Is Contemporary Planning Theory Responsive to Wrights Lessons - Term Paper Example

 Is contemporary planning theory responsive to Wright’s lessons? Brief Introduction Immediately after the collapse of the millennial Novel Economy, Richard Florida instituted a school of thought that is centered on a social group called ‘Creative Class’ (Glaeser, 2004). This line of thought was strongly supported by other planning analysts and experts such as David Brooks, Paul Fussell and Sharon Zukin. Richard Florida describes the theory of the ‘Creative Class’ in which he asserts that densely populated cosmopolitan areas tend to exhibit greater levels of economic advancement. According to Florida, ‘Creative Class’ includes industrial workers, executive professionals, the gay, lesbians and many other social and economic groups. He holds that the ‘Creative Class’ has fostered a progressive urban culture, and that the group serves as a living blueprint for planners (Shapiro, 2006). In fact, Florida was inspired into writing the book by the observation that business and industries tend to move to regions that have a high concentration of skill. This essay will describe three lessons namely; Population Growth and the Role of Technology, Human Progress, and Contemporary Capitalism that city planners can learn from Wright’s book and how Florida’s theory of ‘Creative Class’ address the challenges that emanate from them, and How The Theory Can Evolve To Avoid Collapse Of Western Civilization In Light Of Wright’s Warning. Population Growth and the Role of Technology While Florida’s theory can be generally attractive, Ronald Wright holds a contrary opinion. He demonstrates how population growth and advanced technology are becoming detrimental to the pre-existing economic structures. Wright argues that the current predicaments facing humanity is as old as the universe itself and, therefore, it is only possible to resolve the problems by carefully studying how they began and evolved throughout history. In fact, Wright takes readers through a historical journey from the Stone Age period to the present in a manner that is thorough and comprehensive. This kind of reasoning makes quite some sense because other planning experts have alluded to the fact that history (including human history) usually repeats itself; implying that a thorough analysis of historical events is key to providing solutions to today’s challenges. The ‘Creative Class’ theory asserts that change in society comes out of a deliberate and conscious move by a group of individuals. As such, Florida believed that advancement of humanity is too important to be accidental; people can influence societal trends. In some ways, this line of thinking agrees with Wright’s lessons particularly when the latter criticizes the elite of the society. Wright finds fault in economic systems that concentrate wealth at the top of the hierarchy (McRobbie, 2002). Implicitly, possibly unknowingly, Wright consents to the existence and to the passive but enormous responsibility of the elite by criticizing the upper class. Ronald Wright utilizes historical scenarios to demonstrate how individuals and corporate entities have incessantly found themselves entangled in the progress trap (McRobbie, 2002). One of the examples Wright cites is the China’s invention of gun powder and from which there have been tremendous advances in the making of firearms (Shapiro, 2006). Just about the time when the explosives were approaching a state of perfection, the idea of the atomic and nuclear energy. This line of thought seems to give an impression that it is impossible to sustainably maintain the highest possible level of achievement. This may not be true because there are some development forms that can reach their climax. For instance, country’s economic development can grow and attain a maximum; a system under which there is efficient service delivery synergized with state-of-the-art infrastructure and acceptable living standards. The ‘Creative Class’ theory recognizes the role played by technology in human empowerment. However, a consideration of the natural catastrophes that hit some states of the U.S. point out to the fact that technology can instill a false sense of comfort. The implication is that there would be lack of preparedness for calamities. This is another progress trap. Between the years 1994 and 2003, about 3 billion Americans were displaced by severe earthquakes, hurricanes, floods, and other natural calamities (Tripodi & Sutherland, 2000). The figure had gone up by 60% over the previous two decades. In the year 2011, millions of people were killed and others displaced by a tsunami. Following these natural disasters, property worth more than $40 billion was destroyed, which laid a heavy burden on international insurers and investors. Although technological advancement can elicit tendencies of laxity with regard to disaster preparedness, one cannot afford to