Suchergebnisse

The concept of urban 'walkability' has come to occupy a key role at the nexus of a series of multidisciplinary fields connecting urban design and planning to broader issues of public health, climate change, economic productivity and social equity. Yet the concept of walkability itself remains elusive – difficult to define or operationalise. Density, functional mix and access networks are well-recognised as key factors: density concentrates more people and places within walkable distances; functional mix produces a greater range of walkable destinations; and access networks mediate flows of traffic between them. This complex synergy of density, mix and access – herein called the urban DMA – largely stems from the work of Jacobs. With an approach based in assemblage thinking we show that each of these factors is multiple and problematic to define or measure. Any reduction to a singular index of morphological properties can involve a misrecognition of how cities work. We argue that walkability is a complex and somewhat nebulous set of capacities embodied in any urban morphology, and that it should not be conflated with nor derived from actual levels of walking.

Cover; Half Title; Title Page; Copyright Page; Table of Contents; Contributors; 1 Mapping as Spatial Knowledge; Research Mapping; Assemblage Thinking; Diagramming; Spatial Knowledge; Capacities; Flows; Territories; Acknowledgement; References; Part I Capacities; 2 Functional Mix; Measuring Mix; Entropy; Dissimilarity; Destinations; Proxies; Mixed-use Index; Mix as Assemblage; The Live/Work/Visit Triangle; Three Cities; A Mix of Mixes; Acknowledgement; Notes; References; 3 Walkable Access; Permeability; Catchment; Integration; Three Contrasting Metrics; Six Cases; Properties and Porosities.

In two recent papers Storper and Scott have sought to counter the rise of assemblage thinking in urban studies, suggesting it is indeterminate, jargon-ridden and particularist – that it lacks a critique of power. Against such approaches they propose the 'nature of cities' as an 'urban land nexus' driven by the economics of agglomeration. In this paper we respond, largely agreeing on jargon yet arguing that assemblage is a form of critical urban thinking that holds potential for a general but open theory of urbanity. We also suggest that many parts of Scott and Storper's own work are entirely compatible with assemblage thinking, including concepts such as urban 'bundling' and 'buzz'. Agglomeration theory explains why cities emerge and grow where they do but is weak on issues of scale and morphology. Assemblage thinking embodies capacities to expand urban studies through a better engagement with multi-scale relations, gearing the economics of agglomeration to the study of urban morphology; understanding cities in terms of their possible futures as well as actual conditions. We call for more open and productive interfaces between research disciplines and approaches – a deterritorialisation of urban theory. The choice is not between agglomeration and assemblage, it is between the singular and the multiple.

Space syntax analysis of the city as a movement economy has made major contributions to our understanding of the spatial structure of cities, particularly the importance of a mapping of network integration in relation to density, functional mix and streetlife vitality. It has focused attention of urban researchers onto the importance of the relations between the sociality and spatiality of the city. The primary methods of syntactic analysis involve a reduction of urban morphology to a set of spatial axes; here, we explore some limits to such analysis for urban design. Topological analysis of axial models has long recognized problems in accounting for distance, scale and sinuous streetscapes. Existing adaptations to axial methods that address such problems are modelled and shown to produce a broad range of results for the same urban morphology. In each case, we also compare different capacities for to-movement and through-movement – the distinction between 'closeness centrality' and 'betweenness centrality' that shows that network integration is multiple. We argue that axial analyses privilege visibility over accessibility and can produce distorted mapping at walkable scales; only one of the methods tested measures permeability and walkable access. Space syntax analysis is a powerful tool that will be more useful the better such limits are understood.

Informal settlements and slums are the most pervasive modes of urbanization on the planet, housing up to 2 billion people and absorbing most rural-to-urban migration worldwide. This presents architects, urban planners, and everyone working to improve the lives of the world's urban poor, with a uniquely complex and urgent challenge. Featuring 51 contemporary case studies of informal settlements from over 30 cities across the Global South, the Atlas of Informal Settlement is the first book to map the processes by which informal settlements and slums grow and develop. Each case study uses maps and aerial photographs to examine the key stages of development, while accompanying texts outline the impact of environmental, social, economic and political factors - ultimately revealing the hidden rules and logics embodied in informal settlements worldwide. As the focus of sustainable urban development shifts towards the upgrade of slums through community collaboration, it has become vital to understand how such places develop. The Atlas of Informal Settlement provides key insights, enabling designers and planners to better harness the positive capacities of informal production. The book is also interspersed with short chapters introducing key theoretical concepts - the issues and complexities at stake when thinking about informal settlements - making this book essential reading for all students, academics, and professionals working in informal settlement contexts, from architects and urban designers to NGOs, policy-makers, and community activists