Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

Urban design in the realm of urban studies

Forthcoming (2013) in Carmona, M. (Ed.), Urban design primer: Explorations in urban design. Aldershot: Ashgate.

ABSTRACT Most urban design debates of the twentieth-century have questioned its endurance as a coherent discipline choosing instead to located it rather conveniently in the interstices of architecture and planning. But given its continued preoccupation with aesthetic formalism triggering a general dissolution of the idea of the social, scholars are increasingly making a plea for an alternative social imagination of urban design by reorienting it towards social sciences. While the central argument of this chapter to situate urban design and urban studies together as cognate disciplines might seem to endorse this trend, there is a departure here, as the attempt is to generate an urban knowledge that can offer a counter-narrative of contemporary cities, mobilisinga new space of critical intervention. Their interactions help to decipher the rapidly urbanising, boundless landscape where, by shifting the attention from design to a focus on the urban, the resulting recombinant urbanism emphasises not only the rescaling of the urban but also rethink its postmetropolitanform through the emergent landscape of regional urbanism. Using examples from pedagogy as well as practice including the most recent example ofLe Grand Paris, this chapter finds that the tools and techniques of this recombinant urbanism facilitates a never seen before spatial imagination, where the flavour of the urban is retained even when it is being reformulated as something that is flexibly held between the local and the regional. It also generates space for new theories of visualisation where the core epistemological focus of urban design emphasising typological and morphological understandings of the city, which are frequently considered as methodological toolkitscan be restored as a genealogy of practice rather than mere representation. .

Pushpa Arabindoo

26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

Urban design in the realm of urban studies

Despite Cuthberts (2010: 444)timely reminder that urban design is a transhistorical process as old as cities and civilisation, and if anything, urban design invented itself, recent urban design debates have ironically been dominated by scepticism over its endurance as a coherent disciplinegenerating its own knowledge (Schurch 1999). Jettisoned by doubts over its ability to function as a field, practice or profession, many scholars have commonly argued for its repositioning where it can be informed by other disciplines beyond the bravado of just design (Verma 2011). Notwithstanding the risk of fracture from the diverse knowledges, it seems that the only way out for urban design is to borrow from other primate disciplines, an approach that has pretty much sealed the fate of contemporary urban design. Thus, much of twentieth-century urban design found itself convenientlylocated at the interstices of architecture and planning, coming across either as a weak extension of architectural imagination or the physical consequences of state planning policies. They hardly proved to be fruitful encounters as, by the beginning of the twenty-first century, urban design was reduced to a largely postmodern preoccupation whose commodified version of aesthetic formalism triggered a general dissolution of the idea of the social. Responding to the need for an alternative social imagination of urban design, scholars such as Cuthbert (2007) and Verma (2011) have emphasised the need to disentangle it from the traditional confines of architecture and planning, specifically recommending its reorientation to social science.

In this sense, at first glance, the crux of this chapter in making an argument for situating urban design alongside the cognate discipline of urban studies might seem to be similar to such convictions that an engagement with the social sciences is central to legitimising urban design. While this might be the starting point of the chapter, it signals a departure as well. For, such a repositioning is not just about redeeming urban design but also about generating a new urban knowledge that can offer a critical counter-narrative of contemporary

Pushpa Arabindoo

26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

cities. This chapter argues that by repositioning urban design alongside the allied discipline of urban studies, the push is not merely for a socially defined understanding of urban designbut a more meaningful recognition of the urban condition as both a social production of form and an inherently spatial process. At a moment when social sciences, particularly urban studies, are taking a spatial turn, it seems that there is some use for urban design, which fundamentally is about the production of space. This way, one does not reduce urban designs preoccupation with space to one of determinism or fetish but allows it to partake in the socio-spatial dialectic in a more useful manner (Soja 2003).

On the other hand, in spite of the decidedly spatial imagery of the urban studies narratives, the focus of such texts have been on subjectivities defined by class, race, gender, language, ethnicity, religion, identity, and nationality with little influence of the broader trends in architecture, urban design and planning. As two closely related realms of studying the city, what is being offered here is the forging of a productive working interface between two fields where urban design and urban studies resonate together to mobilise new spaces of critical intervention though a new genre of interactionisturbanists (Lin 1995). There are epistemological and methodological challenges attached to the production of this proposed recombinant urbanism,and these are explored in this chapter.1 Such a gesture shifts attention from design to a focus on the urban emphasising the need to rethink and rescale the urban in a more challenging manner between the local and the regional/global. The application of recombinant urbanism tools to this postmetropolitan phenomenon is illustrated through an examination of the emergent landscape of regional urbanism, briefly considering examples from pedagogy and practice.They help set up a critically effective framework, avoiding the placeless generalisations normally associated with the design and planning of regions.

