Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 32

Chapter1 Problemandresearchstrategy

1.1

Introducingthework

Thisbookreportsonanexplorationthatstartedattheendof2004.Itexploresthe borders between the domain of social geography and the domain of urban and re gionaldesignandplanning.Theworkcontainedinthisbookhasbeeninspiredbytwo questionsthatareformeattheheartofurbanandregionaldesignandplanning (stedebouwkunde).ThefirstofthosequestionsparaphrasesTorstenHgerstrand,the founder of time geography: What about people in urban and regional design and planning?(cf.Hgerstrand,1970)Thesecondquestionlinksthatquestiontothework ofKevinLynch,valuedtheoristonurbandesign,whowasconcernedwiththeexperi enceoftimeincities:Whatabouttimeinurbanandregionaldesignandplanning?(cf. Lynch,1972)Askingthesequestionssupposesastandpointthatshowsconcernfora lackofattentiondespiteampletheorisationtothesetwoaspectsofurbanism(cf. Amin and Graham, 1997; Amin and Thrift, 2002), within the domain of urban and regionaldesignandplanning. Thisthesissstartingpointisthatitisimportanttoknowaboutpeoplestemporo spatialactivitypatternswhenmakingurbanandregionaldesignsandplans.Thecen tral problem of the thesis is that, despite wide acknowledgment of this idea, such knowledgeaboutpeoplesactivitypatternsdoesnotgetfullattentionindaytoday practice of urban and regional design and planning. This is not a particularly new problem, but has been a matter of interest from the 1960s onwards in both Dutch urbanplanning,aswellasabroad.Iwillmakethecasethat,withactivitypatternsof peoplechangingthesedays,thissubjectagaindeservesfullattentionwithinthedo mainofurbanandregionaldesignandplanning. Oneexplanationfortheoccurrenceofthisparticularproblemisthatthereexistsa socalledapplicabilitygapbetweenknowledgeoftemporospatialactivitypatternsof people and knowledge of urban and regional design and planning. Therefore, the explorativeworkcontainedinthisbookisaboutthewaysinwhichdesignersorplan nerscanknowaboutpeoplespossibleandprobableactivityandmobilitybehaviour in time and space andhow theycan act upon thatknowledge while their object of study is something different, namely the design of the built environment. In the 1960s and 1970s the answer to that problem seemed within easy reach in the do mainofurbanandregionaldesignandplanning.Theoriesofpeoplesbehaviour,of urbandevelopmentandofurbanplanningcameintoconfluenceinaperiodcharac terised by much optimism about the future and the ability to actively shape that future.Butthefutureprovedstubborn,resistingbeingshapedfullytothosetheories. Bothhumanbehaviourandurbandevelopmentprovedmoredifficulttograspthan

Timespacematters

imagined.Theresult,nowadays,isthatweareleftwithamuchmoreintricateprob lemthantheplannersofthe1960s;ifwestillwanttoputpeoplecentralinouref fortstoshapethephysicalfabricofcitiesandurbanregions. Thechallengeforthisstudywastofindawaytodealwithsuchincreasedcom plexity without backtracking into a relativism of we cant do anything about it. At the heart of the argument lies the conviction that the shaping of the physical envi ronmentdoesplayaroleinprovidingthenecessaryconditionsforpeoplesindividual livestobeplayedoutintimeandspace.Thescientificrelevanceoftheworkliesin thefactthatitbridgesagapbetweenasocialsciencestanceandatechnicalscience stancesothatitextendsthescientificbodyofknowledgeofurbandesignandplan ning.Thoughthatbodyofknowledgewillultimatelyhavetobefilledwithsubstan tiveknowledgeofwhattypeofdesignprinciplesmightwork(seeKlaasen,2004),I willnotprovidereadymadeprinciplesfordesign.Iwillprovideafirststeptowards developingsuchknowledgebyprovidingideasabouthowknowledgeabouttempo rospatialactivitypatternsofpeoplecanbeembeddedinurbanandregionaldesign andplanning. The work is based on analysing two particular approaches to incorporating em pirical knowledge of activity patterns of people in urban and regional design and planning. The approaches represent two complementary views of how one might grasptheimportanceoftemporospatialactivitypatternsofpeopleinthedomainof urbanandregionaldesignandplanning.Onefocusesonknowledgeaboutpatternsof activities and emphasises the role of empirical knowledge. The other approach fo cuses on the constraints for those activities to unfold and emphasises the role of knowledgeaboutdesignandplanning. The work is coloured by a Dutch context, but its argument extends beyond the borders of that context. There are other reasons for the Dutch colour of the work besidesbeingtheplacewheretheresearchtookplace.TheNetherlandshasagood reputation internationally with regard to the stature of the domain of urban and regionaldesignandplanningduetoboththeplanningsystemaswellastheculture ofdesign.But,asthisfirstchapterwilldemonstrate,thisreputationisunderpressure from within the domain and because the societal context in which the domain is placedisfundamentallychanging.Thesetwoconditionsprovideforavividdebateto takeplaceonthedomainintheNetherlands,whichprovidesarichsourcefordiscov eringnewopportunitiesinlightofthedesignandplanningtasksathand.Itthuspro videsagratifyingsettingforstudy. Inthischapter,firstly,thebackgroundofthisthesiswillbeprovided:thewayitis positionedwithinthedomainofurbanandregionaldesignandplanningandinthe context of societal developments regarding the organisation of time and space in contemporarysociety.Thechapterdescribesthefocusoftheworkbyprovidingthe problemdescription,thekeyconceptsusedinthisthesisandthemainresearchques tion. I conclude the chapter by providing the line of reasoning by which the design andplanningapproachesanalysedinChapters5and6havebeenchosenanddemar cated. 2

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

1.2
1.2.1

Background
AcrisisinDutchurbanandregionaldesignandplanning?

During the 1990s, it was widely held in the Netherlands that the designoriented urbanplanningdomainofstedebouwkunde(urbanandregionaldesignandplanning), itstheoreticalbasisanditspractices,founditselfinacrisisandwasinneedofreha bilitation(NioandReijndorp,1997).Thiscrisiswasparticularlyintellectualinnature, but at times extended into the practices constituting the profession of stedebou wkunde as well as, for example, into educational reform. This was not something particularlynew,asthiscrisiswithregardtoitsefficiencyandrelevancehadbeen proclaimed since the early 1980s, if not earlier (Boelens, 1990). Nor was it the last timethattheneedforrehabilitationwouldbecalledfor(OCW,VROM,LNVandV&W, 2008;BNSP,2009).Theoriginsofthisperpetualcrisisattheendofthe20thcentury canbetracedtoanumberofdifferent,convergingproblemssuchastheshiftupin thelevelofspatialscaleofurbandesignproblems,thechangingrelationbetweenthe urbanandtherural,thefailureoftheplanasaninstrumentforplanning,thefailed projectofmodernisminurbanplanningwithitsfunctionalzoningapproach,there alisationthattheknowledgesystemofpreparatoryresearchfeedingthedesignofa plan was increasingly ineffective if it ever worked at all; and the splintering of the disciplineasaresultofspecialisationandclaimingofurbanandregionaldesignand planningissuesbyotherdomains. Thisproclaimedcrisisstirredthedebateonthecoreofstedebouwkunde;thede bate on this topic during the 1990s is particularly interesting. In this period a new body of literature on thehistory of the domain arose inthe Netherlands (e.g. Valk, 1990; Bosma, 1993; Faludi and Valk, 1994; Somer, 2007). In planning policy circles this was the period marked by the implementation of the Vierde Nota Ruimtelijke Ordening(FourthMemorandumonSpatialPlanning)(VROM,1990)andtheprepara tionoftheVijfdeNotaRuimtelijkeOrdening(FifthMemorandumonSpatialPlanning) (VROM, 2001b; Werkgroep Vijfde Nota Ruimtelijke Ordening, 2000). The planning concepturbannetworksbecamecentralinthepreparationoftheFifthMemoran dumalthoughasaplanningconceptitwasratherambiguousandnotparticularly new (cf. Cammen and Klerk, 2003) while the buzzword by then was ontwik kelingsplanologie(spatialdevelopmentplanning)asopposedtotoelatingsplanologie (landcontrolorientedspatialplanning)(WRR,1998).Stedebouwkundigen(urbanand regional designers) were searching for their role in this new setting (Nio and Reijndorp,1997). 1.2.2 Urbanandregionaldesignandplanning:definitionofitsmaterialobject

Asdifferentopinionsaboutwhatconstitutesthedomainofurbanandregionaldesign andplanningexistwithinthedomain,itisnecessaryheretoelaborateonhowIsee 3

