Cities 62 (2017) 28–40
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Cities journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/cities
From abstract principles to specific urban order: Applying complexity theory for analyzing Arab-Palestinian towns in Israel☆ Maisa Totry-Fakhoury, Nurit Alfasi ⁎ Department of Geography and Environmental Development, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, POB 653, Beersheba 84105, Israel
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 29 September 2016 Received in revised form 25 November 2016 Accepted 1 December 2016 Available online xxxx
a b s t r a c t This paper uses complexity theory to analyze the urban order and development of Arab Palestinian villages and towns in Israel. It follows the spontaneous emergence of abstract planning codes and principles, influenced by changing social, political and cultural dynamics. Based on a morphological analysis of 77 towns in northern and central Israel, and an in-depth investigation conducted in the city of Sakhnin, in the central Galilee, the paper reveals a repeated three-ring structure, corresponding to three socio-political periods. We offer a detailed examination of the links between social values and spatial conduct, thus enabling us to follow how slight changes in social and economic circumstances affect planning principles. In addition, the paper highlights the power of planning-without-a-plan as a method that facilitates shaping the quality of the built environment while allowing local adaptation and creativity. Finally, we discuss the problematic urban pattern created in the typical third ring, which is a top-to-bottom product of modern planning thought. © 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
1. Introduction Complexity sciences are becoming a relevant framework for understanding cities and built environments (Batty, 2005; Batty & Marshall, 2012; Portugali, 1999, 2011; Portugali, Meyer, Stolk, & Tan, 2012; Salingaros, 2000; Ben Hamouche, 2009; Rauws, 2015). Importantly, as de Roo and Rauws (2012) state, scholars build bridges between the worlds of planning theory and practice, and complexity sciences. Since planning approaches “move away from the ambition to achieve predefined outcomes” (Rauws & de Roo, 2016, 1), new viewpoints are needed that might offer less comprehensive and not entirely top-tobottom planning methods. In line with this tendency, the current paper applies complexity tools to highlight the power of planning without a plan; that is, planning subjected to abstract principles, codes and directives that emerge spontaneously to safeguard important sociocultural values. By analyzing the development of Arab-Palestinian towns in Israel, we look at the evolution of a typical urban order, and follow the way changing circumstances affect the contents of the abstract planning principles. Despite the numerous planning problems these towns face on a daily basis, the quality of the mutual order of Arab towns and cities, emerging without a comprehensive land-use plan, serves here as a manifestation of the power of planning-without-a-
☆ The paper was enabled thanks to research funds granted from Israel Science Foundation (grant no. 116/12) and The Ministry of Science, Technology and Space, Israel. ⁎ Corresponding author. E-mail addresses:
[email protected] (M. Totry-Fakhoury),
[email protected] (N. Alfasi).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2016.12.001 0264-2751/© 2016 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
plan and an important lesson regarding the lost foundations of urban planning. Since the establishment of the state of Israel, Arab-Palestinian towns there have been diverted from the development path of other Mediterranean and Middle Eastern cities to form an exclusive type of built environment. Although Palestinians share the same cultural background, including an explicit set of planning principles and spatial routines as other Arab societies, in the six-and-a-half decades under Israeli rule, Palestinian towns have gone through a gradual change effected by their specific social, economic and political circumstances (Khamaisi, 1995, 2005, 2007; Kipnis, 1996). Most of the spatial conditions that do not exist in Arab countries are linked to the local terms of colonization (Yiftachel, 1997), the trauma of land confiscation (Pappe, 1992, 2006; Paz, 1998; Luz, 2007; Falah, 1989, 2003), the military regime in the early state period (Bäuml, 2007), and a degree of integration in the Israeli society (Khamaisi, 2005). It is our claim that the effect of these bold events is clearly visible in a distinctive time-line expressed in space. Specifically, the mutual terms of socio-environmental change on one hand, and the lack of governmental interest and hence intervention in the inner spatial organization on the other hand, makes these towns and villages a good example for exploring processes of highlyordered self-organizing built environments. Based on the approach of complexity science, we presume that the order of the built environment, similarly to other complex systems, emerges from the multifaceted interactions between the numerous inhabitants, landowners, community leaders and other stakeholders that share it and act in it. Considering the bottom-up nature of development in Arab Palestinian towns and the shared cultural and political environment, we sought the components of their typical urban code. The
M. Totry-Fakhoury, N. Alfasi / Cities 62 (2017) 28–40
current paper analyses that code, and follows the association between socio-cultural circumstances and the specific principles that comprise the code. The search for abstract rules and principles that influence the spatiality of Arab towns is not necessarily new. Stavski (1946), Khamaisi (1994, 2005) and Meir-Brodnitz (1986) show that Arab villages and towns in Israel developed according to a rich set of cultural stipulations and religious, mostly Muslim, norms. Moreover, the Palestinian community in Israel is originally part of the Middle East region, the Muslim Ottoman Empire and part of the Arab nation. This community is a traditional patriarchal society that preserves unique cultural and environmental norms, including clear reference to planning principles. Research on Muslim and Middle Eastern urbanism relates to the fact that these cities were not planned in the modern, comprehensive and semi-scientific manner, but developed in a bottom-up fashion subjected to both tacit and articulated stipulations (Hakim, 2001, 2008, 2014; Akbar, 1988). Thus, a leading social value was the strict privacy of family life, particularly of women. Additional qualities were the centrality of community life, traditionally structured in clans (hamullah), the close relationships between neighbors, and habits of mutual supervision and the respect of the elderly, who maintained their right to be decision-makers within the entire clan (Bianca, 2000; Costa & Noble, 1986). As an agricultural society, with 75% of the Palestinians living in villages and working on their lands throughout the first half of the 20th century, land ownership used to be of great importance, and it is still an essential resource for a sustainable life (Yazbak, 2004; Khamaisi, 2005; Schnell & Fares, 1996; Goldhaber & Schnell, 2007). The emergent spatial code and the resulting urban order reflected these qualities. However, the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948 shook the social and economic foundations of the Palestinian society, and had an evident effect on the spatial structure. The loss of most of the elite and middle classes turned the vital Palestinian society to a defeated ethnic minority. Beginning in 1948 and during the military regime that lasted for approximately 15 years thereafter, around 90% of the private lands of Arab citizens were expropriated by the Israeli government, leaving the Palestinian community trapped in narrow confines (Yiftachel, 2000). This resulted in the persistence of Arab-Palestinians on the land, usually termed sumud, meaning that immigration from the villages ceased immediately; people had to cling to their property and use it for dwelling, manufacturing and businesses. Privately-owned land turned to a valuable social asset. At the same time, the development of the built environment remained an internal Palestinian issue; for decades, the state maintained an indifferent attitude toward the internal structure of the Arab towns, and the villages grew and developed according to abstract values rather than a clear land-use plan (Khamaisi, 1995, 2004, 2005, 2007). This method of planning-without-a-plan, that is, building towns and cities subject to abstract principles rather than a comprehensive outline, is related to complexity science and the self-organization of the built environment (Ben Hamouche, 2009; Moroni, 2010, 2015; Alfasi & Portugali, 2004, 2007, 2009; Alfasi, 2014). In this paper we elaborate on this idea and tie the changing order of the built environments to the evolution of planning principles. Moreover, based on Moroni's (2014) explanations to theories of spontaneous orders by Hayek (1948, 1982, 1988), we relate to the relations between the spontaneous emergence of social orders and the spontaneous emergence of social institutions. The first refers to “patterns of cooperation” and “social order of actions” (Moroni, 2014, 12) that constitute the full complexity of social order; emerging as a response to environmental changes and internal events, the order of actions encompasses a large amount of knowledge that guide individuals' relationships and conducts. Whereas, the second refers to “a variety of practices and rules” (Moroni, 2014, 10), whether tacit or explicit, that comprise the basic social rules of conduct. We therefore present the structure of the Arab-Palestinian town, first, as a reflection of the spontaneous social order resulting from changes in
29
socio-cultural environment under the Israeli rule, and second, as a reflection of social institutions (specifically, planning principles), evolving with respect to the specific social order and external circumstances. The paper starts with a brief review of the political and social background of the Arab Palestinian society in Israel in the last seven decades, followed by a brief introduction to the theoretical framework of selforganizing built environments. We then present the three-ring spatial order of the Arab-Palestinian towns and villages, as it emerges from a comprehensive analysis of all 77 towns and villages in the central and northern parts of Israel, excluding only the Bedouin villages and towns of the south, and analyze the evolution of central planning principles in detail. We conclude with reference to the self-organizing urban code and the limits of self-organization as a planning method.
