Western University Scholarship@Western

Geography Publications Geography Department

2006

Mapping Urban Morphology: A Classification Scheme for Interpreting Contributions to the Study of Urban Form

Pierre Gauthier Concordia University

Jason Gilliland University of Western Ontario

Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/geographypub

Part of the Geography Commons

Citation of this paper: Gauthier, Pierre and Gilliland, Jason, "Mapping Urban Morphology: A Classification Scheme for Interpreting Contributions to the Study of Urban Form" (2006). Geography Publications. 111. https://ir.lib.uwo.ca/geographypub/111 Mapping urban morphology: a classification scheme for interpreting contributions to the study of urban form

Pierre Gauthier Department of Geography, Planning and Environment, Concordia University, 1455 de Maisonneuve Ouest, Montréal, Québec H3G 1M8, Canada. E-mail: [email protected] and Jason Gilliland Department of Geography, University of Western Ontario, Social Science Centre, London, Ontario N6A 5C2, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]

Revised version received 5 December 2005

Abstract. Urban morphology is a thriving field of enquiry involving researchers from a wide diversity of disciplinary, linguistic and cultural backgrounds. While this diversity has helped advance our understanding of the complexity of urban form, confusion and controversy has also arisen over the various theoretical formulations forwarded by researchers from different philosophical and epistemological backgrounds. With the aim of improving intelligibility in the field, this paper proposes a straightforward scheme to identify, classify and interpret, or ‘map’, individual contributions to the study of urban form according to their respective theoretical or epistemological perspectives. Drawing upon epistemological discussions familiar to the readers of this journal, the authors first distinguish between cognitive and normative studies. A second distinction is made between internalist studies that consider urban form as a relatively independent system, and externalist studies in which urban form stands as a passive product of various external determinants. Using these basic criteria, it is possible to interpret and synthesize a multitude of contributions and map them using a simple Cartesian grid. The paper highlights how contributions from seemingly different theoretical approaches to urban morphology are intrinsically similar in their treatment of urban form as an object of enquiry.

Key Words: urban morphology, built environment, epistemology, morphological theories, morphological approaches

Urban morphology, in simple terms, is the from a wide variety of disciplinary, linguistic study of city forms. While there is general and cultural backgrounds. Undoubtedly, part agreement among self-proclaimed ‘urban of the confusion arising from divergent morphologists’ as to what they study, there is theories and methods in urban morphology considerable debate over how urban forms are could be alleviated with a multi-lingual to be studied. An inevitable source of glossary of terminology in the field (cf. misunderstanding stems from the fact that Larkham and Jones, 1991; Malfroy, 1986). major contributions to urban morphological Nevertheless, a great deal of confusion and scholarship continue to be made by researchers controversy is due to the diversity (and

