Page 1

X-Section Journal Team 2015 Editor: Assistants: Design & Production:

Pete Griffiths, Programme Leader and Senior Lecturer, Bachelor of Landscape Architecture

Peer-Review Panel:

Dr. Diane Menzies - Landcult Ltd. Dr. Hamish Foote - Unitec Sibyl Bloomfield - Bloomfield & Bark Garth Falconer - Reset Urban Design Matthew Bradbury - Unitec Will Thresher - Thresher Associates Meg Back - Jasmax Heather Wilkins - Boffa Miskell

Russell Cooper & Claire Liesching, 4th Year BLA Students James Currey, Sofia Fourman, Sam Hendrikse & Gabrielle Howdle

X-Section Journal is published annually by the Department of Landscape Architecture, Unitec Institute of Technology. Advertising statements and editorial opinions expressed in X-Section Journal do not necessarily reflect the views of the Department of Landscape Architecture and its staff, unless expressly stated. Copyright to all work included is retained by the authors. Copying or transmission of any part of this publication or the related files in any form, by any means (electronic, photocopying, recording, or otherwise) is restricted to educational use only, with appropriate referencing. No part of this document may be used without the prior written permission of the publisher. Š Copyright 2015 X-Section Journal Publisher: Unitec Institute of Technology, Faculty of Creative Industry and Business, Department of Landscape Architecture, Carrington Road, Mt Albert, Auckland. ISSN 2230-6277 print edition ISSN 2230-6285 online edition Page Credits: Cover Image, Back Page Background Image, Internal Page: Š MOFFATT & NICHOL | WEST 8 | LSU-CSS, see page 24 NZILA: Waitakere Transfer Station Waste Minimisation Learning Centre, The Concourse, Henderson Section Cover Images: Exploration: Jasmax International: Jane Irwin Landscape Architecture Student: LandLAB_ Local Industry: Hanging Gardens Peer-Review: Boffa Miskell










Emergent Urbanism

The Re-Emergence of the Commons

Progression of Human Centred Design

Emergent Realities - Future Practice: A Manifesto

Park[ing] Day






The Giving Delta

Emerging Challenges for Public Space Design

Urban Disturbance Ecology













First Year

Second Year

Third Year

Fourth Year








The Emergence of Vertical Gardens

The Emergence of Possibilities: Garden of Knowledge

A Nga Tamatoa Perspective on Emergence

Therapeutic, Sensory and Healing Gardens

Inhabiting the Shifting Edge

Christchurch’s Emerging Public Realm










Cultural A New Peri-Urban What is Bottom-Up Emergence: Living Agricultural System Design? in Aotearoa for Auckland





The Emergence of a Green Network for a Future Regional Auckland









dition five of X-Section Journal investigates themes that explore the concept of emergence and how this might influence the way landscape architects design for the future. Emergence: Designing for the Future explores issues such as global warming, rapidly expanding populations, as well as landscape design philosophies and theories. What challenges and opportunities do these ideas and arising trends present for landscape architects as the future is reshaped through the design of landscapes? Emergence encompasses the changes, progression and evolution within the landscape. Essentially, emergent behaviour is happening all the time and these unexpected and often unpredictable events allow for adaption, changes of direction, and changes in scope and scale. This journal looks to breach the uncertainty through design thinking; planning, resilientdesign, foundation-design, all catering for the unpredictable. Authors of the content featured in this edition of X-Section Journal have worked with emergence in order to attempt to create resilient and dynamic design solutions for current and future landscape issues. While looking at historical and present influences on site, those featured also look ahead to the future to ensure the longevity of their designs. This journal is a collection of work, illustrating the discovery, exploration and acknowledgement of emergence. X-Section journal showcases emerging designs from students, New Zealand practitioners and international landscape firms. The work ranges from live and current projects, to innovative student design. The journal is a vehicle with which the meaning of Emergence in landscape architecture can be explored.



EMERGENT URBANISM Sofia Fourman 3RD YEAR BLA Refer to page 114 for footnotes



mergence is the continuous interaction of systems that respond to contextual feedback, resulting in incremental change over time. This contextual web is interwoven with relationships and these encounters are amplified with every change within the system. They are catalysts for the unfolding or progression of a landscape or system over time, resulting in its evolution. Chance or chaotic events further contribute to the complexity of the contextual network by creating, intensifying and reinforcing relationships. From these encounters through differentiation, self-organisation and simplification, order arises creating geometry within the system with novel outcomes. Emergent systems therefore have the capacity for adaptation, and thus are resilient. Emergent landscapes provide opportunities and challenges for landscape architects who intervene in the system through design; a design is an attempt of managing, arranging and predicting these complex systems. The emergence phenomena therefore can be used as a construct to inform the practice of landscape architecture. GENERATED VS FABRICATED There is a need to employ a generative process to create spaces and structures within the landscape.1 A generative process is one that is evident in all levels of life from the creation of an embryo to the establishment of a city. It describes how something is made. A generative process is emergent, it arises over time in adaptive response to contextual cues. To achieve the complexity required for the emergence of an apparent form such as a landscape, latent structures unfold through time and differentiation. “Each differentiation adds relationships and brings more interdependence among the centres” 2 that are then revealed through a geometric form of the whole. Simultaneously, a simplification process sheds non-functionalities leaving only the necessary simple geometry in place which contribute to the perceivable form. Unpredictability also referred to as chaos, gives the impetus for further change and evolution by changing conditions in which the structure is situated. Fabricated systems are arranged and designed, although they may imitate generated systems. Every element of a design represents a decision based on some predetermined requirements, rules or aesthetic reasons. Therefore a design will only address a limited amount of issues, achieve a limited number of goals and sift through only a few variations before focusing on one. Every design decision has the potential to be poorly adapted therefore one bad decision can have exponential unfavourable consequences. A fabricated design cannot avoid mistakes which may occur at any level or scale in any number, nor will these be evident until the design fails. These can be in spatial arrangement, size, orientation and relationships from a drawn line of a concept plan to the built


structure within a landscape. In comparison generated plans which evolve over time to fill specific requirements therefore are mistakefree as the structure undergoes continual modification in response to a changing context. ADAPTIVE OR DESIGNER ECOLOGY Comparison of ecological design with designer ecology in parks explores their capacity for long-term sustainability through resilience3. Designer ecologies are altered or human-designed environments; they represent nature for educational, cultural, aesthetic or other needs. They are not operational ecologies even though they fulfil some economic, ecological and cultural needs, because they do not “program, facilitate, or ultimately permit the emergence and evolution of self-organising, resilient ecological systems”.4 Small parks that exhibit designer ecologies cannot be self-sustaining and therefore resilient unless they are connected to a wider green network of similar ecologies. In contrast adaptive ecological design is the capacity for large landscapes to be resilient through self-organisation in response to change or disturbance. “The ability to self-organize is the strongest form of system resilience; a system that can evolve can survive almost any change, by changing itself ”.5 Adaptive ecological design recognises the open, unpredictable, self-organising nature of living systems. As a sustainable approach to design, it is the integration of human culture and nature’s processes; the creation of a “hybridized natural-cultural ecology” 6. Ecological design aims to take cues from nature, mimic its processes, forms and functions while simultaneously integrating a creative cultural response. Application of adaptive ecological design is affected by the issue that science of ecology is divided to reductionist and holistic perspectives. Modern ecological science is largely reductionist hence decision makers have the expectation that nature can be measured and controlled; therefore managed and partially predicted. However ecosystems are open, self-organising and dynamic; and are full of diversity, complexity and uncertainty. They continuously emerge through different states and bifurcations. Ecosystems are comprised of numerous operating states each subject to their own unique contextual pressures and may diverge through different states independently from one another.

EMERGENCE AND TACTICAL URBANISM Emergent urbanism is a bottom-up, tactical approach that acknowledges the phenomena of emergence. Tactical approaches are low cost, temporary, quick to implement and easily adjustable interventions and experimentations based on community and environmental feedback. Commonly landscape architecture practice focuses on the end product of a design then resolves the details. This is an issue as the design is therefore not emergent but fixed. A tactical approach imitates the generative process from conception of the need for change. Flexibility, repetition and experimentation can be employed through a bottom-up planted intervention to observe the result of small changes introduced to a site. This is a way of trialling different experiences, responding to local needs or challenges at a site. The outcomes can therefore dictate the direction of the design. For example pop up parks, street greening and open street initiatives can be tested before these places are made to be permanent. Particularly where governments are concerned with generating revenue from landscape projects, ecological proposals need to exhibit benefits to be implemented. If successful these experiments may gain financial support from the government or other interested parties. The landscape that develops in response to feedback attained through experimentation therefore has emergent qualities and will be better adapted to the site than one that is built from a plan. We cannot predict how an ecosystem will evolve or change thus any landscape intervention needs to be flexible, adaptable and able to accommodate disturbance. The current design practice aims to predict the consequence of a design based on the analysis of the components of the context. Through tactical urbanism we can embrace the challenges and opportunities that arise from temporary and continuously changing states. Interdisciplinary input, different approaches and exploration of anticipated outcomes depending on local context can be investigated and analysed to formulate a site goal before a design is even conceived. Emergent urbanism allows generative processes and thus emergence to dominate the urban environment. Emergent urbanists are the interpreters and facilitators of change in an urban context. Through tactical generative processes they can guide human values to appreciate the advantages of allowing adaptation to determine the design of a landscape. They have the capability to shift paradigms to integrate humans and nature as part of a whole system and to facilitate adaptable ecological design. Emergent urbanism encourages diversity, variability and experimentation. It permits losing control over complex systems to let emergence take over; it is about “strategically letting go�. 7

