<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Kahn, On Green Cities</title>
	<atom:link href="http://planning-research.com/kahn-on-green-cities/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://planning-research.com/kahn-on-green-cities/</link>
	<description>essays on urban studies</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Feb 2011 11:39:58 -0600</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Carruthers</title>
		<link>http://planning-research.com/kahn-on-green-cities/comment-page-1/#comment-66</link>
		<dc:creator>John Carruthers</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 29 Mar 2007 13:36:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://planning-research.martacrane.com/?p=57#comment-66</guid>
		<description>I read Matt’s book, and I liked it a lot – I think it’s an excellent book for urban and regional planners to read. Many of us get into the field because we have strong feelings about the way cities “ought to be” – I have always thought that this is one (among other) of the things that make it so great to be a part of. That said, as a result, we tend to be a highly self-selected group that views activism / intervention as fundamental to the vitality of cities. This makes us very good at identifying and taking aim at problems like environmental degradation, but, sometimes, less open to thinking dispassionately about how they arise and when best to address them. For this reason, I think that some readers may feel frustrated by the Matt’s more positivistic approach and view his lack of prescriptive commentary as a shortcoming. But, as he says above – Green Cities provides a great model for thinking about the environmental trajectory of urbanization and, in that way, provides important insights into how and when urban and regional planning can play a role in improving things. For example, a cornerstone of the EKC hypothesis is that greater wealth – attended by education and income – leads to greater demand for environmentally friendly consumption and policies. It seems to me then, that a key component of any urban environmental policy should be some kind of social policy aimed at achieving more equity and integration in our urban areas. And this is exactly he kind of thing that planners do best – think comprehensively about the complex connections that tie so many urban problems together and, in turn, develop and apply solutions for them. When I read the book, a question that came to mind was how to tie its findings into more normative planning-oriented theory, like Lynch’s theory of Good City Form. That work lays out very specific criteria for gauging the extent to which development patterns serve the best interests of their inhabitants, and I think books like Green Cities can inform that discussion in a direct way.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read Matt’s book, and I liked it a lot – I think it’s an excellent book for urban and regional planners to read. Many of us get into the field because we have strong feelings about the way cities “ought to be” – I have always thought that this is one (among other) of the things that make it so great to be a part of. That said, as a result, we tend to be a highly self-selected group that views activism / intervention as fundamental to the vitality of cities. This makes us very good at identifying and taking aim at problems like environmental degradation, but, sometimes, less open to thinking dispassionately about how they arise and when best to address them. For this reason, I think that some readers may feel frustrated by the Matt’s more positivistic approach and view his lack of prescriptive commentary as a shortcoming. But, as he says above – Green Cities provides a great model for thinking about the environmental trajectory of urbanization and, in that way, provides important insights into how and when urban and regional planning can play a role in improving things. For example, a cornerstone of the EKC hypothesis is that greater wealth – attended by education and income – leads to greater demand for environmentally friendly consumption and policies. It seems to me then, that a key component of any urban environmental policy should be some kind of social policy aimed at achieving more equity and integration in our urban areas. And this is exactly he kind of thing that planners do best – think comprehensively about the complex connections that tie so many urban problems together and, in turn, develop and apply solutions for them. When I read the book, a question that came to mind was how to tie its findings into more normative planning-oriented theory, like Lynch’s theory of Good City Form. That work lays out very specific criteria for gauging the extent to which development patterns serve the best interests of their inhabitants, and I think books like Green Cities can inform that discussion in a direct way.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

