Facilitated and emergent social learning in sustainable urban redevelopment: exposing a mismatch and moving towards convergence

Abstract

This article makes a case for the importance of social learning in urban planning and development practice, particularly in the context of attempts to achieve higher standards of sustainability. We proceed by comparing learning outcomes in Vancouver’s Southeast False Creek and Melbourne’s Docklands urban redevelopment projects. We find that the instrumental model of learning supports facilitated learning approaches pursued in a manner that is mostly disconnected from the learning being demanded for improved decision-making and improved results. The emergent learning which can be empirically demonstrated, which is more easily explained by a systems-theory model, lacks exposure to deliberative process.

Keywords:

• social learning
• urban development
• waterfront redevelopment
• Vancouver
• Melbourne
• policy learning

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the funding support of the Canadian Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council (820-2010-176). An earlier version of this article was presented at the Distinctiveness of Cities/Modes of Reproduction International Conference (TU-Darmstadt).

Notes

1. Government may employ the highly skilled workforce necessary to generate this learning in-house; may outsource this learning through contractual relationships with third parties and work to coordinate the linking of this externally generated knowledge into policy processes and practices or may form different types of partnerships or network arrangements in order to generate this knowledge across the boundaries of organizations, sectors, even national and international boundaries. In practice, all three means of generating policy learning will be mobilized.

2. Recognizing the need for social learning across scales, as per Garmendia and Stagl (2010), we will nonetheless focus for the purposes of this comparative case analysis on learning at the scale of the precinct development project, and the medium-sized set of development, governance and citizen actors involved in any such given project.

3. The research received approval by Simon Fraser University Department of Research Ethics (2010s0550) and the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology University College Human Ethics Advisory Network (CHEAN A-2000370-07/10).

4. The Award was for the VicUrban Melbourne Docklands Innovative Strategy for Designed Development for new Australian urban design initiatives, projects, developments and significant publications that contribute to wider appreciation of urban design. The Strategy, as stated in VicUrban’s press release about the award on 16 November 2004, ‘includes 16 documents developed with the expertise of 15 leading consulting firms. These documents include the Docklands Community Development Plan, Melbourne Docklands ESD Guide, Place and Community Strategy, and Bicycle Strategy.’

5. The city report announcing the selection of Millennium Properties Ltd for SEFC development stipulates that the Developer will: ‘assemble a team with extensive experience in architecture, landscape architecture, engineering, sustainable practices, green building design, cost consulting/development economics, universal access, building code, Certified Professional (CP) Olympic Village development, and project management as a minimum’ (City of Vancouver 2006, 6).

6. VicUrban University is credited as responsible for the idea to redesign the problematic automobile thoroughfare Harbour Esplanade as a pedestrian and cycling route (Hearn and Calvert 2009).

7. When asked, this executive defended this lack of regular citizen-government accountability, insinuating that the role played by the Docklands Authority in lieu of local government was welcomed by the residents of Docklands: ‘the Melbourne Docklands community were a very powerful group of 4,000 people [in 2006] … and we used to meet with them, and they would sort of say, “Why do we have to become part of the City of Melbourne, because you know, you guys respond to us immediately.” ’

8. For example, a post by ‘Contributor’ states: ‘There is a strong movement within place making towards “design by community”. What this means is that the people who ultimately live or work in a place should be the most influential in the development process and decisions that are made. This is regardless of their financial investment in the place. Clearly, this view would make many developers pretty nervous. To have your bottom line profit determined by dollarless stakeholders opens the door to all kinds of unacceptable risk.’

9. Suggested, for example, by this quote from a SEFC architect: ‘The focus that comes out of this project, I think it’s a recognition that if you start to evaluate where value is, whether that’s in terms of dollars or resource consumption or carbon reduction, you can start to take a project and begin at the very beginning and look all the way through.’

10. It is also worth bearing in mind the epistemological dangers of seeking only a particular kind of solution, to the exclusion of understanding and exploring failures.