The Concept of Human Needs in Sustainable Development of Cities

Rodzoś, Jolanta

Artykuł - szczegóły

Tytuł artykułu

The Concept of Human Needs in Sustainable Development of Cities

Autorzy

Rodzoś Jolanta

Treść / Zawartość

Pełne teksty:

Pobierz

Identyfikatory

Warianty tytułu

Teoria potrzeb ludzkich w rozwoju zrównoważonym miast

Języki publikacji

Abstrakty

The concept of sustainable development as an idea of a big complexity is very difficult to implement. Cities, despite undertaking the enormous effort, fail to achieve the balance between economic as well as social development and environmental rights. The weakest link of the sustainable management is the social component, because it is more complex and variable than ecological or economic structures and plays a double role: as a beneficiary of the sustainable development and as a key tool for achieving the sustainability goals. That means that social well-being is the objective that needs to be achieved, and, at the same time, it is also a pivotal factor influencing people’s approach to nature and to production processes, determining environmental and economic success. In the light of this conclusion, the concept of social capital and resilient communities is gaining significance. The problem which remains still unsolved is how to develop such communities that are able to face challenges and to adapt to new conditions in an active way. The concept of human needs seems to be very useful to maximise potential of people as agents of sustainable development. It leads to the conclusion, that creating a life environment allowing its resident to meet their needs, including needs for social well-being and for the sense of power, resulting in a higher level of their life satisfaction, may translate into stronger relations with the place of residence and willingness to act in the interest of the living environment.

Koncepcja rozwoju zrównoważonego, ze względu na swoją złożoność, jest bardzo trudna w praktycznej realizacji. Miasta, pomimo dużych starań, mają duże trudności w osiągnięciu równowagi pomiędzy celami ekonomicznymi a racjami społecznymi i ekologicznymi. Najsłabszym ogniwem w całym procesie zarządzania zrównoważonego wydaje się być komponent społeczny. Społeczeństwo jest systemem bardziej złożonym i zróżnicowanym wewnętrznie niż struktury ekonomiczne, czy przyrodnicze, a ponadto występuje w podwójnej roli: jako beneficjent rozwoju zrównoważonego oraz jako kluczowy element w procesie realizacji całej idei. Oznacza to, że dobrobyt społeczny jest zarazem celem rozwoju zrównoważonego, jak i ważnym czynnikiem wpływającym na stosunek ludzi do przyrody i procesów produkcji, a więc warunkującym sukcesy w sferze ekonomicznej i środowiskowej. W świetle tych wniosków znaczenia nabiera koncepcja kapitału społecznego oraz społeczności adaptacyjnych – trwałych i zdolnych do radzenia sobie w trudnych sytuacjach. Powstaje jednak pytanie, jak budować takie społeczności, które stawiają czoła nowym wyzwaniom i przystosowują się pomyślnie do zmieniających się warunków kulturowych, ekonomicznych, politycznych. Wydaje się, że pomocna w rozwiązaniu tego problemu może być teoria potrzeb ludzkich. Pozwala ona zakładać, że stworzenie warunków życia, które umożliwiają mieszkańcom miast realizować swoje złożone potrzeby, włącznie z potrzebami wyższego rzędu, takimi jak dążenie do samorealizacji, do posiadania wpływu na otoczenie, do wartościowych relacji społecznych może skutkować wyższym poziomem satysfakcji życiowej. Jej osiągnięcie może z kolei przekładać się na silniejsze więzi z miejscem zamieszkania i gotowość do działania na rzecz środowiska lokalnego.

Słowa kluczowe

sustainable development community cities human needs place attachment

rozwój zrównoważony społeczność miasta potrzeby ludzkie więzi z miejscem

Wydawca

Lublin University of Technology

Czasopismo

Problemy Ekorozwoju

Rocznik

2019

Tom

Vol. 14, nr 2

Strony

91--99

Opis fizyczny

Bibliogr. 60 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Rodzoś Jolanta

jolanta.rodzos@poczta.umcs.lublin.pl

Faculty of Earth Sciences and Spatial Management, Maria Curie-Sklodovska University 2c Krasnicka Street, 20-718 Lublin, Poland

