Questions related to Spatial Planning
The article "Ethnographic Knowledge in Urban Planning – Bridging the Gap between the Theories of Knowledge-Based and Communicative Planning”, that was published on November 4th 2021 has serious ethical problems, e.g, plagiarism, authorship and duplication.
I'm a spatial planning master student, I'm studying the soundscape in Jordan- Amman, the methodology I will use is varied from a questionnaire (Soundwalk) to a binaural recording, and I'm wondering if you have any recommendation for questions to be asked in the Soundwalk?
I am looking to evaluate the quality of a land use plan in my country. However I am limited by availability of criteria to use. Do you know of literature I can review or advice on standards used in the planning profession when conducting a plan quality evaluation?
Your response will be much appreciated.
Land use limits are a legislatively defined part of spatial planning tools in the Czech Republic. Is there a similar mechanism in other countries, please? Eventualy, is it available in English (either in the form of a handbook or an article)? My aim is to evaluate the link between land use limits in spatial planning and ecosystem services. Thank you.
As COVID-19 has taken place in human lives and threatened life and by massive deaths everywhere how spatial planning can help to minimize the negative impact COVI9-19.
I want to explore daily passenger volume at railway stations in the selected region.
Should I take into account the number of people getting on the train or getting off the train? Maybe the sum of passenger getting on and getting off the train at particular railway station? Is this correct in this case? I will count double passengers who commute to work and come back from work in the same day. Maybe the average number of passenger getting on and getting off the train?
In fact, do politicians depend on research for decision-making in the field of spatial planning, or does the investigation serve only for politicians to have tools for political propaganda?
i am looking for a full-funded Phd scholarship for my research on maritime spatial planning in South China Sea. please give suggestions.
i am looking for facts of coordination among authorities in implementing maritime spatial plan and ocean management in coastal states around the world , especially in Europe. i want to find out the measures to overlapping marine management of authorities and stakeholders
I'm looking for specific examples of best practices in spatial planning at regional level. If this case-studies involve both the normative structure and the running process of plans it'd be perfect. I already have a bunch of examples following the contents provided by the ESPON projects and some other sources (i.e. manuals on nationalwide perspectives). I just wat to expand them as much as possible. Thanks in advance
I am looking for papers or books where weights from AHP method was used to TOPSIS method? The main research area is related to spatial planning, environment, location of various activities.
The Centre for Research on Territory, Transports and Environment of the University of Porto is organising an international conference on the theme " Spatial Planning for Change". This is the link for the conference website: https://citta-conference.fe.up.pt/
The call for abstracts is now open!
Location and date: University of Porto, 20th September 2019
Digitalization in public administration and not least urban planning is gaining momentum. More and more data gets available and tools and methods advance and get digitized. I was wondering if digitalization (or the digital transformation) will impact urban planning practice in the sense that we will focus more and more on details, while loosing a sense for the big picture. But there could be also other concerns like for example a standardization (there are pros and cons for that of course) or a loss of creativity (while probably enabling new ways of creativity).
Has anybody done research on how planning practice changes due to digitalization?
Hello, I'm interested in studies focusing on the potential impact of China's present and future activity in the Western Balkans on the region's territorial governance and territorial development dynamics.
Can anyone suggest recent research/articles on the matter?
Any help appreciated! :)
Transit Oriented Development areas are located within radious of one 1/4 to 1/2 mile (400-800 m) What do you think what is the optimal distance from housing development to railway station? What is the difference between urban and rural areas?
Currently I have to do a site plan in my academic works. I like to do a site plan for a critical junction area of Galle town, Sri Lanka. From the site planning I like to overcome the traffic jam in the junction.
This is my location
I want to refer some case studies or projects that others done like this. It will make lot for my project. Please advise me
I am preparing an international comparative study on the impact of planning policy instruments on the behaviour of private sector stakeholders in the sustainable development of urban waterfront locations.
What do you consider the most important developments in the fields of Systematic Conservation Planning and/or Integrated Spatial Planning over the last 5 years?
Additionally, are there techniques/tools/technologies that facilitate the application of these newer developments? What are your favorites? What works well? What doesn't?
