Island Systems Planning

Island Systems Planning

A Critical Review of the Presentations from Caribbean Urban Forum 5

Edited by: Asad Mohammed, Perry Polar, Sarika Mahabir and Nika Maingot

Island Systems Planning – A Critical Review of the Presentations from the Caribbean Urban Forum 5

Edited by Asad Mohammed, Perry Polar, Sarika Mahabir, and Nika Maingot April 2016

This book is a publication of the Caribbean Network for Urban and Land Management and is funded by the European Commission Grant Identification Number: FED/2013/320159 Mainstreaming Energy Efficiency and Climate Change in Built Environment Training and Research in the Caribbean (CarEnTrain). ISBN Number:

978-976-620-290-3

© Caribbean Network for Urban and Land Management This document has been produced with the financial assistance of the European Union. The contents of this document are the sole responsibility of the Caribbean Network for Urban and Land Management and can under no circumstances be regarded as reflecting the position of the European Union.

i

Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ................................................................................................... iv FOREWARD...................................................................................................................... v INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................... 1 THEME : ISLAND SYSTEMS PLANNING ............................................................................... 7 FINDING THE RIGHT BALANCE BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND ECONOMIC IMPERATIVES: A CASE STUDY FROM ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA by David F. Brown, Sebastien Paddington and Darian Beharry…..........................................................................7 PARADIGM SHIFTS FOR ISLAND SYSTEMS PLANNING: STRENGHTENING OUTCOMES FOR CHILDREN, YOUTH, FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES by Bonnie Politz …….............................20 EXPLORATION OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES CRITICAL TO QUALITY OF LIFE IN TRINIDID AND TOBAGO COMMUNITIES OF VARYING URBAN INTENSITIES by Samantha Chadee and Valerie Stoute…. ...................................................................................................................30 SUB-THEME 1: SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT IN THE FACE OF CLIMATE CHANGE .... 39 A REVIEW OF CARIBBEAN LAND USE PLANNING LAWS: OPPOURTUNITIES FOR CLIMATE CHANGE ADAPTION by Danielle Edwards…… .......................................................................39 THE EXPERIENCE OF ST. VINCENT AND THE GRENADINES IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A NATIONAL LAND POLICY FOR SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT IN THE CONTEXT OF CLIMATE CHANGE by Benarva Browne…… ...........................................................................48 SUSTAINABLE LAND MANAGEMENT IN THE FACE OF CLIMATE CHANGE by Katja Dietrich, Marcus Mayr, and Faderr Johm……. .....................................................................................68 CLIMATE CHANGE AWARENESS OF ASPIRING URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNERS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY, JAMAICA by Laurence Neufville…… ....................................78 SUB-THEME 2: LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FOR THE CARIBBEAN .......................... 89 LEAN STRATEGIES: A DEVELOPMENT PLANNING TOOL FOR TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO AT THE MUNICIPAL LEVEL by Rodney Ramlogan, Aisha Donaldson, Kyana Bowen and Sean Sooknanan.. ..........................................................................................................................89 LOCAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND SPATIAL PLANNING: AN ANALYSIS OF THE LED IN GROS ISLET TOWN, SAINT LUCIA by Khrystal V. Lucien and Carianne Johnson…...............103 THE RIVERTON RECYCLING PROJECT AND THE INFLUENCE OF PUBLIC PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS IN DEVELOPING GREEN ECONOMIES by Algernor Thompson…… .............113 SUB-THEME 3: MOVING TOWARDS ENERGY EFFICIENY: ALTERNATIVES AND OPPORTUNITIES........................................................................................................... 120 DESIGN SUPPORT TOOLS FOR ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT: CLASSIFICATION, PROCESS AND ILLUSTRATIVE IMPLEMENTATION by Bart Janssens and Tom Coppens….. .................................................................................................................120 SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT IN THE OECS, AN ANTIGUAN AND BARBUDAN CASE STUDY by Colin John Jenkins……… ..................................................................................................130 SUB-THEME 4: PROFESSIONAL PLANNING PRACTICE, EDUCATION & TRAINING IN THE CARIBBEAN .................................................................................................................. 145 ii

PROTECTING NEGRIL: INTERROGATING THE NEGRIL AND GREEN ISLAND AREA PROVISIONAL DEVELOPMENT ORDER (2013) PLANNING PROCESS by Margaret Jarrett……… .........................................................................................................................145 SUB-THEME 5: HABITAT III AGENDA- THE ROLE OF SMALL ISLAND STATES IN THE HABITAT AGENDA ...................................................................................................................... 151 CARIBBEAN HISTORIC URBAN LANDSCAPES IN ISLAND SYSTEMS PLANNING by Patricia Elaine Green…… ..................................................................................................................151 OCEANS GOVERNANCE IN THE OECS: PROMOTING AND FOSTERING MANAGEMENT IN THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT by Asha Singh……. ...............................................................164 SUB-THEME 6: HOUSING POLICY IN THE CARIBBEAN: LESSONS LEARNED AND NEW DIRECTIONS ................................................................................................................. 169 HOW PUBLIC HOUSING CONTRIBUTES TO URBAN SPAWL IN PARAMARIBO? DIGGING DEEPER INTO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN PUBLIC HOUSING, SOUND LAND USE PRACTICES AND URBAN SPRAWL IN SURINAME by Sigrid Heirman and Tom Coppens……… ......................................................................................................................169 AFFORDABLE HOUSING POLICY IN THE US VIRGIN ISLANDS, POSSIBLE LESSONS FOR SIDS by Claude Gooding…………...................................................................................................184 REFLECTIONS ON THE TENANTRIES FREEHOLD PURCHASE ACT CAP 239B by Joy R. D. Best…………… .......................................................................................................................190 HOUSING POLICY AND DELIVERY IN BARBADOS: THE NEED FOR AN EVIDENCE BASED APPROACH TO SOCIAL (AFFORDABLE) HOUSING by Raymond Lorde………........................197 REVIEW AND CONCLUSIONS ......................................................................................... 212

iii

Acknowledgements The editors would, firstly, like to thank all the presenters at CUF5, and in particularly, those whose papers comprise this collection. Special thanks to the Local Organizing Committee, led by Ms. Joanna Raynold Arthurton, President of the Saint Lucia Institute of Land Use Planners (SLILUP); the Ministry of Physical Development, Housing and Urban Renewal; Bentley Brown, Cornelius Isaac and other members of staff of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS); and Marie-Louise d' Auvergne. Integral to the success of CUF5 and other CUFs are our longstanding partners, Caribbean Local Economic Development project (CARILED), InterAmerican Development Bank (IDB), United Nations Human Settlement Programme (UNHabitat) and CARICOM Secretariat. We are deeply indebted to the European Union whose continue support through three projects have made the CUFs possible: • EU- ACP EDULINK 1 - Higher Education Capacity Building in Urban Planning and Management in the Southern Caribbean, 9 ACP-RPR- 12/10 (2008-2011) • EU-ACP EDULINK II - Mainstreaming Energy Efficiency and Climate Change in Built Environment Training and Research in the Caribbean (CarEnTrain), FED/2013/320-159 (2013 – 2017) • EU-ACP Science, Technology and Innovation - Strengthen research development and uptake capacity in Urban, Land and Municipal Management in the Caribbean - NSUS Network for the application of STI to the urban sector (NSUS), FED/2009/21/217062 (2009-2012). Finally we would like to thank The University of the West Indies (UWI), Saint Augustine for their continued support provided to us, the Caribbean Network for Urban and Land Management (CNULM).

iv

Foreword New Contours of the Caribbean Urban Agenda Michael G. Donovan* The theme of the Fifth Caribbean Urban Forum (CUF5), “Island Systems Planning” evoked the vulnerability of the Caribbean, but also the potential of city planning to reduce the environmental impacts of climate change and unregulated urban growth. A sense of optimism percolated throughout the conference due to the encouraging work of a new generation of Caribbean planners committed to expanding housing options, controlling urban sprawl, and ensuring citizen participation in the planning process. Their roles will be even more important in the future as cities in the Caribbean expand and planners are called to upgrade services for the more than one million residents in the Caribbean who live in informal settlements. Debates over urban and land management issues—and their impact on the environment—have been at the heart of the region’s postcolonial development debates. One might ask, “what was new in the Caribbean urban debate?” The active discussion during the 21 breakout sessions of the CUF5, together with these 19 papers, underscore five emerging trends in this policy debate. 1. Caribbean planners are rewriting the “legislative DNA” of urban policy During CUF5, discussants pointed to a raft of new legislation that has entered the Caribbean urban policy dialogue. In Jamaica, this includes several draft legislation: the National Squatter Management Policy and Implementation Plan (expected 2016), the National Housing Policy, the National Spatial Plan, and a revision of the Building Code. In Trinidad & Tobago, the Planning and Facilitation of Development Act was approved by Parliament and is awaiting proclamation by the President. St. Vincent and the Grenadines, one of the most vulnerable countries in the Caribbean, is debating a draft of its Land Policy. All of these efforts matter because enhanced regulatory frameworks will facilitate the growth of affordable housing stock, forcing fewer households into informality. 2. New professional associations are raising the standards of city planning in the Caribbean The Saint Lucia Institute of Land Use Planners (SLILUP) was launched at the Fifth Caribbean Urban Forum, the newest of several associations that are strengthening the discipline of planning in the region. This follows in the wake of the establishment of the Caribbean Planning Association (CPA), a membership organization founded in 2011 and structured on the model of the American Planning Association (APA) and Canadian Institute of Planners (CIP). The Belize Association of Planners (BAP) was formed in 2013, the Planning Association of Dominica (PAD) was established in 2015, and the Spatial Planners Association of Suriname (SAPSU) will begin operating in 2016. The Guyana Planning Association (GPA) will also be created in 2016. These associations provide critical training to planners who are on the frontlines of permitting, affordable housing construction, urban revitalization, and climate change adaptation. Greater solidarity amongst, and mobilization of, planners will increase their voice and influence in national policy dialogues. 3. The Caribbean is creating a post-2015 “New Urban Agenda” The theme of this year’s Caribbean Urban Forum, “Island Systems Planning”, underscored the critical role that city planning plays in reducing the environmental impacts of development. Caribbean planners are engaged in new efforts to enforce coastal setbacks and revise and rewrite unclear, outdated town planning laws. Although debates are often still local or national, a Caribbean-wide regional urban debate is emerging, due in part, to the preparations for the Habitat III United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development (Quito, 2016). Several Caribbean nations, such as Jamaica and Barbados, have drafted national Habitat reports, which summarize their issues in urban governance, housing, urban planning and disaster risk reduction. Caribbean countries have also aligned positions with the urban

v

goal—“make cities and human settlements inclusive, safe, resilient and sustainable”—of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals. Why does this matter? The Caribbean faces distinct challenges typical of Small Island Developing States (SIDS) such as greater dependence on a few economic sectors, higher vulnerability to natural disasters, and limited natural resources. These specificities are typically overlooked in Latin America and Caribbean regional reporting. A concerted attempt by the islands to bring to the forefront their unique challenges is vital to the relevance of HABITAT III. Despite the growing Caribbean-specific urban agenda, CUF5 participants noted key research gaps hampering a comparative Caribbean analysis, including the absence of: • • • •

updated public information about housing costs and prices in primary and secondary markets; information on land supply for housing production; reliable data on housing deficits; and statistical uniformity in the region that foster comparative urban assessments.