Urban Morphology (2006) 10(1), 41-50 © International Seminar on Urban Form, 2006 ISSN 1027-4278 42 Mapping urban morphology apparent incompatibility) of the various development of an internalist perspective on theoretical formulations that have been the development of urban form. adopted and presented by researchers from different philosophical and epistemological backgrounds (Gerosa, 1999). It has therefore Cognitive versus normative approaches been argued that one of the most urgent requirements in the field of urban morphology Our first level of classification sorts each is the elucidation of its philosophical or contribution according to the primary heuristic epistemological foundations (Conzen, 1998; purpose they serve (whether or not this Gerosa, 1999; Whitehand, 1999). It would purpose is explicitly stated by the author). In then be ‘possible to improve intelligibility surveying a sample of the most prominent despite differences of vocabulary and studies dealing with urban form, a twofold language, and thereby carry forward the distinction can be made. First, there are dialogue’ (Gerosa, 1999, p. 45). studies that are aimed at providing explana- In this paper, we propose a system to tions or developing explanatory frameworks or identify and interpret, or ‘map’, individual both (i.e. cognitive contributions); and contributions to the study of urban form secondly, there are studies aimed at deter- according to their respective theoretical or mining the modalities according to which the epistemological perspectives. In an effort to city should be planned or built in the future ‘improve intelligibility’ in urban morphology, (i.e. normative contributions). we offer a two-tiered examination of Drawing upon the work of Lang (1987), prevailing approaches in the field. First, we Moudon (1994) has proposed a similar distinguish between cognitive and normative distinction in her ambitious and fairly approaches to urban form, and then a second thorough exposé aimed at producing an distinction is made between what we term epistemological map of substantive research internalist and externalist contributions. related to urban design. She calls each Using these basic criteria, it is possible to category normative-prescriptive and substan- interpret and synthesize a multitude of tive-descriptive: ‘it is important to distinguish contributions and map them using a simple first between normative or prescriptive infor- Cartesian grid. It is not our aim here to mation (emphasizing the ‘what should be’) and provide a comprehensive review of research on substantive or critically descriptive knowledge urban form (see instead Conzen, 2001; Darin, (emphasizing the ‘what is’ and perhaps also 1998; Hofmeister, 2004; Marzot, 2002; Slater, the ‘why’)’ (p. 332). More recently, Levy 1990; Vilagrasa Ibarz, 1998; Whitehand, 1987, (2005) has suggested that the same distinction 1992); however, we do identify some of the be made in the field of urban morphology, to major contributions in order to illustrate the distinguish between what he termed normative utility of the proposed method of and cognitive approaches. classification. While it is not our intention to For the present purpose we have adopted suggest the superiority of any individual the more straightforward terminology used by contribution or approach, our discussion Levy. We use the expression cognitive to focuses particular attention on the so-called reflect the heuristic nature of an intellectual British, French, and Italian ‘schools’ of urban enterprise concerned with producing know- morphology which should be most familiar to ledge or at developing theoretical means, readers of this journal (Cataldi et al., 2002; methods and techniques destined to produce Darin, 1998; Moudon, 1997; Whitehand, such knowledge. Likewise, the term normative 2001). With the proposed framework we shall denotes accurately an intellectual exercise, highlight and discuss how contributions arising which aims at articulating a view of what the from these three seemingly different future should look like, or at exposing a theoretical approaches are intrinsically similar, doctrine or specific sets of norms and in that each one has contributed to the prescriptions that would serve such a view. Mapping urban morphology 43