2. Theoretical background 2.1. The spatiality of Arab-Palestinian towns In the early 20th century, Arabs living in Palestinian cities experienced the beginning of urbanization, as people living in villages moved to cities, including Jerusalem, Haifa, Jaffa, Lydia and Acre. This process ceased with the 1948 war and establishment of the Israeli state. The urban hierarchy was abruptly emptied of the deported Arab elite and the main cities were populated by a new and mostly hostile Jewish population (Yiftachel, 1999, 1998; Yazbak, 2004). Most residents of the dozens of Palestinian villages that were destroyed became refugees living outside the borders of Israel, while the balance were sheltered by the remaining Palestinian towns (Pappe, 2006; Khamaisi, 2005). The Palestinian cultural, social and economic infrastructure was truncated and no alternative was created to meet the needs of Palestinian society or to attract rural migrants (Khamaisi, 2005; Schnell & Fares, 1996; Goldhaber & Schnell, 2007). Israeli national planning policy, aimed at creating a new, modern Jewish sphere at the expense of the Palestinian minority, had a huge effect on the spatial development of Palestinian towns. National and district outline plans designated stone quarries, parks and national infrastructure near Arab towns, thus restricting their development (Nasser, 2012). Discriminatory development plans such as “Judaization of the Galilee” led to the construction of new villages and suburbs for Jewish residents alone (Falah, 1989; Goldhaber & Schnell, 2007; Luz, 2007). Moreover, the Israeli military regime from 1949 to 1966 limited the mobility of the population between towns (Falah, 1991; Paz, 1998). These inequitable and exclusionary acts restricted immigration from Arab towns and ultimately maintained the traditional self-building habits and familial-based land ownership for the following decades (Khamaisi, 1995). As the years passed, the formerly agricultural Arab society became post-industrial; the proportion of Arabs working in agriculture dropped from about 40% in 1958 to 1.7% in 2010. Participation of Arab women in the labor force rose from 7% in 1970 to about 22% in 2008 (Yashiv & Kaisar, 2012). The creation of new employment in commerce and services and the rising standard of living reduced dependency on clans' aid mechanisms and weakened its role as the main social unit (Khamaisi, 2005).Arab society in Israel still retains traditional social values and strong community life (Al-Haj, 1988, 1995; Abu Odeh, 1993). However, while the clan is significant in terms of the town politics (El-Taji, 2008), its social role has been replaced by the extended and nuclear family. Under these conditions, the development of Arab-Palestinian towns and villages remained extremely problematic. Although the Palestinian population multiplied 11 times since the establishment of the state, from 156,000 in 1948 to 1,720,000 in 2014 (Central Bureau of Statistics, 2015), the municipal area of Arab towns was reduced 10 fold. The lack of migration from towns caused a heavy demand for housing, which had to be met using familial lands. The method of self-
30
M. Totry-Fakhoury, N. Alfasi / Cities 62 (2017) 28–40
Table 1 Three periods of urban development and their basic features. Prior to 1948 Social structure
Clan structure: traditional rural society based on clan relationships
Planning system
Bottom up: planning without a plan according to cultural norms and agreements between residents Clan shared: division of land ownership between clans, without official registration
1950s–90s
2000+
Familial structure: economic changes and local population growth weaken the clan structure, and emphasize the role of the extended family Employment Agriculture: the original Palestinian society Professional: Israeli economic system and land confiscation is based on agriculture shift the employment base to services, crafts and commerce
Land ownership
Restricting outline: the Israeli planning system remains indifferent to the inner development of Arab towns Familial: inherited agricultural lands of clans, extending from the core, are divided between extended families and used for hosing
building helped reduce construction costs and take care of the family's living arrangements using existing land resources (Khamaisi, 2004). Although the state applied various planning tools that constricted the development of Arab towns, it did not interfere with the development inside the towns. As a result, and in spite of enormous population growth, the expanding towns and villages continued to reproduce rural orders, centered on familial assets and traditional spatial control. Researchers have labelled this unique yet typical spatiality “besieged urbanization” (Meir-Brodnitz, 1986) and “selectively disturbed urbanism” (Khamaisi, 1995). The national planning policy of indifference to the inner structure of Arab towns changed only in the early 2000s, after the second intifada, when the Ministry of Interior decided to prepare local outline plans for almost all Arab localities (Baana & Swede, 2012). More than half of these plans have since been completed, and the rest still in the preparation process that frequently involves contested discourses with inhabitants and land owners. Most of these plans disregard the qualities of planning-without-a-plan that took place for many years, perceiving it as inadequate and leading to the creation of deficient and chaotic urban areas. Labeling the exiting urban space as illegal and inadequate is in fact a result of the mismatch between the language and terms of the Israeli planning system that stems from industrial, western society and the spatial characteristics of Arab towns that developed according to the rich tradition of Arab-Palestinian culture (Alfasi, 2014). Based on this outline, we defined three characteristic periods affecting the development of Arab Palestinian towns, each having a specific spontaneous social order in Moroni's (2014) terms, typified by socioeconomic and political features (Table 1). 2.2. Self-organization of the built environment Complexity theory views the urban environment as an open, complex and adaptive system (Batty, 2005; Batty & Marshall, 2012; Portugali, 1999, 2011; Portugali et al., 2012; Salingaros, 2000; de Roo, Hillier, & van Wezemael, 2012; Alfasi & Portugali, 2009; Rauws, 2015; Moroni, 2010, 2015). From this perspective, the development of cities and towns results from the mutual interaction of many diverse agents, including people, institutions, and businesses. The numerous players act upon their interests and initiatives while relating to the cultural norms, behavioral customs and general rules relevant to the city. Specifically, the ability of individuals to follow abstract rules forms spontaneous social orders. These orders emerge from the complex feedbacks between actors and actions, reflecting the existing norms while simultaneously influencing them. This evolution of self-organized systems of rules and social organization makes the built environment highly adaptable to changing conditions (Portugali, 1999; Moroni, 2014). Particularly, it is claimed that the urban code reflected in the variety of spatial relations between built elements is sensitive to the socio-cultural environment (Alfasi & Portugali, 2004, 2007; Ben Hamouche, 2009). This