4. Unresolved housing and land issues still hamper tenure security Participants in CUF5 lamented evidence that points to a growing affordable housing deficit in the Caribbean despite the commendable work of several housing authorities. Although most governments have shifted away from direct construction and are assuming a facilitative role, the private sector has generally been unwilling to assume the risks associated with housing for low-income households. This dynamic has created an “affordability gap” and today many households cannot afford the cheapest units produced in the formal private sector. Apart from these dynamics, CUF presenters urged the adoption of new legislative frameworks for regularization given the large numbers of informal settlements. These challenges are acute in Jamaica where an estimated twenty percent (20%) of Jamaica’s population resides in informal settlements. 1 Speakers also reiterated the centrality of the land question for Caribbean development. These debates echoed the importance which Norman Manley MM, QC ascribed to land in 1943, “Land is the only source of the material life of the people….It is the basis of all production, of all development….It is in very truth the root of our being.” 2 CUF5 discussants presented research illustrating how unresolved land issues continued to stymie the development of housing in the Caribbean 3 and outlined tools to reform public land management. This topic resonated with government officials given the high percentage of land owned by the state, such as in Trinidad and Tobago where state-owned land comprises over half of the country’s land area. 5. Urban sprawl has arrived to the Caribbean CUF5 presenters also shared how the combination of a large number of vacant lots in Paramaribo, Bridgetown, and other cities, combined with low density residential development, has created new, more polycentric urban forms in the Caribbean. These findings are reinforced by Angel’s (2010) spatial analysis, which estimates that by 2050 the 15 CARICOM member states will have converted between 1,200km2 to 5,100 km2 of agricultural land to urban uses. 4 This urban shift will entail a doubling to a quintupling of total urban land area. In other words, by 2050 the urban area of the Caribbean will include the additional landmass of somewhere between three additional Barbadoses and the entire surface area of Trinidad & Tobago. Beyond

1

Ministry of Water & Housing of the Government of Jamaica (2008), Rapid Assessment of Squatting Report, www.mwh.gov.jm/Library/Public/Reports/Rapid_Assessment_of_Squatting_Report.pdf. 2 Public Opinion Newspaper, May 1943. 3 Challenges voiced by Forum participants were reflected in the IDB Country Strategy for Bahamas 2013-2017, which highlighted that land tenure security is reduced by “overlapping claims and rights to land as a result of property disputes[and] uncertainty regarding ownership of land resulting from an outdated real property rights system.” 4 Author’s calculations based on difference in urban land cover between 2000 and the projected urban land cover projections from 2015. Angel et al. (2010), “Annex II: Projections of Urban Land Cover for All countries, 2000-2050” in “A Planet of Cities: Urban Land Cover Estimates and Projections for All Countries, 2000-2050,” Lincoln Institute of Land Policy Working Paper, WP10SA3.

vi

impacting the environment, the growth of cities outside their administrative borders will create additional needs for inter-municipal collaboration for transport, waste collection, water provision, and a host of other issues. Already, contiguous cities like Kingston and Clarendon are beginning to merge, which implies the emergence of new “city-regions” and “urban corridors” in the Caribbean. Towards CUF6 in Paramaribo Outside of the content of the debate, new non-Caribbean actors joined the discussion, bringing international perspectives to the Caribbean discussion. Caribbean government representatives, the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS), the Caribbean Local Economic Development Project (CARILED), and the University of West Indies (UWI) were joined by the United Nations Human Settlements Program (UN-Habitat), the American Planning Association (APA), University of Antwerp (UA), and, for the first time, the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). The involvement of the IDB aligns with its recent commitment to devote 35% of its lending to small and vulnerable countries, especially those in the Caribbean. This commitment recognizes that Caribbean states face distinct development challenges and vulnerabilities, a topic that will be discussed in detail by the IDB Board of Governors, which will hold its Annual Meeting for this first time in the Caribbean this April in Nassau. The diverse dialogue that the Caribbean Urban Forum fosters with housing developers, civil society, academia, planning institutes, and donors is exactly the sort of space where innovations will emerge. I congratulate the SLILUP and the Ministry of Physical Development, Housing and Urban Renewal for organizing a conference whose breadth matched the complexity of urban challenges facing the Caribbean. CUF5 will be a powerful reference for structuring future transnational policy dialogues, including the forthcoming Caribbean Urban Forum VI in Paramaribo and the national urban fora preceding Habitat III.

* Michael G. Donovan is a Senior Housing and Urban Development Specialist at the Inter-American Development Bank.

vii

INTRODUCTION This edited collection of papers is a subset of the many quality papers, presentation and discussions at the 5th Caribbean Urban Forum (CUF) held in Saint Lucia, June 10-12, 2015. While the individual themes of the five annual CUFs held to date are a combination of the priorities in the eyes of the local organising committees and current overarching urban issues facing the region, there has been continuity and growth in the subject matter of these meeting as the forum has evolved. The sub-themes and tracks within the different overall annual themes have evolved from year to year as new partners with different mandates become involved and, as such, the CUF provides a dialogue space for the many important issues and actors in the Caribbean urban sector. This year’s theme “Island System Planning” was raised as a possible organisational framework for spatial planning and management in the Caribbean at the first CUF in Georgetown, Guyana 2011, and signifies the completion of a first, but still incomplete cycle of understanding Caribbean urbanisation. The first CUF was convened in 2011 in Guyana as part of a European Union funded project entitled Strengthen research development and uptake capacity in the Urban, Land and Municipal Management in the Caribbean (NSUS) executed by the Caribbean Network for Urban and Land Management (CNULM). It was co-hosted by a CIDA funded project of the Canadian Institute of Planners on Sustainable Communities in Guyana. The aim of the CUF is to bring together high level policy makers, municipal practitioners, academics, land use planners and allied professionals to share knowledge on urban and land management issues, policy dialogue as well as for capacity building. It has since been hosted in Jamaica (2012), Barbados (2013) and Trinidad and Tobago (2014). The CUF has attracted participation from the majority of Caribbean countries as well internationally. Along with national associations of land use planners and Government Ministries, the CUF is jointly organized with the CARICOM Secretariat, the Caribbean Local Economic Development Project (CARILED), United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat) and the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). Progress in the Caribbean Urban Forum The following two tables have been included in this introduction to map the progress of the CUF in the five years since its inception in 2011. Table 1 illustrates the themes at the CUFs and highlights a few of the outcomes of the conferences. Table 2 provides key performance indicators on the last five CUFs. The attendance of CUF has grown since its inception in 2011 and peaked in the CUF2013 (Trinidad) at 179 participants largely due to the large local planning fraternity. CUF2011 and CUF2015, the events with the lowest number of participants, were also held in countries without a national planning association (Guyana 2011) or a recently formed organization (CUF2015). The number of countries of work from which participants originate was highest in Trinidad (CUF2013) and Saint Lucia due to greater non-Caribbean participation in the former and greater intra-Caribbean representation in the latter. With the exception of CUF 2012 in Jamaica, the foreign participation in CUFs is close to 50% or above and an increasing number of persons are regular attendees at the event. The ratio of males to females is fairly even. Persons hail from a large number of unique organizations, however, the number of different academic organization is not broad and generally includes academic organizations which have ongoing projects with the CNULM i.e. University of the West Indies, University of Guyana, Anton de Kom University of Suriname, University of Technology (Jamaica), University of Amsterdam and University of Antwerp. The number of individual papers continues to increase as well as the number of panel discussions. Formal or informal business meetings are not considered in the calculations although they are popular. In CUF5, a 2 day training course on urban design for campus management and a one day training UN-Habitat course on urban planning for city leaders was held prior to the formal conference.

1

Table 1: Progression of the Caribbean Urban Forum Country/ Year Guyana (2011)

Theme

Sub-themes

Some Key outcomes

Establishing a Policy and Research Agenda for the Urban Sector in the Caribbean

• The Importance of Managing Urban Information for Regional Development and Setting of the Regional Urban Research Agenda • Knowledge Development for Decision Making at the National and Municipal Level • The Professional Community and the Urban Agenda • Promoting the Urban Agenda

Jamaica (2012)

Planning to achieve the Vision.....…. Towards a green urban economy

Trinidad (2013)

[R]Evolution

Barbados (2014)

Placemaking

Saint Lucia (2015)

Island Systems Planning

• Local socio-economic development and poverty alleviation • Defining guiding principles for the Caribbean Green Economy • Enabling mechanisms for governance and professionals • Governance (including Local Governance) • The Informal Sector and urban issues • Hazards Mitigation and Disaster Management in Urban Planning and Management • Security & Safety Aspects of Urbanization • Physical Living Conditions • Sustainable Planning for Urban Development & Management • Institutional Reform, including Legal Reform as a cross-cutting solution • The Green Urban Economy Post Rio +20 • The Evolving Caribbean Urban Agenda: Governance and Community • Local Engagement in the Development Process • Heritage and Culture in the Revitalization of Inner-city Neighbourhoods • Professional Planning Practice, Education & Training in the Caribbean • Building Green Economies: Caribbean Case Studies • Conserving Our Heritage: A Gift from the Past to the Future • Moving Towards Energy Efficiency: Alternatives and Opportunities • Building Strong and Resilient Communities • Involving Communities: Emerging Tools in Participatory Planning • Professional Planning Practice, Education & Training in the Caribbean • Island Systems Planning • Sustainable Land Management in the face of Climate Change • Local Economic Development for the Caribbean • Moving Towards Energy Efficiency: Alternatives and Opportunities • Professional Planning Practice, Education & Training in the Caribbean • Habitat III Agenda- The Role of Small Island States in the Habitat Agenda • Housing Policy in the Caribbean: Lessons Learned & New Directions • Sustainable Development in Saint Lucia

