Guide to Effective Report Writing in Urbanism

Methodology for Urbanism

Guide to Effective Report Writing in Urbanism

By Roberto Rocco & Juliana Gonçalves

A guide for report writing in Urbanism studies

Colophon

Guide to Effective Report Writing in Urbanism

First Edition, 2025

Written by:

Roberto Rocco

Associate Professor of Spatial Planning and Strategy Department of Urbanism

Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment

Delft University of Technology

Julianalaan 134, 2628 BL, Delft, The Netherlands

Juliana Gonçalves

Assistant Professor of Urbanism Department of Urbanism

Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment

Delft University of Technology

Julianalaan 134, 2628 BL, Delft, The Netherlands

Published by:

Chair of Spatial Planning & Strategy Department of Urbanism

Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment

Delft University of Technology

Julianalaan 134, 2628 BL, Delft, The Netherlands

Editorial Coordination: Roberto Rocco

Text Editing and Proofreading: Roberto Rocco and Juliana Gonçalves

Cover and Graphic Design: Roberto Rocco

Copyright © 2025, Roberto Rocco & Juliana Gonçalves

This publication is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0). Under this license, you are free to copy, redistribute, remix, transform, and build upon this work for any purpose, even commercially, provided you properly credit the original author(s), indicate if changes were made, and include a link to the license. For more information, visit https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The author(s) and publisher encourage the distribution and reuse of this publication, aiming to foster broader accessibility, transparency, and knowledge sharing in the Urbanism community.

Disclaimer:

The opinions expressed herein are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of Delft University of Technology or the Department of Urbanism.

ISBN/EAN: 978 94 6518 051 9

DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15286400

Printed in the Netherlands

1. Introduction & Acknowledgements

Effective communication lies at the heart of urbanism. Urbanists engage with complex spatial, social, environmental, and technological issues that demand clarity, critical reflection and excellent visual and textual communication. The Guide to Effective Report Writing in Urbanism is designed to help students and professionals translate rigorous research, insightful analysis, and innovative design into clear, structured, and compelling reports.

Urbanism, especially as taught at institutions like TU Delft, embodies an interdisciplinary blend of spatial planning, urban design, engineering, and social sciences. As such, reporting in urbanism is not merely about presenting findings—it’s a vital tool to foster interdisciplinary dialogue, communicate visions and strategies clearly, and facilitate evidence-based decision-making processes.

This guide emerges from an extensive evaluation of reports produced by students within the Methodology for Urbanism course at TU Delft. By closely examining the strengths, common pitfalls, and recurring challenges identified through student reports, the guide distils key recommendations into accessible strategies. It explicitly addresses common questions such as: How can theoretical frameworks inform urban design and spatial interventions? What constitutes robust methodological practice in urban research?

The guide is structured to lead you through each critical step—from defining research problems and articulating coherent

research questions, to effectively structuring methodological approaches, analyses, and strategies, all the way through to transparent and reflective conclusions. Particular attention is paid to balancing textual analysis with visual communication, and embedding explicit reflections on ethics, sustainability, and spatial justice.

Ultimately, this guide seeks to enhance your analytical clarity, methodological rigour, and ethical awareness, preparing you to communicate your work not just convincingly, but responsibly. Whether you are developing your first urbanism report or refining advanced strategies for professional practice, this guide will equip you with the insights, frameworks, and skills needed to effectively communicate complex urban challenges and innovative solutions.

Acknowledgements

We thank the Urbanism MSc students of TU Delft (cohorts 2023-2025)—whose curiosity, drafts and spirited debates provided the raw material for the insights distilled here. Your reports were both our inspiration and our empirical dataset.

Our gratitude goes to our colleagues in the Department of Urbanism—in particular Remon Rooij for his critical feedback, and collegial support.

Special thanks to the tutors and reviewers of the courses AR2U086 R&D Studio: Spatial Strategies for the Global Metropolis, who play a crucial role guiding students in their planning and design journeys.

2. Methodology for this guide

The methodology adopted to produce this guide involved a structured inductive analysis of 24 extensive group reports submitted by students enrolled in the course AR2U088 Research and Design Methodology for Urbanism in April 2025. Each report was produced by a group of 4 to 5 students for the courses AR2U086 R&D Studio: Spatial Strategies for the Global Metropolis and AR2U088 Research and Design Methodology for Urbanism.

The reports were systematically reviewed, employing an inductive approach to extract key strengths, weaknesses, and recurring issues across submissions. Detailed notes were compiled during the review, highlighting critical points such as clarity of research questions, coherence of theoretical and conceptual frameworks, methodological rigour, stakeholder analysis, textual and visual integration, ethical reflections, and overall report structure.

Feedback provided to each group served as the foundation for a comparative assessment, allowing for the distillation of common themes and essential lessons relevant to report writing in urbanism. This comparative analysis informed the development of clear, actionable guidelines and practical recommendations featured throughout this guide.

3.

TU Delft Urbanism Integrated Knowledge Paradigm Model

This section describes the importance of interdisciplinary knowledge in addressing complex urban challenges and the model of interdisciplinary knowledge proposed for the Department of Urbanism at TU Delft.

Logics of inquiry are underlying epistemological frameworks or approaches researchers adopt when conducting their studies (Stainton-Rogers, 2006). They represent different perspectives on how we acquire, justify, and evaluate knowledge. This speaks to the importance of interdisciplinary knowledge in addressing complex urban challenges.

At the Delft University of Technology (and in the Netherlands more broadly), Urbanism is an interdisciplinary activity that involves planning and designing sustainable, inclusive urban spaces through the integration of design, social sciences, and physical sciences (Rocco et al., 2009).

The Physical Sciences (Positivist paradigm) address the environmental and technical aspects of urbanism. They involve the application of principles from disciplines such as geography, ecology, and engineering to understand and manage the physical underpinnings of urban spaces (Rosenberg, 2005).

The Social Sciences (Constructivist or critical paradigm) entail understanding the human and societal factors that shape urban environments. They include the study of social dynamics, governance, policy-making, and the economic and cultural contexts of urban development (Giddens, 1993).

Finally, the Design Paradigm (Pragmatic or Creative paradigm) speaks to the creative and practical aspects of urban planning and design that are propositional and future-oriented. It involves the conceptualisation and visualisation of spatial interventions and processes to improve urban environments (Biggs et al., 2009; Biggs & Büchler,

2008; Roggema, 2017).

These logics of inquiry reflect diverse philosophical orientations and worldviews, leading researchers to formulate research questions and choose methodologies that align with their chosen approach. For example, let us look at these three different research questions stemming from the canals of Amsterdam:

1. ”How can the efficiency of water management in the canals of Amsterdam be improved to better serve the city’s flood prevention needs?” (Positivist/ Pragmatic)

2. “How does the municipality of Amsterdam organise the governance of its canals, and who are the main stakeholders involved?” (Constructivist)

3. “What are competing claims over the canals of Amsterdam in terms of mobility, water management, leisure and identity? How can urban planning and policy address these competing claims?” (Critical)

It is obvious that each of the Research Questions stems from a different logic of inquiry and that they consequently require different methods to be answered. This connection between logic of enquiry, research questions and methods employed to answer them is absolutely crucial.

Positivism is the prevalent logic of enquiry in engineering (Romero et al., 2013). It is rooted in the belief that objective knowledge can be obtained through empirical observation and quantitative methods. Research under this logic inquiry aims to identify causal relationships and generalisable patterns in the data. Quantitative methods such as surveys, experiments and statistical analyses are

THE PHYSICAL SCIENCES/STEM (Positivist)

The environmental and technical aspects of urbanism. It involves the application of principles from disciplines such as geography, ecology, and engineering to understand and manage the physical underpinnings of urban spaces.

DESIGN (Pragmatic/ Creative)

Creative and practical aspects of urban planning and design that are propositional and future-oriented. It involves the conceptualisation and visualisation of spatial interventions and processes to improve urban environments.

TU Delft Urbanism

Planning and designing sustainable, inclusive urban spaces through the integration of design, social sciences, and physical sciences is an interdisciplinary activity.

THE SOCIAL SCIENCES (Constructivist/ critical)

Understanding the human and societal factors that shape urban environments. It includes the study of social dynamics, governance, policy-making, and the economic and cultural contexts of urban development.

commonly employed to collect and analyse data in a controlled manner (Rosenberg, 2005). The critique of the positivist logic of inquiry centres on its pretence neutrality (Bird, 2018). Positivism generally assumes a single “universal” perspective (male, Eurocentric, patriarchal). The positivist paradigm pretends culture, gender, values, and politics don’t influence real-world issues, hiding biases & conflict under the guise of “neutrality” (Okasha, 2002). Positivism generally doesn’t take alternative ways of knowing into account (feminist/ black/ queer/Indigenous/anti-capitalist/migrant, etc.). As a consequence, it commonly disdains non-expert knowledge.

The Constructivist logic of inquiry is prevalent in the political sciences, economics, governance studies and, more recently, in the understanding of socio-technical systems that address the interrelationships between actors, institutions and technologies (Giddens, 1993; Okasha, 2002; Shannon-Baker, 2023). In this perspective, knowledge is actively constructed by individuals and influenced by their experiences and interpretations. It resonates with understanding the complex interplay between actors, institutions, spaces, and technologies. From this perspective, research explores how individuals and societies conceive, interact with, and shape real-world issues. This perspective commonly uses qualitative methods, case studies, and narrative analysis. It often emphasises stakeholders’ expectations, behaviours, skills, and perspectives (Creswell & Plano Clark, 2007). Critics point out that constructivists often pay insufficient attention to causality and may underestimate the power of technology to shape behaviour.

The Critical logic of inquiry draws heavily from sociology, ethnography, and political economy, as well as from critical theory (Hartimo et al., 2019). This perspective seeks to uncover and challenge prevailing social arrangements, structures, and institutions. This paradigm addresses issues of power, governance, and justice (Giddens, 1993). It utilises qualitative methods, critical discourse analysis, and participatory action research. It prioritises addressing social and spatial inequalities through changes in process, governance, and

political action. The main critique of this logic of inquiry is that it may remain in the diagnosis phase, often failing to advance solutions (Stainton-Rogers, 2006).

The Pragmatic logic of inquiry is expressed in design and engineering disciplines (Duram, 2010). It emphasises practical problem-solving and seeks suitable methods for addressing real-world issues. It deals with understanding and managing systems, including their interrelationships and the impacts of human activities. It commonly uses a mix of quantitative and qualitative methods (surveys, modelling, and interdisciplinary approaches integrating natural and social sciences) and makes ample use of case studies. Issues with the pragmatic logic of inquiry involve the common overlooking of culture, governance and values, with little concern for real-world implementation to which a constructivist approach would contribute (Biggs & Buchler, 2008).

It is beyond the scope of this exercise to define Design, as it involves a wide variety of activities and areas of application (urban design being only one of them) (Biggs & Büchler, 2008; Jong & Duin, 2002; Marchand & Walker, 2009; Oosterhuis, 2009). Design can be understood in its broader conceptualisation as not only the physical design of artefacts or spaces but also process design, institutional design, user interface design, service design and more. A common characteristic of all areas of design is being future-oriented, problem-solving, and propositional

For the purpose of the discussion here, I will define design as the creative process of conceptualising and creating solutions that address specific needs or challenges based on evidence and research, integrating functionality, aesthetics, and usability within cultural, social, and environmental contexts (Biggs et al., 2009).

