**1. Introduction**

Development trends point to the fact that the global population is urbanising [1] and that more than 50% of the world's population is now urban [1, 2]. Whilst this is the global reality, in Africa, more people are leaving in the rural areas [3]. These people are exposed to several challenges, most of which are a result of the urbanisation process. For example, they compete for food, land, water and other resources [4]. The rural areas are also the recipients of waste that is produced by the cities. Climate change, on the other hand, is making farming which is the major rural economic activity, difficult as yields are continuously reducing owing to extreme weather patterns. This exposes the rural communities to high levels of poverty and distress and also to exploit the natural resources in an unsustainable manner. In light of the aforementioned issues, and the need to meet global goals of eradicating hunger and poverty, achieve food security, make human settlements safe, inclusive, resilient and sustainable [5], there is need to rethink approaches to rural

development; a paradigm shift from the old paradigm guided by modernisation to a new paradigm that is driven by the quality of life and sustainability [6]. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) [7] recommends that such an approach requires the integration of the various actors and stakeholders who are involved in the development of rural places; planning is one tool that can integrate multiple actors and stakeholders towards the attainment of sustainable rural development [8].

Several studies have been conducted on rural development and planning in Zimbabwe [9–11]. These studies are critical in the literature of rural planning and development. However, they are silent on the relationship between sustainable rural development and planning. For example, PlanAfric [11] is more evaluative on the rural development approaches in Zimbabwe. Davies [9] analyses the trends in rural planning pre and post-independence in Zimbabwe whilst Hahlani [10] looks into factors that hinder integrated rural planning. This chapter emphasises the instrumentality of planning in sustainable rural development and argues that sustainability in rural planning is a product of deliberate planning. It further argues that without planning, rural areas will not be able to cope with the prevalent issues of climate change particularly considering that most rural areas in Zimbabwe are agro-based. The chapter has eight sections. Following this section is the background and overview. This is followed by a section on the theories that inform the study, literature review and methodology. The results are presented in the proceeding section from which a discussion and recommendations section follows. The last section is the conclusion of the chapter.

### **2. Background and overview**

Rural development has been at the centre of development for most countries across the globe. However, the assumed model of developing rural places was inspired or guided by the modernist philosophy whose focus was mainly hinged on, among other processes, capital investment, the application of science to production and urbanisation [6]. This approach was also materialistic in its conceptualisation of development; hence, little consideration was paid to qualitative aspects of development such as improved quality of life and access to basic services. The modernist approach to the development of rural places resulted in the bias towards urban areas as it was generally assumed that urbanisation of rural places was an indicator of development, thus, as put forward by Rao [12], more attention was put to industrialisation than the agricultural sector, hence the rural suffered. Development was also top-down in approach [6]. The resultant effect of this approach to development was increased poverty in rural places [13, 14], unsustainable exploitation of raw materials from the rural areas as inputs for industrialisation in urban areas, environmental degradation and the consequential effects such as climate change.

After observing that the modernist approach to development was associated with several problems, there was a paradigm shift to a sustainable centred approach to development. According to [6], this approach paid more attention to agricultural development and a participatory approach to development programmes. Following a series of global goals for sustainable development, for example, the World Commission on Environment and Development [15], the Millennium Development Goals and the Sustainable Development Goals, the need to use resources within the regenerative capacity of the environment was put at the centre of developmental goals. In addition, the need to combat the effects of climate change and eradicate poverty and hunger has made it necessary to revisit the approaches to development

#### *No Sustainability without Planning for It: Scope and Dimensions for Sustainable Rural Planning… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.101811*

planning, rural areas included. The UNDP [7] has observed and placed planning at the centre of sustainable development because of its coordinative and integrative capacity.

In Zimbabwe, rural development has been the centre of development policy since independence. According to Davies [9], it has been politically motivated; the aim being that of redressing disparities caused by colonial policies. Several policies, for example, the Growth with Equity and the Growth Point Policy, were put in place to ensure that rural development was realised. The model to rural development, however, reflected the modernist approach as key among the policies, was the development of growth points that were to lead the industrialisation of rural places. However, the effectiveness of the policies in addressing the problems of disparities is debatable as little progress has been made [16]. Like most rural places across the globe, Zimbabwe's rural places are experiencing a myriad of challenges that range from social, economic and environmental [11, 17]. Food insecurity, poverty, income inequalities and the lack of employment opportunities reinforce each other in a vicious cycle by eroding human capital and decreasing labour productivity, thereby perpetuating poverty and social inequalities [18].

