues?

large amount of focus of international planning on planning rights and directing government restructuring. Long term affects are possible.

Spatial community Impact Fig.1.3.4 The table above shows the conclusions from comparing both case studies together. This is the first attempt to understand international planning in a broader sense. International Planning Structure of Planning

163

Approaches of Planning in conflict

5.2 Conclusions The following section will discuss the various roles and performances of international planning in greater detail. The roles and effects will be explained by referring to the instruments and approaches used or not used. 5.2.1 The role of international planning

When referring to the role of international planning, the desired conclusions will describe the role of international organizations as an actor in planning. They will address the function this (often non-urbanism related) actor has within the previously established â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;International planning systemâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;. The main objective of organisations is the establishment of international norms, a process which uses participatory processes. These are carried out through advocacy or mediation, which respectively focuses on single identity communities (one ethnicity) or inter community participation. These actions then produce a difference in the neutrality of international organisations.

Theory 01 Theorhetical: How should they behave

Accept Planning role, Mediation, neutrality is unattainable, participatory strategies.

Based on theories b Brendan Murtagh (2 Calame (2009)

Instruments of the international organization

Theory 02 Functional: How would they like to behave?

Centrality & Independance, Neutrality, Mediation, Advocacy and Awareness, Capacity building, Participation. Role

Conclusions Functional: How do they behave?

The planner of norms

The planner of norms The main role or objective of international planning responds to the main issue of the conflict; a lack of proper coping mechanisms to deal with deprived and conflicted communities. In most cases international planning uses participatory methods in order to strengthen and give voice to these deprived communities. A second reason for the use may be that participation is currently becoming a normative tool of planning. The role of establishing norms corresponds directly to the approaches and instruments discussed in literature. The strengths of an international organization are its independence and knowledge sharing capabilities. The independency of such a body means that it is not necessarily subject to political fluctuations, as was the case in Belfast. Despite the continued collapse of local government, the peace programs were able to continue. In the case of Jerusalem, where one part of the population is misrepresented, International planning attempts to equalize this by being an independent body apart from government. Instruments such as leading by example help to achieve this in a more fractured system such as Jerusalem. Most of the organizations exercise some way of direct participation. Even if it is not as successful as predicted, it helps local actors to recognize a potential in the use of participatory practices. Local planners become more capable of recognizing their role in conflicts. In most current cases, planning is either a force enhancing conflict, or does not realize its potential in working within conflict. This understanding of planning is what sustains the spatial deprivation for many communities. Bringing in knowledge, international norms, and introducing participatory strategies can therefore have great influence.

Based on theories b Michael Barnett (199 (2009), Julia Demiche Kenneth Abbott (199

164

Approaches of Planning in conflict

Theory 01 Theorhetical: How should they behave

Accept Planning role, Mediation, neutrality is unattainable, participatory strategies.

Based on theories by Frank Gaffikin(2011), Brendan Murtagh (2010) , and John Calame (2009)

Instruments of the international organization

Theory 02 Functional: How would they like to behave?

Centrality & Independance, Neutrality, Mediation, Advocacy and Awareness, Capacity building, Participation.

Based on theories by Kai Vockler (2010), Michael Barnett (1999) , Rebecca sutton (2009), Julia Demichelis (1998), and Kenneth Abbott (1998)

Role

Conclusions Functional: How do they behave?

Advocacy Planner Mediator

Advocate and/or Mediator? Often, the stage of the conflict affects the manner in which the establishment of norms is carried out. Belfast, for example, has more potential to mediate between communities than Jerusalem does because the governmental system is not partisan. In the case of Jerusalem, there is much lower desire by the government to improve the situation of its deprived inhabitants, resulting in the need for an advocate planner. Both roles are often exercised simultaneously, but in different degrees. Advocacy methods are used to level the power differentials. In both cases planners use their technical expertise to support the more deprived communities. When we look at cases of Belfast and Jerusalem where alternative master plans are published, exhibited, and submitted by NGO companies, we can see that this does influence local actors to question processes and potentially accept spatial alternatives. Advocacy also reaches an international scope when NGOs publicize their research and findings abroad. Mediation happens most often through the allocation of funding. Similarly to the unjust allocations of resources which historically instigated the conflict, Organizations must find a â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;fairâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; manner of intervening with their funding. Most opposing groups are more willing to participate with international organizations rather that local actors or government, due to their perceived impartiality. Mediation plays a large role in Belfast. In earlier stages of the peace building process, single identity work was still being done, but with negative results. This meant a fairly quick shift towards inter community peace building. Jerusalem currently only supports mediation between NGO companies, as the conflict is still too intense to facilitate inter community contact.

Questions of neutrality Mediation and advocacy are directly linked to neutrality. The strength of the organization is often its perceived neutrality. Thoughts surrounding conflict planning theory assert that neutrality is a manner in which to avoid the conflict. Local planners in Belfast have historically attempted to stay neutral, hereby making sure they rarely addressed the deprived neighbourhoods in fear of the intense conflict. Therefore, conflict planning theorists insist to remain neutral is to remain ineffective. On the other hand, International organizations cannot function without the perception of neutrality, and must therefore remain impartial. In the manner of mediation executed in both case studies we can see that it is indeed very important to exercise impartial mediation. In Belfast, earlier choices to focus on single identity community work caused more conflict. By not attempting to be central in their involvement in Jerusalem, and failing to recognize the Israeli factor, tension is heightened between the two sides.

