General Feedback on Part 2 and Part 4

Part 2 Methods essay (SEM2 grade)

In most parts, most of you provided fine accounts for the three methods.

Regarding Diary & Interview-method some of you forgot to write about how diaries/interviews are carried out in practice. Another relatively common mistake was to describe quite separately interviews and diaries, and really not the combined method. Some of you also largely missed the point that through this method you find out about specific physical actions, which in turn could be analyzed as patterns of action on the urban scale. The method is also good for finding reasons, justification and the role of social and material context regarding such actions with environmental consequences (rather than e.g. finding out about opinions and values, in quantitative terms, which there are other questionnaire- and interview-methods for). If you were not clear about the above, regarding this specific diary & interview-method, you didn’t get full points on questions on this method this time.

Concerning WPR (a specific variety of discourse analysis) not all of you clearly showed that you learnt what this was - a method to find out about (hidden) assumptions and presuppositions behind policies. To get full points on WPR you should also show that you understood WPR from the course readings, as well as in relation to the simplified version used in the course exercise. Some of you missed that WPR is not specific to urban planning or sustainability issues, but that it is rather specific to finding hidden assumptions and presuppositions behind policies (which we feel needs to be repeated).

The LCA method is used to measure environmental (and in an S-LCA also social) impacts. As used in the exercise the method lacks a social perspective, which many of you observed. It is also relevant to question if the fact that a product is less harmful to the environment than another product means that it is always reasonable to prefer that product. LCA is meant as a tool to inform decision-making, and allows for evidence-based analysis, and could also be followed up quite strictly over time. But the rigor of the method could, depending on how and when it is used, be seen as a strength as well as a shortcoming.

On question 4 (comparison of the methods) some of you spilled too much ink on self-evident things such as classifications in quantitative resp. qualitative methods. On the other hand some of you succeeded quite well in the actual comparison: similarities and differences in what the methods could, and couldn’t, be used to construct knowledge about, specifically in the context of sustainable urban planning and design.

On question 5 some were unclear regarding how, and with what purpose, each method could be used in a retrofitting project and therefore didn’t really succeed in describing when the methods are suitable to use in such a context. Just stating that the methods will facilitate for a more sustainable development is not enough. However, some of you also managed to answer quite well.

On question 6 many of you give OK examples of what could be silenced, but seldom an overall analysis of why and how this 'silencing' or ‘invisibility’ of certain factors come about.

An overarching remark on the whole methods essay: Many of you used too much quotes, the best way for teachers to see when you have got a good understanding (and give the highest grades) is when you formulate coherent answers mainly in own words, from your own understanding. (This is really what we in general expect for essay questions.)

Another overarching (but minor) remark: Try to write clearly, be careful about the logical structure in each question/paragraph, proofread.

Project work (PRO1)

For this part you received continuous feedback during supervision and also during the final critique. We have received some questions regarding the reason for students belonging to the same planning projects receiving different grades. We always put one grade on the project, but a peer review of good quality could raise that grade with maximum one step (for example from D to C). However, a peer review of low quality could not lower the grade. Thus, the maximum difference between the grades within one project group was one step in the grading scale.

Part 4 Home exam (TEN1 grade)

Pernilla Hagbert graded most of your TEN1 home exam and these are some of her general comments:

A key to writing good exam (essay/paragraph) responses is to formulate them in your own words. E.g. some of you used long quotes on some questions to illustrate your key learnings. But the point of key learnings is how YOU have understood them, and connect them to your previous knowledge and interests, not just quote or summarize, but discuss and reflect. This would let us know how you’ve processed the things you’ve read more deeply. So in general you could have elaborated and discussed more, and described and referred to more briefly.

Many of you described policies and the impacts too generally and could have provided more context and detail (even though keeping it short).

Overall, a home exam is an opportunity to clearly communicate, and we understand if e.g. language barriers might have hindered some of you from expressing yourself even more deeply and coherently. However, when we found unclear words and phrases in your English, we always tried to interpret these words or expressions in the ‘best possible’ way, i.e. the way we think made most sense to answer the question.

happy holidays,

Greger, Ulrika, Daniel, Pernilla and Nicolas

Welcome to the course Sustainable Planning and Design!