THE RE-EMERGENCE OF THE COMMONS Sam Hendrikse 3RD YEAR BLA Refer to page 114 for references


ften we look to the past to provide solutions for present-day problems. At a time when habitable and productive space is rapidly decreasing in supply, sharing of resources and development of local cooperatives is becoming more important than ever. To appreciate the potential that the commons hold, one must first understand the function of the commons. THE FUNCTION OF THE COMMONS In contrast to the capitalist model adopted by the wider global community of the developed world, the idea of the commons relies on like-minded individuals working towards a common goal. Where capitalism motivates individuals with personal monetary wealth, the commons unites local communities to produce outcomes beneficial to all those involved. This bottomup method of unifying local people into a focused and productive cooperative requires both faith in the outcome of the operation and the understanding of the effort required by the individual to achieve it. A self-organising collective driven by site specific, locally shared ideas challenges the capitalist model by eliminating the monetary element and shifting the motivation from a desire for private wealth to community gain. In countries where capitalism has failed, a move from often-troubled monetary systems to local production of vital resources is of immense benefit to poorer communities. MANAGING THE COMMONS The model for a successful commons describes the optimal size for a common and the way in which these systems are nested in a bottom-up fashion. In his book Lean Logic, Flemming1 outlines a set of 18 rules for proper management of the commons. In particular, rule 4. Manageable Scale states that the maximum number of people contributing to the commons should be limited to 150, in order for all members to learn each others names and develop a greater level of trust in fellow commoners and the

collective aim. Rule 4 also sets a limit to the physical area of a common to a size where commoners can easily monitor local detail and the condition of the commons to improve the management of resources. To overcome the area constraints set by Flemming it is suggested that these systems are nested within larger systems as needed; and are managed on a wider scale by elected leaders of the commons with the shared purpose of the commons in mind. Unlike traditional forms of governance, the commons only progress to larger scale management as needed; retaining the benefits of locally managed resources and site-specific information while allowing the management of region-wide resources by higher authorities. APPLICATION OF THE COMMONS The commons encompasses the morally sound idealisms required to produce social capital for everyone involved with a realistic, shared goal for the commoners to work towards; the enterprise will prosper. When local communities band together with a common interest, revitalisation of a nearby park for example, individual participation increases with the knowledge that fellow commoners are also contributing to the collective cause. Flemming aptly captures this attitude with a short phrase “I can make a difference; we can make it work�. This behaviour is particularly important on a local scale where attention from respective government is often divided between projects seen as more important than the small scale matters of the people. This presents the perfect opportunity for a tactical urbanism intervention whereby local groups reclaim a once common resource through a collective aim and manage it as they see fit. A local park for example could be revitalised and restored through voluntary community work with the common goal of creating an enjoyable open space. It is at this point where conflicts potentially arise with local government, who typically own and manage public open spaces, as commoners circumvent the strict regulations that prevented action in the first place. Governing bodies have to decide between upholding the law or

turning somewhat of a blind-eye to these actions to test whether these projects are successful or not. Following a successful outcome some authorities choose to sanction these activities with supporting infrastructure and approval. The commons provides a platform upon which social governance thrives. While we live in a society where decisions come from a supposedly democratic government at the top, a bottom up approach to managing our public open spaces can provide the general population with what it really wants. A truly common space facilitates social interaction, strengthens community morale and ensures the durability of the common resource it holds. The commons hold the potential to transform the way urban space is used and challenge the capitalist model of the free market through the self-organisation of the common people. No longer bound by conventional currency, monetary wealth and material desire, those who engage with their local commons stand to gain social fulfilment, ethical integrity and independence from the strains of capitalist culture.


Personal participation

Social capital gain

Manageable scale

Ethical idealism

Commonly held goal

Site specific approach


PROGRESSION OF HUMAN CENTRED DESIGN Gabrielle Howdle 3RD YEAR BLA Refer to page 114 for footnotes



uman centred design is an emerging theory observed through tactical urbanism projects that is rewriting the way designers explore, design and implement innovation in the public realm. Human centred design is an inherent part of tactical urbanism, and the way landscape architects design, “it is a philosophy, not a precise set of methods, but one that assumes that innovation should start by getting close to users and observing their activities”.1 Tactical urbanism is a method that strives to improve local streets, neighbourhoods or the city for the local people by “capitalising on local ingenuity”. 2 Complementing the principle views of human centred design raised in, Adaptive Muddling3 and Change by Design4, which focus on citizen participation and distributed leadership to obtain opportunity, inspiration and ideas. Tactical urbanism at its core is defined by small-scale, low-cost, short-term interventions meant to inspire long-term change in the public realm, often referred to as Lighter, Quicker, Cheaper 5 . Tactical urbanism projects start as grassroot actions usually inspired by community collaborations; most projects are intended to be temporary in nature and if successful then implemented, in small steps, at a local scale. Human centred design is an innovative bottom-up approach to solution solving; “a process that starts with the people you’re designing for and ends with new solutions that are tailor made to suit their needs”.6 EMERGENCE OF ADAPTIVE MUDDLING Adaptive Muddling, a concept described by Raymond De Young and Stephen Kaplan emphasises small experiments, not small steps. Adaptive muddling considers three main changes from muddling, exploration, stability and distributed leadership. While muddling conceives the fumbling changes made by designers, scientists, researchers and individuals as experiments, in general none realize that what they are doing is human nature; muddling. Adaptive muddling builds upon people’s inherent tendency to muddle or “trial and error process”7, allowing one to become conscious of experimenting, recognising the human quality of muddling through; to explore, test and improve. Adaptive Muddling describes the symbiotic relationship between exploration and stability, where “explorations are pursued at small-scale, whilst

stability is provided at large scale”.8 The focus on multiple simultaneous small-scale experiments allows for analysis, design and implementation to occur and has an advantage over the top-down or large-step approach. Adaptive muddling allows experiments, which are relatively low risk and tolerant to failure, with other ideas already set in motion to fall back on. This approach is supported by the third facet, distributed leadership, which allows those who have the skills to lead the process of design, the vision and the explored themes, whether it be a landscape architect, an ecologist or an individual with an interest in their street; making leadership central to adaptive muddling. However the success of this approach is dependent on the diversity of the people involved; skills, abilities and interests, “the effectiveness… depends upon its broad base of contribution and the diversity of its contributors”.9 The development of human centred design corresponds to the development of the commons and emergent design, each folding their principles into one another to form a new collection of design theories. Therefore landscape architects and designers alike must come to recognise the emergence of muddling, and that adaptive muddling allows us to take risks and come up with innovative designs based upon human needs. DEVELOPING THE SEQUENCE OF CHANGE BY DESIGN “We spend a lot of time designing the bridge, but not enough time thinking about the people who are crossing it”.10 Design thinking is about the process of design as much as the solution itself. “The design thinking process is best thought of as a system of overlapping spaces rather than a sequence of orderly steps”11, one isn’t given a bench to design for a square; instead one explores opportunities, which may or may not lead to the design of a bench. Tactical urbanism projects tend to address deficiencies in built environments, but a project cannot be successful until one understands whom one is working for and the problem they have. Design thinking has three core stages, each imbedded with cyclical processes; inspiration, ideation and implementation. Inspiration in terms of human centred design is fundamental to its structure, to tactical urbanism and landscape architects it gives the opportunity to design and explore various possibilities with a clear comprehension and understanding of the site through user observation and empathy, whether it be building, block, street or suburb. Ideation is the process of generating, developing, trialling and getting feedback on ideas, allowing one to improve



and repeat the process as required, until the design is ready to be implemented. Throughout the process, designers shift intermittently through divergent and convergent thinking to analysis and synthesis, allowing one to sort through ideas, and concepts that do not fit, that are not viable, feasible or desirable.12 Tactical urbanism employs design thinking and its system of overlapping spaces to propose quick, smallscale, low-cost projects, to inspire long-term change through incremental phases. Human centred design allows tactical urbanism projects to produce different solutions emerging through communication and empathy of personal experience, allowing a wheelchair to comfortably pass through a square, or an elderly man to cross a road. The emergence of human centred design as a theory is relatively new, however the act of human centred design has unconsciously bled itself into good landscape architectural design. LIMITATIONS Human centred design is a process that starts with people’s vision and ends with a solution that suits their needs. This differs from, yet compliments, tactical urbanism that starts with a project for a people, community, or city and ends with a solution that tailors both the needs of the people, the resources available and the environment. Human centred design is a good stepping stone for many tactical urbanism projects and as a process of design within the landscape architecture field; however landscape architect’s deal within social, environmental, economical and even political realms, where human centred design falters. Human centred design has its limitations when it comes to landscape architecture, for example environmental challenges. Landscape architects often work with rich ecological sites, where views and concerns often do not appear in an individual’s agenda; these sites are often beyond self-interest. Therefore using human centred design principles and processes in producing new streetscapes, public spaces, and other local interventions is only half of the process. Other techniques are perhaps required in conjunction with human centred design, in order to tackle environmentally conscious design. The emergent move toward human centred design reflects an increasing understanding of the negative impact of designing all spaces from a city plan, or for a ‘typical’ site. Human centred design considers the people’s needs, wants and visions for a specific project; whilst including them in the various processes and iterations of the design, blurring the line between designer and user. Tactical urbanism is the emergent ‘hands on’ approach of landscape architecture in the public realm; where small-scale projects benefit from the processes of human centred design, design thinking, human nature, empathy and understanding.



