ADDIS ABABA UNIVERSITY
Ethiopian Institute of Architecture, Building
Construction and City Development
Presentation P-5: : "Mapping Urban Morphology: A
Classification Scheme for Interpreting Contributions
to the Study of Urban Form"
PhD in Urban and Regional Planning
Course : Morphology of Cities
By: Nahom Gashaw (GSR/6318/17)
Instructor: Dr. Tebebu Assefa (Associate Professor)
Jan 12, 2025
Addis Ababa, Ethiopia
Review Details
Article Title: "Mapping Urban
Morphology: A Classification Scheme
for Interpreting Contributions to the
Study of Urban Form"
Authors: Pierre Gauthier, Jason
Gilliland
Place of Publication: Concordia
University, University of Western
Ontario.
Year of publication:
Introduction
Urban morphology involves the study
of city forms.
Diversity in theoretical formulations
in urban morphology leads to
confusion.
Proposal: A classification scheme to
interpret contributions to urban form
studies.
Theoretical Framework
Distinguishing cognitive and
normative approaches in urban
form studies.
Internalist vs. externalist
perspectives on urban form as an
independent system or a product of
external factors.
Mapping these contributions using a
Cartesian grid.
Cognitive vs. Normative
Approaches
Cognitive approaches aim to
produce knowledge and theoretical
tools.
Normative approaches focus on
articulating a vision for future urban
development.
Example: Internalist approaches
prioritize understanding the internal
logic of urban fabric.
Internalist vs. Externalist
Perspectives
Internalist approaches view urban
form as a system with internal logic.
Externalist perspectives see
urban form as shaped by external
determinants like social, economic,
and historical factors.
Notable contributors: Conzenian and
process typology schools
Proposed Mapping System
Benefits of mapping urban form
contributions. (Synthetic Representation
and used as Comparison Tool)
Practical representation for researchers and
for National Research Efforts by giving aids
in identifying trends in a country's urban
form research)
Analytical insights into similarities and
differences among theoretical perspectives.
(Identification of Patterns, Visualizing
Similarities and Differences)
Let's break down the image, which found to
be a mapping of contributions to the study
of urban form.
Overall Structure:
The image is divided into four quadrants, each
representing a combination of two approaches:
Internalist vs. Externalist: This axis likely
refers to whether the focus is on the internal
characteristics of the city (e.g., building design,
street patterns) or external influences (e.g.,
economic factors, social dynamics).
Cognitive vs. Normative: This axis probably
distinguishes between approaches that aim to
understand how people perceive and use the
city (cognitive) and those that prescribe how
cities should be designed or developed
(normative).
Quadrant Breakdown:
Internalist-Cognitive: This quadrant seems to
focus on how people understand and navigate the
built environment. Authors like Lynch (1960) and
Rapoport (1977) are often associated with this area.
Their work explored concepts like imageability
(Lynch) and the psychological meaning of built
forms (Rapoport).
Externalist-Cognitive: This quadrant likely deals
with how external factors shape the way people
experience the city. Authors like Whitehand (1972a,
1974) and Slater (1978) might be relevant here.
They probably investigated how economic, social,
and political forces influence urban form and how
people interact with it.
Cont…
Internalist-Normative: This quadrant likely deals
with design guidelines and principles for creating
good urban spaces. Authors like Hillier (1996) and
Conzen (1975) might fall into this category. Their
work probably focused on understanding the spatial
structure of cities and how it can be improved.
Externalist-Normative: This quadrant likely deals
with urban planning and policy perspectives
influenced by external factors. Authors like Duany et
al. (1999) and Calthorpe (1993) might be relevant
here. Their work probably focused on creating
sustainable and equitable cities by considering
economic, social, and environmental factors.
Key Takeaways
Insights from Mapping Urban Form Contributions:
Enhanced Understanding: The mapping
system provides a structured approach to
analyzing and acknowledging the diverse
intellectual contributions in understanding,
managing, and shaping the urban built
environment.
Clarity and Acknowledgment: Helps clarify
the nature of a wide array of urban form
studies, offering a tool to navigate the
complexity and richness of urban morphology
research
Significance of Mapping
System
Comparison and Synthesis: Enables
researchers to compare, synthesize, and
interpret contributions from different
theoretical and epistemological
perspectives, fostering a deeper
understanding of urban form studies.
Research Direction: Offers insights into
research clusters, trends, and divergences
in urban form studies, guiding future
research directions and enhancing
scholarly discourse in the field.
Conclusions
Key Points to Remember
Diverse Perspectives: The study of
urban form encompasses diverse
theoretical and epistemological
perspectives, contributing to a rich
tapestry of urban morphology
research.
Mapping System Impact: The
proposed mapping system
enhances clarity, fosters
comparative analysis, and aids in
identifying research patterns and
trends in urban form studies.
Future Directions
O Further Research: Future studies can
build upon the mapping system to delve
deeper into urban morphology research,
explore emerging themes, and advance
interdisciplinary dialogue in urban form
studies.
O Collaborative Efforts: Collaboration
among researchers, practitioners, and
policymakers is crucial for advancing
sustainable urban development, informed
by insights from urban form studies.
