Boots on the Ground: Integration of Fieldwork in Coastal Governance Decision-Making Processes

Vanessa Werder
{"title":"Boots on the Ground: Integration of Fieldwork in Coastal Governance Decision-Making Processes","authors":"Vanessa Werder","doi":"10.24135/rangahau-aranga.v2i3.200","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Our understanding of and engagement with landscape and site – as a physical, cultural, and spiritual location – have undergone radical changes in recent years. In an era of predicted increases in ecological and climatic challenges and the poly-crisis of the Anthropocene, it is inevitable to reframe how we think through and work with landscapes (Kahn & Burns, 2021). This paradigm shift requires novel frameworks, techniques, and tools for engaging with landscapes on a governance level. The coast of Aotearoa New Zealand exemplifies a particular landscape type, yet has eluded a holistic definition within coastal governance. Together with the Western bifurcation of land versus sea, this omission has caused a lack of communication across marine and terrestrial planning authorities (Peart, 2007) and systemic issues in our (built) environment. We must adopt more site-specific and site-sensitive methods to ground our thinking and practices on the multi-layered constructs of landscapes. Fieldwork counters the technical, apparent omniscient processes of outdated paradigms of controlling ‘nature’ and reveals serendipitous findings rooted within a specific site. Therefore, engaging human researchers deeply within the field and the multi-scalar and diverse ontological reality of the more-than-human and non-vital. This methodological approach critiques the prevalent positivistic framing of current landscape planning practices by adopting an interpretive perspective (Davoudi, 2012). In my research, I look at a coastal site in Tāmaki Makaurau, and explore methods of fieldwork to derive theory from practical activity. This approach enhances the learnings from canonical texts and counters the hardening of divides between theory and practice in landscape architecture and related fields of study (Kahn & Burns, 2021). By exploring site-specific methods, I am uncovering the synthetic qualities of fieldwork practices and address their benefits for integration into decision-making processes for coastal governance.","PeriodicalId":491085,"journal":{"name":"Rangahau Aranga AUT Graduate Review","volume":"42 11 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-10-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Rangahau Aranga AUT Graduate Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24135/rangahau-aranga.v2i3.200","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Our understanding of and engagement with landscape and site – as a physical, cultural, and spiritual location – have undergone radical changes in recent years. In an era of predicted increases in ecological and climatic challenges and the poly-crisis of the Anthropocene, it is inevitable to reframe how we think through and work with landscapes (Kahn & Burns, 2021). This paradigm shift requires novel frameworks, techniques, and tools for engaging with landscapes on a governance level. The coast of Aotearoa New Zealand exemplifies a particular landscape type, yet has eluded a holistic definition within coastal governance. Together with the Western bifurcation of land versus sea, this omission has caused a lack of communication across marine and terrestrial planning authorities (Peart, 2007) and systemic issues in our (built) environment. We must adopt more site-specific and site-sensitive methods to ground our thinking and practices on the multi-layered constructs of landscapes. Fieldwork counters the technical, apparent omniscient processes of outdated paradigms of controlling ‘nature’ and reveals serendipitous findings rooted within a specific site. Therefore, engaging human researchers deeply within the field and the multi-scalar and diverse ontological reality of the more-than-human and non-vital. This methodological approach critiques the prevalent positivistic framing of current landscape planning practices by adopting an interpretive perspective (Davoudi, 2012). In my research, I look at a coastal site in Tāmaki Makaurau, and explore methods of fieldwork to derive theory from practical activity. This approach enhances the learnings from canonical texts and counters the hardening of divides between theory and practice in landscape architecture and related fields of study (Kahn & Burns, 2021). By exploring site-specific methods, I am uncovering the synthetic qualities of fieldwork practices and address their benefits for integration into decision-making processes for coastal governance.
实地考察:沿海治理决策过程中实地考察的整合
近年来,我们对景观和场地的理解和参与——作为一个物理的、文化的和精神的场所——发生了根本性的变化。在一个生态和气候挑战预计会增加的时代,以及人类世的多重危机,重新构建我们对景观的思考和工作方式是不可避免的(卡恩&;Burns, 2021年)。这种范式转变需要新的框架、技术和工具,以便在治理级别上处理景观。新西兰奥特罗阿海岸体现了一种特殊的景观类型,但在沿海治理中却没有一个整体的定义。再加上西方对陆地与海洋的分歧,这种疏忽导致海洋和陆地规划当局之间缺乏沟通(Peart, 2007),以及我们(建筑)环境中的系统性问题。我们必须采取更具场地针对性和场地敏感性的方法,将我们的思考和实践建立在景观的多层次建构之上。田野调查反对技术,明显的无所不知的过程,过时的控制“自然”的范式,并揭示了根植于特定地点的偶然发现。因此,从事人类研究的人员深入研究了该领域内的多标量和多元本体现实的超人与非生命。这种方法论方法通过采用解释性视角批判了当前景观规划实践中普遍存在的实证主义框架(Davoudi, 2012)。在我的研究中,我着眼于Tāmaki Makaurau的一个沿海地点,并探索实地考察的方法,从实践活动中获得理论。这种方法加强了对经典文本的学习,并对抗了景观建筑和相关研究领域的理论与实践之间的分歧。Burns, 2021年)。通过探索特定地点的方法,我发现了实地工作实践的综合素质,并解决了将其纳入沿海治理决策过程的好处。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信