NIGERIAN INSTITUTE OF TOWN PLANNERS

WORKSHOP ON THE REVIEW OF THE DRAFT REPORT ON THE STATE OF URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING IN NIGERIA

7th and 8th December

Gubabi Royal Hotel,

Plot 2359 Sokode Crescent, Wuse Zone 5,Abuja

Sourcing of FundforUrban Planning and implementation

By

PL, Dr, Abubakar Sadiq Sani, MNITP

8th December 2011

  1. Introduction.

Urban Planning is the orderly planning and development of cities and their socio-economic regions. It deals with the regulation of land use and the physical structure of cities, along with architectural, engineering and land development criteria. it is now broadened to include the comprehensive guidance of the physical, economic, and social environment of a community. Attributes of urban Planning include:

(1) General plans that summarize the objectives of (and restrains on) land development;

(2) Zoning and subdivision controls that specify permissible land uses, densities, and requirements for streets, utility services, and other improvements;

(3) Plans for traffic flow and public transportation;

(4) Strategies for economic revitalization of depressed urban and rural areas;

(5) Strategies for supportive action to help disadvantaged groups; and

(6) Provide guidelines for environmental and cultural protection and preservation of scarce resources.

Urban planning determines city's development visions, priorities and vulnerabilities;develop the cities to become engines of national growth, crucibles of cultural fusion; centres of civilization, rule of law, peace and harmony;develop magnetic attraction forother people without making these attracted uncomfortable in their new abode. Urban planning appreciates and maximise the socio-economic values of the cities and its resources, reduces urban poverty and contributes immensely to the development of the Gross Domestic Product.

Despite the practice of urban planning in Nigeria and the contribution of the value adding to city development,most of our cities have no vision, no focus,infrastructures are decaying, public schools and hospitals are a shadow of formerly dominant institutions, most of the residents are not tolerant leading to violence, and urban poverty thrives in our cities. Governments and the public areloosing confidence in the practice, thereby failingto give the necessary political will and funds for the practice because. This paper will look at practice of urban planning in Nigeria and see why it has failed toattract adequate funding and political will necessary to perform well.

2. The role of urban planner in city development.

Initially separatingurban planning from city development had the effect not only of isolating the urban planner but also of making him the centre of attention. Urban planner’sroles in the city development can be classified into three.

The first role is essentially conservative, centred on the continued dominance of professional institutionsissuing directives on city development. In such a role the urban plannerbased on the initial need for urban planning (environmental hygiene) remains unconnected with the clients and stakeholders. He awaits the client’s commission, produces his plan without people’s views and opinion, and withdraws from the scene. This practice is very common in Nigeria where most planners have no or obsolete planning tools,the cyclical linkages of planning process (planning, implementation and review) is not observed and planners only treat the symptoms of urbanisation as against the root cause.Some states don’t even have the Urban and Regional Planning Lawor planning institutions, but unconsciously they practices urban planning. In this role the public and governments have sympathy to the planning profession.

The opposite of this conservative approach is advocacy approach, where the planners are user friendly and actively seek changes resulting in the end of professionalism as we know it today. Such a sociological revolutionary approach would lead the urban planner to associate himself directly with the stakeholders. Since this kind of urban planner is also likely to believe in a decentralised society he/she is happiest when dealing with the disadvantaged, such as tenants of slum clearance areas and self sufficiency communes. In this role the urban planner deliberately forsakes his position of independence and power and allows people to dictate their needs and plans.

The third, middle, path lies between these two extremes, and is much more difficult to identify except in vague terms. In this role the urban planner remains a professionally qualified specialist with flexible standards, but tries to involve the stakeholdersin the planning process. These more participatory approaches to urban plan include a whole range of relatively new techniques, ranging from the data collection, stakeholders consultative meetings through gaming and simulation to the recent computer – aided design procedure.

