Architectural Institute of Japan NII-Electronic Library Service Arohiteotural エnstitute of Japan 【 カテ ゴ リ ー 1 】 日 本建築 学会 計画系 論文集 第586 号 , 73 − 79 . 2004 年12月 J . Archit . P] ann . , AIJ , No . 586 , 73 − 79 , Dec 、 , 2004 ACRITICAL STUDY OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN MODERN REGIONAL PLANNING ・ The transitionfrom Patrick Geddes towards Arthur Glikson 近代 地 域計画 にお け る 市民参加 に 関す る批 評 的考 察 バ トリ ッ ク ・ ゲデ ィ ス か らア ー サ ー・ グ リク ソン へ の 遷移 FumiafeiSA T () * 佐藤文昭 The city planner Sir Patdck Geddes ( 1854 − 1932 ) is defined as the origin of publicparticipation in city planning . At the same time , the shi 食f 「 om Geddes ’ s theory towards the work of ArIhur α ikson , as one of his successors , exemplifies the conscquGnce of separating thc positions of citizens from theseofplanners in the pl 跏 ning Process . Although Geddesian theoryno longerfUnctions as a professional sense of thecurrent planning theory , itcould contribute to empower individuals . through discevering one ’ s own sensc ofvalue within the two different attitUdes of individuals and planners 」n this respect , the Geddesian theery , as the m ( rdern project , ceuld be reinterpreted as develeping an autonomous position of the 血dividuals withih the plarming process , so . that each of them oan eva 且 uate the visions that tle p 且 anners propose . Kegwords ’ Patrick Geddes , the? 〉 ’ otation ofLife , Artha 厂 GlikSon 、 7heNotation { ofLife , modernisation theo り y , dependen のy theory パ . トリ ッ ク ・ ゲディ ス 、 ア ー サ ー ・ グ リク ソン 、 生 命 の 表記 、 近代化理 論 、 従 属理 論 1. Introdロction , Promoting regiona 【 planning not only organised by loGal goverrlments and planners as the professionals , but also by being associated with citizens , is becoming increas 孟 ngly important in current society . However , the citizen1Planner dualityobserved in currcnt planning 血eory isone of 出e major factors obstmcting the satisfaction ofhuman needs . Between the two gmups ofpeople thcre are gaps thatstill 爬 main inthe planning and raise an issue :Isit possibUe fbrindividUalstobe cmpowe 【ed inthe planningproocss inordcr to saIisfy theirown n ds? One of the answers to this issue could be sou 帥 t by identifying the citizen ’ s position within modcm oity plamlng theories , f ()llowing their 廿ansitbn towards 出e present da } The city planner Sir Patrick Geddes ( 1854 − 1932 ) isknown as one ofthe roots of modern city plarming 、 Based on hiscomprehensive surveys of the ‘‘ plaoe ” , “ work ” and 」‘ felk ” applying observationa 晝 methods , he develop a sociologioaHbrmula of . geography . economy and anthropology . 1 S ce this work shows the planning process identica 且fc )r the planners and 山e citizens basept on the regional sirrvey and its analysis , he is def1ned as th6 0rigin of pubIiO participation in eity plalming . This paper argues thc consequen gf progressive 且 y separating . thc positions ofc 而 zens fromthese ofplann ¢ rs in the planning process , whibh is exemplified by the shi食 食om GeddGs ’ theorytowards the work of A 曲 ur Glikson , who isone of the successors of the Geddesian theo π y .Basedon the issueQf thじ empowerment men 口oned above , an altemative relationship be鱈veen individu 印 s and p 置 anners issoug 血 t in its process , The stru じtUre Of this argument isas follows : 一 ] banalyse Geddes ’ s 」 「 Netatio 耶 ef Life ” as one ef the ma 血 framework of his dleory . ・ ] banalyse Glikson ’ s interpretation of the 『 Nota1ion of Life ” and contrast it with Geddes ’ s work ・ Tb locatethe two theories within the transition f om modem towards cu ∬ont planning 血eo 理 」 espeGiaHy fbcusing on tle reason thatthe identical position of citizcns and planners in the Geddcsian theorycannot be applied 孟 ncurrent seciety . ・ 恥 argue the limitatien of the GeddesiantheoryfUnctiening as the curre 囗t planning theory . Instead , its significa 冂 of empowering indivfduals incurrent sooiety issought . 蓼 SeniorStaff Researcher , Pohcy ・ Science System Department , Miしsubishi Research Institute , Inc . , Ph . D . 〔 Edin ) 三 菱総合研究所政策科学 シ ス テ ム 研究部 主任研 究員 ・ Ph . D . 一 73 一 N 工工 一 Eleotronio Library
