IRRATIONAL CITY ABSTRACT. Andrea Sherman HONS2105

Transcription

1 0 ABSTRACT IRRATIONAL CITY Jane Jacobs Urbanism and the Role of Behavioral Economics in Urban Planning In response to the rapid urban population growth in the late-18 th to early-20 th century United States, large-scale, highly centralized city planning efforts attempted to enforce structure and revitalize impoverished neighborhoods. In later decades, these methods were criticized for exacerbating urban crime and economic stagnation by ignoring or disrupting local communities, and placing too great a priority on superficial order. In the mid-20th century, the field of behavioral economics, and a new movement in American urbanism, articulated by the work of Jane Jacobs, arose on a shared critique of these assumed models of rationality and efficiency. Many of the intuitive and observationbased ideas about cities put forth by Jacobs in The Death and Life of Great American Cities, such as the nature of slums, and the value of human capital and diversity, are now reinforced by data in current behavioral research. However, there has been little practical application of behavioral economics to urban planning policy in recent decades. The integration of the two fields is vital to addressing the coming dilemmas of a now predominantly urban globe. Andrea Sherman HONS2105

2 Sherman 1 Andrea Sherman Dr. Stark, Quizon HONS2105 April 29, 2013 The year 2008 was a tipping point in human habitation, the year in which the world s urban population surpassed the rural, according to the United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. As a result of the Industrial Revolution, the United States reached this halfway point much earlier, around The rapid growth spawned a massive effort to improve and control the chaos of cities, through the top-down, highly centralized methods of rational planning. As these efforts proved largely ineffective and even damaging in later decades, new theories began to emerge. By the mid-20th century, the field of behavioral economics, and a new movement in American urbanism, articulated by the work of Jane Jacobs, arose on a shared critique of these assumed models of rationality and efficiency. Many of the intuitive and observation-based ideas about cities put forth by Jacobs are now reinforced by data in current behavioral research. However, there has been little practical application of behavioral economics to urban planning policy in recent decades. The integration of the two fields is needed to address the growing dilemmas of current and future urban population growth. While top-down planning strategies decreased significantly with the reactionism of the Jacobs movement, coming increases in urban populations will necessitate a return to large-scale planning and design. By integrating appearingly irrational or inefficient behavior into future models, this return need not repeat the social and economic failures of the rational planning model. I. New Urbanists and Behavioral Economists Target Rational Models Shifts in urban planning and economics occurred in parallel, recognizing that naturally-occurring social behaviors are not necessarily the most efficient or rational. Early 2oth century regeneration and

3 Sherman 2 infrastructure in the United States was based in state prioritization of efficiency, and imposed order. In Dreaming the Rational City: the Myth of American City Planning, Christine Boyer describes the emergence of centralized planning (beginning in the 1890s) as primarily a means of imposing discipline through spatial means. The process, as condensed by Boyer, began with labeling land by specific function, similarly distributing individuals, monitoring use and constantly rearranging these units for maximum efficiency. The most prolific example of this methodology in action is the changed landscape of the New York Metropolitan area, irreversibly altered by the policies of Robert Moses. With his leadership, hundreds of parks, public housing projects, parkways, and cultural centers were built across New York. Robert Caro s The Power Broker, enumerates the millions of low-income citizens displaced and close-knit communities destroyed for the projects, swept in by policymakers with a firm, paternalistic belief that these organized units were what was best for the poor. Many of the projects were based off of the Garden City model proposed by Ebenezer Howard at the turn of the 20th Century, and the skyscraper Radiant City of Le Corbusier. The supposed utopia these proposals laid out consisted of high residences arranged around green parks, with ugly commercial and industrial locations placed together and at an aesthetically pleasing but accessible distance. This decentralized model remained a dominant influence through post-war reconstruction and revitalization. Decentralizing concentrations of population seemed a logical response to the influx of crowds during industrialization. Jacobs, however, attacked the premise of decentralization on several premises with the publication of Death and the Life in The Garden City and City Beautiful movements were in her view, philosophies which aimed to strip cities of what defined their value and potential for innovation, by attempting to make them operate as towns or villages. Providing luxury high-rises with inner green space, while considered a gift to poor neighborhoods, in fact took away neighborhood factors which offered a route to revitalization. Planning theorist Edward Glaeser credited these projects as Moses greatest mistake,