165

Approaches of Planning in conflict

5.5.2 The Performance of international planning

The performance of International Planning is difficult to rate, as the case studies have offered very few concrete spatial interventions to discuss. This is the first significant finding of the case studies. The socioeconomic status of communities has seen only minor improvements. This leads us to question what has the role of the international planner been able to achieve and effect? Faludi (2010) defines planning as having performed successfully if it has affect on the actors towards whom it is directed. International planning has attempted to influence the process of planning through the network in which they exist. This occurs mostly through the capacity building of different actors and less through the method of physically intervening.

Theory 01 Theorhetical: How should they behave

Accept Planning role, Mediation, neutrality is unattainable, participatory strategies.

Based on theories Brendan Murtagh Calame (2009)

Instruments of the international organization

Theory 02 Functional: How would they like to behave?

Centrality & Independance, Neutrality, Mediation, Advocacy and Awareness, Capacity building, Participation. Performance

Conclusions Functional: How do they behave?

Process influence

Process influence The main goal of international planning has been to establish norms, and in this manner change the process of planning. For Belfast this meant changes in governmental perceptions of planning. Discussions with planning professionals in Belfast supported the conclusion that most of the change has been in the local perception of planning, and the creation of networks. [Through mediation and participation] Participatory strategies can be the means to planning physical changes, but in these cases, it was found to be affective in the formation of networks. The major critique which arises from the case studies is that the position of international influence in the existing network of actors could be better. In Belfast, international planning does not address the existence of a community group structure, attempting to establish new groups, where groups already exist. If the potential of these groups is recognized, international planning could have greater effect.

Based on theories Michael Barnett (19 (2009), Julia Demic Kenneth Abbott (19

166

Approaches of Planning in conflict

Theory 01 Theorhetical: How should they behave

Accept Planning role, Mediation, neutrality is unattainable, participatory strategies. Instruments of the international organization

Theory 02 Functional: How would they like to behave?

Centrality & Independance, Neutrality, Mediation, Advocacy and Awareness, Capacity building, Participation. Performance

Conclusions Functional: How do they behave?

Capacity building Spatial Change

Capacity building vs Spatial Change Process influence can happen in two manners; with the use of capacity building techniques so that the communities and government can improve themselves, or through spatial interventions. The image International organizations put forward is one which, at the surface, shows a strong inclination towards spatial interventions. However, this is not the case. Some physical change does occur, but the main purpose of this type of goal setting is to create awareness. The effect seen in the case studies shows that capacity building is the main result of international planning. Capacity building corresponds well with the notion of establishing norms and practicing participation. The main goal of implementing participatory strategies is to create connections, but secondary to this is to build capacity within communities and within government to steer these deprived populations in a better direction. We can see this being executed successfully in Jerusalem, where NGOs and IOâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s are working to support communities in creating their own master plans. Organizations also use heritage recognition and cultural growth activities to support the protection and creation of communities. All sorts of tools are implemented in order to help communities realize what their planning strengths could be. On a larger scale, international organizations are also attempting to support the structuring of a Palestinian government with international knowledge and funding. The long term goal being that they can eventually exercise more power over the development of Palestinian towns. One of the main critical points found in literature is the ignorance of an underlying cause to the con-

flict, and to do so can greatly hinder the process Based on theories by Frank Gaffikin(2011), of capacity building. organizations Brendan Murtagh (2010) , andInternational John Calamerespond (2009) often to the immediate liveability issues of communities, but do very little to help this community process and reflect on their history. Unless the root causes are tackled, most intervenBased on theories by Kai Vockler or (2010), tions will be temporary face an uphill battle. Michael Barnett (1999) , Rebecca sutton Because the time(1998), restrictions of many programs, (2009), Juliaof Demichelis and Kenneth Abbottthese (1998) issues is often not seen as the addressing most important aspect. However, conflict planning theory asserts this as being a very important approach to any intervention. If capacity building continues without this type of approach, it will continue to be affective only on the building of single identity communities. Inter community participation will continue to be an upward struggle, with the only physical change coming from cross boundary community groups rather than the interventions of international organizations. 5.6 Final conclusions International planning can be seen as a process in itself and the roles which are implemented are highly dependent on the stage of the conflict and stability of the local government. The diagram on the next page illustrates the process. Although spatial change is needed in high amounts, it did not occur in abundance. However, international planning was able to focus attention on the spatial issues. Additionally they were able to influence processes and communities in such a way that they have been introduced to new tools. Tools which can help them to build their own way to spatial change. So in conclusion, international planning works as an instigator of change, rather than a physical actor.

167

Capacity building Planner of norms Participatory processes

Advocacy planner

Mediator

Single identity communities

Inter community

Partisan

Neutrality

Impartial

Fig.1.2. The role structure and effect of international planning

Process influence Spatial change

168

169

Reflection. In order to reflect upon the results of my thesis I will return to the individual components of my research and discuss whether or not they were beneficial steps to take, supported one another sufficiently, and give an adequate answer to the original research questions. Component 1

Context The ethnically divided community

Component 2

Theory 01 The approaches of conflict planning

Component 3

Theory 02 The instruments of international organizations

Component 4

Case Studies The current execution of International Planning in conflict.

