Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Science, pseudo-science and urban design

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

Abstract

Urban design theory has been criticised for being incoherent and insubstantial. It is suggested that this is partly because urban design theory is not robustly based on a fully scientific underpinning. In so far as urban design theory appears to be scientific, it is in danger of being pseudo-scientific. This article explores the relationship between science and pseudo-science, and questions the extent to which urban design theory could be called pseudo-scientific, by considering the hypotheses underlying four classic urban design theory texts. It is found that although the individual texts are more or less scientific, the way the field as a whole combines and uses these can be interpreted as pseudo-scientific. The article reflects on the interpretation of pseudo-science and suggests the need for urban design to have a better system of validation and critical assimilation of scientific knowledge.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Science is not monolithic. It is possible to recognise different kinds of science (for example, logical, empirical, practical, Klaasen, 2007, pp. 471–472) and different stages in the evolution of a science (Shneider, 2009). A basic assumption is that science is characterised by ‘universalism, disinterestedness, organized skepticism, and epistemic communism (or the sharing of methods and findings)’ (Bunge, 2011, p. 413 after Merton, 1973); de Jong and van der Voordt (2002) suggest criteria of reliability, validity, openness to criticism and relevance.

  2. The literature contains myriad criteria for identifying what is pseudo-scientific: Derksen (1993) discusses ‘seven deadly sins’; Lilienfeld (2005) suggests ‘ten commandments’; Bunge (1984, pp. 38–40) identifies 12 conditions, and 19 ‘typical attitudes and activities’ distinguishing scientists from pseudo-scientists (p. 41). But the problem of what is science or pseudo-science is ‘curiously inconclusive’ (Curd and Cover, 1998, p. 177). Science itself may sometimes be pseudo-scientific (Derksen, 1993, p. 19; Laudan, 1984). Defining pseudo-science is in danger of recursive arguments (Popper's suggestion of falsifiability is itself not a falsifiable statement; Ladyman, 2002, p. 85); Lugg (1987, p. 221) suggests that the prospects for demarcation are ‘exceedingly dim’; the so-called ‘demarcation problem’ has been described as a ‘pseudo-problem’ (or not: Lakatos, p. 26) whose presumed ‘demise’ (Laudan, 1983) has in turn been refuted (Bunge, 2011, p. 424).

  3. All four appear in Lloyd-Jones and Roberts’ (1996) Urban Design Canon; the first three feature in Cuthbert's (2010, pp. 15–16) list and two recent compilations (Carmona and Tiesdell, 2007; Larice and Macdonald, 2007); ‘A city is not a tree’ has been republished at least 13 times (www.rudi.net/books/5613; accessed 1 March 2012). For the context of the genesis of these four texts, see, respectively, Raynsford, 2011; Orillard, 2009; Laurence, 2007; Grabow, 1983.

  4. In addition to being an urban design classic (Southworth, 1989; Cuthbert, 2007; Larice and Macdonald, 2007, p. 154; Raynsford, 2011, p. 43), this is perhaps Lynch's most famous or influential work (Pearce and Fagence, 1996).

  5. Lynch carefully states that these are ‘hypothetical’ and not ‘proved to exist, like Platonic archetypes’ (ibid., p. 154). In fact, Raynsford's (2011, p. 52) recent research suggests they were derived from previous ‘civic art principles’, but that Lynch ‘suppressed’ (ibid., pp. 44, 45, 62) or chose not to disclose the urbanistic roots of his work. In any case, scrutiny of Lynch's book (available for half a century) indicates that the elements arose from the author himself, not spontaneously from the survey participants.

  6. Some other instances have been found where the basis of Lynch's theory has been called into question (Sommer, 2009; Taylor, 2009); it is too early to say if these will be followed up. Lynch (1984[2007]) himself seems not to have ever gone back to validate his own hypotheses, although he was critically reflective of the scientific basis of the text, and admitted the lack of validation.

  7. This possibility of other alternatives did not depend on the graphic confirmation of Aragones’ and Arredondo's detailed empirical investigation. From even the most cursory contemplation of the issue, one could conjecture that there could be other elements that would be familiar and useful to urban designers. In any case, even if Lynch's five were the most robust elements identified by the public, this is not to say that there could not be more or better elements for design.