Design could be said to be creative and pragmatic, often going from problem to solution (sometimes too quickly). However, a “good” design (and there are many conceptions of “good” we could employ) can be said to address all the logics of enquiry mentioned here. “Good” design is technically sound, functional and rooted in data

(Positivism). “Good” design is concerned with the material chains necessary for the production of the design and its reuse, recycling, upcycling and the overall ethical and political implications of its production, use, and discharge (Critical). It is also informed by the rich array of human experiences, perspectives and cultures (Constructivist).

“Good” design addresses real-world issues and is environmentally sustainable (Pragmatic).

“Good” design is innovative, creative, and often aesthetically attractive (Creative). Urban design, for instance, aims to transform urban spaces into more equitable, sustainable, and liveable environments (Pragmatic+Critical+Constructivist) (Roggema, 2017).

The Creative paradigm or logic of inquiry, particularly in the context of design disciplines, propels design forward due to its inherent flexibility and capacity for innovation. It allows for the integration of diverse perspectives, fostering interdisciplinary collaboration that can lead to holistic and innovative solutions to complex challenges. This paradigm encourages thinking outside of the box, enabling the exploration of novel ideas and approaches that are both practical and forward-thinking. It values the synthesis of functionality, aesthetics, and usability, ensuring that solutions are not only effective but also culturally and contextually relevant (Rocco et al., 2009).

However, this creative approach is also deeply challenging from a scientific perspective (DeWitt, 2004). Its emphasis on rapid problem-solving and future-oriented solutions can sometimes lead to a superficial understanding of underlying issues, bypassing thorough empirical analysis and theoretical rigour . This rush to solutions may overlook the nuances of cultural, social, and environmental contexts, potentially leading to interventions that are not sustainable or that fail to address root causes. Moreover, the subjective nature of creative processes can introduce biases, making it challenging to ensure replicability and objectivity, which are core tenets of scientific inquiry. Thus, while the creative paradigm fosters innovation and practical application, it must be balanced with rigorous empirical methods and a critical approach to ensure comprehensive and scientifically sound outcomes (Stainton-Rogers,

2006). This is not for nothing; this is the very point of the model proposed here.

These challenges are particularly pronounced when these processes are solitary, leading to solutions that reflect a single perspective rather than a collective, plural and comprehensive understanding of the issue at hand (Biggs et al., 2010). Such an approach can result in irrational confidence in the effectiveness of designs, neglecting the complexity and diversity of real-world contexts. To address this shortcoming, designers can integrate rigorous research methods and embrace co-design practices.

Co-design, also known as participatory design, involves collaborating with stakeholders, including users, community members, and other relevant parties, throughout the design process (Roggema, 2017). This approach ensures that multiple perspectives are considered, leading to more inclusive and contextually appropriate solutions. By engaging in co-design, designers can mitigate the risk of one-sided solutions, fostering a more democratic and effective design process that values the input and experiences of all participants. This collaborative effort not only enhances the relevance and sustainability of design outcomes but also builds trust and empowerment among stakeholders, making the design process more transparent and accountable.

Note:

We owe an awful lot to the Delft Design for Values Institute and the Section of Ethics and Philosophy of Technology in my conceptualisation of “good design”. We realise the discussion in this text was very brief, but scholars like Ibo van de Poel, Stefan Köller, and Peter Kroes have thought long and hard about these issues and have produced scholarship that helps us discuss what “good design” is.

The issue of the academisisation of design practice is ongoing, but advances have been made in the last decades, especially in England, Sweden and other countries where there is an established community of reflective design practitioners. I had the honour to integrate the Research Into Practice group at Hertfordshire University in the UK under

the leadership of Professor Michael Biggs and Daniela Büchler, where these issues were discussed in depth. Please have a look at the references for some of the scholarship produced.

References

Biggs, M., & Buchler, D. (2008). Eight Criteria for practice-based research in the creative and cultural industries. Art, Design and Education in Higher Education, 7(1), 5-18. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1386/adch.7.1.5_1

Biggs, M., Buchler, D., & Rocco, R. (2009). Design Practice and Research: Interconnections and the CriterionBased Approach. European Academy of Design: Design Connexity, Aberdeen.

Biggs, M., Buchler, D., Rocco, R., & Schjerven, C. (2010, 15-17 November 2010). The Production of Academic Research and Some Barriers to Academicisation in the Creative and Performing Arts. ICERI 2010, Madrid.

Biggs, M. A. R., & Büchler, D. (2008). Architectural Practice and Academic Research. Nordic Journal of Architectural Research, 20(1), 83-94. https://core.ac.uk/download/ pdf/1640258.pdf

Bird, A. (2018). Thomas Kuhn. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Retrieved 10 January 2025 from https://plato. stanford.edu/entries/thomas-kuhn/ Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. SAGE. http://www. loc.gov/catdir/toc/ecip0610/2006008436.html

DeWitt, R. (2004). Worldviews :An Introduction to the History and Philosophy of Science. Blackwell Pub. http://www.loc. gov/catdir/toc/ecip047/2003018208.html

Duram, L. A. (2010). Pragmatic Study. In Encyclopedia of Research Design (pp. 1073-1075). SAGE. https://doi. org/10.4135/9781412961288.n326

Giddens, A. (1993). New Rules of Sociological Method: A Positive Critique of Interpretative Sociologies (2nd ed.). Stanford University Press.

Hartimo, M., Kjosavik, F., & Linnebo, Ø. (2019). Introduction to Special Issue on ‘Critical Views of Logic’. Inquiry, 65(6), 631-637. https://doi.org/10.1080/0020174X.2019.1651077

Jong, T. M. d., & Duin, L. v. (2002). Design Research. In T. M. D. Jong & D. J. M. Voordt (Eds.), Ways to study and research DUP Science.

Marchand, A., & Walker, S. (2009). Designing in Design Research: From Solving Problems to Exploring Issues. European Academy of Design: Design Connexity, Aberdeen. Okasha, S. (2002). Philosophy of Science: A Very Short

Introduction. Oxford University Press.

Oosterhuis, R. (2009). The Role of Design in Planning. TU Delft, Urbanism.

Rocco, R., Biggs, M., & Buchler, D. (2009, 2009). A Pedagogical Proposal in an Area of Epistemological Uncertainty. PROJETAR, Sao Paulo.

Roggema, R. (2017). Research by Design: Proposition for a Methodological Approach. Urban Science, 1(2), 1-19.

Romero, P., Rojas, K., & Rojas, C. (2013). Postpositivism, Positivist and Engineering. International Journal of Engineering Research and Development, 9(1), 05-06.

Rosenberg, A. (2005). Philosophy of Science: A Contemporary Introduction. Routledge.

Shannon-Baker, P. (2023). Philosophical underpinnings of mixed methods research in education. In R. J. Tierney, F. Rizvi, & K. Ercikan (Eds.), International Encyclopedia of Education (Fourth Edition) (pp. 380-389). Elsevier. https://doi. org/10.1016/B978-0-12-818630-5.11037-1

Stainton-Rogers, W. (2006). Logics of Enquiry. In S. Potter (Ed.), Doing Postgraduate Research, Volume 13 (pp. 73-91). Sage.

4.

What is an academic report in Urbanism (and why should you care)?

In the course, the role of the report goes beyond mere documentation; it functions as an instrument for students to showcase their critical thinking.

A report is a structured academic document that systematically presents research findings, analysis, and reflections on a specific spatial planning or urban design issue. It is central to the Methodology for Urbanism course, serving not merely as a compilation of gathered data, but as a coherent narrative that integrates empirical evidence, theoretical frameworks, conceptual understandings, and strategic interventions. In this context, a report must demonstrate how clearly articulated theoretical insights and rigorous research methodologies underpin spatial analysis and design strategies.

In the course, the role of the report goes beyond mere documentation; it functions as an instrument for students to showcase their critical thinking, their understanding of complex urban challenges, and their capability to propose informed, innovative, and actionable solutions. and interventions.

The report explicitly requires students to engage deeply with the course’s core themes: vision and strategy-making, socio-spatial justice, sustainability transitions, multi-scalar governance, and ethical considerations. By structuring their findings within a clearly defined conceptual and theoretical framework, students articulate how their chosen urban intervention responds to real-world problems while advancing equity, procedural justice, and long-term sustainability.

Students should think carefully about their report because it is through this medium that they demonstrate their analytical maturity, their ability to interpret and synthesise data, and their proficiency in visually and textually communicating complex urban phenomena.

High-quality reports are not only well-structured and visually compelling, but also include critical reflections on the research and design processes themselves, openly addressing their limitations, biases, and uncertainties. Such reflection signifies intellectual honesty and a readiness for lifelong learning.

Ultimately, a well-crafted report serves as evidence of the student’s academic development, professional preparedness, and ability to contribute meaningfully to the broader societal debate on how urban spaces can become more sustainable, inclusive, and just.

High-quality reports are not only well-structured and visually compelling, but also include critical reflections on the research process itself, openly addressing its limitations, biases, and uncertainties.

TU Delft Urbanism students’ exercise on the organisation of their report (2018). Photo by R. Rocco.

5. What should a report for Urbanism

contain?

A report for the Methodology for Urbanism course should clearly articulate its structure and content, demonstrating coherent progression from theoretical foundations to actionable spatial strategies.

This structured approach ensures students systematically address theoretical insights, methodological rigour, practical interventions, and explicit ethical considerations.

Each section logically builds on the previous one, creating coherence and readability. The emphasis on analysis and critical reflection highlights students’ analytical abilities, while clearly connecting theory, concepts, and practice. Teachers value reports for the analytical and reflective clarity students demonstrate in integrating theory, practice, and ethics towards meaningful, actionable spatial strategies.

Below is a suggested list of recommended sections, each accompanied by a brief explanation of their purpose and content. This structure is intended as guidance; other approaches to organising the report are also valid, depending on your objectives and methodology, as well as your audience.

1. Cover Page

• A representative image

• Clear and informative title and subtitle.

• Author names, affiliation, date, and an engaging visual.

2. Colophon

• Essential information about authorship, institutional affiliations, acknowledgements, and course details, including group members and their student numbers.

3. Abstract

• Concise 200 to 300-word summary highlighting the core issue, key theoretical insights, methodology, significant findings, proposed strategy, and societal relevance.

4. Table of Contents

• Clearly organised and informative, reflecting the logical flow of the report with descriptive subtitles.

5. Preface and Acknowledgements

• A personal contextualization and motivation of the report and/or project. It is also the place to thank people for their support, involvement, or contribution.

6. Introduction

• Contextual Urgency: Describe the broader global and local relevance of your topic, connecting clearly to policy frameworks (e.g.,

SDGs, Paris Agreement).

• Spatial and Social Context: Brief introduction of the geographical location and specific community/stakeholders involved, framing the issue within its spatial, social, economic, and ecological contexts.

• Course Connection: Briefly articulate how your project connects explicitly to course objectives, such as socio-spatial justice, governance, and sustainability transitions.

7. Theoretical Framework

• Clearly defined theories underpinning your analysis, for example:

- Spatial Justice (Edward Soja, Susan Fainstein, David Harvey, CJC)

- Socio-technical Transition Theories (Multi-level Perspective, Frank Geels)

- Governance and Institutional Change (Elinor Ostrom’s Commons theory)

- Behavioural Theories (Theory of Planned Behaviour, Ajzen)

- Political Economy of Urban Development (Harvey, Massey)

- Etc.…

• Clearly explain why these theories were selected and how they support the research questions.

8. Conceptual Framework

• Clearly explain the key operational concepts guiding your design strategy. Examples include:

- Public Goods

- Socio-spatial Resilience

- Energy Decentralisation

- Circularity and Regenerative Design

- Inclusive Participation and Procedural Justice

• Explain explicitly how these concepts connect with the theoretical framework, guiding your analytical approach.