References/citations welcome :-)
Viable territorial systems depend on rethinking the way our society is organised. Spatial planning may (should) contribute to fundamental societal transformations if integrates the principle of sufficiency (i.e. "how much is enough?") in its theories and practices. Otherwise it will be extremely difficult to find a way forward in the era of forced shrinking (e.g. in large extensions of rural areas across Europe).
Does anyone know approaches in this direction? I'd be glad to share thoughts and to discuss possible collaboration in this field.
As a further step in our research, now we would like to get new perspectives on this topic from users and stakeholders involved in Maritime Spatial Planning (MSP) processes. We will appreciate very much if you fill in the questionnaire which will take you 10 minutes. You can reach to the survey here http://dst.azti.es Or alternatively, going directly to the survey https://es.surveymonkey.com/r/dst_quest. Please, do not hesitate to contact us by mailing to firstname.lastname@example.org, if you have any feedback, comments or questions. Thank you for your contribution! Best regards
Dear online map makers and researchers, could you point to any recent (less than five years) online PPGIS that allows customisation of functionalities to engage lay users in spatial planning?
I am looking to perform comparative usability studies of different online mapping tools for public participation.
I am coming across a number of commercial applications of varying relevance and costs, but many of them are too costly or limited in their range of functionalities. There have been a number of research-led applications, but many of them are obsolete or the researchers have moved to industry or other exciting projects.
Here is a doi link to the abstract of a recent article, entitled "Toward Cyborg PPGIS":
If someone has a good example of spatial planning in relation to fluvial floods, it will be great!
"Is there any possibility of bitumen/ asphalt releasing carbon dioxide while being heated upto 170 degree centigrade. Though its known that its ignition temperature is ~400°C still if you have any opinion or test results with you.... please share
I am interested in the mainstreaming of ecosystem thinking in relation to spatial planning. I analyzed the case of Birmingham and I would like to compare it with other significant cases. Thank you
I want to measure these variables. How can i measure urbanization?
By health risks I mean observing diarrhea and TB among slum dwellers. I want to know how to measure it.
I'm observing ecological deterioration of these slum territories and around territories, how could i measure environmental degradation of these areas?
I'm interested in the indicators of the development of megacities or the development of sub-urbs which can contribute more to economic growth.
Space syntax is the analysis of empty space in architectural and urban space scales through a graphic schema, it is helpful in explaining associations between fluxes and the configuration of the built environment, thus associated also with the land use and socio-economic spatial patterns. Any literature in the use of this space syntax and its usability in doing land value analyses (land appraisal) for taxation purposes?
Where this topic is described and/or requirements are outlined.
I am searching for any kind of reference, e.g. reports, calls, drafts, strategy papers.
I appreciate any help you can provide.
disaster manager and geoscientist How is the role of informal stakeholders in disaster management? Any best-practice for developing countries?
Park proximity is considered a feature related to park use and park-based physical activities. Parks play a positive role on urban air quality also. Could someone suggest some research papers on these topics?
In regional (spatial) planning programs, we have different goals & indicators and off course programs. A regional planning program shows a strategic plan for a region on mid-term period. We want to monitor different indicators to assess that how is the situation of any program and indicator. Please share me any experiences about assessment and monitoring of spatial planning programs.
Ozawa and Seltzer (1999) through an extensive survey, attempted to produce a list of skills and competencies a planning graduate should possess, which Alexander (2005) consequently refined into skill-based categories. Both these studies identify ‘Synthesis, Creativity and Design’ to be a major skill set within a planner’s competence. Keeping in mind that a spatial planner’s ultimate object is creating or shaping physical form or spaces, what sort of ‘Design’ does this refer to? Is it the ‘Design’ that I emphasised on my previous post? I do not think so. Then, what sort of ‘Design’ it is?