blatantly dismiss the vital role played by technology in economic growth (Tripodi & Sutherland, 2000). As such Wright’s thoughts on technology should be approached-and perhaps executed-with extreme caution. Human Progress Florida argues that human progress is real and possible while Wright argues that the human progress concept and advancement is nothing but a myth. He explains that humans see their advancement and progress in the quick transition from an industrial system to an information-based one. However, the reality is that the agricultural technology of the late Stone Age era is the only one humanity cannot do without. The agricultural products of about a ten ancient people can adequately cater for the needs of about 6 billion people around the globe today (Tripodi & Sutherland, 2000). Florida’s contemporary theory on planning and development again seems to clash with Wright’s reasoning especially when one considers the latter’s low opinion about the green revolution and development of genetic engineering (Solow, 1956). Wright observes that in spite of these revolutions, not one new crop species has been added to repertoire of staples that have existed since the Stone Age times. However, Florida’s theory of the ‘Creative Class’ argues that expansion and mechanization of agriculture can lead to emergence of metropolitan urban centers (Solow, 1956). As these centers grow, they become inhabited by more and more diverse groups of individuals. On the other hand, advances in genetic engineering have led to creation of many new jobs and subsequently better living standards (Curtis, 1998). Wright’s argument that the invention of agriculture has led to population growth (and therefore more social challenges) is a direct contravention of the ‘Creative Class’ theory. In point of fact, Florida’s theory draws its strength from the fact that dense, culturally dynamic populations are a recipe for economic take-off. Rather than an impediment, Florida views population growth as a key requirement for development. This is quite an interesting contradiction of ideas; both opinions can be true. If a significant proportion of the population comprises of productive individuals, then Florida’s thoughts will hold. However, if the population is predominantly made up of economically incapacitated individuals, expansion of such a population would lead to serious challenges, hence qualifying Wright’s thoughts. The plight that comes with population increase can be grouped into two categories: social and economic. The social challenges are rooted in the fact that as the population grows, the society becomes hierarchical, with wealth concentrated at the top. This situation greatly contributes to the pre-existing predicament. In economic terms, the population can grow until it reaches the bounds of food supply. Ronald Wright advices that it is important for people to make use of what they have; to utilize the knowledge from past mistakes and use them to evade similar traps (Negri, 1999). As individuals strive to acquire material possessions, Wright observes, they are certainly on their way to self-destruction. This, he says, is due to the collapse of the environmental and cultural order. A society that is well endowed with material or monetary wealth will most frequently exhibit vices calamities such as nutritional ailments, terrorism, civil wars, domestic discord, poor governance among many others (Wittel, 1999) all of which Wright believes cannot be part of any development agendum. However, Florida’s seminal paper on the ‘Creative Class’ in fact cites more extreme tendencies such as lesbianism and gay behavior. According to this modern planning concept, human advancement draws its strength from such extreme behavioral orientations and other criminal activities (Negri, 1999). A critical look at Florida’s thinking would elicit feelings of skepticism even in the most casual observer. Any decent human being would have difficulties subscribing to a school of thought. However intellectual it may be, that appears to drum support for such perennial vices and social ills (Wittel, 1999). Therefore, in terms of the social ills, the theory of the ‘Creative Class’ appears weak. The reasons for this opinion are quite obvious, for example, a society that is full of prostitution and homosexuality is prone to attack by serious sexually transmitted infections, which will in turn impact negatively on the work force hence slowing down development (Wittel, 1999). In addition, the erosion of moral values in itself questions the validity of the alleged advancement. Simply put, when it comes to human advancement, the end does not justify the means; it is the means that validates the end result. Contemporary Capitalism Contemporary capitalism blatantly dismisses the concept of sharing, which Wright holds dear to his heart. Again, Wright’s thinking seems impressive. Most economies have indeed expanded, but the masses still live