{"title":"Liveable streets in the context of East and West: a new perspective","authors":"Manish Mandhar, Kathleen Watt","doi":"10.18848/1833-1874/CGP/V05I06/38250","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\"Liveability\" is commonly treated as a universal concept and cities around the world are being judged in accordance with universal criteria. The aim of this paper is to provide a critique of Western notions of liveability, especially those underpinning international city benchmarking exercises. Despite being represented as universal, performance indicators in these rankings are actually socially-constructed, rely heavily on Western values and standards of living and are inherently biased in favour of Western cities. A city's liveability is largely judged by quantitative measures that are statistically driven with little scope for comprehending the quality of cities or streets in other ways. This view of liveability pays little attention to the qualitative aspects of the street, particularly the relationship between the street and its users. The paper argues that there is a close relationship between a liveable city and the vitality of its streets, since a city will be liveable only if its streets are liveable. Eastern streets are inclusive, multicultural, socially cohesive, economically-vibrant and full of life. In our view these are qualities that make them more worthy of the term \"liveable\" than Western streets. Included in the paper is a comparative analysis of Eastern and Western streets to show that the activities and street life that many Western authors aspire to already exists in the East. We believe a new perspective is needed that acknowledges liveability as a relative, even subjective, concept that can only be evaluated using qualitative forms of assessment. © Common Ground, Manish Mandhar, Kathleen Watt, All Rights Reserved.","PeriodicalId":38677,"journal":{"name":"Design Principles and Practices","volume":"5 1","pages":"553-566"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2011-02-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Design Principles and Practices","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18848/1833-1874/CGP/V05I06/38250","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Arts and Humanities","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6
东西方背景下的宜居街道:一个新的视角
“宜居性”通常被视为一个普遍的概念,世界各地的城市都是根据普遍的标准来评判的。本文的目的是对西方的宜居性概念,特别是那些支撑国际城市基准测试的概念提出批评。尽管这些排名被认为是普遍的,但这些表现指标实际上是社会建构的,严重依赖于西方的价值观和生活标准,并固有地偏向于西方城市。一个城市的宜居性在很大程度上是由定量指标来判断的,这些指标是由统计数据驱动的,很少有空间以其他方式来理解城市或街道的质量。这种宜居性的观点很少关注街道的质量方面,特别是街道与其使用者之间的关系。本文认为,宜居城市与其街道的活力之间存在着密切的关系,因为只有当一个城市的街道宜居时,它才会宜居。东方的街道具有包容性、多元文化、社会凝聚力、经济活力和生活气息。在我们看来,这些品质使它们比西方的街道更配得上“宜居”一词。本文通过对东西方街道的比较分析,说明许多西方作家所向往的活动和街头生活在东方已经存在。我们认为需要一个新的视角,承认宜居性是一个相对的,甚至是主观的概念,只能使用定性的评估形式来评估。©Common Ground, Manish Mandhar, Kathleen Watt,版权所有。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。