The Representative Claim of Deliberative Planning: The Case of Isawiyah in East Jerusalem

Abstract

Both advocates and critics of deliberative planning often study deliberative planning processes as if they are real-life approximations of an ideal situation where the only force is the force of the better argument. However, in the course of the last decade democratic theorists came to develop a complex systemic understanding of the role of deliberation in policy making. In this view, legitimate decision making is not a one-time process but an ongoing pattern of interaction between organized institutions and the public sphere. This paper builds on recent work on political representation to develop a framework for studying deliberative planning as a type of representative claim made within a complex ecology of representative institutions and applies this framework to the case of a deliberative planning initiative in East Jerusalem. We examine the weaknesses and strengths of deliberative planning processes in a political environment that is not hospitable to public participation in planning.

Splintering Skylines in a Fractured City: High-Rise Geographies in Jerusalem

“…The existence o f two planning realities (one for Israeli Jerusalem and another for Arab Jerusalem) deprives Palestinians o f their right to the city, representing another facet o f Israel's ethnonational political agenda in contested territories (Kaminker, 1997;Jabareen, 2010;Ron and Cohen-Blankshtain, 2011;Wari, 2011).…”

“…These justifications conceal the real purpose of the Israeli authorities: imposing restrictions on Palestinian development by employing discriminatory planning policies to curb demographic growth and restrict territorial expansion. The existence of two planning realities (one for Israeli Jerusalem and another for Arab Jerusalem) deprives Palestinians of their right to the city, representing another facet of Israel's ethnonational political agenda in contested territories (Kaminker, 1997;Jabareen, 2010;Ron and Cohen-Blankshtain, 2011;Wari, 2011).…”

Planning in Turbulent Times: Exploring Planners' Agency in Jerusalem

“…The case of activist planners offers us yet another example in this respect. As two Israeli researchers observe in their study of Bimkom's deliberative planning initiative in the East Jerusalem Palestinian neighbourhood of Isawiya, ‘Had we chosen to measure Bimkom's planning process against any ideal model of deliberative planning, we would have to deem it a failure' (Ron and Cohen‐Blankshtain, : 646), because of the political limitations inherent in the development of the process and, ultimately, the impossibility of getting any plan approved by hostile local planning commissions. Still, precisely because the chances of achieving tangible results through the planning system remain very low, political mobilization becomes the ultimate goal of planning practices.…”

Divided we rise: politics, architecture and vertical cityscapes at opposite ends of Jerusalem

“…Ironically, or perhaps not, the desire to curb Palestinian development has made Israeli authorities come up with ‘creative’ solutions; for example, the designation of unbuilt spaces as national parks was made to prevent their development by Palestinians (Bimkom ). Even in those areas where the maximum height of six storeys is allowed, other bureaucratic limitations and obstacles are imposed, making development a tortuous operation and often a practically impossible mission (Bimkom ; Braier ; Ron and Cohen‐Blankshtain ). There is a double standard in planning for Jewish and Palestinian neighbourhoods, which is hardly challenged in Israeli polity.…”