American Planning Association (APA). The American Planning Association (APA) is an association of 40,000 planners from 90 countries who work in government, academia, and private practice. APA is organized into 47 state chapters and 24 topical divisions supported by an annual USD 10 million budget with its headquarters in Chicago. APA exists to elevate and unite a diverse planning profession as it helps communities, their leaders, and residents anticipate and meet the needs of a changing world. Our Mission, Vision, and Core Values are:

• Mission: Creating great communities for all.

• Vision: APA will lead the way to equitable, thriving communities by creating unique insights, as well as innovative and practical approaches that enable the planning community to anticipate and successfully adapt to the needs of a rapidly changing world.

• Core Values: APA leaders and staff strive to model a shared set of values that will help us achieve our vision for the future.

• Goals: APA's strategic focus is on four specific Goals that will provide direction for the efforts of leaders, volunteers, and staff: prioritize equity, reframe the voice of planning, upskill planners, and pursue digital relevance.

APA International Division (APA-ID). The APA-ID has over 1,000 student and professional members based in the US and overseas who have, are, or want to do international planning. Our vision, mission, and goals are:

• Vision. We envision a world where planners from diverse backgrounds come together to address global challenges and create more sustainable, equitable, and resilient communities. 

• Mission. The mission of the International Division is to advance international planning in the APA and to enhance the global landscape of planning by advocating for excellence and cultivating a dynamic network for innovation and collaboration. 

• Goals. Through networking, knowledge sharing, and resource development, the division aims to: support planners and students who are involved in or interested in the field of international planning, promote the role of planning and best planning practices at the international stage, and facilitate collaborative problem-solving on urban issues.   

APA-ID Ukraine Rebuilding Action Group (URAG).  URAG was founded two years ago, shortly after the Russian invasion of Ukraine, as an initiative by the International Division in response to a strong interest in planning for post-war rebuilding shown by APA members during the Ukraine session at the APA 2022 National Planning Conference (NPC) in San Diego. URAG has since grown its membership to several dozen members, including not only International Division members but also members representing several other APA divisions and other professional organizations outside of APA. Additionally, we have a database of many other APA members who have attended our NPC sessions and have expressed interest in our mission and initiatives. 

URAG's purpose is to provide relevant, feasible, and effective assistance to Ukrainian communities as they envision city-rebuilding strategies through networking, capacity building, knowledge sharing, and collaboration. Our initiatives include a completed handbook on public participation and guidelines on environmental sustainability planning, both featured on the URAG website (www.urag.org), as well as efforts to support the expansion and refinement of planning education in Ukraine. 

How Can APA Planners Provide Support to Ukraine Rebuilding? URAG members addressed this question early on and concluded that we have the potential to provide guidance for Ukrainian planners to build back better that is relevant, feasible, and effective:

• Relevant - Are US planners and APA relevant to planning for the rebuilding of Ukraine? Yes, planning before the war ends is critical to the successful and cost-effective return of the displaced people, providing for their basic safety, health, social services, and livelihoods. Further, while there are many Ukrainian spatial/physical planners – especially architects and urbanists – as well as regional economic and social development specialists, these experts operate in separate silos legally and institutionally. So, there is both a lack of professional planners and planning educators in general and a lack of attention to integrated, comprehensive planning. We have an important niche to fill.

• Feasible - Can volunteer planners based in the US contribute effectively? Yes, in addition to the URAG website, the APA website alone offers a treasure trove of information and education on virtually all aspects of planning that URAG has started to curate and contextualize for use by Ukrainians involved in planning for rebuilding. These guidelines cite several references from APA’s Knowledge Base.

• Effective - Can our work be effective? Yes, working with partners who have “boots on the ground” we can not only leverage our work through “more hands”, but also reach and influence those involved in planning and decision-making in Ukraine. Our primary metric of success is that our work helps to achieve capacity building, and facilitates preparation of projects that are feasible, implementable, sustainable, and bankable.

URAG applied for a competitive USD 7,000 “Research Grant” from the APA Divisions Council and was awarded USD 4,000 for a one-year period of performance between May 2023 to May 2024. In the grant application, the project is described as providing the integrated spatial, temporal, programmatic, macroeconomic, and environmental context of planning for rebuilding of Ukraine, thus complementing local-focused and end-state planning and design projects and services. 

