According to Doick, Sellers, Castan-Broto, and Silverthorne (Doick et al., 2009), numerous European governments place strong emphasis on integrated land use policies including the re-establishment of public open green spaces through brownfield regeneration, in their research on understanding success in the con- text of brownfield greening projects, they highlight that the UK government considers the regeneration of brown- field sites as a prime tool for delivering regional economic regeneration in addition to neighbourhood renewal as well as international biodiversity commitments. However, they stress that, the lack of monitoring and evaluation

—combined with insufficient supporting revenue funds— results in failure to highlight site issues, challenges in local emphasis and ultimately lack of success with respect to project aims and site sustainability.

Atkinson, Doick, Burningham, and France (Atkinson et al., 2014) support this argument and add that brownfield regeneration to green spaces in particular, has been used to help reverse social and environmental decline in Europe and North America with typical benefits including increased flood retention capacity, temperature regulation, providing habitat for wildlife, community building, encouraging local engagement and providing space for play and recreation. According to them, setting regeneration objectives is important to maximise the benefit from brownfield regeneration at any given location and identifying the objectives of regeneration is crucial to lever the funding required to pump-prime activity.

Kristiánová, Gécová, and Putrová (Kristiánová et al., 2016) also explore the transformation of another specific brownfield typology, old industrial sites, into parks. In their research they argue that the regenerating of former industrial sites into green spaces has numerous benefits including the provision of space for play and recreation in urban environments; enhancing the scenic beauty and neighbourhood appeal; improving the health of urban environments; raising property values; the provision of ecosystem services; habitats for wildlife, in addition to; fostering adaptation for climate change.

Moreover, in their research on renewable energy potential on brownfield sites in the city of Michigan, Adelaja, Shaw, Beyea, and McKeown (Adelaja et al., 2010) for example suggest that with the in- creasing demand to replacing conventional energy sources with renewable energy, brownfields make potential landscapes to intensify renewable energy generation especially that they have relaxed constrains such as own- ership, land use or zoning regulations. Hartmann, Török, Börcsök, and Groma (Hartmann et al., 2014) support the brownfield regeneration for energy-generating purposes argument by presenting a multi-objective examination and evaluation method which provides a basis for the business analysis of an energy-purpose brownfield regeneration project.

Understood as the “ . . . intended temporary or final re-use of brownfield sites which are not based on built con- structions or infrastructure (‘hard’ re-use)” (Unknown Author, 2016), Bardos et al. describe that the ‘soft re-use’ of brownfield sites including the creation of public open and green spaces has not been easy to demonstrate in strictly financial terms. Accordingly, in their research on optimising value from the soft re-use of brownfield sites, through suggesting a ‘Brownfield opportunity matrix’, they propose a value based approach to identify and optimize services provided by the restoration of brownfields to soft re-uses, on a permanent or temporary basis, and explore the links between soft re-use of brownfield sites and sustainability.

This notion of temporary use has been increasingly linked to brownfield regeneration and where weak planning was often blamed for failed regeneration attempts, successful examples of tactical non-planned temporary interventions have introduced effective models to approaching brownfield sites and thus became an important area to be considered in brownfield regeneration attempts. In their research on creative interventions in dynamic cities, Rall and Haase (Rall & Haase, 2011) for example explore a variety of temporary use projects in recently demolished brownfields using a triangular integrated evaluation method combining indicator-generated and questionnaires with experts interviews. Their research results indicate that these uses have been more popular and have greater usage rate, however, they conclude that public acceptance for such interventions can be strengthened with more seating, punitive measures for property owners and increased communication about the method and it’s potential as a planning tool.

The debate on brownfield categorisation and typifying has also been little researched. Considering the ambiguity of the definition that includes a variety of potential interpretations which is often considered as a major setback to understanding the variety of brownfield sites types and ultimately contributing to hindering their regeneration to begin with.