Component 5

Conclusions

A great deal of time was spent attempting to understand the processes, contributors, typologies, and other aspects of the divided community. It was essential, for the definition of terms and context, but even more so for personal growth to have a clear understanding of the divided community. Without this, I would never have been able to make the connections between divided communities, livability, and international planning. This portion of the thesis still remains quite lengthy due to the extensive amounts of research, but was extremely beneficial to do. The nature of the studio as being very broad and encompassing many topics also produced a longer search towards a final topic. The role of planning in conflict corresponds directly to the complex cities studio agenda. The studio is oriented towards more than design, also on theory and speculation. This thesis became more of a speculative work on an aspect of the current planning profession. I believe I have explained the relevance of this in my thesis successfully.

The section discussing the role of the international planner was a great learning process. It has undergone the most changes in structure and content, as it continuously responded to new findings in the case study research, and a constant comparison to the general conflict planning theory. I think this section is much clearer than it used to be. It was only upon making my final conclusions that I could understand the research much better and reformulate some of the structure.

The case studies were essential to the spatial component of the thesis. With these I was able to confirm or deny previous conclusions from the theory, as well as intimately discover the exact affects of conflict in a particular case. I am very happy with the results of my case studies, mainly for the reason that it allowed me to take my abstract theories and apply them to current detailed investigations. Personal discoveries and interviews added to a contented feeling of understanding. Things which I felt I did not grasp fully and frustrated me, slowly began falling into place. Where I failed slightly was the amount of time I let myself use for the spatial analysis, hereby placing a lot of pressure to draw conclusions on the role of the planner. I believe my conclusions concerning the role of the planner and their performance adequately respond to my research questions, but this is also because the structure and consistency of the research was always one of the main discussions with my mentors. I think the ability to formulate proper conclusions and structure is one of the main requirements of the studio. I cannot say that I have created a spatial design, but I am very happy with the conclusions I was able to make. Since p4 they have changed from a list of conclusions to a more comprehensive story.

170

171

Appendix. Interviews

Interview 1: Diana Fitzsimons – Tulley and associates – Titanic Quarter - MAC

Eric Kuhn –master planner titanic quarter Link with NGOs through seminars and events that they run Planning is part of DO – statutory role – BMAP – will not be adopted by government for another year. Its land use and zoning focused. Not imaginative or creative. Massive amounts of documents DOSD – time centre plans, regeneration plans. Those are not statutory so they are ignored by planning department. They do not have planners working within it. They hire consultancies to drop plans. Sailertown. – Inner city deprived community – very few people left, infra issues. Create place there. Private planning consultancy Works with statutory planning agency. North Belfast partnership NIHE – properties that it owns- Works with it separately. Sectarian geography- sarocco. http://www.futurebelfast.com/sirocco-quays.html Former factory. Interface between two communities. Protestants worked during the day, catholic women cleaned at night in the factories. Titanic quarter and this development must stay neutral. Titanic quarter was perceived to be protestant territory since not many catholics worked there. Its designed so that both communities feel ‘comfortable’ there. The oddysey is neutral to kids from everywhere. The future should also have mixed schools and churches. Titanic quarter must have 15-20% social housing. Only people who signed up to shared futures would be allocated there. None of this has happened yet. Lottery funds, Belfast city council, government all funded it (10% private sector, 90% public funding) As long as the area is accessible to everyone (even though the government does not have funds to put in metro) then its okay to have employment located here instead of in deprived areas. Trying to make the city more connected is important. Derry zoned housing according to religion. Middle class suburbs are mixed religion. Territorial thing is in the inner city and periphery public sector areas. NIHE built these in the 60’s and 70’s to be mixed but they gravitated one way or another.

