Publicação
Metodologias de planeamento - Análise comparativa
| Resumo: | Landscape architecture, as one of the fields of knowledge that aims to understand and model the territory has developed its own processes and methods drawing from both science and art. The way in which various disciplines, such as geography or architecture, deal with planning contain multiple overlays but they also contain specific elements. Some of these elements result from discipline specific issues, the evolution of planning itself as a profession while others evolve from ideological diversity and even individual thought processes. In this work we selected a group of planning methodologies and developed a process to compare them. To achieve this goal a method was adopted that enables integrating these methodologies into planning different planning approaches designed and built by various renowned planning professionals and authors over time. This integration allows for the identification and comparative analysis by analogy of the strengths and weaknesses of each methodology both in relation to defined criteria and key planning paradigms such as development, sustainability, evaluation and participation. |
|---|---|
| Autores principais: | Freitas, João Capucho Correia de |
| Assunto: | landscape architecture planning methodology comparative analysis |
| Ano: | 2015 |
| País: | Portugal |
| Tipo de documento: | dissertação de mestrado |
| Tipo de acesso: | acesso aberto |
| Instituição associada: | Universidade de Lisboa |
| Idioma: | português |
| Origem: | Repositório da Universidade de Lisboa |
| Resumo: | Landscape architecture, as one of the fields of knowledge that aims to understand and model the territory has developed its own processes and methods drawing from both science and art. The way in which various disciplines, such as geography or architecture, deal with planning contain multiple overlays but they also contain specific elements. Some of these elements result from discipline specific issues, the evolution of planning itself as a profession while others evolve from ideological diversity and even individual thought processes. In this work we selected a group of planning methodologies and developed a process to compare them. To achieve this goal a method was adopted that enables integrating these methodologies into planning different planning approaches designed and built by various renowned planning professionals and authors over time. This integration allows for the identification and comparative analysis by analogy of the strengths and weaknesses of each methodology both in relation to defined criteria and key planning paradigms such as development, sustainability, evaluation and participation. |
|---|