  8. Death and Life is one of the most famous and most cited works in planning and urban design theory (Harris, 2011, p. 67), lauded as ‘the most influential American book ever written about cities’ (Schwarz, 2010), appearing at the top of Planetizen's list of ‘all-time top 20 planning titles that every planner should read’ (www.planetizen.com/books/20, accessed 1 March 2012).

  9. Although some suggest that Jacobs’ work does not lend itself easily to scientific testing (Hill, 1988, p. 312; Harris, 2011, p. 72), or warn against reductionism (Sorkin, 2010, p. xvii) or reliance on science generally, Jacobs is quite clear about the categorical nature and the significance about this hypothesis: she stresses that ‘All four in combination are necessary to generate city diversity; the absence of any one of the four frustrates a district's potential’ (original emphasis, Jacobs, 1961 [1993], p. 197); and furthermore ‘The necessity for these four conditions is the most important point this book has to make’ (ibid.).

  10. The lack of follow-up is confirmed by Weicher (personal communication, 2012). Indeed, at the time of writing, Weicher's paper shows up with only four citations on Google Scholar, with just two for Schmidt (for comparison, Death and Life has over 8000). Glaeser (2012, pp. 147–148) also suggests that Jacobs was not correct on the issue of age of buildings, referring to various works in economics, which however were not direct tests of Jacobs’ proposition about mixed ages (and conditions) of buildings as one of four prerequisites for diversity.

  11. Harary and Rockey are not widely cited in the urban design literature. A recent retrospective article (Harary, 2011) gives no hint that this strand of criticism ever advanced since 1976.

  12. The Huggins paper is not cited but is assumed to be Alexander and Huggins (1964), the work of Frederic Bartlett is not cited by Alexander here, nor in Alexander and Huggins (1964).

  13. Alexander continues to refer to his own work from the 1960s – including Alexander and Huggins (1964) – in The Nature of Order (Alexander, 2002–2005), as if no other follow-up work was ever done.

  14. Discussions of pseudo-science in the literature surveyed tend to deal either with pure sciences, or applied crafts (such as astrology) that are direct extensions of their own theories, rather than those attempting to assemble findings from a wider body of ‘mainstream’ scientific knowledge.

References

  • Alexander, C. (1965) A city is not a tree. Architectural Forum 122 (1): 58–61, (Part I); and 122(2): 58–62 (Part II).

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, C. (2002–2005) The Nature of Order. An Essay on the Art of Building and the Nature of the Universe. Berkeley, CA: The Center for Environmental Structure.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alexander, C. and Huggins, A.W.F. (1964) On changing the way people see. Perceptual and Motor Skills 19 (1): 235–253.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Al-Kodmany, K. (2001) Supporting imageability on the World Wide Web: Lynch's five elements of the city in community planning. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 28 (6): 805–832.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aragones, J.I. and Arredondo, J.M. (1985) Structure of urban cognitive maps. Journal of Environmental Psychology 1985 (5): 197–212.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banai, R. (1999) A methodology for ‘The Image of the City’. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 26 (1): 133–144.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barabasi, A.-L. (2003) Linked: How Everything is Connected to Everything else and what it Means. New York: Plume.

    Google Scholar 

  • Batty, M. (1980) Limits to prediction in science and design science. Design Studies 1 (3): 153–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Batty, M. (2012) Building a science of cities. Cities 29 (Supplement 1): S9–S16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bettencourt, L.M.A., Lobo, J., Helbing, D., Kuchnert, C. and West, G.B. (2007) Growth, innovation, scaling, and the pace of life in cities. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA 104 (17): 7301–7306.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bollen, J. et al (2009) Clickstream data yields high-resolution maps of science. PLoS ONE 4 (3): e4803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Börner, K., Chen, C. and Boyack, K.W. (2003) Visualizing knowledge domains. Annual Review of Information Science and Technology 37 (1): 179–255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (1984) What is pseudoscience? The Skeptical Inquirer 9 (1): 36–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunge, M. (2011) Knowledge: Genuine and bogus. Science and Education 20 (5–6): 411–438.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carmona, M. and Tiesdell, S. (eds.) (2007) Urban Design Reader. London: The Architectural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carmona, M., Tiesdell, S., Heath, T. and Oc, T. (2010) Public Places Urban Spaces. The Dimensions of Urban Design. Oxford: Architectural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Childs, M.C. (2010) A spectrum of urban design roles. Journal of Urban Design 15 (1): 1–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Claramunt, C. and Winter, S. (2007) Structural salience of elements of the city. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 34 (6): 1030–1050.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Conroy Dalton, R. and Bafna, S. (2003) The syntactical image of the city: A reciprocal definition of spatial syntaxes. In: International Space Syntax Symposium, London: UCL, http://eprints.ucl.ac.uk/1104/1/SIC.pdf.pdf, accessed 1 March 2012.