AG2805 Sustainable Planning and Design is a 15.0 credit fulltime course, working as an introduction to the master’s program Sustainable Urban Planning and Design (SUPD). The course (as well as the program) is interdisciplinary by nature, aiming to introduce students with backgrounds in different types of engineering, architecture, planning, environmental and social science and the humanities, to each others’ way of seeing, thinking and doing sustainable urban development. The course also aims at supporting the students to reflect on the relationship between, on the one hand, sustainable urban development, and, on the other hand, sustainable development in general, or at a regional, national or global scale, but also to turn these insights into actionable knowledge.

Please consult the course plan to see the intended learning outcomes, admission requirements, etc.

The course is divided into four main parts:

Part 1 - Pre, present, post-Stockholm

Part 1 is a small project work, carried out in groups, in which students are asked to identify key characteristics and sustainability issues of a specific city district, suggest concrete proposals for how planning and design could deal with these issues, and identify key stakeholders. The project work is presented orally at a final critique, and written as a PowerPoint presentation.

Part 2 - Methods of planning and design for sustainable urban development

Part 2 comprises a series of lectures, exercises and seminars introducing a selection of methods for planning and design. The idea behind this is to provide an opportunity for students to try out methods from different disciplines, and gain a better understanding of the strengths and drawbacks of these. Each method is introduced by a short lecture, after which the students apply the method through an exercise in smaller groups. The exercise is to be reported in individual ‘lab-reports’. The lab-reports are not assessed, but function as a basis for peer-to-peer learning, and as preparation for the individual essay by which this part is examined.

Part 3 - Project Group Work Sustainable Huddinge

Part 3 comprise a larger project group work in which students are to develop a planning and design proposal that, if implemented, would substantially contribute to an increased sustainability of an urban area. You can apply for doing either a Policy & Planning Project or a Design Project. The Policy & Planning project is divided into four main phases, each of which comprise about five working days: 1) Establishing the baseline and formulating the aim; 2) Identifying solutions and alternatives; 3) Crafting the proposal; and 4) Finalizing and revising. For each of the phases a tutoring and peer-review session provides feedback. The Design Project has two main phases with a midterm presentation; starting with a long-term vision to establish core ideas for long term sustainability in the first phase, to make a pragmatic revision to define what can and must be done in the coming five to ten years. The project work is presented orally at a final critique, as well as in a poster exhibition, typically placed in the area the course has been working with and opened by a vernissage to which local actors are invited.

Part 4 - Reflective home exam (paragraph and essay questions)

Part 4 comprises a home exam which asks the student to describe, compare and critically discuss methods for and definitions of “sustainable urban development”, respectively “sustainable development” in a general sense, and how they relate to each other. Students are also asked to reflect on the project work, with a focus on identifying strengths and weaknesses in relation to a number of predefined themes/focal points.

Premises

The course will be based at KTH Architecture, 6th floor. Address: Osquars backe 5.

Literature – a selection of readings that are available before you are registered on the course

Defining Sustainable Development

Raworth, K. (2012). A Safe and Just Space For Humanity: Can we live within the Doughnut? Nature, 461, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.5822/978-1-61091-458-1
Open access (Oxfam discussion papers)

Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K., Persson, Å., Chapin, F. S. I., Lambin, E., … Foley, J. (2009). Planetary boundaries:exploring the safe operating space for humanity. Ecology and Society, 14(2), 32. https://doi.org/10.1038/461472a
Open access (Stockholm Resilience center website)

Debating the concept of sustainable development

Connelly, S. 2007: Mapping Sustainable Development as a Contested Concept; Local Environment, 12: 3; pp 259‐278. Read pages 259‐268.
Open Access

Hajer, M. & Versteeg, W. 2005: A decade of discourse analysis of environmental politics: achievements, challenges, perspectives; Journal of Environmental Policy & Planning; 7, 3. Read pages 175 – 184.
Open Access

