Planning as the Technology of Politics – To be used or misused. The case of Albania

Albania as a meta-geographical concept triggers a very complex thinking that flutters from its locational geography, history, memories and culture’s [trans]formation, to the dynamic phenomena, behaviors and processes that were and are being “cooked” there. Albania, as a concept, is implicit also in the urban realm. In the last 25 years planners are striving to understand the origins and patterns of space and land use transformations, including people’s reasons for building spontaneously, and inconsiderately towards natural resources, while often breaking the law. But, could it be that in this spontaneous turmoil of territorial transformations, usually induced by people and typically labeled as negative, there is also something positive, that institutions and planners can use as a local ingredient for guiding sustainable development? As a whole, this spontaneity, yet so different from the ruling Cartesian order of the western world as well as from the spiritual “order” of the eastern cultures has become a unique food for thought for designers (architects and planners). The latter are striving to read and understand the phenomenon, and learn about this manipulative environment, full of experiences that are still undisclosed from a scientific and social point of view. Having been subjected to a dictatorship, Albanian cities and people have been oppressed. This has shut opportunities for the know-how and has imprisoned the spirit of creativity in [city][space]making. Nevertheless, the regime could not lead to the destruction of the need, sensation, emotions and energy and that is why when oppression had vanished, the feeling of freedom was so glorious that people had to make use of it. Thus, collective oppression led to collective folly and now we need collective intelligence and creativity to make livable cities and space. The effects of the demise of communism on the territory and the urban fabric have been enormous. One of the very first reforms undertaken by the government was that of land privatization, which resulted in the fragmentation of land into around 2 000 000 properties1. This fragmentation was, among others, very negative to the agricultural productivity – currently the average size of the agricultural farm is 2 ha, which is very low for the efficiency of the sector2.