It is my view that I should elaborate on what sort of ‘Design’ that I intend discuss about. As most of you have already agreed upon or would agree, design fore mostly is a problem solving exercise. Reading into Christopher Alexander’s work on Notes on the Synthesis of Form (1964) design as a problem solving activity, can be broadly understood have three constituents or components. Based on this premise Munasinghe (2007) conceptualises a design activity or ‘an act of design’ can be witnessed in the presence of,
1. A cognitive act that deals with identifying and envisaging patterns on a given problem or situation
2. A process of both problem solving and realizing form with regard to these patterns
3. A product (physical or functional) with which its designer’s thinking can be traced.
Alexander (1964) also extends his argument by stating
“...before we can ourselves turn a problem into form, because we are self-conscious, we need to make explicit maps of the problem structure…”
Hence, a designer in order to achieve physical clarity in a form, must achieve some form of programmatic clarity in his or hers mind and actions. From a spatial planners’ point of view, it is then critical that they have higher capacities in visualising and envisaging the particular ‘physical form’ that they intend to create of shape. Their task in achieving such ‘form’ in this sense, doesn’t necessarily have to be ‘sitting on a drawing board’ composing plans, sections or visuals, although it is an important part of the process, for which they can seek assistance from allied experts. The above mentioned ‘product’ from a planner’s point of view can be a policy decision, a regulation, a charter, a contract, (urban) design guidelines, an assessment and the list goes on… Yet, it is the responsibility of a planners to have clarity of thought especially their spatial thinking ability, on the particular ‘design product’ they intend to achieve. In the absence of such clarity in mind, planner’s identity as a ‘designer of space’ would inevitably extinct, leaving behind a bureaucrat whose task is restricted to the mere application of technical knowledge. Emerging specialities of city designing—the so-called ‘qualified designers’, certainly making this difficult for spatial planners.
If it is clarity of thought or skills of visualisation and envisaging what spatial planners are seeking, there is a wealth of knowledge that they can utilise. Numerous ‘thinking models’ or ‘methods of structured thinking’—Strategic Thinking, Systems Thinking, Design Thinking etc. are already proved effective in uncovering and enhancing cognitive capacities of professionals. It may necessarily mean that spatial planning graduates and students should adapt ‘Design’ thinking at an early stage of their careers within their multi-disciplinary concerns of space, in becoming expert ‘Designers’ of space.
According to Tonkinwise (2011) however, such thinking expertise cannot exist in isolation of being a designer—what Cross (2004) states as ‘designerly ways of being’. Within his explanation, it is quite clear that such state of being is something that has to be manifested within a person, through conscious and deliberate being. It requires both structured way of thinking and acting accordingly. It then inevitably becomes a way of life; a part of who that person is; and his or hers actions then, becomes a part of what that person is. It may be then the need of the day for Spatial Planners and planning students to develop such understanding and act accordingly.
As this is my first ever post on any online media, I thought of keeping it simple. Yet, the question I pose within this writing may be deep and broad enough to even do a PhD research.
So, as the title speaks it self, can a ‘Planner’ (Town/ Urban or Spatial Planner) become a ‘Designer’?
Conceptually and theoretically, ‘Planning’ itself is understood as a ‘Design’ discipline; and its practitioners as ‘Designers’ (Levin 1966, Owen, 2007, Lawson, 2005, Razzaouk and Shute, 2012 etc.). This is commonly accepted on the basis that the ultimate object of ‘Spatial Planning’ (I would refer to term spatial in covering a wide array of specialities) is achieving physical form or space—be it urban, rural or in between. In this sense, a Spatial Planner’s contribution irrespective of being involved in strategic or statutory planning activities, would be to shape the intended physical form, directly or indirectly. It is at this point that I intend to view the title question to be two fold, of which I would write focussing only on the first premise within this post.
As a Town Planner who is immensely passionate about urban design practice, yet never was fortunate (or unfortunate?) enough to have formal specialization in Urban Design, I have often felt a weak designer. I have been hesitant and less confident in composing smooth diagrams, lines, curves and visuals that are supposed to communicate the great planning proposals I have in my mind. I often compare my ‘urban design’ work to that of architects (and students who usually have gone through intensive training in those areas) and realize how far behind I am. This is strongly evident when it comes to designing smaller spaces, the finer details of a typical urban space, that I feel I am incapable of doing so. But, I must state that I possess above-par skills in sketching and drawing compared to my fellow planning colleagues. I’m also confident that similar to any spatial planner, I too understand the language of spatial thinking.