172

Interview 2: Brendan Murtagh – Professor of Planning Queens University

Procedural. Very engineering, systematic, technical planning is present in Belfast. The social aspect is not an aspect of British planning. This has worked well up until 1969. “I don’t think planning has the skills to do this sort of thing.” “So if we don’t have the skills, and the bureaucracy isn’t at reference, and particularly the value base of the profession of what planning is very narrowly here subscribed around land use physical planning” The economy looked as if it was taking off after the 1998 agreement. (NOTE: map SITES OF BELFAST- CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT, ETC. ) 60 000 people left their homes in the north. More walls were built post conflict than beforehand. Segregation similarity index. 1991 66% segregation 2001 67% segregation. After the agreement, knowledge economy grew, did not provide improvement for the deprived. Desegregation within desegregation. Atkinson and flint. Urban bubbling: also results in youth being bubbled. This is what is happening in Belfast now. “Golden triangle of investment” The danger now is that “The city is torn in two, largely because its left to market forces.” Not because of planners, planners are impotent in this process. Part of the city is being presented as normal, the other is ignored. “Why are we in there spending 60 mil on one building, and 20 mil on disadvantaged communities?” New lodge, ardoyne: dissident republicans here that have never agreed to the peace agreement. They are becoming more organized and have set some bombs. This is the danger. If division becomes superseded by a new kind of class division. “The places that suffered most in the conflict, benefitted least from the peace” 70% of administration comes from the EU. “Planners have done nothing to ensure that the benefits of the peace building were more equally spread” “we didn’t really see a new form of politics” People dont have any confidence in politics, many don’t even vote. The legitimacy of the system is the problem. What sort of ‘whole’ city do we want to see? URBAN II 17 mil euro over 5 years – quite small amount of money at the time, eu was frustrated that the peace programs were not getting into the division. what went wrong: local politicians and local community representatives etc. rules were fairly well defined. 5 big projects dealing with disconnection of the city. 135 different projects proposed; dealing mostly with need for a school, care centre etc. But were not dealing with disconnection. You get one we get one attitude, petty program which did nothing to address the underlying problems. If you bring in a bunch of sectarians, don’t be surprised I fit ends up a sectarian mess. Positive measure to come out: How do you get economic investment where market forces don’t want to be? Social economy measure: ashton trust based on new lodge. Community groups calling themselves social Enterprises got funding which they shouldn’t have got (like a lot of others). Urban II created networks, but did nothing for the structure of the deprivation. There was some arrogance on our part on how people would work there. It wasn’t at a stage where it could be that type of development. It needs Stalinist approaches. There is a dark side to community participation. And this wasn’t the location for it. Suffolk & lennadoon – they have transformed the interface. International fund for Ireland backed the community investment, allowing them to make the changes. http://www.slig.co.uk/ They wanted a set of traffic lights on the road (falls road) there was no desire for community relations programs. But it allowed other things to happen. Delivery of the Group is run by professional managers but has representatives from both sides. Economic investment resulted. The groups is trying to gain land, improve their situation. They are very business oriented. They know that this is how you get what you want now. You don’t see a planner anywhere near these things. Philanthropists and investors are involved. If we invest in these groups with the same rigor as titanic, we can make change happen. PLACE FORUM Are looking at things from a design perspective, and Belfast is not this way because of bad architects, there are different reasons. Why are these places declining, and why is investment not going to them? BUT they have created a debate about what the city could look like. The environmental minister has started thinking about what does planning do about these things? They are not anti-titanics… more about the blandification of it. Bmap – contains 1200 ha housing zoned. 1/3 catholic areas 1/3 protestant housing. 1/3 have the potential to contain a mixed population. Why aren’t they doing something more proactive to make sure that these end up as mixed housing? If they are genuinely interested in shared space they should do something about this. PARTICIPATION What right do you have to represent them? How do you represent them? We need to have the right methods and techniques. Children experiencing space: drawing their environment (different type of participation)

173

Interview 3: Arthur Acheson- MAC – Voluntary sector

Ligoniel “Anybody can make a plan, but its the implementation that’s the difficult part” Urban stewardship. Persuasive of the planning service, who in turn persuaded the developer. 1974-75 – village almost completely destroyed as part of a redevelopment – 30 years to rebuild. “We must look to urban stewardship as to the way in which we regenerate ourselves” Urban villages – Belfast. This should be the way we rebuild. The scale of the ward seems to work as a functioning place where people really do get involved. But our council areas are much bigger than that and our administrative units therefore don’t match the energy of the people in them. Ward stewardship should become recognized. A planning officer from the gov. Should treat a ward as their continuing professional development. I am advocating this as the way in which we overcome. As soon as someone is managing it they actually find all the problems which are there in a wholistic way, where as the way it’s run now is that government sends in people about particular things, but nobody puts it together fort hat part. That place needs its own management capabilities. Usually the reason a Group forms is from the government coming in and attempting to do something. No building should be allowed to become vacant. A temporary use should be found. Give it to the community. Parallel to existing structures, but don’t integrate with them. They’re not of a size that Works. City places… but they are not real places. For the convenience of the officers these neighbourhoods are grouped together. Belfast has 3000 staff. 5 Partnership boards, 15 regeneration offices: no one is permanently in them. Its not a proper joined up system. New initiative ‘the social investment fund’ by the office of the First minister: objectives almost identical to the neighbourhood renewal strategy. Now they are thinking to join these together somehow. Government is a mess.” The people who benefit from regeneration are the regenerators” the criteria formed are not based on local needs, they are to rigid and imposed. “there’s huge goodwill locally “ URBAN II worked as a checklist: we have 12 people in the workshop.. tick. Not thorough enough. Various bits of government are beginning to listen. One placed based management system can draw on different departments of government. No one government department can do urban regeneration. “Its the software of the city that is not doing well, and the resulting hardware is the visible outcome of bad geography. “

Interview 4: Gavan Rafferty- Lecturer – PHD of Frank Gaffikin

CSI- cohesion sharing integration program. Coming out of the offices for the First minister. http://www.deloitte.com/view/en_US/us/Services/Financial-Advisory-Services/4a57d87d79ffd110VgnV CM100000ba42f00aRCRD.htm Cost of segregation PEACE I & II Single identity community work – which reinforced segregation in some cases. Later phases of the program then focused on cross community work. It was a tick the box exercise – all about output- and nota bout outcome. IO’s have a certain freedom (neutrality) – shankhill feels government has failed There is no radial connections in transport, where as 60 years ago there was. We need to have sustainable and careful thinking. The power of words is strong in influencing planning direction. Now that the word shared SPACE has made It into gov. Doc. Is very important.