EMERGENT REALITIES - FUTURE PRACTICE: A MANIFESTO Gary Marshall RESILIO STUDIO Images by Sam Hendrikse Refer to page 114 for references



e appear to be at or near the peak of the industrial expansion that has characterized the past 200 years. As we transition into a post growth world, a new reality is emerging and a new paradigm is being born. This emerging reality will be fundamentally different from anything we have experienced in our lifetimes; it will affect everything we do and it will set the context for the future of landscape architecture. This essay is in two parts; in the first part I will briefly explore four fundamental drivers, Peak Planet, Peak Oil, Peak Debt and Peak Complexity, which will individually and collectively underpin the inevitable transition into a post growth economy. In the second part I will discuss five emergent themes that suggest how the future practice of landscape architecture can refocus and adapt to this emerging reality. PART ONE – EMERGING REALITIES “The next twenty years are going to be completely unlike the last twenty years” - Chris Matheson PEAK PLANET


Our global civilization is in ecological overshoot. According to the latest ‘Living Planet Report’1 we have been in ecological overshoot since approximately 1970. We are now collectively consuming more resources than the planet can regenerate and disposing of more waste than it can safely re-assimilate at a rate that amounts to 1.5 planets in order to support our current population and consumptive lifestyles. While we once lived in an empty planet with many more resources available to exploit after exhausting them in one place, we have used all of these places up and we now live in what ecological economist Herman Daly has described as a full planet2. We are reaching limits on a number of fronts; in terms of regenerative capacity we are at or close to the limits of available arable land, fresh water, wild harvest from the sea and in a number of critical minerals3 including phosphorus4 (critical to our industrial food system), indium5 (used for touch screens and solar panels) and, most importantly, oil. In terms of waste assimilation, the planet is unable to absorb many of the waste products (environmental externalities.)6 generated by our industrial activities. The most widely known and pressing externality is our greenhouse gas emissions, which include carbon dioxide, methane and nitrous oxide.7 The consequences, which include destabilized climate sea level rise and acidification of oceans8 could render the planet unsuitable for any form of complex society.9 In our pursuit of these diminishing resources we have displaced and destroyed the habitat for much of the planet’s biodiversity and we are now well into the planet’s sixth

great extinction.10 Ecological overshoot cannot be sustained and a correction that rebalances human activity with that of the earths carrying capacity will play an increasingly import role in our day-to-day life. PEAK OIL Global oil extracted using conventional11 methods peaked in 2006.12 Peak oil does not refer to the moment in which we completely deplete oil supplies – rather, it refers to the moment in which the rate of oil extraction begins declining and the cost to extract rises with respect to money and energy. Peak oil typically occurs after approximately half of the oil in a well has been extracted. In practice, we extract the more readily accessible oil first and leave more inaccessible oil for later. Whereas we could continue to increase the rate of extraction during the first half of the oil well’s lifecycle, during the second half, the ability to increase the rate of extraction is decreased and we enter a period of energy decent. The process of energy descent will compound and will continue year on year for many generations to come. What matters most is not the total quantity of energy extracted but the energy profit ratio or net energy of our energy sources. It takes energy to extract energy and net energy is the measure of how much energy is available to society once the energy taken to extract and refine the energy is accounted for – this is typically described in terms of energy returned on energy invested or EROEI. Fossil fuels have very high EROEI: early oil fields = 100:1; coal = 40:1; and natural gas = 20:1. Unconventional oil and most forms of ‘renewable’13 energy have a much lower energy profit ratio, and/ or they are in limited supply: unconventional oil such as tar sands, shale oil, coal and gas conversion = 5:1; hydroelectric = 30:1; wind 20:1; geothermal = 10:1; and photovoltaic = 4:1. The issue is that we have built most of what we use today using the high energy profit ratios of fossil fuels - an irreplaceable one time energy bonanza that can never be fully replaced using unconventional and renewable energy sources. Because every human endeavor has a minimum energy profit ratio in order to function our ability to support and maintain a number of goods and services we take for granted will be increasingly difficult to maintain.14 For example, moving freight with a truck needs an EROEI of 7:1, education 9:1; modern health care 12:1; cultural expressions such as art 14:1 etc.15 As Nicole Foss reminds us, the paradox facing energy transition strategies relying on unconventional fossil fuels and/or renewable energy supplies is that the EROEI of these energy sources are too low to sustain a society complex enough to produce them.16

PEAK DEBT “Food, shelter, clothing, fuels, minerals, forests, fishers, land, buildings, art, music, and information are real wealth. Money by itself is not. Money is circulated among people who use it to buy real wealth” – Odum and Odum A debt is an obligation or promise to pay for something with income not yet earned. Today, this typically involves payment of the original sum plus interest. When we go into debt we assume that the money needed to pay the debt can and will be earned at some point in the future. This is achievable so long as our income remains equal to or higher than our repayment obligations and/ or there remain enough resources available to exploit in order to continue to generate income into the future. The problem is that for the last 30 years we have grown our debt faster than we have grown our income17 and we live on a ‘full planet’ with few resources to exploit. It is no coincidence that the expansion of global credit coincided with the time that we entered ecological overshoot. Once we no longer had the ability to grow the real wealth of the economy through the easy exploitation of resources we went into debt to ‘grow’ the economy. While we expanded the amount of money in the economy by issuing debt, we did not manage the corresponding growth in the underlying real wealth of the economy. We are now in a situation of undercollateralization where the volume of outstanding debt is greater than the underlying real wealth of the planet.18 Said another way, if it were possible to extract, process and sell all of the resources on the planet today, it would still not generate enough income to pay our outstanding debt. As this debt can never be paid off, it needs to be ‘written off ’ or forgiven. This will substantially reduce the amount and speed of money circulating through the economy – causing a sharp contraction in supply of credit19 and money and a shift from an inflationary economy into deflationary spiral.20 Because modern capitalist economies only work in the space of expansion, the contraction of our economies will require a ‘reboot’ of our existing, growth based economy and the creation of new and alternative means of economic organization. PEAK COMPLEXITY As societies grow and develop they tend to increase in complexity. 21 There is a direct relationship between the amount of energy flowing through the system and its complexity.22 There is also a connection between cultural evolution, which tends to increase as the amount of energy harnessed per capita is increased, or as the efficiency of the instrumental means of putting the energy to work is increased.23 While increases in societal complexity pay dividends in the early stages of development, increasing complexity requires corresponding increases in investment back into the system to maintain the new, more complex state. Beyond a certain point, increased investments in complexity no longer generate the same benefits they did earlier and we enter into a phase of what anthropologist Joseph Tainter terms diminishing marginal returns on investment.24 For example, the intensification of conventional farming requires increasing investment in supporting infrastructure such as farm races, fencing and milking equipment as well as increases in key inputs such as water, fertilizers and antibiotics. This, in turn, requires increasing

investment in indirect expenses such as fencing off streams, repair of roadways, investment in research to reduce methane gas emissions and more efficient irrigation systems, building corporate head quarters etc. Before too long, increasing complexity in one sector of the economy starts to impact other sectors - in this example, intensification of farming practices has resulted in substantial and dramatic loss of water quality in our streams which is resulting in increased investment in the maintenance of New Zealand’s clean green, ‘100% Pure’ brand which is critical to our tourism sector. Tainter’s thoroughly researched and very persuasive arguments suggest that diminishing marginal returns is an unavoidable reality of complex societies, and the more one is aware of this tendency, the more one tends to recognize the effects of diminishing marginal returns in all layers of society. SUMMARY The dominant cultural narrative is that we will overcome, avoid and/or solve at least one if not all of the four problems outlined above. This will be achieved through ongoing technological progress, collective action and/or sheer human genius. As a result we will continue life in much the same way we do today, only more technologically and socially advanced. The consequence that needs to be accepted is that the four issues outlined above are effectively unsolvable to any degree that will enable us to maintain our current economy and lifestyles. They are unsolvable because they are either non negotiable and/or they are wicked.25 The four interrelated themes of Peak Planet, Peak Oil, Peak Debt and Peak Complexity underpin the emerging reality and the inevitable transition into an age of limits26 and a post growth economy. This new reality will set the context for the future practice of landscape architecture. In the words of David Fleming27, the transition to the post growth economy “will not be an achievement: it will be an unavoidable inheritance. The response is to make a virtue of necessity: small-scale elegance will bring a greatly reduced need for the intermediate goods and services that sustain the infrastructure of life and citizenship. There will be reduction to virtual elimination, in (for instance) travel and transportation, packaging and handling, the structures of bureaucracy and regulation. This reduction is the point of entry back into the real world of resilience and consistency with the ecology on which life and all its forms completely relies”.28 LOCALISATION While trying to predict the future in detail can be a rather futile activity, developing a broad understanding of the pattern of probable future scenarios utilizing our best scientific knowledge29, applying the lessons of history30 and observing how other contemporary states and communities are realizing and responding to their own limits31 are necessary places to start. On consideration of these sources, the emerging future that seems most likely is not the immediate collapse into a post-apocalyptic wasteland often portrayed, but a more prolonged contraction and reorganization of our economy characterized by sharp changes in circumstance followed by periods of relative stability, where energy descent and ongoing economic contraction becomes an accepted part of life. This process has all ready begun, and will continue to unfold over multiple generations. ‘Localisation’ is the most concise descriptor for this transition. Here it is useful



to consider David’s Fleming localization spectrum which range between light local where most, if not all routine needs, in particular food and water are procured locally but the equipment needed to produce these goods are imported through to deep local where the ability to purchase goods and services from outside a bioregional economy is not possible and supplies of tools and materials and even metals are not available to import including telecommunications devices and the maintenance and upkeep of the infrastructure to maintain the ‘world-wide-web’32. The primary enabling process of localization is import substitution – a process of systematically substituting those goods and services that are currently provided through large, centralized structures and/or imported into a city or region with ones that are produced locally. For landscape architecture this means engaging in the design, implementation and management of productive landscapes at local and regional scale to produce food, fibre, fuel, construction materials and medicine; and the creation of decentralized and distributed green infrastructure such as grey water wetlands and composting toilets. Import substitution works on many levels, the most important of which is through its ability to build resilience within the natural carrying capacity of the region. This is achieved through the diversifying effect of systematically replacing imports with locally produced alternatives and the inbuilt logic of the approach that means development can only occur within the rates of natural replenishment of the local economy. In the words of Robert Thayer - “By replacing imports, cities and their surrounding regions may, enlarge markets for local and nearby rural goods, increase the numbers and kinds of local jobs, increase transplants of city work into the local region, create new uses for the technology of rural production, and grow city capital”.33

