대부분의 일반적인 계획 과정과 달리, 브라운필드 계획은 잠재된 오염문제로 인한 기술적, 법률적 전문지식을 필요로 한다. 성공적으로 통합적인 의사결정에 관여하기 위해서는 조정된 협력적 계획 모델이 중요하다. 본 연구는 기존의 협력적 계획 접근방식이 브라운 필드 재생에 있어 상반된 분야의 전문가들 및 지역 주민들이 함께 일하며 적절하게 균형 잡힌 협력을 이루어 내기 위한 어려움들을 극복하는 데에 어떻게 효과적으로 적용될 수 있는지 알아보는 것을 목표로 한다. 의사소통적 계획이론 관련 문헌분석을 통해 적절한 지표들을 찾아내어, 네 단계의 브라운 필드 계획과정(대상지 선별, 평가, 정화, 디자인)에 적용시켜 본 후, 중요한 부분들을 짚어내었다. 본 연구의 결과, 크게 세 가지 점에 초점을 맞춘, 브라운 필드 재생에 적합한 협력적 계획 모델의 필요성이 인식되었다(1. 사회, 문화, 디자인 분야와 과학, 기술 분야의 전문가 간의 균형 잡힌 대화의 촉진, 2. 일반주민들과의 잠재적 오염 위험과 관련한 커뮤니케이션을 위한 적절한 방법개발, 3. 전문가 주도의 객관적 데이터와 주민 의견 중심의 주관적 데이터의 통합을 위한 의사결정지원 시스템의 마련).
대부분의 일반적인 계획 과정과 달리, 브라운필드 계획은 잠재된 오염문제로 인한 기술적, 법률적 전문지식을 필요로 한다. 성공적으로 통합적인 의사결정에 관여하기 위해서는 조정된 협력적 계획 모델이 중요하다. 본 연구는 기존의 협력적 계획 접근방식이 브라운 필드 재생에 있어 상반된 분야의 전문가들 및 지역 주민들이 함께 일하며 적절하게 균형 잡힌 협력을 이루어 내기 위한 어려움들을 극복하는 데에 어떻게 효과적으로 적용될 수 있는지 알아보는 것을 목표로 한다. 의사소통적 계획이론 관련 문헌분석을 통해 적절한 지표들을 찾아내어, 네 단계의 브라운 필드 계획과정(대상지 선별, 평가, 정화, 디자인)에 적용시켜 본 후, 중요한 부분들을 짚어내었다. 본 연구의 결과, 크게 세 가지 점에 초점을 맞춘, 브라운 필드 재생에 적합한 협력적 계획 모델의 필요성이 인식되었다(1. 사회, 문화, 디자인 분야와 과학, 기술 분야의 전문가 간의 균형 잡힌 대화의 촉진, 2. 일반주민들과의 잠재적 오염 위험과 관련한 커뮤니케이션을 위한 적절한 방법개발, 3. 전문가 주도의 객관적 데이터와 주민 의견 중심의 주관적 데이터의 통합을 위한 의사결정지원 시스템의 마련).
Unlike most other planning processes, brownfield planning generally requires a high level of technical and legal expertise due to potential site contamination. To successfully engage in inclusionary decision making, an adaptive collaboration strategy for brownfield planning is therefore critical. Th...
Unlike most other planning processes, brownfield planning generally requires a high level of technical and legal expertise due to potential site contamination. To successfully engage in inclusionary decision making, an adaptive collaboration strategy for brownfield planning is therefore critical. This study examines how a communicative planning approach can be used to overcome the challenge of enabling experts from different fields to work alongside lay people from the local community to achieve a properly balanced collaboration in brownfield planning. After identifying appropriate indicators for collaboration through a literature review of established communicative planning theory, these indicators are applied to the brownfield planning process, highlighting critical points of collaboration such as site prioritization, assessment, remediation, and redevelopment throughout. The results suggest the critical need for an adaptive model focusing on three aspects: 1. Facilitation of a balanced dialogue between the experts with social, cultural, and design-based knowledge and the ones with scientific and engineering-based knowledge, 2. Preparation of an appropriate tool for risk communication with the lay people, 3. Development of decision support system for the integration of expert-oriented technical data and public opinion-oriented subjective data.