Bibliografia

1. ALDERFER C., P., 1969, An empirical test of a new theory of human needs, in: Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance, 4(2), p. 142–175.
2. BARKEMEYER R., HOLT D., PREUSS L., TSANG S., 2014, What happened to the ‘development’ in unstainable development? Business guidelines two decades after Brundtland, in: Sustainable development, 22(1), p. 15-32.
3. BLOOM S., L., 2001, Commentary: Reflections on the desire for revenge, in: Journal of Emotional Abuse, 2(4), p. 61‐94.
4. BOYER R., PETERSON N. D., ARORA P., CALDWELL K., 2016, Five approaches to social sustainability and an integrated way forward, in: Sustainability, 8(9), p. 878.
5. BURTON J., 1997, Violence Explained, Manchester University Press, Manchester.
6. CALLAGHAN E. G., COLTON J., 2007, Building sustainable & resilient communities: a balancing of community capital, in: Environment, Development and Sustainability, 10(6), p. 931-942.
7. CASTELLS M., 1996, The Rise of the Network Society, Blackwell, Oxford.
8. CHIESURA A., 2004, The role of urban parks for sustainable city , in: Landscape and Urban Planning, 1, p. 129-138.
9. CLARK A., 2007, Understanding community: a review of networks, ties and contacts, Unpublished working paper No. 09/07, ESRC National Centre for Research Methods Working Paper Series, http://hummedia.manchester.ac.uk/schools/soss/morgancentre/ research/wps/7-2007-05-rlm-clark (18.08.2017).
10. CLAYTON S., 2003, Environmental identity: A conceptual and an operational definition, in: Identity and the Natural Environment: The Psychological Significance of Nature, eds. Clayton, S., Opotow, S., MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA, p. 45-65.
11. COCHRANE P., 2006, Exploring cultural capital and its importance in sustainable development, in: Ecological Economics, 57, p. 318-330.
12. COLEMAN J. 1988, Social capital in the creation of human capital, in: American Journal of Sociology, 94, p. 95-120.
13. COZENS P. M., 2002, Sustainable urban development and crime prevention through environmental design for the British city. Towards an Effective Urban Environmentalism for the 21st Century, in: Cities, 19(2), p. 129-137.
14. CHAN S.-L., HUANG S.-L., 2004, A systems approach for the development of a sustainable community -the application of the sensitivity model (SM), in: Journal of Environmental Management, 72(3), p. 133-147.
15. DALE A., NEWMAN L., 2008, Social Capital: A Necessary and Sufficient Condition for Sustainable Community Development? in: Community Development Journal, 45(1), p. 5-21.
16. DANCHEV A., 2005, Social capital influence on sustainability of development (case study of Bulgaria), in: Sustainable development, 13(1), p. 25-37.
17. DELANTY G., 2003, Community, Routledge, London.
18. DEMPSEY N., BRAMLEY G., POWER S., BROWN C., 2009, The social dimension of sustainable development: Defining urban social sustainability, in: Sustainable Development, 19, p. 289-300.
19. FLORA J., 1988, Social capital and communities of place, in: Rural Sociology, 63(4), p. 481-506.
20. GALTUNG J., 1980, The basic needs approach, in: Human needs, eds. Lederer, K, Galtung J. & Antal D., Oelgeschlager, Gunn & Hain, Cambridge, Massachusetts, p. 55-125.
21. GONZALEZ S., 2006, Scalar narratives in Bilbao. A cultural politics of scales approach to the study of urban policy, in: International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 30(4), p. 836-857.
22. GUARDIA J., POL E., 2002, A critical study of theoretical models of sustainability through structural equation systems, in: Environment and Behavior, 34, p. 137-149.
23. HALLSMITH G., 2003, The key to sustainable cities. meeting human needs, transforming community systems, New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island.
24. HARA M., NAGAO T., HANNOE S., NAKAMURA J., 2016, New key performance indicators for a smart sustainable city, in: Sustainability, vol. 8, no 3, p. 206.
25. HAMPTON K., 2016, Persistent and Pervasive Community, in: New Communication Technologies and the Future of Community American Behavioral Scientist, 60(1), p. 101-124.
26. HEDIGER W., 2000, Sustainable development and social welfare, in: Ecological Economics, 32, p. 481-492.
27. HOLMAN N., RYDIN Y., 2012, What can social capital tell us about planning under localism?, in: Local government studies, 39(1), p. 71-88.
28. HUTCHINS M., J., SUTHERLAND J., W., 2008, An exploration of measures of social sustainability and their application to supply chain decisions, in: Journal of Cleaner Production, 16, p. 1688-1698.
29. KILDOW J.T., 1992, The earth summit: we need more than a message, in: Environmental Science and Technology, 26(6), p. 1077-1078.
30. LEHTONEN M., 2004, The environmental–social interface of sustainable development: capabilities, social capital, institutions, in: Ecological Economics, vol. 49, p. 199-214.
31. LEE S. J., KIM Y., PHILIPS R., 2015, Community well-being and community development: conceptions and applications, Springer International publishing, Switzerland.
