Mind mapping the topic of urbanism
Joseph Kim-keung Ho
Independent
Trainer
Hong
Kong, China
Abstract: The topic of urbanism
is a main one in Housing Studies. This article makes use of the mind
mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) approach to render an image on the
knowledge structure of urbanism. The finding of the review exercise is that its
knowledge structure comprises four main themes, i.e., (a) Descriptions of basic
concepts and information (b) Major underlying theories and thinking, (c) Main
research topics and issues, and (d) Major trends and issues related to
practices. There is also a set of key concepts identified from
the urbanism literature review. The article offers some academic and
pedagogical values on the topics of urbanism, literature review and the mind
mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) approach.
Key words: Urbanism, literature review, mind
map, the mind mapping-based literature review (MMBLR) approach
Introduction
Urbanism
is a main topic in Housing Studies. It is of academic and pedagogical interest
to the writer who has been a lecturer on Housing Studies for some tertiary
education centres in Hong Kong. In this article, the writer presents his
literature review findings on urbanism using the mind mapping-based literature
review (MMBLR) approach. This approach was proposed by this writer in 2016 and
has been employed to review the literature on a number of topics, such as
supply chain management, strategic management accounting and customer
relationship management (Ho, 2016). The MMBLR approach itself is not
particularly novel since mind mapping has been employed in literature review
since its inception. The overall aims of this exercise are to:
1.
Render an image of the knowledge structure of
urbanism via the application of the MMBLR approach;
2.
Illustrate how the MMBLR approach can be
applied in literature review on an academic topic, such as urbanism.
The findings from this literature review
exercise offer academic and pedagogical values to those who are interested in
the topics of urbanism, literature review and the MMBLR approach. Other than
that, this exercise facilitates this writer’s intellectual learning on these
three topics. The next section makes a brief introduction on the MMBLR
approach. After that, an account of how it is applied to study urbanism is
presented.
On mind
mapping-based literature review
The mind mapping-based literature review
(MMBLR) approach was developed by this writer in 2016 (Ho, 2016). It makes use
of mind mapping as a complementary literature review exercise (see the Literature on mind mapping Facebook page
and the Literature on literature review
Facebook page). The approach is made up of two steps. Step 1 is a thematic
analysis on the literature of the topic chosen for study. Step 2 makes use of
the findings from step 1 to produce a complementary mind map. The MMBLR
approach is a relatively straightforward and brief exercise. The approach is
not particularly original since the idea of using mind maps in literature
review has been well recognized in the mind mapping literature. The MMBLR
approach is also an interpretive exercise in the sense that different reviewers
with different research interest and intellectual background inevitably will
select different ideas, facts and findings in their thematic analysis (i.e.,
step 1 of the MMBLR approach). Also, to conduct the approach, the reviewer
needs to perform a literature search beforehand. Apparently, what a reviewer
gathers from a literature search depends on what library facility, including
e-library, is available to the reviewer. The next section presents the findings
from the MMBLR approach step 1; afterward, a companion mind map is provided
based on the MMBLR approach step 1 findings.
Mind
mapping-based literature review on urbanism: step 1 findings
Step 1 of the MMBLR approach is a thematic analysis on
the literature of the topic under investigation (Ho, 2016). In our case, this
is the urbanism topic. The writer gathers some academic articles from some
universities’ e-libraries as well as via the Google Scholar. With the academic
articles collected, the writer conducted a literature review on them to
assemble a set of ideas, viewpoints, concepts and findings (called points
here). The points from the urbanism literature are then grouped into four themes
here. The key words in the quotations are bolded in order to highlight the key
concepts involved.
Theme
1: Descriptions of basic concepts and information
Point 1.1.
“…"urban" is defined solely in terms
of population concentration-the greater the number of persons aggregated at a
place of settlement the more urban the place. (Thus, the terms
"urban" and "rural" are used solely as conveniences, not as
references to a dichotomy)…” (Fischer,
1975);
Point 1.2.
“The concept of new urbanism was created for rebuilding
communities which previously had automobile-oriented environments and
residential areas that were disconnected from social and commercial areas. New
urbanism is also referred to as neotraditional community design emphasizing a
walking-friendly environment” (Kim,
Lee and Bell, 2008);
Point 1.3.
“Urban
studies and Urban
Studies have long focused on studying the diverse and complex array of built
environments and social relations that constitute urbanism. Urbanism, in this context, connotes the
widest sense of the urban, addressing not only urbanisation and development but
also ways of life that define urban areas in specific historical periods” (McCann, 2017);
Point 1.4.