Researchers such as Loures and Vaz (Loures & Vaz, 2018) have also shed light on this dilemma. In their research on exploring expert perceptions towards brownfield redevelopment benefits according to their typology, they argue that understanding brownfield characteristics and different typologies, between abandoned land, contaminated land, derelict land, underulitised land or vacant land, has a strong emphasis on achieving consistency that enables the creation of new methodologies and frameworks to deal with the redevelopment of these spaces.

Identifying the specific brownfield typologies they conclude has a great impact on realizing each site’s potentials and result in more benefits on the different dimensions including the economy, community, ecology and health, moreover, they conclude that knowing the exact brownfield typology and the exact dimensions each has positive impacts on may aid designers, planners and decision makers make better informed designs and prioritising.

In addition to categorising and typifying, prioritising brownfield sites has also been problematic and literature discussions highlight its importance to the regeneration process. In fact, Limasset et al. (Limasset et al., 2018) identify five Points that need to be taken into consideration when designing tools for regional brownfields prioritisation including: (1) assessing end-user needs and orientation discussions; (2) availability and quality of the data needed for the brownfield prioritization tool; (3) communication and stakeholder engagement; (4) drivers of regeneration success, and; (5) financing and application costs.

Similarly, Bartke et al. (Bartke et al., 2016) argue that prioritising brownfields for redevelopment in real estate portfolios can contribute to more sustainable regeneration and land management and that numerous factors must be considered for prioritising actions, especially when adhering to principles. Their research suggests several Multiple Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA) based on lessons learned from literature on success factor, sustainability as- sessment and MCDA approaches, in addition to the web-based Tailored Improvement of Brownfield Regeneration in Europe (TIMBRE), Timbre Brownfield Prioritisation Tool (TBPT) which they argue facilitates the assessment and prioritisation of a portfolio of sites on the basis of the probability of success and sustainable regeneration or according to individually specific objectives.

Lastly, and prior to identifying brownfield regeneration measures and tools, factors including stakeholders, perceptions, concerns, attitudes and information with regards to brownfield regeneration must also be identified. Rizzo et al. (Rizzo et al., 2015) present a participatory methodology applied in order to develop a system to support the categorisation of the needed information and to support the understanding of which typology of information is the most relevant for the specific categories of stakeholders also in relation with their concerns. The engagement process they present consist of five phases; (1) planning and preparatory work; (2) identification of stakeholder categories; (3) engagement activities (e.g focus groups and workshops); (4) submission of a questionnaire, and;

(5) provision of feedback to the involved stakeholders.The results of their research they argue created a knowledge base for the future development of tailored and customised approaches and tools for stakeholders working in the brownfield regeneration field.

In 2002, Thomas (Thomas, 2002) developed a decision support tool augmented by Geographic Information System (GIS) that provide access to state, regional, and local geospatial databases; several informational and visualisation tools, and; assumptions useful in providing a better understanding of issues, options and alternatives in redevel- oping brownfields for decision makers and policy analysts at all levels of governments to establish urban land use policy and development guidelines that may be applicable to related land use issues in a variety of urban and urbanising settings.

Similarly, one decade later, Chrysochoou et al. (Chrysochoou et al., 2012) developed an indexing scheme to screen large numbers of brownfield sites in wide areas, including municipalities, counties, states, or other types of districts, in order to develop initial planning strategies for fund allocation and redevelopment. Their scheme entailed three dimensions; socioeconomic, smart growth and environmental, each has an index constructed on the basis of location-specific variables irrespective of the target end use. The socioeconomic variables included; population density; property values, and; unemployment. Collectively, these variables demonstrate the potential contribution of brownfield redevelopment on economic growth. The second dimension, smart growth, or liveability index as Chrysochoou et al. describe, was developed on the basis of the U.S Green Building Council Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design- Neighbourhood Development (LEED- ND) evaluation scheme, but isolating location-specific features. The third and last dimension, environmental index, incorporated variables that represent the potential sources of contamination (or past use); pathway to exposure (such as soil permeability), and receptors (including zoning, proximity to water bodies, parks, critical habitats, open spaces, wetlands and floodplains).

