Planning places, enabling the practitioner
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urban design is concerned with the social and physical aspects of the urban environment, and is argued to be a powerful agency for developing social well-being. The contemporary city, however, offers a challenging context for urban design. This thesis aims to develop new insights into urban design practice by investigating how the urban design practitioner, as a holder of valuable skills and knowledge, might be enabled to contribute within the contemporary practice context. The thesis offers perspectives on the present-day forces of urban change and the social effects from which participatory planning has emerged. The responding paradigm shift in planning theory is investigated, and identifies principles which guide urban design practice based on creating dialogic space, developing inclusive democratic processes, and validating multiple ways of knowing. The traditional role of the built environment professional within the social processes of producing the built environment is discussed, and the limitations of that role identified. The epistemological and ideological foundations of the built environment professions in the contemporary context are questioned. Empirical research into the topic, including a case study of urban design in the Winnipeg context, identifies a need to review contemporary professionalism cultures and to focus urban design activity on implementation. This thesis argues that urban design practice based on professionalism is not appropriate in the contemporary practice context of public participatory planning and design processes. The urban designer must come first as a citizen, and add value to that involvement by bringing knowledge and skills to the table. Finally, a range of principles intended to enable the urban design practitioner in the contemporary practice context are offered.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".