  • Coppens, T. and van Geel, H. (2012) Urban and architectural design and scientific research: How to save an arranged marriage? Paper presented at the AESOP (Association of European Schools of Planning) conference; 11 July, Ankara, Turkey.

  • Cross, N. (2001) Designerly ways of knowing: Design discipline versus design science. Design Issues 17 (3): 49–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cross, N., Naughton, J. and Walker, D. (1981) Design method and scientific method. Design Studies 2 (4): 195–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, G. (1961) Townscape. London: Architectural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, G. (1971) The Concise Townscape. London: Architectural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Curd, M. and Cover, J.A. (1998) Philosophy of Science. The Central Issues. New York and London: W.W. Norton & Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cuthbert, A. (2010) Whose urban design? Review of A. Krieger and W. Saunders (eds.) ‘Urban Design’. Journal of Urban Design 15 (3): 443–448.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cuthbert, A.R. (ed.) (2003) Introduction. In: Designing Cities. Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 1–20.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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 

  • de Jong, T.M. and van der Voordt, T.M. (eds.) (2002) Ways to Study and Research. Urban Architectural and Technical Design. Delft, the Netherlands: DUP Science.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Jonge, D. (1962) Images of urban areas, their structure and psychological foundations. Journal of the American Institute of Planners 28 (4): 266–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Derksen, A.A. (1993) The seven sins of pseudo-science. Journal for General Philosophy of Science 24 (1): 17–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Faludi, A. (1973) Planning Theory. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feyerabend, P.E. (1998) How to be a good empiricist – A plea for tolerance in matters epistemological. In: M. Curd and J.A. Cover (eds.) Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues. New York and London: W.W. Norton & Co, pp. 922–949.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fowler, E.P. (1987) Street management and city design. Social Forces 66 (2): 365–389.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gans, H.J. (2006) Jane Jacobs: Toward an understanding of ‘Death and Life of Great American Cities’. City and Community 5 (3): 213–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garwood, C. (2008) Flat Earth. The History of an Infamous Idea. London: Pan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Glaeser, E. (2012) Triumph of the City. London: Pan Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldacre, B. (2009) Bad Science. London: Fourth Estate.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldbard, A. (2010) Nine ways of looking at ourselves (looking at cities). In: S.A. Goldsmith and L. Elizabeth (eds.) What We See: Advancing the Observations of Jane Jacobs. Oakland, CA: New Village Press, pp. 57–67.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldsmith, S.A. and Elizabeth, L. (eds.) (2010) What We See: Advancing the Observations of Jane Jacobs. Oakland, CA: New Village Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grabow, S. (1983) Christopher Alexander. The Search for a New Paradigm in Architecture. Stocksfield, UK: Oriel Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grant, J.L. (2011) Time, scale and control: How new urbanism (mis)uses Jane Jacobs. In: M. Page and T. Mennel (eds.) Reconsidering Jane Jacobs. Chicago, IL: Planners’ Press, pp. 91–104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, J. (2010) Editorial. Journal of Space Syntax 1 (1): i–v.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harary, F. (2011) The city is a tree; the real world is not a tree! Geographical Analysis 43 (4): 347–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harary, F. and Rockey, J. (1976) A city is not a semilattice either. Environment and Planning A 8 (4): 375–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Harris, R. (2011) The magpie and the bee: Jane Jacobs's magnificent obsession. In: M. Page and T. Mennel (eds.) Reconsidering Jane Jacobs. Chicago, IL: Planners’ Press, pp. 65–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, D.R. (1988) Jane Jacobs’ ideas on big, diverse cities: A review and commentary. Journal of the American Planning Association 54 (3): 302–314.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillier, B., Leaman, A., Stansall, P. and Bedford, M. (1976) Space syntax. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 3 (2): 147–185.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hospers, G.-J. (2006) Jane Jacobs: Her life and work. European Planning Studies 14 (6): 723–732.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hume, D. (1739) A treatise of human nature, http://www.davidhume.org/texts/thn#T3.1.1, accessed 1 March 2012.