Family unit: modernization strengthens the strive for individual wellbeing and the focus on the nuclear family unit Modern: rising standards of living and educational levels lead to a modern professional profile, including women's labor Modern planning: local outline plans are launched for the first time, using the Israeli planning system Private: fixed land plots are divided into single family units
situation is extremely relevant for the spatiality of Muslim cities that developed in a traditional manner for centuries, and were subject to abstract yet binding stipulations (see: Costello, 1977; Costa & Noble, 1986; Akbar, 1988; Bianca, 2000; Ben Hamouche, 2009; Hakim, 2014). This was also the case in Arab-Palestinian towns that, until recently, were developed by a traditional society in a bottom-up fashion. Specifically, the Arab-Palestinian towns in Israel provide an opportunity to follow the gradual development of tacit planning principles resulting from social and economic changes, and the way they affect the built environment. 3. The spatial order of Arab towns in Israel 3.1. Three-ring morphology A basic spatial order, shared almost by all of Arab towns in Israel was instantly revealed in our morphological examination of land ownership. The analysis is based on data gathered from the National Map and GIS Project of Israel Land Authority.1 The maps we used show the borders of land parcels, providing insight to types of land ownership, the size and location of land parcels and the degree to which they are aligned with roads and infrastructures. It has been argued that Arab towns in Israel developed in a centrifugal manner, from the inside out (Khamaisi, 1994); our analysis confirms this claim. Moreover, we found that almost all (about 98%) of the 77 Arab towns and villages in northern and central Israel are comprised of three sequential patterns: 1) Communal ownership: the old villages that were constructed prior to establishment of the state and now comprise the core of Palestinian towns are clearly visible on the land ownership map. Most of these original villages are built on a single, large land parcel with no secondary division. In practice, the land was and may still be divided to clans but no official registry exists to prove this (Fig. 1). 2) Clans' and extended families' shared spaces: in most towns, the core is surrounded by large and amorphous land parcels, each hosting whole neighborhoods or sections of neighborhoods. This part of the town was built after establishment of the state on land parcels belonging to clans and extended families. Since the state did not interfere with internal construction, the roads, public buildings and open spaces were allocated and built by the residents belonging to a specific clan or extended family, and 3) private ownership: newly planned neighborhoods on land allocated by the state. Land ownership reflects a clear division between roads and residences, and single houses are built on small, fixed-sized plots. This division is evident in Fig. 1, which shows the land parcelization patterns of three different Arab towns: Sakhnin, with 30,000 Muslim inhabitants, in the north; Jat, with 11,000 Muslim inhabitants, in the
1
http://www.govmap.gov.il/mmi
M. Totry-Fakhoury, N. Alfasi / Cities 62 (2017) 28–40
31
Fig. 1. Three-ring structure. Exemplified in Sakhnin (left), Jat(center) and Bukei'a (right).
center (“the triangle”); and Bukei'a, with 6000 Muslim, Christian and Druze inhabitants, in the north. This structure appears in almost all towns in our sample, with two exceptions: approximately 8% of the Palestinians in Israel live in 22 towns and villages with populations of less than 15,000 that have only two rings to date. It is very likely that they will develop a third ring in the future, but currently they contain only the old core and the families' shared spaces. In addition, Jieser el Zarka and E'in Houd developed in an unclear spatial form that does not correspond to the three- ring structure; this may well be related to their unique historical paths. The spatial distribution of Arab Palestinian villages and towns appears in Fig. 2.
Based on land-ownership morphology, we describe the towns as having three distinctive rings: The first ring is the town core, included in the communal land parcel. The core consists of a few dense neighborhoods divided by main roads on shared land that is usually not registered. The second ring is the built fabric circling the core, with housing compounds on shared land. In most towns, this ring was built between in 1948–2000 as part of the gradual expansion of housing into surrounding agricultural lands. The third ring includes the new modern neighborhoods, usually built on national land allocated to the towns, since the late 1990s and early 2000s. This ring is not full as the location of neighborhoods depends on the availability of land, but the
Fig. 2. Regional distribution of Arab town in Israel, not including the Bedouin villages in the Negev. Sakhnin is the circled town at Central Galilee.
32
M. Totry-Fakhoury, N. Alfasi / Cities 62 (2017) 28–40
community values and socio-economic conduct, and the social institutions overseeing the development of the built environment. We related to spatial rules such as the dynamics of residential and commercial development, the emergence of vertical expansion in the form of upper stories built above existing homes, the hierarchy of roads and open spaces and places of employment. Specifically, we link the evolution of socio-cultural order of action in each ring with the evolution of social institutions as codes and abstract planning principles followed by inhabitants. We then tie the abstract principles to the spatial organization of the town.
Fig. 3. Land use structure of the original Arab town (now comprising the core).