PART TWO – FUTURE PRACTICE “An unpredictable future belongs to the best adapted” – Peter Del Tredici The problems explored in the previous section frame an emerging reality that will be very different from today. As designers, we need to accept and come to terms with the enormity of these problems and consider how we might respond and engage with them. This will require landscape architects to accept the fact that many of the projects that they typically engage in, which include large-scale infrastructure projects such as motorways, green field development, retail streets, and high-end parks, are extractive and wasteful and despite the fact that many of these projects integrate ‘green infrastructure’ interventions. At best, these projects passively support, but ultimately perpetuate the unsustainable practices of the growth economy. In this section, five emerging themes, which have been gleaned from the world of design and related fields will be discussed. The five themes suggest how we can reframe and adapt the future practice of landscape architecture to better address our emerging reality. REGENERATIVE DESIGN “The term ‘regenerative’ describes processes that restore, renew or revitalize their own sources of energy and materials, creating sustainable systems that integrate the needs of society with the integrity of nature”. 34 Landscape architecture has a history in regenerative design35 and is perhaps the most obvious place for landscape architects to start. In the context of Peak Planet, we must not only stop the process of decay that will inevitably overcome our vital support systems and key infrastructure36 we must actively rehabilitate the historic damage we have inflected on the planet by building real wealth37 – natural, cultural, social, human, built, commercial and financial – in that order. In the words of William McDonough and Michael Braungart - “doing less bad is no longer good enough, we must do good”.38 In theory this means increasing the ecological carrying capacity of the environment and enhancing ecosystem function, by for example, growing biomass and species diversity, ensuring that water leaves the site at least as clean as it was when it entered the site, establishing habitat for wildlife, growing food and soil and re-mediating any contaminants that might be present on the site. While not technically regenerative design39, this strategy also seeks to reduce the energy intensity of development by matching the ongoing energy requirements of the development with the renewable energy budget of the site40, remove all waste streams to landfill and by reestablishing walking, cycling and sailing as primary means of travel. Managed succession is the most direct and effective means landscape architects have for leveraging nature’s regenerative capacity. Through design or management, allowing the spontaneous generation of indigenous and naturalized species41 to establish, new and novel ecosystems42 emerge that will provide the genetic material for the ecosystems of the future. By allowing plants to establish where they germinate, all of the energy and resources necessary to establish a plant through current industrial

methods are eliminated, which typically include the use of fossil fuels - roads, transport, pesticides, machinery, packaging etc. This is not simply a matter of letting nature takes its course, as ‘conscious and active’ participants in the ecology of place, humans co-evolve with novel ecosystems with beneficial effects in moderating and repairing the environmental impact of human activity while creating the opportunity to provide new resources as plants and animals naturalise.43 NEW ECONOMICS “When the design of an economic system militates against the ecology, we need to redesign the system”.44 Economics typically sits outside the realm of landscape architecture and even design for that matter. However given that the financial and commercial markets are likely to emerge as the first and most pressing issue in the post growth economy we will not be able to avoid responding to this reality and we will need to either adapt or disappear. As the economy contracts from global to local, a number of themes will become more prominent. Our values will shift from the excess of wants to the sufficiency of needs and as the availability of energy contracts, the economic rationale to use a machine when a person can do the same work will dissipate, and the economy will become more labour intensive.45 Livelihood improvements will shift from growing our asset base and increasing leisure time, to placing greater value on frugality and thriftiness while seeking incremental improvements in what English philosopher Stuart Mill would call ‘the art of living’. A proactive response to this emerging economic reality is to recognize that many of the problems we face stem from our economic system and rather than simply waiting to see what happens, landscape architects can take up the challenge by directly engaging with and actively designing and experimenting with new economic and social innovations. These new practices will change the way we generate income and will provide different pathways to funding and maintaining landscape projects. Innovations in this space will include a dynamic mix of both new and old ways of doing things. Old systems that are likely to be useful again in the future will include small scale design and build companies, job sharing and flexible working hours, trade, barter, share and gift based on the principles of reciprocity or mutual exchange. New innovations could include complementary currencies, local savings pools, worker owned cooperatives, micro finance, companies specializing in salvaging industrial materials and in hyper local, neighborhood scale propagation of productive plants for food, fiber, fuel, construction and medicine. These economic innovations are not small reformations of the existing economic order, they are parallel structures – tactical interventions and economic tools that sit adjacent to the existing order that will either supersede existing economic models (making them redundant in the process), or they will be ready to supplant the existing order when it no longer proves useful.



DESIGN TACTICS Non-negotiable and wicked problems such as Peak Planet, Peak Oil, Peak Debt and Peak Complexity are complex problems. They have no ‘solutions’ that will allow us to maintain the status quo, only responses. Here, it is useful to make a distinction between ‘complicated’ and ‘complex’ systems.46 A complicated system, such as an aeroplane, has constant variables like gravity and the energy density of fuel, which allow for predictable relationships between cause and effect to be determined. In this context it is possible to develop strategies for desired outcomes through analysis of available information and design responses accordingly. Complex systems such as a flock of birds on the other hand have emergent properties, which mean that they are unpredictable and the relationship between cause and effect can only be perceived in retrospect or not at all. As such, a complex system can never be fully understood. The best tactic in this context is to learn about the system by acting into the system through prototyping, experimentation and action research. This process can be simplified into three steps: intervene in system; receive feedback to learn about what did and did not work; and respond and update the approach by amplifying successes and dampening failures. The more promising initiative within this field for landscape architects is tactical urbanism.47 In its purest form, tactical urbanism involves a number of prototypes or temporary ‘design experiments’ replicating, in a low-cost, low commitment way, the future change an urban space or landscape could take. The aim is that these experiments are measured for effectiveness; and those that work are either left in place, or implemented in a more permanent manner. Rather than assuming that the best solution for a site can be determined through audit, analysis, design, and modelling; tactical urbanism gathers feedback based on direct experience of the site, thus ensuring solutions are developed through real world trial and error. SMALL, SLOW AND SIMPLE “It is rather more difficult to recapture directness and simplicity than to advance in the direction of ever more sophistication and complexity. Any third-rate engineer or researcher can increase complexity; but it takes a certain flair of real insight to make things simple again.” - Ernst F. Schumacher An underlying assumption of today’s dominant narrative is that we as we continue to grow the economy we will ‘develop’ a solution to just about any problem – whether its improving our transport network; making housing and food more affordable; improving the vitality of our town centres or properly funding environmental programmes - we have relied upon and assumed an ever-increasing availability of energy, resources and money. To paraphrase Samuel Alexander – no matter how rich a society gets, the underlying issue is always assumed to be a lack of money.48 In fact, because we now live on a ‘full planet’ the majority of solutions today, which rely on on-going availability of energy, resources and money at their current levels, are not going to be available to us in the future. Our emerging reality demands solutions that are smaller, slower and simple.

Solutions will be small scale; they will be simple to apply and maintain; they will be labour and knowledge intensive rather than energy, resource and capital intensive and they will use local materials and support local markets.49 Small, slow and simple recognizes that the efficacy of systemic change is best leveraged from the ‘bottom up’.50 Rather than increasing influence by making something bigger or more complex; small, slow and simple solutions are easily replicable and scaled up in the same way that cells in the evolutionary process of life scales up - through replication, bifurcation and diversification. Social Innovation guru Ezio Manzini frames a contemporary manifestation of this thinking as Small, Local, Open and Connected or SLOC. As the name suggests, small and local is coupled with open and connected to ensure “The local can break its isolation by being open to the global flow of people, ideas and information... when they are open and connected, can therefore become a design guideline for creating resilient systems and sustainable qualities, and a positive feedback loop between these systems”. 51 While Peak Planet will ultimately set limits to the degree of ‘connectivity’ we can maintain long term, the sharing of small-scale solutions between disciplines and cultures will help to ensure that our existing knowledge capital is leveraged, and we learn from our collective experiences as we muddle our way through the transition into the post growth economy. POST GROWTH AESTHETICS52 Art, architecture, landscapes, music, fashion, literature and dance all express the values of the culture in which they emerge. The aesthetics of many of today’s artifacts and spaces are increasingly generic, mass-produced, slick and sterile, reflecting the unquestioning assumptions and values of conspicuous consumption and a growing economy. Status is typically earned through ones ability to embody newness, novelty, and technological progress. The aesthetics of the post growth economy will be very distinct from todays. This is not to say that people will not be concerned with aesthetics or will not seek symbols of status - more that the values our aesthetics express will change on a range of levels: from passive consumer to active citizen; from global brands and individualism to local production and collectivism; from the generic sameness of the machine to the nuanced individuality of the hand made; from excess to frugality; from disposable to durable; and from the new and novel, to the repaired, salvaged, recovered and repurposed. For landscape architecture, aesthetic strategies will also include the messiness and rambunctious qualities of novel ecosystems that are influenced, rather than created through management or “design by removal of the unwanted rather than the addition of the wanted”. 53

CONCLUSION This essay argues that we are in the process of transitioning into a post growth economy that is fundamentally different from anything we have experienced in our lifetimes. Because we are designers and creative problem solvers, and the primary medium of landscape architecture includes the regenerative capacity of the natural environment as well as the people and communities - who live, work, play and learn in these places - landscape architects are uniquely positioned to assist with our collective response. This will, however, require a conscious decision by landscape architects to refocus and adapt their current practice to directly address the problems of peak planet, peak oil, peak debt, and peak complexity. A range of themes and opportunities have been explored, and while varied in scope and scale, collectively they suggest a future practice that is directly engaged in the processes of localization through tactical design interventions that are small, slow and simple. Engaging directly in the novel ecosystems of the future and utilizing a wide range of salvaged materials, landscapes will look and feel different from those of today. They will also need to engage in new economic models and systems, which will mean they will be distinct in the way they are funded, created and managed. In this essay, a range of emerging themes have been discussed and it is important to note that the ideas expressed represent only a small selection of the possible directions for the future practice of landscape architecture. ABOUT THE AUTHOR: Gary Marshall is cofounder and executive of Resilio Studio - a multi disciplinary design engaged in landscape architecture, permaculture design, education and social innovation; and Auckland Permaculture Workshop – a community based education programme engaged in teaching ecological design, social innovation and appropriate technology. For people interested in learning more about the ideas expressed in this essay please feel free to contact the author on gary@ or visit our website -



