R1. What are the common threads/relations between these philosophies/theories -sustainable urban development, bioregionalism and small town urbanism?

Objective 1: Investigating each theory/philosophy through a critical analysis of literature available and deciphering common underlying principles.

R2. Can bioregionalism be an alternate development paradigm for achieving sustainable urban development in small towns?

Objective 2: Detailing out the possibilities of bioregional planning by further analysing based on common underlying principles.

R3. What are those few indicative parameters to be looked in to mould a bioregionalistic vision for small towns?

Objective 3: Summarising the study by arriving at indicative parameters for designing small towns.

"Bioregionalism is a body of thought and related practice that has evolved in response to the challenge of reconnecting socially just human cultures in a sustainable manner to the region-scale ecosystems in which they are irrevocably embedded" (Aberley, 2005). It originated as a social activist campaign in North America in the early 1970s. Peter Berg's and Gary Snyder's writings in the 1960s rooted the initial concept of bioregionalism and they strongly believed to take cues from the traditional wisdom of our ancestors and identify ecosystem as a place for a successful life ahead. He emphasizes the importance of a healthy and just population with individual and cultural identities, marked by natural boundaries rather than political administrative boundaries (Aberley, 2005). "Bioregionalism is a technical process of identifying biogeographically interpreted culture areas called bioregions"(Newkirk, 1975). "Within these territories, resident human populations would restore plant and animal diversity, aid in the conservation and restoration of wild eco-systems, and discover regional models for new and relatively non-arbitrary scales of human activity in relation to the biological realities of the natural landscape" (Aberley, 2005).

"Bioregions are resource-rich regions such as a common watershed, biota, landform, and biogeography (Snyder, 1990)(Snyder, 1995)(McTaggart, 1993)(Robertson, 1996)(Foster, 1997)(House, 1999)(McGinnis et al., 1999) which forms a life place and gives a unique identity and value to a particular region. Identifying such bioregions will help in creating sustainable cultural built forms which can strengthen the natural landscape and add to coexistence and resilience. The final boundaries of a bioregion are best described by the people who have lived within it, through human recognition of the realities of Living-in-place" (Berg & Dasmann, 1977). In their writings, they emphasized the importance of a decentralised, bottom up approach of governance and identification of boundaries based on culture and ecology; questioning the arbitrary political and administrative boundaries of governance. It rejects the phenomenons of industrial, consumerist and globalised stereotypes and desires to flourish a localised, resilient and cyclic economy in a symbiotic identifiable cultural landscape. Kirkpatrick Sale proposed "bioregionalism as an alternate development paradigm by based upon principles including":

Division of the earth into nested scales of natural regions.

Division of the earth into nested scales of natural regions.

Development of localized and self-sufficient economies.

Adoption of a decentralized structure of governance that promotes autonomy, subsidiarity, and diversity.

Integration of urban, rural and wild environments (Sale, 1985).

Bioregional planning addresses the conflicts existing between civilisation and nature; issues of development and the need for conservation; adapting to vernacular and experimenting the new; bring revolutionary change and achieving stability; balancing the economy, market forces and protecting the ecology. So, it is an eco-cultural and place centric theory which advocates sustainable habitats for all life forms on earth. Place, ecology and governance become the foundational base for bioregionalistic vision. Bioregionalism can be envisaged as a continuing and evolving process and requires adaptation with its context at every point of time for fostering sustainable future. Figure 2 shows the summary of the theoretical understanding of bioregionalism.