174

175

Literature. ABBOTT, K. & SNIDAL, D. 1988. Why states act through formal international organizations. The Journal of Conflict Resolution, p.42. ABU-NIMER, M. 2001. Reconciliation, Justice, and Coexistence: Theory & Practice Lanham. Maryland: Lexington Books. ACHANKENG, F. 2009. Actors with Obvious Stakes in Conflict must have a place. Journal for the Study of Peace and Conflict, p.58-73. ALEXANDER, C. 1977. A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction, Unites States. ALEXANDER, E. R. 2007. Planning Rights in Theory and Practice: The Case of Israel. International Planning Studies, 12, 3-19. ALFASI, N. 2010. Is Public Participation Making Urban Planning More Democratic? The Israeli Experience. Planning Theory & Practice, 4, 185-202. APJP 2012. Architects and Planners for Justice in Palestine. http://apjp.org/. ARENAOFSPECULATION. 2012. critical perspectives on the spatial future of Israel-Palestine [Online]. http://arenaofspeculation.org/more/links/. BARNETT, M., & FINNEMORE,M 1999. The Politics, Power, and Pathologies of international organizations. International Organization, Vol.53, p.699-732. BARNETT, M., KIM, H., O’DONNELL, M. & SITEA 2007. Peacebuilding: what is in a name? Global Governance, 13, p.3558. BELFAST CITY COUNCIL 2011. PEACE III Programme for Northern Ireland and the Border Counties 2007-2013. BELFAST MUNICIPAL GOVERNMENT 2009. Belfast: a profile of the city. In: DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT (ed.). Belfast. BELFASTTELEGRAPH. 2011. Ligoniel group gets funds to improve beauty spot [Online]. http://www.belfasttelegraph. co.uk/community-telegraph/north-belfast/news/ligonielgroup-gets-funds-to-improve-beauty-spot-16009868.html. BIMKOM 2006. Between fences: The enclaves created by the seperation barrier. BIMKOM. 2006. Planners for planning rights [Online]. http:// eng.bimkom.org/. BIMKOM 20008. The prohibited zone: Israeli planning policy in the Palestinian villages in Area C. BIRO, M., ADJDUKOVIC, D., CORKALO, D., DJIPA, D., MILIN, P. & WEINSTEIN, H. M. n.d. Attitudes toward justice and social reconstruction in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia. In: STOVER, E. & WEINSTEIN, H. M. (eds.) My Neighbor, My enemy: Justice and Community in the Aftermath of Mass Atrocity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. BOAL, F. 2006. Enduring City, Belfast in the Twentieth Century, Belfast, Blackstaff. BOAL, F. W. 2011. Framing Belfast: From Colonialism to Ethnonationalism- and Beyond. Urban Conflicts: Ethno-national divisions, States and Cities. Queen’s University Belfast. BOLLENS, S. A. 2001. City and Soul: Sarajevo, Johannesburg, Jerusalem,Nicosia. City, 5, p.170-187. BOLLENS, S. A. 2011. Urban Governance in divided countries: Six Case studies. Urban Conflicts-Ethno-National Divisions, States and Cities. Queen’s University Belfast. BRYNEN, R. 1996. Buying Peace? A critical assessment of international aid to the West Bank and Gaza. Journal of Palestine studies, 25, p.79-92. BRYSON, J. 2011. Strategic Planning for Public and Nonprofit

