This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Talen, E. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Sense of Community and Neighbourhood Form: An Assessment of the Social Doctrine of New Urbanism

School of Social Sciences and Bruton Center for Development Studies, University of Texas at Dallas, 2601 N. Floyd Road, Richardson, Texas 75083-0688, USA, etalen{at}utdallas.edu

New urbanism, an umbrella term which encompasses 'neotraditional development' as well as 'traditional neighbourhood design', lives by an unswerving belief in the ability of the built environment to create a 'sense of community'. The purpose of this paper is to assess whether the social doctrine of new urbanism can be successfully supported or at least integrated with the social science literature which deals with the question of community formation. Towards this goal, the paper first delineates the social doctrine of new urbanism, and then discusses the conceptual frameworks and empirical findings that either support or contradict the idea that a sense of community will follow the physical form of cities and neighbourhoods generally and new urbanist principles specifically. After laying this groundwork, the remainder of the paper presents an assessment of whether a reconciliation between research and doctrine may be possible, in light of various apparent contradictions between the social claims of new urbanists and the results of research by social scientists. It is concluded that new urbanists need to clarify the meaning of sense of community as it pertains to physical design. Further, it is maintained that while some research supports the idea that resident interaction and sense of community are related to environmental factors, the effectuation of this goal is usually only achieved via some intermediate variable. This latter point leaves open the question of whether any number of other design creeds could produce the same result via a different design philosophy. The need for further research is stressed; this should be focused on investigating the issue more directly.

Urban Studies, Vol. 36, No. 8, 1361-1379 (1999)
DOI: 10.1080/0042098993033


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				S. Mason and E. Fredericksen Fostering neighborhood viscosity: does design matter? Community Dev. J., July 23, 2009; (2009) bsp037v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				P. R. Berke, Yan Song, and M. Stevens Integrating Hazard Mitigation into New Urban and Conventional Developments Journal of Planning Education and Research, June 1, 2009; 28(4): 441 - 455. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M.M. Camina and M.J. Wood Parallel Lives: Towards a Greater Understanding of What Mixed Communities Can Offer Urban Stud, February 1, 2009; 46(2): 459 - 480. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. M. Hess Fronts and Backs: The Use of Streets, Yards, and Alleys in Toronto-Area New Urbanist Neighborhoods Journal of Planning Education and Research, December 1, 2008; 28(2): 196 - 212. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. Pendola and S. Gen Does "Main Street" Promote Sense of Community? A Comparison of San Francisco Neighborhoods Environment and Behavior, July 1, 2008; 40(4): 545 - 574. [Abstract] [PDF]

				S. Ganapati Critical Appraisal of Three Ideas for Community Development in the United States Journal of Planning Education and Research, June 1, 2008; 27(4): 382 - 399. [Abstract] [PDF]

				M. L. Joseph, R. J. Chaskin, and H. S. Webber The Theoretical Basis for Addressing Poverty Through Mixed-Income Development Urban Affairs Review, January 1, 2007; 42(3): 369 - 409. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. Skaburskis New Urbanism and Sprawl: A Toronto Case Study Journal of Planning Education and Research, March 1, 2006; 25(3): 233 - 248. [Abstract] [PDF]

				K. Youngentob and M. Hostetler Is a New Urban Development Model Building Greener Communities? Environment and Behavior, November 1, 2005; 37(6): 731 - 759. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. M. Garde New Urbanism as Sustainable Growth?: A Supply Side Story and Its Implications for Public Policy Journal of Planning Education and Research, December 1, 2004; 24(2): 154 - 170. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. Kim and R. Kaplan Physical and Psychological Factors in Sense of Community: New Urbanist Kentlands and Nearby Orchard Village Environment and Behavior, May 1, 2004; 36(3): 313 - 340. [Abstract] [PDF]

				P. R. Berke Does Sustainable Development Offer a New Direction for Planning? Challenges for the Twenty-First Century Journal of Planning Literature, August 1, 2002; 17(1): 21 - 36. [Abstract] [PDF]