neighborhoods are easily recognized because they were fully planned in advance (see Fig. 1). Although indifferent to the inner structure of the village, national planning attempted to confine its gradual expansion. According to Khamaisi (2004), barriers and constraints, such as national roads, quarries and forests, were located near most of the towns and villages, directing and blocking their growth. Topography also played a major part in the spatial order as the residents prefer to build on land that is less steep, to the reduce cost of construction. 3.2. From abstract principles to spatial order Following the general morphological analysis, we conducted a deeper examination of the built environment in the city of Sakhnin, in an attempt to draw connections between the abstract principles and the qualities of the urban development. Sakhnin is located in central Galilee and numbers approximately 30,000 inhabitants, thus representing a medium-sized city similar to most other Arab cities in Israel (see Fig. 2). The in-depth examination is based on data collected during 2013–2015, aerial photographs from 1988, 2009 and 2014; the master plan from 2004; local plans from 1989, 1992, 1995 and 2000; sketches of the different types of built environment; in-depth interviews with six residents (males and females) of various ages; short interviews with 25 residents; and an in-depth interview with the city engineer. The in-depth interviews lasted for 1 h, and provided information about the structure of the family, the family's history and the history of their privately owned land, the construction process of the house and the social and spatial relations between the neighbors. The analysis of information gathered in Sakhnin makes it possible to draw connections between the social order, exemplified through
3.2.1. Core The spatial order of the core reflects the spontaneous social order existing before the establishment of the state and is the sheer result of the socio-cultural circumstances that existed in the late 19th and early 20th century. The clan-based structure, being a shared trait and a powerful social force, was reflected in the spatial organization of the village. Thus, a leading principle was the division of residential neighborhoods into segments, each controlled by a different clan. Relatively wide public roads marked the borderlines between clans, with narrower streets forming the entrance from the main public roads to the residential areas. Inside the clan's territory, a hierarchy of roads leads to increasingly private areas, from the extended family to the single housing unit. In addition to the spatial expression of the clans' terrain, these principles ensured maximal privacy for inhabitants, especially for women in the private domain. The division into clans also matched land ownership, providing each clan control over its territory and access to it. The distribution of resources in each segment was in the hands of the eldest male in the clan, the Mukhtar (Lewin-Epstein, Al-Haj, & Semyonov, 1994). The organization of land use was affected by agricultural nature of the village. Cultivated lands were located in the extended segments controlled by each clan, again organized according to a shared set of principles, with citrus and other trees marking the outer border of the village and the clans' territories (Arraf, 1996). The center of the village was a shared public space where the mosque and related public uses were located (Fig. 3). The street hierarchy is organized in a typical Mediterranean manner, according to principles described by Hakim (2014) and Ben Hamouche (2009). The use and location of streets needed to match the level of visual accessibility they allowed, from the most private to the most public (Hakim & Zubair, 2005). Ben Hamouche claims that roads display a fractal structure, with a gradual transition from the private to the public spaces that is compatible at all scales, from house to neighborhood and city (Fig. 4a). Residential patterns are created according to the land inheritance method prevalent in Muslim society as also explained by Ben Hamouche (2009). Thus, the clan's land is divided according to kinship and gender (Fig. 5a). Since each generation shares the ancestral land,
Fig. 4. Street hierarchy in the various rings of Sakhnin (after Ben Hamouche, 2009).
M. Totry-Fakhoury, N. Alfasi / Cities 62 (2017) 28–40
proximity of residential buildings is usually a sign of close familial relations, which is also consistent with the principles of privacy. Close relationships are also displayed in the organization of houses around a shared open space. Groups of residential buildings share the entrance to the living area and face a common yard, usually used for lingering, watching young children while doing domestic tasks, and marking family events (Bianca, 2000; Hakim, 2014). In line with Ben Hamouche's findings regarding the fractal structure of roads and streets, self-similarity (that is, the components resemble the whole) is found in the structure of the housing in the second ring (Fig. 6a). During the past few decades, many buildings were reconstructed according to the personal preference and economic means of the owners. Currently, the core consists of original structures but also many building with additional floors and new buildings on top of older, demolished ones. The analysis of Sakhnin reveals that this is done in the absence of clear planning principles. Weak architectural links between the old and the new, various styles and structures, styles of entrance and links between private and public. In addition, there are empty and deserted buildings in the core. Residents explained that some were abandoned because of the owners' lack of will and desire to live in them, and others because of poor relations between members of the extended family who share the ownership of the structures. 3.2.2. Second ring The second ring consists of the built area developed after the establishment of the state on familial agricultural lands that extend out from the core. These new circumstances affected first, the socio-spatial order and second, the spontaneous adaptation of social institutions in the form of planning principles. Again, the links between the social order and the spatial systems are evident. Changes occurred in the type of employment, as people turned from agriculture to commerce, education, public services and crafts, in and outside the village (Yashiv & Kaisar, 2012). Modernization, in addition to rapid population growth (Khamaisi, 2005), weakened the clan's spatial control and changed the land ownership from clan-based to land shared by an extended family. In addition, many towns and villages were allocated land for the development of neighborhoods for landless people. Housing continued to be developed using self-building, enabling people to use the land and adjust the construction budget to the extended family's resources and needs. This ring consists of familial and mixed neighborhoods, which differ in the identity of their inhabitants; the former neighborhoods function as a shared familial court while the latter are divided to smaller courts for different families (Hauz, 2013; Khamaisi, 1994). In line with the social changes, the type of land ownership changed from clan-based to family-based. In Sakhnin, we found that the hierarchy of roads consists of three types: main roads, inner streets and
33
dead-ends. Similar to the old planning principles, main roads divide between neighborhoods and are dedicated to transient traffic, as well as locals of all families and clans. However, they are suited to newer technology, wide enough for two lanes of cars; some have pedestrian paths on one or both sides and space for parking. In addition, as a result of the improved economy in the seventies and eighties and the development of commerce, space for local businesses was provided on the ground floor of houses located on the main road. Inner streets are built on private lands, serve residential areas and usually lead to dead-end streets where extended families live. Most of them allow one or two lanes of cars, and usually lack sidewalks. Dead-end streets are considered private, and are used as gateways to housing complexes; driving and walking mixed with parked cars [see Fig. 4a]. The weakening of the clan structure led to a shift in the organizing principle: instead of clan-based neighborhoods, the segments in this ring are divided according to extended families. Since the neighborhoods are built on former agricultural lands, they almost always belong to the entire extended family or clan; the compounds are larger than those in the core. Residential complexes for subsequent generations are created gradually. Houses are built around a shared courtyard accessible from the dead-end street. Cars are parked in the courtyards but they are also a place the extended family to linger and for children to play. Chairs are placed at the entrance to houses and children's toys are often scattered around (see Figs. 5b; 7). The generational organization of housing in the extended family's compound follows common principles: 1. First generation–original house: the first home in the plot is the father's house. 2. Second generation–other houses on the plot: the area is divided according to the number of sons in the second generation. 3. Third generation–the upper stories: the third generation needs to share the area of the second generation. Once buildings fill the land, apartments are built on upper stories above the first and second generations' houses. Each nuclear family has a private story. 4. Fourth generation–a few options: the residences of the fourth generation depend on the financial status of the family and the amount of vacant land it owns. The preferred solution would be to continue the division of land for the construction of new houses for the younger families. Buying land for the younger generation in the outer ring is the next solution. Those who can't afford this are land-less; they search for living a place at the craft and industrial areas allocated by the state, above a relative's warehouse or a workshop, or are forced out of the village. The family's responsibility for providing housing for their sons is preserved. Another enduring principle is having residents add units or rooms to the house if necessary, making the building process dynamic
Fig. 5. Building dynamic.
34
M. Totry-Fakhoury, N. Alfasi / Cities 62 (2017) 28–40
Fig. 6. The fractal structure of development.
and flexible. Neighbors are flexible regarding the location of the fences between houses, to fit with the families' needs. In addition, undeveloped privately-owned lands are preserved for the future generations by means of planting olive trees and the introduction of other agriculture inside neighborhoods. The residential area always consists of a combination of completely built plots, empty plots and partly-built plots, according to family's size and resources. Again, a fractal selfsimilar structure is displayed, with similar dynamic at the scale of a singular plot, the whole neighborhood and the village (Fig. 5b).
