452 research outputs found
Sort by
Transformations of Urbanising Delta Landscape: An Historic Examination of Dealing with the Impacts of Climate Change for the Kaoping River Delta in Taiwan
Get PDFThis dissertation argues that the floods following extreme precipitation result notˬonly from very heavy rainfall but also from the significant impact of human activities on natural water systems. While most literature emphasises that the increasing magnitude of storm rainfall extends beyond the original protection standards of hydrologic facilities in highly populated delta cities. Based on the knowledge of urban morphology, this study analyses how human systems have affected the transformation of natural water processes in the Kaoping River Delta. The relationship between human environments and natural landscape is illustrated via a 3-layer analytical framework which consists of a natural landscape layer, an infrastructure layer and an occupation layer. This layer-based approach views landscapes as a whole system in which each element interacts with the others. In order to transcend the limitations of traditional urban morphology and the overlay-mapping method, this research initiates an analysis framework with the delta scale from a deductive perspective. Furthermore,ˬit argues that the significant progress of infrastructure technology is the crucial factor to dominate the transformation of modern urban pattern. This influence could be identified by the analytic process of the 3-layer approach from the perspective of the delta or regional scale. This new starting point of a theoretical framework for analysing urban forms has been proved in the Kaoping Delta case. Furthermore, it could be a new and valid theoretical background to extend the knowledge of urban morphology.
The formal transformation of the Kaoping Delta is divided into four main periods, which reveals human activities have affected the operation of natural systems since a century ago. From a delta scale perspective, those effects interacting between different layers can be identified in six different topographies (in italics) of the whole river catchment area.
A. The dike system along the main stream in the plains protects delta cities against floods, which enables rapid urbanisation. Population growth in delta cities increases food demand, which causes the intensive agricultural cultivation of mountain areas.
B. The dike system narrows the original riverbed in the river basin, which raises the water level of the river during storms. This situation blocks the drainage outlets of delta cities and induces higher frequencies of urban inundations.
C. The dike system along the main stream in the plains has significantly changed the surface flowing path of river and dramatically decreased the recharge of groundwater in foothills. It causes serious land subsidence in coastal areas when the ground cannot obtain sufficient groundwater.
D. The dike system and the bridges of transportation crossing river has resulted in the lag-sedimentation of the river in the river basin. When a significant amount of river sand deposits in the riverbed rather than being transited to the estuary to supply the demand for sand along the coast, it induces serious erosion in the coast. À¨Following this context, this study organised a five day workshop in Kaohsiung, ‘Workshop on Water Environment Development in Kaohsiung’ in 2012 to further examine the results derived from Chapters 3 and 4, and to demonstrate how a 3-layer approach can work between multiple disciplines as a platform for collaboration.À¨This workshop followed the theoretical framework of the 3-layers to explore the entire Kaoping River catchment area and its two tributary basins as the chosen local-scale sites: the Meinong River and the Love River. This workshop gives the best demonstration of how to practically utilise the 3-layer approach to organise multiple- disciplinary work, and then to make an integrated plan. The results and process of this workshop are also generalised as a framework, which could be applied to other cases. 
The Meaning of Dwelling Features: Conceptual and Methodological Issues
Get PDF'The Meaning of Dwelling Features. Conceptual and Methodological Issues' relates the research areas of housing preferences and the meaning of a dwelling with each other and with aspects of the means-end approach as applied in marketing research. It results in a conceptual and methodological framework for studying the meaning of preferences for dwelling features. These features are viewed as functional for achieving the goals and values that people pursue. The meaning of dwelling features lies in these functional relationships. The model presented in this study therefore relates preferences for the features of a dwelling to the meaning they have for people. These relationships are called meaning structures. Meaning structures are measured by a semi-structured interviewing technique, which is an adapted version of the laddering technique for measuring means-end chains, and network methods are used for the representation and analysis of these meaning structures
Improving Institutions for Green Landscapes in Metropolitan Areas
Get PDFImproving Institutions for Green Landscapes in Metropolitan Areas investigates how various institutions for green landscapes in metropolitan areas work, which problems hamper them, and how these institutions can be improved. Themes, theories and methods have been selected as a response to the case studies. The following themes were formulated: landscape and institutional developments, the market or government dilemma, the network or hierarchy dilemma, the relation between spatial planning and land development, and Slow Planning and incremental institutional change. Except from the Flemish Park Forest Ghent project, a reflection case, this research examined the Dutch situation and in particular the land consolidation and contemporary developments in Midden-Delfland, the cross-subsidy approach in the Bloemendalerpolder and the National Landscape Laag Holland. The most important methodological recommendation for research in the field of planning, law and economics is to use a multi-theory approach and to select methodology and theory based on the case study data
efnMOBILE 2.0 / Efficient Envelopes
Get PDFBased on the experiences of efnMOBILE 1.0 the hands-on student workshop activities and exhibitions took place in different evironments and locations encouraging new technologies and methodologies. Like efnMOBILE 1.0 the new workshop series efnMOBILE 2.0 provides the European Facade Network (efn), its conferences and the connected professional community with a local platform for communication, exhibition, innovative development and interaction. efnMOBILE 2.0 is reaching out to be developed from a European communication and technology exchange instrument into an international tool to exchange with the global facade community.