Scha¨dler, Morio, Bartke, Rohr-Zaenker, and Finkel (Schädler et al., 2011) also introduced an integrated assessment model which evaluates redevelopment options of large contaminated brownfields aiming to support efficient and sustainable regeneration communication between stakeholders. Their assessment tool integrates three pinnacles of brownfield regeneration including: (1) subsurface remediation and site preparation costs; (2) market-oriented economic appraisal, and; (3) the expected contribution of planned future land use to sustainable community and regional development. Their assessment focused on early stages of brown- field redevelopment which, they argue, is characterised with limited data availability and by flexibility in land use planning and development scope. At this stage, their research found that, revealing the consequences of adjustments and alterations in planning options can foster efficiency in communication between involved stakeholders and thereby facilitate the brownfield regeneration process. Their research results indicated that the integrated assessment provides help in the identification of land use options beneficial in both sustainable and economic development.

On the complexity of decision support systems for brownfield sites regeneration, Stezar, Pizzol, Critto, Ozunu, and Marcomini (Stezar et al., 2013) presented a comparison between two Decision Support Systems (DSS)s; the Spatial Analysis and Decision Assistance (SADA), and the Decision Support System for the Re-qualification of Contaminated Sites (DESYRE) with the main objective of showing the benefits of using DSSs to introduce and process data and then to disseminate results to different stakeholders involved in the decision-making process.

Lastly, with regards to brownfield regeneration meeting sustainability demands, in their research on defining the sustainability objectives of brownfield regeneration to green space, Doick, Pediaditi, Moffat, and Hutchings (Doick et al., 2009) identified the objectives that brownfield regeneration projects must meet in order to be considered sustainable. In addition to the proposed standard set of sustainability objectives, their research suggested designing sites to achieve specific functionality using participatory, context specific methods. The ‘pillars of sustainability’, as Doick et al. describe, include economic, social and environmental objectives. The economic objectives include: (1) being economically efficient and self-supporting; (2) providing employment opportunities; (3) promoting local and regional economic regeneration; (4) promoting attractive and functional landscapes, and; (5) promoting social affluence and community prosperity. The social objectives include: (1) encouraging social inclusion and cohesion; (2) promoting health and well-being; (3) providing good accessibility to green space and local facilities; (4) facilitating education, and; (5) reducing crime and anti-social behaviour. Lastly, the environmental objectives include: (1) minimising the use of un-recycled resources; (2) promoting land, water, soil and air quality; (3) protecting biodiversity and the natural environment, (4) conserving natural and cultural heritage, and (5) combating the impacts of climate change.

The topic of brownfield regeneration is increasingly becoming popular worldwide. In China for example, Chen, Hipel, Kilgour, and Zhu (Chen et al., 2009) present a strategic classification support system for brownfield redevelopment based on two characteristics; brownfield effectiveness and brownfield future needs, the resulting classification, they argue, is of valuable aid to cities and governments as they plan and budget their brownfield regeneration projects.

In another example from the Chinese experience, Zhu, Hipel, Ke, and Chen (Zhu et al., 2015) provide a framework for establishing and optimising an evaluation index system for brownfield redevelopment projects. Their framework involves three steps; (1) the initial design; (2) testing and optimising, and; (3) verification. In the implementation of their project they argue, extensive research has been conducted to ensure the reliability, validity and effectiveness of their evaluation system.

Moreover, and similar to what this paper aims to achieve and from the Chinese experience as well, Cheng, Geertman, Kuffer, and Zhan (Cheng et al., 2011) attempted to identify potential brownfields and establishing priorities for their redevelopment. The identification of potential brownfield sites was done through a four-step system as follows; (1) defining input sites; (2) verifying environmental liability; (3) confirming tax delinquency, and; (4) cross-checking with industrial classification code.