4 Sherman 3 "replacing well-functioning neighborhoods with Le Corbusier-inspired towers." "Moses spent millions and evicted tens of thousands to create buildings that became centers of crime, poverty, and despair, Glaeser reflects (Great Cities Need Great Builders, 2007). By clearing out neighborhoods designated slums, the projects erased, and failed to substitute, the advantages the busy neighborhoods had evolved. These included busy sidewalks which offered children a safe place to play with constant casual surveillance, small businesses which provided valuable services to each other, and a flow of traffic to keep crime at bay. Jacobs argued that the most productive neighborhoods are often the ones which appear the most disorganized, much to the chagrin of aesthetically-focused planners. There is a quality even meaner than outright ugliness or disorder, and this meaner quality is the dishonest mask of pretended order, achieved by ignoring or suppressing the real order that is struggling to exist and to be served (Death and Life, p. 16). The projects displacement destroyed the productive qualities of low-income neighborhoods which might otherwise have naturally unslummed, and replaced them with a pretended order. Adding to the damage of top-down planning, the segmenting and distributing of individuals described by Boyer began to exacerbate racial segregation along neighborhood lines as well. While early scholarly research on racism in the United States pointed to the Great Migration during the industrial revolution as a major cause, recent studies show that rezoning in the push for urban renewal played a key role in the racialization of city space through the cycle of displacement and proliferation of restrictive covenants, Kevin Gotham shows that racialization of urban space was heavily reinforced, creating an association in the real estate industry and public mind (Urban Space, 2000). This fear, was self-fulfilling, creating more reason for real estate professionals and housing reformists to pursue segregationist policies and further reinforce racial paranoia. Thus, the White Flight to suburbia was fueled and city centers became increasingly concentrated centers of poverty (Glaeser, Cutler, 1997).

5 Sherman 4 The common denominator in the failures of traditional planning models, Jacobs argued, was the attempt to form behaviors and communities to fit theory, rather than reforming theory along observed behaviors. An oft-cited example she used was that of Boston s North End, which city planners continued to label a terrible slum despite having among the lowest delinquency, disease, and infant mortality rates in the city the lowest ratio of rent to income ( Death and Life, p.10). Seeing this strange blindness to vitality, she observed that The pseudoscience of planning seems almost neurotic in its determination to imitate empiric failure and ignore empiric success (Death and Life, p. 183). In the same era, the field of economics began to undergo a similar re-assessment. The classical economic theorists such as Adam Smith and Jeremy Benthen founded their writing on theories of human nature before psychology began to emerge as a science. Adam Smith s Theory of Moral Sentiments, for example, contains observations on what would much later be called Risk aversion, and Benthen s writing on utility noted that expected utility was strongly affected by individual situation and behavior. However, psychology was not yet an accepted science, and academic pressure to establish economics as more of a hard science began to distance research from psychology and focus on empirical models, in the neoclassical period of economics. Neoclassical models built their foundation almost purely on utility (Based on Benthen, but ignoring behavioral observations) and assumptions of rationality in decisions-making. predictive failures of traditional economics arise from assumption of rationality (Camerer and Loewenstein 2004). By the middle of the 20 th century, most traces of psychology had disappeared from widely-accepted economic research. During the early 20 th century, the obsession, shared by city planners, with rationality and efficiency caused theorists to label situations in which expected utility failed as anomalies, rather than shift theory to fit observation.

6 Sherman 5 Utility predictions, however, failed often in general application; As the field of cognitive psychology gained greater acceptance and validity in scientific circles as a model for the brain, economists looked to it as a means to identify parameters and qualifications for models of utility. The information-processing metaphor permitted a fresh study of neglected topics like memory, problem solving, and decision making. These new topics were more obviously relevant to the neoclassical conception of utility maximization than behaviorism had appeared to be. Psychologists such as Ward Edwards, Duncan Luce, Amos Tversky, and Daniel Kahneman began to use economic models as a benchmark against which to contrast their psychological models (Advances in Behavioral Economics, p.6). The idea that economic models could not yield accurate insight without factoring in psychological findings gained hold quickly, and behavioral economics began to emerge as a counter to the predictive failings of assumed rationality in the 1960s, the same decade Jane Jacobs theories began to gain foothold in opposition to leviathan planning practices. In 1968, Gary Becker published Crime and Punishment: An Economic Approach, which factored psychological elements into economic decision-making, Herbert Simon developed the theory of bounded rationality, amd Maurice Allais produced the Allais Paradox, a seminal criticism of expected utility (Camererer and Loewenstein 2004). Jacobs-model urbanism and behavioral economics grew in tandem. They were critiques of their respective fields, emphasizing the need for observation-based policy, and taking local environments, be they physical or cognitive, into account when making predictions. At the core, each was built on the common sense that theory should fit observation, when the norm had been the reverse. II. Limited Interaction despite Shared Ideological Foundations

