Going back to the topic of Urban ecology, Goldsmith defined a city as anything more than 2500 people. He then went on to say Urban ecology is the scientific study of the relations that living organisms have with respect to each other and their environment. Also, ecology stretches across disciplines. It is not just limited to Urban issues, but Art, architecture, and various other concepts. Essentially, "we are engaged managers. But when we disengage, a disconnect is created and we tend to abuse these systems." This is how problems arise... we disconnect and no longer get to see the results of our actions. If someone has to look directly at the wetland they destroyed, or kill the chicken they are eating, it will definitely make them re-think their choices. After writing about this disconnect, I was reminded of the concept of IPM (Integrated Pest management). The concept involves farmers limiting the usage of pesticides by actually looking at their crops and seeing how they are doing and what they need specifically. This increases output and creates all around healthier crops http://www.extension.org/pages/17849/integrated-pest-management. If we as a society can reconnect with our wrongdoings, I think it will really help us prosper. If people (not all people, but some) walk into the ghetto, and live the lives of the people there, they will feel connected and try to make change. This is the connection we as a human race need.
On Thursday, Joe Schilling talked to us via skype about Shrinking cities. Schilling made sure to highlight a few significant cities such as Denver, Buffalo and Cincinnati. But, he said the language was inconsistent. How is a city shrinking if neighborhoods inside it are flourishing? What do you call this scenario? And that's part of the problem: every situation is unique, so coming up with a solution becomes increasingly more difficult. So, how do we fix these cities? What is the glue that will piece these cities back together? For many years declining urban cities have made attempts to find the "magic bullet" to bring them back to their glory days. The government has developed programs to try and improve declining cities through improved infrastructure and housing. For example, Detroit's People Mover is a rail system built in Detroit to try and improve the movement of people into the city. The article calls this the "rail-to-nowhere" which makes sense, people are not going to want to travel to cities that do not have appealing attractions. Instead of spending money on expanding the city they should spend money on improving what they have, such as better schooling. These methods of improving declining cities should put priority on the people, not the place http://www.theatlanticcities.com/politics/2012/04/what-cities-looking-shrink-can-learn-new-orleans/1685/. In relation to this issue, some cities in today's world are suffering from the effects of a growing population, other are suffering from shrinking populations. This article introduces the regulation theory. The main argument of regulation theory is that economy doesn't only depend on the market, it depends social and political factors. I believe that the connection between regulation theory and shrinking cities is that when the economy of a city declines it causes a domino effect that will in turn lead to reduced population. This economy doesn't only depend on the performance of the market, it depends on the overall well being of the people within the city. When people in a city are unhappy they will want to leave, this will create a dent in the cities market which in turn will damage the economy. The article provided talks about this http://mailer.fsu.edu/
Impressive blog. I liked your suggested solution for shrinking cities, which is to make it more "pleasant." This also can be achieved if the government provides various public facilities such as new parks, shops, schools, sports events, etc. On the other hand, cities' officials should give a chance for other young and bright minds to do their jobs, so that new ideas flow in. In addition, improving the education means improving the city's future, however, it is a long term solution.
ReplyDelete-Obai Shaikh
group 15
I agree with you both in that any solution is a long term one. But that is not a reason to not begin now. It is often sad to hear of these shrinking cities, although it is not always bad. With the fast paced economy we live with today and the growing numbers of technology related jobs, we see a decline in small the wellness of small cities. I believe that abandoned homes should be refurbished to allow for small businesses to grow and flourish. These serve as a feasible solution to combat shrinking cities. I also agree with you and the article in that shrinking cities are not always a bad thing. It makes available opportunities to thrive in ways not perceived before. This opens doors to new ideas and technologies which made these cities grow and prosper once before.
ReplyDeleteYou know that old saying ignorance is bliss. Sometimes I wonder how nature’s course would’ve been had humans not existed. We posses this great power where we are now able to control our surroundings and often times this disrupts very natural processes. I strongly agree that we must begin to act as if we are one with nature and our surrounding environment. Our cities must not only utilize green technologies, but also include physical plant growth through urban farming and other natural greenery.
Great Post!
Matt Davis – Group 8
Excellent!
ReplyDeleteI agree with you, but then again I dont. I agree that the government should focus on improving the quality of the city, but I dont think we should put our focus into the "shrinking city." It doesnt make sense to try and swim with bricks attached to your ankle, so why should we focus on improving dying cities. What we should do is try to improve areas where the population has moved to. I think the if you get to the source of all our problems, the people of the population, then the economy and wellness will improve. Dont try and draw people out of their current location, into a dying city; improve the city they are in currently in. <<I think thats what the second argument is about. I also think that our economy will collapse because of the global economy. There's no way the US will improve its economy unless other countries improve theirs. countrie's economies are too globally connected.
ReplyDeletePatrick Ryan
Group 16
This is very interesting. Making the city more pleasant is a good way to help "shrinking city". But we cannot just focus on the shrinking city. If we can improve other cities, why we need to improve "shrinking city".--Bin Han
ReplyDeleteOn the subject of urban ecology, I agree that individuals need to become better connected with their surroundings, and more importantly, realize that their actions have a direct effect on their surroundings. With this realization, comes the development of a society of engaged managers. Engaged managers will be able to take responsibility for their community and environment, and realize that they are the ones who can change it. The big question is, how do we get individuals to become better connected to their surroundings? In this day and age, it seems nearly impossible to get people to admit they are responsible for anything negative, not to mention the difficult task of telling people that aren't only responsible, but also need to fix it.
ReplyDeleteThe problem of shrinking cities involves more than removing or restoring differnt buildings and creating new functions. The process also requires the involvement of the "people" element. People leave for a reason, buildings fell into decay for a reason. City planners need to assess the viability of the shrinking city from the human perspective as well as the environmental and economic. When people feel connected to a place, they fight for it. If they lose that connection, then the process for abandoning it comes more easily.
ReplyDeleteIt is amazing how cities that once flourushed with industry, are now diminishing. How did a city that was one of the largest cities for the industrial revolution die and become what it is today? Perhaps due to crime and bad leadership, but I think it has to do with the population of the city moving away from the city. I feel like suburbanization has killed cities.
ReplyDelete-Connor Buzzeo