Sofia Fourman, Sam Hendrikse, Gabrielle Howdle, Al Newsome, Luke Veldhuizen & Liam Winterton 3RD YEAR BLA

riginating in San Francisco in 2005 and taking place simultaneously in 162 cities and 35 countries; this year’s event in Auckland on September 18th, saw Aucklanders creating and viewing what was a small part of a global movement by designers, activists, students and professionals to engage with the public and raise awareness of issues around what it is to live in modern cities and how we might be able to make better use of public spaces. The message behind Park[ing] Day was that, by looking at our shared, open spaces differently we can design our streets to cater to the needs of people, not cars. This notion is no different within Auckland’s CBD, idle cars, half-full car-parks and loading zones occupy a large part of our city while pedestrians within the city are squeezed onto narrow pavements; robbed of the public realm. What started as a guerrilla urban movement 10 years ago is beginning to build momentum as its message and vision becomes ever more relevant to the lives of ordinary people not only those within the landscape profession. This led to the beginning of the collaboration between a group of 3rd year landscape architecture students from Unitec Institute of Technology, Auckland Council and members of the Waitemata Youth Collective. The goal this year was three times the size compared to the previous year, but with the support of NZILA and the Auckland Design Office and the commitment of the students, the ideas were able to take form. With the reimagination of public space, three parallel parks were transformed into parklets along Lorne Street. The team settled on the theme of rest, play and engage; each park was designed to one of these ideals. The aim was to make three effective spaces along the busy street and by doing so, create discussion and engagement along the way. The rest parklet was all about creating not only a place to sit, but a destination; this was achieved by stacking recycled pallets at different heights, placing out reading materials handing out fruit and bordering the site with planting. The play parklet allowed the young designer to come out, with the space having a simple turf base and plant border, allowing the life-sized jenga game and bean bags to create a visual impact from down the street. The engagement spaced allowed the group to take a simpler, more community based approach, by placing chalkboards with a variety of questions to ask city users, from where is the best place to get a quick bite to how you got to work; allowing the public to leave their mark. In total seven temporary parklets sprung up around the CBD from various groups, creating a unique statement, all helping to take the Park[ing] Day message to Auckland and the international community. These parklets were created for the general public and landscape architects to challenge the existing use of car dominated spaces in the city and to reveal how much potential small spaces can have. The challenge was to raise awareness of the event by providing an example and hopefully encouraging more installations like the ones that were implemented on Friday to be undertaken by more community groups in the future. But also to show how little is required to extend public space by providing examples of cheap, quick and fast approaches, reusing and recycling materials to create interesting designs.






ost coastal settlements occupy a tenuous line between water and land. They are strategically positioned on the ocean’s edge, but have to balance the consequences of coastal storms and increasingly the effects of climate change. However, the Deltaic Louisiana Coast has an opportunity that most other coastal regions do not: a dynamic, sediment-rich river that drains 40% of the contiguous US, that can continuously replenish this edge into a rich, productive wetland zone. While other cities are exposed to rising seas on fixed coastal edges, Louisiana can free itself from a century-long approach of flood control into one of controlled flooding and deposition, allowing the annual pulses of the Mississippi River to sustain a thriving wetland apron and allow for active land-building, protecting one of the Nation’s most crucial economic zones, enhancing ecosystem productivity, and nourishing human occupation for centuries to come. On the ground today, the Delta is in dire straights and action is urgent. Due to the levees-only approach of the last century, land loss in Coastal Louisiana has reached a catastrophic point. Between regional subsidence, storm impacts, and Sea Level Rise, Louisiana is losing on average a football field of land every hour, or a total of 1900 Square Miles of Land since 1932, an area the size of Delaware. Without action, by 2100 Louisiana will have lost virtually all of its coastal wetlands. Moreover, the Nation’s shipping network, energy infrastructure, agricultural and energy exports and an irreplaceable cultural heritage which all depend on the River, are in very real danger of going underwater. In September 2013, Changing Course, with the support of the Army Corps of Engineers and the State of Louisiana launched a multidisciplinary design competition seeking innovative,yet implementable solutions to the threats facing the Louisiana Delta.


On August 20, 2015, the Moffatt & Nichol | West 8 | LSU-CSS Team was announced as a winning team in the Changing Course Competition. The Giving Delta project proposes six primary strategies that will bring a self-sustaining Delta into being over the next century. 1. COUPLE ANNUAL RIVER OPERATIONS WITH LONG TERM ADAPTATION The operation of The Giving Delta leverages the power of annual, naturally occurring floods, yielding maximum sediment capture from the River for wetland maintenance in the five estuarine Basins. On an annual basis, fisheries, communities and ecosystems can adapt to changing conditions, yielding a consolidated, sustainable Delta over the long term. 2. SHIFT FROM FLOOD CONTROL TO CONTROLLED FLOOD The Giving Delta proposes a paradigm shift from Flood Control to Controlled Floods. Structures built upriver of New Orleans pulse sediment and freshwater to neighbouring basins during high-water discharge, reducing salinity, improving ecosystem function, while continuing to reduce flood risk to New Orleans. Structures below New Orleans will operate passively, allowing sediment delivery to coastal basins when the river is high and restricting freshwater input when the river is low.







3. MOVE THE MOUTH OF THE RIVER INLAND Shortening the River’s course to the Gulf keeps greater amounts of the River’s sediment in the littoral zone, reversing a century of sediment pouring off the continental shelf. Positioning the new channel 40 miles inland will protect the channel and catalyse investment in a new, state-of-the-art, globally competitive port complex safely out of the area of highest subsidence. 4. INEVITABLE TRANSGRESSION LEADS TO A CONSOLIDATED DELTA ZONE Relative Sea Level Rise and reduced sediment retention are facts of today’s Delta. Taken together, these factors make the current Delta landscape too large to be sustainable. Practical, focused investment within a smaller, consolidated Delta Zone allows the wetland buffer zone to take advantage of sediment delivery during controlled flood-pulse event, concentrating land-building efforts. 5. INVEST IN PORTS & SHIPPING IN A CONSOLIDATED WORKING DELTA The Louisiana coastal zone is worth roughly $140 Billion annually to the United States—the same as the US Auto Industry. Economically speaking, this is not a local problem, but one of national import. The River at New Orleans is at the centre of an infrastructural network that connects the country and feeds the world. A plan for the next century of port investment and improvement starts with the relocation of Port facilities inland to Port Sulphur. A two-pronged shipping channel design improves shipping efficiency and allows for the Mississippi River corridor to compete globally with deeper channels and modernized facilities.

6. LINK COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE IN A RESILIENT AND ADAPTIVE NETWORK The Giving Delta proposes linking every dollar spent to multiple improvements along key spines such as the I-10, US-90, I-45, and the GIWW. Community Development Investments will be linked to infrastructure, transportation, and environmental management, ensuring that a viable Working Coast is also guaranteeing longterm liveability and resilience of major settlements. A host of engineering and design tactics were studied, bringing these strategies to level of realism that demonstrates this project is implementable. Sand Motors and barrier islands harness longshore and offshore coastal processes to keep sediment and sand in the littoral zone for the long term. Investment in the Gulf Intercoastal Waterway underpins the importance of a key commercial and industrial corridor while allowing for inter-basin management of salinity levels. Structures such as passive spillways and controlled floodways are carefully sized for projected flood levels that maximize sediment deposition while keeping salinity levels within the tolerance of oyster beds, commercial fisheries, and native ecosystems. Sediment traps and dedicated dredging allow active control and placement of precious sediments to the areas within the Coastal Zone where it is needed most urgently for economic and residential protection. For more information: CLIENT: Environmental Defence Fund with the support and participation of the State of Louisiana and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers PARTNERS: Moffatt & Nichol, LSU Coastal Sustainability Studio, Deltares, Ioannis Georgiou, Headland & Associates, RAND ALL IMAGES CREDIT: Moffatt & Nichol | West 8 | LSU-CSS


ABSTRACT Public domain design has moved to the forefront of contemporary landscape architectural practice. As a profession, we are also entering the sphere of urban design. Within these areas of practice, landscape architects are meeting the environmental challenges of global warming, water management and the pressures of population growth. Innovation in these fields is currently a prime focus in the media. To be taken seriously in this space, however, we need to engage in the social and political debates around the changing nature of public space. THE PUBLIC DOMAIN IS THE PHYSICAL SPACE OF A DEMOCRATIC SOCIETY


he public domain is the physical space of democratic society.1 It comprises the network of streets, lanes, roads and footways that connect people to people, and to buildings and places. These streets are fundamental to the functioning of urban places. Collectively, a network of streets and parks provides opportunity for fundamental human necessities such as social interaction and exchange, creativity and delight, and the sharing of ideas. As Jane Jacobs has noted – cities are essentially made up of strangers; the public domain allows for free interaction of strangers. Densification means that for some, the public domain replaces backyards as the primary focus for socialisation. The major Australian and New Zealand cities were modelled around nineteenth century European city planning ideals of generous streets, with grand swathes of public green spaces at their core. Parks, traditionally green open spaces, emerged as a result of public concern about the state of industrial towns – parks were seen as natural and healthy, and resulted from the growing affluence of industrialised nations. In many of these cities there is now movement to enhance pedestrian environments of the streets


central to commercial centres, through widened footways, more tree planting, public art and improved public transport. Important new city making projects such as Greens Square in South Sydney, West Basin and Campbell Section 5 in central Canberra, and Auckland Waterfront in New Zealand have adopted the traditional model of a grid of streets, accommodating new thinking about prioritisation of active transport modes, and linked to new parks and public open spaces as the framework for development of new communities. At the same time, in other new urban precincts such as Barangaroo, at the northern tip of the City of Sydney, public streets are shrinking to make way for bigger building footprints, commercial concessions and leasable entertainment areas. PUBLIC OR PRIVATE? The generous and nuanced public open space framed by a connective street system that formed the foundation of the 2006 international competition winning urban plan for Barangaroo has been replaced by a much diminished public space. The foreshore walk, a maximum 30 metres wide, is described by the Barangaroo Development Authority as ‘publicly accessible’, rather

entertainment areas, and the introduction of new uses such as cafes. At the edge of the Botanic Gardens, a hotel has been proposed. Centennial Park is also now “delighted to offer” a range of picnic sites that can be pre-booked for payment. There has recently been public debate around the intention to fence off parts of the newly opened Barangaroo Headland Reserve for commercial activity, with fines for those who enter reserved areas without payment. Most successful, large-scale public places integrate some forms of commercial enterprise to both activate space and offset management costs; the challenge is to balance commercial sustainability with public interest. A civilized city has a dynamic relationship between public and private; markets, malls and eat streets have a public function contained in a private shell, and are the destination for many for socialising. But our public spaces must still cater to the every man everyday, including the vulnerable in society. The public domain must be primarily free from commercial imperatives, and allow the free movement of all classes of people. A design problem arises where the public domain becomes an added extra, something only to draw the punters in to commercial attractions. For the client, the emphasis may be on international appeal, rather than local character and amenity. Newsletters and media releases use glossy images and the glamour of novelty to ‘sell’ ideas, and gloss over public interest conflicts. than simply public. The latest plans propose a major part of the urban parklands to be displaced by Casino Mogul James Packer’s Casino and luxury apartment complex, in the name of so-called public interest. Here the notion of public space is blurred, with the Authority freely admitting that commercial outdoor seating and entertainment areas form part of the calculated 50% open space provision for the whole precinct. THE CHANGING NATURE OF PARKS The 19th century landscape architect Andrew Jackson Dowling described parks as places for “public enjoyments, open to all classes of people, provided at public cost, maintained at public expense, and enjoyed daily and hourly by all classes of persons”. Times change – there is increased pressure on the public purse, we are much more mobile, with a greater and more affluent middle class. Leisure time is increasingly skewed to the pursuit of entertainment – sport, festivals, structured play, open-air films, etc. A focus in current planning for our great urban parks is to accommodate mass entertainment, and to make them pay their way. A key point of recent master plans for Centennial Parklands (an 189 Ha public reserve in the eastern suburbs of Sydney) and the Royal Botanic Gardens (now managed under the same Trust) is “moving towards commercial sustainability”. This includes measures such as commercial uses of existing buildings, more