Space. In spatial terms, the grant does not focus exclusively on local or urban planning, but rather on regional or territorial planning as well, given the focus of other organizations on the urban side in contrast to the need to address many critical aspects of rebuilding by planning at the regional scale. Although these guidelines use UN Habitat’s International Guidelines: Urban and Territorial Planning (2017) as a framework to align with, our interpretation of “territorial” may be somewhat broader than UN Habitat’s in that their usage appears to be more oriented to metropolitan regions, while URAG’s definition is closer to what is considered regional planning in the US, i.e. counties or rayons, states or oblasts, watersheds and river basins, airsheds and air quality districts, biodiversity hot spots and their connecting corridors, and transport and municipal environmental infrastructure regions.  See Box 1 for more information. 

Time. With respect to timeframe, URAG believes that while end-state vision plans are certainly important to incentivize building back better and the return of displaced peoples, dynamic action planning is critically needed to get from vision to reality. In this respect, both near-term and long-term actions are addressed by the sector in both an integrated way as well as in a siloed way, with of course the actual appropriate sequence depending on the location and its particular circumstances.

To create agile, dynamic, and robust plans that can lead communities into the future through change and uncertainty, planners can call on a wide range of new planning approaches and tools. APA recommends: (1) planning with foresight to identify emerging trends and drivers of change; (2) using foresight results to explore scenario planning processes that imagine alternative futures; (3) determining a preferred community vision; (4) employing design thinking for creative, community-driven approaches to solving wicked problems; and (5) learning how to use the future to create dynamic plans. See Box 1 below for more details.

Given that URAG is an organization of unpaid volunteers confined for the most part to a base in the US, a detailed description and analysis of current baseline conditions representing the current context relevant to planning has not been a primary objective of URAG’s work. There are other organizations based in Ukraine and Europe that are in a much better position to do that. URAG has focused instead on guidance on how to “build back better”; Ukraine has stated its objective is to model itself on the EU and US. Further, it is hoped that these guidelines can support planning for rebuilding of areas in other countries besieged by the cascading crises of war, natural disasters, and climate change on top of already degraded baseline environmental conditions.

While recognizing that the prospect of EU accession, and therefore an important focus on EU directives and systems, will continue to drive planning for rebuilding in Ukraine, URAG’s focus in these guidelines is not on legal systems but rather on logical methodologies for planning proven to be effective in the US and internationally, i.e. “international best practices”.  Nonetheless, a section of the guidelines has been devoted to describing some of the EU’s most relevant environmental and energy related directives.

While a limited attempt has been made to address the the Ukraine context is not as full or as consistent as some might expect, it is URAG’s intention to continuously solicit further input on the local context by posting the guidelines on the URAG website and through our planned webinar series. In addition, long-term, the APA International Division will keep looking for opportunities to offer the guidelines in other rebuilding situations globally.

To sum up our discussion so far of the time related aspects of planning for rebuilding, we have asserted that the best time to do comprehensive planning for rebuilding, in general, is now in order to expedite permanent return and integration of displaced peoples into their new communities to stop and reverse emigration and brain drain, to contribute more resources  to the rebuilding; planning, and rebuild most cost-effectively; Then we recommended that the best strategy for doing robust and dynamic planning for rebuilding is to use foresight planning and scenario analysis.

Thirdly, the best method to elaborate and implement the various individual elements of a rebuilding plan, e.g. housing, transportation, environment, etc., is of course stepwise action planning consisting of prioritized, staffed, phased and budgeted measures that increase resilience and adaptability to the impacts of war against a background of risks posed by natural disasters, pre-existing environmental degradation, and ongoing climate change. This guideline focuses on more detailed action planning for environmental sustainability, both siloed by sector and holistically. In doing so, we attempt to address the potential complexities and conflicts in allocating labor and money, between emergency response to urgent needs and trauma (winterization, hospitals, housing, schools, etc.) versus the need for long-term planning solutions based on stakeholder and public input, and how these may vary in wartime versus post-war periods and conflict areas vs. non-conflict areas.