• Design a diagram explaining these relationships.

9. Problem Statement and Research Questions

• Clearly articulate the central issue your research addresses, framing it through a sociospatial justice and sustainability lens.

• Derive research questions logically from the problem statement. Include:

- One main research question (MRQ)

- Several sub-questions (SRQs) that unpack key dimensions (social, spatial, ecological, economic, governance).

10. Methodology

• Methodological Approach: Clearly explain how you approached answering your questions, explicitly identifying epistemological stances (e.g., positivism, constructivism, pragmatism/ design).

• Methods Used: Explicitly detail research methods employed (e.g., GIS spatial analysis, stakeholder analysis, interviews, site visits, document analysis, scenario building, research by design).

• Justification and Limitations: Clearly explain why these methods were chosen, explicitly connecting them to your RQs, and discuss potential limitations or biases. Clarify how the selected theories guide methodological choices and how the conceptual framework shapes the interpretation and analysis of data, helping to ensure methodological coherence and rigour.

11.

Analysis

• Detailed analytical interpretation of the collected data, explicitly discussing spatial, social, ecological, and economic dimensions.

• Include clear maps, diagrams, visuals, and ensure they are fully explained with explicit analytical texts.

• Provide stakeholder analysis, clearly identifying power dynamics, interests, conflicts, and opportunities.

12.

Vision

• Present a forward-looking vision integrating spatial quality, sustainability, socio-spatial justice, and governance.

• Provide a clear Vision Statement and Vision Map with an informative legend.

• Link explicitly to course concepts (e.g., sustainability, equity, resilience, governance, SDGs).

13. Strategy

• Detail explicit, actionable strategies and interventions:

- Clearly structured policy recommendations

- Physical design interventions and spatial strategies

- Community engagement processes

- Timelines and implementation phases (short, medium, long-term)

• Use maps, diagrams, or design intervention cards clearly accompanied by explanatory texts.

14. Evaluation

• Evaluate explicitly how your project addresses socio-spatial justice, ethical considerations, public goods, procedural justice, intergenerational equity, and sustainability, using one of the main frameworks provided by the Methodology course or the Studio.

• Assess the methodological strengths weaknesses, value and limitations of your chosen methods, data, data sources, analysis and design approach.

15. Conclusion

• Clearly summarise main findings, reiterate how your research has answered your questions, and explicitly discuss societal and spatial relevance of your findings and recommendations.

• Give recommendations. This can be design and policy recommendations for certain stakeholders (content driven), but also methodological recommendations or

recommendations for future research for academics.

16. Reflection

• Personal and Group Reflections: Include reflections on your positionality, learning process, insights gained, and growth as an Urbanist.

• In a report produced within an educational setting—such as the MSc Urbanism—personal reflections add depth by connecting your own research-and-design experience with wider perspectives. A reflection becomes academic when you position your experiences against relevant literature, prior projects, and the insights of others. Good reflection can serve two main purposes:

(A) Action-oriented insight – identifying what you might do differently next time, and why.

B) Personal growth – recognising how the work has reshaped your attitudes, assumptions, or values.

You may choose to reflect on ethical or societal value, scientific contribution, the final product, the project process, stakeholder interactions, your learning journey, or your own positionality. Select the angles that feel most meaningful for the project and your professional development, and explain why they matter.

17. References

• Complete, consistent, and properly formatted reference list using the APA 7th citation system.

18. Appendices

• Additional supportive information, full-length interviews, maps, detailed data, or technical specifications that are not central but useful for validating or expanding on your main text.

6. Ten Essential Tips for Writing a

Succesful Urbanism Report

(+1 Insight on Using AI)

This section presents ten practical recommendations that will help you produce a coherent, insightful, and professionally structured report for your Urbanism course. These tips address common challenges students face, highlight best practices, and emphasise key criteria for academic excellence, such as clarity, methodological rigour, and theoretical coherence. Additionally, given the growing importance and prevalence of artificial intelligence (AI) in academic settings, we offer one specific guideline on how to ethically and effectively incorporate AI into your research and writing processes. Following these guidelines will strengthen your analysis, enhance your critical reflections, and ultimately elevate the overall quality and impact of your work.

01

THEORETICAL GROUNDING

You need THEORIES to develop your project. Theories should be mentioned in the abstract, in the problem statement and in the methodology. They should be integrated in the CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK, and they should be explained in the THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK at length (NOT a short paragraph, but a full-fledged explanation of the theory and how it plays a role in your project.

Always explicitly define key concepts (e.g., spatial justice, just transition, relational ontology) early in your report to improve clarity and reader accessibility.

ALIGNING RESEARCH QUESTIONS & METHODS 02

You need a MAIN RESEARCH QUESTION (MRQ), which is an overarching question you wish to answer, often encompassing your objectives, and SUB RESEARCH QUESTIONS (SRQs) that unpack crucial aspect of the MRQ.

Clearly articulate how each research and sub-research question directly links to specific research methods. This helps structure your report logically and ensures methodological rigour. Our suggestion is to have a table laying down the SRQs and the methods used to answer then (sometimes connected to a work plan).

This will help you design your methodology, which is an essential element in any report. We explore how to write the methodology section in Chapter 12.

INTEGRATING THEORETICAL & CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS 03

THEORIES and CONCEPTS are slightly different things.

In the THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK, you explicitly select, discuss, and justify relevant scholarly theories that inform your understanding of the problem, shape your analytical approach, and guide your ethical stance.

You will find a complete explanation on the differences between theories and concepts on page 42.

In the CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK, you visually and logically articulate how key concepts derived from these theories interrelate and operationalise them for your specific context and project objectives. Clearly connect your conceptual framework to your theoretical foundations and explicitly demonstrate how this integration shapes your analysis, strategy, and design interventions. See examples of THEORIES and CONCEPTS at the end of this guide.

ANALYTICAL & INTERPRETIVE SUMMARIES

04

Many students produce amazing maps, incredible diagrams, and schemes, but no accompanying text EXPLAINING and ANALYSING those materials. Never assume analytical conclusions are self-evident. It’s your responsibility as students to conduct the analysis and explicitly communicate your insights.

Teachers are primarily interested in your analytical skills and critical thinking, not only your ability to produce visual materials. Always accompany maps, diagrams, and visuals with clear, explanatory text summarising key findings, highlighting their implications, and demonstrating your understanding of the context and its relevance to your research objectives.

ETHICAL & SOCIETAL REFLECTIONS 05

Provide deeper and explicit reflections on ethical considerations, societal relevance, procedural justice, and intergenerational justice.

Clearly explain how your interventions contribute to public goods, address spatial justice or push intergenerational justice forward. These reflections should not be treated as an afterthought or a secondary aspect of your project; rather, they are integral and central elements.

Ethical and justice-based considerations are at the very heart of urbanism, as they help ground your strategies and designs in the real-world context, ensuring their relevance, fairness, and effectiveness.

By explicitly articulating these reflections throughout the project, you demonstrate the broader implications of your proposals, highlighting their potential to meaningfully benefit communities, enhance spatial equity, and ensure sustainable futures across generations. This comprehensive ethical framing significantly strengthens your project’s validity and practical utility.

RIGOROUS STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS 06

Clearly identify and categorise stakeholders, thoroughly explaining their interests, roles, and the power dynamics that shape interactions between them. Provide a nuanced understanding of who holds influence, who might resist change, and who is vulnerable or marginalised. Explicitly discuss how these insights directly inform your design decisions, spatial interventions, and policy strategies. By articulating these connections clearly, you demonstrate a sophisticated understanding of how stakeholder relationships shape urban transformations, ensuring your project’s practical feasibility, ethical integrity, and potential effectiveness. This analysis helps anticipate barriers and opportunities, ensuring your proposals are contextsensitive, equitable, and grounded in realistic governance structures.

07

INFORMATIVE CAPTIONS , AUTHORSHIP & SOURCES

ALL IMAGES NEED EXPLANATORY CAPTIONS.

Always provide informative, concise captions clearly explaining the content and purpose of each image, map, diagram, or visualisation included in your report. Captions should not only describe what is visually present but also briefly indicate its relevance to your analysis or argument.

Ensure accurate and complete source attribution for each visual, clearly distinguishing between original work by your group and visuals obtained from external sources. Include detailed references or page numbers if you list sources separately, making it easy for readers and assessors to locate and verify the original information. This meticulous practice enhances the academic rigour, transparency, credibility, and readability of your report.

EDITORIAL QUALITY 08

Pay close attention to language, grammar, and referencing consistency throughout your report. Carefully proofread to correct spelling errors, awkward sentence structures, and grammatical inconsistencies. Clearly follow the guidelines provided by the course, particularly regarding citation style and referencing standards (we love the APA 7th edition citation style).

Consistency in formatting, terminology, and visual style is equally important. Editorial clarity significantly enhances readability, coherence, and professional credibility of your work, enabling readers—including your teachers and peers—to fully appreciate the quality of your analysis and argumentation without unnecessary distraction. Excellent editorial quality signals care, dedication, and attention to detail, reflecting positively on your overall academic performance.

TOC AND REPORT STRUCTURE 09

Use informative and descriptive subtitles in your table of contents (TOC) and throughout your report. Each section title should clearly reflect its content and purpose, facilitating a logical narrative flow and assisting reader orientation. Carefully structure your report so that it guides readers effortlessly from context and problem identification to analysis, vision, strategies, and reflections. A well-organised report enables readers to quickly understand the progression and logic of your argumentation. Consider starting each chapter or section with a brief introduction explaining what the reader can expect and conclude with a summary of key points. Clear structuring not only improves readability but also helps demonstrate your understanding and mastery of the subject matter.

MATURE SELFCRITICAL REFLECTIONS 10

Include honest, critical reflections on your research process, explicitly highlighting both strengths and limitations. Discuss openly any methodological shortcomings, practical constraints, or unexpected outcomes. Reflect on your positionality—acknowledging your biases, assumptions, and the potential influence they may have had on your research. Clearly articulate why certain methodological choices were made, and how alternative choices could have influenced the results. Demonstrate academic maturity by being transparent about what worked well and what did not, and explain how your understanding evolved throughout the project. Intellectual humility and selfawareness in these reflections are highly valued by teachers, as they demonstrate your capacity for critical thinking and continuous learning.

An extra tip about AI

If you use Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools like ChatGPT or other language models to assist in your report writing, ensure this use is both responsible and transparent. AI can effectively support idea generation, language improvement, or summarisation tasks, but it must never replace your critical analysis, original thinking, or ethical reflection. Always explicitly acknowledge the use of AI in your methodology or colophon, specifying precisely how and why you used it. Additionally, be aware of the potential biases or inaccuracies AI-generated content may introduce, and always critically review, verify, and contextualise AIgenerated suggestions before including them in your report.

Example AI Disclosure Paragraph

This report made responsible and transparent use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools, notably ChatGPT, to support specific aspects of the research and writing process. ChatGPT was employed to assist with language refinement, summarisation of complex texts, and initial brainstorming of structure and content ideas. At no point did AI replace the authors’ own critical analysis, original ideas, or ethical reflections; rather, AI outputs were carefully reviewed, verified, and contextualised within the broader research conducted by the authors. The limitations and potential biases inherent in AI-generated content were acknowledged, and extra measures were taken to cross-check accuracy against reliable academic and professional sources.

7. Crafting a compelling problem statement

A well-framed context and problem statement form the backbone of any Urbanism report. They orient the reader, justify the project’s relevance, and logically lead to the main research question (MRQ) and subordinate research questions (SRQs).