Shane (2005) describes a different kind of recombinant urbanism where he splices together varying strands of urban design identifying urban actors who recombine elements to create conceptual models of the city at various scales to strengthen its position as an emerging field of enquiry.

Pushpa Arabindoo

26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

RETHINKING THE URBAN Although academic concern for the city is as old as the city itself, urban studies as a specific intellectual endeavour emerged in the early twentieth century when a variety of disciplines from the social sciences came together to outline powerful theories explaining the trends of urban society. Most of them were beguilingly simple models underlining not so useful paradigmatic pervasiveness that deflected attention away from the project of analyzing the full diversity of urban forms, generating instead a series of unproductive debates regarding the intellectual significance of particular cities (Brenner 2003: 206). The problem also lies in the fact that by being both the where and the what of study, the city is marked by ambiguities which undermines the endeavour of urban studies. Bogged by simple dualisms that remain rigidly fixed on either/or dichotomies or binary logic, urban studies finds itself constrained by simplistic invocations of theorising the city with much of this work remaining uncritical and impractical (Soja 2003).

Widely seen as a restless discipline, urban studies, in contrast to thesupposedly narrow focus of urban design on the design aspect of cities, seems to be caught in the trap of studying almost everything in society under the rubric of the urban, not to mention the extraordinary slipperiness of the urban phenomenon itself (Brenner et al. 2011: 226). As urban studies has come to imply an all-embracing ubiquitous research on cities, the need for a new form of critical engagement becomes obvious, through which urban studies and urban design can become more relevant to the larger project of critical urban theory. The kind of critical urbanism that is being called is not just about addressing questions concerning the articulation and possible disarticulation between capitalism and urbanism (Goonawardene 2011). Instead it is one that doesnt remain criticaltheory but overcomes it in practice (Brenner 2009). To achieve this, it is essential to rethink our basic assumptions regarding the object and site of our research, the urban. It begs a move away from the city as a bounded and homogenous entity to a focus on the urban as a point of formulation for widely divergent and dispersed processes (Rutland 2008). In the case of urban design, this requires a specific shift in thinking in terms of the urban rather than design as

Pushpa Arabindoo

26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

the urban has remained a passive backdrop instead of something that is constitutive of subjectivities and socialities (ibid.).But as Keil (2003) reminds us what we refer to as the urban is a complex, multiscale and multidimensional process where the general and specific aspects of the human condition meet the city/urban as a distinct object of critical urban research. And this is perhaps where urban design and urban studies together can play a pivotal role in clarifying the complex yet ambivalent relationship between social relations and the production of space as they engage (theoretically and empirically) with the plurality of the urban in acknowledging the multiple spatialities that define the essence of the city.

RESCALING THE URBAN The interaction of urban design and urban studies produces a new kind of recombinant urbanism that can potentially not only restore the hard won objectivity of urban social science, but also decipher the rapidly urbanising, boundless landscape. To gain a precise understanding of what the urban is today, how it manifests itself and what it could become, first of all, this recombinant urbanism needs to reconceptualise the urban question as a the scale question (Lefebvre 1976 cited in Brenner 2000), one that is still a challenge within urban studies. Most Marxist scholars view the urban as an entirely accidental and random choice of geographical scale. Moreover, everyday scalar terms such as local, urban, regional, national, and global are considered as static entities representing distinctive socioterritorial processes (localisation, urbanisation, regionalisation, nationalisation, and globalisation) (Brenner 2000). On the contrary, these scales cannot be understood in isolation from one another, as mutually exclusive or additive containers; rather they constitute deeply intertwined moments and levels of single worldwide sociospatial totality (ibid.: 369). In this context, it would be too simplistic to understand the urban as a selfdefined scalar entity. Instead, we need to allow a multiscalar articulation of the urban. Thus, the local, regional, national or global are not distinct spatial fixes but a scalar flux where the urban is continuously rescaled from the local to the global in a condition of planetary urbanisation (Brenner and Schmid 2011). Specifically, Pushpa Arabindoo 5
26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

regional re-territorialisation stands out actively as a crucial geographical arena illustrating this process of rescaling. This is where urban design offers an extraordinary opportunity for spatialising urban studies, providing exemplars in terms of rethinking the forms of the urban, particularly through the new emergent landscape of regional urbanism.