7 Sherman 6 Despite the shared foundations of urbanism and behavioral economics, there has been little serious interaction between the fields since the Jacobs heyday. One major reason is that the reactionism of urban movement minimized the role of comprehensive planning, swinging the pendulum from Moses to another, marginalized, extreme. As Thomas Campanella writes in his essay The Death and Life of American Planning, So thoroughly internalized was the Jacobs critique that planners could see only folly and failure in the work of their forebears. Burnham s grand dictum "Make no little plans" went from a battle cry to an embarrassment in less than a decade. He posits that this occurred in three major blows to the profession: Diminishing the identity of planning as a discipline, placing grassroots activism over planning authority at the cost of professional agency, and discouraging the the speculative courage and vision that once distinguished this profession (Campanella 2011). Writing about (and living in) Toronto later in life, Jacobs herself expressed discouragement with the absence of planning initiative. In a speech published in the Ontario Planning Journal, she lamented that the official departments seem to be brain-dead in the sense that we cannot depend on them in any way, shape, or form for providing intellectual leadership in addressing urgent problems involving the physical future of the city (Jacobs 1993). While she had fought vehemently for greater community involvement and a scaling-back of planning, she recognized the importance of a reliable administrative structure for addressing the needs of the metropolis. In The Death and Life of American Cities, she does not advocate for erasure of bureaucracy, but rather an administration which in is arranged horizontally to as closely as possible align with existing communities (p ). While there is emerging research in behavioral studies application to planning, In recent years, the most significant urban innovations have been proposed by architects, private firms, or academic theorists. William Whyte, a former New York City planner and mentor to Jane Jacobs has been instrumental establishing the role of psychology and behavior studies in architecture and urban design, but primarily through his numerous books in recent decades, rather than on an administrative planning level (Kaufman

8 Sherman ). From the cognitive side, Harold Proshansky has established the field of environmental psychology as a serious discipline. His work, however, is most commonly studied in architectural or design programs, rather than urban planning departments. As a whole, examples of proposed and implemented eco-cities are overwhelmingly enacted by designers or civics groups, while planning education has stayed primarily focused on bureaucracy (Brooks 2011). Innovation has been designated to the now more-glamorous fields of architecture and social science, while planning has shrunk to a bureaucratic exercise. In addition, Dr. Nancy Brooks writes that while the urban planners and economists share a common language and agenda, there has been little sharing of ideas between the two. An academic gap has kept each largely unaware of relevant research by the other. Planning education is lacking a necessary foundation in microeconomics, and urban economists would benefit from a more thorough understanding of the environments which affect and are shaped by their policies ( Teaching Economics to Planners and the Role of Urban Planning to Economists, p. 1-10). III. Applying behavioral economics to the Future of Urban Planning In recent years, studies have continued to emerge which provide statistical reinforcement of the type of planning advocated by Jane Jacobs. Big data and ever more advanced analysis techniques strengthen the theories she advocated 50 years ago based on observation. A point that Jacobs drove in constantly was that diversification increases productivity in cities and individual communities, and segmentation, whether it be of people or land use, is damaging. Successful communities flourish economically and socially in areas of mixed land use, which ensure various groups of people throughout the day for a variety of purposes (The Death and Life p ). Geographic Information Systems analysis compiled in 2007 for VivaCity found that social, economic, and physical land-use diversity correlated with the most economically stable and crime-free areas of inner cities (The Generation of Diversity, p. 1-6). Along with Whyte s work in the

9 Sherman s, which laid out a methodology for quantifying day-to-day urban life, this recent research supports the feasibility of applying a behavior-based model to planning practices. Jacobs was also a staunch advocate of public transportation, not only as a way to reduce traffic, but as a vital factor in creating stable neighborhoods even in low-income communities. Countless studies now show that property values increase directly with frequency of public transportation service, and in addition, communities gain economic opportunity and stability through the opportunities public transport brings. Data released in March 2013 by the American Public Transportation Association showed that neighborhoods with high frequency transit provide residents access to over five times the number of jobs per square mile as compared to otherwise similar neighborhoods. The greatest advantage public transport provides is economic mobility. The benefits in stability were shown in the resilience of properties near public transit during the recent recession. Residential property values, the study shows, performed over forty percent higher on average than those not accessible by public transportation (Becker 2013). Recent findings such as these give advocates of community-centric, Jacobs-style urban development firm empirical ground to stand on in the face of growing metropolitan needs. Growing population, the return of American baby-boomers to cities, and a need for energy efficiency are all contributing to an increasingly urban population in the United States. America s population is already near eighty percent urban, and projected to reach ninety by 2020 (UNDP 2012). This surge in urban density will require comprehensive planning to an even greater extent than that of the early 20 th. While the growing metropolis the 21st century will require a resurgence of large-scale urban planning and infrastructure development, application of behavioral economics to the field is a way to implement new strategies without the mistakes of the Moses era. Despite doing arguably more to retract the field of urban planning than any other individual, Jacobs later lamented the complete disappearance of the profession s role. In 1993, now residing in Toronto, she