• Discussion the formation of the Caribbean Planners Association and initial thinking on the Caribbean Urban Agenda. These ideas were presented as papers to the Council for Trade and Economic Development (COTED) of CARICOM entitled Development of a Caribbean Urban Agenda in the Context of Sustainable Development and Urban Development & the Green Economy on 1st-2nd September 2011. • Further examination of the concept of green urban economy. Review of consultants reports on urban sector issues produced under the NSUS project • Review of the Caribbean Urban Agenda. • Formation of the Caribbean Planners Association (CPA) • Guidance on CARICOM’s position on the zero draft document “The Future We Want” to be presented at Rio +20 (Jun 2012). • The above issues were presented as a paper to COTED entitled The Role of Cities in the Green Economy on 17th -20th April 2012 • Review of the urban aspects of the green economy post Rio +20 • Discussions on local governance, culture and heritage and professional planning. • 2nd Annual Meeting of the CPA and Young Planners Network • Examination of the concept of Placemaking • Examine the role of Local Economic Development in developmental planning • 3rd Annual Meeting of CPA

• Examination of the concept of Island Systems Planning • Official Launch of The Saint Lucia Institute of Land Use Planners (SLILUP) • Launch of the UN-Habitat publication: Urbanization and Climate Change in SIDS. • Hosting of Urban Planning For City Leaders Workshop (UN Habitat) • Hosting of Urban Design Studio for Energy Efficient Campus Design and Management • Showing of documentary on East Port of Spain entitled “City on the Hill” (which subsequently won People’s Choice for short film at the Trinidad and Tobago Film Festival 2015) • Discussions on Habitat III Agenda

2

Table 2: Key indicators of progress of the Caribbean Urban Forum Attendance Persons in attendance Countries of work of participants Percentage of foreign participants Raito of males to females Number of unique organizations Number of Academic Institutions Number of participants attending 3 or more CUFs Presentations Panels / Workshops

CUF2011

CUF2012

CUF2013

CUF2014

CUF2015

59 14 73 1:0.96 31 7 -

131 18 37 1:1.38 57 8 -

171 24 45 1:0.88 73 7 15

158 15 72 1:1 63 10 21

132 24 60 1:0.86 57 8 38

7 0

15 5

32 3

37 6

38 10

Structure and Content of the Proceedings The Caribbean’s, like the rest of the world’s population, is highly urbanised. The accelerating rate of urbanisation in the developing world in the second half of the 20th century, due largely to rural-urban migration has slowed down, but natural increases in urban populations continue the growth and importance of urban areas. The Latin American and Caribbean (LAC) region has been described as the most urbanised region in the world with some 80% of its population being urban (UN-Habitat 2012 5). This has created a continent with high urban populations and large sparsely populated rural areas. The Latin American continent is still home to some of the world’s largest natural forests and natural areas. It is also home to widespread natural resource exploitation, including mining and agri-business, and intense rural deprivation and poverty. The Caribbean and Central American parts of the wider LAC are, however, different in character from Mexico and mainland South American countries. The countries of both these regions range from relatively small to micro states. Those that are not islands still have significant coastal areas and are extremely susceptible to a range of natural disasters especially hydrometeorological events. Their significant coastal settlements, along with the generic LAC issues of poverty and informal development, make them susceptible to the impacts of climate change, especially coastal inundation due to more intense storms and storm surges. While the statistics in the 2012 UN-Habitat publication are not as definitive for the Caribbean as in the mainland LAC, they suggest that more than 70% of the population in the Caribbean resides in urban areas. However, this statement needs to be better specified. While, the average population densities of the Caribbean are high, with the exceptions of mainland Guyana, Suriname and Belize, between 200-300 persons per square kilometre, this is not concentrated in dense urban areas but sprawled around ill-defined coastal urban areas, often the capital city. For many islands, the level of urban sprawl was so extensive that it is difficult to differentiate between urban and rural. Indeed, the entire island could be thought of as one urban area. Poor data and definitions make policy development difficult. For example, Trinidad and Tobago, one of the more urbanised countries in the region, is often defined as having an urban population of only 13% because of a definitional problem confusing historical urban administrative boundaries with areas of effective urbanisation. It is the problem of defining urban versus rural areas, their respective densities and finding appropriate boundaries and settlement classification in the region that have given rise to the call for developing an area specific settlement classification system for Islands and the appropriate planning system to manage it. A critical issue was if ‘urban’ and ‘rural’ could be distinct entities in our island context. The name suggested for a relevant framework in 2011 at the first CUF in Guyana was “Island Systems Planning”. When the decision was made to hold the CUF in the smaller, Organisation of Eastern Caribbean State of Saint Lucia, there was general consensus that this topic needed to be better explored and it became the overall theme of the conference. Island Systems Planning was also seen as having relevance to development of the ongoing Small Island Developing States (SIDS) Agenda and its relationship to the preparatory process for Habitat III. Elements of this discussion included the relationship between the Caribbean 5

UN-Habitat 2012, State of Latin American and Caribbean Cities, Nairobi.

3

Urban Agenda and sustainable land management in the region in the context of climate change, local economic development, sustainable energy use, sustainable institutions in small societies, disaster management and the transferability of international best practices to SIDS. Additional sub-themes included those that had been started in previous CUFs and were now established tracks such as, professional planning practice and education, housing policy in the region, and as host country, the issues of importance to Saint Lucia. Inclusive of the main theme “Island Systems Planning”, there were eight sub-themes which also represented current issues of importance to Caribbean SIDS. Thirty two (32) papers were presented at the conference and nineteen (19) of these papers were selected for publication in this book. The relevant briefing for the sections are discussed below, starting with the papers chosen for the main theme. Main Theme-Island Systems Planning Three papers were chosen for discussion in this section of the proceedings, 1. Finding the Right Balance between Environmental, Social and Economic Imperatives: A Case study from Antigua and Barbuda by David Brown, Sebastien Paddington, Darian Beharry, 2. Paradigm Shifts for Island Systems Planning: Strengthening Outcomes for Children, Youth, Families and Communities by Bonnie Politz, and 3. Exploration of Ecosystem Services Critical to Quality of Life in Trinidad and Tobago: Facilitated by an index of urban intensity by Samantha Chadee and Valerie Stoute. Sub-theme 1- Sustainable Land Management in the face of Climate Change The CUF was being held in an OECS country, Saint Lucia, for the first time and a common recent concern in this sub-region and specifically the OECS Commission, a co-host of CUF 5, was relationship between sustainable land management and climate change. Nine of the hottest years on record have occurred in the last decade and carbon dioxide levels is reported to be at their highest for at least the last 650,000 years. The Intergovernmental Panel for Climate Change (IPPC) stated that the scientific evidence for the warming of the climate system is unequivocal and is linked to human activities. Sustainable Land Management practices were therefore seen as having a play a critical role in mitigation and adaption to climate change. This theme was intended to examine a) the relevant land use planning practices needed to adapt to and mitigate climate change, b) approaches to disaster management, c) ocean governance and coastal management practices and d) appropriate laws, institutions and practices. The four papers chosen for this proceeding includes 1. A review of Caribbean Land Use Planning Laws in relation to Climate Change by Danielle Edwards of the Dominica State College, 2. The experience of St. Vincent and the Grenadines in the Development of a National Land Policy for Sustainable Land Management in the Context of Climate Change by Benarva Djenaba Browne, 3. A UN-Habitat paper on Climate Change measures in Informal Neighbourhood Upgrading in the Caribbean, and 4. Climate Awareness among young planners by Laurence Neufville of the University of Technology, Jamaica. Sub-theme 2 - Local Economic Development for the Caribbean This track was promoted by the DFATD funded Caribbean Local Economic Development Project (CARILED), a CUF 5 co-host. Local Economic Development is generally seen as a participatory process that brings together stakeholders in a local area to work together and harness local resources to stimulate the local economy in a sustainable manner. In Caribbean countries, there are challenges in upgrading and supporting the widespread unplanned and informal business and community areas. Participatory planning, Leadership and Public Private Partnerships that support human capital and physical infrastructure development is seen as supporting micro, small and medium enterprise (MSME) growth, particularly in small communities. This thematic track was developed to examine a) participatory planning approaches and Local Economic Development, b) the potential role of private public partnerships in resource mobilization and MSME support in communities, and c) the role of leaders in promoting and guiding the transition from informal to formal businesses among MSMEs. The four papers selected for the proceeding include papers on 1. Development Planning Tool at The Municipal Level by Rodney Ramlogan, Aisha Donaldson and Sean Sooknanan of the Ministry of Local Government, Trinidad, 2. Local Economic Development and Spatial intervention in Gros Islet

4

Town, Saint Lucia by Khrystal Lucien and Carianne Johnson, and 3. The Riverton Recycling Project and the influence of Public-Private partnerships in developing green economies by Algernor Thompson. Sub-theme 3 - Moving Towards Energy Efficiency: Alternatives and Opportunities The Caribbean uses as much as 200% more energy per unit GDP compared to international best practices. Weak urban planning and management has led to poor urban form such as sprawl, low density development, inefficient transportation systems reliant on automobiles, poor waste management and energy inefficient buildings. While the Caribbean countries are generally small producers of Greenhouse Gases (GHG), with SIDS across the globe estimated to contribute collectively less than 0.1% of the total GHG emissions, these states are at the highest risk from impacts of climate change and climate variability and our energy inefficiency is not economically sustainable. The theme session explored mechanism to engage our communities in developing better urban form, transportation systems and a built environment, which is more energy efficient and economically sustainable. Two papers were chosen for the proceedings, 1. Design Support tools for Energy Efficiency in the Built Environment: Classification, Process and Illustrative Implementation by Bart Janssens and Tom Coppens from the University of Antwerp, Belgium, and 2. Sustainable Development in the OECS, an Antiguan and Barbudan case study by Colin John Jenkins. Sub-theme 4 - Professional Planning Practice, Education & Training in the Caribbean The quality and the relevance of training provided both regionally and internationally help to determine the extent to which planners are able to address planning problems in the Region. Across many states there is a need for increased transparency in order to further address urban development challenges. Limited access to large volumes of information held by government and quasi-government institutions remains a significant challenge in planning practice and change is required. This theme addressed a) the extent that regional training programmes were equipping planners to engage communities in creating better places for living, b) the extent that current engagement and planning frameworks give a voice to our communities, and c) How do we increase transparency in the decision making process for development planning outcomes? The paper chosen for this theme was Protecting Negril: A critique of the Negril and Green Island Area Provisional Development Order (2013) Planning Process with reference to Recent Planning Decisions by Margaret Jarrett (UTECH). Sub-theme 5 - Habitat III Agenda- The Role of Small Island States in the Habitat Agenda Habitat III is the United Nations Conference on Housing and Sustainable Urban Development scheduled to take place in 2016. It is the first UN global summit after the adoption of the Post2015 Sustainable Development Agenda. The objective of the Conference is to secure renewed political commitment for sustainable urban development, assess accomplishments to date, address poverty and identify and address new and emerging challenges. It will discuss the important challenge of how cities, towns and villages are planned and managed, in order to fulfil their role as drivers of sustainable development, and hence shape the implementation of new global development and climate change goals. This theme was concerned with the issues that should be considered in the preparation of a Caribbean SIDS position for Habitat III. Two papers were included in the proceedings, The Role of Small Island States in the Habitat Agenda Caribbean Historic Urban Landscapes in Island Systems Planning by Patricia E. Greene (UTECH) and Oceans Governance in the OECS: Promoting and fostering management in the marine environment by Asha Singh (OECS) Sub-theme 6 - Housing Policy in the Caribbean: Lessons Learned & New Directions Despite the housing programs pursued by several Caribbean governments, the region continues to face a large housing deficit. Governments have funded a range of policies throughout the years to expand housing opportunities for low-income residents, including finished houses, informal settlement upgrading, housing microcredit, and urban land market

