This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted 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 Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Brand, R. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Written and Unwritten Building Conventions in a Contested City: The Case of Belfast

School of Environment and Development/MARC Humanities Bridgeford St, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, UK, ralf.brand{at}manchester.ac.uk

Many design conventions are legally binding, state-issued building codes and regulations, but many others derive their authority from other sources, are enforced by other means and exist for other purposes. This paper therefore introduces a scheme to cover the wide variety of de facto building conventions. Particularly interesting examples of seemingly atypical conventions can be found in Northern Ireland where the specific socio-political situation requires particular design approaches. Many design conventions guide the creation of artefacts that attempt to influence people’s behaviour. The distinction between corpo-active versus symbolic mechanisms and socio-fugal versus socio-petal effects is introduced in order to grasp further differences between such socio-active artefacts. The latter are of special significance in situations where communities in strife are slowly learning to practise a peaceful co-existence, as is demonstrated with one specific case study.

Urban Studies, Vol. 46, No. 12, 2669-2689 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0042098009345538


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