As in many large European Cities, Amsterdam is confronted with a large housing boom, partially fuelled by shortcomings in (affordable) housing development. Simultaneously, there is a persistent need to improve neighbourhoods with a weak socioeconomic status. The municipal government aims to both, develop major housing schemes and designate redevelopment areas. In 2017, Amsterdam presented a new urban renewal program for 32 designated deprived neighbourhoods in three boroughs. The program sets out physical housing ambitions, but also intends to anticipate and integrally address social, economic and ecological challenges. To ensure the developments are inclusive, the active involvement of local communities in the decision making process is central part of the new policy. However, a large body of planning literature emphasizes the tendency of large redevelopment processes to become exclusive rather than inclusive. To avoid these pitfalls, new spatial and programmatic governance arrangements may need to be developed. In close collaboration with the municipality and local communities, we conduct empirical action-research on Amsterdam’s urban regeneration program to develop and test promising solutions with practice. The paper analyses the planning process as it evolves. Based on framing theory, we structure and analyse the expected governance barriers hindering the inclusivity during the course of the planning process. The insights gathered regarding inclusivity provide critical input in the conceptualisation of new more forceful inclusive spatial planning strategies. In conclusion, a variety of spatial and programmatic governance arrangements are presented to reinforce the inclusivity of planning processes for a sustained impact of large-scale urban renewal programs.
DOCUMENT
Mobility hubs facilitate multimodal transport and have the potential to improve the accessibility and usability of new mobility services. However, in the context of increasing digitalisation, using mobility hubs requires digital literacy or even owning a smartphone. This constraint may result in the exclusion of current and potential users. Digital kiosks might prove to be a solution, as they can facilitate the use of the services found at mobility hubs. Nevertheless, knowledge of how digital kiosks may improve the experience of disadvantaged groups remains limited in the literature. As part of the SmartHubs project, a field test with a digital kiosk was conducted with 105 participants in Brussels (Belgium) and Rotterdam (The Netherlands) to investigate the intention to use it and its usability in the context of mobility hubs. This study adopted a mixed methods approach, combining participant observation and questionnaire surveys. Firstly, participants were asked to accomplish seven tasks with the digital kiosk while being observed by the researchers. Finally, assisted questionnaire surveys were conducted with the same participants, including close-ended, open-ended and socio-demographic questions. The results offer insights into the experience of the users of a digital kiosk in a mobility hub and the differences across specific social groups. These findings may be relevant for decision-makers and practitioners working in urban mobility on subjects such as mobility hubs and shared mobility, and for user interface developers concerned with the inclusivity of digital kiosks.
LINK
The climate crisis is an urgent and complex global challenge, requiring transformative action from diverse stakeholders, including governments, civil society, and grassroots movements. Conventional top-down approaches to climate governance have proven insufficient (e.g. UNFCCC, COP events), necessitating a shift towards more inclusive and polycentric models that incorporate the perspectives and needs of diverse communities (Bliznetskaya, 2023; Dorsch & Flachsland, 2017). The independent, multidisciplinary approach of citizen-led activist groups can provide new insights and redefine challenges and opportunities for climate governance and regulation. Despite their important role in developing effective climate action, these citizen-led groups often face significant barriers to decision-making participation, including structural, practical, and legal challenges (Berry et al., 2019; Colli, 2021; Marquardt et al., 2022; Tayler & Schulte, 2019).
DOCUMENT