“For a movement that goes by perhaps dozens of names, the lack of
a unifying theory or definition of DIY urbanism is no surprise, at least
partially because it is such a capacious and free flowing concept. The term and its variants have been used to
describe everything from graffiti, skateboarding, parkour and flash mobs … to the creation of multi-acre, multi-million dollar
parks” (Finn, 2014);
Theme 2: Major underlying theories
and thinking
Point 2.1.
“…
cities are disproportionately
the locale of invention …; crime, particularly with regard to property ….; and
behaviors and attitudes which contravene standard morality-for example,
illegitimacy, alcoholism, divorce, irreligiosity, political dissent, violence
for social change, and the smoking of marijuana” (Fischer, 1975);
Point 2.2.
“….rather than the clearly expressed
hierarchy of landscape first, a promising and hopeful fusion
of landscape and urbanism happens when landscape is only one generative medium,
parlayed in conjunction with the traditional figure ground artifact of the city” (Sease, 2015);
Point 2.3.
“…cities are made coherent through the work of
their inhabitants, through the efforts of actors located elsewhere, and through
the power laden and uneven relations among these various actors, all set within
larger social and material contexts which tend to complicate straightforward
assumptions about causality” (McCann and Ward, n.d.);
Point 2.4.
“Aesthetic
urban planning is not
only about creating ambient surroundings, but also creating images, symbolic
representations, and fantasies discursively using books and advertising,
newspapers and television, research, and political agendas. These discursive
practices are used to signify an identifiable and/or imaginary place-identity
to form a sense of place or feeling of belonging to place” (Pløger, 2001);
Point 2.5.
“An
urban society is simply a society
with cities. That is, it has places that are the physical settings for urban
activities, practices, experiences, and functions. "Urbanism" denotes
the prevalence of urban places in a society” (Cowgill, 2004);
Point 2.6.
“Discourses
and discursive formations
in action produce truth, meaning-frames, and cultural schemes about the world.
Political use of discursive planning is made (for example) to stage the
possible meaning and interpretation of a community’s particular social and
spatial qualities. Planners, experts and politicians use texts, maps and
material objects in spatial planning and architecture so as to produce symbolic
discourses to be read” (Pløger, 2001);
Point 2.7.
“DIY urbanism and its
many cousins (tactical, guerilla, pop-up, insurgent ad infinitum) are part of a burgeoning and much larger narrative about public
space and citizens’ right and responsibilities in relation to it … Certain members of
the public are increasingly unwilling to wait for bureaucracies to deal with
pressing urban problems in traditional, methodical ways, instead addressing
these issues on their own” (Finn, 2014);
Point 2.8.
“From
the neighborhood standpoint, new
urbanist communities should be
compact, pedestrian-friendly, and have mixed-use developments …. New urbanist
communities are also expected to provide many open spaces such as parks and
community gardens that preserve natural environments and consider residents’
social interactions in such places. From the block/ street/ building
standpoint, new urbanist communities emphasize interconnections between
architecture and its surroundings such as streets and public spaces. Streets
should be safe and comfortable for people to walk. Civic buildings and public
places should be important sites that reinforce community identity” (Kim, Lee and Bell, 2008);
Point 2.9.
“In
considering structure within cities, three sectors should be
distinguished: the central political authority (which, in the case of a
regional state or empire, may be located outside the city); lesser elites, such
as religious communities, prosperous merchants, regional governors, and local
hereditary nobles; and nonelite residents (grass roots). Amenities may be
provided by any of these levels, and at least the upper two may explicitly
shape physical features and impose specific practices. Other structured
aspects, however, may arise from practices at any of these levels without
explicit planning, through self-organizing processes” (Cowgill, 2004);
Point 2.10.
“In
thinking about cities as possibly having been creations, we should
distinguish among "pristine" and mature and "planted"
cities. Many think the term pristine is problematic, but it is a good term for
settlements that exhibit a degree of urbanness previously unknown and unheard
of in the local tradition, which means that occupants have neither a prior
model to emulate nor prior experience with the consequences of urbanism. Over
time, pristine cities mature and acquire features not previously present, often
as responses or accommodations to earlier features. By planted cities I mean
those created by people who did have some prior experience with urban life” (Cowgill, 2004);
Point 2.11.