Timespacematters

that domain. It is also important toclarifythe use ofthis term in relation to other, particularlyDutchtermsthataresimilar,equivalentoradjacent.Thisalsorelatesto howIamusingEnglishtranslationsofDutchtermsofruimtelijkeplanning,planologie, andstedebouwkundeasIexplainthembelow. InthisthesisIwilluseoneumbrellatermthatencompassesbothruimtelijkeplan ningandstedebouwkunde.Thistermisurbanandregionaldesignandplanning.In translationstedebouwkundesuggestsanemphasisonurbanandregionaldesignand physicalspatial organisation, while ruimtelijke planning suggests an emphasis on urban and regional planning and societalspatial organisation. However, I see these Dutchtermsasinseparable,concerningthesameobjectofstudyinboththeoryand practice,despitebothtermshavingdifferentconnotations.Idoconsciouslyseparate planologie from urban and regional design and planning. What may be confusing is thatplanologieisoftentranslatedasspatialplanning,theliteraltranslationofruim telijkeplanning.However,planologie,inmyview,concernsafundamentallydifferent objectofstudyinboththeoryandpracticeincomparisontothecoherentcomplexof knowledgeandaction(kennisenhandelingscomplex;cf.Boelens,1990:8)thatIwill describeasurbanandregionaldesignandplanning.Iregardplanologietobeaform of political or organisational science while urban and regional design and planning canberegardedasatechnical,practicalscience(seeKlaasen,2004). Ontheonehand,itwillbepossibletoseethecentralproblemofthisthesis(see section 1.3) as a substantive problem concerning the material object of urban and regionaldesignandplanning.Hiddingdefinesthematerialobjectofruimtelijkeplan ning the term that Hidding uses i.e.urbanand regional designand planning, as spatialorganisationastheresultofthereciprocaladaptationofspaceandsociety (Hidding,2006:101).Modelsofthematerialobjectofurbanandregionaldesignand planningareatthebasisofthedefinitionofbothplanninganddesigntasks(Hidding, 2006).Suchmodelsareconceptualinnatureandaimtodescribethecomplexrela tions, mechanisms, processes and elements of societal and physical reality. Hidding (2006: 100) describes how this translates into two fundamental tasks of spatial or ganisationforthedomainofurbanandregionaldesignandplanning.Notethatspa tial organisation is identified by Hidding not in terms of an endimage, but as an intermediateresult,continuouslyadaptedinlightofongoingsocietalprocesses.The first,butnotnecessarilypredominant,fundamentaltaskconcernsthespatialorgani sationofthemutualrelationsbetweenpeople,organisations,etc.Thisrelatestothe geographicallocationofsocial(societal)activitiesintheirrelativepositionsaswellas tothepossibilitytointervene,change,andadapttheserelativepositions.Thistaskis thatofsocietalspatialorganisation.Thesecondfundamentaltaskconcernsthespa tialorganisationofrelationswithandwithinthephysicalenvironment.Thisrelatesto thedesign,transformation,realisationandmaintenanceofthephysicalenvironment, respondingtothecharacteristics,limitationsandpossibilitiesofwhatisalreadythere naturallyandculturally.Thistaskisthatofphysicalspatialorganisation.Thedistinc tion between the two types of spatial organisation must be seen as an analytical

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

distinction.Inrealitytheseareboundtogetherandexistonlyinareciprocalrelation (cf.Figure1.1). Ontheotherhand,itwillbepossibletoseethecentralproblemofthisthesis(see section 1.1) as a problem concerning the framing of urban and regional design and planning tasks in urban and regional design and planning practice. Frames are sys tems of meaning that organise what we know (Healey, 2007: 25). I use the term framingtorefertothechoiceoflanguageforsuchmodels,aswellastothecon struction,(ab)useandadaptationofmodelsofthematerialobjectofurbanandre gionaldesignandplanninginparticularapproaches.Suchframingtakesplaceinde sign and planning processes by applying knowledge in the making of designs and plansandreciprocallybydoingresearchtoinformpeoplewhodesignandplan.This second view implies that, in addition to a substantive component, there are social and procedural aspects that are important for exploring the problem. Note that, though I focus on the use of empirical knowledge by designers and planners, there aremanyothertypesofknowledgethatareusedinthemakingofurbanandregional designs and plans such as ideas about the nature, purpose and appropriate tasks associatedwithplanning,ideasabouttheroleandpowersofanindividualplanneror groupinaparticularsituationorpractice,andideas,concepts,facts,proceduresand theorieswhichplannersanddesignersapplytoproblemsandtasks(seee.g.Healey andUnderwood,1978).

Figure1.1Thereciprocalrelationbetweenthephysicalurbansystemandurbansociety,accord ingtoKlaasen(2004:22)

1.2.3 Twoviewsofthecoreofurbanandregionaldesignandplanning

Thisthesisisaproductofthefirstdecadeofthe21stcentury.Itneedstobeseen,on the one hand, against the background of the developments within the discipline of stedebouwkunde in the 1990s. And, on the other hand, it needs to be seen against 5

Timespacematters

the backdrop of a number of societal developments in the second half of the 20th century,partiallydrivenbythemassificationandinnovationofmobility,information andcommunicationtechnologies. Let'sfirsttakealookatthedisciplineofstedebouwkunde.Thestartingofanum ber of projects in the 1990s, rethinking the foundations of the discipline stedebou wkunde,isofparticularrelevancehere.Thissearchforfoundationsdisclosedsomeof thefundamentaldifferencesintheapproachofstedebouwkundigeproblemsandfor whichtheUrbanismdepartmentattheFacultyofArchitectureofDelftUniversityof Technologymaybeseenasanillustrativeexample.Inthesecondhalfofthe1990s twoverydifferentattemptswereinitiatedattheUrbanismDepartmentofDelftUni versityofTechnologytorethinkthefoundationsforthestedebouwkundeforthe21st century. Ontheonehand,therewerethoseinvolvedintheresearchprogrammeDeKern vandeStedebouwinhetPerspectiefvandeEenentwintigsteEeuw.Forthisgroup,the designoftheurbangroundplanasthedurablefabricofcitiesshouldberegardedas thecoreofthedomain,tobeseeninrelationto(andmediatingbetween)thespatial functionalorganisationoftheterritory(read:landuseplanning),thephysicaldesign ofpublicspacesandthesetsofrulesandregulationsforbuilding(Heeling,Bekkering andWestrik,2001;Heeling,MeyerandWestrik,2002).Suchaperspectiveonurban designandplanningconcernsitselfprimarilywiththecompositionofspatialpatterns withtheaimoftransformingthephysicalfabricofcities.Thephysicalfabricofcities fromthispointofviewisconstitutedbydifferentphysicalelementsthatcanbesepa rated in layers, of which the layer of the urban ground plan plays a primary role in structuringthecompositionofotherlayers(seeFigure1.2). On the other hand, there were those involved in the research programme Net workCities.Forthisgroup,thecoreofthedomainlayinthepossibilityofanurban ism of networks. This meant, first, to revalue planning classics that consider cities and urban regions in terms of dynamic network structures following the work of GabrielDupuy(1991)and,second,toconsidertheconsequencesoftheintroduction ofnewinformationandcommunicationtechnologiesattheendofthe20thcentury (Drewe,2003a).Thisresearchprogrammehasbeenbasedontheassumptionthatso called network thinkers have long been marginalised in mainstream urban and re gionaldesignandplanning,butthat,withtheriseofthenetworksociety(Castells, 1996 (2000)) it is necessary to see urban design and planning problems from the perspectiveofsocalledoperatorsofnetworks.Ofparticularimportanceisthestudy oftherelationbetweenoperatorsoftechnicalnetworks,theoperatorsoffunctional networksandhouseholdsastheyconstitutetheirownparticularnetworkofactivities andtheirinteractionswithothersineverydaylife(Drewe,2003b;Dupuy,Schaickand Klaasen,2008;Dupuy,1991)(seeFigure1.3).Thisviewonthedomainofurbanplan ningconcernsitselfprimarilywiththecomplexinteractionofprocessesintimeand spaceratherthanjustwiththetransformationofspatialpatternsovertime. The study before you has been developed in the context of the research pro grammeNetworkCities.InthatresearchprogrammeIhavetakenupthechallengeto 6

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

give more substance to one of the yet seemingly underdeveloped issues in the re searchprogrammeofanurbanismofnetworks:thewayinwhichthinkingaboutthe networks of households in the making of urban designs and plans may be incorpo rated.Andthisfocusonthedailylifeofpeoplebringsustotheimportanceofanum berofsocietaldevelopmentsinthe1990sinthefollowingsection.

Figure 1.2 The composition of physical patterns in the urban ground plan, public space and builtup space central to the domain of urban and regional design and planning. Source: Heelingetal.(2001);Heelingetal.(2002)

Timespacematters

Figure1.3Threelevelsofnetworkoperators.Source:Dupuyetal.(2008)

1.2.4

Thecontext:technology,time,spaceandbottlenecksindailylife

Thedebateofthe1990sonthecoreofurbanandregionaldesignandplanningtook placeinasocietywheremanyspeculatedabouttheeffectsofnewinformationand communicationtechnologies(ICTs)ontheorganisationoftimeandspaceindailylife andinsocietyatlarge.TheWorldWideWebwaslaunchedin1991andwithinadec ade became a medium for mass communication. Mobile phones became appropri atedbythemassesduringroughlythesameperiod.Timewassaidtobecometime less and spatial distance to be annihilated (see Castells, 1996 (2000); Urry, 2007). Now,onlyseveralyearslater,suchpredictionshavenotcometrue,butthesetech nologiesincombinationwithanumberofothersocietaltrendsandwiththeadap tation to contemporary society of older technologies, such as the car and rail sys tems,thatwerealreadyinplacehavebeenhighlyinfluential,directlyhavingeffects on the organisation of time and space in daily lives of people and for the temporal andspatialorganisationofcities. Withoutattributingchangesintheorganisationofdailylifesolelytotechnological influence, a number of significant dynamics in the temporalspatial organisation of daily life can be identified: timespace compression, timespace convergence, time space flexibilisation and timespace individualisation (see e.g. Janelle and Gillespie, 2004;Janelle,1996;Harvey,1990;Castells,1996(2000);BreedveldandBroek,2003; Breedveld, Broek, Haan, Hart, Huysmans and Niggebrugge, 2001; Franck and Wegener,2002). 8