Think of this section as the narrative bridge that carries the reader from the wider world into the specific issue you will tackle.

01

SITUATE THE READER IN SPACE, TIME, AND SCALE

Begin by painting a concise yet vivid picture of the geographical, temporal, and socio-technical setting of your study area. Use upto-date data, key statistics, and carefully selected maps or infographics to establish where, when, and at what scale the issue unfolds.

Avoid overwhelming the reader with every detail you have gathered; instead, curate the most salient facts that illuminate why this location and this moment matter. Tie local observations to broader regional, national, or global trends—climate targets, demographic shifts, or infrastructural transformations—so the reader immediately appreciates the stakes.

Consider emphasising the urgency of the issue: Why is this problem worthy of your attention—and that of your readers—right now?

IDENTIFY THE CORE TENSION OR PUZZLE 02

Next, sharpen your focus from general context to the precise problem. A strong problem statement does more than list symptoms (e.g., traffic congestion, energy poverty, water scarcity). It articulates the underlying tension, contradiction, or knowledge gap that current policies, practices, or technologies fail to resolve. Ask yourself:

• What fundamental capability or public good is at risk?

• Which populations or ecosystems bear disproportionate burdens or enjoy uneven benefits?

• Where do existing governance arrangements, market logics, or spatial configurations break down?

Support these claims with references to scholarly literature, policy reports, or primary data. Showing both the scale of impact and the insufficiency of existing responses persuades the reader that your inquiry is necessary.

MOVE FROM PROBLEM TO PURPOSE 03

Having exposed the problem, shift toward purpose, or objectives. Explicitly state how addressing this problem will advance spatial quality, sociospatial justice, sustainability, circularity or another guiding value. This is where you forecast the contribution your study aims to make—whether developing a new typology of energy-positive greenhouses, unveiling hidden stakeholder dynamics, or prototyping participatory design tools.

Crucially, the ambition of the project is not to produce a ‘design’ as an end in itself. Design is deployed as a catalyst for transformation. Consequently, state your aims in terms of the societal changes the project seeks to enable—creating public goods, expanding collective capabilities, or structurally

advancing sustainability and democratic planning processes.

Grounding these aims in established normative theories (e.g., Sen and Nussbaum’s capability approach or Harvey’s ‘Right to the City’) can clarify whose agency is enhanced and which public benefits are delivered.

LET QUESTIONS FLOW NATURALLY 04

Only after the context and problem are crystal-clear should you present your Main Research Question (MRQ). The MRQ should read like the inevitable next sentence: a direct response to the puzzle you have just posed. Formulate it at a conceptual level—“How can…?”, “To what extent…?”, “In what ways…?”— and ensure it addresses who, where, and what outcome you care about.

Your Sub-Research Questions (SRQs) then cascade logically from the MRQ, each unpacking one critical dimension—spatial, technical, social, ecological, or institutional—needed to answer the main question.

Keep the SRQs few, feasible within your available time, and explicitly tied to the methods you will employ. Use parallel structure and clear keywords so readers immediately see how each SRQ contributes to the whole.

KEEP ALIGNMENT VISIBLE 05

Throughout, maintain tight alignment: context → problem → purpose → MRQ → SRQs.

If a datum, map, or citation in your context section does not feed the problem statement, omit or relocate it.

If an SRQ does not clearly advance the MRQ, revise it or reconsider its relevance. This disciplined progression not only clarifies your own thinking but also signals to readers that your research design is rigorous, purposeful, and ready to inform strategic urban interventions.

Example of a Problem Statement

South Holland, the economic powerhouse of the Netherlands, is legally committed to reducing greenhouse-gas emissions by 55% before 2030, in alignment with the EU’s “Fit for 55” climate policy (Government of the Netherlands, n.d.). Despite this commitment, the province’s emerging urban energy landscape perpetuates entrenched energy and environmental injustices. Large-scale renewable infrastructures, such as solar parks, grid-expansion corridors, and biomass facilities, predominantly cluster in peri-urban municipalities already burdened by noise and air pollution, while affluent city centres disproportionately accrue subsidy flows and symbolic “green capital” (PBL, 2024).

Approximately one household in seven experiences energy poverty, exacerbating socio-economic disparities and intensifying existing north–south health gradients within the region (Bouzarovski & Thomson, 2021; TNO, n.d.).

Planning decisions remain dominated by technical agencies , utility providers and experts, marginalising migrant and low-income neighbourhoods whose situated knowledge rarely shapes infrastructure design or spatial configurations (PBL, 2024; Soja, 2010). Policy documents frequently invoke a “just transition” but fail to provide robust metrics linking infrastructure placement, inclusive participation, and citizens’ capability expansion (Heffron & McCauley, 2018). Capability theorists caution that neglecting distributive and procedural justice dimensions in spatial planning erodes democratic legitimacy and undermines human flourishing (Sen, 1999). Without systematically

addressing how spatial configurations, decisionmaking regimes, and cultural narratives

co-produce exclusion, South Holland’s 2030 climate targets risk being achieved through socially regressive means (Heffron & McCauley, 2018; Soja, 2010). Re-conceiving the urban energy landscape as a collectively governed public good that distributes benefits equitably, empowers marginalised communities, and accelerates decarbonisation efforts is therefore an urgent research imperative (Harvey, 2008)

Note: This is a short example. Your Problem Statement could be longer.

References

Bouzarovski, S. (2023). Energy poverty in the European Union: Landscapes of vulnerability. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Energy and Environment, 3(3), 276-289. https:// doi.org/10.1002/wene.89

Government of the Netherlands. (n.d.). Dutch goals within the EU climate change framework. Retrieved April 29, 2025, from https://www.government.nl/topics/climate-change/ eu-policy#:~:text=The%20Netherlands%20is%20a%20 strong,percent%20emission%20reduction%20in%202030. Harvey, D. (2008). The right to the city. New Left Review, 53, 23–40. Heffron, R. J., & McCauley, D. (2018). What is the “just transition”? Geoforum, 88, 74–77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. geoforum.2017.11.016

PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency. (2024). Reaching 2030 climate goal becomes extremely unlikely Retrieved April 29, 2025, from https://www.pbl.nl/en/ latest/news/reaching-2030-climate-goal-becomesextremely-unlikely-extra-policy-with-rapid-effect-isneeded

Sen, A. (1999). Development as freedom. Oxford University Press. Soja, E. W. (2010). Seeking spatial justice. University of Minnesota Press.

TNO. (n.d.). Preventing energy poverty. Retrieved April 29, 2025, from https://www.tno.nl/en/sustainable/systemsolutions-environment/social-innovation/preventingenergy-poverty/

Example of research‐questions alignment

Main Research Question (MRQ)

How can South Holland’s urban energy landscape be re-designed to advance socio-spatial justice while meeting the province’s 2030 decarbonisation targets?

The MRQ is framed conceptually (“How can …?”), specifies where (South Holland), what (urban energy landscapes), and what outcome (socio-spatial justice + carbon goals).

Table 1: Example of alignment between SRQs and Methods chosen.

Justice lens / landscape dimension

Distributional justice — spatial configuration

Procedural justice — participation in landscape design

SRQ phrasing

To what extent does the current spatial configuration of renewable-energy infrastructure shape the distribution of environmental burdens and benefits across urban, peri-urban, and rural communities in South Holland?

In what ways do existing planning pathways enable or constrain marginalized neighbourhoods from influencing the evolving urban energy landscape?

Indicative method

GIS equity mapping & household survey

Process tracing & semistructured interviews

Recognition justice — narratives of place

Transformative design instruments

These SRQs:

How are energy poverty, cultural identity, and heritage framed in policy documents and regional media narratives about South Holland’s energy landscape?

Which spatial-planning or design tools could reconfigure the urban energy landscape toward community-owned, lowcarbon solutions?

Critical discourse analysis

Scenario workshops & codesign with communities/ focus groups

• Cascade logically from the MRQ, each probing a specific justice dimension of the landscape.

• Remain few and feasible, fitting a typical graduate-research timeline.

• Connect directly to methods, signalling researcheability and a clear plan for answering each question.

8. Theories vs. Concepts: What’s What?

This section addresses key challenges faced by many Urbanism students: clearly understanding and articulating the roles of theories and concepts in their projects. A theory is a coherent set of propositions or principles designed to explain phenomena and guide analytical frameworks. In contrast, a concept is an idea, term, or mental construct that helps us describe and interpret specific situations or elements within a broader theoretical context. Understanding and distinguishing between these two is fundamental for structuring rigorous, insightful research.

Grounding your project firmly in relevant theories ensures that your arguments are robust, coherent, and aligned with existing academic debates, while clearly articulated concepts help you frame your analysis, clarify your objectives, and justify your interventions. By integrating both theories and concepts explicitly into your analysis, planning, and design phases, you demonstrate intellectual rigour and methodological clarity, strengthening your project’s relevance and credibility.

EXAMPLES OF THEORIES

Theories are broader scholarly frameworks that explain phenomena or provide a lens through which to analyse and interpret reality.

1. Spatial Justice Theory (Edward Soja, Susan Fainstein, CJC)

Explains how spatial arrangements can create or reinforce social inequalities, emphasizing distributive, procedural, and recognition dimensions of justice.

2. Socio-Technical Transition Theory / Multi-Level Perspective (Geels)

Describes how systemic transformations occur through interactions across different scales (niche, regime, landscape), helping to explain complex transitions like the shift towards renewable energy.

3. Commons Theory (Elinor Ostrom)

Analyses how communities manage shared resources sustainably through collective action and governance, challenging assumptions about inevitable resource depletion.

4. Theory of Planned Behaviour (Icek Ajzen)

Explains behavioural intentions through attitudes, perceived norms, and perceived control, important for understanding why individuals or groups adopt sustainable practices.

5. Political Ecology (David Harvey, Erik Swyngedouw)

Explains the complex power relations between humans, their environment, and resources, emphasizing how socio-political and economic structures shape environmental outcomes.

6. Doughnut Economics (Kate Raworth)

Describes a framework balancing social needs and ecological boundaries, offering an economic perspective integrated with sustainability principles.

EXAMPLES OF CONCEPTS

Concepts are more specific, actionable ideas or notions derived from or linked to theories, operationalised in your specific project context.

1. Performative Landscape

A landscape designed not only for aesthetics or productivity but also to actively perform functions beneficial to ecological, social, and economic systems.

2. Energy Circularity

A concept emphasizing minimizing waste by capturing and reusing energy within closed-loop systems, inspired by circular economy principles.

3. Residential Energy Self-Sufficiency

Households produce, store, and manage their own renewable energy, reducing dependence on centralized infrastructures.

4. Productive Landscape

Landscapes strategically designed to integrate sustainable agriculture, renewable energy, and biodiversity, yielding ecological, economic, and social benefits.

5. Polycentric Governance

Governance systems with multiple overlapping decision-making centres operating collaboratively at different scales (local, regional, national), enabling effective management of complex urban transitions.

6. Inclusive Energy Transition

Strategies ensuring equitable access, affordability, and participation for all socioeconomic groups in the energy transition, addressing energy poverty and spatial inequalities explicitly.

Examples of Theories vs. Concepts

Table 2: Example of differences between theories and concepts.

Theory

Socio-Technical Transition (Geels)

Connected Concept

Multi-level Governance

Commons Theory (Elinor Ostrom)

Energy Community Collective

Spatial Justice (Soja, Fainstein)

Equitable Public Goods

Explanation

Operationalizes socio-technical change through institutional and policy interactions at multiple scales.

Practical application of collective action for shared management of renewable energy resources.

Explicitly focuses on fairly distributing spatial benefits and burdens.

