Geodesign parsed: Placing it within the rubric of recognized design theories

Abstract It is neither the “design” portion nor the “geo” part that empower geodesign’s mode of practice and education—it is their combination that facilitates this model of land design and planning. One of the stated features and benefits of geodesign is that it brings together science and design. Inherent in that combining though appears to be the source of confusion. What distinguishes geodesign from design processes that deploy more innovative approaches to GIS? Is it geodesign if GIS workflows are used for decision support? There is a current lack of consistency in assigning the term “geodesign” to projects and practices. The author posits that geodesign engages GIS at several points in a design process including using GIS and relevant scientific data to better evaluate and understand the potential consequences of design alternatives. This article parses out the design portion to clarify what contributions design brings to the process. The intent is to situate the design aspect of geodesign within a lexicon of recognized design theories. The outcome of this analysis reveals core components that comprise a geodesign process. Those form the basis for a proposed Case Study Method in geodesign. A clearer understanding of geodesign as a new model of design practice emerges through this research by placing geodesign within the realm of other design theories and establishing critical dimensions in the form of a Case Study Method. The guidance provided by a Case Study Method approach to organizing and disseminating geodesign projects will help advance future discourse and practices.

[1]  Armand Hatchuel,et al.  Towards Design Theory and expandable rationality : The unfinished program of Herbert Simon. 1 , 2003 .

[2]  B. Berg.  Qualitative Research Methods for the Social Sciences , 1989 .

[3]  Behrooz Kalantari,et al.  Herbert A. Simon on making decisions: enduring insights and bounded rationality , 2010 .

[4]  Paul D. Zwick.  The World Beyond GIS , 2010 .

[5]  E. Guba,et al.  Competing paradigms in qualitative research. , 1994 .

[6]  Carl Steinitz,et al.  A Framework for Geodesign: Changing Geography by Design , 2012 .

[7]  S. Lenzholzer,et al.  ‘Research through designing’ in landscape architecture , 2013 .

[8]  Krista L Schneider,et al.  The Paris-Lexington Road: Community-Based Planning and Context Sensitive Highway Design , 2003 .

[9]  Morris Asimow,et al.  Introduction to design , 1962 .

[10]  Matthew W. Wilson.  On the criticality of mapping practices: Geodesign as critical GIS? , 2015 .

[11]  R. Yin.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods , 1984 .

[12]  Maryanne M. Gobble,et al.  Design Thinking , 2010, The Palgrave Encyclopedia of the Possible.

[13]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The Sciences of the Artificial , 1970 .

[14]  Nigel Cross,et al.  Forty years of design research , 2007 .

[15]  D. Erickson,et al.  MetroGreen: Connecting Open Space in North American Cities , 2006 .

[16]  Mark Francis,et al.  A Case Study Method For Landscape Architecture , 2001, Landscape Journal.

[17]  E. Wilson.  Consilience: The Unity of Knowledge , 1998 .

[18]  Robert Root-Bernstein,et al.  Arts foster scientific success: Avocations of Nobel, National Academy, Royal Society, and Sigma Xi members. , 2008 .

[19]  Jack Ahern,et al.  Greenways as Strategic Landscape Planning: Theory and Application , 2002 .

[20]  H. Scott Fogler,et al.  Strategies for Creative Problem Solving , 1994 .

[21]  Vijay Kumar,et al.  101 Design Methods: A Structured Approach for Driving Innovation in Your Organization , 2012 .

[22]  Tim Brown,et al.  Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organizations and Inspires Innovation , 2009 .

[23]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  The new science of management decision , 1960 .