METHODOLOGY: PLACING THE PROCESS

This section will discuss the methodological grounding of the research. It will place the research within a spectrum of inquiry ranging from quantitative, scientific, positivist objectivity on one hand and qualitative, social science subjectivity on the other. This research will rely primarily on the quantitative side of the spectrum as the process and results are accounted in whole numbers. Where this research strays into subjectivity, the assumptions will be made transparent. The tactical and technical aspects will be described later in each model’s ‘method’ section in Results, Chapter 4. In each methodology will be listed the advantages and disadvantages uncovered as the research was carried forward by the researcher. The methodologies are listed below.

Research Design Page 176 Figure 34 Spectrum of Methods

SOURCE:AUTHOR,2014

P O S I T I V I S T

The first methods used in this research are positivist to uncover ‘logical and credible synthesis’ (Deming & Swaffield, 2011 p.33).Though this research is speculative about a new future for urban transformation, it follows a similar approach that standard traffic engineering uses in calculating trip generation and parking ratios based on land use and metres of floor space per use. The positivist method will be used in tracing District Structure Plans, a Metropolitan Regional Scheme, possible public transport alignments and other possible redevelopment areas to measure two-dimensional space. Following this method will be the methods of modelling and forecasting where and how the increased population will find residences and jobs within an amenity-rich, walkable catchment of public transport.

The advantage of this method is that it reveals actual numbers of cars and their spatial parking requirements, public transit components and the capacity per hour, residences and size of residences per person, work spaces in commercial and retail-shaped

Research Design Page 177 floor plates, floors of buildings with heights, tonnes of carbon emissions abated, dollars of costs saved by not building car-dependent infrastructure and dollars of tax revenue from a broadened base, hectares of greenfield preserved as farm or forest. The whole numbers of identifiable quantities, it is felt, is will help decision-makers understand the ramifications of the many small and large policy settings and infrastructure spending choices they make.

The disadvantage of using any type of ‘quantitative certainty’ from a professional Standards Manual, or examining the experience of other world cities, is that it may lead to a post hoc ergo propter hoc²⁵ logical fallacy; this research will avoid false conclusions that a correlation is equal to a causation. Other cities have different driving habits, tree canopy cover to absorb carbon, shopping and working practices; they are not all alike. However, we are all humans wishing for the least amount of stress with the maximisation of profit in efficiency and many of us are now living in cities. We must be able to learn from the other cities, not to slavishly copy them but to learn from them, to indicate what is possible when intentional planning and design are at the core of how urban growth is structured.

D E S I G N R E S E A R C H

Secondly, design research was employed to understand the question. Design research approaches the issues of metropolitan regional growth and transport provision as a design problem to be worked on via scenario iterations and testing prototypes. Rarely is design research brought to the questions pertaining to land use and transport integration at the metropolitan regional scale; this project will attempt to demonstrate the value of bringing such focus to the issues.

Design research is a method of investigation that sides with finding out rather than finding the already found (Lunenfeld, 2003 P.10)

Incorporated in this method is design thinking (Deming & Swaffield, 2011 p.38) which incorporates understanding needs, defining options, ideating scenarios, prototyping,

25 Post hoc ergo propter hoc: Latin for "after this, therefore because of this" Example: If A happened then B happened, then to recover B again one must have A in place (Pinto, 2001).

Research Design Page 178 testing and developing an implementable product. All of this happens in a revolving series of iterations without pre-judgement. Holding closely a developed idea is useful for a period if only to move forward in making a prototype. A core value in design thinking is being willing to redefine the initial understanding. This research seeks to understand the local and global situation, and uses a similar series of chained steps to develop a method which has been tested and prototyped after much iteration.

Figure 35 Design Thinking Diagram

SOURCE:ORIGINAL FROM PLATTNER INSTITUTE OF DESIGN, ADAPTED BY AUTHOR IN 2013 The research design method allows a creative approach to interpret the issue with an aim to prototype a solution for iterative refinement. The researcher elaborates on points to develop a novel and innovative option for the future. This is, in many ways, the opposite of researching a topic by following a linear process to the end of all possible points.