“Landscape
urbanism has been
articulated against the purported failures of traditional urban design
approaches first to accommodate temporal dynamics of the contemporary city,
and second to embrace environmental and ecological systems as generative and experiential
elements of urbanism” (Sease,
2015);
Point 2.12.
“Landscapes can represent multiple layers of
meaning and there is a long tradition of reading landscapes as texts to
understand how groups construct identity in space” (Arreola,
2012);
Point 2.13.
“Many
scholars have thought of increasing urbanism as simply a by-product or
even an unintended consequence of the creation of increasingly large and
complex political systems.….. At issue is the extent to which early cities did
not simply "happen" as consequences of technological, political, and
economic innovations, but instead were actively and intentionally created” (Cowgill, 2004);
Point 2.14.
“New Urbanism is committed to making physical improvements a public
matter, emphasizing participatory design and publicly rather than privately
produced plans as an approach that is likely to increase social interaction and
collaboration” (Talen, 2002);
Point 2.15.
“Settlements or societies with no more than a
few hundred members cannot sustain the degrees of specialization and
sociopolitical power that we are accustomed to thinking of as urban. Populations of a least a few
thousand seem a necessary, if not sufficient, requirement for a settlement or a
society to be urban” (Cowgill, 2004);
Point 2.16.
“The
more urban a place, the greater its subcultural variety.…. it does so
through at least two related, but independently sufficient, processes: a)
Population size encourages structural differentiation through the familiar
process of "dynamic density" … b) The second process by which
urbanism generates subcultural variety involves migration” (Fischer, 1975);
Point 2.17.
“The
more urban a place, the more intense its subcultures
.….. It [intensity] refers to the
presence of, attachment to, and force of subcultural beliefs, values, norms,
and customs” (Fischer, 1975);
Point 2.18.
“The
traditional sociological approach to
urban styles of community and personality was founded in the work of
Durkheim …, Simmel …, and Park …, and fully presented by Wirth …. The
concentration of large and heterogeneous populations, Wirth posited, eventually
leads to the weakening of interpersonal ties, primary social structures, and
normative consensus” (Fischer, 1975);
Point 2.19.
“The
widened possibilities for human life which the city offered would … lead to the
disappearance of local and tribal cultures, then in the process of fusion in the city” (Robinson, 2004);
Point 2.20.
“There
is a clear, direct link between New
Urbanism and the goal of accessibility.
This link is provided through three interrelated principles: compactness, mix
of housing units, and improvements in transportation” (Talen,
2002);
Point 2.21.
“Enclave urbanism in the twenty-first
century is defined as the
pattern of metropolitan development produced by the globalized real estate and
financial sectors, and codified in planning regulations, whereby metropolitan
regions are becoming agglomerations of unequal urban districts, sharply divided
by race, class and other social distinguishers, and often physically separated.
Enclave urbanism is not random. It reflects the conscious adoption of policies
that shape the physical and social life of the metropolis; it is not the absence of planning but the presence of a
particular kind of planning” (Iossifova, 2015);
Theme 3: Main research topics and
issues
Point 3.1.
“Few planning theorists before the
1990s, however, emphasized how discourse
analysis is a crucial way of understanding and outlining the different reasons,
cultural schemes, meaning-frames and ontologies of urban planning” (Pløger,
2001);
Point 3.2.
“....a
wealth of personal ties and thriving primary groups even in the innermost
recesses of the large city.
Consequently, …. "the variables of number, density and heterogeneity . . .
are not crucial determinants of social life or personality" …” (Fischer, 1975);
Point 3.3.
“…there
has been lack of comprehensive perspectives and related policy implications in
the design and planning principles of
new urbanism for comprehensive community planning. Most research has
focused on the health benefits and economic value of walkable environments …,
and sense of community” (Kim, Lee
and Bell, 2008);
Point 3.4.
“Collections
on topics like global cities,
globalizing cities and city-regions, increasingly attempt to reflect the range
of different urban contexts around the world …. But in response to now
conventional postcolonial sensibilities, writers are also quick to locate their
theoretical reflections in a specific context, and eager to abandon
“western-centric assumptions” about cities …. How is it possible to write
across diverse urban contexts, distinctive and unique, but also interconnected
and part of widely circulating practices of urbanism?” (Robinson, 2004);
Point 3.5.
