The third issue raised in this section, namely exaggeration of the design applications of urban morphology methods, is perhaps the least significant of the three issues. However, just as some scholars are fascinated with advanced algorithms, other scholars seem preoccupied with the succeeding historic layers of the city (see Kropf, 2018; Oliveira, 2018; Strappa, 2018). Perhaps, this position is not surprising given that urban morphology developed from such studies of cartographic maps from historical archives used to trace the physical development of cities alongside social, economic, and technological changes in society over time. However, these scholars arguably exaggerate the potential of such analyses. Space syntax has established a consultancy firm based on provision of morphological analysis in urban design such as evaluation of pedestrian movements in urban planning proposals. However, although such tools may enhance spatial analysis in developing a design brief, it does not provide tangible design solutions. Analogously, the works of scholars such as Kropf (2018), Strappa (2018), and Oliveira (2018) emphasize the design potential in analyzing the historical development of a city. I am somewhat critical of any approach to design that emphasizes a singular aspect of the wide array of factors that contribute to the emergence of high-quality design solutions. The architecture profession is arguably about applying a broader scope to problems and design proposals compared to engineers who are typically specialized in a narrow field such as ventilation, acoustics, or lighting. An excessive focus on one of such aspects will likely not lead to better design proposals. Similarly, a narrow design approach focusing on the historical developments of a context will likely yield mixed results. The layers of historical developments that have shaped the context may constitute an important factor to consider in some cases. In other cases, not so much. In most cases, it is unlikely the most essential driver of the development of an architecture project and it seems counterproductive to teach students to emphasize this single factor in response to the complex challenges that face contemporary society such as energy consumption, adaptability to changing programs, and social inclusion. Lastly, I would like to outline what I believe are more appropriate approaches to architecture, spatial planning, and research on urban morphology. I believe urban morphology research should emphasize development of scientific theories that explain how cities are shaped. These should be based on principles from which you can deduce empirically testable propositions. Urban development policy should in turn be informed by such theories once these have been through rigorous empirical tests and peer review validation. I believe policy based on such empirical research will be advantageous in reaching political goals. Furthermore, research in urban morphology should continue to emphasize the development of tools and methods for analyzing cities. Such tools should advance the development of said theories and knowledge about the mechanisms which structure the development of cities rather than building complex models forecasting the urban development. I believe the latter endeavor can be dangerous as policy might increasingly be
guided by algorithms we do not understand. This may undermine democratic control of society due to a technocratic approach to conflicts of interest and may lead to flawed analyses as seen in previous studies in other fields (Madsbjerg, 2017). Architects and urban planners should increasingly discuss and address the greater challenges facing the world today, such as climate change, inequality, and social segregation. In addressing these issues broad inter-disciplinary holistic analyses are needed rather than narrow single-issue specialists. Such endeavors should arguably include both artistic experiments as well as research-based holistic analyses of the multitude of factors that inform the designer in order to enhance both ethical and aesthetic aspects of design projects. Architects should thus emphasize crossing scales and synthesizing all the different possibly opposing factors into integrated components in the proposals. Design, architecture, and spatial planning are arguably about shaping the physical and material aspects of the human condition in regards to optimization of livelihood and responsible use of the resources. This should include a thorough assessment of the cultural, technical, economic, social, and environmental conditions of the context along a value-based negotiation between these different factors in shaping the design. Accordingly, good design should enhance the quality of life, equitable distribution of resources, and sustainable development for future generations.
REFERENCES
Agha, M., & Lampert, L. (2020, December 16). Outrage: Informality is a fallacy. Architectural Review. https://www.architectural-review.com/essays/ outrage/outrage-informality-is-a-fallacy Andersen, J. E., Jenkins, P., & Nielsen, M. (2015a). Who plans the African city? A case study of Maputo: part 1 – the structural context. International Development Planning Review, 37(3), 329–350. https://doi. org/10.3828/idpr.2015.20 Andersen, J. E., Jenkins, P., & Nielsen, M. (2015b). Who plans the African city? A case study of Maputo: part 2 – agency in action. International Development Planning Review, 37(4), 423–443. https://doi. org/10.3828/idpr.2015.25 Angel, S. (2000). Housing policy matters: A global analysis. Oxford University Press. Chomsky, N. (2016). Who rules the world? Metropolitan Books. Fathi, S., Sajadzadeh, H., Mohammadi Sheshkal, F., Aram, F., Pinter, G., Felde, I., & Mosavi, A. (2020). The Role of Urban Morphology Design on Enhancing Physical Activity and Public Health. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 17(7), 2359. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph17072359
273
