Multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary working
The first question was about the experiences of multi- and transdisciplinary working. The panelists agreed that cooperation with people from different disciplines is not easy, as it requires sharing a common language and understanding of the phenomena in question as well as breaking out of the traditional disciplinary silos and doing something in a new way. According to Pia Fricker, these research projects often fail due to a lack of common understanding and not being able to communicate in a manner that is understandable to all.
Furthermore, the difference between multi- and transdiscliplinarities was discussed. Juanjo Galan explained that transdisciplinary working is even more difficult than multidisciplinary working; it requires assuming a higher level of awareness and being able to imagine the kind of knowledge that does not exist yet , as well as defining research questions than cannot be formulated by independent disciplines. In order to transcend the traditional disciplinary boundaries, a deep understanding of examined phenomena, existing knowledge and knowledge gaps is needed.
How would you define sustainable urban?
All panelists agreed that sustainability has become a loaded concept or buzzword with no one fixed meaning. Different ways to conceive sustainable urban were suggested. From an ecological perspective, no urban environment can be considered sustainable, stated Johan Kotze. Thus, cities can never be ecologically sustainable but the effects can be minimized to tolerable levels. Juanjo Galan suggested that sustainability should not be treated as a final state but rather as a goal or utopia that is promoted to guide all action.
Kimmo Lapintie proposed that when addressing sustainability, we should discuss about possibilities to impact and make a difference. Pia Fricker highlighted interconnectedness and scales as a useful approach to sustainability: if we want to examine the impacts of certain actions, knowledge on its possible effects on other things as well as on different scales provides useful grounds for making such definitions. Tuukka Saarimaa explained that economics usually approach these topics by using counterfactual analysis and calculating different possible future scenarios.
The impact of different disciplines in urban planning
The relative impact of different disciplines on urban planning was asked next; do some disciplines have a bigger impact than others?
Juanjo Galan started by saying that urban planning has historically included knowledge from different disciplines to take into account as many aspects as possible. Instead of discussing whether some disciplines have bigger impacts than others, we should rather ask which interest groups are prevailing in the planning process.
Kimmo Lapintie explained that different experts are usually consulted on different issues of planning: architects and landscape architects address very specific planning issues whereas geographers focus more on the general lines of planning. According to him, Social Sciences should be heard more in the planning processes if we want to address societal issues.
Tuukka Saarimaa added by saying that economists are also heard too little considering the value they could bring to the process. Furthermore, according to him, a lot of the research on urban planning is also poor and thus rather than consulting more, focus should be on the quality of the research consulted.
Future career prospects of USP students
Lastly, the panel focused on skills that the USP programme offer students regarding their future work prospects.
Pia Fricker assured that municipalities have expressed great interest on the new approach by the USP programme. Furthermore, they are in great need of people capable to bring together knowledge from different disciplines and envision future issues.
Johan Kotze added by saying that academia and universities are increasingly focusing on multidisciplinary research and developing research hubs that transcend the traditional faculty boundaries. He believes that these hubs should be taken over by researchers with multidisciplinary orientation.
Juanjo Galan drew these statements together by claiming that the task of multidisciplinary scholars is to break silos and boundaries in city governance, universities and elsewhere. He also encouraged students to gather a transdisciplinary group and do something no one else is capable of.
It was concluded that urban planning and research are not stable fields but rather developing all the time and it is the task of the students to envision where the field as a whole is going. In the future, it will be even more important to be skillful in attaining new knowledge and being able to interact with new fields and people.
Has monetary value become dominant over other values in urban planning?
It was concluded that urban planning and research are not stable fields but rather developing all the time and it is the task of the students to envision where the field as a whole is going. In the future, it will be even more important to be skillful in attaining new knowledge and being able to interact with new fields and people.
Has monetary value become dominant over other values in urban planning?
It was concluded that urban planning and research are not stable fields but rather developing all the time and it is the task of the students to envision where the field as a whole is going. In the future, it will be even more important to be skillful in attaining new knowledge and being able to interact with new fields and people.
Has monetary value become dominant over other values in urban planning?
It was concluded that urban planning and research are not stable fields but rather developing all the time and it is the task of the students to envision where the field as a whole is going. In the future, it will be even more important to be skillful in attaining new knowledge and being able to interact with new fields and people.
Has monetary value become dominant over other values in urban planning?
It was concluded that urban planning and research are not stable fields but rather developing all the time and it is the task of the students to envision where the field as a whole is going. In the future, it will be even more important to be skillful in attaining new knowledge and being able to interact with new fields and people.
Has monetary value become dominant over other values in urban planning?
It was concluded that urban planning and research are not stable fields but rather developing all the time and it is the task of the students to envision where the field as a whole is going. In the future, it will be even more important to be skillful in attaining new knowledge and being able to interact with new fields and people.
Has monetary value become dominant over other values in urban planning?
After Pia Fricker and Tuukka Saarimaa had to leave for other duties, the three remaining panelists discussed values in urban planning.
Kimmo Lapintie commented that attaching monetary value on things is an attempt to make them commensurable. He agreed that, for example, some buildings and places might have historical value that cannot be measured in terms of its economic value. This issue can partly be addressed in terms of architectural value. In urban planning, politicians often decide on values that are to be promoted.
Juanjo Galan argued that planning is intrinsically connected with values and therefore no planning can be carried out value-free. As a planner, you will need to choose the kind of values you want to promote. He also commented that economic value is not the same as market value but rather a way to transform values into same unit to make them comparable with each other.
Johan concluded that, in the end, valuations in society are philosophical questions in which there is no right or wrong answers.