5

reform. The theme addressed the lessons learned from the Caribbean experience and how new programmes should be structured and financed. Papers included in this theme included: 1. How public housing contributes to urban sprawl in Paramaribo? Digging deeper into the relationship between public housing, sound land use practices and urban sprawl in Suriname by Sigrid Heirman Tom Coppens, 2. Affordable Housing Policy in the US Virgin Islands, possible lessons for SIDS by Dr Claude Gooding 3. Reflections in the Tenantries Freehold Purchase Act Cap239B by Joy R.D. Best, and 4. Housing Policy and Delivery in Barbados – The Need for an Evidence Based Approach by Raymond Lorde. Sub-theme 7- Sustainable Development in Saint Lucia These were presentations rather than papers and a synopsis is presented of the key issues form the conference rapporteurs report. Rapporteurs Report A detailed Rapporteurs report which outlined the discussions arising from the paper and panel https://drive.google.com/file/d/0Bpresentations at CUF5 was produced (See TSKY7HLYNpdzV5d0F0blB0ZzQ/view). These papers, along with findings from the Rapporteurs report were reviewed to distil relevant ideas around the concept of Island Systems Planning and other relevant themes.

6

SELECTED PAPERS THEME : ISLAND SYSTEMS PLANNING FINDING THE RIGHT BALANCE BETWEEN ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL, AND ECONOMIC IMPERATIVES: A CASE STUDY FROM ANTIGUA AND BARBUDA David F. Brown, School of Urban Planning, McGill University, Canada Sebastien Paddington Regional Vice President, WSP Caribbean Ltd. Darian Beharry Assistant Project Manager, WSP Caribbean Ltd.

Abstract This paper presents the planning approach, and analytic tools that were used to prepare a Draft Sustainable Island Resource Management Zoning Plan (SIRMZP) for Antigua and Barbuda (2011) that also serves as a revised Draft Revised National Physical Development Plan in conformity with the Physical Planning Act. The project included several workshops and public meetings during which a Vision Statement was developed that was supported by explicit Goals, Objectives, and Spatial Development Strategies. The five goals identified were to: Maintain and Enhance Ecosystem Integrity; Foster Economic Development and Engaging Livelihoods; Enhance Liveability; Improve Accessibility; and Promote Efficient and Effective Governance with respect to Physical Development. The planning approach sought to align demand factors, such as the need for well-served, convivial communities, with supply factors, such as ecological integrity, environmental vulnerability, and environmental resources. This was especially critical given the haphazard pattern of new subdivisions with large lots that fragmented agricultural land and were difficult to serve with adequate social and physical infrastructure. In contrast, the SIRMZP sought to promote strategically located mixed-use settlements that respected environmental imperatives. The project made extensive use of the Spatial Analysis Tools available in ArcGIS to allocate land use activities. This process involved the development of explicit decision rules for each objective that could be used within a “Rules of Combination Land Use Suitability Analysis” approach” to satisfy multiple and sometimes competing objectives. In the course of this analysis careful consideration was given to the identification of land use categories that were appropriate for the local context. The paper focuses on the planning approach and spatial analysis techniques used in the preparation of the plan, and offers lessons that were learned with respect to planning for sustainable development throughout the region. Introduction In Small Island Developing States (SIDS) it is especially critical to appropriately balance economic, social, and environmental objectives, due to development pressures on a limited landmass with fragile marine and terrestrial ecosystems that are further threatened by climate change. This challenge is addressed in this paper, which presents the planning approach, and analytic tools that were used to prepare a Draft Sustainable Island Resource Management Zoning Plan (SIRMZP) for Antigua and Barbuda (2011). This plan was also designed to meet the requirements in the Physical Planning Act for a revised Draft National Physical Development Plan (NPDP) and, as such the Government of Antigua and Barbuda adopted it in 2012. The draft SIRMZP/NPDP was prepared by GENIVAR Trinidad & Tobago Ltd. (now WSP Caribbean Ltd.) in association with Ivor Jackson and Associates and Kingdome Consultants Inc. under the auspices of the Ministry of Agriculture, Lands, Housing and Environment and the Development Control Authority as a component of a project entitled: “Demonstrating the Development and Implementation of a Sustainable Island Resource Management Mechanism

7

(SIRMM)” that was funded by the Global Environment Facility (GEF). A Core Zoning Plan Committee (CZPC) with representatives of a broad cross-section of government departments, non-governmental organizations, and other stakeholders served as a steering committee. Ms Ruleta Camacho of the Environment Division, who was directly responsible for coordinating SIRMM activities, chaired the CZPC. Close liaison with Mr Frederick Southwell, the Director of the Development Control Authority, ensured that the planning recommendations were appropriate for the local legislative and administrative context.

Figure 1: An Interactive and Iterative Planning Process Source: Lash, H. Planning the Human Way, Ministry of State for Urban Affairs, Canada, 1976. Planning Approach The specific mandate for this project was to prepare a comprehensive national physical development plan that sought an appropriate balance between biophysical, social, and economic requirements. As the funding for the project was provided by the Global Environment Facility and channelled through the Environment Division of the Ministry of Agriculture, Lands, Housing and the Environment, the environmental issues facing the country were a central feature of the planning approach. In effect, environmental issues were treated as a supply factor that was used to determine the appropriate spatial allocation of land resources to meet the demand for land use activities such as agriculture, fishing, housing, community infrastructure, commerce, and tourism. This approach was appropriate for a small island developing state that relied heavily on natural resources to support an economy that is largely based on tourism. While the contribution of agriculture to the national economy has declined over the years, it was also treated as an important resource that could once again play an important role in the overall economy, as there still exists extensive areas of arable land and the local market fuelled by residents and tourists is currently largely served by imports. If successful, the restoration of the agriculture sector within Antigua and Barbuda would greatly reduce the heavy reliance of major grocery

8

stores and resorts on imported food products, thereby improving the balance of payments, increasing local employment opportunities, and providing fresher produce. The planning approach relied heavily on land use suitability analysis, a geographic information system (GIS) technique that may be used to identify land and settlement characteristics that render a particular location more or less attractive for a specific land use activity. The extensive use of GIS techniques in this project facilitated an interactive and iterative planning process and provided a tool that may be used to monitor development over the life of the plan. Planning Process The planning process depicted in Figure 1, which was published some 40 years ago, served as an inspiration for this study. The process begins and ends with a listening post that captures the experienced satisfactions and dissatisfactions of people as they go about their daily lives. In this way, it is interactive and iterative by providing a roadmap for the way forward that may be implemented incrementally and adjusted along the way. This approach that is also represented in Etzioni’s Mixed Scanning approach to decision making (1967), which essentially combines rationalistic and incremental models. These planning approaches were operationalized in the Antigua and Barbuda case study via regular interactions with a large steering committee with representation from virtually all government departments that have a role in physical development planning and policy, as well as the general public, and through the use of land use suitability modelling techniques which essentially provided a “cognitive platform” for the committee and the planning team to identify and evaluate alternative spatial development guidelines. In the planning literature such a platform is sometimes referred to as “communicative rationality” or “an open and inclusive planning process that incorporates public participation dialogue, consensus building, and conflict resolution” (Malczewski, 2004, p6). As described in the SIRMZP, “The overall planning approach may be characterised as a Learning Ecology which began with an assessment of the existing relationship between land use activities and the biophysical environment and then proceeded to explore spatial development strategies that may enhance this relationship while, at the same time, meeting the needs and aspirations of residents. Further, a collaborative planning approach is supported through the involvement of stakeholders and the public in the elaboration of a vision, as well as, the development of alternative strategies. In this way a mutual learning process is fostered that in turn contributes to the development of a plan that is intended to receive wide support.” (Genivar, Jackson and Kingdome Consultants 2011, 5). Land Use Suitability Analysis While land use suitability analysis was developed via a number of separate initiatives, it became more widely known when Ian McHarg published Design with Nature (1969). McHarg’s approach to environmental analysis proved very successful in engaging decision makers and the general population in the land use planning process. As each land feature was described separately and assessed in terms of its suitability for each potential land use activity, a series of grey levels could be depicted on transparent overlays that could then superimposed and photographed to reveal the most and least preferable sites for each land use. The explicitness of the process allowed stakeholders to follow the logic of the analysis and suggest alternative ratings that then influenced the results. However, as Hopkins (1977) pointed out, the McHarg method essentially involved adding ordinal values and therefore did not respect mathematical standards. Hopkins considered alternatives such as Gestalt, Land Classification, Factor Combination, Weighted Linear Factor Combination, and Rules of Factor Combination. While the Gestalt approach offered the best results when applied by a highly skilled ecologist, the other techniques relied more heavily on the assessment of individual factors that were then combined, a process that made explicit and consistent assumptions about which land characteristics are important as well as how they should be assessed and combined when making a decision as to where to locate a particular land use activity. The transparency of this process allowed a broader number of people to contribute to the final decision in a meaningful way.

9

Figure 2: McHarg’s Land Use Suitability Model for Staten Island, New York Source: McHarg, Ian L., Design with Nature, The Natural History Press, Garden City, N.Y., 1969. The Rules of Factor Combination technique, which was used in the present case study, essentially simplifies the Factor Combination technique by focusing on specific combinations of land characteristics rather than seeking to assess every possible combination of all land use characteristics. Further, it avoids the many questionable judgements that must be made to establish ratings and weights that are inherent in the Weighted Linear Factor Combination technique. Instead it simply identified places with specific combinations of land characteristics and applied “rules” for development. Examples of these rules are provided below in the case study report. The overall approach is depicted in Figure 4.

Figure 3: Building a Land Use Suitability Assessment Model. Source: ESRI Map Book, 2002. Vision, Goals, Objectives and Strategies The Vision Statement for the plan was developed during a series of workshops that were attended by representatives of a broad range government agencies and community groups.