Policy documents on Sustainable Development

United Nations – Sustainable Development Goals. Available at: http://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/

United Nations World Commission on Environment and Development (1987). Chapter 2: Towards Sustainable Development. In Our Common Future (Brundtland Report) (pp. 42–62).
Open Access

Architecture, Urbanism & Design

Mohsen Mostafavi (2010) Why ecological urbanism, why now? In Harvard Design Magazine
Open Access

Rosi Braidotti (2013) Chapter 1 (pp 21-39): Posthuman relational subjectivity and the politics of affirmation. In: Relational Architectural Ecologies: Architecture, Nature and Subjectivity.
Will be fully available when you are registered, and pp 21-30 are possible to find on the internet

Steven J. Jackson, “Rethinking Repair,” in Tarleton Gillespie, Pablo Boczkowski, and Kirsten Foot, eds. Media Technologies: Essays on Communication, Materiality and Society. MIT Press, 2014.
Open Access

Planning and Design for Sustainable Urban Development

Beatley, T. 2003: “Planning for Sustainability in European Cities: A Review of Practices in Leading Cities”. Excerpt in Wheeler, S. M. & Beatley, T. The Sustainable Urban Development Reader.
Available when logged in at KTH (Library, Ebook) and other universities

Boverket (2015) Barriers to sustainable development
Open Access

Bradley, K., A. Hult and G. Cars (2013) From Eco-Modernizing to Political Ecologizing: Future challenges for the Green Capital. In: Sustainable Stockholm : Exploring Urban Sustainability in Europe's Greenest City, Taylor & Francis, 2013, 168-194 p.
Available when logged in at KTH (Library, Ebook) and other universities

Carmona, M. 2009: Sustainable urban design: principles to practice; International Journal of Sustainable Development, 12, 1, pp 48‐77.
Open Access

Jacobs, J. 1961: “Orthodox Planning and The North End” from: The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Excerpt in Wheeler, S. M. & Beatley, T.: The Sustainable Urban Development Reader.
Available when logged in at KTH (Library, Ebook) and other universities

Rydin, Y. 2010: Governing for Sustainable Urban Development. London: Earthscan. Chapters 1, 2, 4 and 8.
Available when logged in at KTH (Library, Ebook) and other universities

Svane, Ö. 2006: ...but most buildings are already there. Basic starting points for environmental management in the housing sector. Paper presented at the ENHR conference "Housing in an expanding Europe: theory, policy, participation and implementation"
Open Access

Full-time studies

Please note that the course runs full-time from August 29 to October 28. The course is intense and practice-based and includes several mandatory exercises and tutoring sessions, implying that there are very limited possibilities for holiday trips during the course. As a student, it is your responsibility to make sure that any travelling plans of yours are compatible with the schedule and the course demands.

Disabilities? (Funka)

If you have a disability and need special facilities or support measures to follow this course, please contact the “Funka” coordinators via funka@kth.se You find more information here: https://www.kth.se/en/student/studentliv/funktionsnedsattning (Links to an external site.)Links to an external site.

It is also important that you immediately, no later than the beginning of the course, contact the course coordinator and provide information on your needs, and, if necessary a certificate from KTH Funka coordinators. This must be done in order for us to take into account your specific needs.

Course registration

Students must register for the course. If you are not registered, you are not allowed to attend the course and your grades will not be reported. Registration is possible only after you have applied and been admitted to the course. Program students who have not applied when the course starts must contact their student counsellor or program coordinator. This is your own responsibility and cannot be arranged by the course coordinator.

Please register on-line for the course through My Pages -> Courses –> Registrations –> Web registration. You will immediately see in your personal menu when you have registered successfully. If you encounter any problems when registering, please contact the education office (Teknikringen 74).

Questions

Should you have any questions you are most welcome to contact us.

Best regards,
Ulrika Gunnarsson Östling and Greger Henriksson
course responsible teachers