- Does this mean a spatial planner naturally lack such competence? That they have to go through additional training in order to actually be able to design city spaces.
- Does that mean becoming a ‘designer’ of cities, is that straightforward for ‘planners’? What does this tell us about urban design?
I would present a second premise in the following Part-2 of this post, which focuses on a concept that is considered rather unfamiliar, at least within planners.
All types of responses are welcome and I would be delighted to develop a discussion that would benefit everyone.
The EC-funded project INSPIRATION – http://www.inspiration-h2020.eu – is to formulate an end-user driven Strategic Research Agenda (SRA) for land-use, soil management and spatial planning and the related, impacted compartments of the Soil-Sediment-Water (SSW) system in order to meet current and future societal challenges.
In a series of bottom-up stakeholder engagement activities across EU nations the project gathers Research and Innovation (R&I) needs related to the INSPIRATION scope (land and SSW-system use and management), including topics such as:
- What are the strategic research topics?
- What are experiences regarding connecting science to policy/practice?
- What are national and transnational funding schemes to implement such Research?
To complement these activities, I would appreciate your view and contribution! What is your view on the research and innovation needs and opportunities? Do you have a vision on, and what is your insight in upcoming knowledge demands (short, middle and long-term)?
Collecting input from you is crucial for the project in order to help us describing the state-of-the-art as input into the European research agenda.
From my point of view De Certeau's works have a phenomenological approach, but I find quite interesting his contribution to tactics and strategies as subversion forms to hegemony.
Decades ago, when my professor said that, I already doubted it. In my opinion, economists get the wrong unit of analysis. They should examine the amount of housing service, or the square footage, i.e. floor space for various uses. In that sense, the supply is quite elastic, as providers quickly respond to price change. For example, vacant room will be put to market where rebuilding and rezoning takes place.
I am looking for studies on the links between energy consumption, spatial planning and mobility planning. Do you have any suggestions both from academia and planning practice?
As we all know that based on their experiences & perceptions of urbanization & trends, western theories contextualize generalization to the the third world cities. there are lot of ambiguity and confusion about it. One of the interesting discussions participated by Prof.Ananya Roy & Solomon Benjamin has illustrated the direct examples to disapprove to unify the global theory of sub-urbanisation.
Annaya Roy directly disfavored these arguments and suggested these generalization are not the universal ones as they can not spread beyond certain boundaries, hence they are not hegemonic theory. Similarly, Prof.Benjamin suggested that this big terminologies loose its significance to explain the realistic situation at micro level and that too from global south cities.He emphasized upon the ethnographic cases which could directly give the flavor of that case/ site.
Definitely, the formulation of theories should come from the empirical understand of the local cases, then it can be validated for similar context featuring homogeneous characteristics in terms of governance, economy and institutional aspects.
Spatial prioritization for species recovery programmes needs to be evidence based, and it may be better to target effort in certain parts of a species rangeB but I'm struggling to find examples where interventions have been applied with good spatial replication across a species range. Agri-environment schemes perhaps provide the best opportunity for such studies. Maybe there are other interventions applied across big areas, that have been monitored and assessed (both the level of intervention and the animal/plant population response).
Urbanization poses an assemblage of complex issues that are concerned with rapid and seemingly stochastic development, increasing interest in sustainable development as a response to environmental issue, need for long-term thinking, polarizing effects in cities (Spatial & Social) are demanding expansion of the research and policy agenda for spatial planners (Albrechts 2004). The triggers of urbanization issues may be due to numerous processes like increase in urban population, varying social patterns, motivations of economic growth, swaying political atmosphere, altering landscapes and so on. Hence lately, increased emphasis on integrating non-spatial aspects has been recognized as an important step towards managing change. One such paradigm towards meaningful merger of social and spatial aspects is emphasized through coproduction for reinforcing strategic actions with inclusive decision making process. Such complex issues are not static, but they are dynamic and non-linear in reality, bringing transformation to the cities. As a response various integrative methods, frameworks and strategies have been developed at all scales (Regional, City, Neighborhood or are there others?). A general distinction that has emerged to make spatial planning more instrumental to change is through a reduction approach by developing strategies at regional scale (eg: Land-use Plan, Structure plan) and at local scale (eg: strategic projects, Master plan ).