3.2.3. Third ring The development of the third ring follows the lines of Israeli planning habits and laws. The neighborhoods are planned top-to-bottom, with strict division between private areas and roads regardless of the abstract planning principles that guided previous development. There are two kinds of streets in this ring: main roads and neighborhood streets. Both are considered public and dedicated for transients and locals (Fig. 4c). Most residents in the third ring are young couples from various families, who work in free professions or services (in 2010, approximately 55% of Arab women working outside the home worked in the education and health sectors; Abraham Fund, 2013).The buildings usually follow
the model of single-family suburban styles, with a growing share of condominiums. The planning is based on zoning according to the Israeli planning system, with a separation between public and residential uses. This changed the decision-making process for construction from agreements between family members and neighbors to permit and contracts between tenants and the local authority. Commercial establishments are developed either in a shopping center/mall or along the main road (national road no. 805) that crosses the city. The long history of living among family members is not easily abandoned, though. Thus, although the new neighborhoods are planned in a modern, western style, the suburban houses are fenced so that privacy of the family is protected in the front yard, and condominiums are usually occupied by members of the same extended family (Fig. 5c). The evolutions of the abstract principles that guide spatial development of each of the three rings are summarized in Fig. 8 and Table 2:
4. Discussion: the gradual evolution of the urban code The repeated three-ring structure typical of the majority of Palestinian towns provides an opportunity to follow the gradual evolution of the ‘twins’, as Moroni (2014, 16) sees them: the first is the social order,
Fig. 7. Gradual construction of familial a residential complex through three generations in the second ring.
M. Totry-Fakhoury, N. Alfasi / Cities 62 (2017) 28–40
35
Fig. 8. The three-ring urban structure of Sakhnin.
named by Moroni after Hayek (1948) ‘the order of actions’, and the second is the social institutions, that we see here as an urban code. Although not specified in books of law, the urban code manifests a set of abstract planning principles followed by planners, inhabitants and property owners. Particularly, since the first ring (the core) was constructed according to a shared Mediterranean pattern, and the third ring was planned and built in line with the Israeli suburb and shape, the evolution of a new Palestinian urban code is reflected in analysis of second ring's development. The gradual change occurring in the spatial ‘order of actions’ is the result of a changing socio-political environment. The typical spatiality of a Palestinian town reflects the unique circumstances faced by this community in Israel and the unique social structure created there. These circumstances triggered the evolution of specific social institutions that developed and were nurtured through the years. The following analysis links the central planning principles comprising the code, presented in Table 3, to the social values that created them. 4.1. Spatial principle #1: residential dynamics 4.1.1. Social values: self-building; privacy; family responsibility for successors' housing Throughout the years, Palestinian society preserved the custom of self-building; that is, the tendency of the owners to be the planners and developers of their own housing, with almost no entrepreneurial construction. This custom was followed in development of the core, and continued in the second and to a great extent in the third ring as well. The self-building reflects the fact that people tend to live among
other members of their family. The endurance of this custom is also related to the strict adherence to privately-owned lands, property shared by all Palestinians as a result of the traumatic events of the 1940s and 1950s and the shared sumud. In particular, after 1948 private land was considered the exclusive means for housing, and families kept their private properties for accommodating the next generations. Thus, changes in residential patterns correspond to the state of land ownership and social structure in each period: a) back-to-back houses in the core reflect the shared land and the strong communal relations within the clan in the early 20th century; b) the division of agricultural lands between the main families in the clan is reflected in the familial complexes typical of the second ring. The dynamics within complexes result from the scarcity of land, the family's responsibility for the housing of the younger generations, and the habit of living among family members; c) these social values are adapted to living in the third ring, where land-less people from the village reside, with very few if any immigrants from other towns; most residents build their own homes, which are fenced off so that visual privacy is strictly kept between neighbors, unless they are from the same family. 4.2. Spatial principle #2: hierarchy of streets 4.2.1. Social value: hierarchy of privacy In addition to being a spatial expression of the clan's power, the street hierarchy is a means for ensuring the privacy of women in the private domain. This code was initiated in the core where main roads marked clans' territories, and access to the hierarchy of streets was permitted according the degree of familial relations. As the clan's control
Table 2 Abstract principles of spatial development in each of the three rings.
Residential dynamics Street Network Public sphere Open spaces
Core: Fig. 8a
Second: Fig. 8b
Third: Fig. 8c
Back-to-back: proximity of houses as sign of close relations Hierarchy: gradual transition from public to private Centered: the community's open space at the center of core Housing around a shared courtyard
Familial complexes: extended families share a housing space Main or inner: main roads with commerce, inner roads in residential areas Main roads: public spaces are developed inside neighborhoods Open familial space in each plot
Private or dense buildings: housing for single families, according to the availability of land Standard: roads planned by transportation engineers Remote: public space is dull and scarce Private yards with no shared open space
36
M. Totry-Fakhoury, N. Alfasi / Cities 62 (2017) 28–40
Table 3 A comprehensive look at the links between socio-cultural circumstances and planning principles. Socio-cultural features in each period (left) are linked to the relevant abstract planning principles at each ring.
weakened, the street hierarchy in the second ring was reduced, and the road network was developed and used by the neighboring families. Since the inner roads are used mainly for access to residential areas, the mobility inside the neighborhoods in this ring is for residents only. However, this hierarchy has completely disappeared in the third ring due to forced interference of the Israeli planning system. As a result, residents build high fences to ensure the privacy of their homes, which makes the inner streets less comfortable for the use of women and children. 4.3. Spatial principle #3: public sphere 4.3.1. Social value: community supervision The strong community life in the core was reflected in the central public space which was lively and well-preserved by the community. In the second ring, the public space shifted to the main roads between and inside the neighborhoods where commerce co-exists in residential buildings. These new public spaces can be supervised by the residents, thus extending the codes of behavior and maintenance into the second ring. However, there are no open public spaces in the third ring. Attempts by local authorities to develop open spaces in the new, planned neighborhoods have failed. People are reluctant to linger in unsupervised places, which do not belong to a specific family. 4.4. Spatial principle #4: open spaces 4.4.1. Social value: shared familial rituals and conduct The importance of shared open spaces is influenced by social conduct and the type of land ownership. The only open space in the core was the communal center. Therefore, private (shared)
open spaces inside each family residential compound were needed and preserved: the family's courtyard provided a place for Ramadan break-fast gathering, holiday feasts, hosting visitors in times of mourning, celebrating weddings and more. The courtyard was environmentally suitable for the climate, and safe for children to play because it is visible from the homes. The courtyard was preserved in the second ring thanks to the shared land ownership. The family's economic resources are also expressed spatially, as families who do not own private lands are forced to crowd into or on the edges of clan-based areas. The crowded standard of living that these families experience, the fact that they are forced to share the same building, adding floors whenever the family expands, project a living threat: the troubling fate of those who do not own land. On one hand, large clans who own land have more familial spaces (roads and courtyards between the buildings) for their exclusive use. On the other hand, smaller clans who do not own much land end up with smaller, semi-private spaces. The courtyard disappeared in the third ring due to the change in private land ownership under the Israeli planning system, although the cultural need for this familial space still exists. Table 3 offers an integrative look at the social, cultural and political circumstances (left half of the table) and the resulting urban order (right half). Three periods are presented in the left half: prior to establishment of the state (pre-1948), the 1950s–1990s, and the early 2000s. The environmental circumstances include social structure, employment, planning system and type of land ownership. The right half shows the planning code relevant to each of the three rings: the core, the second ring and the third ring. The principles embodied in the code relate to residential dynamics, street network, public sphere and open spaces.