Unlike most other planning processes, brownfield planning generally requires a high level of technical and legal expertise due to potential site contamination. To successfully engage in inclusionary decision making, an adaptive collaboration strategy for brownfield planning is therefore critical. This study examines how a communicative planning approach can be used to overcome the challenge of enabling experts from different fields to work alongside lay people from the local community to achieve a properly balanced collaboration in brownfield planning. After identifying appropriate indicators for collaboration through a literature review of established communicative planning theory, these indicators are applied to the brownfield planning process, highlighting critical points of collaboration such as site prioritization, assessment, remediation, and redevelopment throughout. The results suggest the critical need for an adaptive model focusing on three aspects: 1. Facilitation of a balanced dialogue between the experts with social, cultural, and design-based knowledge and the ones with scientific and engineering-based knowledge, 2. Preparation of an appropriate tool for risk communication with the lay people, 3. Development of decision support system for the integration of expert-oriented technical data and public opinion-oriented subjective data.
* AI 자동 식별 결과로 적합하지 않은 문장이 있을 수 있으니, 이용에 유의하시기 바랍니다.
문제 정의
To accomplish a well-balanced, inclusionary decision making process, the choice of an appropriate adaptive collaboration strategy for brownfield planning is critical. The purpose of this paper is to show how existing communicative planning approaches, specified and modified if necessary, can be used to address the challenge of helping participants with different areas of expertise to work alongside lay people from the local community to achieve properly balanced collaborations that ensure a successful outcome. An overview of the indicators supporting the adoption of a collaborative approach in the existing communicative planning literature and its preliminary application to the brownfield planning process, and a detailed examination of the critical challenges and the aspects needing differentiation, are presented below.
This study focused on developing preliminary collaboration framework for brownfield redevelopment. Through the review of the major literatures regarding communicative planning theories, the important collaboration indicators were chosen and applied to four different stages of brownfield planning process.
제안 방법
Therefore, it is important to find or build a feasible collaborative planning model for brownfield redevelopment to guide urban planners’ efforts. As an early attempt, this study identified a preliminary collaboration framework consisting of thirteen indicators based on current communicative planning approaches and went on to apply this to the brownfield planning process and explore the critical moments at different stages. This research revealed that the critical moments are largely concentrated in the site assessment and remediation phases and are generally associated with imbalances between the participant groups.
It is important to keep the meeting moving by engaging in open conversations and avoiding one-way conversations if the principle agent is a private sector entity. The expected outcome is a site reuse plan that is specific to that site.
The first part of the study dealt with the review of communicative planning theories by two major scholars, Patsy Healey and Judith Innes in order to understand the prerequisite conditions and indicators for successful collaboration. In the second part of the study, the collaborative objectives and expected outcome were discussed for each of four planning stages.
, 2014; Solitare, 2005). This study extends the precedent works by examining how a communicative approach can be applied to brownfield planning, leading to a more effective regeneration process.
Thirteen collaboration indicators are applied to the each stage of brownfield planning(Refer to Table 1). To develop a more specific understanding, this study modeled brownfield pilot programs and brownfield area-wide planning programs based on a bottom up approach that were funded by government programs designed to foster city and district scale redevelopment in U.S. context(U.S. EPA, 2010).
성능/효과
As an early attempt, this study identified a preliminary collaboration framework consisting of thirteen indicators based on current communicative planning approaches and went on to apply this to the brownfield planning process and explore the critical moments at different stages. This research revealed that the critical moments are largely concentrated in the site assessment and remediation phases and are generally associated with imbalances between the participant groups. For an effective adaptive collaboration strategy for brownfield planning, these results suggest a critical need for a new adaptive model that facilitates a balanced dialogue among experts including scientists and designers, as well as lay people, particularly regarding the risk communication and remediation options discussion
참고문헌 (30)
Blokhuis, E. G. J., C. C. P. Snijders, Q. Han and W. F. Schaefer(2012) Conflicts and cooperation in brownfield redevelopment projects: Application of conjoint analysis and game theory to model strategic decision making. Journal of Urban Planning and Development 138(3): 195-205.