We will explore the concept of resilience, frequently used in policy documents and project goals , for a framework that can aid in understanding & managing changes. We intend to do this by looking at cities as interdependent systems for their functioning. Systems perspective in spatial planning is not new by any means, but we use it in our research as an underpinning rational to expand its value for spatial planning. This will be further discussed in the methodology section of this chapter. From a systems perspective, a city is a hybrid system comprising of natural (ecological) systems and human (urban) systems (Pickett et al. 2011). The plurality of systems is emphasized here due to the reason that, even though they are whole system but they comprise of nested systems with numerous parts, which are directly or indirectly related to each other. Implying that any modifications occurring to the parts, either indigenous or endogenous, will have an effect on the system as a whole. With this background we engage with the concept of resilience in cities, and specifically interested in socio-ecological resilience. Here we refer to Holling, who gave the definition of resilience in ecological systems in the 1970's and made a plea to look at ecological and urban systems as interdependent systems which are complex adaptive systems (hereafter referred to as CAS) by themselves. This was established by comparing ecological system with urban system, drawing similarities between the two systems. The similarities of the systems was argued based on three characteristics -i) dependence on the succession of historical events; ii) reliance on spatial linkages; and iii) non-linear structures(Holling & Goldberg 1971). It explicates cities are not homogeneous entities but a spatial system of mosaics with an interplay of economic, social and ecological variables that sets forth a system with spatial heterogeneity. The complex interplay with and within these variables makes urban systems malleable, thus making them attractors for transformation of both kinds planned and self-organized. Heterogeneity, non-linearity and malleability (Sensitive to changes) in an urban system is compared to CAS which is characterized by numerous parts that interact and self-organize corresponding to collective behavior of the individual parts. We will refrain from establishing urban systems as complex adaptive systems in our research, as it has been done capably elsewhere (Portugali 2011). However by assuming it, we use it as the for our research. Our interest lies in better understanding of diverse interactions of system variables that enable self-organizing capacities in urban system. Lately in planning theory self-organization is associated with social innovation, discourse on ecosystem services, power relations and coproduction to mention a few (add ref). The causal effect of in the system increases the surprises and risk in urban areas exposing them to disturbances. For us, spatial planning as a field is concerned with tackling these disturbances to provide a productive environment for people. Planning ultimately is for betterment of a society.
In a systemic sense, researchers over the last few decades have focused on the potentials offered by crisis and disturbance as an opportunity for positive development (vale, Lawrence; Campanella 2005) (Lhomme et al. 2013). The frame adopted by the researchers is through degree of resilience of urban systems, which is one of the characteristics of a complex adaptive system. Resilience theory discards the assumption of equilibrium state of a system. Instead it emphasizes on the non-linear dynamics of change occurring due to the interdependent parts of an socio-ecological system. He also emphasized on including humans as component of the system as the social processes undertaken by humans altered the processes in natural system. From an ecological point of view, urbanization impacts on ecological components in cities such as urban hydrology, soil substrate, urban climate and urban vegetation to mention a few over time (Pickett et al. 2011) has been stressed upon by ecologists. These impacts informs us that resilience is concerned with not only sudden changes in a system but also slow processes that can open opportunities like recombining of evolved structures and process, renewal of the system and emergence of new trajectories (Wilkinson 2011; vale, Lawrence; Campanella 2005). Assuming cities as socio-ecological systems, comprising of both ecological and anthropogenic components whose interactions have an impact on its resilience. A network approach is seen beneficial to gain deeper insight into socio-ecological resilience (Janssen & Bodin 2006) This will be further discussed in the approach of this dissertation.
However, asking a simple question that can be answered in many ways is – what differentiates cities of 21st century from cities in the past? This question rakes the sheer foundation of our image of a city and makes us think in terms of morphological changes that have occurred. From a systems perspective, analysis of structural elements of complex adaptive systems lies in the nested networks they form(Janssen & Bodin 2006). For continuity of the same language, we apply network perspective to socio-ecological systems to analyze the structure of interactions in terms of nodes and links. The overarching research question from a network perspective is -
Which roles do (multiple) networks and (diversified) nodes play in making a region/city/city quarter/neighborhood (more) resilient?