10

Essentially, the statement emphasized the need for sustainable development within “a forwardlooking, strategic, spatial development framework that addresses current development issues and provides a platform for feasible private and public sector development initiatives that reflect local cultural values and aspirations for the next 20 years” (SIRMZP, 2011). Five goals were advanced in support of the vision. These are represented in diagrammatic form in Figure 4. Maintain & Enhance Ecosystem Integrity

Promote Efficient & Effective Governance

Improve Accessibility

Goals

Foster Economic Development & Engaging Livelihoods

Enhance Liveability

Figure 4: Project Goals Specific objectives were associated with each of the goals and integrated in the Rules of Combination land use assessment process. Land use planning strategies were then advanced that were intended to meet the objectives. Antigua and Barbuda Case Study Antigua and Barbuda is a twin island state located in the Eastern Caribbean. In addition, the national territory includes Redonda, a small uninhabited island west of Antigua that is largely a rock mass. While the SIRMZP includes comprehensive physical development plans for both Antigua and Barbuda and briefly mentioned Redonda, this paper will focus on the island of Antigua in the interest of space. The inclusion of Barbuda, which has very different environmental features and development issues, would have greatly increased the length of the paper. The country’s primary resources include a very agreeable climate, outstanding land and seascapes, extensive areas of high ecological value, an engaging history, democratic governance, a well-educated and healthy population, and significant natural resources, such as beaches agricultural lands and fish stocks (SIRMZP 2011, p1) Despite its considerable advantages the country faces a number of development challenges that are common to many Small Island Developing States. As discussed in the SIRMZP (2011), these include: • Fragile terrestrial and marine ecosystems. • Relatively small landmass and population size. • Vulnerability to external economic and natural environmental events, such as economic recessions, hurricanes, and climate change. • Urban decay in two key historic centres. • Pockets of poverty. • Inadequate physical infrastructure. • Extensive poorly located low-density subdivisions that are difficult to service. • Ribbon development along rural highways • Conflicting land uses, especially among housing, tourism and agricultural activities. • Land degradation due to uncontrolled grazing and limited institutional capacity to manage the development process.

11

Figure 5: Map of Antigua and Barbuda

Figure 6: Natural Features of Antigua, SIRMZP, 2011

12

Figure 7: Map of present land use activities in Antigua, SIRMZP 2011. Given this combination of assets and challenges, the SIRMZP (2011) set out to: • Provide for the protection of critical ecosystem functions, minimal risks, and optimal productive use of environmental resources. • Promote the development of a network of cohesive mixed-use settlements that offer a range of housing options and good proximity to local commerce, and public services. • Establish economic growth and employment centres. • Suggest improvements to the road network and public transportation system. • Specify regulations and administrative frameworks to guide development in accordance with national policies. • Provide a framework for the preparation of detailed local plans that respect national land use priorities and strategies. Physical Development Plan The Physical Development Plan proposed in the SIRMZP (2011) gave explicit consideration to each of the primary goals: environmental quality, economy and livelihoods, liveability, accessibility, and governance to arrive at a comprehensive plan. Development control measures were outlined for each discrete area within the plan and an implementation schedule was laid out. To facilitate the interactive nature of the planning process, specific components were specified for each of the goals and explicit physical planning objectives and planning principles were associated with these components. In the interest of space the primary focus for this section of the paper is on environmental and liveability issues. Environmental Quality Ecological Integrity All forms of life depend on the ecological services that are provided by well-functioning ecosystems. The relationship between development and environment is especially important in Small Island Developing States as in these settings even small scale activities that inhibit the effectiveness of natural systems may lead to very costly remedial measures. The physical planning objectives, and planning principles associated with each component of ecological integrity are specified in Figure 8 below. The planning principles may be directly translated into Rules of Combination and used to identify the critical areas that should be protected on a map (Figure 9).

13

Figure 8: Land Use Suitability Model: Ecological Integrity

Figure 9: Spatial Distribution of Existing and Proposed Protected Areas, Antigua Environmental Risks The environmental risks associated with development projects depend on land components such as excessive slopes, erosion propensity, flooding, exposure to hurricanes, and low elevations that may be subject to sea surges or the rising sea levels that are expected due to climate change. The objectives and principles for each of these are set out in Figure 10 and identified spatially in Figure 11.

14

Figure 10: Land Use Suitability Model: Environmental Risk

Figure 11: Spatial Distribution of Environmental Risks, Antigua Environmental Resources The environmental resources of Antigua and Barbuda include beaches, agricultural and grazing lands, fishing grounds, and quarries. While these resources served indigenous peoples well over many years they are under threat by ribbon development and haphazardly located lowdensity development projects that have resulted in sprawl and fragmented good agricultural land; development projects that have rendered beaches vulnerable to storm surges and reduced adaptive capacity to climate change; and pollution and over-fishing that have affected the viability of the fishing stock and health of the coral reefs. There is a clear need to protect high quality agricultural land and develop a “Ridge to Reef” planning program that essentially provides planning guidance on a watershed basis.

15

Figure 12: Land Use Suitability Model: Environmental Resources

Figure 13: Spatial Distribution of Environmental Resources, Antigua Liveability Settlements must provide a healthy, safe and convenient environment for residents to go about their daily activities. In addition, the landscape setting and urban design greatly affect the convenience, pleasure, and sense of well-being among residents. Ideally, children should be able to walk safely to school and parks – something that is not possible with ribbon development or poorly served residential areas. Consequently, the SIRMZP identified core areas within existing settlements and provided for properly planned expansion areas that could be adequately served (Figures 14 and 15).

16

Figure 14: Spatial Distribution of Settlements, Antigua

Figure 15: Land Use Suitability Model: Liveability

17

Comprehensive SIRMZP A comprehensive plan was prepared by combining all of the maps prepared for each of the planning components considered. In accord with the mandate for the project, first priority was given to environmental considerations, followed by well established, core settlements with their designated expansion areas. As all maps had been referenced to precise geographic coordinates such as property lines and natural features, the overlay process was facilitated. The resulting map is displayed in Figure 16.

Figure 14: SIRMZP, Antigua The land use classifications included: settlement; recreation; tourism; heritage; institutional; industrial; transportation; agriculture (private and crown); grazing (private and crown); mangrove/wetlands; forest; and environmental protection areas. These categories were based on standard land use classification guides, such as the Land Based Classification Standards, but adapted so as to respond to development issues in Antigua and Barbuda. The land area devoted to each of the land use classifications was calculated and adjustments were made to ensure that there would be sufficient land for each activity over the next 20 years. In addition, the calculations allow for the determination of likely revenue for particular industries such as agriculture and grazing based on productivity assumptions. In this way the approach greatly facilitates the development of informed, evidence based national policies for different economic sectors. The SIRMZP approach also facilitates the development of local area plans that take into consideration watersheds and ongoing monitoring of development initiatives. Conclusion The planning approach used in this project was effective in facilitating an inclusive, mutual learning process that resulted in an evidence-based interactive plan that enjoyed wide support among government officials, special interest groups, and the general public. The fact that it was an open planning process with a transparent methodology and clear decision rules was very helpful in this regard. Moreover, the plan itself is a living document that can be readily adapted to changes conditions due to the use of GIS technology and clear decision points.

18

Some of the lessons learned for Small Island Development States in the Caribbean are: • Environmental issues, such as ecological integrity, environmental risks, and environmental resources are critical in SIDS. These elements should be given priority. • A participatory, mutual learning approach contributes to the development of a robust plan that enjoys widespread support among government officials, special interest groups, and the general population. • An engaged steering committee that has broad representation from government departments and special interest groups and which agrees to participate in planning workshops is a huge plus for an effective planning process. • A GIS-based “cognitive platform” that illustrates the spatial implications of policies and allows for explicit, transparent discussion about the inevitable trade-offs between conflicting goals is immensely helpful. It was a great pleasure for the planning team to have the opportunity to contribute to the development of a revised National Physical Development Plan for Antigua and Barbuda. It was a reminder that planning can be not only very useful in guiding future spatial development policy, but also an enjoyable activity. References Etzioni, Amitai. 1967."Mixed-scanning: A 'Third' Approach to Decision-making." Public administration review 27 (5): 385-392. Hopkins, Lewis D. 1977. "Methods for generating land suitability maps: a comparative evaluation." Journal of the American Institute of Planners 43, no. 4: 386-400. Lash, Harry. 1976. Planning in a human way. Ministry of State for Urban Affairs. Malczewski, Jacek. 2004. "GIS-based land-use suitability analysis: a critical overview." Progress in planning 62, no. 1: 3-65. McHarg, Ian L. 1969. “Design with Nature.” The Natural History Press, Garden City, N.Y., 1969. GENIVAR, Ivor Jackson and Associates and Kingdome Consultants Inc. 2011. Draft Sustainable Island Resource Management Zoning Plan, Antigua and Barbuda (SIRMZP) (including Redona).

19

PARADIGM SHIFTS FOR ISLAND SYSTEMS PLANNING: STRENGHTENING OUTCOMES FOR CHILDREN, YOUTH, FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES Bonnie Politz Sr. Youth Advisor, Creative Associates International, USA

Abstract Creative Associates International finds that global research, policy and practice are moving towards common agreement regarding: • Development in all its forms (e.g., sustainable, social, land management, economic, education, professional, housing, transportation, energy) is innately cross-sectoral. • Human beings, who live and hope to prosper in urban environments, are innately multidimensional and move through stages of their life cycle development with varying strengths and ongoing needs for support, connection and opportunity. “Island System Planning” has the opportunity to embed and leverage a variety of innovative approaches underway around the globe that focus on this total development package -sustainable and systemic change that strengthens governance, improves social and physical infrastructure, and provides equitable delivery of services in order to evolve into urban areas of promise and hope -- for all children, youth and adults. This presentation will focus on: • Underpinnings of the ‘Collective Impact’ approach that includes long-term commitments to a common agenda by a group of cross-sector actors who are committed to realizing system wide change around social problems. • Two approaches being tested out and implemented in the U.S. as examples of ways to operationalize Collective Impact: o Promise Neighborhoods Initiative: 1) building a complete continuum of cradleto-career solutions of both educational programs and family and community supports, with great schools at the center; and, 2) developing the local infrastructure of systems and resources needed to sustain and scale up proven, effective solutions across the broader region beyond the initial neighborhood. o Promise Zones: the federal/national government partnering with and investing in communities to create jobs, leverage private investment, increase economic activity, expand educational opportunities, and reduce violent crime.

