1887
  1. Home
  2. A-Z Publications
  3. QScience Connect
  4. Volume 2017, Issue 1
  5. Article
Volume 2017 Number 1
  • EISSN: 2223-506X

Abstract

The state of Qatar and its capital Doha are undeniably in a state of profound change. In this current phase of rapid development, neighborhoods, and especially their public realms, have often been neglected due to the prioritization of creating notable architectural objects that support national development plans. Without conscious and sensitive attention toward developing these spaces, it is difficult to encourage communal relations and practices at the point of residence.

Built environment practitioners face unique challenges when planning Doha. Qatar's population has dramatically increased in both numbers and diversity, resulting in resident communities that hold different expectations of and needs from the city. Moreover, traditional living is not commonly associated with urban communities; a lingering question remains regarding how the built environment can preserve tradition and identity.

Planning approaches in Doha have oscillated between rational comprehensive planning and entrepreneurial and management planning and, as a result, have overlooked the micro-scale of the neighborhood. Recent developments in policy approaches to urban planning, including the Qatar National Vision 2030 and the Qatar National Master Plan, include potentials and constraints to address the public realm in neighborhoods. Building on these policy foundations, that focus on the scale of the neighborhood and support local mechanisms for community participation, two entry tactics are developed as actions to be taken by governmental authorities: establish an urban forum at the neighborhood scale and launch a public awareness campaign.

