Search

Urban planning has become an increasingly digital practice in the last three decades and was accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic. Discussions around the digitization of planning processes have focused on the platforms planners use, and the barriers to their use. Such literature does not adequately explain the variability in the use of planning-specific technologies among planning authorities with the same resources and time. We explore the degree to which workplace and professional culture influence the use of digital technologies in planning practice in Australia, Great Britain, and the United States of America. To study cultural attitudes, a mixture of interview data from 29 planners and document analysis from professional organizations were used. The study found cultural factors play a role in determining the diffusion of technology in planning practice. Our analysis demonstrates points of convergence and divergence across all three geographies of practice, with stark differences in the way that technology is discussed and espoused, as well as a broader lack of clear principles to guide the profession through digital transitions across scales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Online participatory planning processes are cheaper, easier, and may reach a broader audience than in-person techniques. However, they are also vulnerable to disruption from automated social bots. This research introduces a bespoke planning-oriented social bot, Urbanist Uma, to explore if and how social bots contribute to echo chambers that may influence planning processes. After four years on Twitter, Urbanist Uma had almost 250 followers and her Tweets had been viewed tens of thousands of times. The high level of homophily in Uma's network demonstrates the need for planners to recognize both the opportunity and risk of the digital public sphere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article contributes to the small but growing corpus of literature which analyses the increasing use of digital technologies as part of spatial planning activities. Much of that existing literature focuses on the opportunities such technology brings or explores the use of specific technology. Instead, the article seeks to problematise digital planning, explicitly questioning some of the optimistic claims made on its behalf. To do so, it makes use of a new conceptual framework to reflect upon the promises and potential pitfalls of greater use of digital technology within and beyond planning practice. The paper concludes that digital planning is no more immune to questions about exclusion and power than any other form of activity affecting the built environment, and that it is essential to question the rationale behind how decisions are made regarding the adoption of new technologies in urban planning systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article was published open access under a CC BY licence: https://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The world's population is aging at a rapid rate, yet many local built and social environments are not well suited to support older adults. Australia exemplifies the demographic–environmental disconnect because it is one of the world's most suburban nations and has one of the proportionally largest baby boom generations. In this research we examined the relationship between built and social environments with respect to older adult vulnerability in Greater Melbourne (Australia). We found that neighborhoods with lower levels of built environment support also had lower levels of social infrastructure. The spatial imbalance across the region was most pronounced when considering the spatial distribution of older adults aged 85 years and older. Our analysis of policymaker interviews revealed a marked disconnect between the scale and scope of the challenges of suburban aging and the state and local government response. Limitations of the study included the operationalization of built environment and social infrastructure variables. Age-friendly planning and design cannot be limited to the "easier stuff" such as communication and information, social participation, and respect and inclusion. Suburban built environments require more effort and investment in transportation, housing, and outdoor spaces and buildings to support the physical and mental wellbeing of older adults aging in place. Walkable suburban neighborhoods with high levels of accessible social infrastructure will help build community connections and encourage older adult physical activity and social engagement. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]