The former works of Frederick Jackson Turner, Howard Odum, Lewis Mumford and Patrick Geddes contributed substantially to regionalism. Geddes' theory of 'Place, work and folks' and Gedessian Valley section reinforces the quest for the sustainable development at the regional level. "Geddes called for the 'systematic planning of entire regions', and insisted on the importance of 'survey before plan', a survey of local and regional conditions -social, historical and physical -before proposing any interventions. This was important not only in geographical terms, but in temporal ones: the past informs the present informs strategies for the future -or should" (Hagan, 2015). "This integration of settlements and modes of production and consumption into the context and conditions of their natural region, roughly delineated by the local watershed, later formed the conceptual basis of bioregionalism" (W. (Stephen, 2004). Another important proponent of ecologically conscious planning and who devised a method of mapping for the same was Ian McHarg. "Ecological Planning is that approach whereby a region is understood as a biophysical and social process comprehensible through the operation of laws and time. This can be reinterpreted as having explicit opportunities and constraints for any particular human use. A survey will reveal the most fit locations and processes" (McHarg & design, 1997). Lewis Mumford, a disciple of Geddes, focussed on "ecological regionalism that combines planning, design and a biocentric understanding of natural processes within a politically grounded and civic-minded environmentalism" (Critchley, 2004). Thus, many theories have developed over time, which reinforce the need for an eco-cultural urban development.

"Small towns can be extraordinary places, towns that have their own identity and a sociable and enjoyable way of life for their inhabitants" (P. & H, 2009). These towns could be resource-rich regions and have a unique cultural landscape. They can be places of environment and pedestrian friendly, encouraging and promoting local crafts, cuisine, traditional wisdom and architecture. "The small town is a context-dependent concept, and should be defined by a variety of indicators comprising material forms, socioeconomic functions, types of administration, and so forth" specific to region and geographic location setting. (Bell & Jayne, 2009). Based on population, small towns are urban agglomerations, having 20000 to 500000 population (UN World Urbanisation Prospects, 2018). Small town urbanism is the emerging condition of urbanity that envisions for a fair, affordable, incremental, grassroot level participatory sustainable urban development. It refers to the way of life, ever developing through migration, integration to built fabric, expressing identity as materiality and society through tangible and intangible elements. The heterogeneous morphology of small towns with the rural-urban dichotomy adds to the distinctiveness of place. "Different kinds of small towns in different settings have different needs, challenges and opportunities. Their well being is often critical not only to their inhabitants but also to the economic and social cohesion of metropolitan regions and deep rural areas. They can be havens in a fast world, places whose inhabitants think globally and act locally. Yet globalisation undermines the distinctiveness of many smaller urban places and threatens vitality and culture" (P. & H, 2009) There are chances of small towns getting engulfed within the urbanised areas because of urban sprawl and completely transforming its cultural landscape. They also face the adverse effects of global warming, being less resilient. "The social and cultural forces, associated with globalization, have overwritten local social and cultural practices and globalization has generated a world of restless landscapes, in which the more places change the more they seem to look alike and the less they are able to retain a distinctive sense of place" (Ritzer, 2007).

Thus, small towns give immense opportunities to develop as centres of sustainable habitats, respecting the characteristics and uniqueness of the region. It is at this venture that the paper tries to explain bioregional planning as an alternative development paradigm for designing these towns. The paradigm should have context based parameters to build sustainable strategies for environment, social and economic aspects of the town. "Therefore, sustainability in small cities has to ensure that this reformulation is not laborious and does not create imbalances, and that identity of people and places is the main concept of any project to conserve the small cities quality of life" (Ricci, 2007). Small towns could be a model of decentralised self sustainable habitats dispersed amidst lush agricultural hinterlands as polarised growth centres keeping a high-speed connectivity to the urbanised neighbouring city. The carrying capacity of the region and the resources that offer a good quality of life can restrain the growth and extent of small towns. It can also look at nature based solutions for resilience and involve local self governments and participatory planning at grass root level for a bottom up planning. So a guiding development paradigm based on the indicative parameters is a necessity to condition urbanism.