3. The Problems

The dominant planning approach of the period was master planning. Structure planning was one response to the failingsof the dominant format, there were some characteristic problems. Plans were based on foreign standards and formal urban economic indices, expensive and involvedlarge teams of professionals. This would not have mattered so much had the plans been implemented, but they were not. Reality had normally moved on after the base data had been gathered. This often left the plans out of date even before they were completed. And even if plans were produced expeditiously, they took little account of implementation realities. Plans were often the product of specialised agencies and departments composed of physical planners. They had little power over sectored and infrastructure provision entities, which were generally reluctant to implement plans in which they hardly had any say. The only power left to plannerswas the control of land use, which they exercised through costly, bureaucratic, quasi-legalistic and often punitive regimes. The reliance on this tool has been one of the main reasons for the alienationof the citizenry from the process conceived as having public (as opposed to private) interests as its focus.

One of the greatest failures of planning has been its inability to respond to growing poverty and exclusion. Planning dealt with the cities through planners’ eyes, and planners rely extensively on data.The formal economy produces data, but the informal economy and society (which control about 75% of the urban economy in Nigeria) is not. Therefore, the burgeoning informal sector was not fully included in master plans, and its unpredictable evolution played a significantrole in rendering plans obsolete. The new urban governance agenda is also unambiguously pro-poor and inclusive.It accepts that one of the reasonswhy the poor are poor is becausethey have been excluded. Urban planning has been seeking ways of bringing ordinarycitizens, and especially the poor, intodecision making processes, using participatorymechanisms to ensure their needsand priorities are explicitly recognised, its achievements must be measuredagainst broad societal goals and values. it is essential that new urban planningengage with the long neglected informalsector.

4. Can urban planningbecome affordable forall?

The new planning approach based on Rapid Urban Sector Profiling for Sustainabilityalready adopted by several developedcountries, is a complex process and based on secondary data. This process ishardly affordable by least developedcountries (LDCs) which lack institutionalcapacities, data recording, financial resources and often clear policies. The challenge, therefore, is toidentify and promote a minimalist approachto urban planning, i.e. an approach that would generally respect the abovementionedcriteria while simultaneously focusing on very few top priorities considered as essential for guiding urban development:

• The process should mobilise civil society and political organizations in thedefinition of the vision (“the city wewant”) and priority areas (“hotspots”)through popular consultations;

• In terms of product, it would usually prioritise infrastructure developmentwith emphasis onprimary road and water networks andon pricing and municipal finance;

• Implementation should include a strong component on institutionalstrengthening, particularly at the localgovernment level;

• The strategy should preferably be associated with a review/reform of urban governance legislation, rules andpractices.Of course minimal planning requiresmaximum political commitment to ensure impact and sustainability. Withsuch commitment, urban planning cancertainly become affordable and useful.

5. User friendly role of urban planning for political will and better funding.

The practice of urban planning is changing from authoritarian to Public-Private sector participation in the planning and management of our towns, the practice is changing from stability in purely social service to radical and complex increasing change. Some of the causes of these radical changes are:

a)Global competition in the production, supply and consumption of infrastructures.

b)Technological advancement in the components and methods of the development of our Towns.

c)Urbanization growth at a rate faster than our conventional design principles and techniques.

d)Multiple communication channels that are continuously changing Town’s skylines and structure.

e)Expectation of 24-hour availability of the management and administration of our Towns.

f)Change from manual to cerebral skill.

g)Elimination of job for life.

As these changes are taking places, the practice of Urban and Regional Planning needs drastic restructuring to conform to the reality and become user friendly. The practice requires more than a narrow specialist who can develop and implement a physical plan, more general skills and activities are needed.Different groups of city residents have become more sophisticated in pursuing their special interests. They are better informed, understand laws and procedures have greater political skills and are more militant and persistent. They have learned that urban planning brings order to change and, thus, they want to influence the planning process.

