Divided cities are shaped by social, political, and spatial dynamics rushing the production of conflict and violence. Spatial inequality in dwelling conditions or accessibility to social and physical infrastructure often materialize in urban areas of developing cities, affecting the quality‐of‐life of those living in these areas. To narrow the increasing gap between better‐off and worse‐off neighborhoods, policy makers are trying to compensate for discrepancies and target these underprivileged areas. Moreover, the specific morphology of cities, their history, their geographical characteristics, and the extent of inequality in a society are just a few of the contingencies that determine the present and future of divided cities. From such contingencies emerge divisions; if not recognized, it is impossible to draw a clear roadmap for the elaboration of a sustainable planning strategy. Although the results on the ground can work out very differently for each place, it will be crucial to look at divided cities keeping in mind individual preferences, individual constraints, and opportunities.
Beirut is a divided city: Although there was a clear boundary during the civil war (Green Line), dividing the Christian East and the Muslim West, today, hundreds of such lines dissect the city; urban fault‐lines, physical markers, or invisible lines shape behaviors and merge identities with territories. However, while these dividing lines have been officially removed, the climate of divide created by these boundaries is still heavily anchored in the mental maps of inhabitants. These mental maps, whether through psychological fractures, sectarian turbulence, racial turmoil, or political obstacles, tend to emerge more often than in the original times of civil conflict, providing profound insights into the fear, separation, violence, and alienation that run through most large metropolises. While recovery attempts such as the Beirut Urban Declaration (a post-blast joint effort between the OEA and architectural schools in Lebanon) in most of its approach still clings to the idea of the city as a unified physical model, a top‐down approach in disguise undermining the differences that subsist between individuals, it is time to shift the focus from this broader understanding of the city to an approach centered around navigating social, infrastructural, economic, and environmental complexity: This is called scaling down.
Five recommendations are proposed so that scaling down to a community‐driven neighborhood planning leads to transformative change acknowledging the divided nature of the society:
First, through land‐use regulations that facilitate the building of new housing, engaging in equity planning that addresses underlying root issues, neighborhoods could become more inclusive, livable, equal, and affordable.
Second, in broadening opportunities for individuals across neighborhoods lacking access to high‐quality education and training, along with empowering marginalized groups, community‐driven neighborhood planning implies the recognition that anyone can make a difference in their life as well as that of others.
Third, by using performance‐based planning parameters such as performance zoning, neighborhood sustainability assessment tools, flexible zoning, outcome‐oriented planning, and effect-based planning, the emphasis is put on short‐term tactical interventions.
Fourth, in striving to enhance people’s physical and psychological assets and building on what individuals and communities have to offer, it will be significant to negotiate linking the most disadvantaged neighborhoods with places of opportunity through better transport connections between the locations of jobs and residential locations using flexible and porous urban forms.
Fifth, for the seed of urban stability and co‐existence to grow, the public sphere in both physical and institutional forms should encompass and respond to all competing identity groups in the city by promoting and protecting the collective public sphere. Physically, planners should revitalize and redevelop public spaces, historic areas, and other urban public assets as places of interaction and neutrality that promote healthy intergroup and interpersonal life.
Such assets exist within Municipal Beirut; approximately 300,000 m2 of non-constructible parcels have been identified through previous research. Within the context of resilient cities, there is a potential for re-naturalization of these non-constructible areas by implementation of green and cool urban design. By reactivating the vacant lots and non-constructible parcels, Beirut will have more opportunity for open and green spaces allowing for the sustainable development of neighborhoods such as Karantina or Bachoura, thus improving the overall quality of life of residents and thereby contributing to diminishing commute time, improving air quality, mitigating urban overheating, and transforming loose spaces into public spaces within neighborhoods. While the repurposing of urban vacant land will not redress the causal roots of systemic inequalities, such interventions can still be pertinent for daily public life in cities. While Lebanon experiences multiple crises and its people struggle more every day, solidarities are direly needed, and spaces where people can meet and connect would play a key role in nurturing these solidarities. Vacant parcels can be such spaces, where playgrounds, food banks, and basic infrastructure can emerge, and where new forms of communal life can be experimented with.
Achieving this reform requires connecting different actors and stakeholders. Politicians, planners, sociologists, anthropologists, technicians, economists, and civil activists must be included in the urban development process, working on spaces, construction materials, and building tools combining this knowledge with a set of legal, administrative, managerial, conceptual, scientific, literary, and negotiation tools. This bottom-up approach is essentially based on building on many small development initiatives, each focused on a specific topic of interest, reacting to problems that are preventing the instauration and development of sustainable planning.
Social inclusion and the role that citizens play in a sustainable development strategy can be beneficial through a voluntary contribution to neighborhood development. Integrating adequate programs, like meet, play, work, gather, plant, and introducing initiatives in urban vacancies can respond to the needs of the neighborhood, ranging from infrastructure to agriculture, and thus generate a sense of collective ownership while at the same time improving the quality of the surrounding environment. Such initiatives usually do not require much capital investments or maintenance, can be managed communally, and operated temporarily, yielding fast results and perhaps serving as a catalyst for an enhanced dialogue and peacebuilding.
The text contained in this article is taken from the following articles published by D. Aouad:
Neighborhood Planning for a Divided City: The Case of Beirut
D Aouad
Urban Planning 7 (1)
2022
Sustainable Beirut City Planning Post August 2020 Port of Beirut Blast: Case Study of Karantina in Medawar District
D Aouad, N Kaloustian
Sustainability 13 (11), 6442
2021
Leftover spaces for the mitigation of urban overheating in Municipal Beirut
N Kaloustian, D Aouad, G Battista, M Zinzi
Climate 6 (3), 68
2018