The Crucial Importance of Community Engagement

Lessons from an Article on Globalization and Conflict

My interest in urban planning was ignited in the winter of 1970 during an urban geography class on the more specific topic of urban economics. As a college freshman with a strength in quantitative skills, I was hooked. Good advisors helped me on a path to an economics degree and a city and regional planning degree.

Interest was one thing. But I fell I love with city planning not because of quantitative analysis. While a graduate school intern in Kansas City, I accompanied my boss, Ralph Ochsner of (then) Ochsner & Associates, to a comprehensive planning community meeting in Nevada, Missouri. In the community center, there were tables of Nevadans working on maps and brainstorming ideas to plan their own city. To me, it seemed chaotic, but it was also exciting! I started to realize that my skills with data and analysis informed city planning; it wasn’t planning itself. Even consultants didn’t “do” planning; they facilitated it. The best city plans were created by the citizens themselves.

A few years ago, a spellbinding speaker on economic statistics reminded me of my thrill in working with numbers. But his talk closed by reminding all of us that numbers only inform public decisions. Emotions make decisions. In other words, use the data to tell a story that influences the souls of decision makers.

This brings me to the present and a fascinating article by David Brooks in the Sunday New York Times on April 10, 2022, entitled Globalization is Over. The Global Culture Wars Have Begun. Yes, globalization is a lot like city planning. His broad point is that “we probably put too much emphasis on the power of material forces like economics and technology to drive human events and bring us all together.” Like my spellbinding speaker, Brooks notes that “human behavior is often driven by forces much deeper than economic and political self-interest (emphasis mine). Three deeper motivations are suggested by Brooks. And they all relate to the critical importance of citizen participation in the planning of their own communities—supported by data but relying on their emotions.

First, says Brooks, “human beings are powerfully driven by. . .thymotic desires.” The concept of thymotic desires comes from Platonic philosophy which, using Wiktionary as a quick source, identifies “that area of the soul where feelings of pride, indignation, shame, etc., are located.” According to Brooks, if people feel “they are unseen, disrespected and unappreciated, they will become enraged, resentful and vengeful.” To city planners, this means we need to involve citizens in such a way that they are seen and heard, respected in their perspectives, and appreciated for their knowledge and caring of their neighborhoods and cities.

How many times have we planners experienced otherwise good planning ideas tossed out by elected leaders because the planners didn’t consult their constituents? How many times have real estate developers been pilloried because otherwise superb redevelopment schemes were proposed without first seeking input from the neighborhood? The numbers work. The economics and financing work. The demographics are right on. But the locals were ignored—they were left unseen, disrespected, and unappreciated. Good ideas go down the drain if thymotic desires aren’t addressed.

Brooks’ second point is that “most people have a strong loyalty to their place. . . .” City planning almost always means change of some form, usually good and positive change. But don’t let that planning take place without people’s involvement. Residents fear different kinds of people moving in—perhaps irrationally, but humans are inherently irrational without disciplined absorption of information such as provided in public planning sessions. They fear being driven out by government or market forces. They fear altered traffic patterns, different noises, more lights, strangers. All these factors can be ameliorated with inclusive planning, of course. But that means planners and developers need to meet affected residents at their place—not at the downtown planning commission.

His third point is that “people are driven by moral longings—by their attachment to their own cultural values, by their desire to fiercely defend their values when the seem to be under assault.” Like it or not, birds of a feather tend to flock together, even in human settlements. Our neighborhoods, our subdivisions, our apartment buildings tend to attract people with similar characteristics and values. This doesn’t mean that we can’t or should get along with other kinds of people. We just tend not to live with different kinds in our own places. There are ample times and places for all kinds of people to meet, mingle, and share. Shopping centers, restaurants, ball games, parades, and so on are “neutral” places where we can truly enjoy mixing with others. We just tend not to reside with other kinds. City planning and globalizing policies must take this into consideration.

David Brooks is addressing globalization—both its advantages and failures—particularly since the end of the Cold War. He is driven by the events in Ukraine in the winter and spring of 2022. How much of globalization, however, has foundations similar to cities and metropolitan areas. People are drawn to “city-states” (e.g., metro areas) for mostly economic reasons. Still, they huddle in more homogenous enclaves for housing, religion, raising children, even language, among other “value” factors. To increase prosperity, however, people have to get along in the neutral places like jobs, entertainment, shopping, and—I dare say—community engagement events. This requires understanding one another, partly through the data we collect about each another. More importantly, we need to appeal to and understand the natural thymotic desires that trigger distrust when we perceive that we are unseen, disrespected, and unappreciated. City planning relies as much—possibly more—on citizen engagement as on the numbers.

Bob Lewis is an Assistant Professor, Urban Planning and Development in the
Saint Louis University School of Social Work