Integrated Planning. Another key cross-cutting theme of planning for rebuilding in Ukraine is integration, along multiple parameters:

• Coordinating and integrating multiple international donors, the EU, and multiple levels of Ukraine's government relating to funding and financing; environmental and social safeguards; design and construction standards; permits and approvals; planning, design, and construction contractor teams

• Integrating spatial and physical planning with regional economic and social development which have traditionally been separated by different legal systems and institutions in Ukraine

• Integrating existing Ukrainian sector-specific plans at local, regional, and national levels (land use, environmental, transport, economic development, housing, etc.) with each other and in turn with proposed reconstruction plans (land decontamination, housing, transport).

This guideline offers recommendations for integration of environmental sustainability planning within individual sectors – in particular, the water and waste guidelines provide good examples – but also includes a section on “planning for the regenerative city” which provides a holistic, cross-cutting approach as a long-term alternative to rebuilding Ukraine.

What we’re not trying to do in this guideline is to be the definitive, exhaustive source on UN SDGs in UA, environmental impacts of the war, UA planning laws, the EU way of doing things, development aid planning projects – there are better sources of each of these topics. What we are trying to do is provide step-by-step methodologies. What methods are most appropriate to apply for any given sector of concern, e.g. transportation, or among multiple concerns, e.g. transportation, energy, and environment, will, of course, vary with the place and the duration and extent of its war impacts.

URAG’s methodology has been driven by the reality of our position as an unpaid group of volunteer professionals organizationally limited to working from our home base in the US. This has led to a focus on producing guidelines and training programs to build the capacity of planners in government, academia, and private practice.

Asking volunteers to commit themselves to long-term and high-quality input requires allowing them to focus on the topics that they know best and are most motivated to spend their valuable personal time on. The guidelines topics and organization reflect this reality to some extent.

In developing the guidelines, we have leveraged ourselves by partnering, respecting, and working closely with the Ukrainian people, government, and private firms. More significantly, several members of the URAG team that prepared this guideline are students or former students from Ukraine, now based in the US or Europe, many of whose studies were supported by US State Department educational grant programs, i.e. the Fulbright, Humphrey, and Muskie programs. We used the USD 4,000 grant from the APA Divisions Council Research Grant to pay for the services of two of these Ukrainians, one in the US and one in Ukraine, to conduct research and prepare sections on specific topics.

In addition to our Ukrainian staff, our team included members of APA’s International Division, Sustainable Communities Division, Hazard Mitigation, and Disaster Recovery Division, as well as URAG members representing other organizations, including inputs from the Society of American Military Engineers (SAME) and Ro3kvit Urban Coalition for Ukraine. All co-authors and reviewers are listed for each main document section and appendix module.

For very few subtopics in this guideline, where our team had less time to conduct primary research, we used AI for a first pass of literature search, almost exclusively to identify and provide brief summaries of relevant documents that we then carefully reviewed and validated. In any event, the URAG website will solicit review and comment on this guideline, with particular interest in the Ukraine context relevant to each section of the guideline.

These environmental sustainability guidelines are presented in a website and module format in four parts:

• Part 1:  Main Document

• Part 2:  Regenesis – The Overarching Holistic Approach

• Part 3:  Environmental Sustainability Planning Modules

• Part 4: Future Social and Economic Planning Modules

These sections are summarized below. A separate tab provides access to detailed outlines of each module.

PART 1: MAIN DOCUMENT

Environmental Baseline of Ukraine

Pre-War Environmental Conditions as indicated by Ukraine’s progress in meeting the challenge of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), followed by an outline of the environmental impacts of the war

Laws and Institutions Relevant to Urban and Territorial Planning

Ukrainian planning laws, regulations, and institutions, including legislative framework and spatial planning system, as well as EU Directives on environment and energy

International Aid to Ukraine for Urban and Territorial Planning

Focusing on German, US, and UNDP development assistance programs supporting urban and territorial planning in Ukraine

UN-Habitat International Guidelines on Urban and Territorial Planning

Overview and analysis of the Guidelines’ recommendations, focusing on those relating to environmental Sustainability, and cross-walking those recommendations against the SDGs, the environmental impacts of the war, and the EU Directives

PART 2: PLANNING FOR THE REGENERATIVE CITY – THE OVERARCHING HOLISTIC APPROACH

NOTE: Part 2 is separate from this main document, but can also be found on the URAG website at URAG.com.