Doughnut Economics (Raworth)

Political Ecology (Harvey, Swyngedouw)

Regenerative Urbanism

SocioEnvironmental Conflict Analysis

Translates economic principles into concrete regenerative spatial practices.

Investigates power dynamics and environmental conflicts within spatial interventions.

9. How to Draw an Effective Conceptual Framework Diagram in Urbanism

A conceptual framework is a visual map clarifying how key concepts, theories, attitudes, values, and planning approaches connect and interact within your research. It helps communicate your central idea, logic, and overall argument clearly.

Drawing a conceptual framework is one of the hardest tasks for a researcher. This is because we have only a vague idea how theories, concepts and frameworks are connected in our minds. Putting this connection to paper makes it tangible to others, but most importantly, helps us clarify those connections to ourselves.

That’s why the process of designing a conceptual framework is crucial and, to a certain extent, rather personal. As we struggle with the connections between ideas in our minds, we advance in our understanding of their complexity.

The challenge is to do it as a collective process of understanding, working in groups. Several minds will find more meaningful connections than one mind thinking alone in isolation. That speaks to the communal spirit of science.

01

CLEAR FOUNDATIONS

Before starting your diagram, list clearly:

• Theories: Abstract explanations underpinning your approach.

• Examples: Spatial justice (Soja, 2010), capabilities approach (Sen, 1999), multilevel perspective (Geels, 2002), doughnut economics (Raworth, 2017).

• Concepts: Ideas and notions operationalising your theories.

• Examples: Circular economy, energy neutrality, resilience, spatial integration.

• Values and Attitudes: Underlying ethical stances shaping your research.

• Examples: Equity, inclusiveness, ecological responsibility, empowerment, intergenerational justice.

• Planning and Design Strategies: Practical interventions and spatial tactics.

• Examples: Community co-design, decentralised energy systems, multifunctional landscapes, green-blue infrastructure.

RELATIONSHIPS & LOGIC 02

Your diagram should clearly reflect logical relationships, showing causality, influence, or integration among concepts, theories, values, and planning strategies.

• Arrows indicate directional relationships (cause → effect).

• Lines without arrows indicate mutual influence or integration.

• Position theories at the base or foundation, values at the core, concepts around the values, and strategies as outcomes or applications.

Example logic sequence:

Theories→ Values & Attitudes → Concepts → Planning & Design Strategies

SYMMETRY, BALANCE, AND CLARITY 03

Diagrams are visual tools that should be clear, balanced, and easy to understand at first glance:

• Use symmetry to convey balance among concepts or categories. Concepts or ideas in the same plane or symmetrically aligned should be in the same category of words.

• Equal importance should have similar visual weight (size, boldness, placement).

• Avoid overly dense diagrams; clarity trumps complexity.

04

CONSISTENCY & CATEGORISATION

Diagrams are visual tools that should be clear, balanced, and easy to understand at first glance:

• Use symmetry to convey balance among concepts or categories. Concepts or ideas in the same plane or symmetrically aligned should be in the same category of words.

• Equal importance should have similar visual weight (size, boldness, placement).

• Avoid overly dense diagrams; clarity trumps complexity.

LEVELS & SCALES

Incorporate clearly defined levels or scales if relevant:

• Global→Regional →Local

• Strategic →Tactical →Operational

• Ensure visual hierarchy matches conceptual hierarchy.

EXPLICIT INTEGRATION OF ETHICAL DIMENSIONS 06

An ethical attitude is central to the practice of spatial planning and urban design. It is not merely a professional requirement, but the very foundation that legitimises the planner or designer’s intervention in space. Spatial interventions inevitably affect people’s lives, their access to resources, and their experience of justice or injustice in the built environment. Therefore, every decision—what to observe, who to engage, which methods to use, whose voices to amplify—carries ethical weight. An ethical approach acknowledges the planner’s responsibility not only to technical rigour or aesthetic quality, but also to fairness, inclusivity, and care for both human and non-human life.

A central element of the Urbanism course is its attention to issues of spatial justice, intergenerational justice, climate justice, social and environmental sustainability, circularity, and more.

There are very clear frameworks that help you understand, apply and discuss ethical issues in urbanism.

FEEDBACK LOOPS & ITERATION

If applicable, clearly represent feedback loops or iterative processes.

Many urban problems require iterative solutions and continuous adjustment.

• Circular or cyclical arrows illustrate iterative dynamics.

08

VISUAL AND GRAPHIC EXCELLENCE

• Use professional graphic design software or digital tools (Adobe Illustrator, Canva, Figma, etc.).

• Maintain readability (clear fonts, appropriate size _minimum 10_, readable colours, minimal distractions).

• Ensure accessibility (colour contrasts for readability, clear labelling).

• We totally get that reports are delivered in PDF format, and that we can zoom in and out to read text in small fonts on a screen. However, this makes the reading experience tiresome. You are not saving any paper by using minuscule fonts in a PDF_ even though minuscule fonts make your report look sophisticated.

CLEAR TEXTUAL EXPLANATION

*THIS ONE IS REALLY IMPORTANT!

• ALWAYS accompany your conceptual framework diagram with explanatory text. You cannot leave the work of interpretation to the reader. The interpretation of the diagram must be given. It is part of your role as a communicator and facilitator to present critical analysis of how the theories and concepts interact and impact your work.

• Clearly describe the logic, relevance, and significance of each component and relationship.

• Teachers look for YOUR analysis. Never assume visual clarity alone is sufficient. It might be true that “an image is worth a thousand words,” but those words will inevitably differ among readers.

Therefore, it is essential that you explicitly articulate the intended meaning behind your visuals through clear explanatory text.

10

GOOD PRACTICES

Good conceptual framework diagrams in the Methodology for Urbanism showed:

• Clear understanding of the central idea guiding the project.

• Clear distinction between theories, concepts, and values.

• Explicit representation of relationships and dependencies (what affects what, what is influenced by what, what’s in the centre).

• Consistent categorisation and visual symmetry.

• Theories at the foundational level, concepts as intermediate stages, and strategies as outcomes.

• Ethics and justice as foundational ideas.

EXAMPLES OF CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORKS

This diagram is a “diagnosis” conceptual, framework, in which students effectively look at the challenges: uneven distribution of goods (society), climate change (environment) and growing demand (economy) impacting the energy landscape (energy poverty, energy transition, grid congestion) impacting the human experience. These impacts are distributed over several scales (national, regional, community, human). The vicious circle of a negative energy landscape has several impacts and iterations, reinforcing that circle.

The main values behind the conceptual framework, according to the group, are:

1. Multi-scalarity

2. Polycentric governance

3. Interdependence

4. Time

5. Sustainability trifecta

These “values” are in fact concepts that are integrated in the diagram. In the text on the right, you can read the group’s justification, highlighting Ostrom’s polycentric governance concept and transition theory.

This conceptual framework diagram was prepared by Kristoffer Torbjørn Hauge, Ula Kunigėlytė, Youjin Lee and Veerle Scheepmaker for the courses AR2U086

R&D Studio: Spatial Strategies for the Global Metropolis and AR2U088 Research and Design Methodology for Urbanism in 2025. It is part of the report titled “Make or Break: Long-term Strategies for the Energy Transition & Energy Poverty in Low-income, Gas-dependent Households in North Holland”.

The groups’ explanation:

The conceptual framework connects transitional theories and ways of governance within existing definitions of sustainability (see figure). It acknowledges the transition being a process at different scales, from national/global forces to the human experience. It incorporate the relationship between multi-scalar challenges in the context of the community, that being energy transition, grid congestion and energy poverty.

It boils down to the direct effects larger challenges affect the community in terms of finance, accessibility and power. A lacking in any of the inner sections reflect where change must happen to avoid a power imbalance between either private or public actors, indicated through the higher sustainable value sets. Every force has an opposite, a push-back, which are accessibility, affordability and autonomy for energy transition, energy poverty and grid congestion respectively.

TAKE-AWAYS FROM THEORIES

Transition

Process

The multi-scalarity of a transition is brought as the main axis. The greater societal values of sustainability, as stated in Our Common Future (1986), define the outer ring of the framework, and the drivers of transition cogwheels (Loorbach, 2002). Sustainability on the local scale should be connected with sustainability aspects on the national or global scale, and is therefore an integral part of the framework. Knowing well that the community currently exist in the later stages of the transition process, the framework will cater for a target group in that phase.

Commons & Governance

Ostrom’s ideas and principles for polycentric governance, as well as the scales of attachment, are indirectly included in the main axis too. It acknowledge the interdependencies on global and national issues, while keeping itself grounded on the community and personal scale. The challenges that will be addressed in the project are a result of greater forces and their relationships with each other, e.g.. the energy transition, grid congestion and energy poverty. As a sub-layer of the framework, one can see this in three levels or scales: the greater societal values, the energy problematics and the personal experiences of those problems.

Main Values Behind the Conceptual Framework:

1. Multi-scalarity

2. Polycentric governance

3. Interdependence 4. Time 5. Sustainability trifecta

CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

UNEVENDISTRIBUTION OFGOODS MATECHANGE

Copyright © 2025 Kristoffer Torbjørn Hauge, Ula Kunigėlytė, Youjin Lee and Veerle Scheepmaker. Cite this figure: Hauge, T., Kunigėlytė, U., Lee, Y., & Scheepmaker, V. (2025). Make or break: Long-term strategies for the energy transition & energy poverty in lowincome, gas-dependent households in North Holland (p.41).Diagram] Urbanism Master’s R&D Studio Report: Spatial Strategies for the Global Metropolis. Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Department of Urbanism,

EXAMPLE *

This diagram puts the Just Energy Transition at the centre. This transition is seen and facilitated through the three lenses of integrated sustainability (People, Planet and Prosperity), which allow students to unpack guiding concepts (Circular Economy, Climate Resilience and Spatial justice at a higher level and phasebased alignment, multi-level coordination and stakeholder collaboration as operative concepts), each of them further unpacked into guiding principles (Spatial Justice, for instance, is correctly understood in its three constitutive dimensions: recognitional, procedural and distributive justice).

This conceptual framework diagram was prepared by Alankrita Sharma, Haoran Zhang, Maria Milusheva, and Simeon Felix Schwager for the courses AR2U086 R&D Studio: Spatial Strategies for the Global Metropolis and AR2U088 Research and Design Methodology for Urbanism in 2025. It is part of the report titled “From Pieces to Players A Just Energy Transition for the People in the Groningen Gasfield Region”.

The groups’ explanation:

The Just Energy Transition Windmill

To address our challenges by integrating diverse theoretical resources, we have developed the Energy Transition Windmill framework. At its core lies the principle of Just Energy Transition, which serves as the ultimate goal of our project.

Surrounding this central concept are three interdependent blades - People, Prosperity, and Planet - representing the key dimensions necessary for achieving a just energy transition. Each blade consists of two layers: outer layers defining specific targets and inner layers outlining concrete strategies to achieve them.

People: Advancing Spatial Justice

The People dimension focuses on spatial justice, encompassing distributive justice, procedural justice, and recognitional justice. To realise spatial justice, effective stakeholder collaboration among civil society, public sectors, and private enterprises is essential, ensuring that diverse voices are included in decision-making and that benefits and burdens are equitably shared.

Prosperity: Building a Circular Economy

The Prosperity dimension emphasises the transition to a circular economy, which involves sustainable production, equitable distribution, and responsible consumption. Achieving this transformation requires multi-level coordination across local, national, and international scales, facilitating synergies between different governance levels and economic actors.

