Abstract
This paper provides a comparative analysis of planning approaches in divided cities in order to investigate the role of planning in alleviating or exacerbating urban division in these societies. It analyses four urban areas—Berlin, Beirut, Belfast, Jerusalem—either of which has experienced or still experiences extreme divisions related to nationality, ethnicity, religion, and/or culture. Each case study is investigated in terms of planning approaches before division and after reunification (if applicable). The relation between division and planning is reciprocal: planning effects, and is effected by urban division. Therefore, it is generally assumed that traditional planning approaches are insufficient and that the recognized engagement methods of planners in the planning process are ineffective to overcome the problems posed by divided cities. Theoretically, a variety of urban scholars have proposed different perspectives on this challenge. In analysing the role of planning in divided cities, both the role of planners, and planning interventions are evaluated within the light of related literature.The case studies indicate that even though different planning approaches have different consequences on the ground, there is a universal trend in harmony with the rest of the world in reshaping these cities. This conclusion draws another one; the contemporary planning interventions in divided cities do not address the root causes of division. Hence, incorporation of ‘difference' as a prominent feature of the city to its plans is not addressed as it should be in these special cases.