Some social scientists or historians might enon. To add to the confusion, the applied raise an eyebrow at the suggestion that it is planning literature, including canonic texts of necessary to make a distinction between urbanism, often aim at conferring scientific cognitive and normative contributions, status on what is highly ideological (Choay, thinking that their different character is self- 1965; Lefebvre, 1970). evident. However, others might question the Whether there is an epistemological gap desirability or even the possibility, on between the explanatory and cognitive on the epistemological grounds, of making such a one hand and the normative on the other, as distinction. The fact that the same proposition implied by Choay (1965), or whether these could elicit two entirely legitimate but categories correspond to opposite conceptual opposite interpretations is indicative of the poles located on a continuum, as Moudon complexities at play in underlying epistem- (1992) suggests, is open to interpretation. The ological and philosophical questions. It is not former position suggests a difference in nature, our intention in the context of this short article while the latter implies a variation in intensity. to proceed to a thorough examination of such To distinguish between cognitive and questions; however, we will evoke briefly normative approaches does much to clarify the some epistemological considerations arising nature of the intellectual contribution of the from the proposed distinction. school of process typology, as exemplified by We posit that differentiating between the ideas of Italian architect Saverio Muratori. cognitive and normative studies is a critical Various commentators have posited that the step for clarifying the multi-faceted nature of Muratorian tradition has developed a the intellectual agenda of urban morphology. normative approach to the built environment. The field of urban morphology lies at the Moudon (1994) states for instance that the so- intersection of several academic disciplines called Italian school offers a renewed such as architecture, urban planning, theoretical foundation for urban planning and geography and history. Each of these design, which engages long-standing city disciplines is influenced in turn, by a variety of building traditions. She contrasts this traditions, research programmes, analytical contribution with the ‘scholarly’ approach of apparatuses, and in particular, by specific the so-called Conzenians, that is, British research problems and research objectives. researchers working in the tradition of Urban planning is a case in point, and one in geographer M.R.G. Conzen. Levy (2005) which the problem of the heuristic expressed a similar idea, when making a programmes and procedures is raised quite distinction between what he termed the acutely. As a practice, urban planning is normative approach of Gianfranco Caniggia clearly oriented towards action, whereas as a and the cognitive approach exemplified by the scholarly subject matter, it assumes a more work of M.R.G. Conzen. Such an interpret- complex and ambiguous character. The ation echoes that put forward by Whitehand discipline of urban planning seems to possess and Larkham (1992), who, in their genealogy a mixed identity: science, applied science and of research traditions in urban morphology, prescriptive practice (Levy and Spigai, 1989). characterize the Italian school as being In the fields of architecture and by extension preoccupied with urban design. We do not urban design and planning, the term ‘theory’ dispute such an interpretation, but suggest that for instance, could assume two distinctly it might obscure the scientific contribution different meanings. In some circumstances, made by proponents of process typology, and typically in the literature of applied planning, in particular those of the ‘second generation’, theory refers to a doctrine accompanied by a such as Cataldi, Maretto and Caniggia who, series of prescriptions. Whereas in other inspired by Muratori’s original ideas, have circumstances, the term theory – as scientists been working towards a science of the built would understand it – refers to a body of environment (Cataldi et al., 1997; Gerosa, principles put forward to explain a phenom- 1992). It is therefore more accurate to depict 44 Mapping urban morphology the intellectual enterprise of process typology such forms. Levy describes the common as both normative and cognitive and to map ground of these studies as ‘the idea that a individual studies according to their primary particular logic has dictated the organization of aim. Accordingly, we term cognitive those the urban fabric in different periods; that some contributions that aim to produce knowledge categories remain constant; that certain aspects (e.g. Caniggia, 1963, 1994) or develop are permanent; that there are rules of theoretical and analytical tools (e.g. Caniggia transformation over time that dictate changes and Maffei, 1979; Maretto, 1984), and we to the fabric; and that the organization and reserve the term normative for contributions development of the fabric are not random, but explicitly aimed at articulating a vision of the follow laws that urban morphology tries to future (e.g. Maretto, 2005, or the intellectual identify’ (Levy, 1999, p. 79). To comprehend contribution represented by the 1983 entry to the urban fabric in terms of ‘urban form’, the Campo di Marte alla Giudecca understood as a system of its own that is competition in Venice by Caniggia and his governed by internal sets of relations, team), or at formulating an approach to necessitates two prerequisites: first, that the planning practice (e.g. Caniggia and Marconi elements in the system are not discrete objects; (1986) on heritage preservation). and secondly, that the relations between The appeal of comparing and assessing the elements are not contingent. In other words, process typology and Conzenian approaches there exists an ‘internal’ logic to this system. resides in the fact that both have developed – Such a perspective allows for the development based on different philosophical and epistem- of theoretical frameworks that find the primary ological grounds – rather sophisticated explanation for morphogenesis in the descriptive and explanatory frameworks to constraints