The UK context has also provided extensive research on brownfield regeneration, Burke, Hough, Morgan, Hughes, and Lawrence (Burke, Hough, Morgan, Hughes, & Lawrence, 2015), for example, shed the light on the Leeds area of the West Yorkshire coalfield experience. Their research aims to identifying approaches to inform the redevelopment of brownfield sites by demonstrating how certain types of publicly available data allow a greater understanding of the interaction between human activity and natural superficial and bedrock geology. If successful, they argue that, this approach can help lessen the impact of delays and increased financial costs caused by unforeseen ground conditions.

The Central and Eastern European context was also grounds for testing brownfield re-use. Alexandrescu, Martinát, Klusáček, and Bartke (Alexandrescu et al., 2014) for example look at the role of the entrepreneurial public sector as actors in brownfield regeneration in the Czech Republic, Poland and Romania. Their research focus on the proactive role the public may play to fostering passive change in the cases of brownfield regeneration whether through mobilising networks or leading by example which, they argue, defines an entrepreneurial path to addressing the regeneration of brownfield sites.

The above mentioned Rizzo et al. (Rizzo et al., 2015)’s research on identifying stakeholders, perceptions, concerns, attitudes and information needed for brownfield regeneration also took place in five European countries, Germany, Italy, Romania, Czech and Poland.

In the Czech Republic case in particular, Martinat et al. (Martinat et al., 2018) argued that the re-use plans for current brownfields are market-demand driven or public sector prioritised and do not always meet the requirements of local residents and visitors. By investigating the range of brownfield re-use options as suggested by the locals and visitors their research found that future brownfield uses including culture, sports and children parks are the most popular. Their research highlights gender as a fundamental overlooked factor to deciding future brownfield end uses as where women were inclined towards the previously mentioned uses, men were more interested in industry oriented end uses.

Osman, Franta´l, Klusáček, Kunc, Martina´t (Osman et al., 2015) studied the factors affecting brownfield regeneration in post-societal spaces also in the Czech Republic case. Their research was based on two sets of data, one was the database of existing brownfields provided by the national CzechInvest agency, while the other was the database for successfully regenerated brownfields compiled by the authors themselves. The main types of functional transformation of space were identified and the factors that appeared to be significant determinants of brownfields regeneration were classified as the result.

Also, from the Czech Republic experience, on their research exploring the spatial patterns of urban brownfield regeneration in the case of Brno, Czech Republic, Frantal et al. (Frantál et al., 2015) challenge the assumption that ‘the closer to the city centre, the better’. Their research results highlights that instead, regeneration seemed to be a function of local development potential, local occupier-demand for specific utilities, and planning regulation. Their research found that higher rates of regeneration have been detected in densely built-up areas (including inner city zones and housing estates), while lower rates are registered for areas with low population density and with a greater supply of green spaces (including garden colonies, green spaces, industrial zones and villa residential districts). Frantal et al. end on the note that the spatial location of brownfield sites has a considerable effect on potential investor decisions and brownfield regeneration.

Other examples from the European context include the above mentioned Stezar et al. (Stezar et al., 2013) compara- tive DSSs study which took place in Romania; Rall and Haase’s (Rall & Haase, 2011) temporary use interventions in brownfield sites which took place in Germany; Kristiánová, et al.’s (Kristiánová et al., 2016) research on the potentials for transforming old industrial sites into parks which took place in the city of Bratislava, the capital of Slovakia; Hartmann et al.’s (Hartmann et al., 2014) multi-objective method for energy purpose redevelopment of brownfield sites which took place in Hungary, in addition to; Bartke et al.’s (Bartke et al., 2016) research on TBPT which also took place in Germany, Czech Republic and Romania.

