PAST: Planning and its interdisciplinary dimensions

The root of my interest in planning stems from the interdisciplinary nature of the field that allows the synthesis and application of professional knowledge for informed decision-making in urban development projects. As a field, urban planning has transgressed the disciplinary boundaries, since its inception in the early 20th century (Pinson, 2004). The competence required to tackle the urban projects, move way beyond the context, conditions, and expectations of the targeted population to combine the knowledge contributions by the field of architecture, engineering, public health, geography, economy, ecology, political science and sociology (Pinson, 2004). In my professional journey, after an undergraduate degree in architecture, one of the critical turning points was the realization of the socio-political nature of the implementation of design in the spatial production processes. This led me to delve into the urban planning field, understand the complexity of land-use policies and their impact on the implementation of the design.

Urban planning is not a field locked into a static state, solely based on technical or technocratic performance. It is a field constantly put to test in terms of the relevancy in the political or bureaucratic arena, its role in community outreach, and questioned on the organization of initiatives that mix public and private interests (Pinson, 2004). Yet, the need for the planning field is more acute than ever in the rise of contemporary urban challenges. Coming from the global south, I have experienced firsthand the wicked problems of urbanization, economic pressures on cities, poverty, and climate change accelerating at an unprecedented level. These phenomenon are not restricted to loci and are experienced in different magnitudes across regions and countries. With the acknowledgment of the challenges that cities faces, I have developed the understanding that it is more critical than ever, to view these challenges as opportunities rather than a threat. Planners, politicians, architects, engineers, and other professionals who shape the built environment of cities and urban regions need a multidisciplinary application of knowledge for problem solving in cities (Yawei Chen, 2019).

The interdisciplinary approach enables the integration of knowledge across fields that can lead to well-informed decisions. The demand for professionals with the skills to connect and integrate the knowledge is growing in contemporary societies, as the quote, “those capable of seeing beyond the silos of particular specialism, and the courage and creativity to make connections and integrate knowledge across fields of expertise and uncertainty (Campbell, 2012), are the need of era (Yawei Chen, 2019). In my observation, an interdisciplinary approach to planning education is necessary. For educators, this means teaching students to work in interdisciplinary environments to discover different disciplinary dimensions to the urban problem, alongside, fostering practice-oriented methodology for experiential learning that focuses on participation and interaction (Yawei Chen, 2019).

Discussion about the interdisciplinary dimensions of planning gives rise to critical thinking on the roles of a planner. The VIU master’s program in planning involves interdisciplinary focus, which in my opinion, prepares well for tackling urban problems in a localized context, however, a globalized perspective in the curriculum would create trans-countries narratives to broaden horizons and create an understanding of the broad scope of the field. The role of the planner is not restricted to a single context. A planner could be working in the public sector, nonprofit sector, private sector, international development, and much more. In the article, ‘The role of the professional planner’, Gunton elaborates on the multiple role-plays of Planner from technocrat, public servant, advocate, bureaucrat to social reformer (Gunton, 1984), and the differences in the approach of each role-play. In my opinion, the planner’s role should not be restricted to singular role-play due to its multidisciplinary nature. Luuk Boelens states in the article, ‘Planning of undefined becoming; first encounters of planners beyond the plan’, that we need to transition from defining planning in set ways, to a movement of ‘planning of undefined becoming (Luuk Boelens, 2014).’ This encapsulates the multiple roles that Planners need to fulfill in the context of dynamic intentions and needs, without knowing the ultimate goal beforehand.

The fluid nature of the field in response to the environment in which it functions. Planners work in bureaucratic environments either as core actors within the system or through relationships with the system. The power dynamics inbuilt in the regulatory processes in the planning role are part of the bureaucratic system (Rydin, 2020). This process decides where, how, and in what forms can the development occur and creates space for control of the private market affecting the public interest. The major actors within this network are the developers, local communities, civil society organizations, social/ environmental groups, or others (Luuk Boelens, 2014). I have realized working in slums with the non-profit organization, that there is no straight line of interventions to improve the quality of life of people. The politically charged environment inhibits a technocratic implementation of strategies; rather, the planner who understands the needs of the local community and thin line of trust that exists between the slum dwellers and public sector, requires a fluid approach. In these cases, a planner needs to employ all role-plays from advocate, social reformer to technocrat. What is required in such situations is the multidisciplinary approach that combines the knowledge from all fields for a better-informed decision in limited resources.

As mentioned in the article, ‘Some of What a Planner Knows; A Case Study of Knowing-in Practice’, social planners like Jane Jacobs and planners working in slums build their practice by knowing in the field (Schon, 1982). Their ‘knowing in practice’ encapsulates the needs of the vulnerable, nature of politics to circumvent, creating interest groups for political visibility and voice, building connections within systems, and figuring out ways to improve quality of life (Schon, 1982). This niche of planning, in my opinion already requires a vast array of role-plays which can be built through an interdisciplinary approach in planning education. Moreover, I have learned that situational planning approach mentioned by Luuk Boelens, in ‘planning for undefined becoming (Luuk Boelens, 2014)’ is required in these situations.

Urban planning, even practiced in slums, is an iterative process from conception to realization, which gets more precise during the process. The governance factors that influence the power dynamics in the decision-making process require concerted dialogue between all concerned parties from the public, private, community groups, non-profits, and others to resolve conflicting demands and co-construct best situations in urban projects. This also requires essential skills of mediation, the ability to negotiate conflicts, mix public, private, and various interests that require transdisciplinary tactics built through interdisciplinary planning education (Pinson, 2004). Moreover, the community plays a significant role even in slums, where dwellers best know their needs and have better solutions to their problems than planning practitioners. In planning, inhabitants are no longer measurable categories for the data process but are the significant actors in shaping the process and production of built environment (Pinson, 2004).

My past journey created the desire to improve the quality of life of people, especially the ultra-poor, and motivated me to apply for the community-planning program at Vancouver Island University. Moreover, in my career exploration, I recognized the need for multidisciplinary knowledge and skills to synthesize it for better solutions to wicked problems in the global south. I have realized until now, that there is no straight path in the work of global planning practitioner, and neither is there one truth.