and potential for change present study urban form and its transformations. The within the system itself. We propose to call following section posits that these explanatory these approaches that are primarily concerned frameworks confer a similar epistemic status to with understanding the internal logic of the urban form as an object of enquiry, and that urban fabric internalist approaches to urban this common trait distinguishes these morphology. approaches from the vast majority of other Jean Castex and colleagues (1980) posit approaches to the study of urban form. that, although to a certain extent a city is a material projection of social, political and economic systems or structures, to compre- Internalist versus externalist approaches hend it as a built object and a form comprising the city as an object allows one to observe that According to the second proposed criterion for this projection proceeds through various classification, each contribution is sorted systems of spatial symbolization, and is according to the epistemic status conferred to manifested in a substance, the built space, that urban form: by distinguishing between has its own consistency and resilience (Castex contributions that consider urban form as a et al., 1980, XI). The understanding of such relatively independent system, and modes of spatial symbolization and of contributions in which urban form stands as a structurally resilient settlement configurations dependent variable, or passive product of and urban forms that make up the specific various external determinants. physiognomy of a city lies at the heart of the An examination of the key research heuristic project of internalist approaches to traditions in urban morphology, specifically urban morphology. the British, Italian and French schools, reveals Alternatively, we label as externalist those that they hold in common the intent to capture approaches that primarily see the urban form in the empirical reality of the city, some as the end product of processes driven by ‘forms’, understood here as the form of the political (e.g. Çelik, 1997), anthropological urban fabric, and to study intricate details of (e.g. Rapoport, 1977, 1982; Rykwert, 1988), Mapping urban morphology 45 geographical and economic (e.g. Vance, 1977, disciplines. This simple theoretical a priori 1990), historical (e.g. Benevolo, 1980), and allows us to better understand the complexity perceptual (e.g. Lynch and Rodwin, 1958; of the urban built environment, and in Lynch, 1960) determinants. Historically, particular to better comprehend how the externalist contributions have been far more process of a city’s physical formation has its numerous than internalist ones; notwith- own weight and inertia, that work to oppose standing the numbers, the importance of the social, economic and political factors, in the internalist approach lies in its ability to same way that it has been alternatively produce original and highly innovative assumed that the physical development of the interpretations of urban material culture. city is conditioned by these factors. We posit that a common object of enquiry, i.e. the city as a spatial form, and a common conceptualization of the urban built environ- Mapping urban morphology ment as a dynamic system granted with relative autonomy, connects the contributions The usefulness of graphically mapping various of the three ‘schools’ and constitutes the contributions to the study of urban form on a primary core of the urban morphology research grid should be seen at both a practical level for programme, albeit this programme is still in researchers interested in urban morphology, the process of becoming a paradigm. From an and at a more analytical and epistemological epistemological perspective, the commen- level, as it elicits new interpretations on the surability of the cognitive-explanatory nature of contributions or groups of theoretical frameworks developed under the contributions that deal with urban form. This auspices of the three schools of urban section will illustrate the benefits of the morphology lies in their common internalist mapping exercise by discussing briefly some perspective. It is interesting to discover how of its results (see Figure 1). It is not our these similarly systemic or structuralist intention to draw a comprehensive picture of frameworks were informed by particular the various contributions to urban morphology, disciplinary and philosophical traditions that but we do reference some well-known are only very remotely connected: geographer contributions in order to illustrate the M.R.G. Conzen drew insights from Cassirer’s pertinence of the proposed approach. philosophy of symbolic forms (Conzen, 1998), At a practical level, the grid allows for a whereas Italian architect and planner Caniggia synthetic representation of some common- was inspired by the European continental alities and distinctions observable in the structural linguistics, particularly the structural theoretical and epistemological perspectives phonology of the Cercle de Prague (Caniggia favoured in various contributions. Such and Marconi, 1985; Caniggia, 1988). The mapping is beneficial as it provides an adoption of Italian methods by architectural immediate basis for comparison when faced scholars in France marked their entrance into with the corpus of contributions emanating the animated French structuralist debate from a variety of disciplinary traditions and (Cohen, 1984). linguistic environments. In fact, the idea to Perhaps the most important contribution of develop such a tool originated in the authors’ urban morphology to the study of cities has attempts to make sense of the wide variety of been to show how the built environment can contributions to the study of urban form by be understood as a system of relations researchers in Canada (Gilliland and Gauthier, submitted to rules of transformation. The 2006) (see this issue, pp. 51-66). When conceptual possibility to capture some cultural conducted more comprehensively, the occurrences in systemic terms has proven mapping can help to identify tendencies in a extremely fruitful in urban morphology, as it national research effort on urban form, for has in numerous other scientific fields and instance, or to distinguish the leanings of 46 Mapping urban morphology