Regional urbanism To many, regionalism is an ambiguous term which at best means thinking bigger. Decades of association with the planning discourse has led to a narrow understanding of the region as something that is simply larger than the city, a scalar expansion from the urban. However, a body of urban studies scholars (primarily from the LA School) have recognised an ongoing radical reorganisation of regional space, referred to generally as a city-region and more specifically as the postmetropolis (Soja2000). The resulting new regionalism is not an alternative to a focus on cities but a radical reshaping of the urban in what is now clearly a process of regional urbanisation. While metropolitan urbanisation occupied a singular scale, regional urbanisation is definable at multiple scales, from the local to the global through a peculiar scalar convergence occurring in the growth of regional cities (Soja 2011). As concepts of city and region merge and blur challenging conventional views of what constitutes the urban and the non-urban, there is uncertainty regarding its empirical reality. Urban studies scholars (at least some of them) acknowledge this new regionalism as a specific cognitive interest, but struggle to provide a more concrete understanding of its spatiality. For, even though the region can be a true life space (Lynch 1976), in general, major elements of the urban are not clearly legible to most people at this scale, thereby leading to a misconstrued understanding that it cannot constitute part of the urban experience. But, contrary to Sojas (2009) assertion that urban design is trapped in a scalar warp, this chapter contends that the much needed clarity of regional urbanisation comes from an urban design embedded spatial imagination where the urban as both form and scale is deconstructed and reconstituted to reveal the social geography and changing built environment of the postmetropolis, an aspect

Pushpa Arabindoo

26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

that has been well explored by urban design, both pedagogically and through practice.

Lynch (1976) is perhaps one of the earliest scholars to set a precedent as he outlined suggestions for experiencing the sensory quality of the region through a glossary of different tools including a spatio-temporal mapping of sub-landscape typologies, detailing its ambient characteristics through the use of images and indices. In spite of these clear-cut recommendations, it must be acknowledged that as managing the sense of a region fell into the remit of planning, it has been bogged down by techniques that do not go beyond the lamentations, artistic conceptions, exhortations, and overblown, unrealistic site plans (ibid.). As a result, the region has often been perceived as a coarse-grain extended version of the urban, producing inexpressive, fuzzy renderings of the regional habitat. Over the years, several urban design studios in different North American universities have addressed the challenges of the American metropolis and metropolitan regions. Kelbaugh (1997) provides a good overview of a decade of urban design based studio charrettesconducted by the University of Washington to bring greater coherence to the Seattle region. Emphasising the use of three-dimensional graphic tools of urban design to understanding, designing, planning and developing the region, these workshops have tried to develop a typological understanding of critical regionalism by reinstating the neighbourhood as a unit of the region. More recently, the urban design programme at Graduate School of Design, Harvard University has introduced a three-year studio exercise speculating about alternative futures for the Mumbai Metropolitan Region. This isquite different from the landmark Project on the City studios lead by the Dutch architect Rem Koolhaas which sought to rethink the urban scale through a blatant architecture of bigness discourse.Thepedagogical thrust of the current studio is towards a collaborative approach with other (non-architecture) programmes including the Harvard Business School, Harvard Kennedy School and Harvard Law School whereby urban design is employed to provide a more nuanced inter-disciplinary understanding of the socio-ecological dimensions of the Mumbai Metropolitan Region (Figure 1).

Pushpa Arabindoo

26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

FIGURE 1 HERE

From a practice-based perspective, a good illustration of this effort is the Le Grand Paris project, a state-led initiative to rethink Paris not as a city but a region using approaches that neither seem like bland planning strategies nor can be seen simply as large-scale urban design. Initiated in 2007 by the then French President Nicolas Sarkozy to produce a new political vision for Paris, Le Grand Paris was also meant to create a new paradigm for urbanism. What is notable is the characteristic urban design approach adopted in this restructuring of the relations between the city and its region. Ten teams of international architects were commissioned to create an imagined community, a set of social relations, an economy and an institutional framework thatoperates in and through a multiscalar reorganisation of the postmetropolitan condition. They demonstrate a profound shift in methodologies that clearly suggest the kind of recombinant urbanism that this chapter has been proposing by bringing together epistemological and methodological aspects from the two realms of urban design and urban studies. The resulting new consensus of urbanism is not without challenges. It highlights a complex, changing, non-local and mixed socio-spatial reality that is the urban, even as concerns of hierarchisation of spaces and intensified polarisation at all levels cannot be ignored (Enright 2012).