Author: Scott T. Edmondson, AICP, ISSP-SA, Sr. Planner-Analyst & Growth Policy Analysis Modernization Lead, Data Analytics Group, Administration, San Francisco Planning, and Principal/Founder of Sustainability 2030 (www.sustainability2030.com)

Contributor: Charles M. Kelley Jr., AIA, NCARB, LEED AP BD+C, Principal, Green Urban Design

Best Approach Practice No. 1:  Change the approach to sustainability planning quickly enough for success using performance imperatives, continuous innovation, a strategic approach, and whole systems engineering.

Best Approach Practice No. 2:  Use Regenerative Urbanism to create a regenerative built environment of the abundant regenerative sustainability economy and regenerative city (and region).

Best Approach Practice No. 3:  “Harden” socio-economic systems for the period of climate system recalibration if mitigation is successful or not.

Best Approach Practice No. 4:  Restore damaged nature in the context of new nature arising from accelerating climate change and associated ecosystem changes.

Best Approach Practice No. 5:  Work across the system, as necessary.

Best Approach Practice No. 6:  Plan and design for the new context of accelerating climate change, unsustainability, and new nature.

Best Approach Practice No. 7:  Harness the market and legal system to reverse climate change and unsustainability and accelerate the transition to an abundant regenerative ecological economy.

Best Approach Practice No. 8:  Continuously innovate to needed systems performance.

Best Approach Practice No. 9:  Design new governance patterns and forms that are required to generate the decision-making intelligence needed for regenerative systems sustainability success.

Best Approach Practice No. 10:  Use full-cost decisions, funding, and 10-year budgeting to fix the broken system of public finance.

PART 3:  ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY PLANNING MODULES

NOTE: Part 3 is separate from this main document, but can also be found on the URAG website at URAG.com.

Aligning with UN-Habitat IGUTP Section B3. Urban and Territorial Planning and the Environment, 14. Local Authorities

MODULE 1: PLANNING SYSTEMS FOR HAZARD MITIGATION AND DISASTER AND INFRASTRUCTURE RESILIENCE

Author: Ipshita Karmakar, Masters of City Planning, MIT,  Fulbright Scholar, Member of International Division of American Planning Association, and Consultant to World Bank

Contributors:

• Jim Schwab, FAICP, former Director of the Hazards Center of the American Planning Association, former Chair of the APA Hazard Mitigation and Disaster Recovery Division, and Adjunct Lecturer in the University of Iowa School of Planning and Public Affairs

• Sandra Pinel, PhD, AICP, Regional Affairs Specialist, Security Sector Assistance, Office of International Affairs, Department of Homeland Security

(a) Create climate mitigative, adaptative, and resilient settlement patterns. Formulate urban and territorial plans as a mitigation and adaptation framework in response to climate change and for increasing the resilience of human settlements, especially those located in vulnerable and informal areas.

(c) Relocate high-risk built environments to low-risk areas. Locate essential urban services, infrastructure, and residential developments in low-risk areas and resettle, in a participatory and voluntary way people living in high-risk areas to more appropriate locations.

(d) Defensively harden key urban functions to increasingly extreme events and climate conditions. Assess the implications and potential impacts of climate change and prepare for the continuity of key urban functions during disasters or crises.

(i) Integrate sectoral utility services when synergies create higher value. Collaborate with service providers, land developers, and landowners to closely link spatial and sectoral planning and to promote intersectoral coordination and synergies between services such as water, sewerage and sanitation, energy and electricity, telecommunications, and transport.

MODULE 2:  INNOVATIVE STRATEGIES FOR EQUITABLE AND LOW-CARBON URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND GREEN BUILDINGS

Author: Vatsal Bhatt, Ph.D., Member,  International Division of American Planning Association, and Vice President for Cities and Communities of US Green Building Council

(b) Develop energy-efficient urban forms using renewable energy. Set up and adopt efficient low-carbon urban forms and development patterns as a contribution to improving energy efficiency and increasing the access and use of renewable energy sources.

(g) Preserve and use existing built assets to strengthen social identity when revitalizing areas of decline. Identify and recognize the value of declining built environments with a view to revitalizing them, taking advantage of their assets, and strengthening their social identity.