"The development of a vision for a sustainable city means setting up goals that depend on the needs of the community, the environmental, social and economic values. It is not a defined static state, but a process that changes with the changes in the society, the institutions and culture of living" (Sofeska, 2016). "The small town sustainable development is a combination of economic development, social and cultural progress and environmental protection with full respect for all human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the right to development, while achieving stability and peace throughout the world" (United Nations Human Settlements Programme (UN-Habitat, 2019). Bioregionalism and small town urbanism summarises on ecological bonding; indigenous cultural coherence; democratic decentralised governance; and region reliant and dependent economy. Both these concepts envisions sustainable development. "Furthermore, in the sustainable development philosophy, the notion of Think Global, act local tends to favour local actions and thus small localities are places where such experimentations can take place" (Mainet, 2015). "A true shift toward sustainability ultimately will require what I call green regions: spatial units that mix urban settlements with surrounding hinterlands and ecosystems and that together yield compact, sustainable cities and settlement patterns" (Beatley, 2011).

Bioregionalism is grounded in environmental ethics as nature forms the base for sustenance of life. The first strategy would be to reify the ecological layer as the determinant for the growth of town to mold the cultural landscape and providing food, water, energy, shelter, and resilience. It is extremely important to recognize the function of the environment, its attributes, and resources as shared commons. Bioregionalism urges making resources as shared commons on a fair base. The concept of boundaries and territorial demarcation advocated by bioregional planning relies more on natural boundaries like watersheds rather than administrative or political boundaries. Watershed planning from a regional perspective would be enabled by the second strategy. The prime step involved in creating a bioregional plan is to do mapping of the existing resources and patterns (shared commons) in the region. (Wahl, 2017). So, mapping of the covers – ‘blue, green and brown’ of the region becomes the third strategy to comprehend unique bioregional patterns and resource base of the region for formulating action plans and councils for protecting watersheds. “Once identified, these ecological patterns and spatial resources are logical form determinants – they suggest the spatial form to guide plans toward sustainability” (Silbernagel, 2005). “Bioregionalists view the local watershed as an appropriate scale for decentralized, community-based environmental learning and self-governance. They visualize federations of watershed communities united at the level of the larger region” (Nelson & Weschler, 2001). The watershed-based planning approach is fairer encompassing bottom top approach, inclusive, participatory, holistic regional development, preserving/conserving the sensitive areas and fosters sustainability ((Foster, 1985); (Slocombe, 1993); (Bioregional assessments: Science at the crossroads of management and policy, 1998)).

"An environmentally sensitive approach to land use planning and urban development is key to successful sustainability efforts in small towns" (P. & H, 2009). This must be conceived and implemented at two levels -spatially and regulatory. Reducing ecological footprint and encouraging compact developments will help to contain spatial growth within the carrying capacity of the region. At a macro-level, several small towns can form polycentric dispersed growth centres with high-speed transit systems at a regional level for networking and movement. Within the small town, a compact city ensuring adequate natural open spaces as lungs for leisure and resilience. Decentralized approaches in terms of physical development and governance are yet another trait of bioregionalism; small town urbanism can also work at its best adopting a decentralized model. Small towns could have an adaptive cyclic model based on carrying capacity and apportioning of resource base for current and future needs. "The adaptive cycle model suggests a tendency (rather than a deterministic relationship) for systems to pass through phases of growth (seizing opportunity), conservation (accumulation and specialism), release or creative destruction (collapse and uncertainty) and reorganization (innovation and restructuring)" (Powe, 2020).

In a nutshell, the focus of bioregional planning for small towns should be on an eco-place centric approach concentrating on 'place', 'setting', 'context', 'ecology' and 'environment'. The bioregional patterns need to be understood from a regional scale and not in piecemeal project basis. The scales can vary from macro-meso-micro to efficient knowledge of the unique systems referring to the region/small town. "To bring about real change, environmental sustainability efforts must be integrated into the social and economic fabric of small towns" (P. & H, 2009).