Organizations, San Franscisco, John Wiley and Sons Inc. B’TSELEM 2011. Israeli Information center for Human rights in the occupied territories. Israel. B’TSELEM. 2012. The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories [Online]. http://www.btselem.org/. BYRNE, S. 2001. Consociational and Civic society approaches to peacebuilding in Northern Ireland. Journal of Peace research, 38, p.327-352. CAIN. 2011. Conflict and politics in Northern Ireland [Online]. http://cain.ulst.ac.uk/. [Accessed May 17 2012]. CALAME, J. & CHARLESWORTH, E. 2009. Divided cities: Be lfast,Beirut,Jerusalem,Mostar,and Nicosia, Philidelphia, University of Pensylvania Press. CARMONA, M., HEATH, T., OC, T. & TIESDELL, S. 2003. Public Places Urban Spaces, Burlington, Architectural Press. CARPENTER, J. 2006. Adressing Europe’s Urban Challenges: Lessons from the EU URBAN community Initiative. Urban studies, 43, p.2145-2162. CENTER FOR SECURITY STUDIES & ETH ZURICH 2011. Mediating Conflicts with Religious Dimensions. CENTRE ON HOUSING AND EVICTIONS 2005. Ruling Palestine: A history of the legally sanctioned Jewish-Israeli seizure of land and housing in Palestine. COCHRANE, F. 2000. Beyond the political elites: A comparative analysis of the roles and impacts of community based NGOs in conflict resolution activity. Civil wars, 3, 1-22. CU2 2008. Donegall Pass: Towards a Sustainable Community. Queens University Belfast: Contested Cities-Urban Universities. CULLINGWORTH, B. & NADIN, V. 2006. Town and country planning in the UK, Oxon, Routledge. DAMAZER, M. 2009. Gerry Anderson’s Walls and Peace [Online]. http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radio4/2009/03/walls_and_ peace.html: BBC Radio 4. DEMETRIOU, C. n.d. Nicosia Urban Area. Cyprus: Department of Town planning and Housing, Nicosia,Cyprus. DEMICHELIS, J. 1998. NGOs and Peacebuilding in Bosnia’s Ethnically Divided Cities. United States institute of Peace. DIBBINY, I. 2008. Jerusalem and its hinterland. International Peace and Cooperation center. DIEHL, P. F. 2005. Introduction. The Politics of Global Governance: international organizations in an Interdependent World. Boulder: Lynne Rienner Publishers. ESCOFFERY, E. 2008. The United States and Northern Ireland: International pressures as an impetus for civil rights progress. College Undergraduate research electronic journal. EU 2012. European Union structural Funds in Northern Ireland. Northern Ireland: CSF Managing Authority. FALUDI, A. 2010. The Performance of Spatial planning. Planning practice and research, 15, p.299-318. FAWAZ, M., GHARBIEH, A. & HARB, M. 2009. Beirut: Mapping Security. FITZDUFF, M. & CHURCH, C. 2004. NGOs at the Table: Strategies for Influencing Policies in Areas of Conflict. United States: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. FITZDUFF, N. & WILLIAMS, S. 2007. Cumulative Impact case Study: How did Northern Ireland move towards peace? Collaborative learning projects. FLYVBJERG, B. 2004. Phronetic Planning Research: Theoretical and Methodological Reflections. Planning Theory & Practice, 5, 283-306. FLYVBJERG, B. 2006. Five Misunderstandings about CaseStudy Research. Qualitative Inquiry, 12, 219-245. FORESTER, J. 1987. Planning in the Face of Conflict. Journal of the Americal Planning Association, 433-446. FORESTER, J. 1994. Bridging Interest and Community: Advocacy Planning and the Challenges of Deliberative Democracy. Journal of the Americal Planning Association, 60, 153-158.

176 FORESTER, J. 2006. Making Participation Work When Inter-

ests Conflict: Moving from Facilitating Dialogue and Moderating Debate to Mediating Negotiations. Journal of the Americal Planning Association, 72, 447-456. FORUM FOR AN ALTERNATIVE BELFAST 2011. Shared Space Report. http://www.forumbelfast.org/projects/sharedspace-2011.php. GAFFIKIN, F. & MORRISEY, M. 1999. City visions: Imagining place, enfranchising people. London: Pluto Press. GAFFIKIN, F. & MORRISSEY, M. 2011. Planning in Divided Cities: Collaborative Shaping of Contested Space, Blackwell Publishing Ltd. GAFFIKIN, F., STERRETT, K., MCELDOWNEY, M., MORRISEY, M. & HARDY, M. 2008. Planning shared space for a shared future. Community relations council GARSTKA, G. J. 2010. Post-Conflict urban planning: The regularization process of an informal neighborhood in Kosova/o. Habitat International, 34, 86-95. GHADBAN, S. 1997. Composition of the traditional Palestinian House pre 1948 [Online]. www2.arnes.si/aa/2000/ghad00gb. html. [Accessed May 17 2012]. GRAHAM, S. 2010. Cities Under Siege: The new Military Urbanism. Brooklyn: Verso. HABITAT, U. 2010. Introducing (spatial) planning in postconflict contexts: The case of the somali cities. HABITAT, U. 2011. Bridging the urban divide. State of the world’s cities. London. HACKETT, M. 2009. Forum for an Alternative Belfast [Online]. http://www.forumbelfast.org/links/. [Accessed January 15th 2012]. HEALEY, P. 2003. Collaborative Planning in Perspective. Planning Theory & Practice, 2, 101-123. HEALEY, P. 2009. City Regions and Place Development. Regional Studies, 43, 831-843. HEALTHY CITIES BELFAST 2007. Planning for Healthier People. HEALTHYCITIES 2011. Response to the consultation on Regional Development Strategy, Department for Regional Development. HERBERT, S. 2007. Titanic quarter: regenerating Belfast. London: 3 fox international. HODGETT, S. & JOHNSON, D. 2001. Troubles,Partnerships and possibilities: A study of the making Belfast work development initiative in Northern Ireland. Public administration and development, 21, p.321-332. HOLMES, M. 2005. Ireland And the European Union: Nice, Enlargement And the Future of Europe. Manchester: Manchester University Press. IFI 2010. Sharing this space: A strategic framework for action 2006-2010. IFI 2011. Helping Unionist and Nationalists to Learn,Work & Live Together as a part of a shared future on the Island of Ireland. Annual Report & Accounts 2011. INTERACTION. 2012. http://www.peacewall.org/home.htm. IRSHALEM & BIMKOM n.d. The Planning Deadlock: Planning Policy,Land Regularization, Building Permits and House Demolitions in East Jerusalem. JANSSEN-JANSEN, L. B. & HUTTON, T. A. 2011. Rethinking the Metropolis: Reconfiguring the Governance Structures of the Twenty-first-century City-region. International Planning Studies, 16, 201-215. KAHANOFF, M., SALEM, W., NASRALLAH, R. & NEUMANN, Y. 2007. The Evaluation of Cooperation between Palestinian and Israeli NGOs: An Assesment. UNESCO. KAHANOFF, M., SALEM, W., NASRALLAH, R. & NEUMANN, Y. 2007. The Evaluation of cooperation between Palestinian and Israeli NGOs: An Assessment. IPPC, Unesco KEATING, W. D. & KRUMHOLZ, N. 2000. Neighborhood Planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 20, 111114.