“For many years there has been substantial
urban political and economic interest
in exploiting the use of cultural and aesthetic planning in order to improve
the position of cities, within an expanding inter-urban competition. Built
environments, places and spaces, have been regenerated in order to exploit
their aesthetic, cultural, and historical significance so as to enhance
commercial, consumption and public value, either for their citizens and/or tourists
and capital” (Pløger, 2001);
Point 3.6.
“For
Zardini …, the singular actions emerging between the cracks of formal urbanism have in common a shared desire to ‘propose
alternative lifestyles, reinvent our daily lives, and reoccupy urban space with
new uses’. For Hou …, what gives these various experiments some kind of unity is
that they explore, and potentially reveal, the alternative cities within the existing
city, occupying urban spaces and ‘injecting them with new functions and
meanings’.” (Iveson,
2013);
Point 3.7.
“Latino Urbanism argues that Latino urban living in
modern American cities can incorporate many of the principle tenets of New
Urbanism: compact urban form, pedestrian activity, public transportation,
sustainability, recycling and active use of public and private Spaces” (Arreola, 2012);
Point 3.8.
“New Urbanist principles are evaluated in terms of three social goals: community,
social equity, and the notion of the common good. Obviously, there are more
than three types of social goals. These particular goals were selected because
they are prevalent in discussions about the social implications of city design”
(Talen, 2002);
Point 3.9.
“Questions
about the ways in which cities are
imagined and about how these imaginings
are realised in particular urban settings are of considerable importance in the
development of a critical understanding of urban experiences and the spaces,
and they are also significant politically, being intertwined in how cities may
be thought about, conceived, and lived” (Goldman, 2011);
Point 3.10.
“Saskia
Sassen, Peter Taylor and the global-city theorists emphasize how global cities, as the home for the
rule-makers of global capitalism, are unique spatial configurations generating
socio-spatial dynamics geared toward extending and reproducing the power and
authority of transnational elite social and corporate networks” (Goldman,
2011);
Point 3.11.
“The appraisal of New
Urbanism is most often focused on its physical design, while analysis of
its social goals is limited. This is not difficult to explain: Establishing a
link between the physical design of cities and social goals like “sense of
community” and “equity” is difficult” (Talen, 2002);
Point 3.12.
“The
concept of governance, along
with its parallel, cognate, and crosscutting concepts, is one lens through
which urbanists have studied urbanism. The key question, from this general
governance perspective, is not only why cities are the way they are at a
particular time, or only how urban built environments, societies and political
economies are shaped and reshaped in reference to wider forces and processes, but
also how they are made to be the way they are, through the
concerted actions of the state, other public and private institutions, social
movements, civil society and the practices of everyday life” (McCann, 2017);
Point 3.13.
“The connection between physical design and
community, particularly its affective component, is complicated. Some even
view the linkage as potentially harmful. For example, a key paradox confronting
attempts to build community through physically oriented policies and planning proposals
is that, at least at the neighborhood level, such community building efforts
have historically been linked to efforts to promote social homogeneity and
exclusion” (Talen, 2002);
Point 3.14.
“The
modern architectural movement Metabolism
originated in the 1960s and represented a new conceptualization of architecture
and the city landscape which embraced utopian futurism. Metabolism offered the
opportunity to re-construct the national image and to establish the social role
of modern architects in Japan. In doing so, the Metabolists followed the modern
utopian architectural assumptions in believing that architects could change society
and people’s habits for the good” (Tamari, 2014);
Point 3.15.
“Urbanism as a way of life seems to be
returning within various forms of community planning, not only as spatial planning
or housing schemes, but also as imagined, mythical, segregated, ethnic and
mobile lives” (Pløger, 2001);
Point 3.16.
“It is
notoriously difficult to agree on a cross-culturally applicable definition of
"the" city, but we cannot do without definitions altogether” (Cowgill, 2004);
Point 3.17.
“Scholars like Crawford have begun the
important work of developing typologies to capture some of the shared dynamics
of the myriad DIY urban practices
across different cities. For her, key dynamics involved in these emergent ‘everyday
urbanisms’ include: Defamiliarization …; Refamiliarization ; Decommodification …;
Alternative economies ….; Collaboration across difference” (Iveson, 2013);
Theme 4: Major trends and issues
related to practices
Point 4.1.
“…the
majority of studies concerned with urban
enclaves in China seem to neglect not only that enclaves are part of
larger, complex urban systems, but also that they are interlinked and
interconnected through spatial, social, ecological and economic networks and
relationships on various scales, and that therefore, their adjacency and
co-presence in patchworked urban space must have important implications for perceptions
of inequality among urban residents” (Iossifova, 2015);
Point 4.2.