Planet: Strengthening Climate Resilience

The Planet dimension highlights the necessity of climate resilience, which encompasses absorptive capacity, transformative capacity, and adaptive capacity. Ensuring resilience demands phase-based alignment across the short, medium, and long term, allowing for adaptive strategies that respond to evolving environmental and socioeconomic conditions.

Crucially, these three blades are neither static nor isolated; they are deeply interconnected and mutually reinforcing.

Just energy transition can only be achieved when all three dimensions - People, Prosperity, and Planet - advance simultaneously, ensuring a holistic approach that balances social equity, economic viability, and environmental sustainability.

2.7 The “Just Energy Transition Windmill” framework

Copyright © 2025 Alankrita Sharma, Haoran Zhang, Maria Milusheva, and Simeon Felix Schwager. Cite this figure: Sharma, A., Zhang, H., Milusheva, M., & Schwager, S. F. (2025). Conceptual framework diagram: From pieces to players – A just energy transition in Groningen [Diagram]. In From pieces to players: A just energy transition for the people in the Groningen Gasfield Region (pp. 34-35). Urbanism Master’s R&D Studio: Spatial Strategies for the Global Metropolis & Research and Design Methodology for Urbanism, Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Department of Urbanism.

Figure

EXAMPLE *

In this diagram, INCLUSIVITY, EQUITY and CONNECTIVITY are the values or concepts guiding the work of the group. These overarching ideas translate into actionable concepts (Collective Sustainable Responsibility, Mobility Efficiency and Women in Energy Transition. This last concept is actually the guiding motif in the whole project. These actionable concepts in turn translate into concrete policies addressing accessibility, affordability, safety and micro-mobility, which the authors believe will help deliver Just Urban Mobility. There are some minor legibility issues, with the use of very small fonts to describe policies.

This conceptual framework diagram was prepared by Quazi Anika Afrin, Sterre Keukens, Kika van der Schans, Kate Schuitemaker for the courses AR2U086

R&D Studio: Spatial Strategies for the Global Metropolis and AR2U088 Research and Design Methodology for Urbanism in 2025. It is part of the report titled “Design In Pink: Spatial Strategies for Inclusive and Safe Urban Micro Mobility.”

The groups’ explanation:

Identifying Key Concepts

Mobility Efficiency: Allowing everyone to be able to make point to point movement with ease and energy efficiently.

Equity: Not everyone has access to the same mobility options. This is because not everyone can afford it, use it, or has access to the same options.

Collective Sustainable Responsibility: Governance decisions influence the energy transition and determine to what extent everyone can participate in this transition. Stakeholder engagement is essential for designing the urban environment in a way that meets the needs of the people living in the area. Reusing resources for new energy and changing spatial planning through combined efforts can make this possible.

Inclusivity: A key aspect of the energy transition is enabling people to adopt a more energy-friendly lifestyle. To support this, spatial planning must be adapted to create an environment that facilitates and encourages sustainable lifestyle changes.

Women in Energy Transition: The transition community is more vulnerable to the energy transition and it is important to ensure that the future transition can cater to their needs.

Connectivity: The last mile transport and the point to point movement is often not provided by public consumption. It is thus very important that the connections between spaces are easily accessible by all.

Framework’s Philosophy:

This perspective is appropriate for our research because it allows us to analyse both the structural realities of mobility inequality and energy poverty (realist ontology) and the social relationships, governance decisions, and stakeholder collaborations that shape access to mobility and resource distribution (relational ontology). By integrating both views, we can develop a spatial strategy that addresses tangible barriers while considering the dynamic interactions that influence the energy transition.

Reflection and Justification:

This framework is established to help guide us through the research process in a way in which we can perceive what is important and how the concepts are interconnected. It is essentially a step by step guide of how we would like to connect the various research methods and participatory exercises to establish our goals. For our concepts we choose, we found three methods or research concepts we would like to explore and achieve to feel like we have made progress with the core concept.

To elaborate, for Women in Energy Transition, we want to understand the lives of the Urban Women and their perspectives, while also connecting their voices to the municipalities so that we can all come together and collaborate to make urban space also catered to women and learn from the women what they seek from public spaces. All these factors would come together for us to feel that we have successfully achieved Collective Sustainable Responsibility.

Similarly, we want to have strong governance structures that allow for redistribution of resources to achieve mobility equity and efficiency for all and we strongly believe that through inclusive and well connected initiatives and practices, we can start to work towards all the aspects we set out to achieve.

Figure 20: Conceptual Framework

Copyright © 2025 Quazi Anika Afrin, Sterre Keukens, Kika van der Schans, and Kate Schuitemaker (2025). Cite this diagram: Afrin, Q. A., Keukens, S., van der Schans, K., & Schuitemaker, K. (2025). Conceptual framework diagram: Inclusivity, equity and connectivity guiding just urban mobility [Diagram]. In Design in pink: Spatial strategies for inclusive and safe urban micro mobility (p. 29). Urbanism Master’s R&D Studio: Spatial Strategies for the Global Metropolis & Research and Design Methodology for Urbanism, Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Department of Urbanism.

EXAMPLE *

In this diagram, inspired by the Doughnut Economy diagram created by Kate Raworth, two complementary concepts lie at the centre in a Yin-Yang interaction: Mobility Justice and Energy Transition. The implication is that mobility justice and energy transition are indissociable and complementary. The group adopts an explicit spatial justice perspective, explained in their theoretical framework. This perspective provides the group with its main framework: Recognitional, Procedural and Distributive Justice, which lie outside the circle, providing the main evaluative framework for the several categories addressed by the group, including for example Safe, Circular and Inclusive Mobility. The diagram could also be used to evaluate the project.

This conceptual framework diagram was prepared by Evelien Vos, Faried Nurmohamed, Jordan Comvalius, Lars Wagenaar, and Sanne Peters for the courses AR2U086 R&D Studio: Spatial Strategies for the Global Metropolis and AR2U088 Research and Design Methodology for Urbanism in 2025. It is part of the report titled “Shared Routes,Shared Future: ‘Mobility, Energy and Nature in Transition’”.

The groups’ explanation:

The conceptual framework (figure 9) shows the relationship between the terms explained in the theory. The framework is used in this research as an instrument in analysis, as well as during the visioning and strategy processes. It is used to assess the current situation and level of mobility justice and to test whether the vision and strategy reach the goals set in the problem statement.

Mobility justice and the energy transition are the core of the problem addressed in this design research. They are interlinked, because mobility injustice and the resulting dependence on private, fossil fuel-burning cars, hinder the energy transition. At the same time, the transition towards more sustainable modes of transport and a new mobility system offers the opportunity to increase mobility justice throughout Noord-Holland.

As explained in the theory, mobility justice can be seen as a form of spatial justice, which can be split up into distributional, procedural and recognitional justice.

To make these concepts more measurable, they are split up further. Different aspects of mobility justice and energy transition were chosen and defined and then divided into the categories of spatial justice.

How to use the conceptual framework?

The framework consists of sliders, that can be adjusted to visualise different situations. This provides the opportunity to look at the various concepts through the perspectives of the chosen transition communities. For every community, the values can be adjusted to the level they are currently at or the level we desire them to be at in the vision. Adjusting the values also helps thinking in extremes and allows testing the effects of different interventions on aspects of mobility justice and their impact on communities.

Procedural justice

Symbiotic

lanoitingoceR

ecitsujlanoitubirtsi

Copyright © 2025 Evelien Vos, Faried Nurmohamed, Jordan Comvalius, Lars Wagenaar, and Sanne Peters (2025). Cite this diagram: Vos, E., Nurmohamed, F., Comvalius, J., Wagenaar, L., & Peters, S. (2025). Conceptual framework diagram: Shared routes, shared future – Mobility, energy and nature in transition [Diagram]. In Shared routes, shared future: Mobility, energy and nature in transition (p. 21). Urbanism Master’s R&D Studio: Spatial Strategies for the Global Metropolis & Research and Design Methodology for Urbanism, Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Department of Urbanism.

EXAMPLE *

In this diagram, the notion of Regional Identity Transition is at the centre of concentric circles of Governance, LandUse and Factors influencing the transition (People, Energy and Landscape).

Important concepts lie at the intersection between those categories. Public acceptance, for instance, lies at the intersection of People and Energy, Integrated Land Use lies at the intersection of Energy and Landscape and Landscape Management lie at the Intersection of People and Landscape.

These important concepts are encircled by the all-important issue of Governance, which implies Participation, Decentralization and Spatial Equity (Fair Distribution).

This conceptual framework diagram was prepared by Shreya Rajmane, Roos van der Knaap, Hongyue Kang and Hugo Lock for the courses AR2U086 R&D Studio: Spatial Strategies for the Global Metropolis and AR2U088 Research and Design Methodology for Urbanism in 2025. It is part of the report titled “Energy from the land, Power to the people: Bottom-up approach in the management of identity transition of the rural landscape’”.

The groups’ explanation:

Landscape identity transition is the main topic of this project. A better approach to landscape identity transition is our main goal. The concept of landscape identity is viewed from three different dimensions: landscape, energy and people.

We observe an unsynchronised dynamic between these factors, resulting in a not well managed landscape identity transition. Streamlining the relation between landscape, energy and people is key to an improved transition. In this framework, the relations between the three dimensions are key components to achieve our vision. The relations are divided in two layers: land-use and governance.

The first layer is the land-use layer, which includes integrated landuse, landscape management and public acceptance. Integrated or multifunctional land-use (Vreeker, R., 2004) shows the desired dynamic between landscape and energy. Through designing spatial principles and a catalogue, different functions on the same piece of land are combined, which should result in a better dynamic between landscape and energy.

Landscape management describes the relation between landscape and people. Currently, the management of land (and energy) in a certain region is often not connected to the residents of this region. As a result, these people feel disconnected from the changing environment and they also combat development. Our aim is to connect these two dimensions, where residents of an area have more influence over the developments in this area.

Public acceptance (Upham et al., 2015) is a desired result in the relation between people and energy. As of now, citizens often resist new energy projects in their surroundings. This is due to a lack of participation in the decision-making process, with a lack of public acceptance as a result. By empowering the local community, public acceptance should improve.

This brings us to the second layer, governance. Participation is one of the key concepts in the project. It is the aim to position the new governance in a higher mode of governance (Michaelson et al., 2024) By collaborating with and empowering the local community in the decision-making process, the landscape identity transition will happen in a more fair manner. This adds to the concept of decentralisation, which can be applied to all three dimensions. For this concept the notion of spatial justice (Moroni, S., De Franco, A., 2024) is very important. The proposed decentralized governance is a bottom-up approach (Duquenoy, S., 2021) and should result in more equal opportunities to resources that are useful in the development of energy projects. This goes hand in hand with the concept of fair distribution.

Fair distribution describes a fair spatial division of the burdens and benefits of energy projects. Ultimately, the combination of all these concept should lead to a better approach to regional identity transition.

Figure 14: Conceptual Framework (Przybylinski, S., 2023), (European Commission, n.d.), (Vreeker, R., 2004), (Upham et al., 2015), (Michaelson et al., 2024) Energy from the land, Power to the people

Conceptual Framework

Copyright © 2025 Shreya Rajmane, Roos van der Knaap, Hongyue Kang and Hugo Lock (2025). Cite this diagram: Rajmane, S., van der Knaap, R., Kang, H., & Lock, H. (2025). Conceptual framework diagram: Energy from the land, power to the people – Bottom-up approach in the management of identity transition of the rural landscape [Diagram]. In Energy from the land, power to the people: Bottom-up approach in the management of identity transition of the rural landscape (pp. 23–24). Urbanism Master’s R&D Studio: Spatial Strategies for the Global Metropolis & Research and Design Methodology for Urbanism, Delft University of Technology, Faculty of Architecture and the Built Environment, Department of Urbanism.

