Trial-and-error urbanism: addressing obduracy, uncertainty and complexity in urban planning and design

Abstract

This article argues that sustainable and communal neighborhoods could be significantly more common in North America if development practices addressed the barriers posed by sociotechnical obduracy and the inevitable limitations of expertise through expanded opportunities for experimentation. In reconceptualizing the problems faced by alternative urbanisms through the lens of science and technology studies, I explore how the intelligent trial-and-error (ITE) framework for governing emerging technologies could be extended to partially address the barriers of obduracy, uncertainty and complexity when pursuing alternative urban designs. An examination of how Baugruppen (cooperative building groups) were integrated into the planning process of Quartier Vauban, Freiburg, is used to illustrate both the potentials and a concrete application of an ITE-like approach. I then discuss some of the barriers to an ITE model of urban planning in North America and recommend further research at the intersection of urban studies and science and technology studies.

Keywords:

• new urbanism
• obduracy
• intelligent trial-and-error
• building collectives
• expertise
• science and technology studies

Acknowledgements

The author thanks his three anonymous reviewers and Edward J. Woodhouse for their insightful comments and critiques.

Notes

1. What constitutes “sustainable” and “communitarian” is, of course, controversial. I simply presume that design features like walkability, reduced driving, mixed uses and medium density, as well as the greater usage of passive house architecture and renewable energy systems, are promising and therefore worthy of more experimentation.

2. Hommels builds upon a long lineage of other STS scholars, such as Wiebe Bijker and Thomas Hughes. I have left them out of my review because her work already synthesizes and expands upon their approaches.