“In many cities around the world we are
presently witnessing the growth of, and interest in, a range of micro-spatial urban practices that are
reshaping urban spaces. …. At present, we are not quite sure how to describe
what is happening. Those seeking to come to grips with such practices have
begun to group them together for consideration under banners such as
‘insurgent’, ‘do-it-yourself’ (DIY), ‘guerrilla’, ‘everyday’, ‘participatory’
and/or ‘grassroots’ urbanism” (Iveson, 2013);
Point 4.3.
“One
of the most powerful aspects of some of the practices being grouped together under
the banner of DIY urbanism is that
their participants are not content with lobbying for a better city some time in
the future, and they often refuse to wait for permission to do things
differently. Walls and billboards are appropriated as spaces of communication. Roads
are appropriated as spaces for gathering. Benches and rooftops are appropriated
as spaces for play” (Iveson,
2013);
Point 4.4.
“Talen … argues that the DIY
movement in the United States is actually the latest in a long tradition of
American self-help and urban beautification efforts starting
at least as far back as the municipal art and civic improvement movements of
the mid-to-late 1800s through the City Beautiful era and into the mid-20th
century as urbanists like Jane Jacobs and William “Holly” Whyte promoted fine-grained, contextual design solutions” (Finn, 2014);
Point 4.5.
“The
key movers and shakers for urban
transformation in India’s largest cities include coalitions of local
business elites (such as the Confederation of Indian Industry and NASSCOM, the
software industry’s chamber of commerce), professionals from the IFIs and
bilateral aid agencies, non-resident Indians living abroad (NRIs),
internationally connected NGOs, along with India’s elite urban bureaucrats and
officials” (Goldman, 2011);
Point 4.6.
“The Mexican housescape has become a
landscape fixture in Garfield for both immigrant and non-immigrant ethnic Mexicans. The
ensemble of front property enclosure, bright house color and yard accents
including religious statuary, plantings and furniture, creates a Mexican Latino
cultural space. This landscape signals cultural stability in the community” (Arreola, 2012);
Point 4.7.
“The rise of the modern skyscraper in New York was an
essential element in the changing urban landscape of the 1920s. These
buildings, grand in scale and utopian by design, looked unimpeded toward the
future. They were architectural displays of a particular vision of America:
sturdy, immobile, and theoretically unaffected by the changing world around
them” (Gordon, 2005);
Point 4.8.
“Fundamentally, landscape
urbanism is about constructed ground …., not a re-creation of some
preexisting natural or ideal state. Indeed, in the design for the Toronto Don
Lands, the sinuous curves of the Don River hearken not to an excerpted, fixed moment in history but rather to facilitating variously scaled
experiential engagement with the river and its attendant ecologies” (Sease, 2015);
Point 4.9.
“Radio’s
emergence as a popular
medium brought the invisible to the forefront of everyday life and
significantly altered how the city could be imagined. The city’s interface was
conceived as a network. It deemphasized
its center and placed importance on the hubs surrounding it in a radial
fashion” (Gordon, 2005);
Point 4.10.
“The West has reached a
state where segregated areas are not usually visually apparent as “fortified enclaves”; rather, they “are presumed to be part of an open city where freedom, diversity
and equality reign”; thus, the “contemporary enclave city is all the more difficult to challenge
because of its semblance of openness”…” (Iossifova,
2015);
Point 4.11.
“There is good evidence that the layouts of many
cities in East and Southeast Asia
were designed to be cosmograms, or
at least to physically embody some important religious concepts…. However, the
use of city layouts to express such concepts is less clear in other parts of
the world, and there seems to be great variation” (Cowgill, 2004);
Each of the four themes has a set of
associated points (i.e., idea, viewpoints, concepts and findings). Together
they provide an organized way to comprehend the knowledge structure of the urbanism
topic. The bolded key words in the quotation reveal, based on the writer’s
intellectual judgement, the key concepts examined in the urbanism literature.
The referencing indicated on the points identified informs the readers where to
find the academic articles to learn more about the details on these points.
Readers are also referred to the
Literature
on urbanism Facebook page for additional information on this topic. The
process of conducting the thematic analysis is an exploratory as well as
synthetic learning endeavour on the topic’s literature. Once the structure of
the themes, sub-themes
and their associated points are finalized, the reviewer is in a position to
move forward to step 2 of the MMBLR approach. The MMBLR approach step 2
finding, i.e., a companion mind map on urbanism, is presented in the next
section.