Introduction Creative Associates International finds that global research, policy and practice are moving towards common understanding and agreement on three core precepts: • Development, in all its forms (e.g., sustainable social, land management, economic, education, professional, housing, transportation, energy) is innately systemic, crosssectorial and integrated; • Problems are typically complex, and require solutions with no disciplinary boundaries; and, • Human beings, who live and hope to prosper in urban and rural environments, seek to improve their well-being and well-functioning – in ways that are multi-dimensional (and not focused solely on income) and move through stages of their life cycle development with varying needs for support, connection and opportunity. “Island System Planning” has the potential to embed and leverage a variety of systemic and sustainable approaches that embed these precepts and, thereby, strengthen governance and improve social and physical infrastructure, resulting in increasingly positive outcomes for citizenries of children, youth and adults and the communities they live and thrive in. Global Paradigm Shifts A revolution is underway in global development focused on sustainable and scalable solutions that are developed and led locally. At the same time, challenges (such as climate change, population growth-cum-employment and equitable benefits from trade) require greater international cooperation. Over the next 20 years, massive amounts of attention and financial

20

capital will need to be targeted to local community infrastructure that can have direct impact on the life options and outcomes for young people and their families to be felt around the globe. According the 2014, the U.S. Agency for International Development’s Eastern and Southern Caribbean Youth Assessment: “The Eastern and Southern Caribbean faces great challenges that cannot be addressed with modest support through a set of unconnected initiatives. The needs are interconnected and significant, and require a cross-cutting approach that seeks systemic improvements and that gives greater voice to all stakeholders. The challenges will only be fully addressed by far-sighted action by its citizens, governments, regional institutions, and donors.” 6 As in the Caribbean, the capabilities of youth and family to overcome disadvantage is contingent upon the health and vitality of local communities to provide opportunity to young people to make positive transitions to adulthood. According to the Center for the Study of Social Policy: “Research and experience shows that families do better when they live in strong and supportive communities. In short, place matters. Yet many communities face challenges of high poverty, unemployment, failing schools, and housing instability. These outcomes are influenced by unequal access to opportunity and decades of disinvestment in neighborhoods of concentrated poverty. An equitable approach to ensuring that all neighborhoods become the kinds of places that enable all children (youth) and families to succeed and thrive requires intentional efforts to build, sustain and operationalize certain types of community capacity.” 7 Overcoming disadvantage in the local community environment is important for Caribbean nations to place at the top of their development agendas, and to work cooperatively across islands to increase developmentally appropriate, holistic and integrated opportunities for individual, family and community success. The islands may benefit from policies and programs that promote an equitable approach to community advantage and capability-building that focuses on “….intentional efforts to build, sustain and operationalize…community capacity.” In this vein, the time has come for governments, practitioners and donors to move away from time-honoured ‘needs’ assessments and move towards complex problem solving, with attention to understanding of ‘what is working, why it is working, and how it can be leveraged’ to impact broader numbers of citizens and communities. It is clear that the ‘needs’ in education, health, civil society, employment and workforce development, and other systems, are well-documented -- from all angles and perspectives. It is also clear that in even the most disadvantaged communities, economic, social and political assets exist that can be identified and built upon to provide youth and families safe and engaging opportunities that lead to greater well-being and better community outcomes. When building a positive approach upon individual, family and community assets, it is possible to abandon deficit-oriented needs assessments that typically derive from siloed or categorical issues or top-down definitions of problems; as historically framed by government leaders, policymakers and the media. In this context, Creative Associates International believes: • In the importance of lasting, significant durable change (in the state, welfare, opportunities, equity of youth, families and communities) • That learning is a dynamic, intentional process both within organizations and across partnerships • That if we better understand processes and systems of change then we will have better opportunities for continued success. US Agency for International Development “Eastern and Southern Caribbean Youth Assessment,” October 2014. 7 Center for the Study of Social Policy, Washington, D.C. www.cssp.org 6

21

To strengthen and support the infrastructures that support the positive and healthy development of children, youth and families around the globe, Creative Associates International envisions that: • Nurturing young people and their families fosters the growth and sustainability of healthy communities • All young people need a variety of opportunities, safe places and caring adults and peers as they grow and develop • Young people must be active participants in their learning and development to be productive citizens • An intentional focus on the positive development of young people and their families will result in more effective and practical policies, programs and practices • Changes in information, attitudes and involvement of young people and adults will lead to increased support for youth and family development. • A focus of this paper is to establish linkages between these concepts and purposes underlying the Caribbean Urban Forum 2015. Place-Based Approaches: Engagement and Learning to Impact Outcomes In thinking through future opportunities for Caribbean development, leaders may wish to develop a ‘theory of island change’ that builds on an outcomes-oriented and evidence-based process of learning and change. The principal idea we wish to present in this paper is that we all learn best by reflecting on and understanding the changes we envision, commit to and are held accountable for. When we more completely understand the processes and systems of change, then we have a greater chance of achieving sustained success, positive outcomes, and long-term impact. A critical piece of this puzzle is the need for data on the elements of strength and success in programs, practice and policy so that those positive elements are identified and serve as critical building blocks to broader development within and across communities and countries. We propose that learning and change must be inextricably linked for the best possible chance of achieving desired impacts and outcomes. Embedded in an intentional process of learning and change leading to impact is the idea that individual contributions lead to active engagement, reflection, and learning. On the whole, this is a cyclical, participatory process that informs quality design, effective program implementation, and continuous learning. In practice, iterative, reflective feedback serves as the basis for informed decision-making. We are talking about more than just random learning among policy-makers; rather, a proactive approach to learning focused on community-defined missions, articulated goals, specific objectives and their desire to achieve sets of changes that result in significant impact. Local systems of learning are not simple or easy, yet without this kind of learning among and within local communities, it is not possible to achieve purposeful and sustainable change and impact. Without this type of approach, development will proceed haphazardly, randomly, non-intentionally and siloed in ways that do not advance the chances in positive life outcomes desired by youth, families and the communities and countries they live in. In this paper we wish to talk specifically about two approaches being tested out and implemented in the U.S. that operationalize learning and change for impact and that can potentially address Caribbean Island development opportunities and challenges at the core of the Caribbean Urban Forum 2015, and similar efforts and discussions. We begin by talking about ‘Collective Impact’ and how long-term commitments to solve complex problems can be tackled by formerly fragmented, disparate actors who had been working as islands unto themselves. We then provide an overview of the U.S. experience with Promise Neighborhoods Initiatives (PNI) being implemented in a variety of communities utilizing the Collective Impact approach. Collective Impact There are numerous avenues for reaching positive results. In the manufacturing industry, the assembly line was a monumental innovation to ensure, for example, that an automobile or a computer could be taken from stage one through completion in the most effective and efficient process; with human labour and increasingly with mechanical and robotic assemblage. Each

22

person or robot has a specific task that requires completion before the next task can occur. Accountability for a quality finished product is based on each step of the process. Those who are responsible and accountable for impact and outcomes in the human and community development worlds are faced with less linear and more dynamic sets of interconnections. There must be common acknowledgement that any one leader, executive, boss, principal, manager, parent, etc., cannot effect lasting change by themselves. No one person is solely responsible for high numbers of school dropouts, adolescent pregnancies, juvenile crime, substance abuse and other maladies that are found in every community around the globe. No one ‘system’ is responsible for these outcomes. Similarly, no one person or system is responsible for the vast array of positive outcomes we find in all communities, including, young people who have: spaces and people needed to learn the basics; regular opportunities to learn art, music, technology and physical education in school and community; adequate preparation for the world of work and careers; spaces and people needed for safe and developmentally appropriate recreation in schools and communities. Leaders and systems are mutually dependent in the ongoing processes of building and sustaining human and physical infrastructure. Over time, this mutually dependent reality has come to influence our approaches to complex public policy and program implementation realities. As shared in the Stanford Social Innovation Review |Winter 2011 8, there is a growing body of experience and research that points to: 1. “Large-scale social change comes from better cross-sector coordination rather than from the isolated intervention of individual organizations...” 2. No single organization has the ability to solve any major social problem at scale by itself. Collective impact is a powerful new approach to cross-sector collaboration that is achieving measurable effects on major social issues; for example: The scale and complexity of the U.S. public education system has thwarted attempted reforms for decades. Major funders, such as the Annenberg Foundation, Ford Foundation, and Pew Charitable Trusts have abandoned many of their efforts in frustration after acknowledging their lack of progress. Once the global leader—after World War II the United States had the highest high school graduation rate in the world—the U.S. now ranks 18th among the top 24 industrialized nations, with more than 1 million secondary school students dropping out every year. The heroic efforts of countless teachers, administrators, and non-profits, together with billions of dollars in government, foundation and charitable contributions, may have led to important improvements in individual schools and classrooms, yet system-wide progress has seemed virtually unobtainable. Against these daunting odds, a remarkable exception seems to be emerging in Cincinnati (Ohio). Strive, a non-profit subsidiary of KnowledgeWorks, has brought together local leaders to tackle the student achievement crisis and improve education throughout greater Cincinnati and northern Kentucky. In the four years since the group was launched, Strive partners have improved student success in dozens of key areas across three large public school districts. Despite the recession and budget cuts, 34 of the 53 success indicators that Strive tracks have shown positive trends, including high school graduation rates, fourth-grade reading and math scores, and the number of preschool children prepared for kindergarten. Why has Strive made progress when so many other efforts have failed? It is because a core group of community leaders decided to abandon their individual agendas in favor of a collective approach to improving student achievement. More than 300 leaders of local organizations agreed to participate, including the heads of influential private and corporate foundations, city government officials, school district representatives, the presidents of eight universities and community colleges, and the executive directors of hundreds of education-related non-profit and advocacy groups. These leaders realized that fixing one point on the educational continuum—such as better afterschool programs—wouldn’t make much difference unless all parts of the continuum improved at the same time. No single organization, however innovative or powerful, could accomplish 8

John Kania and Mark Kramer. “Collective Impact. Stanford Social Innovation Review. Winter 2011.