In spite of the aforementioned, on the regional scale, little research has been done on the topic of brownfields. In fact Abd Elrahman (AbdElrahman, 2016) points out that, similar to the case of Jordan, brownfield sites in Egypt undergo independent attempts for development with no identified comprehensive approach. He argues that different state governments identify a variety of redevelopment potentials while others restrict the development to particular uses in order to minimise exposure to leftover contaminants on-site. His research identifies the numerous benefits of brownfield regeneration, yet he ends on the note that the success of such sites redevelopment heavily depends on their successful space utilisation.

The lack of participative approaches in decision-making with regards to urban redevelopment in general and brown- field regeneration in specific was also not a problem exclusive to the study case. In fact, in his research on the public versus expert perspectives towards the benefits and barriers of the reuse of post-industrial sites in urban areas, Loures (Loures, 2015) highlights that post-industrial sites planning and redevelopment are increasingly becoming less the result of design and more the expression of economic and socio-cultural factors, and that designers tend to be primarily focused on aesthetics leaving society’s other main goals to secondary status.

His research findings demonstrate that while the general public considers the biological, chemical and physical contamination impacts, liability and clean up to be the main barriers to post-industrial site development, experts look at the high redevelopment costs and the challenges to obtain financial support. Furthermore, while the general public consider the creation of open green spaces and the creation of jobs their main priority, experts were more considered with reducing urban sprawl and encouraging recreation and connectivity.

Although this paper stresses the importance of having measures and tools for the support of brownfield regeneration, it equally emphasise the importance of having specifically tailored tools for the variety of brownfield types in the study context. Similarly, Bartke and Schwarze (Bartke & Schwarze, 2015) argue that when it comes to brownfield regeneration and achieving sustainability, there is ‘no perfect tool’ that provides a ‘one size fits all’ solution. They highlight that although certain general principles have been proposed for the evaluation of brownfield sustainable development, the practical application for Sustainability Assessment Tools (SAT’s) remains contingent on the actual requirements of tool users, e.g planners or investors, to pick up such instruments in actual decision-making. Moreover, and more relevant to the idea of public participation this paper bids to highlight, they conclude that there are no perfect tools for brownfield regeneration and that in order to be meaningful, the user requirements of decision makers including the general public must take precedence in the design of SAT’s.

Numerous studies have recognised the importance of stakeholder involvement in brownfield regeneration with a special emphasis on public participation including the previously mentioned Rizzo et al. (Rizzo et al., 2015) and Alexandrescu et al. (Alexandrescu et al., 2014). Buchecker, Hunziker, & Kienast (Buchecker et al., 2003) for example explored the social barriers associated to participative landscape development almost fifteen years ago today which they argue are mainly connected with the pressure to adopt collective standards and called for the need to embrace new communication instruments and concluded that fostering a participative landscape development requires a long-term learning process. Similarly, Valencia-Sandoval, Flanders, and Kozak (Valencia-Sandoval et al., 2010) argued that in the lack of relevant resource data at appreciate scales to develop community plans, community engagement through the use of participative landscape development may be an effective mean of informing and impacting local policy related to sustainable community development.

García-Martín, Bieling, Hart, and Plieninger (García-Martín et al., 2016) also argue that in order to achieve a holistic approach to landscape management, the involvement and coordination between different sectors and stakeholders at many levels must be included. Similarly, through looking at the scope, representativeness, timing, comfort and convenience for five public participation in landscape development experiences, Eitar and Vik (Eiter & Vik, 2015), identify ten methods that contribute to increase their evaluation criteria thus underline the importance of combining methods to achieve effective participation within the restricted frameworks of concrete spatial planning processes.

The shifting focus from traditional top-down to bottom-up and integrated approaches through involving participation of local stakeholders has also been brought up in the work of Sevenant and Antrop (Sevenant & Antrop, 2010) as they explored ways to involve ‘the local people’ in an attempt to grasp their aspiration with regards to the landscape features of their surroundings. Lastly, the final example on public participation this paper highlights is Dramstad and Fjellstad (Dramstad & Fjellstad, 2011) research towards bridging the gap between science, policy and people where they reflect on the applications of landscape research and the issue of communicating scientific findings to policy, management, landowners and the general public.

