Globalisation

Some are arguing that the impact of population growth, overexploitation of natural resources, the extinction of many biological species, the worsening of environmental problems, the production of new forms of uneven development, the persistence of poverty, the instability of the global economy, and persistent geopolitical crisis in different parts of the globe, are some of the most crucial and global contemporary problems that we face today. But some might dispute this view and argue that in the second half of the 20th century we have been witnessing a massive scientific-technological development that has triggered an enormous extension of the infrastructure of social communication throughout the world and, most importantly, it has improved the conditions of life for some important part of the world population.

“The growing economic interdependence of countries worldwide through increasing volume and variety of cross-border transactions in goods and services, free international capital flows, and more rapid and widespread diffusion of technology” (IMF)

So behind all of the numbers and hierarchy of exchanged goods and services, what does this mean for individuals? Is quality of life increased, decreased, or equal? What effect is the world economy putting on the environment? These are the questions I have begun to ask in my mind for a few years now, and they have resounded even more after just a few weeks in this class. So far Diamond raises some great concepts. By categorizing the rise and fall of civilizations by 5 key aspects we can set a precedent to follow, so that future mistakes will at least be informed mistakes.

Globalization while not western in concept, is run by capitalist / western societies and has forced all countries and industries to become involved at some level. Many goods today consumed by Americans, maybe produced by Chinese of South American raw materials and passed through a Dutch port system before being sold in a super market. It has recently (1970) become disconnected from governmental control through the neoliberal movement that pushes for free trade at the domestic level. It has enabled multinational corporations to operate where borders may once have restricted access.

As our readings have addressed the globalised approach in my personal opinion does not enable the world a chance at an enriched life, only those at certain cores or within a reasonable periphery. Africa as a focal point, will not in my lifetime be capable of playing a role in any of these cores. Perhaps they can benefit in certain sectors as a peripheral influence.

Methods of mass production and industry outweigh the cost of human labor and sustaining individual life, and this infrastructure is proportionally(to the people) lacking in the African continent. However countries such as Malaysia or Australia are enabled to utilize industry to provide for their citizens at a rate capable of surpassing the defined level of poverty.

The environment has suffered due to increased reliance on natural resources to power machines to generate the goods required to participate in the global economy, but in my mind this over use, will best occur with a highly refined economic model in place as Globalization attempts to accomplish (The most efficient network) However this is not as simple as saying water runs to the lowest point. By having a set system in place to monitor resources and control their supply and demand, this can better enable its own protection. While this sounds utopian, this is the eventual goal of the system to develop a sustainable society by importing goods that might not be easily produced for something that is over produced. The EU is an example of where corporations have access to many differing resources that transgress borders, yet are attempting to be mindful of their resource.

In terms of design (Policy) globalization is a project of sorts, but it is an organic project that CAN NOT be micro with that intention. It is a project that has no defined goals and no defined beginning or end, but this is no different from the idea of building a city. It is an organic system that has a goal of growth, but may also not follow its set parameters.

California Scenario

Having done the majority of my Landscape Architectural Studies in the Midwest, I was not aware of Noguchi’s small plaza in Costa Mesa, California. I recently visited this project, and was a bit confused. The idea is great, represent California through the landscape. My immediate thought was this is A Landscape Architect’s version of California Adventure at Disney. I enjoyed the ties to the landscape, and even the culture of this place, yet I thought something was amiss. It seemed to kitsch, like something we would design in our first year. Too much meaning was attached to the garden’s elements. I suppose this is my realistic and pragmatic design training coming through.

I specifically found the ground level water system and paving selection to be fantastic. I suppose it could be enhanced if they were to integrate actual drainage systems within the sculptural system. I intend to use this concept in my Grand Avenue Civic Center design.

http://www.landliving.com/articles/0000000576.aspx

Located next to the OC Preforming Arts Center
611 Anton Blvd., Costa Mesa, CA, USA

Design vs Living (Post Katrina)

Andres Duany of Miami based DPZ, has been a controversial Architect and Planner involved in community design, and specifically New Urbanism. His following is based on acceptance or his “preaching” forcing your acceptance. Everyone else is an outcast to him.

Usually when he or any other egomaniac designer doesn’t get immediate acceptance they will move on to someone who will listen, accept, and pay the bills. However Mr. Duany is a coy business man, next to being an Architect. His tool kit of community planning, and New Urbanist ideas usually are adapted slowly and in small green / grey plots open to development. However in the wake of the Katrina disaster an entire city is in need of design, planning, construction, and humanity. He was not welcomed as much as he brought his own money and time to the table. According to the Wall Street Journal Duany donated 150,000 of his man hours and materials towards a design charette and planning meeting.

This may seem welcome and noble of such an elevated designer, however most if not all of his donation will be repaid by government grants for his assistance in the area. If he happens to succeed in pushing his ideas forward with a desperate community he will also have earned free PR and development rights.

Now in defense of his strategy this is a great time to plan New Orleans properly and to attempt to make it respond to race, income, and welfare of the citizens. On the other hand, many of the homeless citizens will take whatever they are given and as fast as possible. “I don’t give a flip what you call it…Just get me back into my house” So it is critical that Mr. Duany doesn’t recreate Seaside up the coast. While Seaside was a success financially it managed to ostracize all but the richest from the community. Why should the firefighter have to live 45 minutes away?

It is great that some want to step up and help shape new design and developments, but at what cost? I hope Andres Duany is allowed to procede, yet under the guidelines of an externally developed General Plan. This General Plan needs to be derived from community input from all classes and race. These tasks might be hard given the economic situation in New Orleans.

Irvine versus Bristol

Do I live in the wrong culture? I am stuck in a conundrum of wanting to have easy and quick access to goods, yet disagree with the development of our suburban lifestyles. If you were to say tomorrow, no more cars are allowed, my immediate thought would be to applaud! Then the reality would sink in about what I would really be giving up! Living in Irvine I am privileged with more bike accessible path / trail ways than vehicle circulation. Yet all of the public spaces are spaced at intervals beyond an average walk or bike ride. One is required to drive to CVS or the bank, and to reach beyond Irvine? (This goes for 98% of southern California) you better ride a bus if you intend on arriving in a reasonable amount of time. School is about a 70 mile round trip, and thankfully I only have to do this for 3 more weeks, but some people drive that daily year round. What happened to living where you work?

At the beginning of April I visited the United Kingdom, a westernized nation very similar to our own. What I learned was their mentality is completely different, and not just in the capitol of London. In one week I walked more on my brief “holiday” / tour, than I do day to day in one month in Irvine. Most of this sounds obvious, we live in a society dominated by cars. I suppose my biggest shock was a short day trip to Bristol on the west coast to meet an old friend. He told me to walk to his house, only “45” minutes. Wow. I asked a friend of mine to walk over to my house (2 mile round trip) and was told I was crazy.

People actually utilized train service “religiously” to move between activity centers, whether that is a shopping district, or a city, 100 miles apart.

I am really stuck in this challenge of how can we change minds, since that is not the only barrier. The core of our lifestyle is based in cars, and it really irritates me, and I am not just being jealous that I have a Ford Taurus, and everyone else has a Lexus or Pathfinder.

With gas skyrocketing, perhaps some will open their eyes, but most likely not. Unfortunately change does not come quickly. Development of TODs and urban living is slowly arriving, but it will take 100 years to correct and catch-up to the last 50 years of improper zoning and infrastructure development.

As a student and professional in the field of design and policy I hope to come to the table with the tools to speed up a change in mindsets.