Figure 1. Mapping contributions to the study of urban form.

various groups of researchers, whether or not scientific studies concerned with the city as an these groups conduct formal exchanges. artifact and spatial form, and which On a more analytical level, in addition to conceptualize its built environment as a the intrinsic heuristic value of the proposed system. Such a depiction best qualifies the categories, the mapping allows one to study work of M.R.G. Conzen (1960, 1962, 1968), the distribution of various contributions in for instance, as well as the scientific efforts of different quadrants in order to identify patterns various proponents of process typology. of concentration (possible research ‘clusters’) Whereas Muratori’s philosophy and research or dispersion. The exercise allows for the methods broke the ground, the second recognition of similarities or differences generation process typologists such as between narratives, which might otherwise go Caniggia and Maffei (1979), Cataldi (1977), unnoticed. and Maretto (1984), have worked more A closer look at the grid reveals that the attentively at developing a science of the built internalist/cognitive quadrant includes various environment. The research tradition known as Mapping urban morphology 47 space syntax has also produced several States in recent decades, such as New important contributions to urban morphology Urbanism (Duany et al., 1999) and transit- that fall in this category, and is best oriented development (Calthorpe, 1993). represented by the work of Bill Hillier and In the externalist/normative quadrant group Julienne Hanson from the Bartlett School of are studies that develop applied approaches to Planning at University College London (e.g. the processes dealing with the making of urban Hillier and Hanson, 1984; Hillier, 1996). fabrics. Among the contributions to be found The externalist/cognitive quadrant regroups in this category are those arising from the scientific contributions concerned with the researchers who first developed externalist forms and transformations of the urban built explanatory theoretical frameworks and then environment, but which rely predominantly on translated them into operational planning and explanatory frameworks based on external design tools for the benefit of practitioners conditions of development. The vast majority (e.g. Larkham, 1992, 1996; Lynch, 1981; of scientific contributions dealing with urban Rapoport, 1977). form (especially from the Anglo-Saxon world) have adopted a common externalist perspective, even though they have come from Conclusion a wide array of disciplinary perspectives (e.g. Benevolo, 1980; Lynch, 1960; Mumford, Thus far, most commentators in urban 1961; Rapoport, 1982; Vance, 1977). Most of morphology have insisted on the simple the work that has been conducted in the so- cognitive/normative dichotomy to characterize called Conzenian tradition (most notably the research on urban form in general, and contributions of geographer Jeremy Whitehand contributions arising from the Conzenian and (1972a, b, 1974, Whitehand and Whitehand, process typology approaches in particular. 1984) has been concerned with the impact of The mapping of specific contributions social or economic factors on the evolution of displayed in Figure 1 shows that, from the urban form. It therefore could be argued that proposed epistemological perspective at least, although these more recent contributions draw there might actually be more similarities upon Conzen’s ideas, they are fundamentally between the core contributions of M.R.G. different in that they adopt an externalist Conzen and the cognitive contributions of the explanatory framework. process typologists than there are between The studies categorized as internalist/ Conzen’s own work and the contributions of normative could be otherwise qualified as the so-called second generation Conzenians. urban design normative contributions, as they Reading the proposed mapping allows one aim at devising an urban form that has yet to also to visualize the dual nature of the be built. Many contributions from process intellectual contribution of process typology; typologists could be cited in this category (e.g. the enterprise has produced works of an Cervallati et al., 1981; Davoli and Zaffagnini, explanatory or cognitive nature as well as 1993; Maretto, 2005; Spigai, 1980). For normative treatises. The mapping stresses further discussion of the influence of typo- implicitly that its dual nature distinguishes morphological approaches on urban design, process typology from more purely normative see Lane (1993) and Nigrelli (1999). Some of planning and design theoretical perspectives the ideas about heritage preservation that have (e.g. New Urbanism), which are confined to been put forward by Conzenian researchers the internalist/normative quadrant. The said also belong in this category, such as Kropf ’s duality could raise specific epistemological (1996) paper on typological zoning and questions pertaining to the modalities Conzen’s (1966, 1975) own work on the utility according to which morphological knowledge of town-plan analysis. This category of could be operationalized in applied circum- studies also includes the popular urban design stances and, conversely, how planning issues doctrines that have come out of the United could be problematized for research. Spigai 48 Mapping urban morphology