in incessant cycles of poverty; the implication being that the economic growth is tailored to benefit few elite, thus exponentially widening the income gap. The last century saw a four-fold multiplication of the world's population and a forty-fold increase in the global economic output (Shapiro, 2006). Therefore, if the gap that exists between the rich and the poor had merely been maintained 18th century levels, all human beings would be ten times richer now than they were at that time. Today, however, this disparity gap has massively widened over the last century. Presently, the number of individuals living in absolute poverty globally exceeds the total world population a century ago. Agriculture has remained a dangerous (or potentially so) and self-contradictory remedy to the age-old challenge of human sustenance. The emergence and subsequent growth of factory farming led to environmental pollution, overpopulation, obesity and emission of greenhouse gasses. According to Wright, this situation leads to expanded populations but rarely offers conclusive solutions to the food problem (Glaeser, 2004). He observes that the food crisis has been ignored; by resorting to organic farming technologies and use of hybrid seed instead of placing strict emphasis on plant diversification and soil quality improvement. For a long time, the Chinese enjoyed food self-sufficiency. However, since the year 1995, China has lost about 6 million hectares of agriculturally productive land to factories, modern cities, roads and, most interestingly, deserts (Shapiro, 2006). To compensate for the deficit, it resorted to importation of food stuffs from abroad; for instance, Soya from Brazil. This enabled Brazil to increase her exports to China by a very huge percentage. Radical environmental reforms, which for a long time have been looked at as unnecessary, are gradually gaining popularity. With the growing scarcity of clean water and fertile soils, sustainable agricultural practices now look more realistic than the classical unsustainable approaches. Conclusion Although Richard Florida’s theory of the ‘Creative Class’ looks appealing, it needs to undergo some major modifications so as to avoid falling into Wright’s stereotypes. According to Florida’s theory, the elite class (comprising of only 40% of the entire population) are the major opinion makers. Florida observes that creativity has become the driver of economic growth. The ‘Creative Class’ that takes part in the creativity, therefore, drives America’s economy. The validity of this concept is nested in the fact that creativity is the spearhead of human existence and is often the ultimate goal of education. However, it would be dangerous for the destiny of an entire society to be placed in the hands of a few individuals who possibly do not understand the plight of the masses. Another weakness of this planning theory is that the so-called ‘Creative Class’ is depicted as greatly influential people who are unconscious of their strength. If these individuals can gain consciousness of their dominant role, they can do what the author only wishes in his book: that the ‘Creative Class’ can deliberately make efforts to bridge the economic, intellectual, technical and social gaps between them and the masses. Florida’s theory also needs to evolve so as to offer a clear and generally more acceptable definition of the term ‘creativity’. According to the current understanding of the theory, any kind of creativity is considered integral to the concept of planning and development. It would be worthwhile to redefine creativity, particularly within the framework of Florida’s thinking, as any novel form of thinking or action that does not breach the traditional moral values. The importance of such a modification cannot be overemphasized because negative creativity such as technology-assisted crime, prostitution, drug trafficking, and homosexuality can be a great impediment to the social and economic advancement. References Curtis, S. (1998). Human capital and metropolitan employment growth. Journal of Urban Economics, 43 (2), 223-43. Glaeser, E. L. (2004). Review of Richard Florida’s The Rise of the Creative Class. Retrieved from http://www.creativeclass.org McRobbie, A. (2002). Clubs to Companies. Notes on the Decline of Political Culture in Speeded up Creative Worlds. Cultural Studies, 16 (4), 516-532. Negri, A. (1999). Value and Affect. Boundary, 26 (2), 77-88. Shapiro, J. M. (2006). Smart Cities: Quality of Life, Productivity, and the Growth Effects of Human Capital. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 88 (2), 324-335. Solow, R. (1956). A Contribution to the Theory of Economic Growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 70 (5), 65-94. Tripodi, J. & Sutherland, M. (2000). Ambush Marketing. Journal of Brand Management, 7(6), 412-422. Wittel, A. (1999). Towards a Network Sociality. Theory, Culture & Society, 18 (6), 51-76. Read More