  • Inam, A. (2002) Meaningful urban design: Teleological/catalytic/relevant. Journal of Urban Design 7 (1): 35–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Isaacs, R. (2000) The urban picturesque: An aesthetic experience of urban pedestrian places. Journal of Urban Design 5 (2): 145–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, R.K. (1980) Urban environments as visual art or as social settings? A review. The Town Planning Review 51 (1): 50–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kirby, A. (2012) Introduction to a new meta-journal in urban studies. Cities 29 (Supplement 1): S1–S2.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klaasen, I. (2007) A scientific approach to urban and regional design: Research by design. Journal of Design Research 5 (4): 470–489.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krieger, A. (2009) Where and how does urban design happen? In: A. Krieger and W. Saunders (eds.) Urban Design. Minnesota, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 113–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuhn, T.S. (1970) Logic of discovery or psychology of research? In: I. Lakatos and A. Musgrave (eds.) Criticism and the Growth of Knowledge. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ladyman, J. (2002) Understanding Philosophy of Science. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Lakatos, I. (1998) Science and pseudoscience. In: M. Curd and J.A. Cover (eds.) Philosophy of Science. The Central Issues. New York and London: W.W. Norton & Co, pp. 20–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lang, J. (1994) Urban Design: The American Experience. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.

    Google Scholar 

  • Larice, M. and Macdonald, E. (2007) The Urban Design Reader. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laudan, L. (1983) The demise of the demarcation problem. In: R.S. Cohen and L. Laudan (eds.) Physics, Philosophy and Psychoanalysis. Essays in Honor of Adolf Grunbaum. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: D. Riedel Publishing Company, pp. 111–127.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Laudan, L. (1984) The pseudo-science of science? In: J.R. Brown (ed.) Scientific Rationality. The Sociological Turn. Dordrecht, the Netherlands: D. Riedel Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Laurence, P.L. (2007) Jane Jacobs before Death and Life. Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians 66 (1): 5–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer, J. (2010) A physicist solves the city. New York Times magazine, 17 December, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/19/magazine/19Urban_West-t.html, accessed 1 March 2012.

  • Lilienfeld, S.O. (2005) The Ten Commandments of helping students distinguish science from pseudoscience in psychology. Association for Psychological Science Observer 18 (9): 1–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lloyd-Jones, T. and Roberts, M. (1996) An urban design canon. Urban Design Quarterly 59: 23–24.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lugg, A. (1987) Bunkum, flim–flam and quackery: Pseudoscience as a philosophical problem. Dialectica 41 (3): 221–230.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, K. (1984 [2007]) Reconsidering the image of the city. In: M. Carmona and S. Tiesdell (eds.) Urban Design Reader. London: The Architectural Press, pp. 108–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madanipour, A. (2006) Roles and challenges of urban design. Journal of Urban Design 11 (2): 173–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, L. (ed.) (1976) Logic of design and the question of value. In: The Architecture of Form. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, R. (2009a) The elusiveness of urban design: The perpetual problem of definition and role. In: A. Krieger and W. Saunders (eds.) Urban Design. Minnesota, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 38–60.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, S. (2009b) Cities Design and Evolution. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marshall, S. and Çalişkan, O. (2011) A joint framework for urban morphology and design. Built Environment 37 (4): 409–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Merton, R.K. (1973) The Sociology of Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Montgomery, R. (1998) Is there still life in The Death and Life? Journal of the American Planning Association 64 (3): 269–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morello, E. and Ratti, C. (2009) A digital image of the city: 3D isovists in Lynch's urban analysis. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 36 (5): 837–853.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moudon, A.V. (1992) A catholic approach to organizing what urban designers should know. Journal of Planning Literature 6 (4): 331–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Orillard, C. (2009) Tracing urban design's ‘Townscape’ origins: Some relationships between a British editorial policy and an American academic field in the 1950s. Urban History 36 (2): 284–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owers, D. (1997) Theory and practice in urban design. Built Environment 22 (4): 253–257.