Nevertheless, this approach has facilitated a renewed spatial imagination of the region, exploring issues in the form (literally) of the social, economic, cultural and political. It not only revamps the inherited cartographies that have long underpinned urban investigations but also radically reconfigures the urban as they clarify the topological and typological characteristics of regional urbanisation (Figure 2). Urban design is used effectively to redraw the morphology of the region, not merely as a pattern-making exercise but to grasp in the same object the micro-scale detail of everyday situations as well as the strategic territorial scale of the metropolitan region as a whole. While it risks exposing the ground for territorial reappropriation and speculation, these schemes to a large extent recast

Pushpa Arabindoo

26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

our imagination of the urban landscape making crucial connections across scale between the local and the regional, providing an immediacy and physical congruity to an otherwise non-decrepit zone of urban wasteland.

FIGURE 2 HERE

NEW EPISTEMOLOGICAL AND METHODOLOGICAL TOOLS One reason why urban studies views urban design with suspicion is the latters prioritisation of the visual, based on an assumed aesthetic consciousness that is supposedly bereft of more pressing social, economic, cultural and political issues. For social scientists, this is a superficial preoccupation easily favouring the marketisation and commodification of the built environment. If social sciences have any kind of engagement with the visual, it is purely methodological with little acknowledgement of its ability to mediate and constitute social relationships. Rooted in this prejudice, urban studies scholars have been quick to reject the instrumentality of urban design in the field of urbanism, deliberately reducing its core epistemological basis emphasising typological and morphological knowledge as a mere methodological or even less, a classificatory exercise. This, seemingly rigid and fixed toolkit is of little use to urban studies persistence in deciphering the city as text, signs or representation, on the basis that such an approach is more dynamic and fluid. Only a few such as Zukin (1987: 144) acknowledge that urban morphology could possibly not only resolve the methodological disagreements between neo-Marxist, neo-Weberian and mainstream analysts but also integrate cultural and economic analysis showing how the spatial and built environment concretizes, transmits, and transforms the citys constituent social interests. But for many, the inherent reliance of urban design on maps and diagrams is seen disparagingly as a process that involves the reduction of the urban landscape to a strictly codified set of regulations and guidelines. This is because of the suspicion with which urban studies and social sciences in general view the process of mapping as expressions of power/knowledge. While it would be too naive to assume that the world can be truthfully mapped using scientific techniques that capture and display spatial information, there is no point in dismissing urban Pushpa Arabindoo 9
26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

design for failing to reveal the truth of the landscape. For, the alternative of the social sciences to seek refuge in a positivistic domain like GIS can prove to be equally situated and value-laden as urban design mapping exercises.

This is perhaps why it might be useful for urban studies to take a closer, less critical view of projects like Le Grand Paris if only to better understand the urban design led process involving the production of maps and diagrams as not mere graphic representations of the urban plan based on a limited sense of a pattern language.Instead, it would be helpful to acknowledge its approach to citymaking where its suggested typological and morphological intensification of the region can provide a useful epistemological framing for urban studies. As lAUC, one of the ten teams involved in the project clarify, the use of typological (and morphological) diagrams is not to reinforce the old formula of a classificatory order but to generate an urbanism of substance, maximising the intensity between local, metropolitan and global conditions (2011: 105-9). Its preoccupation extends beyond the formal to the sociocultural addressing the scale of the post-metropolis as not just a mere plan but grasping simultaneously the micro-scale detail of everyday situations as well as the territorial scale of the region as a whole. While the ten urban design schemes envisioning Le Grand Paris could be criticised as a state-sanctioned, commercial cartographic initiative, urban design in the past has shown certain sensitivity in accommodating alternative viewpoints through counter mapping, challenging equally well the selfreferential nature of such proposals claiming accuracy of the urban condition. This compels one to rethink the typological and morphological exercises of urban design as not only methodological but as epistemological and ontological practices that allow to address quite effectively the more complex question of what is the urban scale by literally reassembling the urban. Empirically, the kind of mapping employed by urban design is a good alternative to what is popularly employed in urban studies GIS, setting up a practice which Kitchin and Dodge (2007) recognise as not just a narrow understanding of spatial representation but also the pursuit of representational solutions (not necessarily pictorial) to solve relational, spatial problems.