Despite having multiple interested stakeholders in rural planning, the approaches that have been adopted to guide and encourage rural development are disintegrated and are characterised by gaps and overlaps [10, 11], necessitating an approach that integrates the various activities and programmes of the multiple actors in rural planning and development [6, 16]. Planning is important in achieving sustainability as it helps to cover the social, political, environmental and physical issues that affect the prosperity of rural areas [7, 19]. Against this background, the chapter examines the instrumentality of planning in enhancing sustainability in rural development and planning in Zimbabwe and shows that without planning for it, sustainability in rural development will not be achieved.

### **3. Theories informing the study**

This study is informed by the sustainability theory and the style/models of planning theory. These models seek to highlight how planning is done and its procedures. This section also seeks to highlight the multi-dimensions of planning as well as the importance of planning in different scenarios and in promoting sustainable development.

### **4. Sustainability theory**

The theory of sustainability is derived from the concept of sustainable development which is premised on the notion of maintaining or improving the state and availability of resources or materials over the long term [20]. It entails meeting fundamental human needs while conserving the life support systems of the earth. This implies that chasing the sustainability goal should aim at maintaining, improving or sustaining conditions that are beneficial to people, their communities and the environment [21]. Sustainability is preoccupied with the long-term treatment of the biophysical environment and the resources therein, social systems and people in ways that are consistent with human wellbeing and the stability of a dynamic system [20]. However, Bossel [22] outlined that the sustainability of human society is now at stake because the change of the environment is so fast that there is inadequate time for adaptive response. This overwhelming rate of change affects the ability of the ecological system to respond,

consequently making the system to lose viability and sustainability. In this study, the theory of sustainability plays a critical role in justifying the need to plan for sustainability in rural areas. The reasons, according to the sustainability, include the desire to improve maintain and improve the social, economic and environmental conditions of the rural areas within the development process of rural places. The rational is that, by planning for sustainable rural development, both rural and urban areas become sustainable because of the rural-urban relations [1, 2, 14].

### **5. Literature review**

This section reviews the literature on the key aspects of rural sustainability, planning for rural sustainability, the actors in the sustainability of rural places as well as their role. It also looks at the factors that enhance or hinder planning for sustainability in rural areas. Rural sustainability is defined by Bryant and Granjon [23] as the development strategies that maintain and produce healthy rural communities. Such communities will have compatible economic, political, socio-cultural and environmental values that respond to any requirements in these dimensions in the long run. Rural sustainability is dynamic as information, conceptualisation and values about the different dimensions of sustainability change with time [23, 24]. As such Bryant and Granjon [23] recommend that in planning for sustainability there is a need to take account of the fact that what is appropriate at a given place in time maybe inappropriate in the same place as changes occur. For example, the nature and extent of ruralurban links have changed [25, 26]. This significantly affects the approaches to rural sustainability planning. Similarly, what is appropriate in a place at a given time may not be appropriate in another place at the same time. Rural places that are closer to cities have a different set of needs compared to rural places that are further away from cities.

Sustainability, whether urban or rural, maintains the same characteristics, goals and dimensions. Bryant and Granjon [23] highlight those previous conceptions about sustainability in rural places focused on the ecological imperative, giving less attention to socio-cultural, economic and political issues. However, with a continued evolution in the concept of sustainability, and changes in social and economic aspects in both rural and urban places, sustainability is now fundamentally the same, with differences only seen in the environments, population density and activities between the rural and urban places. This entails that certain characteristics of the rural places influence sustainability planning in rural contexts. Some of these characteristics are linked to the biophysical environment which is considerably important for rural communities who depend largely on its resources for livelihood activities. Thus, for most people in the rural places who are mostly small holder peasant farmers, availability of arable land, fertile soils, sufficient water, good climatic conditions and the presence of flora and fauna are important. Land availability and favourable climatic conditions for example, are significant biophysical factors for successful farming [27].

