Equity of the Sexes An Analysis of Vienna’s Step 2025 Urban Development Plan

History and Theory of Urban & Regional Planning in the School of Architecture + Planning

Questions

Despite the progress made for females over the past century, there is still a significant gender disparity in the professions of urban planning and architecture. The proposed strategy for correcting this issue is gender mainstreaming which, according to UN Women, “aims to transform discriminatory social institutions, laws, cultural norms and community practices, such as those limiting women’s access to property rights or restricting their access to public space”. Vienna has been a leader in the gender mainstreaming movement since 1991 (Urban Development Vienna, 2013, p.13). Vienna’s STEP 2025 Urban Development Plan (UDP) was adopted in 2014, with a series of goals set to keep Vienna “a highly livable and, more specifically, also a very affordable city – a status that must be preserved and further developed” (Urban Development Vienna, 2014, p.13).

In this case study, I analyzed the STEP 2025 UDP to determine if the gender mainstreaming initiatives of the late 1990s to the early 2000s are still implemented in Vienna’s urban planning practices. According to the Manual for Gender Mainstreaming in Urban Planning and Urban Development (MFGM), Vienna first began its gender mainstreaming planning methods in the early 1990’s after a photo exhibition (created by two female urban planning employees) titled “Who Owns Public Space? Women’s Everyday Life in the City”. After this eye-opening exhibition came to a conclusion, the Women’s Coordination Office (WCO) was established in the city of Vienna’s Urban Development department in 1992. The WCO “ took over the central task of evolving and establishing the (then) novel strategy of gender mainstreaming” in the field of urban development and gender mainstreaming was officially defined as a core task of all urban planning projects (Urban Development, 2013, p. 13). As a result of this huge undertaking, a series of successful pilot projects came to fruition- most of which focused on three primary elements: gender equity, mobility, and accessible public spaces.

These primary elements to gender mainstreaming can be elucidated in previous urban planning works and theories. June Manning Thomas stated that the “dilemmas of social inequality continue, in problem areas ranging from lack of access to good public education and employment opportunities to inadequate housing” and many remain marginalized as a result (2012, p. 378). Although her focus was on racial inequalities, equity remains the underlying issue. Furthermore, the theory of advocacy planning, as best described by Paul Davidoff, states that “planners should be able to engage in the political process as advocates of the interests both of government and of such other groups, organizations, or individuals who are concerned with proposing policies for the future development of the community.” (Davidoff, 2011); this framework of planners working with and for the citizenry was a primary planning tactic for the pilot projects of the WCO. Finally, green infrastructure, which provides a “cultural ecosystem” and has a positive impact on mental health and social cohesion (Eisenman, 2013), is imperative to maintain Vienna’s growing population and its plentiful green spaces. These theories remain major principles in gender mainstreaming planning practices- but does gender mainstreaming remain a core task of the overall urban development?

Methods

Research question: “Can Vienna’s STEP 2025 UDP be considered a gender equitable plan when compared to the standards of the MFGM?”

In order to answer this question, I analyzed both the STEP 2025 UDP and the MFGM. The manual was created a year before STEP 2025- the main objective of this document was to serve as a “compilation of the ways in which gender mainstreaming is implemented at different scale levels and in different projects of urban planning in Vienna” (Urban Development, 2013, p. 14). I was interested to learn if the gender mainstreaming initiatives that were so prevalent in Vienna’s urban development in the late 1990s-the early 2000s were still put into practice in the STEP 2025 plan. For this case study research, I assessed the STEP 2025 UDP through the gender mainstreaming lens.

Vienna has a thirty year history of being a front-runner in the gender mainstreaming movement; however, can these achievements be implemented in the growing density and population of the future? Given Vienna’s recent history in advocating for gender equity, I was curious to see if gender mainstreaming still has the impact that it did 2-3 decades ago. I quantified the input gender mainstreaming has on current urban development based on the primary principles of gender mainstreaming; the assessment criteria used to examine the cases were:

• Equity
• Mobility
• Access to public/green spaces
• Safety
• Public participation

I used the readings in our coursework to better understand and evaluate these assessment criteria. In regard to gender-sensitive design and planning, I referred to the MFGM. To better assess the social and political aspects of equity planning, I referred to the work of June Manning Thomas, which explains:

[Equity planning] approached the problem of the planners’ role in cities fraught with social justice problems in a slightly different way than did advocacy planning. Both equity planning as described by Krumholz (1982) and advocacy planning as promoted by Davidoff, Davidoff, and Gold (1970) were concerned with social justice for disadvantaged urban populations, and called on planners to assist such populations by planning on their behalf. (2012, p. 377)

In addition to this description of equity and advocacy planning, I looked to Davidoff to understand the past challenges of advocacy planning, such as the lack of input that citizens’ organizations had on urban planning as “a result of both the enlarged role in society played by government bureaucracies and the historic weakness of municipal party politics” (Davidoff, 2011)- this helped me to better understand the success or failure of representation in urban development projects. Finally, I aimed to better understand the theory behind green infrastructure as described by Eisenman, who explained that “the ideology of the public park was predicated on the importance of open, public green space to the health and vitality of urban populations” (Eisenman, 2013); this is paralleled by the MFGM in the chapter titled “Gender mainstreaming in public space planning”.