Pushpa Arabindoo

10

26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

Implications for research

Reflecting on what he considers as the existential problem of urban studies, Katz (2010) recounts how a persistent, depressing narrative of urban crisis poses a dilemma for urban studies as a field. He calls urgently for a viable counternarrative that does not naturalise public failure as the master narrative of urban history. Desperate for success stories that could be assembled into a coherent tale of progress and hope, he is at the same time aware that one cannot completely ignore the challenge of urban decline and failed urban policies. It is in the pursuit of this impossible space that this chapter suggests the development of a recombinant urbanism that brings together the essential elements of urban studies and urban design. The enthusiasm of the latter to do good and solve urban problems can be infectious and a good antidote to the cynicism of the former. For instance, urban design optimistically relies on best practices to provide a trenchant critique of current practice and develop better systems which, on the other hand, is considered with scorn by urban studies as something that is saddled with normative assumptions stunting creative expression, alternative visioning, debate and, ultimately perhaps, innovation in the built environment (Moore 2013). Thus, it is quickly dismissed as an instrument of urban entrepreneurialism and competitiveness abetting the creation of suspect imaginaries and the production of global relational geographies (McCann 2008; Peck and Tickell 2002). While this is harsh and a tad unfair, urban designs conviction in stories about best places can seem romanticised and even privileging the city of superlatives (Beauregard 2003). Developing the hybrid space of recombinant urbanism proves useful in this context where applying urban studies critically reflective lens of comparative urbanism effectively tempers urban designs boisterous search for excellence and helps avoid the narrow paradigmatic circumscription of best-practice driven initiatives (Figure 3).

FIGURE 3 HERE

Pushpa Arabindoo

11

26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

URBAN DESIGN IN URBAN STUDIES If urban design is criticised today for being atheoretical (see Chapter 1), it is in large part because its intellectual modesty is frequently mistaken for insubstantial theory. Critics are unreasonably mercurial in owning or disowning it, fixated as they are on a transient and superficial understanding centred around its aesthetic currency. Many believe that if it is to develop a guiding sensibility in explaining the wide array of urban transformations, it needs to be rooted in a deeper ideological reflection borrowed from other disciplines, particularly the social sciences as the latters counter-influence could possibly offer impressive insights into understanding the city (Verma 2011). Socialising urban design, however, is not as easy as it seems. Most social scientists outright condemn urban design as a particular form of capitalist urbanisation (Hubbard 1996). Rattled by the discomfort of urban design in dealing with the intense socio-political critique inherent in theories derived from Marxist analysis, they are uncertain as to whether urban design can deepen, extend and transform our understanding of capitalist structurations of urbanisation. Even though their suspicions are justified, their confident positioning within the realm of urban studies to seek answers to the still unresolved urban question is not reassuring either. The broad field of urban studies might provide the much-needed theoretical thrust in understanding our cities, but most of it tends to polarise itself in potentially unproductive ways. It seems that social theory of cities alone can never be a chimeric search for the essence of the urban (Keith 2000). Given that the production of space has important materialities, it might therefore be useful to bring a distinctively architectural understanding of form, type and spatial configuration into the theory of social space (Lehtuvuori 2012).

This chapter provides this critical injection through a recombinant urbanism produced by situating urban design and urban studies together. Urban design here is not a mere applied dimension of urban studies, but one that can reexamine the forms of the urban in a Lefebvrian sense as we ask what is urban about cities and rethink the genealogy of the urban as a complex, multiscalar condition. As the urban question is redefined as a scale question, we find that this

Pushpa Arabindoo

12

26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

is something urban design undertakes quite comfortably as recent engagements reveal its uncanny ability to rescale deftly from the local to the global to address postmetropolitan challenges. In the case of urban studies, this simultaneous turning inside out and outside in of the urban meddles with its traditional understandings of what is urban, suburban, exurban, not urban, etc. Urban design, on the other hand, has adapted more successfully in reconstituting the urban as seen in recent examples to rescale major metropolitan cities such as Le Grand Paris. This is achieved by including aspects of social analysis into the design process alongside conventional urban design techniques involving a visual array of representation. In fact, typological and morphological emphasis of urban design clarifies the regional scale in what could otherwise have remained as mere outlines of an abstract plan. While these proposals are not without challenges, they exemplify well useful aspects of a recombinant urbanism produced at the interface of urban design and urban studies. They are also a belated reminder of something that both urban designers and urban studies scholars have ignored for quite some time now Lynchs (1976) seminal observation that our senses are local but our experience is regional.