Caser, U. S., S. Annunziata and A. Makarenko(2013) Collaborative urban design, a promising approach to brownfield recovery-FRUNZE 35, Kiev UA.Revista de Geografia e Ordenamento do Territorio 1(4): 7-29.
Comp, T. A.(2007) Science, art an environmental reclamation: Three projects and a few thoughts. In A. Berger(Ed.), Designing the Reclaimed Landscape. London: Routledge. pp. 63-76.
Dukes, E. F. and K. Firehock(2001) Collaboration: A Guide for Environmental Advocates. Charlottesville, VA: Institute for Environmental Negotiation, University of Virginia.
Dukes, E. F., M. A. Piscolish and J. B. Stephens(2008) Reaching for Higher Ground in Conflict Resolution: Tools for Powerful Groups and Communities. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Forester, J.(1999) The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Geertman, S.(2002) Participatory planning and GIS: A PSS to bridge the gap. Environment and Planning B 29(1): 21-36.
Guo, G., Q. Zhou and L. Q. Ma(2006) Availability and assessment of fixing additives for the in situ remediation of heavy metal contaminated soils: A review. Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 116(1-3): 513-528.
Hollander, J. B.(2011) Sunburnt Cities: The Great Recession, Depopulation and Urban Planning in the American Sunbelt. London: Routledge.
Hollander, J. B. and J. Nemeth(2011) The bounds of smart decline: A foundational theory for planning shrinking cities. Housing Policy Debate 21(3): 349-367.
Huxley, M. and O. Yiftachel(2000) New paradigm or old myopia? Unsettling the communicative turn in planning theory. Journal of Planning Education and Research 19(4): 333-342.
Innes, J. E. and D. E. Booher(2010) Planning with Complexity: An Introduction to Collaborative Rationality for Public Policy. London: Routledge.
International City/County Management Association and Superfund/Brownfield Research Institute(ICMA)(2001) Brownfields Redevelopment: A Guidebook for Local Governments and Communities. Washington, DC: author.
Johnson, M. P., J. Hollander and A. Hallulli(2014) Maintain, demolish, re-purpose: Policy design for vacant land management using decision models. Cities 40: 151-162.
Lafortezza, R., R. C. Corry, G. Sanesi and R. D. Brown(2008) Visual preference and ecological assessments for designed alternative brownfield rehabilitations. Journal of Environmental Management 89(3): 257-269.
Linkov, I., A. Varghese, S. Jamil, T. P. Seager, G. Kiker and T. Bridges (2005) Multi-criteria decision analysis: A framework for structuring remedial decisions at contaminated sites. In I. Linkov and A. B. Ramadan (Eds.), Comparative Risk Assessment and Environmental DecisionMaking. Amsterdam: Springer. pp. 15-54.
McCall, M. K.(2003) Seeking good governance in participatory-GIS: a review of processes and governance dimensions in applying GIS to participatory spatial planning. Habitat International 27(4): 549-573.
Pearsall, H., Lucas, S. and Lenhardt, J.(2014) The contested nature of vacant land in Philadelphia and approaches for resolving competing objectives for redevelopment. Cities 40: 163-174.
Sadoway, D. and S. Shekhar(2014) (Re)prioritizing citizens in smart cities governance: Examples of smart citizenship from urban India. The Journal of Community Informatics 10(3).
Sen, B. and R. K. Sen(2014) Bottom-up integration of data-aware communities: Some initial work in Kapgari village community. In the Conference Proceedings of the Global Humanitarian Technology Conference (GHTC), 2014 IEEE. 10-13 October, San Jose, CA. pp. 445-450.
Solitare, L.(2005) Prerequisite conditions for meaningful participation in brownfields redevelopment. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 48(6): 917-935.
Talen, E.(2000) Bottom-up GIS: A new tool for individual and group expression in participatory planning. Journal of the American Planning Association 66(3): 279-294.
Tress, B. and G. Tress(2003) Scenario visualisation for participatory landscape planning: A study from Denmark. Landscape and Urban Planning 64(3): 161-178.
※ AI-Helper는 부적절한 답변을 할 수 있습니다.