Findings

Ultimately, I discovered that that the STEP 2025 Urban Development Plan for Vienna is a gender equitable plan that has achievable goals that are cross-sectioned by gender equity planning practices.

First, I found that gender mainstreaming is mentioned across the entire document- specifically in the introduction of the UDP, where it is named as one of the nine key principles of STEP 2025 (p. 22). Additionally, the MFGM is explicitly referred to, making the gender mainstreaming initiative a multidisciplinary and cooperative goal. This integration of gender mainstreaming methods into the entire urban development plan is encouraging- but also confusing. Although the concept of gender mainstreaming is relatively new, the tactics used in gender mainstreaming are anything but. Therefore, I decided to compare the STEP 2025 UDP and the MFGM to see how many qualities they shared. To better illustrate this comparison, I created the follow table:

Upon viewing the results of this exercise, I found that the language and goals of the MFGM are mirrored in the STEP 2025 UDP. At this point, I had concluded that the multidisciplinary and multi-scale integration of gender mainstreaming criteria into urban planning and development in Vienna is what has brought gender equity into the “mainstream”. To see how the above issues have impacted Vienna today, I looked for some concrete data. I was able to conclude my search with the “Vienna In Figures” document, produced by the City of Vienna for the year 2022. Upon looking at the data there has been an improvement in sustainable mobility between the years of 2019 and 2021- commuters who travel on foot have increased from 28% to 35% and cycling has increased from 7% to 9%, however the use of public transport has decreased (partially due to the pandemic) from 38% to 30% and the use of cars has only decreased slightly (from 27% to 26%) (City of Vienna, 2022, p.9). These results echo the “city of short distances” principle that is prevalent in both the UDP and the MFGM. Additionally, 49% of Vienna’s land use is devoted to green spaces and bodies of water which are within a 5 minute walk to approximately 2/3 of the population (City of Vienna, 2022, p. 5). This effort to provide plentiful green spaces to the public, where safety and accessibility are key, is still a primary goal for the city of Vienna.

Future Scenarios

I considered three different possible futures for Vienna based on the STEP 2025 plan and the Manual for Gender Mainstreaming: business as usual, advanced climate change, and a feminist utopia. After exploring these three possible futures, I determined that:

In a business as usual scenario, Vienna has the potential to nearly triple in population in the next hundred years- planners should look to new and innovative ways to prepare for the continued increase in migrants who will flock to Vienna for its quality of life, affordability, universities, and accessibility.

In an advanced climate change scenario, Vienna may suffer a huge drop in population due to war and shortages of natural resources- planners may have to grapple with extreme drought and extreme weather patterns which may wipe out the lush parks and plentiful lakes that Vienna is so renowned for.

Finally, in the event that Vienna becomes a feminist utopia, there is hope for the city: the founding mothers of Vienna’s next phase of development may make Vienna a “net zero” city, causing planners to prepare for the infrastructure required to provide 100% renewable energy, urban farming plants, and housing for a booming population.

Regardless of the circumstances, I believe Vienna’s gender equitable planning methods will maintain its reverence as the most livable city in the world (Economist Intelligence Unit, 2022).

References

Butler, O. E. (2019). Parable of the sower. Grand Central Publishing.

Davidoff, P. (2011). Advocacy and Pluralism in Planning. In R. T. LeGates & F. Stout (Eds.), The City Reader (7th ed., pp. 435–445). Routledge.

Eisenman, T. S. (2013). Frederick Law Olmsted, Green Infrastructure, and the Evolving City. Journal of Planning History, 12(4), 287–311. https://doi.org/10.1177/1538513212474227

Gender mainstreaming. UN Women. (n.d.). Retrieved October 7, 2022, from https://www.unwomen.org/en/how-we-work/un-system-coordination/gender-mainstreaming

Global liveability index 2022. Economist Intelligence Unit. (2022, August 26). Retrieved November 1, 2022, from https://www.eiu.com/n/campaigns/global-liveability-index-2022/

Jojola, T. (2013). Indigenous Planning: Towards a Seven Generations Model. In David C. Natcher, Ryan Christopher Walker, & Theodore S. Jojola (Eds.), Reclaiming Indigenous planning. McGill-Queen’s University Press.

MacAskill, W. (2022, August 5). The Case for Longtermism. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2022/08/05/opinion/the-case-for-longtermism.html

Thomas, J. M. (2012). Social Justice as Responsible Practice: Influence of Race, Ethnicity, and the Civil Rights Era. In Planning ideas that matter: Livability, territoriality, governance, and reflective practice. MIT Press.

Urban Development Vienna. (2013). Manual for gender mainstreaming in urban planning and urban development. City of Vienna. Retrieved October 7, 2022, from https://www.wien.gv.at/stadtentwicklung/studien/pdf/b008379d.pdf

Urban Development Vienna. (2014). STEP 2025 -urban development plan vienna. City of Vienna. Retrieved October 7, 2022, from https://www.wien.gv.at/stadtentwicklung/studien/pdf/b008379d.pdf

Vienna In Figures. City of Vienna. (2022, August). Retrieved October 31, 2022, from https://www.wien.gv.at/statistik/pdf/viennainfigures-2022.pdf

Back to the Critical Case Studies of a Present Plan Home Page