© 2017 Qaddumi, Ahmadi, licensee HBKU Press.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.5339/connect.2017.qgbc.2
2017-04-28
2024-11-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/connect/2017/1/connect.2017.qgbc.2.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.5339/connect.2017.qgbc.2&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Salama A, Wiedmann F. Demystifying Doha: On Architecture and Urbanism in an Emerging City. Surrey: Ashgate 2013.
     [Google Scholar]
  2. Rizzo A. Rapid urban development and national master planning in Arab Gulf countries. Cities. 2014; 39::50–57.
     [Google Scholar]
  3. Wingfield CJ. City planning. In: Banovetz JM, ed. Managing the Modern City. Washington, DC: International City Management Association 1971;:297–317.
     [Google Scholar]
  4. Banfield E. Ends and means in planning. In: Faludi A, ed. A Reader in Planning Theory. 1st Ed. Oxford, New York, NY: Pergamon Press 1973;:139–142.
     [Google Scholar]
  5. Dalton LC. Why the rational paradigm persists – the resistance of professional education and practice to alternative forms of planning. Journal of Planning Education and Research. 1986; 5:3:147–153.
     [Google Scholar]
  6. Lindblom CE. The science of muddling through. In: Campbell SFainstein SS, eds. Readings in Planning Theory. Cambridge, MA, Oxford: Blackwell 1996;:47–53.
     [Google Scholar]
  7. Hamdi N. Small Change: About the Art of Practice and the Limits of Planning in Cities. London: Routledge 2004.
     [Google Scholar]
  8. Hall T, Hubbard P. eds. The Entrepreneurial City: Geographers of Politics, Regime and Representation. Chichester: Wiley 1998.
     [Google Scholar]
  9. OECD. Competitive cities: A new entrepreneurial paradigm in spatial development. OECD Territorial Reviews Summary; 2007. Available at: http://www.oecd.org/gov/regional-policy/38747575.pdf (Accessed 17 April 2015).
  10. Albrechts L. Changing roles and positions of planners. Urban Studies. 1991; 25:1:123–137.
     [Google Scholar]
  11. Sager T. Neo-liberal urban planning policies: a literature survey 1990–2010. Progress in Planning. 2011; 76::147–199.
     [Google Scholar]
  12. Gardner A. How the city grows: Urban growth and challenges to the sustainable development in Doha, Qatar. In: Sillitoe P, ed. Sustainable Development: An Appraisal from the Gulf Region. New York, NY, London: Berghahn Books 2014;:333–366.
     [Google Scholar]
  13. Snoj J. Population of Qatar by nationality. BQ Magazine. 12 July 2014;. Available at: http://www.bqdoha.com/2013/12/population-qatar (accessed 17 April 2015).
     [Google Scholar]
  14. Nagy S. Making room for migrants, making sense of difference: Spatial and ideological expressions of social diversity in urban Qatar. Urban Studies. 2006; 43:1:119–137.
     [Google Scholar]
  15. Nagy S. Dressing up downtown: Urban development and government public image in Qatar. City & Society. 2000; XIII:1:125–147.
     [Google Scholar]
  16. General Secretariat for Development Planning (GSDP), Qatar National Vision 2030; 2008. Available at: http://www.gsdp.gov.qa/www1_docs/QNV2030_English_v2.pdf (accessed 19 April 2015).
  17. Ministry of Municipality and Urban Planning (MMUP). Qatar National Development Framework 2032. Qatar National Master Plan; 2014.
  18. el Samahy R, Hutzell K, Himes A. Inexhaustible ambition two eras of planning in Doha. Architectural Design. 2015; 85:1:80–91.
     [Google Scholar]
  19. el Samahy R, Hutzell K. Closing the gap. In: AMO Archis NAI Tank Pink et al. eds. Al Manakh Cont'd. Archis 2010;:184–190.
     [Google Scholar]
  20. Sillitoe P. Conclusion. In: Sillitoe P, ed. Sustainable Development: An Appraisal from the Gulf Region. New York, NY, London: Berghahn Books 2014;:497–530.
     [Google Scholar]
  21. Sandercock L. Sustaining cosmopolis: Managing multicultural cities. In: Keiner M et al. ed. Managing Urban Futures. Aldershot: Ashgate 2005;:209–220.
     [Google Scholar]
  22. Kaliski J. Democracy takes command: The new community planning and the challenge to urban design. In: Saunders WS ed. Urban Planning Today. Harvard Design Magazine Reader 3 Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press 2006;:24–37.
     [Google Scholar]
  23. Kee T. Institutional incubator for community outreach – the community project workshop at the University of Hong Kong. In: Miazzo FKee T, eds. We Own the City. 2014;:80–87.
     [Google Scholar]
  24. Lydon M. Tactical urbanism: Short-term action, long-term change. Vol. 1. The Street Plans Collaborative. Online Publication; 2012. Available at: http://issuu.com/streetplanscollaborative/docs/tactical_urbanism_vol.1 (accessed 17 April 2015).
  25. Energizing Kowloon East Office (EKEO). Energizing Kowloon East Office (EKEO): Bridging the Urban Planning Gap. In: Miazzo FKee T, eds. We Own the City. 2014;:70–79.
     [Google Scholar]
  26. Keiner M. Towards gigapolis? From urban growth to evolutionable medium-sized cities. In: Keiner M et al. eds. Managing Urban Futures. Aldershot: Ashgate 2005;:221–234.
     [Google Scholar]
  27. McGee R, et al.  Legal frameworks for citizen participation: Synthesis report. Learning Initiative on Citizen Participation and Local Governance (Logolink). Sao Paulo 2003.
     [Google Scholar]
  28. Goetz A, Gaventa J. From consultation to influence: Bringing citizen voice and client focus into service delivery. IDS Working Paper 138 Brighton: Institute of Development Studies 2001.
/content/journals/10.5339/connect.2017.qgbc.2
Loading
Scaling down planning in Doha towards the neighborhood and its public realm
QScience Connect 2017, 2 (2017); https://doi.org/10.5339/connect.2017.qgbc.2
/content/journals/10.5339/connect.2017.qgbc.2
/content/journals/10.5339/connect.2017.qgbc.2
Loading

Data & Media loading...

  • Article Type: Research Article
Keyword(s): neighborhood, participation, planning approaches, public realm and urban governance

Most Cited Most Cited RSS feed

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error