The motive is to develop spatial planning tools to support the ecosystem approach (considering bio-physical and socio-economic factors, suitability of cultured species, scale of operations and farming technologies employed) to aquaculture and fisheries development. But, as a beginner, I would like to know what are the spatial planning tools widely used in these kind of research. Any kind of help is greatly appreciated.
Creative city is a cutting-edge topic for urban and regional policies, however, it's really difficult to find spatial planning tools on this matter (such as maps, cartography, indicators, development plans, local action plans,ecc.). Do you know some interesting case-studies?
Why most of landscape fragmentation studies use use categorical maps to depict patterns of fragmentation rathern than conventional topographical maps?
Last day US Geological Survey (USGS) and Esri released new map of global ecological units. Here is the information: http://blogs.esri.com/esri/esri-insider/2014/12/09/the-first-detailed-ecological-land-unitsmap-in-the-world/?utm_source=esri&utm_medium=email&utm_term=78724&utm_content=article&utm_campaign=globe_2014
What do you think about it? Can it be used in spatial planning in your country?
Is this a question of semantics, or is there a genuine fundamental difference between the two? - e.g., that marine spatial planning involves better spatial organisation of activities in the ocean for long-term sustainability of ecosystems and associated goods and services, whereas maritime spatial planning is simply better organisation of ocean-based activities excluding a link to environmental sustainability.
They seem to be used interchangeably but I can't find a concrete comparison of the two terms. Thanks in advance.
The relation between these two kinds of plans are very important but in a lot of cases we don't have any strategic plan previously to a Spatial Plan. So we need to put a strong strategic component in the spatial plan (normally a Municipal Master Plan). But I think that it is very different.
I would like to determine endmembers using PPI method. The PPI is typically run on an MNF transform result.
However, I do not know when to apply an image fusion technique to the image data - is it before or after MNF transformation? Which technique can provide a better result!
Thanks for any help.
Economic planning was the forefront of planning in developing nations like India. Recently the new central government abolished the planning commission. They are looking for new planning organisation with more private and public participation. Whether there is chance to provide for spatial planning extending from city to region to district and state i.e. from micro to macro. What should be the role of various actors who may add to current budget based planning some spatial elements? Can the District Planning agencies can be strengthened to facilitate planning at grass roots.
Or did all these urban-regions emerge/are they emerging in developed countries that had some more characteristics than the defined dynamics in common which led them to a polycentric region?
There is a widespread effort to operationalize resilience in the context of urban spatial planning. However, an important precondition to this effort is the acquisition of evidence and documentation of the spatial characteristics and properties of social resilience. Does anyone have in mind a relevant study / work?
Does urban resilience mean an improved capacity for all to avoid, cope with and recover from shocks and adversities to which the community as a whole is exposed? Are there any conflicts between resilience of some groups and that of others? Does (personal) individualized make sense? If yes, are there any conflicts between personal and collective resilience?
I was looking for material on mitigating and adapting measures for climate change. But the problem I faced was that I mostly get policy framed proposals, or which are primarily related to technology and science, e.g. using green roofs etc. I wanted to know how spatial planning can help in mitigating and adapting to climate change. The scale will be around 1:200,000 (i.e. for a district in India). I believe that if you use this level of scale, you can do spatial planning measures best. If you use a larger scale, it will become more policy based framework, and if use a smaller scale, say 1:50000, then it will be a technological measure, and will not solve my purpose.
While polycentric urban regions identified by scholars as a new urban phenomenon and is a spreading pattern worldwide, what are the opposing reasons to this approach? Are there any ideas supporting the former patterns that mostly can be seen in developing countries-Urban Primacy?
My recent case study reveals that frequently impact assessors are unable to apply SEA because they consider some spatial plans to have none of the strategic aspects to assess. It got me curios about the roots of spatial strategy and impact assessment. Hence, considering the context of SEA, when can we say that a spatial decision is strategic one and how to call the other decisions – design, operational or tactical?