The natural resources that are entrenched in the biophysical environment are an important source of many livelihoods in rural places. Bryant and Granjon [23] observe that besides farming-related activities, there are other livelihood activities such as sand mining and gravel extraction as well as forestry and woodland management. Rural communities are also characterised by small communities that can be concentrated into small villages, dispersed or both. However, rural places that are close to cities and towns have certain characteristics that differentiate them from those that are distant from the cities. Resources in such places are critical for the well-being of the population in cities as well.

#### *No Sustainability without Planning for It: Scope and Dimensions for Sustainable Rural Planning… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.101811*

Planning for sustainability should therefore take account of the characteristics of the rural places and the relationship between the rural places and the urban areas since these are interlinked systems [8, 23, 25]. However, focusing on rural development and sustainability tend to treat the rural places as homogeneous places [28] and as independent from urban areas [29]. A comprehensive approach is required for the realisation of sustainability as both a process and a goal, hence, the United Nations, [30] and Marsden [24] argue that planning is key if sustainability is to be attained.

Scholarly and policy works have identified several factors that affect planning for sustainability [9, 20, 23, 24, 31]. One of the factors that impact on planning for sustainability and its subsequent realisation is state policy [31]. His argument is informed by Lipton's [14] urban bias theory which, among other issues, argue that states act to protect the interests of cities and to discriminate against the interests of the rural places. In this instance, financial, human and productive resources are deliberately moved out of the rural places to benefit urban dwellers. Douglass [32] argues that, on top of providing food and natural resources to cities, rural places have pronounced poverty and hunger with relatively low income; they continue to experience out-migration and environmental degradation. State policies in this instance are discriminatory and lead to the extraction of resources from the rural places. This incentivise urban areas resulting in a reduced supply of labour in rural places. This in turn, endangers the sustainability of rural places [31, 32].

The continued separation of rural and urban places in terms of policy and planning is another factor that affects rural sustainability planning [33]. This continued separation of focus between the rural and urban places in the face of changing rural and urban relations [26] has a negative influence in the planning and realisation of sustainability [23]. To address the problems associated with the separation, [33] recommends that plans that transcend rural and urban places whilst protecting the natural and urban activities are required.

Planning for sustainability involves multiple actors which range from the public institutions, private organisations, civic organisations, non-governmental organisations and the local people who participate in the planning processes and activities. The public sector usually provides a framework for sustainable development through the various arms and tiers of the government. The private sector is usually involved in the implementation of sustainability programmes through investments while the civic organisations and nongovernmental organisations play a variety of activities that ranges from advocacy to supporting and mobilising the local people. With such a range of actors, [33] recommends that there is a need for strong institutional frameworks that coordinates the plans and activities of the various actors that are involved in the planning of sustainability. Failure to coordinate the plans and activities of the various actors and the rural and urban places results in chaotic and complex spaces that make sustainability difficult to plan for and achieve [34]. Thus, without planning for it, sustainability will remain a pipe line dream.

Several approaches have been put in place to address sustainability challenges across the globe. At the global level, ratifications have been put in place and international goals set to ensure that sustainability. The Brundtland Commission of 1987 marks the dedicated commitment towards sustainable development. The Millennium Development Goals and the current Sustainable Development Goals are some of the international efforts towards sustainability. These frameworks have been adopted by different countries in a localised manner to plan for sustainability. The adopted approaches and strategies are not uniform across the globe [35]. The approaches are linked to the main challenges to sustainable development that places face, hence, priority also differs among and between nations. The approaches include strategies earmarked to deal with poverty, environmental

deterioration, marginalisation, water and sanitation, safe, resilient and sustainable human settlements as well as climate change issues among others [5, 28, 30, 35]. To address the challenges, some countries have developed sector-specific programmes and projects. States have developed policies that aim to trigger planning towards sustainability in different contexts, for example, climate change policies, housing policies and economic blueprints. However, scholarly work shows that most of these approaches are planned and implemented in silos, making planning for sustainability insufficient [11, 29, 34].

In summary, scholarly work shows that the sustainability of rural places is key to the attainment of sustainability in both rural and urban areas. There is also clear evidence from scholarly work that the approaches to sustainability planning generally lack comprehensiveness, making the efforts disintegrated and less effective. The question that remains to be answered is, what should planning-for-sustainability, particularly in the rural context, take?.