The urban planning of Amman underwent— and is until this day still undergoing— several attempts to regulate the city which were influenced historically by the early Ottoman occupation followed by the British rule and more recently with contemporary global trends. That in addition to population growth and the advancement of transportation and the resulting introduction of paved roads and motorised vehicles had a large impact on the urban plan of the city.

As a result of these changes, marginal spaces which are the foci of this potential brownfield typology emerged. According to this research findings, the definition of brownfields partially applies to three types of urban landscapes found throughout the city of Amman; the Fadlih (English: land leftover); the Nutfih (English: land bit), and; the Arasah (English: No known translation, but roughly equivalent to intermediate space between properties). The definition also applies to a fourth type called Bour (English: unfit for cultivation), however, this type was not taken into consideration as the definition implies it identifies as a rural brownfield where this research is solely investigating urban brownfields.

To further elaborate, a Fadlih which when taken back to its root word and according to the Arabic dictionary translates into: “what remains from something” (Almaany Arabic Dictionary, n.d.) and in the planning practice in Amman refers to the piece of land which results from the opening of a street. Note at Figure 1 & Figure 2 below, the red line represents the right of way, the leftover piece of land which resulted from the intersection of the right of way or legal quarter—-understood as the up to 25% of any private-own land the government is allowed to acquire in order to provide public infrastructure including street opening—- line and the property outline would be the Fadlih (outlined in the red circle).

In most cases, the resulting shape is irregular and too small for the building regulations to apply on (i.e. setbacks and building percentages), therefore remains vacant and neglected.

On the other hand, a Nutfih which when taken back to its root word and according to the Arabic dictionary translates into: “little of something” (Almaany Arabic Dictionary, n.d.) and in the planning practice in Amman refers to the remaining land bit which results from the division or regulation of a previously owned land parcel. The Nutfih is also often irregular in shape and too small for the building regulations to apply on. Note at the figure below the Nutfih’s outlined in blue, unlike the Fadlih’s, Nutfih’s are given separate lot numbers, also note Nutfih’s are given the same land use (residential D in the case demonstrated) and are given special regulations such as lower prices, less setback requirements or increased building percentages to encourage adjacent landowner(s) to buy them.

The third and last marginal planning outcome, the Arasah which when taken back to its root word and according to the Arabic dictionary translates into: “the wide space between properties where there is no building” (Almaany Arabic Dictionary, n.d.) and in the planning practice in Amman refers to the land area found between two neighbouring parcels or two constructions in two adjoining parcels. No map was provided for this type as it was undetectable on the GAM GIS maps due to the setbacks and regulations to each land-use.

Interestingly, unlike the Fadlih and Nutfih, the term Arasah was found in regional planning regulations in Jordan in addition to neighbouring countries such as Syria and Saudi Arabia.

Landlord and tenants law no. (11) for the year 1994 amended by the law no. 2000/30 and law no. 2009/17 and law no. 2010/43 and amended law no. (22) for the year 2011 and law no. (14) for the year 2014 (D.L.S., 2014) states that; (A) for the owner of a rented Arasah for any purpose the right to clear it provided the following two conditions apply; (1) the tenants issued a legal building license; (2) that the owner has notified the tenant(s) through the notary not less than two months in advance. The tenant(s) afterwards have no right to return to the previously rented property and is only entitled to a compensation estimated by the concerned court. (B) If there exists any construction that the tenant(s) got permission from the landlord to build on the Arasah to be cleared — excluding kiosks, security rooms or the similar— they are not allowed to be removed unless they have been erect no less than ten years.

From another legal point of view regarding the Fadlih and Nutfih, the property law, article (173) states that unless within the legal quarter, a property owner is compensated for the complete value of the land if the street right of way deducts the whole property or leaves a Fadlih or Nutfih invalid for construction or use which in this case becomes property of the municipality (D.L.S., 2015). In line with this law, the municipality currently owns abundant similar urban landscapes which are unfit for traditional use and construction which is problematic not only as these sites seize to participate in the economic growth, but also became an extra burden on the governmental authorities as they are already serviced with infrastructure and road network for example but fail to generate revenue to balance the acquired services.

