This Page is under constructuction. Images to be added.

A Framework for Theory Applicable to the Education of Landscape Architects (and Other Environmental Design Professionals

[Text Icon #1] A Detailed Reading


The framework for design as a verb identifies six different questions [Figure 2]. Each is related to a theory-driven modeling type. The models on which we rely must be based in usable and valid (or presumed to be valid) theory. The framework is "passed through" at least three times in any project: first, downward in defining the context and scope of a projectždefining the questions; second, upward in specifying the project methodologyžhow to answer the questions; and third, downward in carrying the project forward to its conclusionžgetting the answers. The six questions with their associated modeling types are listed downward, in the order in which they are usually considered when initially defining the context and questions of a design problem.

	I	How should the state of the landscape be 
		described; in content, boundaries, space, 
		and time?  This level of inquiry leads to 
		Representation Models. 

	II	How does the landscape operate?  What are 
		the functional and structural relationships 
		among its elements?  This level of inquiry 
		leads to Process Models.

	III	Is the current landscape functioning well?  
		The metrics of judgment (whether health, 
		beauty, cost, nutrient flow, or user 
		satisfaction) lead to Evaluation Models.

	IV	How might the landscape be altered;  by 
		what actions, where, and when? This is 
		directly related to I, above in that both 
		are data; vocabulary and syntax.  This fourth 
		level of inquiry leads to Change Models.  
		At least two important types of change 
		should be considered:  change by current 
		projected trends, and change by implementable 
		design, such as plans, investments,  
		regulations, and construction.

	V	What predictable differences might the 
		changes cause?  This is directly related to 
		II, above, in that both are based on 
		information; on predictive theory.  This 
		fifth level of inquiry shapes Impact 
		Models, in which the process models 
		(II) are used to simulate change.

	VI	Should the landscape be changed?  How is 
		a comparative evaluation among the 
		impacts of alternative changes to be made?  
		This is directly related to III, above, in 
		that both are based on knowledge; on cultural 
		values.  This sixth level of inquiry leads 
		to Decision Models.

	[Implementation could be considered another level, 
	but this framework considers it as a forward-in-time 
	feedback to level I, the creation of a changed 
	representation model.]

Figure 2 A Framework for Design as a Verb (based on Steinitz, 1990)2

Note that the six levels have been presented in the order in which they are normally recognized. However, I believe that it is more important to consider them in reverse order, both as a more effective way of organizing a landscape planning study and specifying its method (which I consider the key strategic phase) and as a more effective educational approach. A design method for a project should be organized and specified upward through the levels of inquiry, with each level defining its necessary contributing products from the models next above in the framework.


	
	Decision:	To be able to decide to propose 
			or to make a change (or not) one 
			needs to know how to compare 
			alternatives.
	
	Impact:		To be able to compare alternatives, 
			one needs to predict their impacts 
			from having  simulated changes.
	
	Change:		To be able to simulate change, one 
			needs to specify (or design) the 
			changes to be simulated.
	
	Evaluation:	To be able to specify potential 
			changes (if any), one needs to 
			evaluate the current conditions.
	
	Process:	To be able to evaluate the landscape, 
			one needs to understand how it works; 
			and
	
	Representation: To understand how it works, one needs 
			representational schema to Describe it.

Then, in order to be effective and efficient, a landscape planning project should progress downward at least once through each level of inquiry, applying the appropriate modeling types:

	Representation,
	Process,
	Evaluation,
	Change,
	Impact, and
	Decision.

At the extreme, two decisions present themselves: "no" and "yes." A "no" implies a backward feedback loop and the need to alter a prior level. All six levels can be the focus of feedback; (IV), "redesign" is a frequently applied feedback strategy.

A "contingent yes" decision (still a "no") may also trigger a shift in the scale or size or time of the study. (An example is a highway corridor location decision made on the basis of a more detailed alignment analysis). In a scale shift, the study will again proceed through the six levels of the framework, as previously described. A project should normally continue until it achieves a positive, "yes," decision. (In my area of application, a "do not build" conclusion can be a positive decision). A "yes" decision implies implementation, and (one assumes), a forward-in-time change to new representation models.

Figure 3 shows the use of the framework in its complex context, relating the component questions and models over changes in time and changes in scale. The time-scale relationships presume that one's design actions were preceded by similar considerations, and that they will, in the future, be reconsidered by designers. An example is the many times that design changes have been made in Central Park, New York City, since its original design. (See Steinitz, 1990) The scale relationships presume that "a design problem" can be simultaneously or sequentially considered at different scales in order to be resolved. An example is the design of a community, street and house.

When repeated and linked over scale and time, the framework may be the organizing basis of a very complex study. Regardless of complexity, the same questions are posed again and again. However, the models, their methods, and their answers vary according to the context.

While the framework looks orderly and sequential, it frequently is not so in application. The line through any design project is not a smooth path: it has false starts, dead ends, serendipitous discoveriesžbut the line does pass through the questions and models of the framework as I have described it, before a "yes" can be achieved.



Carl Steinitz

Graduate School of Design

Harvard University

RELATED INFORMATION


[Framework Diagram] Recent Paper on the Past, Present and Future Use of the Framework

Click on the icon to retrieve Carl Steintiz's Paper- Geographical Informations Systems: A Personal Historical Perspective, The Framework for a Recent Project, and Some Questions for the Future" devivered at the European Conference on Geographical Information Systems, Genoa, Italy, March 30, 1993


[Framework Diagram] An Example of the Framework in Practice

Click on the icon to retrieve a summary of the Alternative Futures Snderville Basin, Utah Study completed at the Graduate School of Design in the 1991.


[Home Page Icon] A Work in Progress: The EPA Camp Pendleton Study


[Framework Icon] Return to the Framework Overview