All events of efnMOBILE 2.0 follow an overall theme: ‘Efficient Envelopes’. Focusing towards adaptive and transdisciplinary approaches to improve the building envelope’s thus the building’s performance through human-centered solutions in facade technology. The task is to inspire the upcoming generation of architects, designers and engineers to allow themselves to follow uncharted paths of development, think outside the box, to build showcase examples, and to come up with ground-breaking solutions — for a better design as it relates to climate, health and an overall building design approach. The concept is supposed to foster the dialogue around sustainable design and development and to increase awareness and actionable solutions for sustainable design.
In 2016 and 2017 efnMOBILE 2.0 has been present at three annual conferences of efn: Lucerne 2016, Delft 2017 and Detmold 2017 and additionally at the glasstec fair 2016 in Dusseldorf (Germany), and in 2017 at the University of Antwerp and the ICBEST conference in Istanbul (Turkey). Each event includes a three-to-five-days-workshop on location — to inspire and innovate - followed by a period designated to design development and engineering, and concludes with a final presentation to the professional public at fairs, conferences or in the educational context.
During each event, the participants build mock-ups of different scales, do field research or intercultural exploration. To reach this goal the project contributes to the following outcomes:
increased knowledge sharing between the various European research and education centres and between those centres and industry and further international actors.
development of novel concepts and technologies and/or the new combinations of existing technologies.
development of new knowledge such as effective evaluation tools/methods for adaptive facades.
start of new collaborations and research projects in the area of facades technologies.
This time efnMOBILE 2.0 also included an international online survey on facade education with responses from more than 200 participants. The survey addressed practitioners and scholars and was focussing on the needs and expectations of facade industry and consultancy. The results of the survey will help to further improve the existing programs and to develop new programs overseas.
efnMOBILE 2.0 has been made possible through the funding of the ALCOA Foundation. The editors and the efn-members like to thank ALCOA Foundation for supporting this initiative to make building envelope design and connected educational programmes more efficient and successful by creating a platform for organized sustainable creative thinking
Imagine: PROTOTYPING efn MOBILE
No full textThe Prototyping efn Mobile programme ‘emerging envelope’ develops innovative façade constructions with international student teams of the European Façade Network (EFN). The inspiring energy of workshops and 1:1 mock-up buildings generates a plethora of new ideas for intelligent, adaptive and sustainable façades. From adaptive building envelopes to sustainable end-of-life concepts, from user-interacting building envelopes to low-budget façades for various climate zones, this book provides innovative ideas and intelligent solutions for future-proof façade design and construction. Imagine is a series of publications that investigates technology and material development to provide architects and designers with ideas for their designs
DASH 03 - The Woonerf Today
No full textWith its recognizable structures, informal surrounding spaces, special traffic rules and widespread application, the concept of the woonerf or home zone came to prominence in the Netherlands in the 1960s and 70s. It represents one of the most characteristic concepts with regard to the design of residential areas and has become firmly rooted socially. The underlying themes of the woonerf small-scale collectivism, greenery and ecological patterns along with the connection between outdoor spaces, the car and the home are still essential components of the modern-day building assignment. Abroad, the concept of the home zone is synonymous with pedestrian-friendly residential districts with small-scale architecture. The central question in this new issue of DASH is whether the woonerf is still useful as a template for smallscale and informal forms of urbanization.
The essays and analytical contributions examine the spatial and social aspects of living in the collective space of a home zone. Extensive documentation presents a broad range of inspiring solutions in the Netherlands and abroad from the recent and more distant past, with projects by Vandkunsten, Onix, Verhoeven, Zuiderhoek, Vikangas, Persson, Lyons and others.