THE DESIGN CHALLENGE The idea of the city as a collective space must be fundamental to public space design; the interaction of public and private is essential to real urbanity. Each project must be framed within a social, political and physical context; reference to the urban whole is more important than individual identity. For the designer, each project should be approached with a well-researched understanding of what constitutes quality urban space. Material configurations and thematic conceptualisation are overlays that contribute to distinctive character and picturesque novelty; they are not the basis for city making. As businesses, we have a responsibility to fulfil a brief; as professionals we also have a wider responsibility in spheres of environment and society that should temper how we approach a brief and guide each project. This responsibility also extends to the political sphere, where we must become an active contributor to the debate. REFER TO PAGE 113 FOR ADDITIONAL IMAGERY 29



ABSTRACT Conceptualising a city as an ecosystem, particularly an urban ecosystem, provides opportunities for exploring how the application of ecological processes and paradigms can inform our understanding of the interconnected and interdependent aspects of the city. Contemporary ecological thinking is beginning to embrace the notion that complex, interdependent emergent systems cannot be fully understood from just one perspective. Instead, such systems need to be considered from different perspectives, with each informing the others, and ultimately contributing to a holistic and interrelated understanding of the system. As such, this essay does not attempt to develop an all-encompassing view of the city as an ecosystem, but rather to focus on how cities respond to disturbance of natural phenomena. In particular, this paper will explore the emergent logics of the infrastructural response of Los Angeles to its problematic river, ad-hoc interventions in Christchurch following the devastating earthquakes, and a speculative proposal for how disturbance might be a model for urbanism in Pacific island states.





raditionally, ecosystems were conceived of simple linear systems that would eventually reach a stable climax condition. Once that stable climax condition was reached, the ecosystem would then maintain itself in a static condition indefinitely. Recently however, ecologists have begun to recognize that natural systems are always in a state of flux – constantly shifting and adapting to environmental changes. Major changes in environmental conditions that cause flux to occur are referred to as disturbance. Resilience refers to an ecosystem’s ability to recover from and adapt to disturbance; when the same kind of disturbance affects an ecosystem on a regular basis, it is called a disturbance regime and the ecosystem in question is typically adapted to that disturbance. For instance, many grassland ecosystems are adapted to fire disturbance regimes, typically from stray lightning strikes. Fire-adapted grasses burn quickly and have a root system that allows them to survive and quickly regenerate quickly after the fire, even in low temperatures. Whilst any tree saplings that are not fire adapted, burn and perish even in lower temperate fires. This negates the growth of saplings into mature trees that would eventually shade out the grasses and in turn transition the plant community into a woodland. The fire regime and grass adaptations are even further interdependent, where the burning of the plant material recycles the plant nutrients back into the soil that plants use to regrow after the disturbance. On an even larger scale, one can see how fire regime adapted plant communities are spatially located based on macro-level climate patterns and weather events. This simplistic example of grassland fire ecology, reveals how there are multiple interdependent layers of interactions that reveal different aspects of how the grassland ecosystem functions and adapts. Within the last decade the field of ecology has begun to embrace the idea that “each perspective on an ecosystem reveals only one face to its complex and changing states.”1 For instance, if one studied the grassland from the perspective of nutrient cycles the critical role of fire in suppressing the growth of trees might be missed. This idea proposes a holistic and inherently interdisciplinary approach to understanding the complex and interdependent systems in the world; and is especially crucial for understanding the emergent properties of the city as an urban ecosystem. If the city is conceived of as an urban ecosystem, then the effects human culture and activity have must be taken into account; which by extension includes the role of social and economic factors in human decision-making. In the same way contemporary ecologists advocate for multi-perspectival studies on the environment, the same must be done when considering the city from other disciplines. Such as anthropology, where Arjun Appadurai suggests through his five scapes, ethnoscapes, technoscapes, finanscapes, mediascapes, and ideoscapes, one might study modern, urban and globalized cultures.2 Appadurai proposed that culture, technology, wealth and financial exchange, communication, and politics are all deeply interrelated and must all be accounted for when studying human culture. It is essential to take advantage of the

perspectives offered by various disciples, as within each discipline there are definite vantage points; as suggested through Appadurai’s anthropological scapes and the multitude of ecological lenses with which one can explore interactions in an ecosystem. Therefore, this paper does not attempt to develop an all-encompassing view of the city as an ecosystem, but rather to focus on how cities respond to and are informed by disturbance regimes of natural phenomena. THE URBAN ECOSYSTEM In its most basic form an ecosystem is a spatially defined unit in which living organisms interact with the physical world and each other, resulting in exchanges of energy, nutrients and raw materials.3 Cities just like any other ecosystem can be defined spatially and the fact they rely on constant flows and cycles of energy, raw materials, nutrients, wealth, labour, and population.4 The urban ecosystem is an anthropogenic ecosystem; it is unique in the disproportionate role that one species, human beings, play in affecting the outcomes of natural and artificial processes. Humans reshape the physical environment to suit their own needs, much like a beaver damming a stream, except on a much larger scale. The complex social structures and networks that humans make play a major role in how a city is formed. The urban ecosystem is also unique because it effectively has no discrete spatial boundaries. While the form of a city itself can be spatially defined, the flows of energy, nutrients and raw materials extend far beyond the extents of the city. A typical ecosystem is limited in terms of resource availability, serving as a limiting factor to keep populations in check. Human communication and transportation technology however, have made it possible for the massive global exchange and redistribution of not only the basic ecological needs of the city, but also wealth, fuel, manufactured goods and people. As a result an urban ecosystem is “no longer able to regulate human population size, structure, or genetic diversity.”5 Instead, a city’s trade connections and wealth play a large role in determining its available resources, implicating economics and technology as important facets of the urban ecosystem. Social aspects of an urban ecosystem can also drive disturbance; gentrification for instance, is a culturally generated disruption that can affect the form of the city. Gentrification typically implies the displacement of a usually lower income group by a higher one.6 Income inequalities and individual human ambitions among other factors can cause cultural-based disturbance and flux in the urban ecosystem. DISTURBANCE REGIMES OF NATURAL PHENOMENA Transformative natural disasters, such as earthquakes, volcanism, tornadoes and sudden violent weather events such as hurricanes “are unique for urban environments as a large amount of vacant land presents itself in a very short period of time.”7 These kinds of disturbances whilst unpredictable are known hazards, as they tend to occur over and over again within the same region. Earthquakes occur along fault lines and zones of tectonic activity; consequently, communities located in seismically active areas are aware of the high likelihood of seismic events. This is very different from the social and economic processes, such as gentrification that take longer to manifest in the urban fabric. In ecological terms a sudden



natural disaster creates new spatial and potentially programmatic niches in the city. Other forms of disturbance such as seasonal rains, monsoons, flooding and tidal inundation occur on a regular predictable cycle and occupy the city for extended periods of time. Unlike transformative disturbance these temporal disturbances transform the character of a city for a period of time before retreating and allowing the city to return to its normal conditions; such cities lead dual lives, based on the seasons.

will be longer lasting and potentially inform a new network of open spaces throughout the city. However, it is only two years into the rebuilding process, far too early to say how the areas unsuitable for building will be reintegrated into the city. It is important to note that while new landscaping projects contribute to new ecological systems, these emergent temporary and semipermanent interventions into the disaster spaces of the city are filling a programmatic niche and providing new uses for unused spaces. They are driven by human values and interests in improving the quality of life, soon after disturbance.



Between September 2010 and February 2011 the city of Christchurch (New Zealand), experienced two massive earthquakes and countless aftershocks that permanently altered Christchurch’s urban form and ecosystem. New Zealand is a seismically active region where earthquakes are a known hazard throughout the nation. The Canterbury quake on September 4th 2010 however, was not only the strongest earthquake to strike New Zealand in almost 80 years, but also occurred along a previously unknown fault line.8 The 7.1 magnitude quake produced a visible 25 kilometre long ‘rip’ across the Christchurch region, “displacing farm paddocks and roads by as much as 4 meters.”9 This was followed four and a half months later by a 6.3 magnitude aftershock. The following year there were over 8,500 aftershocks, with an average of 23 aftershocks per day.10

While earthquakes have always been a fact of life in the Los Angeles region, the seasonal flooding of Los Angeles River was once an incredibly destructive and transformative disturbance regime before it was channelized in the 1930s. Today, the Los Angeles River is effectively a massive stormwater channel that is meant to convey as much water as possible, as quickly as possible, out of the city and into the ocean.16 Historically the river had no consistent watercourse, meaning major storms with heavy rainfall would result in the river flowing over its banks and flooding the surrounding areas, often carving out an entirely new channel. At one time the river emptied into the Santa Monica Bay and records indicate that river dramatically shifted its course at least nine times in the 1800s.17 Ever since Los Angeles was founded as a pueblo (native american village) in 1781 the Los Angeles River and its destructive floods have always played an integral role in the development of the city. Just a decade after the founding of the pueblo a major flood prompted the pueblo to relocate to higher ground.18

