Dear colleagues,
I am just recovering from an interesting but for me hectic conference
that took place in Oporto on Friday last. Once again I noticed how
difficult is to communicate among planners, not only for the different
academic backgrounds but also because of the country-specific planning
culture people come from. Both facts strongly affect the (supposed)
meaning, interpretation and usage of some key-words and
key-expressions, often generating some sort of “loquacious dialogue
among deaf people”.
Sooner or later it would be useful to write down some sort of a
glossary, just for “normalizing” (as to say: proving some generally
accepted norms) the chaotic situation.
The goal of this mail is not to write a glossary, but it aims at
taking advantage of internet communication tools for a preliminary
analysis of how planners currently use some of the most important (and
mostly abused, not to say misused) technical words in our promiscuous
“scientific environment”, for understanding how the potential glossary
could be and on what it should focus.
Herewith I enclose just a short list of words and expressions, some
others are potential confrontations, asking you to add others you
already experienced interpretation problems with and reckon it would
be useful to discuss. Then, please, give your personal explanation,
possibly going into the detailed mechanisms (etymologically or
experienced based) that according to you gives one specific meaning
and not another meaning to them, always trying to provide some
examples.
Thanks a lot for contributing to the creation of a common planning language!
Fabrizio
-------------------------------
Pre-glossary scouting
Please, give your interpretation of the following words or expressions,
add yours and when explaining always try to provide some examples!
Absolute/Objective/General vs Relative/Subjective/Localized
Accessibility:
Anthropological vs Sociological:
Architectural vs Artistic:
Area (geography?) vs Zone (geography? architecture? planning?):
Bibliographic review:
Cause vs Effect:
Centrality (urban):
Citizens:
City/Town:
Coherent vs Useful:
Complex vs Complicated:
Consensus building vs Participation:
Design (urban interventions):
Design (policy making):
District vs Estate/Pole (industrial):
Economic vs Financial:
Empirical research:
Evolution vs Growth (urban):
Form/shape vs Structure (urban):
Infrastructure:
Integration vs Interaction (processes):
Interview (qualitative vs quantitative?):
Land-use:
Macro-sociological vs Micro-sociological:
Management (within urban planning):
Mathematical vs Rational(e):
Metabolism (urban):
Method:
Methodology:
Metropolitan area:
Metropolitan region:
Mobility (urban):
Model (projecting):
Model (socio-economic analysis):
Mono-centric (provide examples):
Multi-centric (provide examples):
Paradigm:
Planner (urban):
Plan/Planning (spatial):
Policy vs Politics:
Policy making:
Poly-centric (provide examples):
“Predict & provide” vs other forecasts (like weather forecast) [this
is not a joke!]:
Pro-active vs Re-active:
Process (planning) – (please provide detailed examples):
Programs (within urban planning):
Projecting:
Qualitative (provide examples):
Quantitative (provide examples):
Questionnaires (types):
Regeneration (urban):
Rehabilitation (urban):
Resilience (?):
Revitalization (urban):
Sample (statistic):
Science/scientific/scientist:
Scouting:
Space vs Time:
Spatial:
Stakeholders:
Strategy (planning):
Sustainable vs Affordable:
System:
Technique/technical/technician:
Territory:
Tool (instrument) vs Goal (objective):
Type:
Typology:
Zoning:
--
http://www.linkedin.com/in/fabriziogiulietti
“Solo i pensieri che hanno camminato hanno valore”
F. Nietzsche, Il Crepuscolo degli Idoli (1888)
|