Urban Planning in Planet Earth’s Tragedy of the Commons

Copyright © 2019 Richard S. Bolan.

All rights reserved. No part of this book may be used or reproduced by any means, graphic, electronic, or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, taping or by any information storage retrieval system without the written permission of the author except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews.

The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Because of the dynamic nature of the Internet, any web addresses or links contained in this book may have changed since publication and may no longer be valid. The views expressed in this work are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the publisher, and the publisher hereby disclaims any responsibility for them.

Any people depicted in stock imagery provided by Getty Images are models,

and such images are being used for illustrative purposes only.

Certain stock imagery © Getty Images.

ISBN: 978-1-5320-7910-8 (sc)

ISBN: 978-1-5320-7911-5 (e)

Library of Congress Control Number: 2019911237

iUniverse rev. date: 10/02/2019

This book is dedicated to:

my grandson: Garrett

and my seven step-grandchildren:

Katrina, Dan, Ben, August, Annalee, Thea, and Zane

and my two step great-grandchildren: Anna and Kloe

I fervently hope that 30 years from now global natural conditions will leave all of them healthy and free from air and water pollution, hurricanes, tornadoes, wild fires, infested agriculture, excessive heat, environmental disease and loss of biodiversity.

Contents

About the Author

Acknowledgments

Chapter 1      Introduction

Chapter 2      Urban Population Growth

Chapter 3      The Rise of the Oligopoly Corporatist Economy

Chapter 4      Corporate Control of Governance

Chapter 5      The Role of Technology

Chapter 6      The Atmosphere of Future Urban Development

Chapter 7      Urban Planning Education for Overturning the Tragedy of the Commons

Chapter 8      Epilogue

About the Author

Richard Stuart Bolan has a sixty-year career in urban planning. He graduated from Yale in civil engineering and from MIT with a master’s degree in city and regional planning. He earned a PhD from New York University, majoring in urban planning and political science. He was a practitioner for ten years before joining the faculty at Boston College in 1967. While there, he served as editor for the Journal of the American Institute of Planners. In 1985, he moved to the Humphrey School of Public Affairs at the University of Minnesota. In 1990, he became involved in working in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe as they moved from Soviet-style communism to democratic, private-economy societies. His scholarly focus has been on planning theory and philosophy, and his most recent publications include Urban Planning’s Philosophical Entanglements: The Rugged, Dialectical Path from Knowledge to Action (Routledge 2017).

Acknowledgments

While graduate trained in urban planning, I spent much time teaching environmental planning, a logical focus since my early study of civil engineering. Yet I came to learn that our approach to environmental planning was seriously deficient because of our lack of ability to bring economics, political science, and other social sciences into the environmental-planning process. The focus on environmental science was preventing us from fully understanding and adopting actions that would move us toward solving our current and local climate challenge and environmental damage.

The first author who gave me serious concern was Sheldon Wolin, a political scientist whose 2008 book, Democracy Incorporated: Managed Democracy and the Specter of Inverted Totalitarianism, provided the first hint that the corporate domain was really moving the world away from democracy. Another author who really accelerated my concern was Barry Lynn, a journalist whose 2010 book, Cornered: The New Monopoly Capitalism and the Economics of Destruction, highlighted the perils of oligopoly that had been moving dominantly since the 1980s. This book was also facing the economic downturn of 2008–2012. These two works highlighted how our ability in environmental planning was being diminished by the global corporate oligopoly. In effect, reading those two books really pushed me to begin work on this book.

From this, I am also indebted to several other authors who greatly helped my understanding of the Tragedy of the Commons. Jane Mayer’s book Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires behind the Rise of the Radical Right is a New York Times best seller that illustrates how the use of money shapes the behavior of businesspeople and politicians—not just money earned by working but also inherited money and superfluous exchanges often under less-than-legal circumstances.

Other works have also helped in bringing my concern for urban planning to meet the earth’s climate challenges. They include the following: Saaskia Sassen, Cities in a World Economy, fourth edition (2012); Robert Kuttner, Can Democracy Survive Global Capitalism? (2018); William Domhoff, Who Rules America? The Triumph of the Corporate Rich (2014); Martin Gilens, Affluence and Influence: Economic Inequality and Political Power in America (2012); Tim Jackson, Prosperity without Growth: Foundations for the Economy of Tomorrow, second edition (2018); Ian Gough, Heat, Greed and Human Need: Climate Change, Capitalism and Sustainable Well Being (2017); Samuel Stein, Capital City: Gentrification and the Real Estate State (2019) and Daniel Stokols, Social Ecology in the Digital Age: Solving Complex Problems in a Globalized World (2018).

I also acknowledge with great gratitude the help provided me by staff at iUniverse including Reed Samuel, Jill Gaynor, Christine Colborne and Louie Angels.