    Google Scholar 

  • Page, M. and Mennel, T. (eds.) (2011) Reconsidering Jane Jacobs. Chicago, IL: Planners’ Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pearce, P. and Fagence, M. (1996) The legacy of Kevin Lynch: Research implications. Annals of Tourism Research 23 (3): 576–598.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phelan, S.E. (2001) What is complexity science? Emergence 3 (1): 120–136.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Popper, K.R. (1963) Conjectures and Refutations. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.

    Google Scholar 

  • Punter, J. (1997) Urban design theory in planning practice: The British perspective. Built Environment 22 (4): 263–277.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rapoport, A. (2000) Science, explanatory theory and environment-behavior studies. In: S. Wapner, J. Demick, C.T. Yamamoto and H. Minami (eds.) Theoretical Perspectives in Environment-Behavior. New York: Kluwer/Plenum, pp. 107–140.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Raynsford, A. (2011) Civic art in an age of cultural relativism: The aesthetic origins of Kevin Lynch's. Image of the City. Journal of Urban Design 16 (1): 43–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rowley, A. (1994) Definitions of urban design: The nature and concerns of urban design. Planning Practice and Research 9 (3): 179–197.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, C.G. (1977) Influence of land use diversity upon neighborhood success: An analysis of Jacobs’ theory. The Annals of Regional Science 11 (1): 53–65.

    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 

  • Schwarz, B. (2010) Gentrification and its discontents. Atlantic (June): 85–89.

  • Scott Brown, D. (2009) Urban design at fifty. A personal view. In: A. Krieger and W. Saunders (eds.) Urban Design. Minnesota, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 61–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shneider, A.M. (2009) Four stages of a scientific discipline; four types of scientist. Trends in Biochemical Sciences 34 (5): 217–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Simon, H.A. (1969) Sciences of the Artificial. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sommer, R. (2009) Beyond centers, fabrics, and cultures of congestion: Urban Design as a metropolitan enterprise. In: A. Krieger and W. Saunders (eds.) Urban Design. Minnesota, MN: University of Minnesota Press, pp. 131–152.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorkin, M. (2010) Jane's spectacles. In: S.A. Goldsmith and L. Elizabeth (eds.) What We See: Advancing the Observations of Jane Jacobs. Oakland, CA: New Village Press, pp. xv–xviii.

    Google Scholar 

  • Southworth, M. (1989) Theory and practice of contemporary Urban Design: A review of urban design plans in the United States. The Town Planning Review 60 (4): 369–402.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg, E. (2000) An integrative theory of Urban Design. Journal of the American Planning Association 66 (3): 265–278.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, N. (1980) Planning theory and the philosophy of planning. Urban Studies 17 (2): 159–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, N. (2009) Legibility and aesthetics in urban design. Journal of Urban Design 14 (2): 189–202.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P. (2006) Jane Jacobs (1916–2006): An appreciation. Environment and Planning A 38 (11): 1981–1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thagard, P. (1998) Why astrology is a pseudoscience. In: M. Curd and J.A. Cover (eds.) Philosophy of Science: The Central Issues. New York and London: W. W. Norton & Co, pp. 27–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thoenes, C. (2003) Introduction. Architectural Theory. From the Renaissance to the Present. Köln, Germany: Taschen, pp. 8–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, R. (2008) Biophilic theory and research for healthcare design. In: S.R. Kellert, J. Heerwagen and M. Mador (eds.) Biophilic Design: The Theory, Science and Practice of Bringing Buildings to Life. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weicher, J.C. (1973) A test of Jane Jacobs’ theory of successful neighborhoods. Journal of Regional Science 13 (1): 29–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Bartlett School of Planning, University College London, Wates House, 22 Gordon Street, London, WC1H 0QB, UK

    Stephen Marshall

Authors
  1. Stephen Marshall
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Marshall, S. Science, pseudo-science and urban design. Urban Des Int 17, 257–271 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1057/udi.2012.22

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/udi.2012.22

Keywords

Search

Navigation