 
Private Sector-led Urban Development Projects: Management, Partnerships & Effects in the Netherlands and the UK
Get PDFCentral to this research lays the concept of private sector-led urban development projects (Heurkens, 2010). Such projects involve project developers taking a leading role and local authorities adopting a facilitating role, in managing the development of an urban area, based on a clear public-private role division. Such a development strategy is quite common in Anglo-Saxon urban development practices, but is less known in Continental European practices. Nonetheless, since the beginning of the millennium such a development strategy also occurred in the Netherlands in the form of ‘concessions’. However, remarkably little empirical knowledge is available about how public and private actors collaborate on and manage private sector-led urban development projects. Moreover, it remains unclear what the effects of such projects are. This dissertation provides an understanding of the various characteristics of private sector-led urban development projects by conducting empirical case study research in the institutional contexts of the Netherlands and the UK. The research provides an answer to the following research question:
What can we learn from private sector-led urban development projects in the Netherlands and UK in terms of the collaborative and managerial roles of public and private actors, and the effects of their (inter)actions?
Indications for a market-oriented Dutch urban development practice
Urban development practice in the Netherlands has been subject to changes pointing towards more private sector involvement in the built environment in the past decades. Although the current economic recession might indicate otherwise, there are several motives that indicate a continuation of private sector involvement and a private leadership role in Dutch urban development projects in the future.
First, a shift towards more market-oriented development practice is the result of an evolutionary process of increased ‘neoliberalization’ and the adoption of Anglo-Saxon principles in Dutch society. Despite its Rhineland roots with a focus on welfare provision, in the Netherlands several neoliberal principles (privatization, decentralization, deregulation) have been adopted by government and incorporated in the management of organizations (Bakker et al., 2005). Hence, market institutionalization on the one hand, and rising civic emancipation on the other, in current Western societies prevents a return towards hierarchical governance. Second, the result of such changes is the emergence of a market-oriented type of planning practice based on the concept of ‘development planning’. Public-Private Partnerships and the ‘forward integration’ of market parties (De Zeeuw, 2007) enforce the role of market actors. In historical perspective, Boelens et al. (2006) argue that Dutch spatial planning always has been characterized by public-private collaborations in which governments facilitated private and civic entrepreneurship. Therefore, post-war public-led spatial planning with necessary government intervention was a ‘temporary hiccup’, an exception to the rule. Third, the European Commission expresses concerns about the hybrid role of public actors in Dutch institutionalized PPP joint ventures. EU legislation opts for formal public-private role divisions in realizing urban projects based on Anglo-Saxon law that comply with the legislative tendering principles of competition, transparency, equality, and public legitimacy. Fourth, experiences with joint ventures in the Netherlands are less positive as often is advocated. Such institutionalized public-private entities have seldom generated the assumed added value, caused by misconceptions about the objectives of both partners grounded in incompatible value systems. This results in contra-productive levels of distrust, time-consuming partnership formations, lack of transparency, and compromising decision-making processes (Teisman & Klijn, 2002), providing a need for other forms of collaboration. Finally, current financial retrenchments in the public sector and debates about the possible abundance of Dutch active land development policies point towards a lean and mean government that moves away from risk-bearing participation and investment in urban projects and leaves this to the market. Importantly, Van der Krabben (2011b) argues that the Dutch active public land development policies can be considered as an international exception, and advocates for facilitating land development policies. In this light, it becomes highly relevant to study private sector-led urban development as a future Dutch urban development strategy.
Integrative urban management approach
This research is rooted in the research school of Urban Area Development within the Department of Real Estate and Housing at the Faculty of Architecture (Delft University of Technology). It is a relatively young academic domain which views urban development most profoundly as a complex management assignment (Bruil et al., 2004; Franzen et al., 2011). This academic school uses an integrative perspective with a strong practice-orientation and carries out solution-oriented design research. Here, the integration involves bridging various actor interests, spatial functions, spatial scales, academic domains, knowledge and skills, development goals, and links process with content aspects. Such a perspective does justice to complex societal processes. Therefore it provides a fruitful ground for studying urban development aimed at developing conceptual knowledge and product for science and practice. Such integrative perspective and practice-orientation forms the basis of this research and has been applied in the following manner. In order to create an understanding of the roles of public and private actors in private sector-led urban development, this research takes a management perspective based on an integrative management approach. This involves viewing management more broadly as ‘any type of direct influencing’ urban development projects, and therefore aims at bridging often separated management theories (Osborne, 2000a). Hence, an integrative management approach assists in both understanding urban development practices and projects and constructing useful conceptual tools for practitioners and academics. Integrative approaches attempt to combine a number of different elements into a more holistic management approach (Black & Porter, 2000). Importantly, it does not view the management of projects in isolation but in its entire complexity and dynamics. Therefore, our management approach combines two integrative management theories; the open systems theory (De Leeuw, 2002) and contingency theory. The former provides opportunities to study the management of a project in a structured manner. The latter emphasizes that there is no universally effective way of managing and recognizes the importance of contextual circumstances.