(1980) and Levy and Spigai (1989) have ‘The Italian school of process typology’, Urban discussed such matters, and have proposed Morphology 1, 49-63. theoretical formulations aimed at building Çelik, Z. (1997) Urban forms and colonial bridges between the two heuristic poles. confrontations: Algiers under the French rule Accordingly, their contributions are mapped at (University of California Press, Berkeley). Cervallati, P.L., Scannavini, R. and De Angelis, C. the intersection of the cognitive and normative (1981) La nouvelle culture urbaine: Bologne categories. face à son patrimoine (Seuil, Paris). It is expected that the proposed ‘mapping’ Choay, F. (1965) L’urbanisme utopies et réalités system will be useful to act as a guide for (Seuil, Paris). future reviews of literature in the field. Cohen, J.L. (1984) ‘La coupure entre architectes et Furthermore, it is hoped that this system will intellectuels, ou les enseignements de l’italo- help to clarify and adequately acknowledge the philie’, in Secrétariat de la Recherche Architect- nature of a wide array of intellectual contri- urale Extenso (Ministère de l’Industrie et de la butions to the understanding, management and Recherche, Paris). making of the urban built environment. Conzen, M.P. (2001) ‘The study of urban form in the United States’, Urban Morphology 5, 3-14. Conzen, M.R.G. (1960) Alnwick, Northumberland: a study in town-plan analysis Institute of British References Geographers Publication 27 (George Philip, London). Benevolo, L. (1980) The history of the city (MIT Conzen, M.R.G. (1962) ‘The plan analysis of an Press, Cambridge, MA). English city centre’, in Norborg, K. (ed.) Boudon, F., Chastel, A., Couzy, H. and Hamon, F. Proceedings of the IGU Symposium in Urban (1977) Système de l’architecture urbaine. Le Geography Lund 1960 (Gleerup, Lund) 383- quartier de Halles à Paris (Éditions du CNRS, 414. Paris). Conzen, M.R.G. (1966) ‘Historical townscapes in Calthorpe, P. (1993) The next American metro- Britain: a problem in applied geography’, in polis: ecology, community and the American House, J.W. (ed.) Northern geographical essays dream (Princeton Architectural Press, New in honour of G.H.J. Daysh (University of York). Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne) Caniggia, G. (1963) Lettura di una città: Como 56-78. (Centro studi di storia urbanistica, Roma). Conzen, M.R.G. (1968) ‘The use of town plans in Caniggia, G. (1988) ‘Studio sui processi di the study of urban history’, in Dyos, H.J. (ed.) formazione e di mutazione delle tipologie The study of urban history (Edward Arnold, edilizie: stato della disciplina’, in Consiglio London) 113-30. Nazionale delle Ricerche Problemi del restauro Conzen, M.R.G. (1975) ‘Geography and townscape in Italia, Atti del Convegno Nazionale tenutosi conservation’, in Uhlig, H. and Lienau, C. (eds) a Roma nei giorni 3-6 novembre 1986 Anglo-German Symposium in Applied (Campanotto editore, Udine) 21-34. Geography, Giessen-Würzburg-München (Lenz, Caniggia, G. (1994) Lecture de Florence (Institut Giessen) 95-102. Supérieur d’Architecture Saint-Luc, Bruxelles). Conzen, M.R.G. (1998) ‘Apropos a sounder Caniggia, G. and Maffei, G.L. (1979) Compo- philosophical basis for urban morphology’, sizione architettonica e tipologia edilizia/1 Urban Morphology 2, 113-14. Lettura dell'edilizia di base (Marsilio, Venezia). Darin, M. (1998) ‘The study of urban form in Caniggia, G. and Marconi, P. (1986) ‘Continuità France’, Urban Morphology 2, 63-76. tipologica e manutenzione consepevole: metodi Davoli, P. and Zaffagnini, M. (1993) Progettare nel e tecniche per la mutazione fisiologica della tessuto urbano (Alinea, Firenze). città’, Restauro e città, anno II, 127-44. Duany, A., Plater-Zyberk, E. and Speck, J. (1999) Castex, J., Celeste, P. and Panerai, P. (1980) Suburban nation: the rise of sprawl and the Lecture d’une ville: Versailles (Éditions du decline of the American dream (North Point Moniteur, Paris). Press, New York). Cataldi G. (1977) Per una scienza del territorio Gerosa, P.G. (1992) Éléments pour une histoire des (Alinea, Firenze). théories sur la ville comme artefact et forme Cataldi, G., Maffei, G.L. and Vaccaro, P. (1997) spatiale (XVIIIe - XXe siècles) Collection villes- Mapping urban morphology 49