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

Although I will go into more detail in Chapter 2, explaining these concepts and their implications, it is important to pay attention to these concepts here. What do theyconcretelymean?Thefirstconcept,timespacecompression,impliesthatpeople generallyhavebecomemorebusy,i.e.aredoingmoreinthesameamountoftime; asisthecaseintheNetherlands(Breedveldetal.,2001)(cf.Peters,2003;Galle,Dam, Peeters,Pols,RitsemavanEck,SegerenandVerwest,2004).Italsoimpliestheideaof an increasingly faster turnover time for goods and information (Harvey, 1990). The second concept, timespace convergence, implies that new means of transportation and communication have allowed for information, goods and people to travel in creasinglylargerdistancesinshortertimespansasisthecasesincetheintroduction oftherailwaysystemsinthe19thcenturyandisstillincreasinglythecasewiththe introductionofnewtechnologiesorwithadjustmentstoexistingtechnologies(Woud, 2006; Harvey, 1990). The combination of these two concepts implies the idea that moreandmorepeoplemightexperiencetimepressureinschedulingtheirdailyac tivities. Paradoxically in the Netherlands, this also seems to apply to free time in which more and more activities take place (Haan, Broek, Huysmans and Breedveld, 2003). Thethirdconcept,timespaceflexibilisation,impliestwothings.Ontheonehandit implies that agrowth in variation of the daily pattern of activities ofpeoplecan be observed.Afterall,noteveryonecanorwillparticipateinthespeedingupofdaily life.Ontheotherhand,itimpliesthatpeoplemightbeforcedtobecomemoreflexi ble to tune in to other, more dominant temporospatial patterns elsewhere. They maysobecomemoreflexiblebecausetechnologiesweavetogethertherhythmsof economic and social activities in multiple places at the same time (Castells, 1996 (2000)).Thatdoublesidedconceptofflexibilisationisconnectedtothelastconcept thatIhaveputforwardabove,timespaceindividualisation. Thisconceptreferstothewhoandwithwhomofactivitiesofpeople.Withregard to the latter, the Sociaal Cultureel Planbureau (SCP; the Netherlands Institute for Social Research) has shown that there is a trend in which people are spending less timeonsocialcontacts(Breedveldetal.,2001).Atthesametime,withmorewomen on the labour market, active 55plussers and the emergence of task combining households all phenomena characteristic of increasingly individual choices with regard to life style classic notions about households seem no longer sufficient to understandandorganisecities(Knaap,2002).However,atthesametime,relatively littlehaschangedoverthelastdecadeswithregardtothecollectiverhythmofdaily life,atleastintheNetherlands;thecollectiverhythmbeingaphenomenoninwhich thewithwhomofactivitypatternsbecomesultimatelyvisible.Therhythmofdayand night and the rhythm of life governed by labour hours are still the two dominant Zeitgeber(thecuesthatregulatetheorderoftime)intheNetherlands;andtheMon daytoFriday and 9to5 culture of paid work proves to be very persistent there (Breedveldetal.,2001). TheSociaalCultureelPlanbureau(SCP)hasclaimedthatamultiplechoicesociety is emerging; the demanding society is the other side of this coin (Breedveld and 9

Timespacematters

Broek,2003).Thistensionbetweenthemultiplechoicesocietyandstrongcollective time structures has meant that in particular for those households that combine a multitudeoftasks,socalledtaskcombiners,thequalityoflifehascomeunderpres sure.Duringthe1990sitbecamewidelyrecognised,inparticularinsocialpolicycir cles,thattherewasasetofproblemsthatneededtobetackled.TheVROMraadin their advice Dagindeling geordend? (Planning daily routine arrangements?) (VROM raad, 2000) distinguished three types of bottlenecks that needed to be solved to improvequalityoflifefortaskcombininghouseholds: 1. Beschikbaarheidsknelpunten (availability bottlenecks) such as opening timeswhicharearesultoftemporalorganisationaslaiddownbyinsti tutions,forexample,providingamenities; 2. Bereikbaarheidsknelpunten (accessibility bottlenecks, i.e. to be physi callywithinreach)whicharearesultofthespatialpositionofservices and amenities, for example in how they are positioned in relation to publictransportfacilities; 3. Toegankelijkheidsknelpunten (approachability and utility bottlenecks) whicharerelatedtotheappropriatesocialeconomicandsocialcultural conditions for accessibility of services and amenities; think of services andgoodsbeingtooexpensivetobuyortoreach,orofamismatchbe tweenavailablegoodsandservicesanddesiredgoodsandservices.

1.3
1.3.1

Problemstatementandkeyconcepts
Problemstatement

Thisstudydealswithanintellectualproblem,aproblemoftheory,ratherthanwith anempiricalproblem.Itconcernstheexplorationofhow,inthedomainofurbanand regionaldesignandplanning,todealinabetterwaywithaparticularkindofknowl edgeandwithaparticularwayofseeingurbantransformationprocesses. Inanidealsituation,urbanenvironmentsaresuitedtoaccommodatethedesired anddesirableactivitiesandmovementsofpeoplethatinhabitandvisitthemasbest aspossibleforasmanyaspossible.Urbanandregionaldesignersandplannershave animportantroletoplayininventingnewenvironmentsandadaptingthosethatno longersuffice,soastobetteraccommodatethosedesiresanddesirablesthanbefore. Torealiseurbanenvironmentsthatcanbesustainedoverlongerperiodsoftime,itis important to understand how peoples lives are organised in time and space on a daily, weekly and monthly basis (Klaasen, 2004; Drewe, 2004; 2005b). Urban and regional designers and planners would ideally base their decisions on a thorough understanding of how urban environments and their proposals for interventions in thoseenvironmentswouldaffectpeoplesactivitiesandmobility.Itisalsoimportant 10

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

thattheyunderstandhowchanges in activity and mobility behaviour in turncreate newdemandsfortheurbanenvironmenttoaccommodate.Klaasen(2004),amongst others,hasarguedthatwithoutsuchunderstandingerrorsindesignandplanningare easilymade,resultingindifficulttouseorillusedurbanplacesandlargerurbansys tems. Knowledge on the socalled temporospatial activity patterns of people is readily available within thedomainof human geography(see Chapter2). Two major prob lemsoccurwithusingandapplyingsuchknowledgeinurbanandregionaldesignand planning. One has to do with the dissimilarities between the domain of urban and regional design and planning and the domain of human geography. Fundamental differencesexistbetweentypesofknowledgeinthetwodomainsTherearefunda mental differences between the type of knowledge on how to make urban and re gional designs and plans focused on physicalspatial interventions and changes in urbanareasandregionsconstitutedbylargetemporalgrains(years,decades)and knowledgeabouthowtounderstandactivitybehaviourofpeoplefocusedonem piricalknowledgeoftemporospatialpatternsconstitutedbysmallertemporalgrains (days,weeks,months).Toapplythelattertotheformerprovesdifficult:atthepiv otalpointbetweenthesetwobodiesofknowledgeasocalledapplicabilitygapcan befound(seeChapter3). Theothermajorproblemoccurswhenlookingatthefactthatsocietyischanging: thedomainofurbanandregionaldesignandplanningseemstobelaggingbehindin understandingthosechangesandactinguponthem(Drewe,2004;2005a).Proposed interventionsareoftenbasedonanunderstandingofpatternsofbehaviourofdays pastratherthanpossibleandplausiblepatternsoffuturebehaviour(Klaasen,2004). It is indeed difficult to grasp activity patterns of people now that they are rapidly changingduetosocietalandtechnologicaldevelopments(seeChapter2).Theques tion is if one can find new ways to propose urban interventions based on a funda mental understanding of temporospatial activity patterns of people and the way thesemaybechangingovertime. Ifurbanandregionaldesignersandplannersarenotcapableofansweringtothe questionofhowtoaccommodate,sustainably,activitypatternsofpeople,itislikely that, within their domain of knowledge and action, they remain searching for the relevance of the domain in society. In the meantime society will have already changed again, answering to its owndynamics. If,however, it wouldbe possibleto applyknowledgeontemporospatialactivitypatternsofpeopleinurbanandregional designandplanning,therelevanceofthatdomaininaworldwherethosepatterns are changingwould increase significantly. Resolving the applicability gapproblem is crucialtogettingthere.Previousattemptshavelargelyfailedwithregardtoembed dingknowledgeonactivitypatternsofpeopleinurbanandregionaldesignandplan ning(seesection1.4). Thisleadstothefollowingconciseproblemstatementforthisthesis:

11

Timespacematters

Agapoccursbetweenunderstandinghowtemporospatialactivitypatterns of people get constituted and change, and knowing how to design and planurbansystems.Thisgaphindersthemakingofdesignsandplansfor urbanareasandregionsthatcanaccommodateplausibleandprobablefu turepatternsoftemporospatialbehaviourinasustainablemanner.With outunderstandingtheorderingoftimeinrelationtotheorderingofspace, thisgapcannotbebridged.Norcanthisproblemberesolvedwithoutun derstanding knowledgeapplication processes when different knowledge domainshavetobebridged. To elaborate this problem statement I will explain three key concepts as building blocksforthemainresearchquestionsofthisstudy.Firstly,IwillidentifywhatIthink ofastemporospatialactivitypatternsofpeople.Secondly,Iwillprovidearudimen tarydefinitionoftheapplicabilitygapconcept.Thirdly,Iwillbrieflyoutlinethebasic ideaofknowledgeutilitystudies.Theseconceptswillbeelaboratedinmoredetailin Chapters2,3and4. 1.3.2 Temporospatialactivitypatternsofpeople

Thefirstkeyconceptconcernsthenotionoftemporospatialactivitypatternsofpeo ple. The basic concept of temporospatial activity patterns of people can be under stoodbylookingattheweblikeschemeoffigure1.4.Thisfiguredemonstrateshow anindividualmaycombineaseriesofactivitiesduringalimitedamountoftime,and howonecanmeasureanddocumenttherelationintimeandspacebetweenthose activities.Figure1.4showshow,forexample,thenumberofactivities,thedistance, i.e.moving,betweenactivitiesaswellasthelocationofahomebaseareofinflu ence on the total amount of activities that can be undertaken by an individual in a certainamountoftime.Theideaisthatactivitypatternsareconstitutedbyboththe patternofmultipleactivitiescarriedoutinsituaswellasbythepatternsofmobility necessary to combine activities in different places. In this thesis I focus on activity patternsofpeople,butasimilarconceptmay,forexample,applytopatternsofac tivitiesofcompanies. Iwillexplicatethatthisseeminglysimpleideahaslargetheoreticalimplications. ThespatialreachofanactivitypatternwillshowinChapter2tobesubjecttoarange of socalled constraints (Hgerstrand, 1970), although people are also themselves capableofseekingwaystoincreaseorreorganisethespanoftheiractivitypatterns (Giddens,1984).Suchinfluenceagencymustbeseeninthecontextofpowerful mechanisms by which both societal patterns and peoples individual patterns are continuously being adapted (e.g. Janelle, 1969). Temporospatial activity patterns of peoplearethusnostaticgivens,butmustbeseeninrelationtosocietalprocesses. Suchprocessesarecharacterisedbybothtemporalandspatialorder.Ipositthat these orders cannot be seen apart, but must be seen in terms of temporospatial order.Furthermore,Ipositthattheymustbeseenasbeingdynamic,thusintermsof 12

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

temporospatial ordering. Such ordering is where the domain of urban and regional designandplanningcomesintoplay.Moreover,withitsfundamentaltaskofsocietal spatialandphysicalspatialorganisation,urbanandregionaldesignandplanninghas asignificantroletoplayinsuchordering.IwillexplaininChapter2theworkingsof four major types of mechanisms of temporospatial adaptation, already introduced earlierthischapter,bywhichsuchorderingmaytakeplace:timespacecompression, timespaceconvergence,timespaceindividualisationandtimespaceflexibilisation.

1.3.3 Applicabilitygap

Figure1.4Awebconceptforquantificationoftheorderingcharacteristicsofactivitypatterns. Source:Vidakovic(1988:122)asadaptedbyKlaasen(2004:70)

The applicability gap is the second key concept in this thesis. Although the term applicability gap originates in design theory, and in particular in environment behaviourstudies(Hillier,MusgroveandO'Sullivan,1972;Zeisel,1981),theconcept ofagapbetweenknowledgeandactionisrecognisedthroughoutliteratureonplan ning in general (Friedmann and Hudson, 1974) and urban and regional design and planninginparticular(HeideandWijnbelt,1994;Klaasen,2004).Muchofthelitera turefocusesononeofaseriesofpossibleexplanationsoftheapplicabilitygapsoc currence.IidentifyinChapter3threemajorcategoriesofexplanationsfortheappli cability gap problem: structural aspects, related to the gap between professional communitiesamongstthemselvesand/orintheirrelationtoacademiccommunities; contentbased aspects, related to what is regarded relevant knowledge in different domainsanddisciplines;andproceduralaspects,relatedtogapsinprocessesofplan 13

Timespacematters

ninganddesign.ThroughoutthethesisIalsolookatexplanationsfortheapplicability gap at a socalled metalevel, i.e. referring to methodological aspects of managing knowledgesuchaslaidbarebythedomainofsocalledknowledgeutilitystudies. 1.3.4 Knowledgeutility

TounderstandthethirdkeyconceptasIuseit,theconceptofknowledgeutility,it helpstodistinguishitfromknowledgeuse.ThisisthethirdkeyconceptthatIexplain here. Both use of knowledge and utility of knowledge concern processes of knowl edge being transferred or knowledge travelling from one context to another. The use of knowledge then is a relatively neutral term without a particular normative connotation. An oftenused distinction between types of knowledge use is that be tween instrumental use of knowledge, conceptual use of knowledge and symbolic use of knowledge. Landry, Amara and Lamari (2001a), Amara, Ouimet and Landry (2004)andBeyer(1997)provideindepthtreatmentsofthesecategories.Whenusing distinctions between different uses of knowledge another often made distinction is the one between tacit and explicit knowledge (Nonaka and Takeuchi, 1995), each implyingdifferentwaysofusingknowledge. Utility of knowledge has a different connotation. Utility is a term originally coinedineconomics,buttheuseoftheterminthecontexthereisdifferentfromits economic meaning, though associated with the possibility to quantify and measure utilisation.Thus,adifferencecanbemadebetweentheuseofknowledgeandthe usefulnessofknowledge.Thequestionofwhogetstodecidewhatisdeemeduseful knowledgeinplanninganddesignprocessesisamatterofconcern,butisbeyondthe scopeoftheworkathand.Itisimportanttonotethatusefulnessi.e.utilitycanbe definedfromboththepointofviewofthesourceofknowledgeaswellaswhatcould beconsideredareceivingendofaprocessofknowledgetransfer. Knowledgeutilitystudiesinthecontextofplanningaremethodologicalinnature. Othertermsusedtodescribethesetypesofstudiesareknowledgeinfluence,knowl edgeuptake,knowledgetransfer,knowledgediffusionandknowledgemanagement studies. One can distinguish between three major fields of study that comprise knowledge utility studies with a direct relevance for urban and regional design and planning. Firstly, there are those studies, grounded in the social sciences (in particular evaluation studies), that focus on theuse of knowledgefor policy purposes (Weiss, 1977;Weiss,1979;Dunn,1980;Dunn,1983;Dunn,Hicks,HegedusandvanRossum, 1990;HealeyandUnderwood,1978;Caplan,1979;Knorr,1976;Innes,1990; Landry, Amara and Lamari, 2001b; Landry et al., 2001a; Landry, Lamari and Amara, 2003; Amara et al., 2004). This category forms the largest body of work on the subject. Secondly,therearethosestudiesgroundedinthetechnicalordesignsciences,that focusontheuseofknowledgefordesignpurposes(HeideandWijnbelt,1994;Heide andWijnbelt,1996;MeyandHeide,1997;Hamel,1990).Butinthissubdomainmost researchdoesnotreferorapplytourbanorregionaldesign,butrathertoarchitec 14

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

turalortoindustrialdesign.Thirdly,thereisabodyofliteraturethatworksunderthe bannerofevidencebasedpolicy(Davoudi,2006)orevidencebasedplanning(Krizek, ForsythandSlotterback,2009;Nutley,WalterandDavies,2003). Demonstratingthepossiblewiderangeofviewpoints,Weiss(1979)outlinedase riesofmodelsofknowledgeusethatcanbecharacterisedaswaysinwhichknowl edge travels in particular contexts. Extending on the work by Weiss on the Many MeaningsofResearchUtilisation,Iwillconsideragenericmodelofknowledgeutility to be built upof three dimensions;Weisss models providing one dimension con cerning how knowledge travels in certain contexts plus two other dimensions of knowledge utility: strategies to improve on knowledge utility and stages of knowl edgeutility(seeChapter4).

1.4
1.4.1

Relevance
Societalrelevance

Between 2000 and 2002 the Wetenschappelijke Raad voor Regeringsbeleid (WRR, ScientificCouncilforGovernmentPolicy)publishedaseriesofreportsonthechang ing relation between cities and countryside in the Netherlands (Mommaas, Heuvel and Knulst, 2000; Knaap, 2002; Scheele, 2001; AsbeekBrusse, Dalen and Wissink, 2002).Thatseriesofreportsdemonstrateshowrelevantitisinlightofthesetof disciplinaryandsocietalproblemsassetoutabovetopaymoreattentiontoknowl edgeofthedailypatternsofactivitiesandmobilityofhouseholdswithinthedomain ofurbanandregionaldesignandplanning.TheWRRdemonstratesthattherelevance ofastudyonthatsubjectliesmainlyinthefactthatchangingactivityandmobility patternsofpeopleprovidemultiplechallengesforcontemporaryurbanandregional designandplanningintermsof: Thegrowthoftheleisureindustryanditsspatialconsequences(Mommaas etal.,2000)(seealsoHaanetal.,2003); Theneedfornewspatialconceptsandsteeringmechanismsforspatialdy namics in light of changes in activityandmobility behaviour ofpeople and companies(Knaap,2002)(seealsoBoelens,2009;Klaasen,2004); The need to change municipal spatial policies in light of societal changes, particularly with regard to the mismatch between the low level of scale of municipal policies in contrast to the relatively higher level of scale of peo ples and companies activity patterns (Scheele, 2001) (see also Hoog and Vermeulen,2009); Thechangesinthewaydifferentscientificdisciplinesregardtherelationbe tweensocietaldynamicsandspatialdynamics(AsbeekBrusseetal.,2002).

15

Timespacematters

Thesechallengeshavealreadyled,inpractice,tothedefinitionofanumberofdesign tasks within the domain of urban and regional design and planning. In the Nether lands,inparticular,thisneedstobeseeninthecontextofageneralshift,aroundthe turnofthecentury,fromafocusonurbanexpansiontowardsthedesignandplan ningtaskbeingfocusedonintensifieduseofbuiltupareas,themixingoffunctions, and, particularly, the focus on transformation of urban areas rather than on greenfielddevelopment(seeCammenandKlerk,2003). One example is the task of designing public space and spatial concentrations of urban services from the perspective of multiple, diverse and intensive land use (cf. BSIKprogrammes Habiforum 20002004 Meervoudig Ruimtegebruik Multifunc tionalandIntensiveLandUse,andHabiforum20042009VernieuwendRuimtegebruik InnovativeLanduse)(Habiforum,2009;Gouw,HillebrandandZantinge,2006;Nio andReijndorp,1997:238;Coolen,2004;LagendijkandWisserhof,1999aand1999b; Tummers, 2002; Harts,Maat and Zeijlmans van Emmichoven,1999; Rodenburg and Nijkamp,2004). Anotherexampleisthetaskofdesigningplacesaroundpublictransportnodesso astoprovidepossibilitiesforsynergybetweenfunctionsandpossibilitiesforactivity chainingforhouseholdsorinmoregeneralterms,inanswertotheincreasingdiver sityofmobilityandactivitypatterns,thedesignofsocalledmobilityenvironments (e.g. Bertolini and Dijst, 2000; Cammen and Klerk, 2003: 378; Boelens, Sanders, Schwanen, Dijst and Verburg, 2005; Rooij and Read, 2008). A third example is con cernedwithdesigningregionalvisionsfornetworksofcities(e.g.VROM,2001b).For eachofthesedesigntasksitisnecessarytoincludethinkingaboutpeoplestemporo spatialactivityandmobilitypatternswhiledesigningthephysicalandprogrammatic fabricofcities. Allthiscoincideswitharevivalofattentiontotheeveryday(hetalledaagse)in the domain of urban and regional design and planning although this can not be consideredamainstreamdiscourseinthedomainofurbanandregionaldesignand planning(Karsten,2009).Exemplaryofthatrevivalisaseriesofthemeissuesbythe Dutch professional magazine Stedebouw & Ruimtelijke Ordening (S&RO) (NIROV, 2007a;2007b;2007c);aswellasthereappreciationofJaneJacobswork,exempli fied in the Netherlands by the first Dutch translation of Death and Life of Great American Cities (Jacobs, 1961 (2009)). The work by Arnold Reijndorp continues to highlighttheimportanceofeverydaylife,whichseeminglyescapestheattentionof urban designers and planners (Reijndorp, Kompier, Metaal, Nio and Truijens, 1998; Hajer and Reijndorp, 2001; Dudok, Teeffelen and Reijndorp, 2004; Reijndorp, 2004; Nio, Reijndorp and Veldhuis, 2008).Also the work of Marion Robertsdraws explicit attentiontoeverydaylifeandinparticularitspeculiaritiesorhiddenaspectssuchas thenighteconomy(RobertsandEldridge,2009).Thetemporalorganisationofsociety alsoreceivesampleattentioninpopulararchitectureandpopulardesign,exemplified inpublicationssuchasbySepandVerheije(2004)andMaas(2006). Andalthoughthesesearchesforbetterurbanandregionaldesignandplanning provide some interesting openings, they are symptomatic of the problem rather 16

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

thanexemplaryfortheemergenceofasolutiontothenecessaryadaptationwithin thedomainofurbanandregionaldesignandplanningtocontemporaryprocessesof timespace (re)organisation. Luuk Boelens explains that we planners have failed to translate the more behavioural, collaborative or relational, poststructural planning theoriesintoconvincing,decisiveandsustainablepractices(Boelens,2009:185). In light of these design tasks, the societal developments as I described them abovecannotandshouldnotbeseenseparatefromthedebateonthecoreofstede bouwkunde.Thisisnotonlybecausetheorganisationoftimeandspaceincontempo rarysocietyischangingandtransformationsincontemporarycitiesareunavoidable asaresult.Inmyview,thephysicallayoutofcitiescannotbemeaningfullyseparated inurbanplanningfromthepatternsofuseofurbanplacesinbothtimeandspace.It is to accommodate temporospatial activity patterns that urban designers and plan ners concern themselves with the physical layout of the city. But that temporal di mension has been largely neglected in urban design and planning (Klaasen, 2004; Klaasen,2005b;NioandReijndorp,1997;Bonfiglioli,2004).Tocontributetoliveable cities,knowledgeofthedaily,weekly,monthlyandyearlytemporalandspatialpat ternsofuseinurbanenvironmentsneedstobeembeddedinthebodyofknowledge ofurbanandregionaldesignandplanningmorethanitisnow. 1.4.2 Fundamentalquestionsonpeople,timeandspace

Asintroducedatthestart,twofundamentalquestionsprovidetheintellectualstart ingpointsforthisthesis.Thefirstquestionwasraisedaround1970byTorstenHger strand, a geographer: What about People in Regional Science? (Hgerstrand, 1970) Thecoreofhisargumentwasthatitwasnecessarytodevelopadetailedunderstand ing of peoples daytoday behaviour in terms of their temporospatial patterns of activity and mobility as a basis for planning rather than generalised economic or sociologicaltheories(cf.Pred,1977)(seeFigure1.5;seeChapter2).Thesecondques tion was asked by Kevin Lynch, urban designer and planner, in 1976: What Time is this Place? (Lynch, 1972). The core of his argument was that, within the domain of urbanandregionaldesignandplanning,itisnecessarytopayattentiontotherela tionbetweentimeandspaceasperceivedbypeopleandthetemporalorganisation ofspacesastheyareinscribedinurbanenvironments. IarguethatthetwoquestionsputforwardbyLynchandbyHgerstrandneedto berelatedtoeachotheraswellasbevaluedforthecomplexityoftheirimplications. Ialsoarguethatthishassofarnotbeendonesufficientlywithinthedomainofurban andregionaldesignandplanning.Still,Iwillnotbethefirstinthedomainofurban andregionaldesignandplanningtograpplewiththeproblemoftimeandpeoplein terms of temporospatial activity patterns. I will summarise three previous attempts todojustthatbelow.Firstly,Boelensworkdemonstratestheimportanceoftheoris ingandconceptualisingabouttimeandspaceasdoneby,forexample,AnthonyGid dens,NigelThrift,ManuelCastellsandDavidHarvey(Boelens,2009;Boelens,2010) (cf.AsbeekBrusseetal.,2002)(seeChapter2).Butsuchtheorisationdoesnotneces 17

Timespacematters

sarily brings one closer to finding ways to embed time more firmly in urban design thinkingapartfromraisingawarenessandraisingasenseofurgencythatsomeof thecoreideasaboutcitiesinthedomainofurbanandregionaldesignandplanning thathavebeenprevalentoverthelastdecadeswillnotsufficeforthe21stcentury. Despite developing an interesting framework for innovating practices in the do mainofurbanandregionaldesignandplanning,Boelensfailstofundamentallyinte gratetimeandspaceinhistheoryonplanning.Whileheprovidesinthissensehighly relevant case material from practice in particular the case of the Stedenbaan (Boelens,2009:Box5.1;Boelensetal.,2005)(cf.KlaasenandRadema,1987;Radema andKlaasen,1986),herefrainsfromreturningtothequestionoftimeandspacein thesubstantiveportionofhistheory.

Figure 1.5 Hgerstrands timespace cube concept provides an annotation system to visualise the complex relation between temporospatial behaviour of people and the physical environ ment.Source:Parkes,ThriftandCarlstein(1978)

Dreweincontrasthighlightsthetheoreticalimportanceoftimeinrelationtospaceas he finds a notion of time integral to theory on network urbanism, building on the work by Gabriel Dupuy (Drewe, 2004; Drewe, 2005b; Drewe, 2005a; Dupuy, 1991; Dupuyetal.,2008).Drewearguesthattounderstandthecomplexityofcitiesinthe network society, it is important to highlight the temporal dimension of urban sys tems in terms of time use of individual people as well as in terms of the collective structuresoftimeinsociety.However,hisworkremainsonanabstractlevelandasa result regrettably remained to occupy an academic niche in urban planning in the Netherlands.Still,hepointsthewayforfurtherresearchtotheworkofSandraBon 18

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

figlioli(BonfiglioliandMareggi,1997),whohasvividlyarguedsincethe1980stosee cities as temporal objects. She has suggested to conceptualise cities in terms of chronotopes,literallytimeplaces.Herworkhasbeenidentifiedbyothersaswellfor havingpotential(NioandReijndorp,1997;GrahamandHealey,1999),butthework hasseeminglyremainedsomewhatparochialandhasonlybeentranslatedintoEng lish to a limited degree. Although her approach has been institutionalised in Italian timepoliciesanddispersedinaEuropeannetworkofresearchers,herapproachhas not been able to really influence mainstream urban planning. Still, we might draw morelessonsfromherworkthansofarhasbeendone.(SeeChapter6) IntheNetherlandsMargotMeywasthefirst,andoneoffewtodate,toattempta concretetranslationofresearchontimeusetomakingurbandesignsforneighbour hoodsinanattempttoovercometheapparentapplicabilitygap(thegapbetween researchanddesign)(Mey,1994;Mey,1996;MeyandHeide,1997).Herworkshould beseeninthecontextofabodyofworkgroundedinthetheoryoftimegeography (see Chapter 2). Time geographical theory has had quite some follow up in Dutch academicresearch(e.g.Vidakovic,1980;Vidakovic,1981;Vidakovic,1988;Dijstand Vidakovi, 1997; Dijst and Vidakovic, 2000; DroogleeverFortuijn, Hietbrink, Karsten and Rijkes, 1987; Dijst, 1995; Dijst, 1999; Arentze, Dijst, Dugundji, Joh, Kapoen, Krygsman,MaatandTimmermans,2001;Dietvorst,1995;Dietvorst,1994).However, timegeographywasandisseldomusedbyurbandesignersorinthecontextofurban designtasks.Meydevelopedanddefendedtheargumentthatitispossibletotrans lateempiricalstudiesontimeusetoaconcreteurbandesignbydevelopingtypical userprofilesinherPhDthesis(Mey,1994)andaresearchreportforPRO(Athen Dutchinstituteforprogrammingpolicyresearch)(Mey,1996),butherworkhasnot been followed up since. As far as is known, only Luuk Boelens has attempted one othersuchstudyinDutchurbanplanning(Boelensetal.,2005).Inaddition,forthe domain of tourism and recreation planning there are some examples to be found based on the touristrecreationcomplex concept developed by Adri Dietvorst at Wageningen University (Dietvorst, 1989).However, these concern product develop mentfortourismormanagementoftouristareasratherthanphysicalspatialdesign andplanning. Acknowledgingboththedesirabilityaswellastheapparentdifficultyofembed ding knowledge of temporospatial activitypatterns ofpeople in urbanand regional design and planning, Ina Klaasen has argued that, to deal with that difficulty, it is necessarytoliterallyputtimeinthepicture,amongstotherfactors(Klaasen,2005b). Her argument is that the invisibility of such knowledge for urban designers and planners might be located in the fact that urban designers and planners primarily reasonfromspatialmodels;thesecanonlyindirectlydepicttime.Andthatclaimmay indeedbevalid,thoughitisembeddedinamuchwiderproblem,asChapter3will demonstrate.However,Klaasenssolutionofembeddingknowledgeoftemporospa tial activity patterns of people in spatial organisation principles (see Klaasen, 2004) remainsatthesurfaceofwhatincorporatingtimeinnotionsofspacemayimplicate (seeChapter2).Moreover,inrecentyears,somecriticismhasalsoarisenontheuse 19

Timespacematters

of such spatial organisation principles in urban and regional design and planning as givens (see e.g. Healey, 2007: 228, denoting them as spatial ordering principles). Althoughthatcritiqueinmyviewdoesnotdisqualifythepossibilityofdeveloping suchprinciples,thecritiquedoesprovidegroundforexamininghowknowledgeem bedded in those principles gets positioned within the body of knowledge of urban andregionaldesignandplanning. 1.4.3 Scientificrelevance

Although Mey, Boelens and Klaasen have thus developed approaches for applying knowledgeoftemporospatialactivitypatternsofpeopleinthedomainofurbanand regionaldesignandplanning(Mey,1994;Mey,1996;Boelensetal.,2005;Boelens, 2009;Klaasen,2004;Klaasen,2005b),theseapproacheshavenotbeenappropriated inmainstreamurbanandregionaldesignandplanning.So,althoughitisinprinciple possible, knowledge of temporospatial activity and mobility patterns of people just simplydoesnotgettranslatedintourbanandregionaldesignandplanningpractice. Twoareasofparticularinterestemerge.Ontheonehand,thereisnolargebody ofliteratureontemporospatialactivityandmobilitypatternsasanintricatecompo nentofurbanandregionaldesignandplanning.Ontheotherhand,thereseemsto beaproblemofapplicabilityofempiricalknowledgeofsuchpatternsinthemaking ofurbandesignandplans.Iaimtocontributetoboththeseareasofinterest.Todo so,IbasethetheoreticalfoundationofthisthesisontwoelementsoftheworkbyIna Klaasenondevelopingurbanandregionaldesignandplanningasascience(Klaasen, 2004). Firstly, I adopt her idea that the adherence to a creativecraft approach to urbanandregionaldesignandplanningcultivatesasocalledapplicabilitygapwhich hinders the development of a scientific body of knowledge in urban and regional designandplanning.ThetermapplicabilitygapwaslabelledbyHillier,Musgroveand OSullivan to describe the gap between empirical research and the synthesis of knowledge, the latter being characteristic of designing (Hillier et al., 1972). Klaasen considerstheapplicabilitygapasoneaspectofherbroadertheoreticalworkonde veloping a scientific body of knowledge of urban and regional design and planning. Heruseoftheconceptoftheapplicabilitygapisbasedonhypothesesonthebehav iour of designers as they have been developed in particular in research on design processes(e.g.Cross,2001;Hamel,1990).Secondly,Iadopttheideathatthestruc turally lacking temporal dimension in the language and cognitive schemes of urban designersleadstotheunderestimationoftherelevanceofthetemporospatialchar acteristicsofactivitypatternsofpeople(Klaasen,2004:63;Klaasen,2005b).Klaasen developstheideathatthisisforanimportantpartduetothedifferencebetweenthe static spatial models that designers use and the dynamic reality governed by space andtimeinwhichtheyoperate.AnotheraspectthatKlaasenidentifies,isthediffer enceinthedominantgrainofobservationoftimeintransformationprocesses(years, decades) and the dominant temporal grain of observation for activity patterns of people(days,weeks) 20

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

WhereKlaasenconsequentlyfocusesonthedevelopmentofsubstantivecontent forascientificbodyofknowledgeforurbanandregionaldesign(Klaasen,2004),Iwill focusonexploringandtheorisingthesetwointerrelated,butinmyviewlessdevel opedelementsofherwork.Ontheonehand,thisisbecauseKlaasensworkinitially refrains from approaching the problem of the applicability gap in all its complexity (seeChapter3).Ontheotherhand,thisisbecauseherworkinmyviewmissesa comprehensiveframingoftheimplicationsofputtingthenotionofactivitypatterns inacentralpositioninhernotionoftimespace(seeChapter2).Thisthesiswillaimat extending the scientific body of knowledge for which Klaasen sketches the outline suchthatitwillbeinclusiveofthesenotions.

1.5
1.5.1

Aimandresearchquestions
Aim

The general aim of this thesis is to explore new possibilities for embedding knowl edgeabouttemporospatialactivityandmobilitybehaviourofpeopleinthedomainof urbanandregionaldesignandplanning.WiththisexplorationIwanttocontributeto thescientificbodyofknowledgeofurbanandregionaldesignandplanningassetout byKlaasen(2004).Iaimtodosowiththehelpoftwomajorbuildingblocks.Onthe one hand, based on an intricate understanding of the applicability gap problem (Chapter 3), the work operationalises the applicability gap problem in terms of the use and utility of knowledge (Chapter 4). On the other hand, I operationalise the substantive relation between temporospatial activity patterns of people and the temporospatialorganisationofurbanareasandregions(Chapter2). 1.5.2 Researchquestions

Followingfromtheproblemstatementthetwomaininterrelatedresearchquestions are: Inwhatwaycanthetemporospatialorderingofurbansystemsinparticular of temporospatial activity patterns of people be understood so as to act upon that understanding in the domain of urban and regional design and planning? and Whatisthepotentialofparticularapproachestocontributetoresolvingthe applicabilitygapproblem;approachesthataimtoprovideanunderstanding oftemporospatialactivitypatternsofpeoplefromadesignandplanningper spective? 21

Timespacematters

In the next section I will explain how I will use the analysis of two particular ap proachestoexplorethecentralproblem.Themainresearchquestionsareunravelled intoaseriesofsubquestionsthatneedtobeansweredintheanalysisofparticular approachesthatatfirstsightshowpotentialtoresolvetheapplicabilitygapproblem: Which approaches, at first sight, show potential to contribute to resolving the applicability gap problem by bridging knowledge domains considering theorderingoftimeandtheorderingofspacerespectively? Whichstrategiestoembedknowledgeoftemporospatialpatternsofpeople are put forward by particular approaches combining activities of research, planninganddesign? Inwhatwayistheorderingoftimespaceconsideredintheframingofdesign andplanningtaskswithinparticularapproaches? Whataspectsoftheapplicabilitygapproblemaretackledbyparticularap proaches? Combiningtheanswerstothethreequestionsdirectlyabove,canlessonsfor tackling the applicability gap problem can be derived from particular ap proaches?Ifso,whichlessons? Whichaspectsofthetwoapproacheshelpandwhichdonthelptotacklethe applicabilitygapproblem? Workingfromthefindingsontheapproaches,whatfurtherresearchisnec essarytoembedknowledgeoftemporospatialactivitypatternsofpeoplein themakingofurbanandregionaldesignsandplans? Thefirstsubquestionisansweredinthischapter;thefollowingthreesubquestions areaddressedintheconclusionsofthedescriptiveChapters5and6.Theremaining seriesofquestionsareaddressedinChapter7.

1.6
1.6.1

Researchstrategyandselectionprocess
Theprinciplebehindselectingapproachestostudy

Overthelastdecades,severalapproachesthatshowpotentialforresolvingtheappli cability gap problem have emerged. Two of those approaches that emerged in the 1990sandearly2000shavebeenselectedforanalysisinthisthesis.Thedescription ofthewayinwhichtheyhavetriedandthedegreetowhichtheyhavesucceeded and why they have or have not to embed knowledge of temporospatial activity patternsofpeopleinurbanandregionaldesignandplanningformsthecoreofthis thesis. Ihavechosentostudytwoapproachesthatexemplifyparticularproblemsolution sets for embedding knowledge of activity patterns of people in urban and regional designandplanning:theapplicationoftrackingstudiesinurbanandregionaldesign 22

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

(Chapter5)andthesocalledtimesofthecityapproach(Chapter6).Boththeseap proaches show, on first sight, potential to provide lessons for embedding such knowledgeinthepracticesofthedomainofurbanandregionaldesignandplanning. The two approaches represent two different viewpoints on knowledge of activity patterns of people. Both show how the focus on spatial patterns in urban and re gionaldesignandplanningmaybeextendedsoastoincludethenotionoftime.The one viewpoint focuses on knowledge about the particular weblike and rhythmic patterns of activities and emphasises the role of empirical knowledge about them. The other approach focuses on the constraints within which those activities may unfoldandemphasisestheroleofknowledgeaboutdesignandplanning. Theseviewpointsareexpectedtoofferrivalstrategiesfortacklingtheapplicabil itygapproblem.Thesemaycomplementeachother,butmayalsodemonstrateeach othersweaknesses.Assuch,thecompilingofthefindingsfromthetwoapproaches, and viewing them against the theoretical framework built in Chapters 2, 3 and 4, providesaplausiblebasetosuggestfurtherresearchonimprovingtheuseofknowl edgeoftemporospatialactivitypatternsofpeopleinurbanandregionaldesignand planning. 1.6.2 Onthesearchprocessandthestructuringoffindings

Theresultsofthisstudyhaveemergedfromaniterative,explorativesearchprocess. Theentrypointformysearchwasthebodyofempiricalknowledgeontherelation between physical urban structures and activity patterns of people. I found several bodies of literature, the largest was that on the relation between urban form and travelbehaviour,whichtriedexplicitlytolinkcharacteristicsofthelayoutofcitiesto howactivitypatternsofpeoplegetconstituted.Howeverthequestionthenemerged whysuchknowledgewashardlyusedalreadywhileitwasreadilyavailable? Toaddressthatquestion,andsettingthebaselineforthestudy,Iidentifiedthe applicabilitygapproblem(seesection1.3andChapter3).Iinitiallyfocusedmyre search on instruments that might help in bridging the gap. The socalled medium shiftgotmyparticularattention:themomentoftranslationofnumericalorverbal informationintovisualinformationasacrucialstepindesignprocesses.Byrevisiting the body of literature on theory and practice of the domain of urban and regional designandplanningIrealisedthattheapplicabilitygapproblemIhadbeendealing withwasfundamentaltothatdisciplineandprofession.Thegapbetweenempirical knowledge and the making of urban designs and plans was treated in a particular body of literature linking organisational theory, design theory and planning theory: knowledgeusestudiesorknowledgeutilitystudies. Ichosetobuildthestudyprimarilyaroundamorequalitativemethodofresearch basedonliteraturestudy.ThisliteraturestudyIsupportedbyinterviewsandgroup meetings to collect information on particular topics. Theory on urban and regional design and planning as well as on timespace came to play a much more important partinthestudy.IsearchedforalevelofanalysisonwhichIcouldshowtheintrica 23

Timespacematters

ciesoftheapplicabilitygapproblem.Ifoundthislevelofanalysisintheidentification of different approaches of which I selected two to study in more detail. These ap proaches,asdistinguishableentities,alsoformthecorechaptersofthethesisitself. 1.6.3 Thechoiceofapproaches