Hence, an integrative management approach favors incorporating theories from multiple academic domains such as political science, economics, law, business administration, and organizational and management concepts. Hence, it moves away from the classical academic division between planning theory and property theory, and organization and management theories. It positions itself in between such academic domains, and aims at bridging theoretical viewpoints by following the concept of planning í¡nd markets (Alexander, 2001) rather than concepts such as ‘planning versus markets’, public versus private sector, and organization versus management.
Also, such an integrative view values the complexity and dynamics of empirical urban development practices. More specifically, this research studies urban development projects as object, as urban areas are the focus point of spatial intervention and public-private interaction (Daamen, 2010), and thus collaboration and management. Here, public planning processes and private development processes merge with each other. Thus, our research continues to build upon the importance of studying and reflecting on empirical practices and projects (e.g. Healey, 2006). In addition to these authors, this research does so by using meaningful integrative concepts that reflect empirical realities of urban projects. Thereby, this research serves to bridge management sciences with management practices (Van Aken, 2004; Mintzberg, 2010) through iterative processes of reflecting on science and practice.
Moreover, the integrative management approach applied in this research assists in filling an academic gap, namely the lack of management knowledge about public-private interaction in urban development projects. Despite the vast amount of literature on the governance of planning practices (e.g. DiGaetano & Strom, 2003), and Public-Private Partnerships (e.g. Osborne, 2000b), remarkable little knowledge exists about what shifting public-private relationships mean for day-to-day management by public and private actors in development projects. Hence, here we follow the main argument made by public administration scholar Klijn (2008) who claims that it is such direct actor influence that brings about the most significant change to the built environment.
An integrative urban management model (see Figure 2.3) based on the open systems approach has been constructed which forms a conceptual representation of empirical private sectorled urban development projects. This model serves as an analytical tool to comprehend the complexity of managing such projects. In this research, several theoretical insights about publicprivate relations and roles are used to understand different contextual and organizational factors that affect the management of private sector-led urban development projects.
Hence, a project context exists within different often country-specific institutional environments (e.g. the Netherlands and UK). In this research, contextual aspects that to a degree determine the way public and private actors inter-organize urban projects, consist of economics & politics, governance cultures, and planning systems and policies. Hence, institutional values are deeply rooted in social welfare models (Nadin & Stead, 2008). For instance, the differences between Anglo-Saxon and Rhineland model principles also determine public-private relationships. However, the process of neoliberalization (Hackworth, 2007) and subsequent adaptation of neoliberal political ideologies (Harvey, 2005) has created quite similar governance arrangements in Western countries. Nevertheless, institutional rules incorporated in planning systems, laws and policies often remain country-specific. But, market-oriented planning, involving ‘planners as market actors’ (Adams & Tiesdell, 2010) intervening and operating within market systems, have become the most commonly shared feature of contemporary Western urban development practices (Carmona et al., 2009). In this research, the project organization focuses on institutional aspects and interorganizational arrangements that structure Public-Private Partnerships (Bult-Spiering & Dewulf, 2002). It involves studying organizational tasks and responsibilities, financial risks and revenues, and legal rules and requirements. Inter-organizational arrangements condition the way public and private actors manage projects. Hence, such arrangements can be placed on a public-private spectrum (Bãrzel & Risse, 2002) which indicates different power relations in terms of public and private autonomy and dominance (Savitch, 1997) in making planning decisions. These public-private power relations are reflected in different Public-Private Partnership arrangements (Bennet et al., 2000) in urban development projects. As a result, in some contexts these partnerships arrangements are formalized into organizational vehicles or legal contracts, in others there is an emphasis on informal partnerships and interaction.
The lack of management knowledge on private sector-led urban development projects, and our view of management as any type of direct influencing, results in constructing a conceptual public-private urban management model (see Figure SUM.1). This model is based on both theoretical concepts and empirical reflection. In this research, the management of project processes by public and private actors contains applying both management activities and instruments. Project management (Wijnen et al., 2004) includes development stage-oriented initiating, designing, planning, and operating activities. Process management (Teisman, 2003) includes interaction-oriented negotiating, decision-making, and communicating activities. Management tools consist of legal-oriented shaping, regulating, stimulating, and capacity building planning tools (Adams et al., 2004). And management resources consist of crucial necessities (Burie, 1978) for realizing urban projects like land, capital and knowledge. In essence, all these management measures can be applied by public and private actors to influence (private sector-led) urban development projects.
