Abstract
Widely held notions such as the uniqueness of each design and design situation and of learning the design craft in a studio with ‘apprentice’ and ‘master’ relationships, have hitherto left little room for thinking about urban design as a science. In this paper it is argued that urban and regional design is basically a practical science like medicine, applied psychology and other technical sciences. In a practical science the objective of research is the application of science : research is focused on ‘what is possible’, be it desirable or not (yet) desirable. Practical sciences differ inter alia from empirical ones in that the concept of falsification (and conversely verification) has only limited application, owing to the complexity and heterogeneity of the concrete contextual conditions, and in some cases also of temporal and/or financial and/or ethical considerations. All these constraints apply in the case of urban design. A heuristic research approach as developed by the philosopher of science Imre Lakatos is particularly suitable to develop a body of knowledge for urban and regional design, be it that the focus is on the context of discovery, instead of on the context of justification. Some examples of knowledge generated by this approach, in the form of ‘spatial organization principles’, are presented. ‘To approach a city, or even a city neighborhood as if it were a larger architectural problem, capable of being given order by converting it into a disciplined work of art, is to make the mistake of attempting to substitute art for life.’ (Jane Jacobs The Death and Life of Great American Cities 1961: 373)
Citation
Klaasen, I. (2002) Urban and regional design: a practical science, in Durling, D. and Shackleton, J. (eds.), Common Ground - DRS International Conference 2002, 5-7 September, London, United Kingdom. https://dl.designresearchsociety.org/drs-conference-papers/drs2002/researchpapers/41
Urban and regional design: a practical science
Widely held notions such as the uniqueness of each design and design situation and of learning the design craft in a studio with ‘apprentice’ and ‘master’ relationships, have hitherto left little room for thinking about urban design as a science. In this paper it is argued that urban and regional design is basically a practical science like medicine, applied psychology and other technical sciences. In a practical science the objective of research is the application of science : research is focused on ‘what is possible’, be it desirable or not (yet) desirable. Practical sciences differ inter alia from empirical ones in that the concept of falsification (and conversely verification) has only limited application, owing to the complexity and heterogeneity of the concrete contextual conditions, and in some cases also of temporal and/or financial and/or ethical considerations. All these constraints apply in the case of urban design. A heuristic research approach as developed by the philosopher of science Imre Lakatos is particularly suitable to develop a body of knowledge for urban and regional design, be it that the focus is on the context of discovery, instead of on the context of justification. Some examples of knowledge generated by this approach, in the form of ‘spatial organization principles’, are presented. ‘To approach a city, or even a city neighborhood as if it were a larger architectural problem, capable of being given order by converting it into a disciplined work of art, is to make the mistake of attempting to substitute art for life.’ (Jane Jacobs The Death and Life of Great American Cities 1961: 373)