Cities within Liberal Democracies: Planning for the Unknown

While Leipzig experienced a heavy decline in its population during the 1990s, the city managed to turn this trajectory around and see population numbers rise again. To build on this positive development, the city continues to develop an integrated urban development plan, the Leipzig 2030 strategy. What we found particularly interesting was how the city designed the strategy emphasizing processes for citizen involvement and the flexibility to allow for re-adjustment in the face of pressing challenges, such as climate change. Today, the city functions as a nation-wide lighthouse again – as, for example, our group experienced in a discussion with the Leipzig Unteilbar movement. Both protagonists found their way to Leipzig from former Western Germany and decided to stay after finishing university to support and strengthen civil society. This shows that Leipzig is a city where both internal city leadership and an external civil society maintain self-confidence. Both spheres manage to form productive relationships with both tension and long-term trust. The city also has strong ties with Leipzig University – located directly on the center square and serving as a knowledge hub and connector to different actors, such as business leaders. Leipzig has been successful in attracting large corporations, while also fostering local startups and new ideas through the innovation lab at SpinLab. Meanwhile, Leipzig’s community of artists, that give the city its unique identity and feel, are transforming blank walls, empty spaces, and parkland into destinations. All of these actors negotiate and shape the spaces of the city that make Leipzig what it is today. It is to the benefit of the city government to allow each of these actors room in the city to make their place. 

One particular moment in Leipzig seems an appropriate metaphor to describe our overall “learning experience”. It took place while we were cycling through the western part of the city; through the former industrial landscape near the railway lines. A long stretch of land has been redeveloped by various citizen initiatives, for various uses, including a children’s adventure playground, focused on independent play, and encouraging children to paint, craft, and build themselves. There we saw a young boy, around 7 years old, casually holding an axe. The reactions of the American fellows in particular, of shock-horror that a child could be left to handle dangerous equipment, left a lasting impression and catalyzed conversations on the role of rules, regulations, and responsibility. In observing this one moment, many of us asked ourselves: given the appropriate formal and legal framework, can we leave spaces open for creative and spontaneous actions? Does this describe the approach that Leipzig has taken more generally, or one which the city aspires to in relation to citizen participation? While this raised safety concerns for some, the playground represented something special that was happening in Leipzig. The city’s history and political decision-making has left space for the future. What is so special is that there is still room for people to experiment and shape Leipzig based on their own vision.

Could this be a blueprint for progressive city development in general? Should fostering openness be added as a crucial element to other progressive ideas in urban development such as freedom, equality, and solidarity? The example of Leipzig shows different mechanisms of how to deal with uncertainty in urban planning processes, such as involving citizens in project development or temporary use. It also demonstrates that there might even be the need for new formal schemes to foster and incorporate the unplanned into urban planning. In doing so, the promise of liberal democracies that the future is open and it’s on everyone to take part to shape it, could be reflected by urban governance schemes that plan for the unknown.