These management measures can be used by actors to reach project effects. In this research, project effects are perceived as judgment criteria for indicating the success of the management of private sector-led urban development projects. They consist of cooperation effectiveness, process efficiency, and spatial quality. Effectiveness involves the degree to which objectives are achieved and problems are resolved. Ef ficiency is the degree to which the process is considered as efficiently realizing projects within time and budget. Finally, spatial quality is the degree to which the project contributes to responding to user, experience and future values of involved actors (Hooijmeijer et al., 2001). Such process and product effects are a crucial addition to understand the results of private sector-led urban development projects.
Comparative case study research using a lesson-drawing method
This research systematically analyzes and compares private sector-led urban development cases in both the Netherlands and the UK in a specific methodological way. In essence, this study is an empirical comparative case study research using a lesson-drawing method. Hence, case studies allow for an empirical inquiry that investigates a contemporary phenomenon within its real life context (Yin, 2003). Such a qualitative approach is very suited for the purposes of this research as it enables revealing empirical collaborative and managerial mechanisms within private sector-led urban development projects. The reason to include studying the UK lies is the fact that it can be considered as a market-oriented development practice, from which valuable lessons can be drawn for the Netherlands. Thereby, this research places itself in a longer tradition of Dutch interests in UK planning and development (e.g. Hobma et al., 2008). Hence, this research aims at drawing lessons in the form of ‘inspiration’ from practices and projects, as opposed to the more far-reaching transplantation of spatial policies (e.g. Janssen-Jansen et al., 2008). However, in order to draw meaningful empirical lessons there is a need to indicate whether they are context-dependent or -independent. This requires systematically comparing the institutional planning practices of both countries by indicating differences and similarities between the Netherlands and the UK.
Based on these methodological principles ten Dutch and two UK of private sector-led urban development cases are selected and studied. The Dutch cases focus on scope over depth aimed at sketching the phenomenon of ‘area concessions’ in both inner-city and urban fringe projects. The UK cases focus on depth over scope aimed at understanding the applicability of a private sector-led approach in complex large-scale inner-city projects. As techniques the case study research uses document reviews, semi-structured interviews, project visits, and data mapping.
Comparing Dutch and UK planning and urban development practices
The institutional context of urban development in the Netherlands and the UK shows some structural differences, despite the fact that such contexts are often subject to change. For instance, the Dutch planning system uses Napoleonic codified law based on a constitution with abstract law principles as rule, and a limited role of judicial power. The UK planning system is based on British common law lacking a constitution, and uses law-making-as-we-go as judges act as law-makers. In terms of spatial planning, the Netherlands is characterized by binding land use plans within a limited-imperative system based on legal certainty. Dutch spatial planning can be labelled as ‘permitted planning’ based on ‘comprehensive integrative model’ (Dí¼hr et al., 2010) which involves hierarchically coordinated and related public sector spatial plans. UK spatial planning has no binding land use plan, places importance on material considerations based on discretionary authority and flexibility. Historically, UK’s spatial planning can be labelled as ‘development-oriented planning’ based on a ‘land use management model’ with a focus on public sector coordinated planning policies. Moreover, Dutch and UK urban development also differ in terms of public and private roles in organizing and managing development (Heurkens, 2009). In the Netherlands, local governments are active bodies using spatial plans, active land development policies and public investment to develop cities. The private sector often operates reactively and is historically focused on the physical realization of projects. In general, public-private decision-making processes are based on reaching consensus, development project coordination typically involves ‘collaboration models’, and management is focused on process as product outcomes.
In the UK, local government uses relatively less regulations and investment to develop cities, thereby facilitating market parties. The development industry is a mature sector, actively initiating and investing in projects. Decision-making is characterized by negotiations, and the organization of projects is often based on a clear formal public-private role division. Despite such a generic Dutch-UK comparison being of crucial importance to this research, it does no justice to increasing similarities between European planning practices. Moreover, such institutional contexts evolve as a result of changing planning priorities in each country. For instance, some basic characteristics of the UK planning system attracted the attention of Dutch planners, including comprehensive principles for project coordination, private sector involvement and negotiations, options for the settlement of ‘planning gain’, packaging interests, development-oriented planning, and discretion for planning decisions (Spaans, 2005). Hence, such more market-oriented planning principles have become valuable and sometimes necessary mechanisms to effectively cope with an increasingly less public-led and more private sector-led Dutch urban development practice.