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
Architectural Institute of Japan
NII-Electronic Library Service
Arohiteotural エnstitute of Japan
【カ テ ゴ リー1】 日 本建築学会計画系 論文集 第586号 ,73−79.2004年12月
J.Archit. P]ann ., AIJ, No .586,73−79, Dec、,2004
ACRITICAL STUDY OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN
MODERN REGIONAL PLANNING ・
The transition from Patrick Geddes towards Arthur Glikson
近代地域計画に お ける市民参加 に 関す る批評的考察
バ トリ ッ ク ・ゲデ ィ ス か らアーサー ・グ リク ソ ン へ の 遷移
Fumiafei SA T()*
佐 藤 文 昭
The city planner Sir Patdck Geddes (1854−1932)is defined as the origin of public participation in city planning. At the same time, the shi食f「om
Geddes’s theory towards the work of ArIhurα ikson, as one of his successors , exemplifies the conscquGnce of separating thc positions of citizens
from these ofplanners in the pl跏 ning Process.
Although Geddesian theory no longer fUnctions as a professional sense of the current planning theory, it could contribute to empower individuals
.through discevering one’s own sensc ofvalue within the two different attitUdes of individuals and planners」n this respect, the Geddesian theery, as
the m (rdern project, ceuld be reinterpreted as develeping an autonomous position of the血dividuals withih the plarming process, so.that each of them
oan eva 且uate the visions that tle p且anners propose.
Kegwords ’ Patrick Geddes, the?〉’otation ofLife, Artha厂 GlikSon、7he Notation{ofLife , modernisation theoりy, dependenのy theory
パ .トリ ッ ク ・ゲディ ス 、アー
サー・グ リク ソン 、生 命 の 表 記 、近 代 化 理 論、従属 理 論
1. Introdロ ction
,Promoting regiona 【planning not only organised by loGal goverrlments
and planners as the professionals, but also by being associated with citizens,is becoming increas孟ngly important in current society . However , the
citizen1Planner duality observed in currcnt planning 血 eory is one of 出 e
major factors obstmcting the satisfaction ofhuman needs . Between the two
gmups ofpeople thcre are gaps that still 爬 main in the planning and raise an
issue:Is it possibUe fbr individUals to be cmpowe 【ed in the planning proocss
in ordcr to saIisfy theirown n ds?
One of the answers to this issue could be sou 帥 t by identifying the
citizen’s position within modcm oity plamlng theories, f()llowing their
廿 ansitbn towards 出 e present da} The city planner Sir Patrick Geddes
(1854−1932)is known as one ofthe roots of modern city plarming、 Based on
his comprehensive surveys of the‘‘plaoe
”,“work
”and
」‘felk”applying
observationa 晝 methods , he develop a sociologioaHbrmula of.geography.economy and anthropology .1 S ce this work shows the planning process
identica且fc)r the planners and 山 e citizens basept on the regional sirrvey and
its analysis , he is def1ned as th6 0rigin of pubIiO participation in eity
plalming.
This paper argues thc consequen gf progressive且y separating. thc
positions ofc 而zens from these ofplann ¢ rs in the planning process, whibh is
exemplified by the shi食 食om GeddGs’theory towards the work of A 曲 ur
Glikson, who is one of the successors of the Geddesian theo πy. Based on
the issue Qf thじ empowerment men 口oned above , an altemative relationship
be鱈veen individu印s and p置anners is soug 血t in its process, The stru じtUre Of
this argument is as follows:
一]banalyse Geddes ’s」「Netatio耶 ef Life”as one ef the ma 血 framework of
his dleory.
