Jane Jacobs is still here: Proceedings of the Conference Jane Jacobs 100: her legacy and relevance in the 21st century
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
On the occasion of Jane Jacobs’ 100 anniversary, the chair of Spatial Planning and Strategy of the Delft University of Technology, together with the OTB Research Institute for the Built Environment and the Rotterdam Erasmus University College organised a two-day conference on Jane Jacob’s legacy at TU Delft on 24-25 May 2016. This event was complemented one year later by a ‘Jane Jacobs Year’ closing event. <br/><br/>We wished to celebrate the life and accomplishments of one of the most important urban thinkers of our time, someone who has influenced generations of designers and planners and others concerned with the built environment: the great Jane Jacobs.<br/><br/>Jacobs’ theories and ideas are seminal to many different academic fields: urban design, planning, architecture, sociology, human geography, environmental psychology, economic geography and many more. Her writings have been influential for more than five decades. This alone tells us of her importance for urban studies and for understanding the complex relationship between urban space and society. <br/><br/>This is reflected, among other things, in the immense popularity of Jane’s ideas among young planners and designers today. Among a number of male planners who influenced urban theory in the 20th century, Jane Jacobs distinguishes herself not only as one of the few women able to break the ceilings of this male-dominated profession, but simply as the most influential of them all. This is ironic, since Jane Jacobs would hardly see herself as a planner.<br/><br/>Maybe, like Roberta Gratz (who was a friend of Jacobs’), she was an ‘anti-planner’, someone with a keen eye for careful empirical observation, for whom cities ought to be understood from the careful exploration of how the built environment influences and is influenced by human life. Jacobs was an astute observer of the life of cities and the processes that produce both cities and citizenship.<br/><br/>In their contributions, the authors of the texts included in this book demonstrate how Jacobs is still relevant as a theorist in the realms of politics, economics and design, and how she can also help us understand how urban form yields meaning. But they also criticise and review her ideas in light of the experiences accumulated in more than 50 years since her main works were published, and the perspectives of places that have little similarity to New York or Toronto. This is relevant, because indeed Jane Jacobs’ ideas are being reviewed reinterpreted and reinvented, and occasionally refuted, in contexts as diverse as Cairo, São Paulo or Addis Ababa. And it’s high time this happens. <br/><br/>The conference aimed to explore those new insights on Jacobs’ legacy and to take her ideas forward in the context of globalisation, internationalisation and accelerated urbanisation in places like China, India and Brazil. The intensity and scale of current urbanization is unprecedented and new challenges have emerged since she published her texts. How are the ideas of Jane Jacobs still relevant for the understanding of the interplay between urban space and society? Or do we need new theories? To what extent have Jacobs’ ideas inspired today’s urban leaders and thinkers? How are they tackling urban issues such as growing inequality, spatial fragmentation, street life, safety in the public space and environmental decline?<br/><br/>We discussed Jacobs’ ideas critically and to take stock of how those ideas have been used, misused and hopefully updated. We invited abstract submissions for six different tracks, exploring essential aspects of Jacobs’ ideas:<br/><br/>Track 1: Jane Jacobs, ethics, and the just city<br/><br/>Track 2: Jane Jacobs and Street Spaces – Streets as public places<br/><br/>Track 3: Jane Jacobs and the dynamics of neighbourhoods<br/><br/>Track 4: Jane Jacobs and the Reshaping old urban fabrics in Chinese cities<br/><br/>Track 5: Jane Jacobs and organised complexity<br/><br/>Track 6: Jane Jacobs and safety in public space<br/><br/> The conference was organised by Roberto Rocco (TU Delft Urbanism), Brian Doucet (University of Waterloo, Canada, then Erasmus University College in Rotterdam) and Andre Ouwehand (TU Delft OTB).<br/><br/>For more information, please visit the website https://janejacobs100.co
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».