From Dublin's rapid growth to uncertainty over the economic future of small and medium-sized towns, urban development is in danger of drifting headlessly, writes Michael J. Bannon.
Ireland is now an urban society. The 2002 census shows that the "aggregate town" component of the population now accounts for 60 per cent of the total, while 67.2 per cent of the population reside in the cities, towns and villages collectively.
What is overlooked, in the absence of clear data, is that upwards of 90 per cent of all jobs are now urban-based. At a wider level, Ireland can be said to be almost wholly urbanised, inasmuch as virtually all houses are now equipped with the facilities and amenities once the prerogative of an urban elite, while urban national and international cultures permeate almost every household.
Yet many people view urbanisation as something of a pariah, something alien and something to be disguised if possible. The reality, as in other European countries, is that cities and towns have nurtured civilisation and fostered cultures; they have been the focus of learning, of the arts and of literature.
In today's world, they are where people work, where innovation takes place and where the "global economy comes to earth". Prosperous cities and towns are the cornerstones of national wealth. Efficient, properly organised and well-managed cities should be cherished as keys to national competitiveness and future prosperity.
Ireland is one of a decreasing number of countries lacking a national urban policy. Rather, various urban-related programmes and initiatives are threaded through an array of mainstream programmes, resulting in too little co-ordination and a loss of synergistic effects.
Unlike some leading EU member-states, Ireland does not have a department of urban affairs or a minister with overarching responsibility for urban research, for urban policy formulation or its implementation.
This contrasts with the handling of the rural domain, where a number of government departments and dedicated agencies, backed by official policies and guidelines, have explicit responsibility for rural affairs.
A comprehensive, holistic national policy for urban development is important for many reasons. There is need for research, debate and action to implement an urban policy appropriate to Irish circumstances.
There is a wide range of choices from which Ireland can select, but choose we should, rather than drift headlessly into one or other of these profoundly different models.
First, one option is the "Boston-Berlin" dichotomy now at the heart of government policy. Does Ireland wish to follow the generalised American form of urban development or should we pursue a European model of urban management as enunciated in the European Spatial Development Perspective? Or does Ireland opt for something in between?
Second, it is two years since the Government published the National Spatial Strategy 2002-2020 with long-term proposals for the development of all areas of the country and for each category of settlement.
Key policy and investment decisions to support critical elements of the strategy - most especially the designated gateways - have not materialised; indeed the so-called decentralisation episode seems largely to point to anywhere but the gateways. Significant policy and resource decisions are required if the NSS is not to go the way of the 1969 Buchanan report.
Third, across Europe cities of various sizes both co-operate and compete nationally and internationally. In Ireland's case, Dublin is vigorously promoted "as a national gateway serving the whole country".
The decision to concentrate on Dublin is being pursued largely on the basis of intuition; there is a lack of scientific research evidence as to the economies or diseconomies attaching to concentration on Dublin, as opposed to the promotion of alternative models for the country.
The result is that Dublin has grown rapidly and expanded widely - but a big city is not necessarily either a good or an efficient city. Growth is not necessarily development and a sprawling metropolis is hardly a sustainable one.
The NSS-designated gateways need a larger share of Ireland's modern service and knowledge economies. Increased internal competition and greater inter-urban partnership might be best for Ireland.
A fourth concern of a national urban policy relates to the future of small- and medium-sized towns in an era of declining manufacturing employment and as functions concentrate in the county towns and larger places. What will be the future economic base of such settlements?
Finally, other issues and concerns require a targeted, cross-cutting urban focus; several mainstream programmes should be "urban-proofed" in the interest of achieving synergies and more effective delivery.
These include policies relating to issues such as the definition of roles for groups of urban places, the promotion of both polycentric development and inter urban co-operation, poverty, exclusion and community development initiatives, heritage enhancement, design quality, urban land policy, infrastructure co-ordination, urban governance and planning guidance.
EU ministers with responsibility for urban policy and spatial planning meet in Rotterdam on November 29th-30th to consider reports on the urban situation in all EU states. It is to be hoped that the Irish delegation commits Ireland to formulating an urban policy for the country.
Such a policy should build on Ireland's considerable urban endowment in the interests of sustainable national development and the implementation of the National Spatial Strategy. A carefully worked out, comprehensive, pro-active urban policy is needed to guide the development of the State and the island.
Michael J. Bannon is emeritus professor at the department of planning and environmental policy, UCD. He was a member of the NSS Expert Advisory Group and author of Irish Urban Policy: Metropolitan Dominance - the Challenge in Achieving Balanced Territorial Development, prepared for the EU ministerial meeting in Rotterdam.