・]banalyse Glikson’s interpretation of the 『Nota1ion of Life”and
contrast it with Geddes’s work
・Tb locate the two theories within the transition f om modem towards
cu ∬ ont planning血 eo 理」espeGiaHy fbcusing on tle reason that the identical
position of citizcns and planners in the Geddcsian theory cannot be applied
孟ncurrent seciety.
・恥 argue the limitatien of the Geddesian theory fUnctiening as the
curre 囗 t planning theory. Instead, its significa 冂 of empowering indivfduals
in current sooiety is sought .
蓼Senior Staff Researcher, Pohcy ・Science System Department, Miしsubishi Research Institute, Inc., Ph. D .〔Edin)
三 菱総合研 究所 政策科学 シ ス テ ム 研 究部
主任研 究員・Ph. D .
一 73 一
N 工工一Eleotronio Library
Architectural Institute of Japan
NII-Electronic Library Service
ArchitecturalInstitute ofJapan
Aiso, two models of their communication: `trnodenlisation
theory" and
"dependeney
theery" will be applied as the foundation for arguing the
positions of citincns or individuals and plarmers in regional pianning.2 It
will show the shift of their relationship from modern towards post-modern,
based en which an alternative function of the Geddesian theery will be
placed in the cunent p)anning precess.
2. PatrickGeddes'"NotationofLife"
Geddes develops the so-called `fNetation
of Life" that is one of the"Thinking
Machines", and proposes it in the explanatory diagrarns in Civics:
As Conc ete and A Lie Sociolo Part II, written in 190S.] As shown in
Figure l, the Notation of Life diagram comprises four concepts of life:
LtActs"/ thc simpte practical life,
"Facts"/ the simp]e menmi life, "Drearns":
the fu11 inner life and "Deeds":
the fu11 effective life. Ihrough the successive
I lPLACEi IT- +-----lvvoRKl1
r1 l-"
iFOuc
'f lFEEUNGtL tllEXPERIENCEt1t l
SENSEI ll l
cycle ofthe four parts ef]ife in this order, the city and its inhabitants eyolve
towards the ultirnate goal of thei[ synthesis.4
Geddes uses metaphorically "Town"
for 'tActs" as the first part of life, by
which he means the eomprehension by both the natural and social sciences
of human activities in "lbwn"
through the theoretical development frorn
biology to sociology. The three formu)as of `tplace::,
ttwoTk"
and "folk:'
together with the six correlated conditions (plaee-WORK, place-FOLK,
work-PLACE, work-FOLK, foLk-PLACE, folk-WORK) create the nine
squares ef the matrix, This matrix of "Acts"
is applied to the fo11owing"Factsi',
`"Dreams"
and "Deeds",
creating a total of 9 x 4 =
36 squares in the
complete diagram shown in Figure 2, ln the "Acts" matrix, each square
corresponds te another in the nine-square rnatax by retating at right angles
anticlockwise at the centre of the figure,
AorS DEEDS ACTS DEEDS ACTS DEEDS ACTS'-
L...lf--H'1"-.J --'i
LJ----'1-.-
FACTS DREAMS FACTS DREAMS FACTS DREAMS FACTS
Figure 1: The process of the eyo[ution ofcity: "Acts"
and "Facts"
correspond
Source: Philip Boardman, The Worlds of Pani k Ge des: B'ele ist TownPlanner Re-educatorPeace-wa.ttor (Lendon: Routledge & Kegan Paut,
16 See/PatrickGeddes. amatisai n ofHisto CLondon/SocielogicalPublications.1923). Geddes tries te generalise vNrieus kinds of knowledge required for cieating
238. In a seciologicai sense, Habennas presents a provisional framework for
the relationship between the three worlds and attitudes. The diagram, called"ratienalisationcernplexiges:'.consistsoftwoaxes/worlds<objective,sooia],and