32. LEWICKA M., 2005, Ways to make people active: Role of place attachment, cultural capital and neighborhood ties, in: Journal of Environmental Psychology, 4, p. 381-395.
33. LEWICKA M., 2011, Place attachment: How far have we come in the last 40 years?, in: Journal of Environmental Psychology, 31, p. 207-230.
34. McKENZIE S., 2004, Social sustainability: towards some definitions, Magill, Hawke Research Institute, Australia, http://naturalcapital.us/images/Social%20 Sustainability%20-%20Towards%20Some%20Definitions_20100120_024059.pdf (16.08.2017)
35. MASLOW A. H., 1954, Motivation and personality, third edition, 1987, revised by Frager R., Fadiman J., McReynolds C., Cox R., Longman, New York.
36. MASLOW A. H., 1968, Toward a psychology of being, Wileyand Sons, New York.
37. MASLOW, A. H., 1971, The farther reaches of human nature, Harper, New York.
38. MAX-NEEF M., 1991, Human scale development – conception, application and further reflections, The Apex Press, New York and London.
39. MIERZEJEWSKA L., 2017, Sustainable Development of a City: Systemic Approach, in: Problemy ekorozwoju/ Problems of Sustainable Development, 12(1), p. 71-78.
40. NORBERG-SCHULTZ C., 1979, Genius loci. Towards a phenomenology of architecture, Rizzoli, New York.
41. ONYX, J., OSBURN L., BULLEN P., 2004, Response to the environment: social capital and sustainability, in: Australian Journal of Environmental Management, 11(3), p. 212-219.
42. PARK L., 2010, Opening the black box: reconsidering needs theory through psychoanalysis and critical theory, in: International Journal of Peace Studies, 15(1) p. 1-27.
43. PHDUNGSILP A., 2011, Futures studies’ backcasting method used for strategic sustainable city planning, in: Futures, 43, p. 707-714.
44. PINCETL S., 2010, From the sanitary city to the sustainable city: challenges to institutionalising biogenic (nature's services) infrastructure, in: Local Environment, 15(1), p. 43-58.
45. PINCETL S., 2012, Nature, urban development and sustainability – What new elements are needed for a more comprehensive understanding?, in: Cities, 29, p. 532-537.
46. PUTNAM R., D., 1993, Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy, Princeton University Press, New Jersey.
47. PYTKA P., RODZOŚ J., Więzi terytorialne w kontekście zjawiska peryferyjności, in: Barometr Regionalny. Analizy i prognozy, 3(25), p. 21-31.
48. RAMASWAMI A., WEIBLE CH., MAIN D., HEIKKILA T., SIDDIKI S., DUVALL A., PATTISON A., BERNARDAT M., 2012, A social-ecological-infrastructural systems framework for interdisciplinary study of sustainable city systems, in: Journal of Industrial Ecology, 16(6), p. 801-813.
49. REEVE J., 2009, Understanding motivation and emotion, Wiley & Sons Inc., Hoboken, New York.
50. ROBINSON J., 2004, Squaring the circle? Some thoughts on the idea of sustainable development, in: Ecological Economy, 48, p. 369-384.
51. ROSELAND M., 2000, Sustainable community development: integrating environmental, economic, and social objectives, in: Progress in Planning, 54, p. 73-132.
52. SCANNEL L., GIFFORD R., 2010, The relations between natural and civic place attachment and pro-environmental behaviour, in: Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30, p. 289-297.
53. SEELIGER L., TUROK I., 2013, Towards sustainable cities: extending resilience with insights from vulnerability and transition theory sustainability, 5, p. 2108-2128.
54. TUAN Y.-F., 1977, Space and place: The perspective of experience, The University of Minnesota Press, Minnesota.
55. UZZELL D., POL E., BADENAS D., 2002, Place identification, social cohesion, and environmental sustainability, in: Environment and Behavior, 34, p. 26-53.
56. VALLANCE S., PERKINS H.C.; DIXON J.E., 2011, What is social sustainability? A clarification of concepts, in: Geoforum, 42, p. 342-348.
57. VASKE J., J., COBRIN K., 2001, Place attachment and environmentally responsible behavior, in: Journal Environmental Education, 32(4), p. 116-121.
58. WOOLCOCK M., NARAYAN D., 2000, Social capital: implications for development theory, research, and policy, in: The World Bank Research Observer, 15(2), p. 225-249.
59. WORLD BANK, 2002, Understanding and measuring social capital: a multidisciplinary tool for practitioners, The World Bank, Washington, http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2211614687413196 75/pdf/multi0page.pdf (12.08.2017).
60. ZACKLAD M., 2003, Communities of action: A cognitive and social approach to the design of CSCW systems, in: Proceedings of the International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work, https://www.researchgate.net/publication/220729398 (12.08.2017).

Uwagi

Opracowanie rekordu w ramach umowy 509/P-DUN/2018 ze środków MNiSW przeznaczonych na działalność upowszechniającą naukę (2019).

Typ dokumentu

Bibliografia

Identyfikator YADDA

bwmeta1.element.baztech-c84703f4-2ff6-4622-9eab-3aa8b852543a