Chapter 1

Introduction

At the time of this writing, people around the world see many important (and disturbing) trends providing a significant framework for trying to understand the future—not only for ourselves but especially for our children and grandchildren. The year 2018 saw important events providing a new and broader awareness of global warming and environmental devastation. Highly publicized reports by the United Nations, the United States government, and a major international conference in Katowice, Poland, coupled with significantly increased media attention, have placed the world’s environmental problems as a significant focus of attention. Political discussion in 2019 in the United States has seen the promotion of the Green New Deal. The years 2017 and 2018 also provided the experience of rising sea levels, increasing hurricanes, tornadoes, devastating forest fires, deadly tsunamis, increasing destruction of living creatures, and other planetary issues that are becoming more and more evident.

In this book, I will offer some concerns about how the most critically important of these trends interact and what are likely to be the difficult challenges that we and our future generations will be facing. Two fundamental causal trends to be highlighted are (1) the forecasted global growth of urbanization and (2) the growing global power of the corporate world and their key combined damaging roles in the Tragedy of the Commons. As an urban planner, I see these interlinked trends as a coming primary challenge for a very enlarged and difficult responsibility for urban planning.

In my title, I use the term Tragedy of the Commons. I feel the term well signifies what we are experiencing as we live through these critically important, destructive trends. A full clarification of this term is found in Wikipedia:

The tragedy of the commons is a term used … to describe a situation in a shared-resource system where individual users acting independently according to their own self-interest behave contrary to the common good of all users by depleting or spoiling that resource through their collective action. The concept and phrase originated in an essay written in 1833 by the British economist William Forster Lloyd, who used a hypothetical example of the effects of unregulated grazing on common land (also known as a common) in the British Isles. The concept became widely known over a century later due to an article written by the American ecologist and philosopher Garrett Hardin in 1968. In this modern economic context, commons is taken to mean any shared and unregulated resource such as atmosphere, oceans, rivers, fish stocks, or even an office refrigerator. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tragedy_of_the_commons) (Emphasis added.) (G. Hardin, The Tragedy of the Commons, Science 162, no. 3859 [1968]: 1243–48)

However, the tragedy we are currently facing is far broader and more complex than the original thinking around a small, common piece of farmland. Today, I argue, the commons is planet Earth, and many individual users—acting independently and according to their own self-interest—are behaving contrary to the common good of all users by endangering the planet through their private action.¹ Garrett Hardin warned that eventually humans must embrace a world of limits.

Who Contributes to the Tragedy of the Commons?

In the broadest sense, who exactly is behind the Tragedy of the Commons? All of us. When heating our homes, what is the source of heat? What is the source of electricity in our homes? For almost everyone, the sources include coal, oil, and natural gas. For some people in the Global South, their housing may lack heating and cooling and electricity, and consequently, they are minor contributors. However, living in urban housing makes the clear majority of us contributors to the Tragedy of the Commons.

Driving an automobile also makes us contributors to the Tragedy of the Commons. Auto makers are involved in looking to electric cars and shared vehicles and expanded public transportation, but these are still focused on the future, and every person driving around a sprawling urban area today is a contributor to the Tragedy of the Commons.

Farmers in rural areas using fertilizers and insecticides help pollute waterways and thus contribute to the Tragedy of the Commons. Trucking companies moving freight over long distances add significantly to air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions and thus contribute to the Tragedy of the Commons.

The history of urban living since the Industrial Revolution in the nineteenth century has been one of global warming and the destruction of natural resources.

Accompanying that history has been the economy and the growing power of the global corporatist world. Clearly, the corporate use of coal, oil, and natural gas has been essential to the urbanization process, and these have contributed to the broad array of industrial production, financialization processes, and contemporary, new technologies.

A key contemporary trend is population growth and migration from rural to urban places (one of Garrett Hardin’s original major concerns). This is explored more fully in Chapter 2.

A recent author, Ashley Dawson (2017), argues that the world’s cities are the true primary cause of climate change and destruction of earth resources. This has been discussed by scientists for some time, with much literature pointing to the role of urbanization in environmental menacing since the nineteenth century. For me, the Tragedy of the Commons is primarily focused on urban areas expanding substantially in the next twenty-five to thirty years, which the United Nations has forecast. Given this, the question arises, what do we know of urban planning, and can this profession really help us in overcoming the urban Tragedy of the Commons of planet Earth? In the global world of professional education, urban planning is at best a small, limited profession. Its global roster is miniscule compared to the professions of law, medicine, and especially business.

Independent, broad, corporate economic action—powerfully dominant in today’s global economy—is one of the key sources of damage to planet Earth. The basis for government institutions regulating independent economic action has become weaker and weaker. The regulated have taken control of the regulators. Government and other social institutions have become ruled by the global capitalist economy. As well, corporate economic activity primarily is focused on urban areas and is uncontrolled in determining the optimum land locations for corporate business activity and for premium housing for the wealthy or near wealthy.