DIAGRAM

The methodology section can be seen as the ‘recipe’ of an Urbanism project. It describes the research and design approach (the cooking instructions) as well as the data (the ingredients) used in the project.

Just like a cooking recipe, both the process and the data used must be clearly described, so that others can understand, evaluate, and possibly reproduce your project or apply your approach to another context.

Urbanism projects often combine different types of research methods – quantitative, qualitative, spatial, and design-based methods. This makes urbanism methodologies particularly important and also more complex. Use clear, concise language and justify each method. Don’t just list what you did – explain why it matters.

Below is a guide to help you structure this section and understand the purpose of each method commonly used in urbanism.

01

PURPOSE OF THE METHODOLOGY

Before jumping into the tools and techniques, begin your methodology section by stating why you are using a particular approach.

Is it to understand behaviors in space? To evaluate the effects of a policy? To co-design with a community?

Framing your intent will help the reader make sense of the choices you make.

EXPLAINING YOUR APPROACH 02

Urbanism research is rarely a linear process.

Unlike lab experiments with fixed and rigid steps, urbanism projects evolve as we engage with places, people, and ideas.

Your initial questions may shift. Your methods may adapt. Your design may be reworked multiple times based on feedback, new data, or emerging insights.

This process is called iterative – you learn, test, reflect, and adjust repeatedly.

This requires a more elaborate description of the research approach, as explained below.

START WITH YOUR RESEARCH ORIENTATION a.

Begin by summarising how all your methods work together to answer your sub-research questions and support your design.

Consider using a diagram and a timeline to show how different phases and methods relate.

Link this to the philosophical or strategic orientation of your project. This helps ground your choices and shows coherence even if the process was flexible. Some examples:

• Systematic: “This project identified five factors that influence the behaviour of urban commuters”.

• Exploratory: “This research started with a broad exploration of informal street uses in downtown São Paulo.”

• Design-driven: “The project used urban design as a tool to test spatial hypotheses about community safety.”

• Participatory: “Methods were co-developed with local residents through workshops and walk-alongs.”

A combination of the above examples is also possible, as it is likely that each of your research questions have a different orientation.

ACKNOWLEDGE THE ITERATIVE NATURE OF RESEARCH b.

It’s perfectly acceptable, and often necessary, to explain that your methodology evolved during the project. But this must be structured and intentional in your final write-up.

Instead of writing “we changed our method halfway through,” explain why and how these changes supported your goals:

“Initial exploratory interviews revealed issues of accessibility not considered in our original site analysis. As a result, a second round of observations focused specifically on pedestrian movement and seating behaviour.”

Use reflective language:

• “Based on early findings...”

• “In response to feedback from...”

• “To deepen the analysis of...”

This shows you were responsive, not disorganised.

c.

USE A VISUAL FRAMEWORK

To help your reader follow your process, consider including a diagram or timeline of your research and design journey. This can show:

• What you did in each phase (e.g., site analysis → observation → initial design → testing → redesign).

• When and why methods were introduced or revised.

• How design and research interacted (e.g., how sketches led to interviews, or vice versa).

Even a simple flowchart can clarify a complex process.

PRESENTING ITERATION AFTER THE FACT d.

When your project is finished, the temptation is to present it as neat and linear.

But in research-led urbanism, showing iteration adds credibility – it reflects real-world complexity and shows your ability to navigate it. But you have to present it cohesively, some tips are:

• Narrate the journey in stages or “cycles” (e.g., First cycle: exploratory mapping → Interviews → Design sketching. Second cycle: testing and refinement → community feedback → final design.)

• Use headings to separate stages and methods.

• Reflect at the end of the section on how iteration improved your outcome:

“The iterative process allowed for a deeper understanding of resident needs, leading to a more responsive and contextually sensitive design proposal.”

e.

SUGGESTED STRUCTURE

To make your methodology section coherent and iterative-aware, these are the elements that need to be included (not necessarily in this order):

1. Research orientation and goals.

2. Overview of methodology.

3. Visual representation (timeline, diagram, or design-research loop).

4. Method Detailed Description 1 (e.g., literature review) → what, why, how.

5. Method Detailed Description 2 (e.g., observations) → what, why, how.

6. Method Detailed Description 3 (e.g., layers mapping) → what, why, how.

7. Method Detailed Description 4 (e.g., pattern language)→ what, why, how.

8. Method Detailed Description 5, 6, 7…

9. Iterative process → how findings from each method influenced the next step.

10. Reflections on the process → what changed, what was learned.

11. Link to outcomes → how this process shaped your final design or insights

3.

KEY RESEARCH METHODS EXPLAINED

In the following pages are some of the main methods you might include in your project and what to include when describing them. Make sure each method is justified and explained clearly.

It is important to note that your Main Research Question (MRQ) does not need to be directly linked to a specific method. The MRQ typically addresses a broader, overarching concern that is answered through the cumulative process of your entire research and design journey.

In contrast, your Sub-Research Questions (SRQs) are more specific and operational, and they should be clearly connected to particular methods that help answer them. Each SRQ can often be addressed through one or more methods—be it literature review, site observation, interviews, or design iterations. Making these connections explicit not only strengthens the coherence of your methodology but also helps demonstrate the rigour of your research design.

KEY RESEARCH METHODS EXPLAINED

A useful way to clarify these links is to include a table that maps each SRQ to the method(s) used, the rationale behind the choice, and the expected type of insight or outcome. This will help both you and your readers follow the logic of your research process. See an example below:

Table 3: Second example of alignment between SRQs and Methods chosen.

Sub-Research Question (SRQ)

What informal uses of public space can be identified in the neighbourhood?

How do residents perceive safety in the neighbourhood’s public spaces?

Which spatial factors contribute to the urban heat island effect in the case area?

Method(s) Used

Exploratory Observations, Field Notes, Photographs

Short Street Interviews, Indepth Interviews

To capture everyday, unplanned, and temporary uses of space in situ

To gather first-hand experiences and perceptions of local users

A typology of informal spatial practices and their locations

How can design strategies mitigate heat stress in vulnerable areas?

Literature Review, GIS Mapping, Thermal Imaging

Design Prototyping, Scenario Development, Feedback Sessions

To identify relevant indicators from existing research and spatially analyse their local manifestation

To test spatial interventions and assess their feasibility and acceptance

Common concerns, perceived safe/ unsafe zones, and explanatory narratives

Spatial correlation between heat retention and urban form

Iterative design strategies tailored to local environmental and social conditions

a.LITERATURE REVIEW

A literature review helps you understand what has already been said or discovered about your topic. In urbanism, this often includes planning theory, urban design strategies, and case studies from other cities. It can also help to identify factors that influence the issue you are investigating, which can then be used as a basis for mapping and design, for example:

• if the literature highlights that urban heat islands are influenced by vegetation cover, building density, and surface materials, these elements can be mapped in your study area to locate the most heat-vulnerable zones. Urban design interventions can then be used to modify these factors.

• if the literature indicates that housing vulnerability is influenced by rental prices, overcrowding, and proximity to essential services, these indicators can be mapped in your study to highlight areas at higher risk of displacement or housing precarity. Policy design can then be used to address these factors.

What to include:

• The approach: Systematic literature review, Narrative literature review, Exploratory literature review, etc.

• How you selected sources (e.g., scholarly databases like Web of Science and Scopus, keywords or combination of keywords used)

• The scope (e.g., time period, region, themes)

• How the literature informed your questions or design approach

OBSERVATIONS

b.

Observations help you understand how space is used in real life. This can be structured (e.g., counting people at specific times) or unstructured (e.g., noting informal uses of space or movement patterns).

An observations strategy can include two steps: starting with exploratory observations, where you visit the location without a plan, followed by systematic observations, where you develop an observation protocol before the site visit, which is used to guide the observations. The latter helps to reduce observation bias.

What to include:

• Strategy used: Exploratory or systematic, or a combination.

• How many observations took place, where and when (on a map, for example).

• What you observed (e.g., behaviours, activities, flows, affordances).

• Tools used (e.g., maps, photographs, time logs).

• Why the site was chosen.

• Observation protocols should be included in the appendix.

c.SHORT AND IN-DEPTH INTERVIEWS

Interviews offer insight into how people experience or think about urban issues. Short interviews may be done on the street, usually aimed at understanding residents’ perceptions, while in-depth interviews are more structured and reflective, usually targeting professional experts or “community” experts (such as community leaders, who have a deep local knowledge). A stakeholder mapping and analysis can help you identify who to approach for in-depth interviews.

What to include:

• Who was interviewed (e.g., residents, planners, experts, policymakers, community leaders).

o Anonymise if necessary.

• How participants were selected.

o A map can help show where people were interviewed in case of street interviews.

• The format (e.g., recorded, anonymous, in person or online, street or in-depth)

• Themes covered in the interview

• How interview transcripts were analysed (e.g., thematic analysis, thick summaries, coding)

• Interview protocols and transcripts should be included in the appendix

SURVEYS

d.

Surveys help gather broader data from a larger group, usually online. These can be used to quantify preferences, needs, or perceptions.

What to include:

• How many people responded.

• How the survey was distributed (e.g., online, in person).

• Key topics or types of questions

• Survey questions and answers should be included in the appendix.

• How data was analysed (e.g., simple statistics, coding).

4.

DESIGN AND ACADEMIC RESEARCH

In Urbanism, research and design are not separate phases but intertwined processes.

The interplay between research and design is often iterative: insights from research inform a design move, and the outcomes of that design provoke further questions.

Usually, research helps uncover spatial, social, and environmental conditions while design tests responses to those findings. Design is thus not just a product but a process of inquiry through maps, models, and sketches.

To clearly present this in a methodology section, describe how design was used as a tool for inquiry:

• Which methods informed which design decisions.

• What kind of design tools or techniques you used.

• What you mapped/sketched and why.

• How these helped generate insights or ideas.

• How design informed your understanding or shaped your research questions.

• How research questions led to design strategies.

• How feedback and testing refined the final design outcome.

This emphasises that design is not just a product of research, but a method of research in itself.

5.

‘RESEARCH-BYDESIGN’

Research by designing is an idiosyncratic approach to inquiry—meaning it is distinctive, personal, and often highly specific to the context and the researcher’s design process.

Unlike conventional research methods that aim for replicability and generalisability, research by designing embraces the iterative, situated, and often intuitive nature of spatial design practice.

In this approach, designing is not merely the outcome but a method of investigation in its own right: through drawing, modelling, mapping, and scenario-making, the researcher explores spatial questions and generates new knowledge.

Because of its open-ended and often subjective character, research by designing requires a clear and transparent explanation of the design process, including the rationale behind design decisions, the tools and techniques used, and how design iterations contributed to answering the research questions.

Without this methodological clarity, the research risks being perceived as arbitrary or merely artistic.

TRIAGULATION

6.

In geolocation, triangulation is a method used to find the exact position of a place or object by measuring angles from two or more known locations; where the angle lines intersect is the target’s location.

Similarly, triangulation in academic research refers to the use of multiple methods, data sources, or theoretical perspectives to confirm or validate results.

The aim is to increase the validity and robustness of findings by cross-verifying evidence from different angles. In urbanism, triangulation is especially valuable because urban questions are complex and multi-layered. Many issues in Urbanism are actually considered ‘wicked’ problems: problems that don’t admit a single solution, or that can never be fully solved, or that cannot be solved without creating other problems.

