I spoke at the American Association of Geographers Annual Meeting March 28th 2025 in the Paper Session ‘Local Government in Multi-Level Territorial Governance Systems’. My topic specifically was on Digital Urban Planning in Different Cultures: Systematic Review of the Literature.
Why this topic?
Working around the Sustainable Development Goals, I started looking into the different cultural contexts of technology in planning. Cultural contexts significantly influence planning approaches by shaping societal norms, governance structures, civic engagement practices, technology adoption rates, and knowledge bases. Understanding these influences is essential for effectively integrating digital tools like AI into urban planning processes to address contemporary societal challenges.
Considering the context outlined above, this study is driven by two main research questions. The first aims to explore:
These two research questions will underpin the assessment of the planning culture cross-contextually. To ensure a rigorous and transparent approach, the systematic review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol (Regona et al., 2022). PRISMA is a well-established framework that facilitates clarity and consistency in the reporting of systematic reviews, enhancing the reliability and comprehensiveness of the research process.
Grouping thematically
After sorting the papers through the PRISMA process, I reviewed the remaining and the four recurrent themes from the review of the literature where as follows:
(a) Citizen Engagement and Participatory Urban Planning;
(b) Artificial Intelligence Applications in Urban Analysis and Visualisation;
(c) Urban Artificial Intelligence, Sustainability and Future Cities; and
(d) Artificial Intelligence and Urban Mobility, Security and Socioeconomic Impacts.
But what were the findings?
Every article's relationship to the pertinent SDG has revealed that they are all in common with objectives 3, 6, 7, 9, 11, 15, and 17. As expected, Goal 11—Sustainable Cities and Communities—was the most often cited objective. Disaster risk reduction, sustainable transportation, and sustainable cities and human settlements are the subjects related to this objective. Due to the nature of the research question, the majority of the publications were related to the theme of sustainable cities and human settlements. Goal 17: Partnerships for the Goals, particularly the Technology subject, was the second most often mentioned goal. These goals where often placed in relation to other themes or fit into one of the four themes above. From this, these themes can be extrapolated to be the four streams in which technology in the built environment and planning are moving through into the future.
Broken down by each theme, the findings could be summarised as follows:
(a) Citizen Engagement and Participatory Urban Planning;
AI enhances citizen participation in urban planning by providing data-driven insights that align strategies with community preferences (Zhuang, 2022; Vanky & Li, 2023). Emphasising political discourse, bottom-up models, and cross-sector collaboration fosters inclusive, responsive development whilst addressing biases and social impacts (Palmini & Cugurullo, 2022; McCarroll & Cugurullo, 2024; Laurin et al., 2021).
(b) Artificial Intelligence Applications in Urban Analysis and Visualisation;
AI is transforming urban planning by processing large datasets for effective city management (Darwood et al., 2023). It enhances citizen engagement, infrastructure monitoring, and mobility planning, supporting inclusive and sustainable development (Haqbeen et al., 2021; Vanky & Le, 2023). However, challenges remain around data accuracy, social impacts, and resource demands (McCarroll & Cugurullo, 2022).
(c) Urban Artificial Intelligence, Sustainability and Future Cities; and
AI supports sustainable urban planning by enhancing citizen engagement, optimising resource management, and improving mobility (Haqbeen et al., 2021; Vanky &Le, 2023). It aids decision-making through data analysis and urban analysis tools whilst fostering inclusive governance and addressing socioeconomic impacts (McCarroll & Cugurullo, 2022; Laurin et al., 2021).
(d) Artificial Intelligence and Urban Mobility, Security and Socioeconomic Impacts.
AI revolutionises land use planning through automated classification, predictive modeling, and scenario simulations, optimising urban layouts (Lv et al., 2015;Srivastava et al., 2019). It enhances traffic management and sustainable mobility by using real-time data for dynamic adjustments, reducing congestion, and supporting eco-friendly transit systems (Thi et al., 2019; Zerza &Park, 2020).
Overall, outside of the SDG’s, citizen participation was the most consistently mentioned way of engaging urban planning with AI across the themes. However, there was a lack of comparative studies or cross-cultural studies for places to learn from elsewhere in the world – is this because technology in planning is moving so fast that any comparison may not be relevant as quickly as it comes out? Or is the field of study too new? Both these questions need further interdisciplinary study to be discussed further.
These questions and this topic are what I am beginning to explore in my PhD programme. For more insights into Artificial Intelligence, technology or its integration into planning or to explore our consultancy services, please see https://www.auroraheritageplanning.co.uk/services.