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.
Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XL-8, 147-154, 2014www.int-arch-photogramm-remote-sens-spatial-inf-sci.net/XL-8/147/2014/doi:10.5194/isprsarchives-XL-8-147-2014Integrated flood disaster management and spatial information: Case studies ofNetherlands and IndiaS. Zlatanova1, T. Ghawana2, A. Kaur2, and J. M. M. Neuvel31Faculty of Architecture, Jullianalaan, TU Delft, 134, 2628BL Delft, the Netherlands2Centre for Disaster Management Studies, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Sector-16C, Dwarka, New Delhi, P.O. Box-110078, India3Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Risk management, Handelskade 75, 7417 DH Deventer, the NetherlandsKeywords: Floods, Spatial Information Infrastructure, GIS, Risk Management, Emergency Management Abstract. Spatial Information is an integral part of flood management practices which include risk management &emergency response processes. Although risk & emergency management activities have their own characteristics, forexample, related to the time scales, time pressure, activities & actors involved, it is still possible to identify at least onecommon challenge that constrains the ability of risk & emergency management to plan for & manage emergencieseffectively and efficiently i.e. the need for better information. Considering this aspect, this paper explores flood managementin Netherlands& India with an emphasis on spatial information requirements of each system. The paper examines theactivities, actors & information needs related to flood management. Changing perspectives on flood management inNetherlands are studied where additional attention is being paid to the organization and preparation of flood emergencymanagement. Role of different key actors involved in risk management is explored. Indian Flood management guidelines, byNational Disaster Management Authority, are analyzed in context of their history, institutional framework, achievements andgaps. Flood Forecasting System of Central Water Commission of India is also analyzed in context of spatial dimensions.Further, information overlap between risk & emergency management from the perspectives of spatial planners & emergencyresponders and role of GIS based modelling / simulation is analyzed. Finally, the need for an integrated spatial informationstructure is explained & discussed in detail. This examination of flood management practices in the Netherlands and Indiawith an emphasis on the required spatial information in these practices has revealed an increased recognition of the stronginterdependence between risk management and emergency response processes. Consequently, the importance of anintegrated spatial information infrastructure that facilitates the process of both risk and emergency management isaddressed.Conference Paper (PDF, 1063 KB) Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., XL-8, 147-154, 2014www.int-arch-photogramm-remote-sens-spatial-inf-sci.net/XL-8/147/2014/doi:10.5194/isprsarchives-XL-8-147-2014Integrated flood disaster management and spatial information: Case studies ofNetherlands and IndiaS. Zlatanova1, T. Ghawana2, A. Kaur2, and J. M. M. Neuvel31Faculty of Architecture, Jullianalaan, TU Delft, 134, 2628BL Delft, the Netherlands2Centre for Disaster Management Studies, Guru Gobind Singh Indraprastha University, Sector-16C, Dwarka, New Delhi, P.O. Box-110078, India3Saxion University of Applied Sciences, Risk management, Handelskade 75, 7417 DH Deventer, the NetherlandsKeywords: Floods, Spatial Information Infrastructure, GIS, Risk Management, Emergency ManagementAbstract. Spatial Information is an integral part of flood management practices which include risk management &emergency response processes. Although risk & emergency management activities have their own characteristics, forexample, related to the time scales, time pressure, activities & actors involved, it is still possible to identify at least onecommon&
MULTIFILE
The population in rural areas in the northern provinces are aging in a much higher pace than in other parts of the Netherlands. Many young and higher educated citizens move out of these provinces. Quality of life in rural villages decreases likewise and the inhabitants that stay behind are more vulnerable, with lower income and educational levels. Recent decentralization policies put a larger burden on local constituencies to guarantee the quality of the living environment but a lot of them lack sufficient knowledge and capacity to tackle this complex issue.The initiators of this application have joined their knowledge and experience to put together a consortium with the aim to support these smaller constituencies in rural areas in the three northern provinces with a new and innovative methodology: the GO! approach. This approach was developed in the neigborhoods of Utrecht municipality and will be used for the first time in rural communities with a comparable size .This approach consists of the following steps:• First to identify possibilities to create a healthier living environment by analyzing available data on pollution, spatial layout and social cohesion.• To discuss the result of this analysis with local citizens and other local stakeholders in order to link the data with local experiences• To prioritize into major themes as a result of the combination of all this available information.• To link these major themes to combinations effective measures available from RIVM and international databases.• To present these combinations to the local government, their citizens and other local stakeholders in order to let them choose for an effective approach and inplemant it together in order to create a local healthier living environment.The GO! approach will provide local citizens and professionals with the necessary tools and knowledge to work jointly and effectively to realize a healthier living environment. The project partners that jointly started the consortium will put in effort during this first year to build and formalize the consortium and to make arrangements with several constituencies in the three northers provinces to formulate their own specific knowledge agenda as a basis for concrete project proposals in the second stage to be implemented with the support of the formalized consortium.