M. Totry-Fakhoury, N. Alfasi / Cities 62 (2017) 28–40
37
4.5. Limits of self-organization
5. Summary
The theory of self-organization sees conflicts and inner contradictions as sources of creativity: when the various agents struggle to overcome uncomfortable situations, reduce waste and improve wellbeing, they are inventive, test new behaviors and advance the system as a whole. Problems are thus solved within the system without external intervention, and new orders may emerge. However, the case of the Arab towns in Israel which developed according to local principles in a selforganizing manner shows that some planning failures may be unsolvable from within. Conflicts arise in two principal situations: when changing norms and novel planning principles are confronted with outdated built environments, and when “external” modern areas are introduced that are unsuitable for the social structure and norms of inhabitants. With respect to the Arab towns, the inadequacy of the core for current lifestyles results from the lack of public spaces and undeveloped infrastructure there. Moreover, as the result of shared land ownership and the lack of housing market, this ring is frozen in time with almost no attempt to preserve, renovate and update the old urban fabric. Adjusting the old, narrow streets and dense built area of the core to a modern lifestyle is a challenging task in most Arab-Palestinian towns, because land and buildings cannot be sold to strangers. Moreover, the fundamental lack of cooperation between people of different clans and extended families with property in the core leads to the emergence of new and uncorrelated building types. Since the shape of old fabric is not considered a social value, there are no conservation plans for the old cores and the dense urban fabric gradually turns unpleasant and messy. A visit to the core of Sakhnin exemplifies the need for an external intervention to safeguard architectural assets, build and maintain public infrastructures and rearrange traffic patterns. People renovate and replace the existing houses in various ways; some invade nearby passages and sidewalks that currently lack a binding registry; others desert the old houses they are unable to sell. Clearly, the old set of rules has been abandoned and the new one is unfit for the existing situation. Planning intervention that defines preemption rights, outlines the public places and passages, and delineates architectural guidelines for renovation and rebuilding – subjected to the consent of the residents – could save the deteriorated old cores. The third ring, where modern planning was enforced poses a different challenge. Here, intervention in the spatial organization is needed to adjust the impersonal built environment to prevailing values, such as familial social structure and the privacy of women. Town residents are reluctant to accommodate the new condominiums where strangers will turn to neighbors; people prefer to buy single-family houses, which are becoming extremely expansive. Since the streets and parks are completely public, women, including young mothers with children, do not use them, unless accompanied by male family members. Young residents in the third ring of Sakhnin admit they prefer to linger in their families' courtyards in the second ring. A sensitive planning intervention in the third ring would allocate familial complexes where construction could be gradual and meet residents' needs. Finally, the absence of a housing market in Arab towns – a result of the social structure and style of landownership – is a major setback, causing prolonged economic and generational gaps. Weaker families are left with no residential solution while those who possess land in the second ring tend to keep it for the next generations. The development of decent familial compounds on public lands in the third ring could ease the pressure to “save” land and generate a land market in these towns. Providing economic and mediational tools to encourage and enable people to act on their private domain is a major challenge of the Israeli planning system, one that is far more necessary than preparing comprehensive outline plans for these towns.
In this article, we used the viewpoint and tools of complexity theory to analyze the spatial development of Arab Palestinian towns in Israel. These traditional communal societies live in selforganized built environments that were never planned in a comprehensive manner. Nevertheless, the vast majority share similar three-ring urban structures, each presenting a typical urban pattern. We analyzed land-ownership outline of all 77 towns and villages in the central and northern parts of Israel, excluding only the Bedouin villages and towns of the south, and found comparable structure in 75 of them, which developed without the direct involvement of a leading hand. With a shared time-line clearly expressed in the spatial development, these Arab-Palestinian towns and cities exemplify an adaptive self-organized urban development in a changing social and economic reality. Considering the shared environmental circumstances, these towns provide an opportunity to follow the links between sociocultural values and abstract planning principles, and between them and the resulting urban code. Specifically, the links between spontaneous emergence and adaptation of social order, and of social institutions (for example, abstract planning principles) in each period are evident. The changing social, political and economic reality is clearly expressed in the spatiality of Arab Palestinian towns: moving from the core, comprised of the original town built in the 19th and early 20th centuries, to the second ring, created in 1950s–1990s, and into the third ring built in Israeli style in the last fifteen to twenty years. The core was designed according to Islamic building rules typical of the entire Mediterranean area. These rules were culturally oriented to match the agricultural, patriarchal and clan-based community living in Palestine. The second ring around the core represents the spontaneous adaptation of these rules to the changing political and social reality of Palestinians living in Israel. Thus, mixed-use familial neighborhoods were created, each built and managed by its inhabitants with minimal intervention from governmental agencies. This pattern is extensively shared in the rapid expansion of towns and villages from since the mid-1950s through the late1990s. In the third ring, though, the tradition of adapting planning principles to relevant values was cut off. Created according to the Israeli planning system, this ring represents a modern unified development. The common application of planning-without-a-plan enables us to assess ideas about the effect of acceptable planning principles on the quality of the urban order. As opposed to the planned spaces in the third ring, the self-organized spaces in the first and the second rings fit the society's needs and values. While the plan deals with specific aspect of the built environment, land use and few building characteristics, development according to shared abstract principles produces a rich set of nuances, a variety of local interpretations and a diverse yet clear urban pattern. Familial spaces are different, yet all share an immediate access from residents' homes, a high degree of visual privacy, shade in the daytime and good natural ventilation. Streets are different, yet each is clearly signed according to the accepted typology and provides gradual access from public to private. Public spaces are different, yet each part is assigned to a clear social entity responsible for maintenance and supervision. Despite these qualities, bottom-up and unplanned, selforganized spaces are not easily adapted to the rapid change in the needs of a modern, urbanized society. In the face of modernization, unexpected conflicts arise that require planning intervention. Although self-organizing systems, urban areas and traditional societies included, are most flexible and adjusting, the current lifestyle demands external intervention consistent with local values and existing circumstances. The question remains, should intervention be based on a mutual agreement regarding the relevant values and principles or, as modern planning agencies act, on a sheer top-tobottom activity.
38
M. Totry-Fakhoury, N. Alfasi / Cities 62 (2017) 28–40
Appendix A. Spatial structure of all 77 towns and villages in northern and central Israel.