As is typical for sudden intense disturbance regimes, the Canterbury Quake and Christchurch Aftershock completely altered the city of Christchurch in seconds, opening up new spatial niches throughout the city. Both earthquakes destroyed built structures and caused significant soil liquefaction that forced countless buildings to be condemned and slated for demolition. Many areas cannot be rebuilt upon because the soil liquefaction has made the ground unstable and has compromised its load bearing ability.11 At least 50% of Christchurch’s central business district is slated for demolition.12 The rebuilding process for Christchurch is expected to take at least two decades and the long-term planning efforts for the re-imagining of the city have only just begun. Even after the first earthquake in 2010 local residents began to look for ways to occupy the new spatial niches of destroyed buildings and unbuildable lots. Several different activist groups emerged with the goal of making something useful and positive out of the piles of rubble that “had appeared or were likely to appear over the coming weeks”.13 After the second major earthquake that caused further damage and liquefaction in areas, these proposals gained even more traction. Proposed uses for the new spaces ranged from small landscaping and parklet type improvements, to public art interventions.14 The longevity of such interventions varied depending upon sitespecific conditions. For instance, a landscaping feature added to a demolished site is likely to be temporary, as the owners will probably wish to rebuild at a later date.15 Still, such interventions improve the quality of life in the city, at least temporarily in the wake of a natural disaster. Other areas with liquefied soils will never be rebuilt and any interventions done in such areas 32

The disturbance caused by the river was incompatible with Los Angeles’ urban expansion and growing role in commerce. The temporary flooding and resulting damages posed a serious risk to people, property, agriculture, and the railroads; many of which were located along the river’s course and were an essential element of commerce. Even more dangerous to the city was the river’s habit of completely transforming its own watercourse. While annual rainfall patterns in Southern California do occur fairly consistently, the actual intensity of each rain event can vary significantly between years, making flood risks unpredictable. Even as early as 1874 people were recognizing a need for a flood control system for the city, as noted by a road engineer in his field notes.19 Four decades later in 1914 the Los Angeles River flood had caused extensive damage, prompting the creation of a flood control program for the city.20 The river continued to flood and along with it the importance and power of the city’s flood control program grew. After two more devastating floods in the early 1930s the US government stepped in to take control of the flood control program and embarked on a massive infrastructural solution to all but eliminate the river’s disturbance regime: a fifty-one mile long concrete channel. The result was a fifty-one mile long series of “vertical, trapezoidal, and transition structures” that appear as a concrete scar bisecting Los Angeles.21 The river’s disturbance regime proved to be incompatible with the anthropogenic elements of Los Angeles’ urban ecosystem, which was to create a massive infrastructure to





suppress what would otherwise be a natural form of disturbance. In fact the act of channelizing the river could be considered its own form of disturbance that virtually eradicated the river’s riparian ecosystems. Yet as testament to the resilience of the city’s urban ecosystem, new unique ecologies have emerged from the river’s present condition. Bridge overhangs provide habitat for bats and swallows; both species that are invaluable for consuming insects for urban disease control.22 The nutrient-rich tertiary-treated sewage that makes up roughly 60% of the river’s daily flow contributes to expansive sludge and algae flats at the mouth of the river that are a valuable stopover point for migratory birds.23 While the infrastructural solution for Los Angeles was to eliminate the river’s disturbance regime, Los Angeles’ urban ecosystem has demonstrated its ability to adapt to novel conditions and be resilient. SPECULATIVE URBANISM: DISTURBANISM IN THE SOUTH PACIFIC The anthropogenic aspect of the urban ecosystem has typically been concerned with human needs and desires such as food supply, housing, sanitation, and commerce. Natural disturbance regimes are instead disruptions to human ambitions. If disturbance was leveraged as an integral component to the city, cities might look very different. For instance, Los Angeles might not have developed with major industrial and commercial activities taking place in a river’s flood plain, or housing developments creeping further and further into fire-prone areas. A speculative alternative form of the urban ecosystem might embrace and incorporate disturbance regimes, rather than react to them. Disturbanism, a phrase coined by Barnett and Margetts in their essay ‘Disturbanism in the South Pacific’ proposes incorporating natural disturbance regimes into the way cities are built and improve urban resilience.24 Barnett and Margetts use islands in the Pacific as the basis for their proposal because climactic patterns result in relatively frequent and major storm events, cyclones, which are the primary natural disturbance regime.25 Cyclones can devastate both urban ecosystems and natural (non-anthropogenic) ecosystems on the islands. However, the natural ecosystems have adapted to the disturbance and are COASTAL SAGE SCRUB: ANNUAL FLUX CYCLE


able to recover quickly, whereas the built urban ecosystem takes longer to recover, in part due to social and economic issues such as funding, international assistance and the availability of heavy machinery.26 Presently “instead of seeing cyclones as a necessary part of the system and therefore to be assimilated, modern urban settlement planning the Pacific attempts to resist cyclonic events.” Barnett and Margett’s disturbanism proposal lays the theoretical argument for seamlessly weaving disturbance into the urban ecosystem without making any formal speculations on what such a design would look like. The ideas of Landscape Urbanism and Ecological Urbanism promote the use of natural ecological processes as ways of improving both the sustainability and liveability of the urban ecosystem.27 As ecologically sound principles continue to be incorporated into design it is possible that disturbance-based flux and disturbance regimes will become integrated with the creation of the urban ecosystem, rather than problems to be reacted to. Such a model for the urban environment would be practical for a host of different reasons, not in the least of which is in an economic sense; as a city that is properly adapted to disturbance regimes will not need constant rebuilding and reinvestment every time a disturbance occurs. The impacts on residents could be minimized and presumably there would be fewer injuries and fatalities stemming from disturbance. Figuring out how to embrace and integrate disturbance-based flux into the city would make for a safer, more effective, practical and holistic city. Some forms of disturbance such as the Los Angeles River’s flood behaviour can be more or less controlled by massive infrastructural interventions; other examples of this would be the massive storm surge barriers that are being proposed for the Venice lagoon, that are currently functioning in Holland. But these kinds of infrastructural interventions are costly and are often complicit in environmental degradation. The kind of ad-hoc responses typified by the small scale, temporary interventions in Christchurch demonstrate the capacity for resilient social responses that take advantage of newly created niches in the city. Yet the optimistic hope of considering the city in terms of the response to disturbance regimes is that one-day cities might actively incorporate disturbance regimes and their responses to create more resilient cities, as Barnett and Margett theorize.





rganised and funded by Urban Pantry and supported by Waterfront Auckland, ‘Growing the Future’ was held at the iconic Silo6. From April 17th through to 27th, Silo6 was transformed into a lush yet gritty urban garden. Unitec Diploma Landscape Design students, Sam Jennings, Melissa Marjo, Trish Reynolds and Sally Trolove, led the design. Created specifically for ‘Growing the Future’ the project explored and celebrated food growing for inner-city residents through installations, artwork, workshops and film.

A key challenge for this project was the timing of the exhibition. We had just ten weeks to produce plants of sufficient quality and quantity to be at their peak very late in the growing season. This was achieved by growing most of the plants from seed in the MIT greenhouses at Unitec; supported by the donation of large citrus and feijoa trees that added both height and maturity to the exhibit.


A UNIQUE SITE The site chosen was inside one of the 14 meter high, 7 meter wide concrete silos. This unique space provided some particular challenges, not least keeping the garden looking its best over the ten day event with minimal sunlight. Light sources were limited to narrow interior louvre windows that allowed light from adjacent silos, interior electric lighting and an east facing roller door that could be opened during the day – although this exposed the garden to strong wind. The design reflected Wynyard Quarter’s beginnings as an industrial site, formerly a working port and tank farm, as well as its more recent incarnation as a public park. The requirements for the materials used were low cost and recycled; achieving a high impact installation on a limited budget. Materials used included rusted corrugated iron panels, bricks, concrete cinder blocks and recycled air conditioning ducting, all supported by timber framing and scaffolding to create the industrial look desired.

The plants were all edible and chosen for their colour, foliage and/ or flowers. A broad selection of 20 varieties aimed to show that even citrus and corn can thrive in these confined urban spaces. Companion plants such as marigolds and nasturtiums were used for bright and contrasting colour. Anticipating that the plants would need to be frequently rotated during the festival due to the limited light within the silo, several hundred plants were grown. This allowed for under-performing plants to be replaced with stronger specimens – ailing plants were returned to the greenhouse to be revived. Once installed, the plants were rotated four times over ten days and generally coped well, despite the lack of light. BEYOND THE EXHIBITION At the end of the event attention turned to disposing and dismantling the installation in a thoughtful and sustainable manner. Metal was returned to the scrap yard, and bricks and blocks were reused as fill for a construction development. Timber framing was returned to the Unitec workshop for reuse and the plants were donated to local community gardens or composted. Just one rubbish bag went to landfill.




Bela Grimsdale 1ST YEAR BLA

nalysis of Tui Glen Reserve revealed the relationship between the water and the land. How could one explore the significance of these within the site and the surrounding landscapes? Pursuing this relationship led to tracing the waterways back to their original source, resulting in an analogy of whakapapa, genealogy and a family tree. Streams, rivers, and creeks all have names and tie back to original ancestors, they represent a natural path of genealogy crossing the land, overlaying stories and histories. Stories connect whakapapa to the landscape, the stories of people who have come before and people yet to come are overlaid into the land. Water becomes a metaphor of genealogy connecting landscape back to whakapapa. This design is a response to the specific conditions of the site and an interpretation of its long history. The topography of the site falls steeply away from the road, levelling out into grassed open space, before falling once again into Henderson Creek.The pathways are derived from the connections between the waterways and whakapapa; allowing raised steps and pathways to interweave with the path of the water, drawing people along it to create new stories. The design overlays the interaction of people, water and land as they travel across the site. Through respect to whakapapa the water is purified using riparian planting, swales, a settlement pond and floating wetland booms.





