Nordic Journal of Architectural Research / Nordisk Arkitekturforskning
Not a member yet
1153 research outputs found
Sort by
Theory, research and practice: Towards reflective relationship between theory and practice in architectural thinking
At the present time researches and doctoral dissertations in architecture generally tend towards perspectives and methods which have been borrowed from other branches of science. The doctoral dissertations resulting from this, scientific-analytical, generally presented in verbal form, have an important and established position in postgraduate studies in architecture. Yet education in architecture still lacks a research model to cater for the special nature of the architects' praxis, especially the creative imparting of form. At the level of the doctoral dissertation there is no form of research within the education in which a direct, reflective connection with the practical business of the field could be achieved, and in which the special nature of architecture somewhere between art and science is duly taken into account. The present paper considers the need for new forms of practice- and architectural design-based researches
Industry vs. Landscape. Landscape Planning and the Design of Industrial Facilities
Landscapes change continually. In the 20th century, much of the Swedish landscape has been marked by technical and industrial projects such as power stations, road construction, industrial plants, quarries, and landfills. Environmental awareness and public opinion have profoundly influenced the way industrial facilities are designed and sited in the landscape. Roughly speaking, this development can be divided into four periods. During two of these periods, 1900-29 and 1950-69, the ideal was to assert the facilities' industrial character; In the other two periods, 1930-49 and 1970-95, the goal was to hide those facilities, subordinating them to the natural landscape
The concept of city was long considered unequivocal, even though it slowly evolved. Polis; urbs and civitas. A political center, a place for trade, the favored city of commerce. Then the industrial city, the garden city, and the modern city. Today, the word "city" is used so broadly as to be virtually meaningless. Consequently, phrases such as "urban design" and "city planning" have also lost much of their significance. Our understanding of the city derives from a first phase of agricultural society and a second phase of mechanized industrial society. There is as yet no consensus as to the role of the city in the third phase, infotmation society. Is it then meaningful to speak of these three archetypal patterns: the grid, the park, and the neighborhood city? Or do we thereby merely transfer the conceptual problems to another level without improving our ability to orient ourselves in urban issues