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69
Spatial structure
Location
Size ~(thousands)
Main religion
Locality
Nazareth Um el Fahem Shafa'mer Taybe Tamra Sakhnin Baka el Gharbiya Tira A'rabeh A'ra'ara Kufur Qasim Qalansawa Kufur kana Mghar Judaideh-Maker Kufur manda Yaffa (Nazareth) Rieneh Jufur karea' Dalyet el Carmel Yarca Majd el Kroom Jieser el Zarka Ma'aleh E'iron Abu Snan Iksal I'blien Tora'an Kabul Nahef Furiedis E'in Mahel O'sfia Beit Jan Dier el Asad Jat Daburieh Dier Hanna Kufur Yassif Jaljoulieh E'ilot Rameh Bui'eneh Mashhad Kisra-Smea' Basma Abu Gosh Shaa'b Bukei'a Yanoh Jat Mukiebleh E'ilaboon Horfesh Joulis Sajour Mazra'a Zemer Fasoota Kaukab abu Elhiejah Me'ilya Jesh Kufur Bara Meisar Soulam Taybeh el Zeo'bieh Sheikh danoun Kufur Mazer Sheikh Danoun Naa'ora
Lower Galilee Upper Triangle Lower Galilee Lower Triangle Central Galilee Central Galilee Upper Triangle Lower Triangle Central Galilee Upper Triangle Lower Triangle Lower Triangle Lower Galilee Central Galilee Upper Galilee Central Galilee Lower Galilee Lower Galilee Upper Triangle Haifa area Upper Galilee Central Galilee Haifa area Upper Triangle Upper Galilee Lower Galilee Lower Galilee Lower Galilee Central Galilee Central Galilee Haifa area Lower Galilee Haifa area Upper Galilee Central Galilee Upper Triangle Lower Galilee Central Galilee Upper Galilee Lower Galilee Lower Galilee Upper Galilee Upper Galilee Lower Galilee Upper Galilee Upper Triangle Jerusalem Upper Galilee Upper Galilee Upper Galilee Lower Galilee Central Galilee Upper Galilee Upper Galilee Central Galilee Upper Galilee Upper Triangle Upper Galilee Central Galilee Upper Galilee Upper Galilee Lower Triangle Upper Triangle Lower Galilee Lower Galilee North Lower Galilee Upper Triangle Lower Galilee
76 52 40 40 32 30 28 25 24 24 22 21 21 21 20 18 18 18 18 17 16 15 14 14 13 13 13 13 13 12 12 12 12 11 11 11 10 10 9 9 8 8 8 8 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 6 6 6 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
Mixed Muslims Mixed Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims Mixed Mixed Mixed Muslims Mixed Mixed Muslims Druze Druze Muslims Muslims Muslims Mixed Muslims Mixed Mixed Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims Mixed Druze Muslims Muslims Muslims Mixed Mixed Muslims Muslims Mixed Muslims Muslims Mixed Muslims Muslims Muslims Mixed Druze Muslims Mixed Druze Druze Druze Muslims Muslims Christians Muslims Christians Mixed Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims
Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three ringsb Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Unclear Two ringsa Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Two rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Two rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Two rings Two rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Three rings Two rings Two rings Two rings Three rings Two rings Three rings Two rings Two rings Two rings Two rings Two rings Two rings Two rings Two rings
M. Totry-Fakhoury, N. Alfasi / Cities 62 (2017) 28–40
39
(continued)
70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 a b
Spatial structure
Location
Size ~(thousands)
Main religion
Locality
Nien E'in Houd E'in el Asad Um el Kutuf Ei'n Arafeh-Ei'n Nakufah Ras Ali Tamra el Zeo'bieh Sandalah
Lower Galilee Haifa area Upper Galilee Upper Triangle Jerusalem Lower Galilee Lower Galilee Lower Galilee
2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Muslims Mixed Druze Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims Muslims
Two rings Unclear Two rings Two rings Three rings Three rings Two rings Three rings
Small towns contain clear core and a second ring. The third ring will most probably develop in the future. Towns marked in bold are presented in Fig. 1.
References Abu Odeh, L. (1993). Post-colonial feminism and the veil: Thinking the difference. Feminist Review, 43, 26–37. Akbar, J. (1988). Crisis in the built environment: The case of the Muslim City. Leiden: Brill. Alfasi, N. (2014). Doomed to informality: Familial versus modern planning in Arab towns in Israel. Planning Theory & Practice, 15(2), 170–186. Alfasi, N., & Portugali, J. (2004). Planning just-in-time versus planning just-in-case. Cities, 21(1), 29–39. Alfasi, N., & Portugali, J. (2007). Planning rules for a self-planned city. Planning Theory, 6(2), 164–182. Alfasi, N., & Portugali, J. (2009). Proposing a new structure for the Israeli Planning System. Tel Aviv: The S. Daniel Abraham Center for International and Regional Studies (in Hebrew). Al-Haj, M. (1988). The changing Arab kinship structure: The effect of modernization in an urban community. Economic Development and Cultural Change, 36, 237–258. Al-Haj, M. (1995). Kinship and modernization in developing societies: The emergence of instrumentalized kinship. Journal of Comparative Family Studies, 25, 311–328. Arraf, S. (1996). The Arab Palestinian village. Ila Al Umoq (in Arabic). Baana, E., & Swede, R. (2012). Outline planning for Arab localities in Israel, part A. Jerusalem, Bimkom: Planners for Planning Rights and The Arab Center for Alternative Planning (in Hebrew). For English abstract: http://eng.bimkom.org/_Uploads/31outlineplan. pdf Batty, M. (2005). Cities and complexity: Understanding cities with cellular automata, agent based models, and fractals. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press. Batty, M., & Marshall, S. (2012). The origins of complexity theory in cities and planning. In H. Meyer, J. Portugali, E. Stolk, & E. Tan (Eds.), Complexity theories of cities have come of age: An overview with implications to urban planning and design (pp. 21–55). Heidelberg & Berlin: Springer. Bäuml, Y. (2007). A blue and white shadow. The Israeli establishment's policy and actions among its Arab Citizens: The formative years, 1958–1968. Haifa: Pardes (in Hebrew). Ben Hamouche, M. (2009). Can chaos theory explain complexity in urban fabric? Application in traditional Muslim settlements. Nexus Network Journal, 11(2), 217–242. Bianca, S. (2000). Urban form in the Arab World: Past and present. Zurich: Thames & Hudson. Costa, F. J., & Noble, A. G. (1986). Planning Arab towns. Geographical Review, 76, 160–172. Costello, V. F. (1977). Urbanization in the Middle East. Berkeley: University of California Press. de Roo, G., & Rauws, W. S. (2012). Positioning planning in the world of order, chaos and complexity: On perspectives, behaviour and interventions in a non-linear environment. In H. Meyer, J. Portugali, E. Stolk, & E. Tan (Eds.), Complexity theories of cities have come of age: An overview with implications to urban planning and design (pp. 207–220). Heidelberg & Berlin: Springer. de Roo, G., Hillier, J., & van Wezemael, J. (Eds.). (2012). Complexity and spatial planning: Systems, assemblages and simulations. Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing. El-Taji, M. T. (2008). Arab local authorities in Israel: Hamulas, nationalism and dilemmas of social change. (Unpublished dissertation). University of Washington, available from: http://lib.haifa.ac.il/electronictexts/1435124.pdf Falah, G. (1989). Israeli ‘Judaization’ policy in Galilee and its impact on local Arab urbanization. Political Geography Quarterly, 8(3), 229–253. Falah, G. (1991). Israeli “Judaization” Policy in the Galilee. Journal of Palestine Studies, 20(4), 69–85. Falah, G. W. (2003). Dynamics and patterns of the shrinking of Arab lands in Palestine. Political Geography, 22(2), 179–209. Goldhaber, R., & Schnell, I. (2007). A model of multidimensional segregation in the Arab ghetto in Tel Aviv-Jaffa. Tijdschrift voor Economische en Sociale Geografie, 98, 603–620. Hakim, B. (2001). Julian of Ascalon's treatise of construction and design rules from sixthcentury Palestine. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, 60(1), 4–25. Hakim, B. (2008). Arabic-Islamic cities: Building and planning principles. Middle East Studies Association of North America (MESA). Hakim, B. (2014). Mediterranean urbanism: Historic urban/building rules and processes. Netherlands: Springer. Hakim, B., & Zubair, A. (2005). Rules of the built environment in the 19th century Northern Nigeria. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research, 23(1), 1–24.
