(Click on the graphic to enlarge)
Just like their dwellers, cities can get sick.
When that happens, each citizen experiences multiple and dramatic symptoms affecting daily life: crime and insecurity, pollution, traffic jams, sanitary and waste management problems, air, water, damage and loss of property, property value, broken schools, ailing infrastructure, high taxes for poor quality services and quality of life in a seemingly endless sequence of calamities.
Treating symptoms, however, can be treacherous. Self-medication and turning to emergency rooms can end in even more dangerous treatment-borne complications, making the recovery more difficult and relapses more likely[1].
Adopting partial “solutions” that maximize a specific subsystem –being it tourism, housing, security or commerce- can create new, more complex and challenging problems[2].
Fighting crime without considering its causes and context –such as the reciprocal interactions between unemployment, poor education and inadequate housing and transportation- can end clogging courts and filling jails with increasing number of inmates that return to the city more violent and organized, spiraling up the cycle of violence –as the cases of Colombian[3] and Mexican[4] cities dramatically show-.
Experience shows that building public housing without addressing unemployment, crime and security issues often ends with squatters living in “vertical slums” such as Chicago’s Cabrini-Green. A prosperous, money-making logistic hub can turn into a “container town” that blue and white collar employees flee for safer suburbs before darkness falls.
A careful review of the history of “magic bullets” for sick cities, such as public housing, employment subsidies, “zero tolerance” or ambitious urban or touristic “revival” initiatives shows a discouraging rate of failure, unintended consequences and conflict between different groups of interest pressing to speed up for a new, and equally specific solution. Policies get mixed up with politics and vice versa, creating regulatory mazes that become a quagmire for reformers[5].
And then, people get sick of the city and leaves.
Property values drop, unwanted settlers like squatters and criminals get in and business and investment gets out at ever more alarming rates[6].
By then, the sick city has become also a “third rail” that every new administration tries to avoid, postponing solutions for cosmetic quick fixes.
It is usually a big event –such as Olympic Games, or land getting cheap enough to attract real estate speculation or a major social upheaval- that brings the sick city back to the spotlight.
By then, everybody is painfully aware that partial solutions and quick fixes will not do.
They have to find a doctor for the city that can unravel the maze of conflicting partial solutions and unlock the forces for change, aligning them towards a shared vision of the future all stakeholders want not for them, but for their children and grandchildren. This is the way every great city started in the first place.
In discussing the case of Colon City, Panama, and the approach we propose as a team of “city doctors”, we will show how a systemic, multi disciplinary and strategic plan can be developed and applied by a private-public consortium, the tools required and the lessons learned from what happened to Colon and the experience in other cities’ turnarounds.
In
order to achieve progress in closing the gaps in all strategic indicators,
avoiding the fate of previous projects that focused on improving specific
areas, the consulting team developed a systemic framework and tools to coordinate
all the efforts and actions required for a successful recovery and
transformation, shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Framework for Colon’s
transformation
(Click on the graphic to enlarge)
This
model helped visualize Colon City as a system whose specific functions and
subsystems –such as security, housing, health or tourism- only can produce
successful and stable results if they are focused and aligned to a shared
vision and common indicators.
The
key to successful recovery of Colon City historical center –and the entire Manzanillo island area- was to align actions in the seven areas following a
shared vision and a integrated plan –shown in Table 2-.
Table 2: Integrated actions for Colon City’s
transformation
Area
|
Approach & actions
|
Synergies with
|
Community
development
|
·
Coordinate and align efforts: turn
from “relocation” into transformation of Colon and new host communities
through private & public action
·
Creating social and economic
conditions for successful new communities
|
·
Jobs
·
Transportation
|
Security
|
·
“Broken windows” approach
·
Turning gangs around
·
Creating local jobs
·
Attracting, developing and retaining
human capital to Colon City
·
Increase critical manpower and
resources for: police, justice, education and health services
·
Improve critical infrastructure
·
Health
|
·
Community development (construction)
·
Waste management (jobs)
·
Health & quality of life
·
Education & training
|
Tourism
destination
|
·
Cultural shows
·
Historic buildings and places
(“Stranger’s Club”)
·
Tourism circuits
·
Tourism package project coordination
·
Employing local workforce for
hospitality, tourist guides
·
Coordinate and organize value chain
(from the port / airport on and back)
·
Organize services around shared client
experience
|
·
Education & training
·
Community development
|
Waste
management and infrastructure
|
·
Involving local workforce in cleaning
, infrastructure building, sanitation and health campaigns
·
Block teams of residents to keep the
city clean and provide quick feedback for improvement, problems
·
Local recycling and waste management
micro enterprises, teams generating extra revenue, self-sufficiency, local
jobs
·
Education as prevention agents
|
·
Health and quality of life
·
Security (de-slumification[1])
|
Health
& quality of life
|
·
Campaign for clean water and air
·
Remodeling local hospital, health
centers for prevention
·
Campaigns for respiratory,
gastrointestinal diseases
·
Improving food supply and preservation
chains
·
Health and cleaning habits education
·
Transportation (commuting, connecting
parts of the city)
|
·
Security
·
Community development
·
Waste management jobs
|
Education
& training
|
·
Focus on SKA required for Colon City’s
transformation jobs, employability
·
Graduating not only individuals, but
small companies able to provide services to Colon City and create sustainable
jobs
·
Kindergarten to University approach,
job market-oriented education, vertically aligned
·
Run by a public-private consortium
integrated by government, business and universities
|
·
Community development
·
Employment and workforce development
|
Employment
and workforce development
|
·
Provide alternatives to gangs and subsidies
·
Increase local workforce’s
employability
·
Put Colon’s resident to work in
Colon’s transformation
·
New model of contract for community
building linking housing to jobs and performance standards
|
·
Security
·
Education and training
·
Tourism
·
Waste management
|
The
actions in each area must be coordinated and sequenced with others to avoid
conflicts and unwanted consequences –such as, for example, relocating squatters
in places where they cannot find jobs- and “connecting the dots” finding
synergies between different areas that save time and resources – such as, for
example, employing former and recovering gang members in cleaning streets,
recycling and managing waste and building their new houses and remodeling the
old historic district-
[1]
In her 1961
book The death and life of great American cities Jane Jacobs coined the term
“de-slumification” to describe how slum dwellers can turn around and revert the
decay by taking ownership and finding reasons to stay (Jacobs, 1993)
References:
No comments:
Post a Comment