How we all contribute to the Tragedy of the Commons has been well summarized by David Harvey:

Nature has been modified by human action over the ages. The environment is a category that has to include the fields that have been cleared, the swamps and wetlands that have been drained, the rivers that have been re-engineered and the estuaries that have been dredged, the forests that have been cut over and re-planted, the roads, canals, irrigation systems, railroads, ports and harbours, airstrips and terminals that have been built, the dams, power-supply generators and electric grid systems that have been constructed, the water and sewer systems, cables and communications networks, vast cities, sprawling suburbs, factories, schools, houses, hospitals, shopping malls and tourist destinations galore. (Harvey 2010, 84)

Staff at the United Nations have informed us of current trends of people moving away from rural living to urban living, so that by 2050 two-thirds of the world’s population will live in urban areas.² Economic trends may be confusing. Today, looking at the role of the corporatist activities, focusing not only on greed but also power, suggests both current and future difficulties. One of these prime difficulties is evident by the constantly growing level of inequality worldwide. This is the focus of Chapter 3. Economic power is also increasing control over governments and the diminishment of democratic governance, as explored in Chapter 4.

Additional notable trends are those in technological innovation (Chapter 5), from dominant communication technology to the use of robotics in industry, in the military, and in our homes. Consistently and historically, technological innovation has created circumstances that diminish the overall need for human labor. These are the key trends that I am looking at in the chapters that follow.

Have We Had Effective Urban Planning for the Tragedy of the Commons?

If urbanization is at the core of the Tragedy of the Commons, what is the importance of these new trends for those who are or might be involved, professionally or otherwise, in urban planning? We have had considerable literature in recent years discuss the successes and failures of urban planning in the twentieth century. This includes the criticism of the hardships entailed in the US in urban redevelopment work from the Housing Act of 1949, where active but slum neighborhoods were destroyed, replaced by high-rise, middle- and upper-income apartment towers or commercial/industrial parks.

A deeper criticism has emerged from the phenomena of urban sprawl, inspired by the concepts of English garden cities; by the nineteenth-century development of streetcar suburbs (Warner 1978); by Frederick law Olmstead’s Riverside, Illinois; and by Frank Lloyd Wright’s Broadacre City. Sprawl was also stimulated by the massive ownership of automobiles in the twentieth century, combined with the rapid, intensified preference for owning a single-family home on a private, single lot of land. In the United States, this was also fortified by the Federal Housing Administration in the time just after World War II (unfortunately, an FHA official encouragement at that time included promoting racial segregation). Finally, the US Interstate Highway program facilitated urban sprawl in significant ways. Urban sprawl has been dominant in the United States since the 1950s, but I also observed signs abroad of suburban sprawl as I was working in Central and Eastern Europe in the 1990s, when those nations were overcoming communist rule and seeking to move to free market democracies.

Low-density urban development has created many difficulties for contemporary urban areas, beginning with high levels of traffic congestion, significant environmental pollution and damage, and loss of farmland and woodland. Today, we have also become more aware of significant, negative psychological and health impacts of sprawl living.

An overall criticism of the work of the urban planning profession has been offered by Samuel Stein (2019). He was educated in urban planning but early in his book he argues:

By the end of my education, I realized that capitalism makes the best of planning impossible: any good that planners do is filtered through a system that dispossesses those who cannot pay. (Stein, 2019, 9)

An excellent summary of the relation of urban planning and capitalism is also provided by Michael Dear:

Urban planning is always situated within the framework of existing relations of authority and subordination in capitalist society, and these relations regulate its identity and function. (Dear, 1981, iv.)

Perhaps the most important trend is that discussed for the past sixty years or so—climate change or global warming. This trend has entailed significant scientific exploration on an ongoing basis since Rachel Carson’s book, The Silent Spring, published in 1962. Continued concern was enhanced by the book by Donna Meadows et al., The Limits to Growth, published in 1972.

The United Nations has played a leading role in drawing attention to climate change and environmental destruction. There have been many international conferences hosted by the United Nations since the 1960s.

In the United States, President Jimmy Carter was an early advocate of environmental concerns, as noted in his report Global 2000.³ The year 1972 was also the occasion for the United Nations conference on the human environment, held in Stockholm, Sweden. In 1983, the UN set up the World Commission on the Environment and Development (WCED), which then produced the Brundtland Report, published in 1987, that focused on sustainability. This led to the 1987 Montréal protocol that was successful in stopping the depletion of the ozone layer. This was followed by the 1992 international conference that took place in Rio de Janeiro. The Kyoto Protocol took place in Japan in 1997 and involved great debate as to procedures for reducing carbon emissions. In 2001, the United States abandoned the Kyoto Protocol. In 2002, the World Summit on Sustainable Development was held in Johannesburg. This meeting was also highlighted by obstructionism by the United States.⁴

In December 2015, the Paris Agreement was forged, an agreement within the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC), dealing