Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
careful monitoring of the changes in the various sectors to see if real progress is
being achieved.
The dynamism and commitment to local community or neighbourhood develop-
ment of the EcoDistrict organization must be praised. But for those working in the
field of urban sustainability and in green issues, there is little in the content and in
the strategies that is really new. The uniqueness lies in their attempt to integrate or
at least inter-relate vary different sectors of the character and functioning of neigh-
bourhoods or community areas within cities to create meaningful change through
grass roots mobilization with professional help. Yet there may be several weak-
nesses in subsequent stages, weaknesses that plague all grass-roots organizations.
One is the fact that the implementation of the ideas from the experts that produced
the report depends on community leaders who may lack the skills and the finances
to ensure that policies are successfully pursued. As yet it is too soon to see how suc-
cessful these EcoDistricts will be in transforming their neighbourhoods. Many cit-
ies do not have the track record of proven environmental interest and improvements
that is found in Portland, nor the commitment of a solid majority of its population
to these types of sustainability initiatives. But since the EcoDistrict approach claims
to provide skill-training, and recommends policies with a proven record of success,
there must be hope that the approach will be more successful than the alternative
in most cities, mainly top-down policies that seem to be imposed on areas by city
officials, with few attempts to involve the local residents in generating and main-
taining the projects. Such approaches mean that there are few signs of any collec-
tive feelings of what amounts to local ownership and belonging in the projects, as
when plans and implementation are produced by, and for, the local community. Also
this organization, which also stresses the need for public-private partnerships, does
seem to be a product of an American system that often distrusts direct government
action and often prefers private enterprise and local solutions. So its applicability to
other countries with more centralized planning systems may be problematic. But a
general unresolved question is whether land owners will co-operate in this develop-
ment process and what happens if they do not. Moreover it is not clear whether the
citizens in the local districts within cities have really got the power to reject propos-
als that they think are detrimental to their area, or to generate their own. NIMBY-
ism is often a powerful response against change and many in inner cities may resist
what others see as progress. There may also be resistance from the different views
held by city planners and city councils, although in some cases they may be con-
sidering the wider needs of the city. More generally there are few mentions of the
many problems faced by all grass-roots organizations (Davies and Herbert
1993
,
Chap. 6). Certainly the desire of the EcoDistrict organization to provide profes-
sional advice to their various projects by training people to identify problems and to
help the implementation of some of the strategies through local community action
is a new and significant venture. But there can be no guarantee of successful con-
clusions. Nevertheless, the Ecodistrict approach does provide another useful way
of improving urban areas, not by new developments, but by the more difficult task
of retro-fitting districts within cities to create a more sustainable future, through an
approach that involves local community development and involvement.