The disadvantage of design research is that there may not be a clearly repeatable experiment, but rather a process by which discovery may be made. The process may be described, but never quite attain the level of sophistication of a classically scientific experiment. The ramification of this is that were another researcher to attempt to re-do the process to verify the findings, the other may find very different results leading to other conclusions. However, in this is found the genius of design research; a process begins the evolution of a static ‘fixed-on-facts’ frame to a much more plastic and flexible ‘options-seeking’ mind.

P R A C T I C E R E S E A R C H

Research Design Page 179 The third method employed in this research was practice research, defined as

“…an activity which can be employed in research, the method or methodology must always include an explicit understanding of how the practice contributes to the inquiry and research is distinguished from other forms of practice by that explicit understanding (Rust, Mottram, & Till, 2007, p.11).

To paraphrase the above, the method is not to ‘do’ the practice; it is doing the practice with an explicit understanding of how the practice itself is a tool of the inquiry as a means to a novel contribution’s end. In this instance, the practice is one of using the tools of land use design (such as Urban Planning and Landscape Architecture) to examine the region as though it were a project to be designed as a physical possibility (Deming &

Swaffield, 2011 p.245)

The advantage of the practice research method is that it permits skills from professional practice to be used in the research forum making a link from the community towards academia and vice versa. Having professionals in academia, hopefully, links transport’s industry-hardened rigour to pure research while, in reverse, carries academic curiosity to an often indifferent professional practice. Professionals have frequently dealt with the same questions in practice and can bring insights which are not presented in academic journals.

The disadvantage of practice research is the chance that practice-led thinking about a project, i.e. delivering a complete scenario for implementation, is not what academic inquiry is traditionally focussed on. Likewise, a ‘null-hypothesis’ (Deming & Swaffield, 2011 p.122) is not a part of professional landscape architecture, urban design or urban planning as there are always relationships between social, ecological and environmental characteristics and the professional’s role is to manage these interactions for a net benefit.

As there are no ‘null-hypotheses’ in practice, it then becomes difficult to separate the need for objectivity from the need to create an argument for decisive action leading to subjective conclusions.

Research Design Page 180 H E U R I S T I C

The fourth method employed was a heuristic method (Deming & Swaffield, 2011 p.35). Heuristics uses intuition, rules-of-thumb, experience, commonsense decision making;

it is based on the notion that we must proceed lest there be no decision. It is akin to using one’s intuition to find one’s way around a new city, seeking a café near where people are congregated, or to find a public transport service along a major arterial; it begins the process of understanding with a possibility of being partially, or entirely, correct. This method was used so that portions of the overall methodology could be repeated in less data-rich (not collected) or data-restricted (not willing to share) locales.

The advantage to this method is that it can clear the obfuscation of jargon and statistics to describe what is evident. For example, if a public transport line appears to operate with many patrons who walk to shops after descending from the transport before arriving home, then that is a valid observation. Likewise, if a highway network has peak congestion after many collector roads and residential streets linked to single-family residential homes distribute their generated trips, then that is also a valid observation.

The disadvantage with heuristics is that there have been many rules-of-thumb which have been poorly informed or not completely thought through. There is a chance, as in other methods, of a post hoc ergo propter hoc logical fallacy which would lead to a false conclusion that a correlation is equal to causation; this stance will be avoided in this research.

O C U L A R E S T I M A T I O N

The fifth method adopted, ocular estimation, was used to quite literally ‘go and see’

the opportunities latent in the urban landscape. Ocular estimation is useful to ‘ground-truth’ different zones of the region and to witness first-hand the amounts of space, the traffic congestion, the spatial adjacencies, and the derelict or maintained character as a means to appreciate redevelopment potential along transport corridors.

While originally a method based in vegetation mapping when other techniques, such as aerial photography or digital remote sensing are insufficient, it is the best means to

Research Design Page 181 describe effective data collection from in-the-field research (van Hees & Mead, 2000).

While this research did not set out literal quadrats and count each ‘species’ found in the square, it did use a great deal of first-hand observations of on-the-ground urban environments. The advantage of this process is the building of knowledge and data from the ground-up as opposed to receiving data from a third party. The disadvantage of this, as a corollary, is that it relies on a subjective interpretation of the urban conditions to imagine what the place could become.

Research Design Page 182