" (Thayer & Robert, 2003)uses the term life-place synonymously with bioregion. The study of life-place connects natural place, sacred place, identity, local arts, practices, food, and wisdom into a holistic knowledge set. The bioregion, a unique area defined by natural boundaries and supporting distinct living communities, is emerging as a meaningful geographic framework for understanding place and designing long-term sustainable communities. Bioregional patterns are regionally unique and fit with geomorphic, climatic, biotic, and cultural influences of a place" (Silbernagel, 2005). Thus, the social components of a region shape the cultural landscape and will be physically manifesting as built forms or as tangible, and intangible elements. Theory of bioregionalism tries to unearth these elements to allow for future developments sensibly and gives identity to the small town. The first strategy is to identify these elements which form the spatial metaphors for placemaking and place marking in small towns. Further, they are enhanced by natural cues of the region such as green belts, agricultural fields, and hinterlands, green and blue corridors in determining the growth and extend of the small town, formulating development regulation guidelines and techniques of land development including setback regulations, minimum lot sizes, zoning, and controlled land uses. Sustainable methods of construction with indigenous resources and materials become the second strategy for bioregionalistic vision and can also help in lowering the carbon footprint. The combined effort of vernacular wisdom and experimental efforts in modern construction can reduce embodied energy and bringing in new vocabulary and identity to the small town. Bioregionalism theory advocates the natural energy cycles which are close ended in a loop. Circularity in resource consumption and 'cradle to cradle' practices in a small town make it a sustainable entity. Third, well derived policies supporting sustainable regional growth patterns add to the aspirations of small-town development. "Policies for small towns need to build on the assumptions about the relations between people and place, activities, locational dimensions, resonance with material experiences and cultural imageries" (Healey, 2007).

The place making and landscaping of small towns should be conversant through bioregional patterns and should be appropriate to give an inclusive character and dynamism. The space within the town becomes compact settings to enhance social interaction and place identity (Powe & Hart, 2017)(Daniels, 1999);(Tolbert et al., 2002),(Hanna et al., 2009). The sense of place, the associational value of people, and place attachment nurtures through bioregional planning. Apart from this, mixed-use developments, walkable neighborhoods and Transit Oriented developments, sustainable modes of transport including cycling and public transport, passive solar designs, greening, inclusive and universal design, waste management and sustainable resource production and consumption for food, water, energy, promoting local arts and crafts are all ways of incorporating bioregional vision at the place level. Small towns that pursue sustainable measures augment community development, place identity, and mobilize resources. (Friedman, 2014),(Dale et al., 2008).

In short, a symbiotic relationship between culture and ecology can promote a reduced ecological footprint. The social construct of small town depends on the history and legacy associated with it. Bioregionalism offers a platform for analyzing these life forms and incorporating them into future developments. Undoubtedly, the quality of living and the livability index will be thoroughly enhanced with this alternate development paradigm.

"Bioregionalism is a daringly inclusive doctrine of fundamental social change that evolves best at the level of decentralized practice. Although none of the tenets of bioregionalism are etched in stone, these tenets stake claim to a dynamic, grass-roots approach to conceptualizing and achieving transformative social change" (Aberley, 2005). Environmentally sensitive land use planning regulations as part of the governance and laws should be implemented for mainstreaming bioregionalistic vision. The power of taking decisions shall be vested upon the local governing bodies for more inclusive, fair and informed planning. The regional resources and patterns can be best identified and conserved by the residents or communities of the region or a town. Bioregionalistic vision for small towns advocates a democratic mode of governance in its strictest sense. Some common decentralized approaches to governance which can be adopted includes collaborative environmental planning (Wondolleck & Yaffee, 2000), community based environmental management (Agrawal & Gibson, 1999), institutionalized participation (Ribot, 2002), and an enhanced role for civil society (Friedmann, 1998). The local level decision making strengthens communities and the bonding with nature; helps in efficient implementation of policies; monitoring the resources and for better resilience.