23

this alone. Instead, their ambitious mission became to coordinate improvements at every stage of a young person’s life, from “cradle to career.” Strive didn’t try to create a new educational program or attempt to convince donors to spend more money. Instead, through a carefully structured process, Strive focused the entire educational community on a single set of goals, measured in the same way. Participating organizations are grouped into 15 different Student Success Networks (SSNs) by type of activity, such as early childhood education or tutoring. Each SSN has been meeting with coaches and facilitators for two hours every two weeks for the past three years, developing shared performance indicators, discussing their progress, and most important, learning from each other and aligning their efforts to support each other. Strive, both the organization and the process it helps facilitate, is an example of collective impact, the commitment of a group of important actors from different sectors to a common agenda for solving a specific social problem. Collaboration is nothing new. The social sector is filled with examples of partnerships, networks, and other types of joint efforts. But collective impact initiatives are distinctly different. Unlike most collaborations, collective impact initiatives involve a centralized infrastructure, a dedicated staff, and a structured process that leads to a common agenda, shared measurement, continuous communication, and mutually reinforcing activities among all participants.” There is no ‘magic bullet’ or magic potion to address issues and realities as described above. There is no guarantee that Collective Impact or any other collaborative approach will make ‘the difference’ being sought. What is certain is that if we go back to the three precepts outlined in the opening of this paper, Collective Impact offers some hope that caring and committed adults and youth allies can reframe their relationships and ease-up on their need for individualized reward in movement towards positive change. As outlined in the 2011 Stanford Social Innovation Review, there is a set of critical conditions to consider and work towards in moving towards and achieving Collective Impact:

A follow-up edition of the Stanford Social Innovation Review states: “People often ask whether we would refine the five conditions of collective impact that we articulated in the initial article: a common agenda, shared measurement, mutually reinforcing activities, continuous communication, and backbone support. Although our work has reinforced the importance of these five conditions and they continue to serve as the core for differentiating collective impact from other forms of collaboration, we also realize that they are not always sufficient to achieve large-scale change. In addition, several mindset shifts are necessary for collective impact partners, and these are fundamentally at odds with traditional approaches to social change. These mindset shifts concern who is engaged, how they work together, and how progress

24

happens. Although not necessarily counterintuitive, they can be highly countercultural and therefore can create serious stumbling blocks for collective impact efforts.” 9 Therefore, participants in this Caribbean Urban Forum and colleagues across the Caribbean who are working to improve human and community outcomes, can be instigators, examples of and supporters of shifting mindsets and behaviors. To achieve the vision of Collective Impact our behaviors, our data systems, and our accountability systems must shift from ‘I’ to ‘We’. This will not happen overnight but will require proactive leadership, over a sustained period of time. Political partisanship will need to take a back-seat to a core commitment and compact with community that can reap the following benefits from Collective Impact:

According to a 2012 edition of the Stanford Review that continues to follow all aspects of Collective Impact: “Of all the collective impact examples we have studied, few are as different in scale as GAIN and Communities That Care, yet both of these efforts embody the principles of collective impact, and both have demonstrated substantial and consistent progress toward their goals. GAIN, created in 2002 at a special session of the United Nations General Assembly, is focused on the goal of reducing malnutrition by improving the health and nutrition of nearly 1 billion at risk people in the developing world. The development of GAIN was predicated on two assumptions: first, that there were proven interventions that could be employed at scale to improve nutrition of the poor in developing countries, and second, that the private sector had a much greater role to play in improving the nutrition even for the very poor. GAIN is now coordinated by a Swiss Foundation with offices in eight cities around the world and more planned to open soon. In less than a decade, GAIN has created and coordinated the activity of 36 large-scale collaborations that include governments, NGOs, multilateral organizations, universities, and more than 600 companies in more than 30 countries. GAIN’s work has enabled more than 530 million people worldwide to obtain nutritionally enhanced food and significantly reduced the prevalence of micronutrient deficiencies in a number of countries. In China, South Africa, and Kenya, for example, micronutrient deficiencies dropped between 11 and 30 percent among those who consumed GAIN’s fortified products. During that time, GAIN has also raised $322 million in new financial commitments from its partners and leveraged many times more from its private sector and government partners.

9

Kania, John, Fay Hanleybrown, and Jennifer Splansky Juster. "Essential Mindset Shifts for Collective Impact." Stanford Social Innovation Review, September 2014.

25

At the other end of the spectrum, the Franklin County / North Quabbin Region of Western Massachusetts has a population of only 88,000 people dispersed across 30 different municipalities and 844 square miles. When two local social service agencies—the Community Coalition for Teens and the Community Action of the Franklin, Hampshire, and North Quabbin Regions—first called a meeting to discuss teenage drinking and drug use, they were astonished that 60 people showed up. From that first meeting, coincidentally also in 2002, grew Communities That Care, that now includes more than 200 representatives from human service agencies, district attorney’s offices, schools, police departments, youth serving agencies, faithbased organizations, local elected officials, local businesses, media, parents, and youth. Overseen by a central coordinating council, the initiative operates through three working groups that meet monthly to address parent education, youth recognition, and community laws and norms. In addition, a school health task force links these work groups to the 10 public school districts in the region. Over an eight-year time frame, the work of Communities That Care has resulted not only in reducing binge drinking, but also in reducing teen cigarette smoking by 32 percent and teen marijuana use by 18 percent. The coalition has also raised more than $5 million of new public money in support of their efforts. Different as they may be, these two initiatives demonstrate the versatility of a collective impact approach and offer broad insights into how to begin, manage, and structure collective impact initiatives.” 10 Promise Neighborhoods Initiative New York City, New York; Castries, Saint Lucia; Georgetown, Barbados; and, Bridgetown, St. Vincent are examples of diverse, urban areas that are large in size and population compared to their surroundings. One can look at any of these urban settings broadly, in their entirety, or as a set of smaller, densely-populated neighborhoods; neighborhoods with common underlying realities coupled with individualized ‘personalities’. Globally, public policy and reform efforts tend to be based on analysis of available data that focuses on broader urban realities. Typically, this is because data most easily collected by the public sector (where the majority of urban budgets are based) is linked to the public systems they are accountable for; i.e., education, health, public safety, transportation, etc. It is then the work of program implementers to pigeon-hole the available dollars into realities they experience at the neighborhood or smaller, sub-community level. In the U.S., and increasingly on the global front, there is growing momentum to focus on ‘placebased’ policy and implementation. These place-based approaches proactively pay attention to the individualized personalities of a defined community parameter while recognizing how this ‘place’ connects with and is impacted by its larger urban zone. The U.S. Promise Neighborhoods Initiative is based on the model of the Harlem Children’s Zone (HCZ), a nonprofit organization in the poverty-stricken community of Harlem, New York City. Through individualized support to children, youth, and their families, HCZ has reported remarkable success. Students attending HCZ Promise Academy Charter School are 49% more likely to attend college, 71% less likely to become pregnant before they graduate, and 100% less likely to be incarcerated than youth peers attending local public schools 11. According to the U.S. Department of Education 12 , the implementing body for Promise Neighborhoods, this federal initiative is focused on: - Identifying and increasing the capacity of eligible entities that are focused on achieving results for children and youth throughout an entire neighborhood; - Building a complete continuum of cradle-to-career solutions of both educational programs and family and community supports, with great schools at the center; Fay Hanleybrown, John Kania, & Mark Kramer. “Channeling Change: Making Collective Impact Work” Standford Social Innovation Review. January 26, 2012. http://www.ssireview.org/blog/entry/channeling_change_making_collective_impact_work 11 Will Dobbie and Roland G. Fryer, Jr. “The Medium-Term Impacts of High-Achieving Charter Schools on Non-Test Score Outcomes.” National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper No. 19581. October 2013. 12 US. Department of Education. “Promise Neighborhoods.” Accessed June 1, 2015. http://www2.ed.gov/programs/promiseneighborhoods/index.html 10

26

-

-

Integrating programs and breaking down agency “silos” so that solutions are implemented effectively and efficiently across agencies; Developing the local infrastructure of systems and resources needed to sustain and scale up proven, effective solutions across the broader region beyond the initial neighborhood; and Learning about the overall impact of the Promise Neighborhoods program and about the relationship between particular strategies in Promise Neighborhoods and student outcomes, including through a rigorous evaluation of the program.

Today, the Promise Neighborhoods Initiative brings together community partners, centered on strong schools, to provide high-quality ‘wraparound’ social, community and educational support to children and families to improve results and reverse the cycle of generational poverty. The Promise Neighborhoods approach aims to amplify and accelerate local efforts to achieve collective impact. The aim is to bring consistent, individualized focus to children at every step of their lives, from college to career by changing the mindset of families and community leaders through coordinated partnerships and a continuum of solutions that benefit children and youth. Promise Neighborhoods Institute (of Policy Link) has developed a common set of ten academic and community results, with fifteen associated indicators. This supports a data-driven and learning process, generating real-time data for continuous improvement and instituting a community of learning to address interventions that fall short. Promise Neighborhoods Common Indicators 13 Table 1: Education Results & Indicators Results Indicators Children enter kindergarten ready to succeed in school.

• # and % of children birth to kindergarten entry who have a place where they usually go, other than an emergency room, when they are sick or in need of advice about their health. • # and % of three-year-olds and children in kindergarten who demonstrate at the beginning of the program or school year age-appropriate functioning across multiple domains of early learning as determined using developmentally appropriate early learning measures. • # and % of children, from birth to kindergarten entry, participating in center-based or formal home-based early learning settings or programs, which may include Early Head Start, Head Start, child care, or preschool.

Students are proficient in core academic subjects.

• # and % of students at or above grade level according to State mathematics and reading or language arts assessments in at least the grades required by the ESEA (third through eighth and once in high school).

Students successfully transition from middle school grades to high school.

• Attendance rate of students in sixth, seventh, eighth, and ninth grade.

Youth graduate from high school.

• Graduation rate.

High school graduates obtain a postsecondary degree, certification, or credential.

• # and % of Promise Neighborhood students who graduate with a regular high school diploma and obtain postsecondary degrees, vocational certificates, or other industry-recognized certifications or credentials without the need for remediation.

Promise Neighborhoods Institute at PolicyLink: “A Developmental Pathways for Achieving Promise Neighborhoods Results.” Accessed June 1, 2015. http://promiseneighborhoodsinstitute.org/Media/Public/Files/A-Developmental-Pathway-forAchieving-Promise-Neighborhoods-Results 13

27

Table 2. Family and Community Results & Indicators Results Indicators Students are healthy.

Students feel safe at school and in their community. Students live communities.

in

stable

Families and community members support learning in Promise Neighborhood schools.

Students have access to 21st century learning tools.

• # and % of children who participate in at least 60 minutes of moderate to vigorous physical activity daily. • # & % of children who consume five or more servings of fruits and vegetables daily; or possible third indicator, to be determined (TBD) by applicant. • # and % of students who feel safe at school and traveling to and from school, as measured by a school climate needs assessment; or possible second indicator, TBD by applicant. • Student mobility rate; or possible second indicator, TBD by applicant. • For children birth to kindergarten entry, the # and % of parents or family members who report that they read to their child three or more times a week. • For children in kindergarten through the eighth grade, the # and % of parents or family members who report encouraging their child to read books outside of school. • For children in the ninth through twelfth grades, the # and % of parents or family members who report talking with their child about the importance of college and career; or possible fourth indicator TBD by applicant. • # and % of students who have school and home access (and % of the day they have access) to broadband Internet and a connected computing device; or possible second indicator TBD by applicant.