(j) Promote green buildings. Promote the construction, retrofitting, and management of “green buildings” through incentives and disincentives, and monitor their economic impacts.

MODULE 3: CREATE HIGH-PERFORMING PUBLIC AND GREEN SPACES

Author: Scott T. Edmondson, AICP, ISSP-SA, Sr. Planner-Analyst & Growth Policy Analysis Modernization Lead, Data Analytics Group, Administration, San Francisco Planning, and Principal/Founder of Sustainability 2030 (www.sustainability2030.com)

(f) Create high-performing public and green spaces. Apply urban and territorial planning to identify, revitalize, protect, and produce high‑quality public and green spaces with special ecological or heritage value, integrating the contributions of the private sector and civil society organizations into such undertakings, and to avoid the creation of heat islands, protect the local biodiversity and support the creation of multifunctional public green spaces, such as wetlands for rainwater retention and absorption.

MODULE 4: PLANNING AND MANAGING RIVER BASINS AND WATER RESOURCES

Author: Timothy D. Van Epp, FAICP, PP, Team Leader, Ukraine Rebuilding Action Group of the International Division of the American Planning Association, and Managing Director of Eurasia Environmental Associates, LLC

Reviewer: Bill Cesanek, AICP, Chair of the Water  & Planning Network of the American Planning Association, and Senior Infrastructure Planner of CDM Smith

(e) Provide water and sanitation services and reduce air pollution. Use urban and territorial planning as an action plan to improve access to water and sanitation services and reduce air pollution and the amount of water wasted.

MODULE 5: PLANNING TO CLEAN UP CONTAMINATION AND MANAGE WASTES

Author: Timothy D. Van Epp, FAICP, PP, Team Leader, Ukraine Rebuilding Action Group of the International Division of the American Planning Association, and Managing Director of Eurasia Environmental Associates, LLC

(h) Include waste management in land use planning. Integrate solid and liquid waste management and recycling into spatial planning, including the location of landfills and recycling sites.

MODULE 6: TRANSPORTATION PLANNING BEST PRACTICES

Author: Jing Zhang, AICP, LEED-ND, Chair of the International Division of American Planning Association, and Transportation Planner for Morgantown Monongalia Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) in West Virginia.

(k) Design, manage, and maintain shaded streets for non-motorized and public transportation modes and carbon sequestration. Design streets that encourage walking, the use of non-motorized transport and public transport, and plant trees for shade and carbon dioxide absorption.

PART 4: FUTURE ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC MODULES

Part 4, under construction, is separate from the main document, but will also be found on the URAG website at URAG.com.

Aligning with UN-Habitat IGUTP Section B1. Urban and Territorial Planning and Social Development, 8. Local Authorities; B2. Urban and Territorial Planning for Economic Development; and B3. Urban and Territorial Planning and the Environment, 14. Local Authorities

PLANNING FOR IMPROVED AIR QUALITY

(e) Provide water and sanitation services and reduce air pollution. Use urban and territorial planning as an action plan to improve access to water and sanitation services and reduce air pollution and the amount of water wasted.

PLANNING FOR RESILIENT INFRASTRUCTURE

(i) Integrate sectoral utility services when synergies create higher value. Collaborate with service providers, land developers, and landowners to closely link spatial and sectoral planning and to promote intersectoral coordination and synergies between services such as water, sewerage and sanitation, energy and electricity, telecommunications, and transport.

CULTURAL HERITAGE PRESERVATION PLANNING

(k) Encourage cultural activities, both indoor (museums, theatres, cinemas, concert halls, etc.) and outdoor (street arts, musical parades, etc.), recognizing that the development of urban cultures and respect for social diversity are part of social development and have important spatial dimensions

(l) Protect and value the cultural heritage, including traditional settlements and historic districts, religious and historical monuments and sites, archaeological areas, and cultural

landscapes.

PLANNING FOR PEOPLES DISADVANTAGED BY THE WAR (PTSD, AMPUTATION, HEARING LOSS, NEUROLOGICAL DISORDERS)

(h) Improve urban safety, particularly for women, youth, the elderly, the disabled, and any vulnerable groups, as a factor of security, justice, and social cohesion