Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

From form to process: Re-conceptualizing Lynch in light of complexity theory

  • Original Article
  • Published:
URBAN DESIGN International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

New Urbanism’s disposition towards urban design emphasizes creating places that, in part, derive structure and meaning from ‘imageable’ components. These components resonate with the formal categories articulated by Kevin Lynch. That is to say, New Urbanist projects emphasize defined streets (edges) neighborhood coherence (districts) civic buildings (landmarks) connective public open spaces (nodes) and gridiron street networks (paths). Lynch, however, deemed that such urban features arose from dynamic processes, whereas New Urbanists pre-designate formal features without full consideration of their functional dynamics. In order to better situate this notion of ‘functional dynamics’, this paper argues that urban settings can be considered as examples of complex adaptive systems (CAS). The paper re-purposes Lynch’s formal categories to discuss CAS dynamics in urban settings, with processes rather than forms providing the essential mechanisms with which to achieve the conviviality NU projects aspire to.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1

Source: google street view.

Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Al-Hindi, K.F. and Karen, E. (2001) (Re)placing the new urbanism debates: Toward an interdisciplinary research agenda. Urban Geography 22: 189–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, C. (1979) The Timeless Way of Building, vol 1. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Araabi, H. (2015) A typology of urban design theories and its application to the shared body of knowledge. Urban Design International 21(1): 1–14.

  • Aravot, I. (2002) Back to phenomenological placemaking. Journal of Urban Design 37–41.

  • Bateson, G. (2002) Mind and Nature: A Necessary Unity. New York: Hampton Press (NJ).

    Google Scholar 

  • Bathelt, H., Malmberg, A. and Maskell, P. (2004) Clusters and knowledge: Local buzz, global pipelines and the process of knowledge creation. Progress in Human Geography 28(1): 31–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batty, M. (2007) Model cities. Town Planning Review 78: 1–19.

  • Bettencourt, L. and West, G.B. (2010) A unified theory of urban living. Nature 467(7318): 912–913.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bonabeau, E., Guérin, S., Snyers, D., Kuntz, P. and Theraulaz, G. (2000) Three-dimensional architectures grown by simple ‘Stigmergic’ agents. Bio Systems 56(1): 13–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brain, D. (2005) From good neighborhoods to sustainable cities: Social science and the social agenda of the new urbanism. International Regional Science Review 28(2): 217–238.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Casti, J. (1979) Connectivity, complexity and catastrophe in large-scale systems. International Series on Applied Systems Analysis 7: 203.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corner, J. (1999) Eidetic operations and new landscapes. In: Recovering Landscape: Essays in Contemporary Landscape Theory, pp. 153–169. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

  • Cullen, G. and Brooks, K.W. (1962) Townscape. Princeton: The Architectural Press.

  • Cuthbert, A.R. (2007) Urban design: Requiem for an era – review and critique of the last 50 years. Urban Design International 12(4): 177–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • DeLanda, M. (2005) Intensive Science & Virtual Philosophy. New edition. New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deneubourg, J.L., Aron, S., Goss, S. and Pasteels, J.M. (1990) The self-organizing exploratory pattern of the Argentine ant. Journal of Insect Behavior 3(2): 159–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dovey, K. and Pafka, E. (2015) The science of urban design? Urban Design International 21: 1–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Durack, R. (2001) Village vices. Places Journal 1–8.

  • Ellis, C. (2002) The new urbanism: Critiques and rebuttals. Journal of Urban Design 7(3): 261–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fainstein, S.S. (2000) New directions in planning theory. Urban Affairs Review 35: 451–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ford, L.R. (1999) Lynch revisited: New urbanism and theories of good city form. Cities 16(4): 247–257.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gibson, J.J. (1986) Gibson theory of affordances.pdf. Chapter Eight the Theory of Affordances.

  • Grant, J. (2006) Promised and prospects: New urbanism in practice.

  • Grant, J. (2007) Two sides of a coin? New urbanism and gated communities. Housing Policy Debate 18(3): 481–501.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haken, H. and Portugali, J. (2003) The face of the city is its information. Journal of Environmental Psychology 23(4): 385–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamer, D. (2000) Learning from the past: Historic districts and the new urbanism in the United States. Planning Perspectives 15(2): 107–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hebbert, M. (2003) New urbanism – The movement in context. Built Environment (1978) 29(3): 193–209.

  • Heylighen, F. (1989) Self-organization, emergence and the architecture of complexity. In Proceedings of the 1st European conference on System Science (Vol. 18, pp. 23–32). Paris: AFCET.

  • Heylighen, F. (2004) Mediator evolution: A general scenario for the origin of dynamical hierarchies. ECCO Working Paper.

  • Heylighen, F. (2011a) Self-organization of complex, intelligent systems: An action ontology for transdisciplinary integration. Integral Review 1–39.

  • Heylighen, F. (2011b) Stigmergy as a generic mechanism for coordination: Definition, varieties and aspects. ECCO Working Paper.

  • Holland, J. (1995) Hidden Order: How Adaptation Builds Complexity. Canada: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holland, J. (2006) Studying complex adaptive systems. Journal of Systems Science and Complexity 1–8.

  • Jacobs, J. (1961) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Vintage Books.