Mind
mapping-based literature review on urbanism: step 2 (mind mapping) output
By adopting the findings from the MMBLR
approach step 1 on urbanism, the writer constructs a companion mind map shown
as Figure 1.
Referring to the mind map on urbanism, the
topic label is shown right at the centre of the map as a large blob. Four main
branches are attached to it, corresponding to the four themes identified in the
thematic analysis. The links and ending nodes with key phrases represent the
points from the thematic analysis. The key phrases have also been bolded in the
quotations provided in the thematic analysis. As a whole, the mind map renders
an image of the knowledge structure on urbanism based on the thematic analysis
findings. Constructing the mind map is part of the learning process on
literature review. The mind mapping process is speedy and entertaining. The
resultant mind map also serves as a useful presentation and teaching material.
This mind mapping experience confirms the writer’s previous experience using on
the MMBLR approach (Ho, 2016). Readers are also referred to the Literature on literature review Facebook
page and the Literature on mind
mapping Facebook page for additional information on these two topics.
Concluding
remarks
The MMBLR approach to study urbanism provided
here is mainly for its practice illustration as its procedures have been
refined via a number of its employment on an array of topics (Ho, 2016). No
major additional MMBLR steps nor notions have been introduced in this article.
In this respect, the exercise reported here primarily offers some pedagogical
value as well as some systematic and stimulated learning on urbanism in Housing
Studies. Nevertheless, the thematic findings and the image of the knowledge
structure on urbanism in the form of a mind map should also be of academic
value to those who research on this topic.
Bibliography
1. Arreola, D.D. 2012.
“Placemaking and Latino Urbanism in a Phoenix Mexican immigrant community” Journal of Urbanism 5(2-3), Routledge:
157-170.
2.
Cowgill,
G.L. 2004. “Origins and Development of Urbanism: Archaeological Perspectives” Annual Review of Anthropology, Annual
Reviews, 33: 525-549.
3.
Finn,
D. 2014. “DIY urbanism: implications for cities” Journal of Urbanism 7(4), Routledge: 381-398.
4.
Fischer,
C.S. 1975. “Toward a Subcultural Theory of Urbanism” The American Journal of Sociology 80(6) May: 1319-1341.
5.
Goldman, M. 2011. “Speculative Urbanism and the
Making of the Next World City” International
Journal of Urban and Regional Research 35(3) May: 555-581.
6.
Gordon,
E. 2005. “Toward a Networked Urbanism: Hugh Ferriss, Rocketfeller Center, and
the “Invisible Empire of the Air”” Space
and Culture 8(3) August, Sage: 248-268.
8.
Iveson,
K. 2013. “Cities within the City: Do-It-Yourself Urbanism and the Right to the
City” International Journal of Urban and
Regional Research 37(3) May: 941-956.
9.
Iossifova,
D. 2015. “Borderland urbanism: seeing between enclaves” Urban Geography 36(1): 90-108.
10.
Kim,
S.K. J. Lee and R.A. Bell. 2008. “New Urbanism in Michigan: Case Studies,
Public Opinions, and Evidence-based Policy Suggestions” Institute for Public
Policy and Social Research, Michigan State University, USA.
13. Literature
on urbanism Facebook page,
maintained by Joseph, K.K. Ho (url address: https://www.facebook.com/Literature-on-urbanism-380413252324951/).
14. McCann, E. 2017. “Governing
urbanism: Urban governance studies 1.0, 2.0 and beyond” Urban Studies 54(2), Sage: 312-326.
16. Pløger, J. 2001. “Millennium Urbanism – Discursive
Planning” European Urban and Regional
Studies 8(1), Sage: 63-72.
17. Robinson, J. 2004. “In the tracks of
comparative urbanism: difference, urban modernity and the primitive” Urban Geography 25(8): 709-723.
18.
Sease,
A. 2015. “Landscape (and) urbanism? Engaging Nolli” Journal of Urbanism 8(4), Routledge: 352-372.
19. Talen, E. 2002. “The social goals of
new urbanism” Housing Policy Debate
13(1): 165-188.
20. Tamari, T. 2014. “Metabolism: Utopian
Urbanism and the Japanese Modern Architecture Movement” Theory, Culture & Society 31(7/8), Sage: 201-225.