KEMPEN, R. V. & MURIE, A. 2009. The new divided city: Changing patterns in european cities. Tijdschrift voor Economische en sociale Geografie, 100, 377-398. KHALAF, S. & KHOURY, P. S. 1993. Recovering Beirut: Urban Design and Post-War Reconstruction. The Netherlands: E.J.Brill. KHALAF, S. & KHOURY, P. S. 1993. Recovering Beirut: urban design and post-war reconstruction. The Netherlands: E.J.Brill. KLIOT, N., MANSFELD, Y. & KOTEK, J. 1999. Progress in Planning, Oxford, Elsevier Science Ltd. LARKIN, C. & DUMPER, M. 2009. UNESCO and Jerusalem: Constraints, challenges and opportunities. Jerusalem Quarterly, 39, 16-28. LEDERACH, J. 1997. Building Peace: sustainable reconciliation in divided societies. United states: United states institute of peace. LEIN, Y. 2004. Facing the Abyss: The isolation of Sheikh Sa’ad Village-Before and After the seperation Barrier. B’Tselem – The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories. LEMORE, A. 2005. Killing with kindness: funding the demise of a Palestinian state. International affairs, 81, p.981-999. LEONARD, M. & MCKNIGHT, M. n.d. Teenagers’ perceptions of Belfast as a Divided and/or Shared City. Shared space: A research journal on peace, conflict and community relations in Northern Ireland, 23-37. LOWNSBROUGH, H. & BEUNDERMAN, J. 2007. Equally Spaced? Public and Interaction between Diverse Communities: A Report for the Commission for Racial Equality, London, Demos. MAKAS, E. G. 2005. Representing competing entities in postwar Mostar. Cornell University. MARGOLIT, M. 2006. Discrimination in the Heart of the Holy City [Online]. http://home.ipcc-jerusalem.org/: International Peace and Cooperation Center. [Accessed May 17 2012]. MOORE, L. 2011. Beyond The Troubles: Murals of Belfast, Northern Ireland. web urbanist. http://weburbanist. com/2007/08/03/beyond-the-troubles-murals-of-belfastnorthern-ireland/. MURTAGH, B. 1999. Urban segregation and community initiative in Northern Ireland. community development journal. MURTAGH, B. 2002. The Politics of Territory, Hampshire, Palgrave. MURTAGH, B. 2008. New spaces and Old in ‘Post-Conflict’ Belfast. In: ANDERSON, J. (ed.) Divided Cities/Contested States working Paper series. MURTAGH, B. & ELLIS, G. 2008. the Skills Agenda and the Competencies for Managing Diversity and Space. Town Planning Review. MURTAGH, B. & ELLIS, G. 2010. The skills agenda and the competencies for managing diversity and space. The Planning Report, 81, 563-583. MUSARÒ, P. 2011. Living in Emergency: humanitarian images and the inequality of lives. University of Bologna N.A. 2012. Jerusalem as “Corpus Separatum” under the UN Partition Plan [Online]. http://www.1948.org.uk/un-resolution-181/. NGOMONITOR 2012. making NGOs accountable. http:// www.ngo-monitor.org/articles.php?type=whatsnew&article_ type=academic. NIHE. 2012. Northern Ireland Housing Executive [Online]. http://www.nihe.gov.uk/. NINIS. 2010. Northern Ireland Neighbourhood Information Service [Online]. http://www.ninis.nisra.gov.uk/: Statistics Northern Ireland. NORTHERN IRELAND GOVERNMENT 2011. Shaping our future; Regional development strategy for northern Ireland 2025. In: DEPARTMENT OF REGIONAL DEVELOPMENT (ed.). Belfast: Corporate Document Services.