  • Jarvis, H. and Bonnett, A. (2013) Progressive nostalgia in novel living arrangements: A counterpoint to neo-traditional new urbanism? Urban Studies 50: 2349–2370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jepson, E.J. and Edwards, M.M. (2010) How possible is sustainable urban development? An analysis of planners’ perceptions about new urbanism, smart growth and the ecological city. Planning Practice and Research 25(4): 417–437.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Joh, K., Boarnet, M.G., Nguyen, M.T., Fulton, W., Siembab, W. and Weaver, S. (2009) Accessibility, travel behavior, and new urbanism: Case study of mixed-use centers and auto-oriented corridors in the South Bay Region of Los Angeles, California. Transportation Research Record: Journal of the Transportation Research Board 2082: 81–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kashef, M. (2009) Sense of community and residential space: Contextualizing new urbanism within a broader theoretical framework. ArchNet-IJAR 3(3): 80–97.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kauffman, S. (1993) The Origins of Order: Self-Organization and Selection in Evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Kropf, K. (1996) Urban tissue and the character of towns. Urban Design International 1(3): 247–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lansing, J.S. (2003) Complex adaptive systems. Annual Review of Anthropology 32(1): 183–204. doi:10.1146/annurev.anthro.32.061002.093440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leonardi, P.M. (2011) When flexible routines meet flexible technologies: Affordance, constraint, and the imbrication of human and material agencies. MIS Quarterly 35(1): 147–167.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, K. (1960) The Image of the City. Cambridge: The MIT Press.

  • Lynch, K., Banerjee, T. and Southworth, M. (1995) City Sense and City Design: Writings and Projects of Kevin Lynch. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, S. (2008) Cities Design and Evolution. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehaffy, M., Porta, S., Rofè, Y. and Salingaros, N.A. (2010) Urban nuclei and the geometry of streets: The ‘emergent Neighborhoods’ Model. Urban Design International 15(1): 22–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moore, S. (2013) What’s wrong with best practice? Questioning the typification of new urbanism. Urban Studies 50(11): 2371–2387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moudon, A.V. (2000) Proof of g: A substantive basis for new urbanism. Places 13(2): 38–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, M. (1998) Planning, governing, and the image of the city. Journal of Planning Education and Research 18(1): 61–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neuman, M. (2005) The compact city fallacy. Journal of Planning Education and Research 25(1): 11–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Plater-Zyberk, E., Longo, G. and Hetzel, P. (2003) The Lexicon of new urbanism. Miami: Duany Plater-Zyberk & Company.

  • Portugali, J. (2000) Self-Organization and the City. Berlin: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Read, S. (2005) The Attractor of the Ground. Delft: SpaceLab.

    Google Scholar 

  • Read, S. (2007) Deep landscapes: Constructing urban landscapes for inhabitation. 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, Istanbul.

  • Saab, A.J. (2007) Historical amnesia: New urbanism and the city of tomorrow. Journal of Planning History 6(3): 191–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schurch, T.W. (1999) Reconsidering urban design: Thoughts about its definition and status as a field or profession. Journal of Urban Design 4(1): 5–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Silva, P. (2016) Tactical urbanism: Towards an evolutionary cities’ approach? Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 43(6): 1040–1051.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sorkin, M. (1992) Variations on a Theme Park: The New American City and the End of Public Space. New York: Hill and Wang.

    Google Scholar 

  • Southworth, M. (2003) New urbanism and the american metropolis. Built Environment (1978) 29(3): 210–226.

  • Steigerwald, B. (2001) City views. Reason Magazine.

  • Strogatz, S.H. (2001) Exploring complex networks. Nature 410(6825): 268–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talen, E. (2000) New urbanism and the culture of criticism. Urban Geography 21(4): 318–341.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talen, E. (2006a) Connecting new urbanism and american planning: An historical interpretation. Urban Design International 11(2): 83–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talen, E. (2006b) Design that enables diversity: The complications of a planning ideal. Journal of Planning Literature 20(3): 233–249.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Talen, E. (2013) Charter of New Urbanism 2nd Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill.

  • Talen, E. and Ellis, C. (2002) Beyond relativism: Reclaiming the search for good city form. Journal of Planning Education and Research 22(1): 36–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Trudeau, D. and Malloy, P. (2011) Suburbs in disguise? Examining the geographies of the new urbanism. Urban Geography 32(3): 424–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Veninga, C. (2004) Spatial prescriptions and social realities: New urbanism and the production of northwest landing. Urban Geography 25(5): 458–482.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waldheim, C. (2006) The Landscape Urbanism Reader. 1st edition. Princeton: Architectural Press.

  • Weller, R. (2008) Landscape (Sub) urbanism in theory and practice. Landscape Journal.

  • Wohl, S. (2015) The grand bazaar in Istanbul: The emergent unfolding of a complex adaptive system. International Journal of Islamic Architecture 4(1): 39–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wohl, S. (2016) considering how morphological traits of urban fabric create affordances for complex adaptation and emergence. Progress in Human Geography 40(1): 30–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zimmerman, J. (2001) The ‘Nature’ of urbanism on the new urbanist frontier: Sustainable development, or defense of the suburban dream? Urban Geography 22(3): 249–267.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Architecture Department, Iowa State University, 4009 Mathews Road, Ames, IA, 50014, USA

    Sharon Wohl

Authors
  1. Sharon Wohl
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sharon Wohl.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Wohl, S. From form to process: Re-conceptualizing Lynch in light of complexity theory. Urban Des Int 22, 303–317 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-017-0048-6

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-017-0048-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation