Learning from students: geodesign lessons from the regional design studio

This paper explores potential issues in the emerging field of geodesign by examining key lessons learned through design studios. Presenting three distinct projects as examples from regional design studios in an undergraduate landscape architecture program, this paper points out common learning experiences that repeat despite very different contexts. Recurring issues that can be observed from these examples include difficulty in addressing scale, difficulties in dealing with the volumes of data and information available and complications due to perceptions of the false dichotomy between science and design. With the potential to reshape urban planning and design, the need for geodesign to openly embrace a grand vision of itself is evident. However, for these changes to be meaningful, serious changes need to be undertaken in our educational processes developing a generation of urban and regional geodesigners who are better equipped to think scientifically while shaping landscapes and places responsibly and creatively.

[1]  Frederick Steiner,et al.  The living landscape : an ecological approach to landscape planning , 2000 .

[2]  Michael F. Goodchild,et al.  Towards Geodesign: Repurposing Cartography and GIS? , 2010 .

[3]  Lance Freeman,et al.  Neighborhood Food Environment and Walkability Predict Obesity in New York City , 2008, Environmental health perspectives.

[4]  J. Voogd,et al.  Multicriteria evaluation for urban and regional planning , 1982 .

[5]  Robert B McMaster,et al.  Scale and Geographic Inquiry , 2004 .

[6]  M. Monmonier Coast Lines: How Mapmakers Frame the World and Chart Environmental Change , 2008 .

[7]  Robert B McMaster,et al.  A Research Agenda for Geographic Information Science , 2004 .

[8]  C. Thompson Linking landscape and health: The recurring theme , 2011 .

[9]  Daniel Weiner,et al.  Community Participation and Geographical Information Systems , 2002 .

[10]  Stephen J. Carver,et al.  Integrating multi-criteria evaluation with geographical information systems , 1991, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[11]  Carl Steinitz,et al.  A Framework for Theory Applicable to the Education of Landscape Architects (and Other Environmental Design Professionals) , 1990, Landscape Journal.

[12]  Jyrki Kangas,et al.  Integrating spatial multi-criteria evaluation and expert knowledge for GIS-based habitat suitability modelling , 2001 .

[13]  Florent Joerin,et al.  Using GIS and outranking multicriteria analysis for land-use suitability assessment , 2001, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[14]  Farhana Azim Design in Nature , 2014 .

[15]  G. Ding,et al.  Geo-Narrative: Extending Geographic Information Systems for Narrative Analysis in Qualitative and Mixed-Method Research , 2008 .

[16]  W. J. Neal,et al.  Living by the rules of the sea , 1996 .

[17]  Takemi Sugiyama,et al.  Preference and Relative Importance for Environmental Attributes of Neighbourhood Open Space in Older People , 2010 .

[18]  Helen Couclelis,et al.  The Abduction of Geographic Information Science: Transporting Spatial Reasoning to the Realm of Purpose and Design , 2009, COSIT.

[19]  Ria Hutabarat Lo Walkability: what is it? , 2009 .

[20]  Ma Jin-w,et al.  GIS: Designing Our Future , 2010 .

[21]  Daniel Weiner,et al.  Community participation and geographic information systems. , 2002 .

[22]  Kyle D. Brown,et al.  Social Consciousness in Landscape Architecture Education: Toward a Conceptual Framework , 2003, Landscape Journal.

[23]  Ernest L. Boyer,et al.  Building Community: A New Future for Architecture Education and Practice : A Special Report , 1996 .

[24]  J. Nassauer,et al.  Design in science: extending the landscape ecology paradigm , 2008, Landscape Ecology.

[25]  Piotr Jankowski,et al.  Integrating Geographical Information Systems and Multiple Criteria Decision-Making Methods , 1995, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci..

[26]  Gabe Ignatow “Idea hamsters” on the “bleeding edge”: profane metaphors in high technology jargon , 2003 .

[27]  Michael E. Dietz Low Impact Development Practices: A Review of Current Research and Recommendations for Future Directions , 2007 .

[28]  J. K. Ochsner,et al.  Behind the Mask: A Psychoanalytic Perspective on Interaction in the Design Studio , 2000 .