NOTHOLT, S. 2008. Fields of Fire: An atlas of ethnic conflict, United Kingdom. O’DOCHARTAIGH, N. 2007. Conflict,territory and new technologies: Online interactions at a Belfast interface. Political Geography, 26, 474-491. O’DOCHARTAIGH, N. 2010. Chapter 9: Nation and neighborhood: nationalist mobilisation and local solidarities in the north of Ireland. In: GUELKE, A. (ed.) The Challenges of Ethno-nationalism. Basingstoke. O’DOCHARTAIGH, N. 2011. Territoriality and Order in the North of Ireland. Irish Political Studies, 26, 313-328. PALESTINIAN NATIONAL AUTHORITY 2011. National Development Plan 2011-13: Establishing the state, Building our Future. PAPADAKIS, Y. 2005. Echoes from the Dead Zone: Across the Cyprus Divide. London: I.B.Tauris and Co Ltd. PEACENOW. 2012. Promoting peace in Israel [Online]. http:// peacenow.org.il/eng/. PIERSON, C. 2011. The Cityside Initiative - Community based peacebuilding in North Belfast. PLACE. n.d. PLACE Architecture and built environment centre [Online]. http://www.place.uk.net/. [Accessed May 17, 2012]. PLACE BUILT ENVIRONMENT CENTRE 2006. Happy to live here? PLOGER, J. n.d. Belfast City Report. CASE centre for analysis of social exclusion. PULLAN, W. 2009. The Space of Contested Jerusalem. Jerusalem Quarterly [Online]. PULLAN, W. 2011. Everyday life and the possibilities for transformation in Belfast, Jerusalem and other divided cities. conflict in cities and the contested state. PUTZEL, J. 2004. The politics of ‘participation’: Civil society, the state and development assistance. Crisis states development research centre LSE. RACCIOPPI, L. & O’SULLIVANSEE 2007. Grassroots Peacebuilding and third party intervention: The European Union’s special support programme for peace and reconciliation in Northen Ireland. Peace & Change, 32, p.361-390. RIWAQ. 2011. http://www.riwaq.org/2010/index.php. ROM-TRANSPORT. 2000. The Jerusalem Transportation Masterplan [Online]. http://www.rom-transport.com/project/ project_jtmp.htm. [Accessed May 17, 2012]. SADAKA. 2012. Jerusalem Past and Present [Online]. http:// www.sadaka.ie/About_Palestine/West_Bank/Jerusalem.html. SCHOONRAAD, M. D. 2004. The long road to socio-spatial integration. TUDelft. SEUPD 2010. Peace III: EU Programme for Peace and Reconciliation 2007-2013 Northern Ireland and the Border region of Ireland Operational Programme. SHARMA, S. K., SHRESTHA, S., ADHIKARY, R. N., DEV, R. & KARMACHARYA, P. 2011. Local Peacebuilding Approaches. USAID. SHARON, A. n.d. 1919 Scheme by Sir Patrick Geddes [Online]. http://www.ariehsharon.org. [Accessed May 14, 2012]. SHARON, A. n.d. 1930 British Mandatory Scheme [Online]. www.ariehsharon.org. [Accessed May 14, 2012]. SHARON, A. n.d. 1944 Henry Kendall Scheme [Online]. www. ariehsharon.org. [Accessed May 14, 2012]. SHIRLOW, P. & MURTAGH, B. 2004. Capacity building, Representation and Intracommunity Conflict. Urban studies, 41, p.57-70. SHOSHAN, M. 2010. Atlas of the Conflict Israel-Palestine, Rotterdam, 010 Publishers. SHOSHAN, M. n.d. Foundation for achieving seamless territory [Online]. http://www.seamlessterritory.org/The_Foundation.html. Berlin Babylon, 2001. Directed by SIEGERT, H. STOVER, E. & WEINSTEIN, H. M. 2004. My Neighbor, My Enemy: Justice and Community in the Aftermath of Mass Atrocity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

SUTTON, R. 2009. Negotiating the City: The Role of Urban 177 Planning. Journal for the Study of Peace and Conflict, p.24-40. Ultra Zionists, 2011. Directed by THEROUX, L.: BBC. THIESSEN, C., BYRNE, S., SKARLATO, O. & TENNENT, P. 2010. Civil society Leaders and Northern Ireland’s Peace Process: Hopes and Fears for the future. Humanity and Society, 34, p.39-63. TIDWEL, A. 1998. Conflict resolved? a critical assesment of conflict resolution. new York: continuum. TUKAN, J. 2002. Hybrid City. In: SORKIN, M. (ed.) The Next Jerusalem. New York: The Monacelli Press Inc. UNITES NATIONS OFFICE FOR THE COORDINATION OF HUMANITARIAN AFFAIRS OCCUPIED PALESTINIAN TERRITORY 2009. The Planning Crisis in East Jerusalem: Understanding the phenomenon of “illegal” construction. VERMA, N. 2007. Institutions and Planning. Amsterdam: Elsevier. VET, A. D. 2007. Subjective Atlas of Palestine, Rotterdam, 010 Publishers. WALTZ, V. & ISAAC, J. 2010. The fabrication of Israel: About the Usurpation and distribution of Palestine through Israeli Zionist Spatial Planning. WALTZ, V. & ZSCHIESCHE, J. 1986. Die Erbe habt Ihr uns genommen, Das Arabische Buch. Germany. WARD, S. 2004. Planning and Urban change. California: Sage publications. WARI, S. 2011. Jerusalem: One planning system,two urban realities. City, 15, 456-472. WEISS, T. 1996. Nongovernmental organizations and internal conflict. In: BROWN, M. (ed.) The International Dimension of Internal Conflict, Center for Science and International Affairs. Cambridge. WEIZMAN, E. 2007. Hollow Land: Israel’s Architecture of Occupation. WIKIPEDIA 2009. Emergency aid to Gaza. http://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/File:Emergency_aid_to_Gaza_in_2009.PNG.

178

NART NI NOITIS