Theapproachesanalysedinthisthesisarechosensothattheycovertwofundamen talpropertiesoftheconceptoftemporospatialactivitypatternsofpeople:thetem porospatialpatternsthemselvesandtheconstraintstowhichpeoplearesubjectedin producing those patterns. These roughly match with two fundamentally different viewpoints within studies of activity behaviour: the choicebased approach and the constraintsbased approach (see Chapter 2). Moreover, these two viewpoints also enlightenthetwosidesoftheapplicabilitygapproblem,eachstartingontheother end:empiricalknowledgeaboutactivitybehaviourontheonehandanddesignand planningontheother.Thefinalchoiceofapproacheshasbeentheresultofanitera tive,explorativeresearchprocess(seesections1.6.2and1.7). Thefirstapproachcentresonanonlyrecentlyinthelasttenyearsdeveloped approach for the collection and processing of data on temporospatial activity and mobilitybehaviour:theuseoftrackingtechnologiessuchasGPS(GlobalPositioning System)andmobilephonepositioning.Trackingtechnologies,offeringstateoftheart researchtechniques,isalogicalchoiceforthisstudyasresearchintotheworkingsof activitysystemsisatthebaseofthinkingaboutpeoplestemporospatialactivityand mobility behaviour in the context of urban and regional design and planning (see Chapter2).Themajorconcerninthechapterontrackingtechnologiesisifthisnovel approachenablesresearchersanddesignerstogetbeyondtheapplicabilitygapprob lem.Theapproachcanbeconsiderednovelforitextendsbeyondbeingjustanother researchtechniquethatreplacespaperdiariesforstudyingactivitybehaviour.Iposit thattheintroductionoftrackingtechnologiesmayfundamentallychangesomething intheepistemologyofactivitybehaviourresearch.Howandtowhatdegree,though, isamatterofdebate. Thesecondapproachpicksuponthesuggestionthatthesocalledtimesofthe city approach, which conceptualises cities as chronotopes, may provide ways for ward in urban and regional design and planning for embedding a concern for the smallgrainsoftimesuchasdaysandweeks.Suchgrainsarecharacteristicforpeo ples activity and mobility behaviour. The approach, primarily developed through French, German and Italian actionresearch practices, is analysed with regard to its theorisation of problemsolution sets being considered as planning endeavours and theanalyticalandactionorientedresearch,designandplanningstrategiesthatcon stitutetheapproach.Theselectionofthisapproachisprimarily,althoughnotexclu sively, based on Paul Drewes expectations of the approach: it seems to deliver an important step forward in bringing activity patterns of people to the fore in urban andregionaldesignandplanning(Drewe,2004): 24

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

It provides starting points for the development of new spatial concepts basedontheunderlyingconceptofthepostindustrialcity(i.e.basedona servicebasedandknowledgeeconomy); Itprovidesaframeworkformultidisciplinaryscientificreflectiononcontem poraryurbandesignandplanningleadingtoaninnovativeproblemformula tionbasedonatemporaldescriptionofspatialphenomena;and It provides concrete methods for local political processes such as socalled multipartnertablesofcodesign,mobilitypactsandavisuallanguagesup portingtheseprocessesintheformofsocalledchronotopicmaps Demarcatingtheapproaches

1.6.4

Ratherthandemarcatingtheapproachesbyaconcretesituatedpractice,Ihavecho sen asa first step to definethe approaches by episodescharacterised by the intro duction of a new way of framing and/or tackling an urban and regional design and planningproblemanapproachthatillustratestheproblematicoftheapplicabil itygap.Suchanepisodecanbeanalysedbylookingattheconstellationofpractices and publications that are associated with the approach. The period from 1990 on wards is of particular interest as was demonstrated at the start of thischapter and theapproachesareselectedfromthisperiod. Thesecondsteptodemarcatetheapproachesisintermsoftheirrelationalmap of knowledge, i.e. the network of knowledge experts involved (see Chapter 4). But involvedinwhat?Theapproacheshavebeenidentifiedbynetworksthatareorgan isedaroundanidentifiableresearch,planningand/ordesignapproachthatisofrele vance to the problem statement. Often approaches get reduced to discourse or stories,i.e.languagebasedendeavourslargelystrippedofsubstantiveaspects.But such a conceptualisation would not allow for a broader mapping of the subject at hand.Itismorehelpfultodefineapproachesindirectlyintermsofthenetworkof expertssupportingtheapproach,aswellasdirectlyintermsofwhatcouldbecalled the program of the approach. In particular, I am choosing as a starting point net works of experts that organise themselves around certain knowledge strategies oc cupyingonlypartsoftheknowledgedomainofurbanandregionaldesignandplan ning,i.e.withintherelationalknowledgescheme(seeChapters3and4,Table3.3). InbothapproachesofChapters5and6,agroupornetworkofprofessionalsiscom mittedtochangingsomefundamentalpropertyoftheknowledgedomainbyrefram ingthetypeofknowledgeand/ormannerofdealingwithknowledgeofactivityand mobilitybehaviourofpeople. However, not all networks of experts are the same. Peter Haass distinction be tweendifferenttypesofnetworksofexpertsishelpfulhere(Haas,1992).Notethat Haassaimwastodistinguishepistemiccommunitiesfromothergroups.Epistemic communities are networks of professionals with recognised expertise and compe tenceinaparticulardomain,andanauthoritativeclaimtopolicyrelevantknowledge 25

Timespacematters

withinthatdomainorissuearea(Haas,1992:3).Basedondistinguishinggroupsof expertsaccordingtothedegreetowhichtheysharesocalledcausalbeliefs,princi pled beliefs, interests and consensus on their knowledge base, he distinguishes be tweenfivetypesofgroups: (a) Epistemiccommunities(cf.theconceptofpolicycommunities;see Healey,2007:177178), (b) Interestgroupsandsocialmovements(cf.theconceptsofregime networks;MossbergerandStoker,2001), (c) Disciplinesandprofessions, (d) Legislatorsandbureaucraticagencies. (e) Bureaucraticcoalitions. I am excluding from my analysis the groups consisting exclusively of legislators and agencies.ThegroupofbureaucraticcoalitionsistheoddoneoutinHaasswork;the conceptcommunitiesofpractice(Wenger,McDermottandSnyder,2002)concern ing a similar type of network is more apt here. Such communities and epistemic communitieshelphereindemarcatingtheapproaches,while(b)and(c)willshowto be related to particular strategies for enhancing knowledge utility within the ap proaches. 1.6.5 Whatwouldhavebeenalternativeresearchstrategies

Severaldirectionsforresearchhavebeenconsideredtotackletheresearchquestion anditssubquestionsasalternativestotheresearchstrategyfinallychosen: Usingempiricalresearchresultsontemporospatialactivitypatternsofpeo ple and applying this in a concrete urban design so as to update Margot Meysapproachtocontemporaryactivitypatterns; Aresearchbydesignapproach(asdefinedbyKlaasen,2004)focusingonthe development of spatial organisation principles derived from knowledge of temporospatialactivitypatternsofpeople; Adesignresearchapproachthatfocusesonstudying(measuring)theways inwhichindividualdesignersorateamofdesignersdealswithapredefined designtask(cf.Hamel,1990); A knowledge utility approach studying the types of and the ways in which knowledgeisbeingusedinthemakingofanurbandesignorplan. Iwillbrieflyaddressthecentralweaknessesandstrengthsofthesealternativestrate gies and reasons why they have not been chosen. The first direction has not been chosen for a number of reasons. Although the research strategy has been tested beforeanditisseeminglypossibletoproduceresultsintermsofurbandesigns,itis 26

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

not likely that this strategy would now lead to a higher degree of appropriation of knowledge of temporospatial activity and mobility patterns of people by urban de signers than after the first attempts. Moreover, the problems associated with the applicabilitygaparenotfundamentallybeingsolvedbythisstrategy.Abetterunder standingofpeoplesactivitypatternsandoftherelationbetweentheseactivitypat terns and the structure of the built environment do not automatically lead to the appropriationofsuchknowledgebyurbandesigners. A more designbased strategy to tackle the problem as suggested by the subse quenttwooptionsresearchbydesignordesignresearchwouldpossiblyprovide resultsthatwouldbemoreeasilyappropriatedbyurbandesigners.However,before itwouldbepossibletotackletheproblemathandaseitheradesignresearchprob lem or a researchbydesign problem, it is first necessary to answer a number of questionsaboutwhatactuallytoappropriatethen. Such questions might be developed and possibly answered using an explorative strategy based on a research strategy akin to that of knowledge utility studies. Knowledge utility studies are an eclectic field of study and have emerged after the comprehensive, cybernetic approach to urban and regional design and planning proved to collapse under its own weight at the end of the 1970s (see Chapter 3). Knowledge utility studies concern themselves with the way in which knowledge travels from one domain to another. There are several reasons why this strategy seemsmoreaptherethantheotherstrategiesdescribedinthissection,butthereare somecriticalremarkstobemadeaswell. In knowledge utility studies researchers generally try to answer their research questions by observing the use and transfer of knowledge in a practicebased case environment.Thisallowsforcleardemarcationofcasesintermsofcasestudymeth odology.However,itisdifficulttoassesstheuseofaparticularbodyofknowledgein suchasettingandmoststudiesthereforeratherfocusontheclassificationoftypesof knowledgeused.Moreover,fewexamplesofpracticesareactuallyavailableinwhich to study the integration of knowledge of activity patterns of people in urban and regionaldesignandplanning.Asitisdifficulttoidentifyifsuchintegrationwilltake place in a practice case, it was therefore necessary to choose and delimit units of studyinanotherwaythaniscustominknowledgeutilitystudies.