Since 2010, the US Department of Education has obligated over $100 million to non-profit organizations and institutions of higher education in twenty-one low-income communities in the United States. To be eligible to receive a one-year Promise Neighborhood grant, implementing organizations must 1) propose to work with one public elementary or secondary school located within the identified geographic area served, 2) provide at least one of the solutions from the proposed continuum of services and 3) demonstrate that residents within the community will have an active role in decision-making in the implementation of the Promise Neighborhood. The Center for the Study of Social Policy a research and technical assistance partner in the Promise Neighborhood Initiative, states: “Based on our experience working with communities, we believe the following types of capacity are essential for successful and sustainable neighborhood transformation: • Managing a broadly supported community process designed to improve results for children (youth) and families in a particular neighborhood • Working with neighborhood residents as leaders, “owners” and implementers of neighborhood transformation efforts • Creating strategic and accountable partnerships that engage multiple sectors and share accountability for results • Collecting, analyzing and using data for learning and accountability • Designing and implementing strategies based on the best available evidence of what works • Developing financing approaches that better align and target resources • Addressing policy and regulatory issues • Using sophisticated communications strategies to build public and political will • Deepening organizational and leadership capacity In a “co-learning” partnership with several communities that are committed to this work, we learn and disseminate information and tools about what makes a difference at the neighborhood level. This learning informs systems reform and public policy agendas to better support community efforts to improve the well-being of families and dismantle the structures that perpetuate disparities in outcomes and opportunities.”

28

Closing 2015 is an excellent point in time to build momentum for sustained change in cities and urban areas across the Caribbean. A child, youth or family’s street address should never determine their life destiny. Local and national leaders, across political parties, must reframe their perspectives, their relationships and their behaviour in order to positively impact the odds of equitable outcomes for a majority of citizens, including: graduating secondary school, being healthy and fit, prepared for a wide variety of workforce and economic opportunities, and actively engaged in giving back to the community and country. Collective Impact and Promise Neighborhoods approaches are potential building blocks for ensuring equity – if and when the political will exists and is sustained.

29

EXPLORATION OF ECOSYSTEM SERVICES CRITICAL TO QUALITY OF LIFE IN TRINIDID AND TOBAGO COMMUNITIES OF VARYING URBAN INTENSITIES Samantha Chadee The University of Trinidad and Tobago O’Meara Campus Supervisor: Professor Valerie Stoute The University of Trinidad and Tobago O’Meara Campus

Abstract Urban ecosystems, centres of economic, social and cultural development, are considered among the most important existing ecosystems. They provide services and facilities critical to quality of life. These include education, employment, utilities, and recreation and cultural services. However, these areas are challenged by a multitude of environmental and socio – economic issues which are exacerbated as urbanization increases. Mapping and characterization of urban ecosystems within the Caribbean are critical to effective urban management in the region. This in turn is a requisite for enhancing quality of life and realizing sustainable development. In this study, the quality of and overall satisfaction with ecosystem services are estimated using data obtained from a survey designed to capture individuals’ perceptions. This instrument has seven major scales: Overall Satisfaction, Total Access (which has several sub – scales), Environmental Quality, Positive Environmental Behaviour, Recreation and Culture, Freedom, and Disturbance. The data is intended to be used in the development of indexes for each scale and sub – scale. Scale data is examined for respondents from communities of ranging degrees of urbanization, as estimated by an independent, statically validated Urban Intensity Index. This latter is a continuous metric, developed for Trinidad and to Tobago in order to overcome the limitations of the current dichotomous approach to defining urban areas. Key words: Urban ecosystems, ecosystem satisfaction, ecosystem services, perception index, multivariate statistical analysis, urban intensity index Introduction The urban ecosystem concept is a growing and developing research perspective which is multidisciplinary, both in conceptualization and in practical considerations. This concept provides a holistic perspective to urban areas. This is needed as the advent of prolific urbanization, with the concomitant complexity of its possible positive and adverse impacts, has made it no longer feasible to view humans along with their built and social environments as separate entities from nature. Urban ecosystems are defined as comprising of the natural, the built, and the cultural and socioeconomic environments, and their interactions with each other, within urban areas (Dizdaroglu, Yigitcanlar, & Dawes, 2012; Srinivas, 2003). Currently, urban ecosystems are considered among the most important, with the majority of the world’s population residing in urban areas and future projections indicating that populations within these areas, as well as the size of the global urban acreage, will continue to increase (UN, 2014). This trend is reflected in Trinidad and Tobago where urban areas comprise only an estimated 12% of the combined land area but are home to 60% of the population (CSO, 2008). These areas are associated with the provision of vital services and facilities which include biophysical benefits as well as the typical infrastructure and facilities within urban areas, including important socioeconomic indicators of quality of life such as educational institutions, health care facilities, potable water, and electricity (UN-HABITAT, 1994; Tacoli, 1998).The ability of urban ecosystems to sustain the provision of these myriad services to inhabitants is compromised by complex and interrelated issues, which arise from urbanization and are intensified as urbanization increases. These include increasing costs of critical services to quality of life, strain on the environment and natural resources, human health issues, crime and inequitable access (Srinivas, 2003).

30

The mapping and characterization of urban ecosystems, inclusive of the flows of ecosystem services to and impacts of disturbance regimes on Caribbean residents, are critical therefore to effective urban management and ultimately to improved quality of life and the realization of sustainable development within the region. In this paper, urban ecosystems in Trinidad and Tobago are mapped and characterized through the development of a multivariate measurement of urban intensity and a survey instrument designed to capture individuals’ perceptions of their access to critical urban ecosystem services. The overarching objective of the larger study is the elucidation of how perceptions of access to ecosystem services and impacts of disturbances change with urban intensity. The Trinidad and Tobago Urban Intensity Index (TT UII) Demarcation of urban boundaries is critical to urban ecosystem studies. In Trinidad and Tobago, an urban – rural dichotomy is used to define urban areas and is primarily based on population density, agricultural cultivation, and element of remoteness from urban hubs (CSO, 2008). The urban – rural dichotomy in Trinidad is shown in Figure 1. Although an urban- rural dichotomy is important on certain scales, it is limited in understanding the effects of urbanization. These limitations, such as detection of convergence in urban and rural lifestyles and of lack of access to typical urban infrastructure within urban areas, are exposed as urbanization increases. Consequently, increased urbanization has blurred the distinction between urban and rural areas. Therefore, making comparisons along the urban – rural gradient, at differing levels of urbanization, instead of between urban and rural areas alone, can better elucidate the full range of urban effects and identify thresholds of change (Boone, et al., 2012; McDonnell, et al., 1997). The urban intensity index, developed in this study, measures the urban – rural gradient in Trinidad and Tobago. It was developed from the multivariate analysis of physical data from the built environment of 581 communities in Trinidad and Tobago. The total range of index values for the 581 communities was sub-divided into ten classes and also into eight classes of increasing urban intensity. The classification of the index overcomes the limitations of assessing urban intensity at the individual community level. It facilitates greater elucidation and understanding of trends and makes the index a more pragmatic tool for decision makers and other stakeholders. The classification of the index was validated and results indicate that the eight- not the ten- category classification is the superior one. The geographic distributions of the eight Urban Intensity Index classes in Trinidad and Tobago are given in Figures 2 and 3. The highest urban intensity classes in Trinidad are concentrated in the Western part of the island while the Eastern part of the island is mainly comprised of communities which are in the two lowest urban intensity classes. The communities in the highest urban intensity class (8) of 400,000 or greater are within the City of Port Spain and the Borough of Arima, both of which are situated in Trinidad. The highest urban intensity class for Tobago is class 7 (325,000 to 399,999). All other Tobago communities are in classes 1 to 4, with index scores of 199, 999 or lower.

31

Figure 1: The Distribution of Urban Areas in Trinidad (CSO, 2008) For Trinidad, within the two most rural administrative areas/regions (the Regions of Sangre Grande and Rio Claro/Mayaro), there are two distinct clusters of communities which are in a higher urban intensity classes than the rest of the region. Further, within all regions in Trinidad, even those which occupy a very small land area, communities have differing levels of urban intensity as reflected by the different index classes within these regions.

Figure 2: Index Groups for Trinidad

32

Figure 3: Index Groups for Tobago Urban Ecosystem Services Survey The islands in the twin-island Republic of Trinidad and Tobago are both relatively small in area, even though Trinidad, in particular, is highly industrialized. There are also the considerations that this country has a high vehicle to land density and fuel is very inexpensive. Together, these factors give a certain fluidity to what individuals may consider their local ecosystem. Consequently, some ecosystem services will extend beyond the community boundaries. The survey instrument, which used a proprietary six point interval scale, was designed to capture individuals’ perceptions of key ecosystem services and disturbances on seven multidimensional scales: Satisfaction, Total Access, Environmental Quality, Positive Environmental Behaviour, Freedom, Recreation and Culture, and Disturbance. Due to the broad concept of access and the relative independence of its components, the components of the Total Access scale were considered to be genuine sub-scales. The structure of the survey is given in Table 1. Administration of the Survey The survey was administered online using Survey Monkey® for a period of six months. It was targeted at residents of Trinidad and Tobago. Individuals were invited via multiple modes to participate but the primary outreach was via an email introducing the study along with the link to the survey. Email invitations were sent to university students, different Governmental and private organizations, such as the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Planning and Sustainable Development, and Trinidad and Tobago Aquatics Organizations. Respondent Demographics Data was collected from 568 participants during the six month period. Respondents came from various communities within all 14 regional corporations and municipalities in Trinidad and communities in Tobago. The largest number of respondents resided in the North Eastern part of Trinidad within the region of Tunapuna/Piarco while the smallest number resided in Tobago. Most of those who responded were female (55.1%), employed (59.4%), within the age group 18 to 25 (51.7%), with at least a secondary school education, (99%). The majority of employed respondents were Government workers (68.2%) in various industries, in particular education (58.8%). Analysis of Scale Scores A scale score for each of the seven scales was derived for each respondent. Several statistical analyses were conducted to test relationships between scale scores, as well as the impacts of demographic characteristics on the intensities of the respondent’s perceptions, as registered by scale scores.

33

Table 1: Structure of the Ecosystem Services Survey Scale sub - sections (or Sub-scales for Total Number of Scale Access) Items • Items on this scale were Satisfaction 26 interspersed between the sub – sections of the other 6 major scales 8 • Air quality Environmental 6 • Noise levels Quality 8 • Land use 6 • Purchasing and financial behaviour 8 • Conservation behaviour Positive Environmental 4 • Environmental citizenship Behaviour 4 • Educational behaviour 3 • Political behaviour 6 • Religious and cultural Freedom 5 • Sexual 3 • Political 8 • Entertainment 7 • Sporting and Fitness 7 • Food related Recreation and 9 • Parks and Green spaces Cultural 10 • Cultural events 7 • Nature Related 2 • Religion and Spirituality 6 • Crime and Safety 5 • Flooding Disturbance 3 • Bush Fires • Dengue 3

Total Access

• • • • • • • • •

Transportation Health Care Safety and Protective Services ICT Utilities Education Employment Commerce and Banking Political Representation

11 9 5 12 8 4 6 11 7

Total 26

22

25

14

50

17

73

Correlation Analysis of Scale Scores Correlation analysis was conducted to test the associations among the scale scores. Significant correlations between these scale scores are shown in Table 2, along with the Pearson product moment correlation coefficients and p values for each relationship. Although some of the correlations are small (