société-idées 7 (Université des sciences (eds) Le plan et l’architecture de la ville. Il humaines de Strasbourg, Strasbourg). piano e l’architettura della città (Cluva editrice, Gerosa, P.G. (1999) ‘The philosophical foundations Venezia) 137-52. of urban morphology’, Urban Morphology 3, Levy, A. and Spigai, V. (1992) La qualité de la 44-45. forme urbaine Rapport pour le Ministère de Gilliland, J. and Gauthier, P. (2006) ‘The study of l’Équipement du Logement et des Transport urban form in Canada’, Urban Morphology 10, (Secrétariat Permanent du Plan Urbain, Paris). 51-66. Lynch, K. (1960) The image of the city (MIT Press, Habraken, N.J. (1998) The structure of the Cambridge, MA). ordinary: form and control in the built Lynch, K. (1981) Good city form (MIT Press, environment (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA). Cambridge, MA). Hillier, B. (1996) Space is the machine (Cambridge Lynch, K. and Rodwin, L. (1958) ‘A theory of University Press, Cambridge). urban form’, Journal of the American Institute Hillier, B. and Hanson, J. (1984) The social logic of of Planners 24, 201-14. space (Cambridge University Press, Malfroy, S. (1986) ‘Introduction à la terminologie’, Cambridge). in L’approche morphologique de la ville et du Hofmeister, B. (2004) ‘The study of urban form in territoire Eidgenössische Technische Germany’, Urban Morphology 8, 3-12. Hochschule Zürich, Architekturabteilung, King, A.D. (1984) ‘The social production of (Geschichte des Stadtebaus, Zürich) 12-76. building form: theory and research’, Society and Maretto, P. (1984) Realtà naturale e realtà Space 2, 429-56. costruita (Alinea editrice, Firenze). Kostof , S. (1991) The city shaped: urban patterns Maretto, P. (2005) ‘Urban morphology as a basis and meanings through history (Thames and for urban design: the project for the Isola dei Hudson, London). Cantieri in Chioggia’, Urban Morphology 9, 29- Kropf, K.S. (1996) ‘An alternative approach to 44. zoning in France: typology, historical character Marzot, N. (2002) ‘The study of urban form in and development control’, European Planning Italy’, Urban Morphology 6, 59-73. Studies, 4, 717-37. Moudon, A.V. (1986) Built for change: Lane, A. (1993) Urban morphology and urban neighborhood architecture in San Francisco design: a review Occasional Paper 35, (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA). Department of Planning and Landscape Moudon, A.V. (1992) ‘A catholic approach to (University of Manchester, Manchester). organizing what urban designers should know’, Lang, J. (1987) Creating architectural theory: the Journal of Planning Literature 6, 331-48. role of the behavioral sciences in environmental Moudon, A.V. (1994) ‘Getting to know the built design (Van Nostrand Reinhold, NewYork). landscape: typomorphology’, in Frank, K.A. and Larkham, P.J. (1992) ‘Conservation and the Schneekloth, L.H. (eds) Ordering space. Types changing urban landscape’, Progress in in architecture and design (Van Nostrand Planning 37, 87-183. Reinhold, New York) 289-311. Larkham, P.J. (1996) Conservation and the city Moudon, A.V. (1997) ‘Urban morphology as an (Routledge, London). emerging interdisciplinary field’, Urban Larkham, P.J. and Jones, A.N. (1991) A glossary of Morphology 1, 3-10. urban form Institute of British Geographers, Mumford, L. (1961) The city in history: its origins, Historical Geography Research Group its transformations, and its prospects (Harcourt Monograph 26 (Geo Books, Norwich). Brace and World, New York). Lefebvre, H. (1970) La révolution urbaine Muratori, S. (1960) Studi per una operante storia (Gallimard, Paris). urbana di Venezia (Istituto Poligrafico dello Levy, A. (1999) ‘Urban morphology and the Stato, Roma). problem of the modern urban fabric: some Nigrelli, F.C. (1999) Percorsi del progetto urbano questions for research’, Urban Morphology 3, in Francia e in Italia 1960-1997 (Officina 79-85. Edizioni, Roma). Levy, A. (2005) ‘New orientations in urban Rapoport, A. (1977) Human aspects of urban form: morphology’, Urban Morphology 9, 50-3. towards a man-environment approach to urban Levy, A. and Spigai, V. (1989) ‘Contribution au form and design (Pergamon Press, New York). projet urbain: éléments d’une théorie de la Rapoport, A. (1982) The meaning of the built composition urbaine’, in Levy, A. and Spigai, V. environment: a non-verbal communication 50 Mapping urban morphology

