Transcending Dilemmas in Urban Policy-Making: Envisioning versus Adapting, Growing versus Stabilizing

The problems faced by stakeholders in contemporary urban policy-making processes are becoming increasingly intricate and are emerging at an increasingly faster pace. Many of these problems are emerging as dilemmas between option A or option B. This article proposes that dilemmas can be addressed at three different levels of complexity. At the lowest level, stakeholders accept dilemmas without questioning their formulation, and assume that an either-or choice is required. They accept both the costs and the benefits of either option A or B while dismissing the benefits and costs of the discarded alternative. At a higher level of complexity, stakeholders manage to transcend the dilemma: they reconfigure the problem formulation and create a hitherto unforeseen solution that compounds the benefits of options A and B while rejecting the costs of both options. At the highest level of complexity, stakeholders purposefully look for several dilemmas to transcend in tandem while creating synergies throughout the process. In order to illustrate this argument, the article explores the case of Porto and considers two dilemmas in particular. The first is the envisioning versus adapting dilemma: should cities embrace a powerful vision for their future or adapt to emerging opportunities? The second is the growing versus stabilizing dilemma: should cities continuously pursue economic growth or aim to maintain an agreed-upon level of economic activity? The article offers empirical insights on both dilemmas as experienced in Porto and concludes with a reflection about the strategic relevance of addressing dilemmas at the highest level of complexity possible.