1.7
1.7.1

Onresearchmethodandtechnique
Onmethod

For the description and analysis of particular approaches to research, planning and designIhaveusedatechniqueakintoatechniquegenerallyusedincasestudyre search;eventhoughthisstudycannotbecharacterisedassuch.Toanalysethetwo different approaches the same protocol was used: (a) structuring the approaches alongthelinesofaspectsoftheapplicabilitygap;(b)evaluatingthemagainsttime 27

Timespacematters

space theory, and (c) evaluating them against the three dimensions of knowledge utility. Theory building and the use of theory as a framework for evaluation has playedanimportantroleinsettingupthisprotocol(seesection1.7.2).Thestudyis akintoanembedded,multiplecasestudyaseachanalysedapproachcontainsmulti ple projects or cases embedded in the approach. However, as I also evaluate the global nature of the two approaches the research design of the study has also ele ments of holistic case study design (Yin, 2009: 46). The study is not meant to be a comparativestudyofthetwoapproaches.Theyarebothevaluatedagainstthetheo reticalframework,notagainsteachother.Still,theydocomplementeachotherand inChapter7Iwillthereforedrawconclusionsbasedonthecompiledfindingsofboth analyticalchapters. The method is based largelyon the systematic study of documentationon each particularapproachandtheevaluationoftheirprinciplesanduseinpracticeagainst thetheoreticalframework.Theliteraturestudydeskresearchhasbeencombined with participation in the setup of empirical research and educational pilot projects ledbyothers(seesection1.7.3).Ratherthantheempiricalwork,thesetupandde velopmentofprojectssubsequentlyservedasembeddedcaseswithintheanalysis of,inparticular,thetrackingbasedapproach.Thestudyisthusatypicalinthesense thatitdoesnotcontainempiricalfieldwork. 1.7.2 Ontheuseoftheory

The theoretical framework of the study has two major components: theory on the applicabilitygapproblemandtheoryontimespace,ormoreparticulartemporospa tialordering.Thesecomponentscanbeseenasrepresenting,respectively,theoryof urbanandregionaldesign,andplanningandtheoryinurbanandregionaldesignand planning (cf. Faludi, 1973). I hold that these components cannot be meaningfully separated and need to be seen in relation to each other. This point of view is sup portedbyreferringtotheoryonthesocalledmaterialobjectofurbanandregional designandplanning(Hidding,2006;seesection1.3). Thetheoryontheapplicabilitygapproblemneedstobeseenasanexplanatory theory. It explains why knowledge on temporospatial activity patterns of people is difficulttouseinurbanandregionaldesignandplanning.Myaimhereisnottotest the theory directly, but to examine approaches with regard to the degree to which theypayattentiontodifferentexplanations.Thesuppositionhereisthatthereisnot onesimpleexplanationtotheapplicabilitygapproblem,butthatthereisalwaysan amalgamofexplanations. ThetheoryontimespacethatIuseinthisstudyleansongrandtheory,inpar ticularsocialtheorywithageographiccomponent.Forthisthesissuchtheoryhelps to identify links between societal processes and transformations in the physical spatialorganisationofcities;andthus,toidentifywhichrolethedomainofurbanand regionaldesignandplanningmayplayinaccommodating(changesin)societalproc

28

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

esses.Again,mymajorconcernisthedegreetowhichapproachesdealwiththeintri cacyoftimespacethatthetheorydemonstratestoberelevant. Extending on the theoretical framework on the applicability gap, theory on knowledgeuseandknowledgeutilityplaysadifferentroleinthisthesis.Fromsuch theory I have derived a conceptual model of how the use of knowledge works on three dimensions of knowledge utility: (a) how does knowledge travel in certain contexts, (b) which strategies to enhance knowledge utility are used, and (c) which stagesofknowledgeutilitycanbedistinguished.ToevaluatetheapproachesofChap ters5and6,Iconfrontthemwiththisthreedimensionalmodelofknowledgeutility. Thebodiesoftheoryontheapplicabilitygapandontimespacedeliverindicators and criteria for that evaluation. The first two dimensions of the knowledge utility model are combined in a conceptual grid. That grid is used to draw conclusions in each chapter on a particular approach. Based on these conclusions, in Chapter 7, whichcontainsgeneralconclusions,thethirddimensionisusedtoidentifystrengths, weaknessesandwaysforward. 1.7.3 Onthesearchforandtreatmentofsourcematerial

Astheuseoftrackingtechnologiesinurbanandregionaldesignandplanning(Chap ter 5) concerns a relativelynew field of study inparticular the searchfor its rele vanceinthedomainofurbanandregionaldesignandplanningthereisrelatively littledocumentationavailable.Thedocumentationthatisavailableoftenshowsthe experimental,trialanderrortypeofattemptsdevelopedoutsidedisciplinaryoraca demicconstraintsandthusdoesnotnecessarilyalwaysanswertoacademicorhighly professional rigor. Still, I have attempted to rely mostly on those accounts that do displaysomerigorandsignsofexternalreview.InexampleswheretheseareabsentI relyonlessformalaccountsandreportsofexperimentsusingtrackingtechnologies. As the people and projects within the domain of information visualisation have a largeonlinewebpresence,Ihavereliedonfindingaccountsontrackingvisualisations foralargepartthroughonlinesearchingandnetworking.Ihaveavoideddelvinginto thebodyofliteraturethatsolelyattemptstosolvetechnicalissuesoftrackingstudies, althoughIhaveincludedsomeaccountsthatprimarilyfocusontechnicalissuesbut dodisplayadirectinterestforthedomainofapplicationathand. Thesourcesthatpresentanaccountofpilotstudiesusingtrackingtechnologies, inwhichIhavebeendirectlyorindirectlybeeninvolved,consistmostlyoffinalised researchreportsorstudentreports,butduetotimeconstraintsIhavealsouseddraft reportsandpreliminaryresearchresultstofillinsomeofthegaps.Creditsformuch ofthatmaterialshouldgotothosepeoplethathavebeeninvolvedinthisresearch,in particular Stefan van der Spek, Frank van der Hoeven, Otto Trienekens, Remco de Haan and Peter de Bois. When I was directly involved in the pilot studies in particular I primarily contributed to the shaping of the research questions and researchsetup.Lastly,oneothersourceneedstobemadeexplicit.Thequalitative materialresultingfromroundtableandplenarydiscussionsattheUrbanismonTrack 29

Timespacematters

eventcontributedmuchtoaninitialframingoftheanalysis(SchaickandSpek,2007; Schaick,2008;SchaickandSpek,2008);itisincludedinsection5.2onindicatorsof structuralaspectsoftheapplicabilitygapproblem. With regard to the timesofthecity approach (Chapter 6) I am not the first to studyitspotential.Severalindepthstudiesfocusingonsituationsinparticularcoun tries have been published (Bonfiglioli and Mareggi, 1997; Mareggi, 2002; Belloni, 1998; DATAR, 2001; SZW, 2002; Keuzenkamp, Cloin, Portegeijs and Veldheer, 2003; OCW,2007),aswellasseveralcomparativestudiesbasedonthestateoftheartin the1990s(BoulinandMckenberger,1999;Mckenberger,2001).Thesamegoesfor someexplorativestudiesinmorerecentyearsofbestpracticesandtheirtransferabil ity(Horelli,2005;IERMB,2008;OCWandDehora,2009;Mairhuber,2001;Mairhuber andAtzmller,2009)andofcasestudiesinwhichparticularplanninginstrumentsare developed (SUREconsortium, 2006). This material has been used as secondary sourcematerial. Thebodyofliteratureontimeorientedurbanplanninganddesignonwhichthis chapterisbasedoriginateslargelyfromtheperiodbetweenthemid1990sandmid 2000s.Sometheoreticalliteratureoriginatesfromthe1980s.Idistinguishtwotypes ofsourcesonwhichmyanalysishasbeenbased:(1)documents(co)authoredbycore membersoftheepistemiccommunityontimeorientedurbanplanninganddesign; these are partially planning documents and partially articles and compiled volumes onplanningpractices;(2)documentsinwhichtheepistemiccommunityisreferredto byauthorsfromoutsidethecorenetwork;mostoftheseareexplorativedocuments toseeiftherearelessonstobelearnedfrompastpractices.Thefactthatthereare several different language domains involved in any case Italian, German, French, Dutch,andEnglishtranslationoftermsmightinsomecasesleadtolossofhidden andculturallydependentmeanings.Forthatreason,Iwilloftengivetheoriginalterm togetherwithanEnglishtranslation.

1.8

Planofthebook

InthischapterIhaveintroducedthecentralproblemofthisthesis.Ihaveshownhow thatproblemrequiresacombinationofamethodologicalandasubstantiveapproach, resultinginanexplorative,largelytheoreticalstudy.IhaveexplainedthatIhavecho sen to use a research strategy that is akin to knowledge utility studies that are a methodological type of studies. In addition I have explained the reasons for my choice to study two different approaches to incorporating empirical knowledge of temporospatialactivitypatternsofpeopleinurbanandregionaldesignandplanning. The following Chapter 2 will focus on the definition and conceptualisation of time spaceontheborderbetweenthedomainsoftimegeography,ofsocialtheoryandof urban and regional design and planning. The subsequent two chapters will develop the concepts of the applicability gap and of knowledge utility to serve as a further theoretical and methodological framework for the thesis. Those three chapters will 30

Chapter1Problemandresearchstrategy

provide the basis on which to draw conclusions from the analysis of the three ap proaches. Figure1.6presentsanoverviewoftheoutlineofthethesis.Thecoreofthethesis isformedbytheanalysisoftwoapproacheseachelaboratedoninadescriptiveac countoftheapproachinasinglechapter.Eachofthetwochapterstreatingaparticu larapproachisbuiltupalongthelinesofthethreemajoraspectsoftheapplicability gapproblemplusmetalevelaspects.InthesechaptersfirstlyIaimtoidentifypossi bleindicatorsoftheapplicabilitygapproblemsfortheapproaches,and,secondly,to explorepossibleandplausiblyeffectivestrategiestoovercometheapplicabilitygap. Thefirstofthetwocorechaptersrevolvesaroundtheintroductionoftrackingtech nologies such as GPS (Global Positioning System) and mobile phone tracking in the domainofurbanandregionaldesignandplanning.InthischapterIsearchforwaysin which research using these technologies may help in literally putting the time spacecharacteristicsofpeoplesbehaviourinthepicturewithinthedomainofurban and regional design and planning. The second of the two core chapters revolves around the introduction of timeplanning policies with a spatial component, in par ticularsocalledterritorialtimeplans,inseveralEuropeancountrieswithanemphasis onplanningpracticesinItaly,GermanyandFrance.Thesepracticeshavebeensaidto provide interesting exemplars for embedding knowledge of temporospatial activity patternsofpeopleinpracticesofurbandesignandplanning(Drewe,2005b;Nioand Reijndorp, 1997; Mey and Heide, 1997). I search in this chapter for the degree to which this potential is realised. The conclusions on the findings regarding each of theseapproachesareforthemostpartincludedinthetwodescriptivechapters.In Chapter7Iputthecompoundfindingsinthecontextofthetheoreticalframeworkas setoutinChapters2,3and4.Iwillalsoreflectthereonthemainresearchquestions andIwillidentifyavenuesoffutureresearch.

31

Timespacematters

Figure1.6Structureofargumentationandoutlineofthethesis

32