Empirical findings from Dutch private sector-led urban development cases
Urban development practice in the Netherlands since the year 2000 witnessed an increased use of the concession model. Hence, this is the Dutch definition for private sector-led urban development. It can best be characterized as a contract form between public and private parties which involves the transfer of risks, revenues, responsibilities for the plan, land and real estate development to private developers based on pre-defined set of public requirements (Gijzen, 2009). In theory (Van Rooy, 2007; Van de Klundert, 2008; Heurkens et al., 2008) this collaboration model holds promising advantages of being a more effective, efficient and transparent strategy to achieve a high quality built environment. Nonetheless, possible disadvantages like the lack of public ‘steering’, dependency of market actors and circumstances, inflexible contracts, a project management orientation, and a stern public-private relationship also are mentioned. Moreover, conditions for the application of concessions in theory involve a manageable project scale and duration, minimal political and societal complexity, and maximum freedom for private actors. Motives for choosing concessions are the lack of public labor capacity and financial development means, risk transfer to private actors, increasing private initiatives and private land ownership. Hence, in theory public and private roles in the concession model are considered as strictly separated.
However, there is a lack of structural empirical understanding and evidence for such theoretical assumptions. Therefore, empirical cases in Amsterdam, The Hague, Enschede, Maassluis, Middelburg, Naaldwijk, Rotterdam, Tilburg, Utrecht, and Velsen (see Table 5.1) are carried out. This includes studying private sector-led projects in both inner-city and urban fringe locations. The main conclusions based on cross-case study findings of these ten Dutch projects are highlighted here. Notice that public-private interaction and collaboration remains of vital importance in Dutch private sector-led urban development projects. Despite the formal contractual separation of public and private tasks and responsibilities, in practice close informal cooperation can be witnessed, especially in the early development stages. Moreover, public actors do not remain as risk free as theory suggests, because unfavorable market circumstances can cause development delays affecting the living environment of inhabitants.
Furthermore, it seems that constructing and using flexible public requirements with some non-negotiable rules is an effective condition for realizing public objectives during the process. In terms of management
OverHolland 10/11: Architectural studies for the Dutch city
Get PDFThis edition of OverHolland is a good deal thicker than usual, as befits a celebratory issue. The editors have decided to make it a double issue, which at the same time makes clear that the OverHolland series will not end with No. 10. When the series began seven years ago, a contract was signed for the publication of ten issues. The achievement of that goal certainly warrants a celebration — but that is no reason to bring the series to an end. The editors and publishers will make every effort to ensure that it continues.
‘OverHolland — Architectural studies for Dutch cities is a series published on the joint initiative of the Department of Architecture at Delft University of Technology and SUN Publishers. The editors and publishers plan to publish two issues a year. The field of architectural research covered by the series includes both typological and morphological urban research and the question of architectural interventions in the context of Dutch cities.’ This was OverHolland’s ‘mission statement’ when it was launched. As it turned out, two issues a year was rather too ambitious a target, but that was not for lack of commitment. The standard of quality the editors sought often entailed more preparatory work, and in the past two years, there have also been considerable funding difficulties. However, OverHolland has proved highly popular, especially with urban historians and geographers, and has thus become a platform for the exchange of research between various disciplines.
As this issue goes to show, OverHolland’s programme is by no means exhausted. Much of issue 10/11 is devoted to an exploration of the main changes in the area that is now the Randstad between 800 and 2000. Changes in the landscape, habitation patterns and infrastructure are shown in six maps that indicate the situation in 800, 1200, 1500, 1700, 1900 and 2000. These ‘snapshots’ provide an overall picture of (a) the history of habitation and the urbanisation process and (b) changes in landscape and infrastructure. The study follows on from earlier texts published by Henk Engel and Reinout Rutte in issues 2 and 3 of OverHolland.
‘Twelve centuries of spatial transformation in the western Netherlands’ is the result of a joint study carried out from March 2008 to February 2011 by the University of Amsterdam’s Historical Geography research group and the Urban Architecture and History sections (Institute of History of Art, Architecture and Urbanism, IHAAU) at Delft University of Technology’s Faculty of Architecture. The maps and texts were produced in close consultation, the various tasks being divided up as follows. Guus Borger and Frits Horsten provided abundant source material for the maps and wrote most of the text. Otto Diesfeldt, Iskandar Paní© and Arnoud de Waaijer drew the maps and wrote the accompanying technical explanations. Henk Engel and Reinout Rutte initiated and supervised the project, edited the articles, contributed texts on the towns and cities concerned and wrote the explanations for the 1900 and 2000 maps. The editors and publishers wish to thank the Netherlands Architecture Fund for funding this issue.