For example, to understand how public space is used in a neighbourhood, a student might combine systematic observations (to capture actual behaviours), short interviews (to gather user perceptions), and spatial mapping (to analyse physical conditions that influence use). When findings from these different methods align or complement each other, the researcher gains a more reliable and nuanced understanding of the issue.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS 7.

If your project involves people (e.g., interviews, surveys, workshops or other forms of interaction), include a short note on how you handled ethical issues such as consent, anonymity, and data protection.

You should always follow the guidelines provided by the Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) of TU Delft.

Examples of potential ethical issues in the methodology (note that the project itself may have other ethical virtues and limitations):

1. Participant-Related Ethical Issues

• Informed Consent: Failing to obtain clear and voluntary consent from participants.

• Anonymity and Confidentiality: Not protecting identities or sensitive personal information.

• Power Imbalances: Ignoring asymmetrical relationships between researcher and participants.

• Misrepresentation of Voices: Distorting or selectively presenting what participants have said.

• Lack of Cultural Sensitivity: Disregarding local customs, values, or languages.

• Tokenism in Participation: Engaging communities superficially without giving them real influence.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

2. Data-Related Ethical Issues

• Data Protection and Storage: Mishandling or improperly storing sensitive data.

• Use of Images and Maps: Publishing visuals that reveal personal or sensitive information without consent.

• Bias in Data Collection: Introducing personal or institutional bias in questions, sampling, or analysis.

• Exclusionary Research Practices: Failing to include diverse or marginalised voices due to logistical or structural barriers.

3. Researcher Conduct and Transparency

• Plagiarism and Citation Ethics: Using others’ work without proper attribution.

• Manipulation of Results: Omitting or altering data to support pre-set conclusions.

• Lack of Transparency: Hiding or underreporting changes in methodology or limitations.

• Conflict of Interest: Not declaring relationships or funding that could bias the research process.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

4. AI-Related Ethical Issues

• Opaque Use of AI Tools: Not disclosing when AI tools (e.g., ChatGPT, GIS automation, or generative design tools) are used to analyse data, generate text, or produce visualisations.

• Bias in AI Outputs: Uncritically adopting AI-generated insights that may reflect embedded biases in training data or algorithms.

• Over-Reliance on Automation: Using AI to replace critical analysis or design thinking without proper verification.

• Intellectual Ownership and Attribution: Failing to acknowledge the role of AI in generating content, thus blurring authorship and accountability.

• Data Ethics in AI Training: Using AI tools that may have been trained on unethically sourced data (e.g., scraped texts or images without consent).

LIMITATIONS 8.

No methodology is ever comprehensive enough or complete enough. We always wished we had more time. But limitations are not about what could have done more have we had the time. Limitations are about constrains that shaped the choices we made: what data was available, what methods were feasible, and what assumptions we had to make in order to move forward with clarity and purpose.

It is good practice to briefly acknowledge the limitations of your approach, such as small sample sizes or language barriers. This shows critical thinking and transparency. Table 1 shows several examples of typical limitations in urbanism projects. Limitations can be described at the end of the methodology chapter or as part of the reflection chapter at the end of the report.

Table 4: Typical limitations in urbanism projects.

Method / Data Type

Typical Limitation

Observations Snapshot in time; weatherdependent; observer bias

Interviews Small sample size; biased responses; language barriers

Surveys Low response rate; selfselection bias; limited reach

Census / Official Data Outdated; not disaggregated at neighbourhood level

GIS / Spatial Data Incomplete layers; low resolution; outdated mapping

Design-Based Methods Hard to “measure” outcomes; subjective interpretation

Participatory Workshops Unequal participation; dominant voices; limited documentation

Field Notes / Sketches Subjective; lack of standardisation

Literature Review Limited to published sources; language bias; over-reliance on Global North

Temporal Scope Limited fieldwork period; excludes long-term change

How to Acknowledge / Mitigate

Conduct over multiple days/ times; document conditions; triangulate with other methods

Clarify selection criteria; anonymise responses; send questions in advance in case of language barriers

Report response rate; compare to known demographics; distribute through varied channels

Note the data’s publication date; supplement with local sources or field observations

Validate visually onsite; mention limitations in spatial accuracy; annotate maps if needed

Clarify design’s exploratory role; use visuals and feedback loops; combine with other evidence

Use facilitation strategies; ensure diverse voices; record reflections immediately after sessions

Explain context and purpose; use alongside other documentation like photos or maps

Be explicit about scope and limits; seek grey literature; include diverse epistemologies

Note timing and seasonality; suggest future longitudinal study

11.

HOW TO DRAW AN EFFECTIVE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

DIAGRAM IN URBANISM

Quantitative and Qualitative Methods in Urbanism

Urbanism projects may use both quantitative and qualitative methods to understand complex spatial realities. Each approach serves a different purpose and offers distinct insights.

Urbanism often requires both perspectives. Used together, qualitative and quantitative methods allow for richer, more grounded analyses of spatial and social phenomena. The table below compares the two approaches and offers examples relevant to urbanism projects.

a.

QUANTITATIVE METHODS

Quantitative methods focus on measuring and analysing numerical data to identify patterns, test relationships, and compare conditions across sites or populations. These methods are typically used to quantify variables such as traffic flow, land-use mix, or housing density. They rely on structured tools like surveys, GIS analysis, and statistical models. Quantitative research is useful when your goal is to identify broad trends, support generalisations, or evaluate change over time.

For example:

• Census data can be used to analyse demographic change or income inequality at the neighbourhood scale.

• Land-use analysis in GIS might quantify the proportion of green space versus built area across different districts to support environmental planning.

• A survey of residents may be conducted to rate satisfaction with public amenities, with results analysed statistically to compare across age groups or locations.

b.

QUALITATIVE METHODS

Qualitative methods, on the other hand, aim to explore how people experience, interpret, and give meaning to urban spaces. These methods emphasise context, narrative, and depth over breadth. Techniques like interviews, observations, walk-alongs, and participatory workshops help uncover local knowledge, social dynamics, and lived experiences. Qualitative research is especially valuable when working with communities, investigating perceptions, or addressing place-based issues that cannot be reduced to numbers alone.

For example:

• Semi-structured interviews with residents can reveal how people perceive safety, belonging, or exclusion in public space.

• Walk-along observations may capture informal uses of a square—such as street vending, children playing, or elderly people gathering—that help interpret the social role of space beyond its formal design.

• Participatory workshops involving local stakeholders can surface hidden knowledge about flooding, waste management, or mobility challenges, allowing co-design of contextsensitive interventions.

Table 5: Key differences between quantitative and qualitative methods

Aspect

Quantitative

Methods

Purpose To measure, compare, and test relationships

Data Type Numerical (counts, rates, percentages)

Qualitative

Methods

To understand, interpret, and explore meanings

Typical Techniques

Structured surveys, GIS mapping, statistical analysis

Tools Used Excel, SPSS, GIS, sensors

Textual, visual, spatial, and narrative

Sample Size

Often large, aiming for generalisability

Analysis Style

Statistical, objective, focused on trends

Interviews, observations, field notes, participatory mapping

Audio recorders, notebooks, sketchbooks, cameras

Often small, aiming for depth and contextual understanding

Thematic, interpretive, sensitive to context

Strengths Breadth, comparability, evidence-based rigour

Depth, nuance, insights into lived experience

Limitations Can miss social or cultural context

Can be time-consuming, less easily generalised

Example in Urbanism Mapping surface temperatures to identify heat islands

Interviewing residents about thermal comfort and shade use

12. Inductive and Deductive Reasoning in Urbanism

Urbanism projects are not just defined by what you study, but also by how you reason through your research.

Two core reasoning approaches used in academic research are deductive and inductive reasoning. Understanding the difference helps clarify the logic of your methodology and the direction of your inquiry.

a.

DEDUCTIVE REASONING

Deductive research begins with a general theory or hypothesis and tests it through empirical observation. It moves from the general to the specific. This approach is often used when a project starts with well-defined concepts, theoretical frameworks, or expectations based on previous research. For example, you might begin with the theory that “mixed-use neighbourhoods promote walkability” and use site analysis, mapping, and behavioural observation to test whether this holds true in a specific context.

In a deductive approach, spatial planning and design often begin with pre-defined objectives or principles—such as sustainability standards, zoning models, or mobility frameworks—that are applied to a specific site. The designer acts as a problem-solver, using spatial tools to implement or test generalisable theories. This is common in projects where regulatory frameworks, evidencebased guidelines, or strategic visions are already established. For example, applying the principles of Transit-Oriented Development (TOD) to a peripheral neighbourhood involves testing a known model against a local condition. In this way, deduction encourages consistency, clarity, and alignment with established planning paradigms.

b.

INDUCTIVE REASONING

Inductive research starts from specific observations and builds toward broader generalisations or theoretical insights. It moves from the specific to the general. This is useful in exploratory urbanism projects where patterns, problems, or insights emerge from fieldwork, interviews, or design experiments. For example, after mapping informal uses of a public square and speaking to users, you might induce a broader understanding of how underused spaces support everyday resilience.

An inductive approach positions planning and design as an open-ended process of discovery. Rather than starting with abstract models, the designer begins by engaging deeply with the site— through observations, interviews, mappings, and participatory processes—and allows patterns and needs to emerge from the context itself. Design in this mode is often iterative, experimental, and situated. For instance, in working with an informal settlement, inductive design may reveal alternative spatial logics, resilience practices, or community structures that challenge conventional planning assumptions. Here, planning becomes not the imposition of a model, but the co-production of spatial strategies that arise from lived realities.

Table 6: Comparing Deductive and Inductive Approaches in Urbanism

Aspect

Direction of Reasoning

Starting Point

From general theory to specific observations

Existing theory, hypothesis, or conceptual framework

Purpose To test or validate a theoretical proposition

Common in Explanatory research, policy evaluation, hypothesis testing

Typical Tools Surveys, structured observations, statistical comparisons

Role in Urbanism

Strengths

Testing if known models or patterns apply in a given context

Clarity of focus; builds on established knowledge

Limitations May overlook local complexity or emerging patterns

Urbanism

Example Testing whether access to green space correlates with wellbeing

From specific observations to general insights

Field observations, interviews, exploratory design

To discover patterns or generate new understanding

Exploratory research, participatory work, ethnographic mapping

Field notes, open-ended interviews, sketching, grounded mapping

Uncovering new dynamics or practices through analysis of the existing

Context-sensitive; generates grounded, original insights

Harder to generalise; results may remain sitespecific

Identifying unplanned uses of green space and their social meanings

Guide to Effective Report Writing in Urbanism

Writing clear, rigorous, and impactful reports is a core skill for every urbanism student and practitioner. Reports are not just academic exercises—they are powerful instruments for communicating complex ideas, influencing decision-making, and driving meaningful change towards sustainable and just urban futures.

This practical guide walks you step-by-step through the essentials of effective report writing in Urbanism. It explains the structure and logic behind high-quality reports, shows how to clearly integrate theoretical and conceptual frameworks, and demonstrates how to effectively combine visuals, spatial analysis, and text to produce comprehensive, analytical, and convincing documents.

Through clear guidelines and valuable insights drawn from real student reports, authors Roberto Rocco and Juliana Gonçalves (Department of Urbanism, TU Delft) equip you with tools to develop robust methodological approaches, address ethical and spatial justice considerations explicitly, and reflect critically on your research and design processes.

Whether you’re writing your first report or refining your professional practice, this guide will enhance your ability to communicate effectively, analytically, and ethically in Urbanism.

Group of Spatial Planning and Strategy

Delft University of Technology

ISBN/EAN: 978 94 6518 051 9 DOI: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15286400