10 Sherman 9 made a speech listing a slew of recent successful initiatives in Ontario, from public transportation to waterfront development, pointing out in frustration that Not one of these forward looking and important policies and ideas not ONE was the intellectual product of an official planning department, whether in Toronto, Metro, or the province. In fact, she insisted, our official planning departments seem to be brain-dead in the sense that we cannot depend on them in any way, shape, or form for providing intellectual leadership in addressing urgent problems involving the physical future of the city (Jacobs 1993). While this method worked for the local improvements to which she pointed, rapidly expanding urbanization in the 21 st century is ringing in large-scale projects which require top-down planning. Direct Involvement of stakeholders The success of any plan relies on the direct involvement of stakeholders for which Jacobs advocated. Throughout Death and the Life, she argues that the success or failure of neighborhood revitalization hinges on local involvement. Once again, her anecdotal observation proves empirical. In Behavioral Economics, Past, Present, and Future, Camerer and Loewenstein show that the effectiveness of any economic model relies on understanding parameters set by the locale.

11 Sherman 10 Works Cited Becker, Sofia, Scott Bernstein, and Linda Young. The New Real Estate Mantra: Location Near Public Transportation. Rep. American Public Transportation Association, American Association of Realtors, 20 Mar Web. 29 Apr Brooks, Nancy. "Teaching Urban Economics to Planners and the Role of Urban Planning to Economists." Oxford Handbooks Online Oxford University Press. Date of access 29 May. 2013, ordhb e-2. Campanella, Thomas J., Dr. "Jane Jacobs and the Death and Life of American Planning." Reconsidering Jane Jacobs: The Death and Life of American Planning: Places: Design Observer. The Design Observer Group, 11 Apr Web. 30 Mar Campanella, Thomas J., Jane Jacobs and the Death and Life of American Planning, Places Journal, April Accessed 29 Jan Camerer, Colin F., and George Loewenstein. "Behavioral economics: Past, present, future." Advances in behavioral economics (2004): Caro, Robert A. The Power Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York. New York: Vintage, Print.

12 Sherman 11 Ellis, Cliff. "Dreaming the Rational City: The Myth of American City Planning by Christine Boyer." Berkeley Planning Journal 2.1 (1985): EScholarship. University of California. Web. Evans, Graeme, and Foord, Jo. "The Generation of Diversity: Mixed Use and Urban Sustainability." Urban Sustainability Through Environmental Design: Approaches to time-people-place responsive urban spaces. Taylor and Francis December Web, retrieved May 9, Glaeser, Edward L.. "Great Cities Need Great Builders". The New York Sun. (January 19, 2007) Retrieved April 1, 2013 Glaeser, Edward L., Matthew E. Kahn, and Jordan Rappaport Why do the poor live in cities? The role of public transportation. Journal of Urban Economics 63, no. 1: Web. Accessed April 20, %20in%20cities.pdf?sequence=2 Gotham, Kevin Fox. "Urban Space, Restrictive Covenants and the Origins of Racial Residential Segregation in a US City, " International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 24.3 (2000): Print. Gratz, Roberta Brandes. The Battle for Gotham: New York in the Shadow of Robert Moses and Jane Jacobs. New York: Nation, Print. Horayangkura, Vimolsiddhi, "Incorporating Environment-Behavior Knowledge into the Design Process: An Elusive Challenge for Architects in the 21st Century." Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, Volume 50, 2012, Pages 30 41

13 Sherman 12 Jacobs, Jane. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. [New York]: Random House, Print. Jacobs, Jane Jane Jacobs, Are Planning Departments Useful? Ontario Planning Journal 8, no. 4 (July/August 1993), 4-5 Kaufman, Michael T. (13 January 1999). "William H. Whyte, 'Organization Man' Author and Urbanologist, Is Dead at 81". 13 January, 1999 The New York Times. Retrieved 16 April United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs. Population Division. World Urbanization Prospects the 2011 Revision. New York: United Nations, Print.