This double issue also contains articles by three PhD students. Nikki Brand and Kim Zweerink take a closer look at the period 12001500, the centuries during which the urban system in what is now the Randstad began to take shape. Following on from her article in OverHolland 9, Nikki Brand traces the emergence of the waterway network and investigates how it may have influenced the development of the nine main towns in the area: Amsterdam, Haarlem, Leiden, The Hague, Delft, Rotterdam, Dordrecht, Gouda and Utrecht. Kim Zweerink examines how the layout of these towns evolved and uses the location of urban institutions to show the initial development of town centres.
Esther Gramsbergen looks at how the development of urban institutions affected the layout of a single city, Amsterdam, which in the sixteenth century assumed a predominant position with Holland’s urban system, and whose urban institutions displayed the most differentiated development from then on. Following earlier studies on the areas around the Dam square (in OverHolland 3) and the Binnengasthuis hospital (in OverHolland 6), Gramsbergen now examines the Plantage district. After the city council had launched Amsterdam’s Fourth Expansion in 1662 in response to robust population growth, the city’s development rapidly slowed, and after the Dutch Republic’s annus horribilis 1672 it came to a complete (albeit temporary) halt. The area east of the River Amstel remained vacant, and the city council decided to create the Plantage and establish the ‘Hortus Botanicus’ (botanical garden) there. In the nineteenth century, this first ever deliberately designed urban green space was to become a testing ground for cultural and educational institutions.
Esther Gramsbergen’s study follows an article by Freek Schmidt. This discusses the emergence of private country homes in Watergraafsmeer and the accompanying cultural components, which also guided Amsterdam’s city fathers when creating the Plantage and the botanical garden. Robert Cavallo then provides an introduction to a number of graduation projects for the redesign of the area adjoining the Plantage, Roeterseiland, home to many of the University of Amsterdam’s buildings since the late nineteenth century.
OverHolland 10/11 concludes with two book reviews. Herman van Bergeijk reviews Jaap Evert Abrahamse’s dissertation De grote uitleg van Amsterdam. Stadsontwikkeling in de zeventiende eeuw (‘The Great Expansion of Amsterdam: urban development in the seventeenth century’), and Anton Kos discusses Bas van Bavel’s recent study Manors and Markets. Economy and Society in the Low Countries, 500-1600
Knowledge Sharing Strategies for Large Complex Building Projects
Get PDFThe construction industry is a project-based sector with a myriad of actors such as architects, construction companies, consultants, producers of building materials (Anumba et al., 2005). The interaction between the project partners is often quite limited, which leads to insufficient knowledge sharing during the project and knowledge being unavailable for reuse (Fruchter et al. 2002). The result can be a considerable amount of extra work, delays and cost overruns. Design outcomes that are supposed to function as boundary objects across different disciplines can lead to misinterpretation of requirements, project content and objectives. In this research, knowledge is seen as resulting from social interactions; knowledge resides in communities and it is generated through social relationships (Wenger 1998, Olsson et al. 2008). Knowledge is often tacit, intangible and context-dependent and it is articulated in the changing responsibilities, roles, attitudes and values that are present in the work environment (Bresnen et al., 2003). In a project environment, knowledge enables individuals to solve problems, take decisions, and apply these decisions to actions. In order to achieve a shared understanding and minimize the misunderstanding and misinterpretations among project actors, it is necessary to share knowledge (Fong 2003).
Sharing knowledge is particularly crucial in large complex building projects (LCBPs) in order to accelerate the building process, improve architectural quality and prevent mistakes or undesirable results. However, knowledge sharing is often hampered through professional or organizational boundaries or contractual concerns. When knowledge is seen as an organizational asset, there is little willingness among project organizations to share their knowledge. Individual people may recognize the need to promote knowledge sharing throughout the project, but typically there is no deliberate strategy agreed by all project partners to address knowledge sharing.
In the literature, two main approaches on knowledge sharing can be distinguished, an object or content -oriented perspective and a community-oriented perspective. In the object perspective, technology is seen as a medium to store and share knowledge. The limitations of this perspective are that social processes and tacit knowledge are not adequately supported and there has generally been a slow adoption of such technology in design practices. The community perspective prevents these problems by allowing for the natural and informal formation of communities, however, communities can become largely independent and unconnected, which makes it more difficult to entice them towards a certain strategic direction. Since both approaches have their limitations, this thesis proposes a holistic framework for knowledge sharing in LCBPs drawing on concepts by Mintzberg (1973) and Activity Theory. Mintzberg’s concepts are used to discuss the type of implementation (top-down, bottom-up), and the origin of the strategies (deliberate/emergent/(un)realized). For analysing the content and effect of each strategy, concepts from Activity Theory (tools, subject, object, rules, community, and division of labour) are used. The proposed model, the Knowledge Diamond, consists of four dimensions for analysing and designing knowledge sharing strategies for LCBPs.