REFERENCES Beauregard, R. A. (2003). "City of superlatives." City & Community2(3): 183-199. Brenner, N. (2000). "The urban question as a scale question: reflections on Henri Lefebvre, urban theory and the politics of scale." International Journal of Urban and Regional Research24(2): 361-378. Brenner, N. (2003). "Stereotypes, archetypes, and prototypes: three uses of superlatives in contemporary urban studies." City & Community2(3): 205-216. Brenner, N. (2009). "What is critical urban theory?" City13(2-3): 198-207. Brenner, N., D. J. Madden, et al. (2011). "Assemblage urbanism and the challenges of critical urban theory." City15(2): 225-240. Brenner, N. and C. Schmid (2011). Planetary urbanisation. Urban Constellations. M. Gandy. Berlin, Jovis: 10-13. Cuthbert, A. (2010). "Whose urban design?" Journal of Urban Design15(3): 443448. Pushpa Arabindoo 13
26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

Cuthbert, A. (2011). Urban design and spatial political economy. Companion to urban design. T. Banerjee and A. Loukaitou-Sideris. Abingdon and New York, Routledge: 84-96. Cuthbert, A. R. (2006). The form of cities: political economy and urban design. Malden MA, Blackwell Publishing. Cuthbert, A. R. (2007). "Urban design: requiem for an era review and critique of the last 50 years." Urban Design International12(4): 177-223. Enright, T. E. (2012). A thousand layers of governance: the metropolitan project of Grand Paris. WPSA Annual Conference. Portland OR, Western Political Science Association. Goonewardena, K. (2011). Critical urbanism: space, design, revolution. Companion to urban design. T. Banerjee and A. Loukaitou-Sideris. Abingdon and New York, Routledge: 97-108. Hubbard, P. (1996). "Urban design and city regeneration: social representations of entrerpreneurial landscapes." Urban Studies33(8): 1441-1461. Katz, M. B. (2010). "The existential problem of urban studies." Dissent57(4): 65-68. Keil, R. (2003). "Urban political ecology." Urban Geography24(8): 723-738. Keith, M. (2000). Walter Benjamin, urban studies, and the narratives of city life. A companion to the city. G. Bridge and S. Watson. Malden MA, Blackwell Publishing: 410-429. Kelbaugh, D. (1997). Common place: Toward neighborhood and regional design. Seattle, University of Washington Press. Kitchin, R. and M. Dodge (2007). "Rethinking maps." Progress in Human Geography31(3): 331-344. l'AUC Architects and Urbanists (2011). "The metropolis as integral substance." Architectural Design81(1): 102-109. Lin, J. (1995). "Ethnic places, postmodernism, and urban change in Houston." The Sociological Quarterly36(4): 629-647. Lynch, K. (1976). Managing the sense of a region. Cambridge MA, MIT Press. McCann, E. J. (2008). "Expertise, truth, and urban policy mobilities: Global circuits of knowledge in the development of Vancouver, Canada's 'four pillar' drug strategy." Environment and Planning A40(4): 885-904.

Pushpa Arabindoo

14

26/06/2013

Urban design/urban studies

Draft Do not cite without author consent

Moore, S. (2013). "What's wrong with best practice? Questioning the typification of new urbanism." Urban StudiesOnline: 1-17. Peck, J. and A. Tickell (2002). "Neoliberalizing space." Antipode34(3): 380-404. Rutland, T. (2008). "Book review Visualising the invisible: Towards an urban space." Journal of Regional Science48(3): 685-688. Schurch, T. W. (1999). "Reconsidering urban design: Thoughts about its definition and status as a field or profession." Journal of Urban Design4(1): 5-28. Shane, D. G. (2005). Recombinant urbanism: Conceptual modelling in architecture, urban design, and city theory. Chichester UK, Wiley-Academy. Soja, E. (2003). "Writing the city spatially." City7(3): 269-280. Soja, E. W. (2000). Postmetropolis: critical studies of cities and regions. Oxford, Blackwell Publishing. Soja, E. W. (2009). Designing the postmetropolis. Urban design. A. Krieger and W. S. Saunders. Minneapolis and London, University of Minnesota Press: 255269. Soja, E. W. (2011). "Beyond postmetropolis." Urban Geography32(4): 451-469. Verma, N. (2011). Urban design: an incompletely theorized project. Companion to urban design. T. Banerjee and A. Loukaitou-Sideris. Abingdon and New York, Routledge: 57-69. Zukin, S. (1987). "Gentrification: Culture and capital in the urban core." Annual Review of Sociology13: 129-147.

Pushpa Arabindoo

15

26/06/2013