Moreover, the Fadlih and Nutfih are also problematic to potential property owners for a variety of reasons, at least the two revealed through the investigations for this research, firstly, according to local participants and confirmed by local news, several incidents where buyers would forcibly buy the Fadlih or Nutfih as a prerequisite to buy the adjacent property were reported and published in local newspapers (Al-Said, 2015). According to Rum News Agency, the reported case is currently under investigation at the complaints department of the Board of Grievances (ibid), moreover, according to the locals statements, this is a recurring situation that often goes unnoticed due to the marginal difference to the property size that the buyer pays for unknowingly. Secondly, there are Fadlih and Nutfih hunters that buy these pieces of land as part of a deceptive scheme, the hunters are interested in Fadlih and Nutfih for two main reasons, firstly as mentioned earlier, they are often given special regulations and special prices therefore are more affordable, secondly, due to their location between the property and street especially adjacent to un-owned land, the hunters wait until the adjacent property is purchased and occupied to start a series of unpleasant activities such as piling waste or limiting street access which would force the new owner to either buy the Fadlih or Nutfih for a price much higher than the hunter bought it for or sell their own new property for a price much cheaper than what they bought it for.

Below are few images of Fadlih’s, Nutfih’s and Arasah’s scattered throughout the city. Note their deteriorated physical conditions.

With the enactment of the Small Business Relief and Brownfield Revitalisation Act (also known as the ‘brownfield law’), the definition of brownfields was expanded to include mine-scarred lands making these properties eligible for the benefits of the brownfields program. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) defines mine-scarred lands as “lands, associated waters, and surrounding water sheds where extraction, beneficiation (crushing or separating), or processing of ores and minerals (including coal) has occurred” (E.P.A., 2004).

According to EPA (E.P.A., 2005), mine sites have a variety of potential uses and their post-mining clean-up for redevelopment provides an opportunity to turn them into lands that have beneficial uses. However, similar to the situation in Jordan, complex economic, social and environmental issue face communities planning to redevelop them including finding resources to characterize and remediate sites with potential significant environmental issues; addressing state and local regulatory requirements, and; working through redevelopment issues with the local community and stakeholders.

To help address these challenges, the EPA through its Brownfield and Land Revitalisation Technology Support Centre, prepared a primer on Mine Site Clean-up for Brownfield Redevelopment which this study suggests adopting to provide information about the clean-up aspect of mine site redevelopment, including new and innovative approaches to more efficiently characterise and clean up those sites. The use of these approaches to streamline characterization and remediation of mine sites offers the potential for redevelopment at a lower cost and within a shorter time frame (ibid).

Meanwhile, in terms of the guidelines for rehabilitating mined and quarried land in Jordan, the management of mines and quarries post-activity in Jordan is extremely modest. The environmental impact assessment does not exceed the role of being a formality or a routine procedure, and despite having environmental rehabilitation guidelines, the mine/quarry owners prefers to pay the very little bail condition of half a Jordanian Dinar per meter square of waste.

The lack of follow up is also increasing the problem, according to research findings, in one case for example, where the owner declared they were going with the forestation option, however, the foundation rubble used to fill the site was not corresponding to the required specifications which resulted in landslides that affected the adjacent streets and constructions.

In another case, the site was rehabilitated for recreational purposes, however, after few years, the owner filed to change the land use from industrial into residential D and after providing the required documents and studies to the interested parties, the soil test showed the site is not suitable for traditional construction, despite that, the owner eventually attained the residential D land use change permission provided special building techniques are used. Unfortunately, the site was sold and construction commenced using traditional methods which led to the collapse of large parts of the site in addition to the new established construction.

