IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i20p13227-d942567.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Sustainable Development Goals and Equity in Urban Planning: A Comparative Analysis of Chicago, São Paulo, and Delhi

Author

Listed:
  • Nathan Teklemariam

    (Department of Political Science, College of Behavioral, Social and Health Sciences, Clemson University, 2087 Barre Hall, Clemson, SC 29634, USA)

Abstract

Today, for the first time in the history of human civilization, over half of the world’s population lives in urban areas. Due to this global urbanization, the United Nations included sustainable urban development in its recent Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) agenda. SDG Goal 11 is one of 17 comprehensive SDGs, and it pays specific attention to making “cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable”. This study comparatively analyzes the current state of participatory urban planning processes in three cities: Chicago, Illinois, U.S.; São Paulo, Brazil; and Delhi, India. Utilizing the cities’ most recent master plans, a content analysis found that public engagement was a key instrument that they adopted in the production of their planning documents, but the level of engagement and tools used to engage the public differed among cities, with Chicago and São Paulo demonstrating more robust public engagement than Delhi. The historical context of the comparative countries’ political, cultural, and socioeconomic development also plays a role in the degree to which a landscape for public engagement and participation exists. The study finds that the ideals of a just city can be determined by the level of participation with which cities engage their citizens during the planning process, and that sustainable urban development is further determined by the level of social equity that currently exists in a city itself.

Suggested Citation

  • Nathan Teklemariam, 2022. "Sustainable Development Goals and Equity in Urban Planning: A Comparative Analysis of Chicago, São Paulo, and Delhi," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(20), pages 1-16, October.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:20:p:13227-:d:942567
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/20/13227/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/20/13227/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Salo V. Coslovsky, 2015. "Beyond Bureaucracy: How Prosecutors and Public Defenders Enforce Urban Planning Laws in São Paulo, Brazil," International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 39(6), pages 1103-1119, November.
    2. Rémi Genevey & Rajendra Kumar Pachauri & Laurence Tubiana & Raphaël Jozan & Tancrède Voituriez & Sanjivi Sundar, 2013. "Reducing inequalities: A sustainable development challenge," Post-Print hal-03051151, HAL.
    3. Cernea, M.M., 1992. "The Building Blocks of Participation: Testing Bottom-Up Planning," World Bank - Discussion Papers 166, World Bank.
    4. John F. Forester, 1999. "The Deliberative Practitioner: Encouraging Participatory Planning Processes," MIT Press Books, The MIT Press, edition 1, volume 1, number 0262561220, December.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. E. Melanie DuPuis & Brian J. Gareau, 2008. "Neoliberal Knowledge: The Decline of Technocracy and the Weakening of the Montreal Protocol," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 89(5), pages 1212-1229, December.
    2. Makena Coffman & Karen Umemoto, 2010. "The triple-bottom-line: framing of trade-offs in sustainability planning practice," Environment, Development and Sustainability: A Multidisciplinary Approach to the Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development, Springer, vol. 12(5), pages 597-610, October.
    3. te Brömmelstroet, Marco, 2017. "Towards a pragmatic research agenda for the PSS domain," Transportation Research Part A: Policy and Practice, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 77-83.
    4. Primmer, Eeva & Kyllonen, Simo, 2006. "Goals for public participation implied by sustainable development, and the preparatory process of the Finnish National Forest Programme," Forest Policy and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 8(8), pages 838-853, November.
    5. Liz Barry, 2022. "Community science and the design of climate governance," Climatic Change, Springer, vol. 171(3), pages 1-17, April.
    6. Davies-Colley, Christian & Smith, Willie, 2012. "Implementing environmental technologies in development situations: The example of ecological toilets," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 34(1), pages 1-8.
    7. Ahmed Z. Khan & Frank Moulaert & Jan Schreurs & Konrad Miciukiewicz, 2014. "Integrative Spatial Quality: A Relational Epistemology of Space and Transdisciplinarity in Urban Design and Planning," Journal of Urban Design, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 19(4), pages 393-411, August.
    8. Füg, Franz & Ibert, Oliver, 2020. "Assembling social innovations in emergent professional communities. The case of learning region policies in Germany," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 28(3), pages 541-562.
    9. Crystal Legacy & Ryan van den Nouwelant, 2015. "Negotiating Strategic Planning's Transitional Spaces: The Case of ‘Guerrilla Governance’ in Infrastructure Planning," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 47(1), pages 209-226, January.
    10. Peter Munthe-Kaas, 2015. "Agonism and co-design of urban spaces," Urban Research & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(2), pages 218-237, July.
    11. Xiaosu Ye & Lie Ma & Kunhui Ye & Jiantao Chen & Qiu Xie, 2017. "Analysis of Regional Inequality from Sectoral Structure, Spatial Policy and Economic Development: A Case Study of Chongqing, China," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 9(4), pages 1-17, April.
    12. Peter Dithan Ntale & Jude Ssempebwa & Badiru Musisi & Genza Gyaviira Musoke & Kimoga Joseph & C. B. Mugimu & Ngoma Muhammed & Joseph Ntayi, 2020. "Gaps in the structuring of organizations in the graduate employment context in Uganda," Journal of Organization Design, Springer;Organizational Design Community, vol. 9(1), pages 1-10, December.
    13. Corianne Payton Scally & J. Rosie Tighe, 2015. "Democracy in Action?: NIMBY as Impediment to Equitable Affordable Housing Siting," Housing Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 30(5), pages 749-769, July.
    14. Derk Jan Stobbelaar, 2020. "Impact of Student Interventions on Urban Greening Processes," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(13), pages 1-19, July.
    15. Patricia Molina Costa, 2014. "From plan to reality: Implementing a community vision in Jackson Square, Boston," Planning Theory & Practice, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 293-310, September.
    16. Ratka ÄŒolić & Ä orÄ‘e Milić & Jasna Petrić & NataÅ¡a ÄŒolić, 2022. "Institutional capacity development within the national urban policy formation process – Participants’ views," Environment and Planning C, , vol. 40(1), pages 69-89, February.
    17. Einsiedel, Edna F. & Boyd, Amanda D. & Medlock, Jennifer & Ashworth, Peta, 2013. "Assessing socio-technical mindsets: Public deliberations on carbon capture and storage in the context of energy sources and climate change," Energy Policy, Elsevier, vol. 53(C), pages 149-158.
    18. Jongwng Ju & Jaecheol Kim, 2023. "Applying the Delphi Approach to Incorporate Voiceless Stakeholders in Community Planning," Land, MDPI, vol. 12(10), pages 1-23, October.
    19. repec:lib:000cis:v:5:y:2017:i:1:p:26-34 is not listed on IDEAS
    20. Maie Kiisel, 2013. "Local Community Participation in the Planning Process: A Case of Bounded Communicative Rationality," European Planning Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 21(2), pages 232-250, February.
    21. Anbumozhi, Venkatachalam & Bauer, Armin, 2013. "How Low-Carbon Green Growth Can Reduce Inequalities," ADBI Working Papers 420, Asian Development Bank Institute.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:20:p:13227-:d:942567. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.