Anti-adaptive urbanism: long-term implications of building inward-turned neighborhoods in Israel

ABSTRACT

Theoretical models of neighborhood planning have changed substantially since the midst of the twentieth century. This is not necessarily the case, however, with the practice of planning and building new neighborhoods. Particularly, the influence of early-modernist models as ‘neighborhood unit” and “towers-in-the-park” remains extremely high. This paper ties these models with term “anti-adaptive urbanism” and highlights the qualities that make them stubborn: The comprehensiveness of the plan, meaning that such neighborhoods follow a complete plan prepared in advance, encompassing the public and private elements; and the hierarchical design dedicated for creating an inward-turned residential areas. Long-term socio-spatial implications of building such neighborhoods are investigated through comparing pairs of old (since the 1950s–1960s) and new (developed since the 1990s) neighborhoods constructed in five cities throughout Israel. Exploring the urban dynamics over the period of 1983–2013, the results reveal the socio-spatial burden of having anti-adaptive neighborhoods.

KEYWORDS:

• Neighborhood planning
• adaptive urbanism
• towers-in-the-Park
• neighborhood Unit
• anti-adaptive neighborhoods

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Supplementary material

Supplemental data for this article can be accessedhere.

Notes

1. See: https://data.oecd.org/pop/fertility-rates.htm.

2. Up until the land reform in 2009–2013, it was named Israel Land Administration. For Israel’s land policy and the reform, see Hananel (2012, 2013, 2015).

3. See for example the case of the city of Ashdod in Yacobi and Tzfadia 2009; Aharon-Gutman (2014). However, in Tel Aviv, where most of the land is either private or under municipal domination, governmental control is much weaker. For the development regime in Tel Aviv, see Margalit (2009, 2013).

4. www.madlan.co.il.

5. An appendix (supplemented data) provides extensive information of the survey conducted in the old and new neighborhood of Ashdod, as an example to the physical survey conducted in all neighborhoods.

6. Relatively high rates of participants replied “don’t know” on this question, probably because not all have kids in primary school.

Additional information

Funding

This work was supported by the Ministry of Environmental Protection, Israel.

Notes on contributors

Nurit Alfasi

Nurit Alfasi is an associate professor at the Department of Geography and Environmental Development in Ben-Gurion University of the Negev and since 2011 the head of the planning graduate program. Her research interests include planning theory and the legitimization to planning, and the relations between planning policies and urban processes. Her current research deals with the housing crisis and the institutional envelop around urban regeneration.

Amitai Raphael Shnizik

Amitai Raphael Shnizik holds an MA degree in urban planning from the Department of Geography and Environmental Development, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.

Maureen Davidson

Maureen Davidson holds an MA degree in urban planning from the Department of Geography and Environmental Development, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev.

Alon Kahani

Alon Kahani holds an MA degree in urban planning from the Department of Geography, The Hebrew University, and works as the director of knowledge development and economy at the Department of Policy Making, at Israel Authority of Urban Regeneration.