See below examples of a discontinued quarry which when established was located outside the boundaries of the Amman, however, due to urbanisation and urban sprawl has become part of the city boundaries. The surrounding neighbourhoods are endangered of landslides and suffer from constant dust which is causing severe pulmonary problems especially to elderly and children whom are also endangered of falling into the steep cliffs, yet, nothing is being done about this according to the statements of the local area residents.

Note at the figure below a quarry site discontinued since the early 2000s, located within an urban setting and has been given a green space land use as the post-mining end use. Today, more than a decade post its closure, the site still awaits treatment.

End land use in the mining industry is increasingly becoming a key consideration guiding the rehabilitation and closure planning and the need to develop comprehensive land use plan prior to conceptualising closure objectives and associated rehabilitation measures is also gaining momentum. Towards reinstating post-mining land capabilities to the pre-mining landscape and towards ensuring that mining operations consider ways of reinstating functional end land use that passively contribute towards the future biophysical and societal demands of people living in Amman or in proximity to the disturbed environment, mine closure planning (Kotze, 2013) which the study argues is miss- ing in Amman must be considered, a mine closure planning that provides broad future land use objective(s) for the site, and a plan that describes the final and future land use proposals and arrangements (M.P.R.D.A., 2013).

The economic boom in the early 2000s had considerable effects on the urban transformation of Amman. Large-scale property development ventures poured into the country and novelty planning methods such as gated communities and high-rise skyscrapers were introduced to the urban fabric of the city. Similar patterns of urban change emerged in neighbouring countries such as Beirut, Cairo, Dubai, Qatar and Damascus –prior to the Syrian crisis— (Daher, 2013), thus, this section focuses on a typology which is the manifestation of a particular outcome of the economic thrive and shortly following crisis in the context of Amman.

The socio-economic and political characteristics of Amman encouraged foreign investors to extensively operate in it. Consequently, numerous oil capital projects from Arab Gulf countries mushroomed throughout the city. The term ‘Arab Megaproject’ was first introduced by Barthel (Barthel, 2010) to describe large-scale real estate development which he considered as vectors of contemporary Arab town planning and the circulated images of the back then proposals for the majority of mega projects in Amman mimicked images of similar western development projects (Adham, 2005). Moreover, the projects promised the provision of better services for the area; creating a competitive business environment that supports start-ups and entrepreneurs, and create first-class tourism attractions.

However, in addition to other identified effects of the ‘cutting-edge urbanism’ (Daher, 2011) in Amman such as the excessive privatisation; the abrupt increase in property values; the pressure on the already struggling infrastruc- ture system including transportation, water and power supply; the circulation obstructing urban flagship projects created, as well as; the social impacts such as emphasising the already apparent urban segregation through the promise to create a lifestyle that accommodates the contemporary needs for the elite in the centre of Amman and pushing lower-income groups to the city peripheries (Daher, 2013). This study therefore identifies another potential brownfield typology which is abandoned unfinished mega projects structures.

In order to keep up with the rapid change, benefit from what seemed to be an exceptional opportunity and compete with neighbouring countries to attract potential investments, poorly planned extreme measures were implemented. For example, to speed the process, in many cases building permissions were obtained without the provision of all necessary documents such as soil tests, drainage analysis or environmental impact assessment. Moreover, the proposed projects were given abundant facilitations such as minimal—to none—setback requirements, additional floors, higher building percentages, and less open/ green space requirements, facilitations that according research findings, GAM today regrets. The following paragraphs demonstrate three controversial unfinished mega projects in Amman.

Under the general brownfield definition, contaminated and hazardous sites are widely recognised. Similarly, in Jordan, there are numerous types of sites that identify as contaminated or hazardous. However, through the conduct of the study, the following three types were the most prominent.

Whether due to demographic shifts or the constant transformation of the city, abandoned and neglected sites and buildings are dispersed throughout Amman. The following paragraphs shed the light on three famous examples.