Urban planning has been grossly maligned. Many of the ills of urbanization have been conveniently dropped upon the doorstep of urban planners. Planning, however, does not exist as an independent function or as a separate agenda. It is one of the responsibilities of government to anticipate the future and to prepare for it. There are many reasons why planning may not result in a better living environment for all. Planners’ advice may be good or bad, taken or ignored. Planners may not have adequate training. Politicians may have a distorted sense of the public interest. Plans may be unrealistic, given their resource requirements. Powerful economic interests may feel threatened by planning recommendations. Plans may not reflect the priorities of community groups or business interests. Implementation authority may be fragmented among jurisdictions. In trying to correct these deficienciesplanning has opened itself to public participation, to a more realistic view of stakeholder interests, to advocacy work, to setting social priorities, to environmental impact analyses, to multi-jurisdictional management and other areas where consensus signals good governance at work. Yet, the planning function still falls short. Slums are multiplying, urban crime is rampant, development keeps sprawling, transport efficiency is declining, energy costs are raising, health problems increase, and many citizens are walling themselves off from others. What’s happening here? Has planning failed and does it need to be replaced by a more effective approach? Urban Planning is accepted everywhere as a necessary function (a hallmark of human society). Municipalities, communities, and states all engage in planning. Where it is not working, however, there has been much experimentation and innovation to make planning fit the prevailing mood and political mode of governance.

6. Conclusion

Urban planning creates value for city development and ensures peace and harmony between people and land uses, but because of the conservative role of the practice in Nigeria, the profession is isolated, thereby limiting the contribution of the practice in Nigeria. The practice must be user friendly, accommodate the views of all stakeholders, build the capacities of institutions responsible and maintain the linkages between data collection, data analysis, planning, monitoring and review. The practice must be allowed to follow the circular nature of planning process, thereby maintaining its self correcting and dynamism nature. Only then will people and Governments will appreciate Urban Planners in their quest for funding and political will necessary to perform.

References

  1. 1. Abiodun, J. O. (1995) Urban and Regional Planning problems in Nigeria, Ife, University of Ife Press Limited. P 189.
  2. Akin L. Mabogunje, (1980), Development Process: A Spatial Perspective.Unwin Hyman Limited, London.
  3. Bryan Lawson, How Designers Think – The Design Process Demystified, Butterworth Architecture, England, 1990.
  4. Clegg, G. L. The Design of Design, CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge, 1969.
  5. Falade, J. B. (1999) the changing nature of Cities and the challenges of Planning Practice.. State of World Cities Report 2004/2005- Attacking Poverty, September 2000
  6. Habitat Debate - Vol. 7 - No. 1 - 2001 - Five Years after Habitat II (HABITAT, 2001, 32 p.
  7. Michael Spence, Patricia Clarke Annez, and Robert M. Buckley, (2009) Urbanization and Growth, COMMISSION ON GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT, The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development /The World Bank change in global weather patterns.
  8. Sani, A. S. (2008), Town Planning in history, its prospects and challenges in the 21st century, Environ: Journal of Environmental Studies. Vol 2. No 9. ABU Press.
  9. Sani, A. S. (July 2011), Contribution of Designers to the Built Environment, 2 Dar Seminar Paper, KanoStateUniversity of Science and Technology.
  10. Sani, A. S. (July 2004), Urbanization and Integration in Kano, 2ND Centenary of Uthman Danfodio Jihad in Kano,
  11. Sani, A. S. (2006), Analysis of Housing in Kano, unpublished Thesis.
  12. Shiels, C. R. et all, Low income countries of the commonwealth of independent countries: progresses and challenges in transition. (2004).
  13. UNHCS, Assessment of Experience with the Project Approach to Shelter Delivery for the Poor (HABITAT, 1991, 52 p.)
  14. UN Habitat, 2001Habitat Debate, Cities without slums, United Nations Centre for Human Settlement, Habitat, Vol. 6, N0. 4.
  15. UN Habitat, 2001, "Urban Governance and Urban Poverty: Lessons from a Study of Ten Cites in the South", University of Birmingham, U.K., June 2001
  16. UN Habitat,2004 Habitat Debate, Planning for a better future,United Nations Centre for Human Settlement, Habitat, Vol. 6.