approach (Sage, Beverly Hills, CA). eclecticism in geographical research’, Area 4, Rykwert, J. (1988) The idea of a town: the 215-22. anthropology of urban form in Rome, Italy and Whitehand, J.W.R. (1972b) ‘Building cycles and the ancient world (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA). the spatial pattern of urban growth’, Samuels, I. and Pattacini, L. (1997) ‘From Transactions of the Institute of British description to prescription: reflections on the use Geographers 56, 39-55. of a morphological approach in design Whitehand, J.W.R. (1974) ‘The changing nature of guidance’, Urban Design International 2, 81-91. the urban fringe: a time perspective’, in Johnson, Slater, T.R. (1978) ‘Family, society and the J.H. (ed.) Suburban growth: geographical ornamental villa on the fringes of English processes at the edge of the Western city (Wiley, country towns’, Journal of Historical London) 31-52. Geography 4, 129-44. Whitehand, J.W.R. (ed.) (1981) The urban Slater, T.R. (ed.) (1990) The built form of western landscape: historical development and cities: essays for M.R.G. Conzen on the management (Academic Press, London). occasion of his eightieth birthday (Leicester Whitehand, J.W.R. (1987) The changing face of University Press, Leicester). cities: a study of development cycles and urban Spigai, V. (1980) Guide per l’analisi e la form (Basil Blackwell, Oxford). progettazione della funzione abitativa in aere Whitehand, J.W.R. (1992) The making of the urban urbane di impianto antico. Istituto universitario landscape (Basil Blackwell, Oxford). di architettura di Venezia (Dipartimento di Whitehand, J.W.R. (1999) ‘A century of urban teoria e tecnica della progettazione urbana, morphology?’, Urban Morphology 3, 1-2. Venezia). Whitehand, J.W.R. (2001) ‘British urban Vance, J.E. (1977) This scene of man: the role and morphology: the Conzenian tradition’, Urban structure of the city in the geography of Western Morphology 5, 103-9. civilization (Harper and Row, New York). Whitehand, J.W.R. and Whitehand, S.M. (1984) Vance, J.E. (1990) The continuing city: urban ‘The physical fabric of town centres: the agents morphology in western civilization (John of change’, Transactions of the Institute of Hopkins University Press, Baltimore). British Geographers, NS 9, 231-47. Vilagrasa Ibarz, J. (1998) ‘The study of urban form Whitehand, J.W.R. and Larkham, P.J. (eds) (1992) in Spain’, Urban Morphology 2, 35-44. Urban landscapes: international perspectives Whitehand, J.W.R. (1972a) ‘Urban-rent theory, (Routledge, London). time series and morphogenesis: an example of

Building Futures

The group Building Futures, set up by the Royal Examples of questions that Building Futures Institute of British Architects, seeks to address seeks to answer are: how and where shall we be future built environments, and issues affecting the living in 50 or 100 years’ time, when the climate built environment professions, in 20 years and even has changed and cities are bigger than ever? What further in the future. Its aims are: technologies will architects be using to design ! to promote debate on the future of the built buildings and what new materials will they be environment; specifying? How will new technologies affect the ! to influence relevant professionals, clients, buildings we use every day? educationalists, decision makers and policy Collaboration and dialogue are central to the makers to anticipate and analyse developments Building Futures programme. A steering group has affecting architecture and urban design, both as overall responsibility for the programme. There is professional disciplines and as activities also an advisory group which is involved in and influencing society; consulted on projects. ! to collaborate with key individuals and Questions and requests for further information organizations; should be directed to Karolina Grebowiec, Royal ! to build upon and complement existing work; Institute of British Architects, 60 Portland Place, ! to use a variety of media including publications London W1B 1AD, UK. E-mail: buildingfutures and events. @inst.riba.org