According to urban theorist Jane (Jacobs, 1961) "cities are settlements that generate economic growth from their own local economy". The word 'local' needs to be stressed here as it suggests rootedness and living in place, core concepts of bioregionalism and small-town urbanism. Economic sustainability is yet another dimension to achieve an integrated urban development perspective. "The goal of economic activity is to achieve the highest possible level of cooperative self-reliance in bioregionalism" (Aberley, 2005). Projecting and paving a way for economies of localization forms a major strategy. Localized economies based on the identified assets of the small towns, along with revitalization efforts for declining sectors to bring in newer job perspectives and products with experiments and exploration through networking and globalization, can reinforce the place economics. Small town urbanism, since it is based on local character, place identity; the urban form and morphology can contribute to economic sustainability through responsible tourism initiatives. As the town itself becomes an artefact for enjoyment, responsible tourism initiatives will have fewer negative effects on the socio-cultural and environmental context and generate economic benefits for local people and is participatory, interdependent in all tourism related activities. "Providing desirable places to live in and visit, where a combination of heritage buildings and desirable locations near natural amenities, encourages business to set up to supply the emerging local economy and/or niche manufacturing which may have a wider market" (Powe & Hart, 2017). Local crafts, arts, heritage, food, indigenous resources, architecture etc. becomes central for achieving a unique economic model prevailing to the region/town. These can become self-expressive for maintaining the cultural landscape and to bring in conviviality and hospitality. “An asset-based approach developed by John Kretzmann and John McKnight in the early 1990s helped sell their Unique selling points (USP’s) in a global world and found a niche. The homogenization that results from globalization may even allow small town economies to be distinct and to draw economic success from being different”(P. & H, 2009)

So, these localized economies become as much as part of the global economy and contribute to the GDP of the nation. This further strengthens the spatial dynamics and interdependence of a ‘Mega city and a neighboring small town’ or ‘urban and rural’ or ‘city and the suburb’ relationship. With small towns, they can become primary centres of manufacturing activity too, providing employment opportunities and parasitic small business growth. The proximity of living and working places advantages the economic setups combined with the space/time compression of a globalized world. Being indigenous and rooted to place help in building ‘Eco-economics’ for the community. “Eco-economics means bioregionally-scaled economies designed based on ecological principles. It means running an economy the way nature runs a forest. Ecological principles mandate decentralization, deconcentration, and regionalization of our economic systems. As much as possible, there must be local production, consumption, and full-scale recycling, drawing from local resources. It further mandates that no economic activity be allowed that is destructive or compromising to the ecological integrity of the region within which it takes place” (Haenke & Wahl, 2021-03-19).

Having identified the thrust areas of theories/philosophies which clearly propose an eco-cultural development perspective; certain indicative parameters are devised for formulating the bioregionalistic vision of small towns.

"Bioregionalism is a social movement and action-oriented field of study focused on enabling human communities to live, work, eat, and play sustainably within Earth's dynamic web of life. At the heart of the matter is this core guiding principle: human beings are social animals; if we are to survive as a species, we need healthy relationships and secure attachments in our living arrangements with one another and with the land, waters, habitat, plants, and animals upon which we depend" (Pezzoli & Leiter, 2016).

So bioregionalism is essentially an attempt to bring back nature to daily life for sustenance of life forms on earth and to create just, safe, resilient and healthy sustainable habitats. “It is at the human-scale of community where sustainability turns from a concept into a lived reality of regenerative cultures adapting to the uniqueness of the life-place they inhabit” (Wahl, 2017). A set of indicative parameters and strategies has been identified to ground the theory of bioregionalism spatially and also to aid in adopting a practical approach for designing sustainable small towns. These parameters focus on the three thrust areas of bioregionalism – Ecology, Place and Governance. “A society which practices living-in-place keeps a balance with its region of support through links between human lives, other living things, and the processes of the planet — seasons, weather, water cycles — as revealed by the place itself” (Berg & Dasmann, 1977). The indicative parameters also look at these large processes at a regional scale (to set a base), to a town and community level (to understand the relevant negotiations shaping a cultural landscape) and to a need and scale of one’s own self (to change the behaviour and attitude towards nature). Table 2 shows the indicative parameters and a framework for bioregionalistic vision of small towns.