Socioeconomic regional approaches to Green infrastructure

For our theory class, we read a text, noted below, that I believe is applicable to community planning, Specifically the policymaking side to how we sustainably plan our land for community. The author talks about the differences in the way that water management practices are both executed and understood by American planners vs European planners. It should be noted that there seems to be a clearer perspective that America has gleaned about these practices that narrows the scope of what can and should be done based on these revelations. You can also look at a similar issue when comparing how America and Europe approach brownfield planning. Europe has a wider scope of solutions and less strict policy about what can be done resulting in a wider range of more inventive solutions. America's solutions have been working better in the last few decades, but I think that the question still wants to be addressed about whether a narrower scope and more definition of a problem results in better or worse solution outcomes. I believe that shortcomings of the "American narrow view" of this management become more clearly an issue when looking at lower-income areas that simply cannot afford to implement the strategies that make sense in more affluent areas of the city. If we are planning for water management in a rigorously defined manner that does not account for solutions feasible in all socioeconomic sectors, then I believe that this is the main pitfall of this sort of rigorous definition. Maybe the solution would be to zone areas that can afford the current definition of green infrastructure for water management that should follow that current definition, and lower the standard of rigor to follow that definition in lower-income areas to allow for some experimentation and innovation in the lower-cost green infrastructure department.

 How can we expect the members of communities across America to begin to adopt planning ideologies that benefit the beautification of their areas while working towards a more sustainable approach to water management if we have this "ivory tower" approach to an expensive and unattainable existing green infrastructure strategies? It is not directly related, but looking at the scrutinization of sustainable building innovations proposed by "garbage warrior" Michael Reynolds shows how the current American system condemns alternative thinking about the future of sustainable thinking and planning. I believe that we need to start lowering judiciary standards about what can be done in the way of green planning in communities in order to begin to breed more innovation and feasibility in the sector.

Referenced  and links for consideration- 

Mell, Ian, Global green infrastructure: lessons for successful policy-making, investments and management

Garbage Warrior Documentary

https://earthship.com/garbage-warrior/