Hauz, I. (2013). Spatial dynamics in Arab cities in Israel. (An MA thesis submitted to BenGurion University of the Negev). Hayek, F. A. (1948). Individualism and economic order. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Hayek, F. A. (1982). Law, legislation and liberty. London: Routledge. Hayek, F. A. (1988). The fatal conceit. London: Routledge. Israel Central Bureau of Statistics (ICBS) (2015). Statistical yearbook. Jerusalem: Central Bureau of Statistics Publications. Khamaisi, R. (1994). Centrifugal factors and their effect on the structure of Arab localities. In D. Grossman, & A. Meir (Eds.), The Arab localities in Israel; geographical process (pp. 114–127). Jerusalem: Magnes (in Hebrew). Khamaisi, R. (1995). Land ownership as a determinant in the formation of residential areas in Arab localities. Geoforum, 26, 211–224. Khamaisi, R. (2004). Barriers to the planning of Arab localities in Israel. Jerusalem: Floersheimer Institute for Policy Studies (in Hebrew). Khamaisi, R. (2005). Urbanization and urbanism of Arab settlements in Israel. Horizons in geography (Ofakim Be'Geographia). vol. 64–65. (pp. 293–310) (in Hebrew). Khamaisi, R. (2007). Between customs and laws: Planning and management of land in Arab localities in Israel. Jerusalem: The Floersheimer Institute for Policy Studies (in Hebrew). Kipnis, B. (1996). Normative changes in the pattern of housing of Arab population in Israel, from the late 1970s to the early 1990s. Social security (Bitachon Socialy). vol. 45. (pp. 37–53) (in Hebrew). Lewin-Epstein, N., Al-Haj, M., & Semyonov, M. (1994). The Arabs in Israel in the labor market. Jerusalem: The Floersheimer Institute for Policy Studies (in Hebrew). Luz, N. (2007). On land and planning majority-minority narrative in Israel: The MisgavSakhnin conflict as parable. Jerusalem: The Floersheimer Institute for Policy Studies (in Hebrew). Meir-Brodnitz, M. (1986). The suburbanization of Arab settlements in Israel. Horizons in geography (Ofakim Be'Geographia). 17–18. (pp. 105–123) (in Hebrew. Moroni, S. (2010). Rethinking the theory and practice of land-use regulation: Towards nomocracy. Planning Theory, 9(2), 137–155. Moroni, S. (2014). Two different theories of two distinct spontaneous phenomena: Orders of actions and evolution of institutions in Hayek. Cosmo & taxis: Studies in emergent order and organization. vol. 1(2). (pp. 9–23). Moroni, S. (2015). Complexity and the inherent limits of explanation and prediction: Urban codes for self-organizing cities. Planning Theory, 14(3), 248–267. Nasser, K. (2012). Severe housing Distress and Destruction of Arab homes: Obstacles and Recommendations for Change. Dirasat: Arab Center for Law and Policy [in Hebrew]. For English abstract: http://www.il.boell.org/downloads/Dirasat_Kais_Nasser_Final_ 2012(2).pdf Pappe, I. (1992). The making of the Arab-Israeli conflict, 1947–1951. London and New York: I.B. Tauris. Pappe, I. (2006). The ethnic cleansing of palestine. London and New York: One world. Paz, Y. (1998). Preserving architectural heritage in deserted neighborhoods after Independence War. Cathedra: for the history of Eretz Israel and its Yishuv. vol. 88. (pp. 95–134) (in Hebrew). Portugali, J. (1999). Self organization and the city. Berlin: Springer. Portugali, J. (2011). Complexity, cognition and the city. Berlin: Springer. Portugali, J., Meyer, H., Stolk, E., & Tan, E. (Eds.). (2012). Complexity theories of cities have come of age. Berlin: Springer. Rauws, W. (2015). Why planning needs complexity: Towards an adaptive approach for guiding urban and peri-urban transformations. University of Groningen. Rauws, W., & de Roo, G. (2016). Adaptive planning: Generating conditions for urban adaptability. Lessons from Dutch organic development strategies. Environment and Planning. B, Planning & Design. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0265813516658886. Salingaros, N. (2000). Complexity and urban coherence. Journal of Urban Design, 5, 291–316. Schnell, I., & Fares, A. (1996). Towards high-density housing in Arab localities in Israel. Jerusalem: The Floersheimer Institute for Policy Studies (in Hebrew). Stavski, M. (1946). The Arab village. Tel Aviv: Am Oved (in Hebrew). Yashiv, E., & Kaisar, N. (2012). Arab women in the Israeli labor market: Characteristics and policy proposals. Jerusalem: Bank of Israel (in Hebrew). For English Abstract: https://www.boi.org.il/deptdata/mehkar/papers/dp1205h.pdf
40
M. Totry-Fakhoury, N. Alfasi / Cities 62 (2017) 28–40
Yazbak, M. (2004). The Arabs in Haifa: From majority to minority, processes of change (1870–1948). In A. Bligh (Ed.), The Israeli Palestinians: An Arab minority in the Jewish State (pp. 123–148). London: Frank Cass Publishers. Yiftachel, O. (1997). Israeli society and Jewish Palestinian reconciliation: Ethnocracy and its territorial contradictions. Middle East Journal, 51, 505–519. Yiftachel, O. (1998). Planning and social control: Exploring the dark side. Journal of Planning Literature, 12(4), 395–406.
Yiftachel, O. (1999). Ethnocracy: The politics of Judaizing Israel/Palestine. Constellations, 6(3), 364–390. Yiftachel, O. (2000). Ethnocracy, democracy and geography. Alpayim, 19, 78–105 (in Hebrew).
