Complexity as the telos of postmodern planning

The civic neighborhood commons confer greater benefits for communities they serve than the order of the shopping center. Figure 1· Shopping stores· Complex adaptive system· Bottom-up dynamism· Vernacular pluralism· Natural flowFigure 2· Shopping malls· Automobile city and postwar urban sprawl· Postmodern veneer· Top-down modernist structure· Commercial establishment· Compression of time and space

The illustrator designed is a space called Tree space, with a combination of both complex adaptive system and postmodern veneer. This space is well organized and outlined yet giving enough room for urban sprawl, like a tree, where its branches have the freedom to expand to any direction but always connected to the trunk. Each branch is outlined and organized as departments. The main idea is to create a space where multiple micro agents have an opportunity to start or expand their business, unlike shopping center where an only corporate developer has total control over the development. Creating complexity requires fine-grained subdivisions, Independent developers, multiple and diverse ownership, dispersed control, openness to the unexpected and novel and an enduring openness to incremental change and evolution without any notion of completion, as said in the article. Unfinished space gives opportunities to the new developers, ultimately providing space for urban sprawl and natural flow. The constant search for opportunities and synergies by multiple micro agents make the system as whole a highly efficient converter of inputs of energy and materials into mass, richness, and diversity. In nature and society, complex adaptive systems require three essential elements. First, they require a broad, diverse and eclectic mix of autonomous agents. Second, they require multiple and diverse ownership of premises and businesses, as only this can produce the dispersed decision making required for bottom-up self-organization, which is the defining dynamic of all complex adaptive systems.

A system that believes the complex system can be perceived by breaking down the problems or concerns into separate components in which the purpose is to improve the problem, not to end the problem. It is a system with several rules, linear relationships, and the hierarchy of authority. The term is utilized by the author to describe how it was believed that by this top-down system problems like chaos, inequity, irrationality could be resolved. This notion had an impact on enhancing the issues and was able to segregate and achieve perfection in rationality and efficiency.

A study of analyzing and modeling complex systems about how order, structure, pattern can emerge. This theory does not provide simple answers, instead provides multiple probabilities to be inspected. It is represented in the article that cities were complex, multilayered, self-organized, and were evolving. Little changes frequently resulted in unpredicted results because of impossibility of making predictions. It demonstrates that non-equilibrium and non-linear dynamics are essential features of the natural system, and are the reasons for continuous change through disturbance and evolution.

 It is the movement of the traditional hierarchy of the city where the city is settled from “logical, bound, mixed” to “fragmented, diffused, unbounded and stretched”. The postmodern metropolis is evidently diverse, self-organized, fluid, messy and evolving and eventually functions as a complex adaptive system. In the article, Los Angeles is referred to as a typical postmodern city due to its diversity, and vigorousness.

A strategy is a special plan made to achieve a market position and to reach the organizational goals and objectives. It is what you are aiming for when you are aiming and planning. Planning is the actual work itself when designing a city. Policy refers to a set of rules made by the organization for rational decision making. Whereas planning is coming together collectively to share ideas for what to do to keep the corporation thriving. It is also what you will allow and not allow while designing a city. These three words are used in designing an urban system.

Urbanism can be defined as any urban growth, it seems that it is impossible to be urban resilient. When in fact, urban resilience is against corporatism and population density.For instance, rural life would be an example of urban resilience because these type of people are intentionally not living next to others in a community, or as a place of businessesUrban resilience can be defined as the ability to prepare, respond and recover from significant hazardous threats to a community or a nation, various examples of this include the African American community throughout the whole history in the U.S.A (more specifically the riots of 1993), the French revolution, civil wars in developing countries trying to adapt the complexity of urban systems.

Yes, because if there is no solid theory of how to plan a city, then it's left up to whoever has the money to design the city themselves. And this typically involves businesses since many times they have the cash to build an expensive large building in urban areas.Yes, Postmodern planning might bring in a phase of corporate-dominated city planning because the corporate world bare purpose is to make money and more often than not, whatever that may be viewed as a potential asset building opportunity will be seized by those businesses.

Yes, because individual stores will no longer be needed as it is the only restaurant seem to be surviving. And those restaurants typically follow postmodern building designs per their brand. So, these malls will either need to be demolished or converted into something different such as some converted to homeless shelters, zoos, etc. 

The article explores the relationship between complexity theory and the analysis, planning of designing of cities, especially the suburban and neighborhood subsystems. They argue that even though complexity theory is an apposite goal for postmodern urban planning, it has been far less influential in their planning and designing. This has left the design and management of urban subsystem to the demands, choices of a huge corporation, a situation more likely to deliver more mechanical order than postmodern complexity. It is also the freedom to express your views and input your ideas to the table. As you share your ideas so that you feel that sense of having the power and control to voice one’s own opinion. Also, people, unique diversity plays an essential role and is vital in sustaining sustainability.

 This is interesting because it shows how the methodology of the phrase “complexity theory” puzzled and got all these social scientists to provide their arguments and give all their reiterations to the phrase and gives or allows the readers to pose more questions and see more than one side to the philosophy of “complexity theory”.

This is interesting because it shows, the goals of obtaining a finished and flawless form and a marketable aesthetic means that while new urban developments have the requisite connection, mix, and intensity of uses required of complex adaptive systems, they often lack the equally vital diversity of ownership, adaptability, open evolving form and messy edge of chaos self-organization. Consequently, new urban villages and many transit-oriented developments (TOD) built, to date, are accused of having more in common with shopping centers or Disneyland than the evolved traditional towns they seek to emulate.

It interesting to see the dynamic between the two theories as one believes in control and order for life to continue smoothly and as predicted while the others believe in the freedom to let things take its course naturally planning wise as time goes on.