Three of these were inspired by Activity Theory, namely tools, procedures, and social practices, while a fourth emerged as a crucial dimension in this thesis: physical settings. This framework was used to examine knowledge sharing strategies in a comparative analysis of two large complex building projects. Based on rich data from observations, documents and interview, the origins, the development and the effect of both forms of knowledge sharing environments are investigated. The first part of the analysis sheds new light on the possibilities of knowledge sharing in large complex building project. The unique, temporary, and complex nature of such projects has often been reported as a potential barrier to investing knowledge sharing. However, this analysis highlighted that the while the location is unique, the underlying challenges are typically not, and although projects are per definition temporary, these large, complex projects often last for a decade. Investing in knowledge sharing is therefore possible and worth the effort, and with respect to complexity more needed than those involved are aware of.
In the second part of the empirical data analysis, the knowledge sharing strategies inuse in the two cases were examined. The first case represents a people-oriented approach using collocated open plan offices for the entire design team; the second case represents a tool-oriented approach drawing on a Building Information Model (BIM). The co-located offices provided the physical setting for knowledge sharing, but it not planned as a conscious strategy and so was mainly regarded as sharing the same office floor and was not used to its full potential. Physical boundaries remained between subteams and interaction was restricted to the level of project managers. In the second case, the implementation of a BIM represented a bottom-up and emergent strategy that embraced digital technologies for specific problems. The analysis showed that there was limited understanding about requirements and implication of changes in the design processes. Introduced through a bottom-up emergent strategy without commitment from all project partners, it was not possible to utilize the potential benefits of a BIM system for the overall design team. The analysis also revealed that what practitioners referred to as a BIM, was not a true BIM implementation, thereby indicating that digital concepts are still not completely clear in practice.
This comparative analysis of two cases led to several conclusions:
- Irrespective of whether a tool or people-oriented approach is used, there will be emerging strategies with which people try to address problems caused by limited knowledge sharing.
- The physical setting can play a major role in supporting interaction. Designers and managers will make intentional or spontaneous use of the possibilities that their physical setting affords, even though tools are available that can facilitate distributed work. Thus, tool implementations do not make physical settings obsolete.
- Tools provide a technological infrastructure such as creating virtual proximity, handling design and criteria changes, enhancing design representation, or dealing with changes in personnel. However, there is no magic want that cures all problems and challenges of LCBPs.
- Procedures refer to formal and informal rules about knowledge sharing. Such rules are important means of creating shared expectations and information exchange, however, procedures can only guide but not dictate the actual behaviour of actors in regard to knowledge sharing.
- Social practices form the social infrastructure that enables and facilitates knowledge sharing through the physical setting, tools, and procedures. However, if the project culture has emerged intuitively, these practices may involve rather limited sharing behaviour at various levels (i.e. executive, managerial, and technical).
Through my research and recommendations, I have attempted to offer fresh insights to practitioners about the value and necessity of knowledge sharing in large complex building projects. The framework of the Knowledge Diamond is not intended as a magic cure, but it can serve as a guideline for enhancing knowledge sharing by paying explicit attention to all four dimensions and taking advantages of new technologies such as BIM and 3D models. Although the insights of this research are based on only two cases, the conclusions were confirmed by a panel of experts who confirmed similarities with their own experience.
This study also contributed to the literature on knowledge sharing and project management. The Knowledge Diamond can help to conceptualise knowledge sharing at both the inter-organizational and cross-disciplinary level. It can also form the basis for further theory development about work in project-based settings and help to define new project management methodologies
Evaluation of Innovative Land Tools in Sub-Saharan Africa: Three Cases from a Peri-Urban Context
Get PDFSub-Saharan Africa is urbanizing rapidly, but most countries lack appropriate tools to manage their urban growth. This creates both risks and opportunities for prospective land holders, resulting in a tangle of insecure land rights and claims under multiple tenure systems. Recently, innovative land tools have been proposed and implemented to formalize land tenure. It is envisaged that tenure security for land holders will increase and in turn contribute to poverty reduction.
This study evaluates such tools in three peri-urban areas in Lusaka (Zambia), Oshakati (Namibia) and Gaborone (Botswana), with a focus on the perspective of the land holders. The author concludes that the tools are to some extent pro-poor, and makes recommendations for further improvements. These innovative land tools are also considered a necessary addition to conventional and administration tools. This study makes valuable reading for academics, policy makers and practitioners within the land administration domain and related disciplines