Te Kerekere Roycroft 1ST YEAR BLA

ublic needs are continually changing in the cultural landscapes we occupy, especially in high use areas. The utility required fifty years ago differs from that needed today. Spaces emerge and develop according to a number of external influences, most notably the available local services. Mt Albert town centre, chosen as the site for this investigation, features a parking lot located between the train station and a bus stop near the main intersection. The disuse and degradation of the car park can be attributed to these factors from outside the site boundaries making the space feel somewhat cramped and awkward. The same external influences mean Mt Albert Town Centre currently acts as a transit stop on the way in to the city rather than a destination. This studio called for a redesign of this space as an area for gatherings and public events and redevelopment of the town centre as a transport hub following the connection of the train station to the bus stop with a pedestrian bridge. The redesign of the Mt Albert Town Centre hopes to bring more people through the space and subsequently boost the economic production of the area. Designing this space for the future encompasses re-utilisation of these derelict spaces in order to make them relevant to the diverse range of people that will use the space. Using emergent design principles and exploring a wide variety of possible outcomes will ensure the long term success





Refer to page 116 for footnotes

his design aims to recognise the sentimental connotations of the site. A strong east to west axis connects the site to the wider context. This resonates as a counterpoint between Colin McCahon’s connection to landscape, his approach to how it is represented visually, and Geoff Park’s writing on landscape as theatre. Interventions are fluid, experimental and reliant on how the space may change over time. Installation of sculptural frames serve as a lens and a gateway, seeking to question how we view landscape personally and historically. Colin McCahon changed how landscape within New Zealand was represented. Where we once only saw pastoral, colonial scenes, McCahon described how a connection to a personal landscape could be created over time and space, a spiritual connection that became part of his identity as well as his work. His work was dark and provocative, its content became what surrounded him; “I am not painting protest pictures. I am painting about what is still there and what I can see before the sky turns black with soot and the sea becomes a slowly heaving rubbish tip. I am painting what we have got now and will never get again. This is one shape or form, has been the subject of my painting for a very long time.”1 This idea of presence in the moment served as a cornerstone idea in my design which was further developed when I went to Smiths bush in the middle of suburban Auckland and experienced the feeling and mood of a deep dark landscape, with a cathedral of Kahikatea overhead and the richness and smell of decaying plant matter under foot. This created the tone of my design, represented by the rich brown hue that has been used. Geoff Park’s writing on the New Zealand Landscape and how it is experienced as theatre is both insightful and relevant, Oratia sits as a gateway between the urban and the rural. Is this landscape something to be looked at and photographed or is it to explored and experienced?

Landscape discourse seems overly focused with the idea of the sentimental. The notion that by providing a connection with the space by implementing a scaled installation on the site of some memorable moments of the past somehow provides resonance within the design, seems like a disconnected starting point. This design sees that approach as a barrier. Instead it inherently understands the connotations associated with the site instead of being a framework it becomes the vernacular, the accepted. The main focus is on visual and memory connections within the site. View shafts connect to the wider context and are enhanced by the installation of seven sculptural apertures that resemble a frame or a gateway, questioning how we view landscape personally and historically. The site encourages people to explore through their own interaction rather than be led into a preconceived moment. Vegetation on site exists in swathes with no exclusivity to native or exotic. A grid of native Kauri and Rimu is composed adjacent to exotic grasses, allowing the site to naturalise into a unique form that will develop and change over time. Growth and reseeding will have an entropic cyclic effect that will adjust to the conditions. Hydrology on site is of major importance and consideration of planting along the stream side to promote long term health is one of the designs key points.




Sharon Eccleshall 2ND YEAR BLA

hyllis Reserve is part of a network of parks that hinge off Oakley creek. Oakley creek (Te Auaunga) is the longest urban stream in the Auckland and is of significant ecological importance.

The objective of this project was to improve the site through the addition of new clubrooms, upgraded soccer fields and to provide recreational benefits for the local community, whilst enhancing and protecting the adjacent ecological corridor including Oakley Creek. During the initial research and discussions, an understanding of the potential effects of urban development on the waterways and methods of mitigation emerged. Phyllis Reserve has surface potential with its contextual location, regenerating vegetation and adjacent creek. Although the site has some interesting hidden artifacts, with glimpses of the past scattered along the creek banks, my initial thought was to find a simple symbol that could be used in a variety of ways to create a sense of connection, association and continuity. The truncated icosahedron shape emerged from its association with the soccer ball; the interlocking pattern provides a structural contrast to the soft forms of the bordering vegetation and meandering creek. Overlaying the hexagonal pattern across the site created areas for catchment and terracing. These shapes provided opportunities for retaining banks, filtrating and mitigating water and a channel for pedestrian circulation. The walkways are framed with white blocks, providing seating and a complimentary link in material to the new building. The vibrancy of the white also creates a clear path of connection throughout the site. The wetlands created on site are outlined with Corten weathering steel and bent to form seamless shapes. The use of weathered steel creates a contrasting palette to the surrounding greenery. The design of the wetlands and retaining features will reduce the damaging effects of the urban fringe in the ecological area. Structural shapes that emerge from the landscape begin to symbolize the emerging history of the site; a stark reminder of what is hidden and what is permeating from the past.




James Currey 2ND YEAR BLA

arakai is widely recognised for the strong presence of geothermal activity within the area, which supports the highly regarded Parakai pools complex. Situated 40 minutes from Auckland’s CBD, Parakai serves as a popular holiday destination for many of Auckland’s residents and draws many people to the area. The surrounding landscape is for the most part untouched and ecologically rich, due to the fact that only small farming communities have been occupying the landscape; with minimal impact over the past few decades. Parakai’s current population is set to increase dramatically with many subdivisions already planned and in place for the future. Alongside with Auckland’s current housing crisis its very likely that Parakai is set for a vast change. The natural setting which has been so prominent over the years will be subjected to a range of environmental threats as more people occupy the landscape. The two main drivers of the design were focused on ecologically enhancing the area through a non invasive design; which would support the wildlife throughout the site. The second was to ultimately expand on the tourism productivity that the pools currently provide. The design for site was to transform the area into a wetland reserve; expanding and integrating on the pool complex’s success and the existing wetlands formed by the Kaipara tidal river from the north. Water will be drained from the pools complex into a wakeboard cable pool. This will provide another tourism feature which is heavily supported by the pools and the existing geothermal activity. From there the water will drain down a canal with interactive stepping stones and through to the wetland. Board walks will allow for access throughout the site whilst avoiding the natural bogging throughout the wet seasons. The site will allow for an increase in tourism growth for the Parakai community. Due to the sites location within Parakai it will help to serve as an ecological hub with housing developments built up around the reserve. The site will support large areas of wetland planting and provide access throughout the site and helping to raise interest and awareness regarding current ecological issues.


EMERGING COMMUNITIES Sharon Ecchelshall, Glenn Ridley & Nick Slattery 2ND YEAR BLA


his Negotiated Studio project focused on the redevelopment of Point Chevalier town centre. The design process involved consultation with Pasadena Intermediate School students and Chris Casey of the Point Chevalier Social Enterprise Group. The emergence of boutique, eclectic communities requires a sense of place, an anchor that grounds the locals and provides a communal connection for individuals to engage in conversations with the broader demographics of the area. Our approach to enhancing the Point Chevalier community hub placed emphasis on this anchor and involved research into community psychology. Through our exploration we began to refine our objective, as we realized the effects of change, material development, automated services and impersonal glitches. The result; insular, disengaged humans within fragmented communities. The design creates a place to nurture the resistance of community to create a space that caters for the dynamic demographic of Point Chevalier, through a safe, multifunctional space with many options for social interaction. The circular theme emerged from the cyclic relationship between human engagement and happiness. The aesthetically pleasing meeting place gives residents a point of connection where they can fill their emotional tanks with happiness through feelings of inclusion and belonging. The success of these boutique communities relies heavily on involvement. Humans belong in networking communities; they need to interact frequently with other people. This space includes unique design elements; a sculptural art piece by local year 11 students, which symbolizes family and unity. An installation of petrified totem poles, of several significant materials that reflect the relationship and stories of local iwi with the surrounding landscape. The site creates spaces of enclosure and safety through the cloaking of plants across the space, whilst main lines of travel are wide and accommodating of large crowd movements. This is not downtown; this is the emergence of suburban relief.




Erica van der Zanden 3RD YEAR BLA

he history of the site lies deep within the multi-layered, interwoven fabric of the landscape; ancestors use this narrative to inform cultural life and identify with place. The project explores considerations for designing a papakāinga for Ngāti Huri, a rural Marae in South Waikato. Ngāti Huri’s ancestral land is integral to their physical, spiritual, emotional, social and economic well-being. The design strategy is consistent with Ngāti Huri’s values and contemporary environmental principles. The intention is to design a low impact development, protecting, restoring and enhancing the connection to the land, rivers and streams. The design will contribute to a vibrant future for a thriving rural community, whilst addressing the issues around cultural landscapes and ecological performance of development. Through extensive analysis of the site, local and regional context in terms of cultural, economic and ecological values, lead to the designs rational; that the tangible features are just as important as the intangible features . The design itself reveals major viewpoints through to significant sites as you meander down a steep slope paved to the local stream that runs past the back of Pikitu Marae. The pathway gives way to platforms for wānanga, places to meet and share knowledge, discuss, deliberate and consider. The sites are shaped by the lands former inhabitants and include urupā (grave sites), pā sites, hāngī stones, rock art and previous house sites. All intangible sites are referenced through the design with obscured, subtle orientation; all with the Marae as the center point because they are considered to be wāhi tapu (scared) to the Ngati Huri people. The development of Pikitū Marae provides the opportunity for Ngati Huri to return home to their ancestral lands and develop alongside it. The sustainable design integrates vegetable gardens, a nursery, ātea (open space), stream restoration and community buildings to create a self-sufficient, resilient and sustainable community that caters to the wide demographics of the Ngāti Huri people.




Liam Winterton 3RD YEAR BLA

rban sprawl in Auckland is pushing the city to its limits. With Auckland experiencing a rapid increase in the demand for residential dwellings, land once considered too far to commute from is currently under development. These housing developments are often located in or near rural areas of ecological significance.

The brief for this project was to re-establish the riparian margin along Waimoko stream with restorative planting to be added to the existing native covenant. The site will be subdivided and will undergo further riparian planting to deal with the modifications to the landscape. This site presents a unique ecological opportunity, as it is located in the upper catchment of the Waimoko stream. It has the potential to mitigate the effects of subdivision of neighbouring properties and the associated poor water management, such as silt run off, while enhancing the aquatic environment and ecology. The site and others like it create the opportunity to educate clients, local residents and the public as well as allowing landscape architects to implement interventions to solve the issues that come from rapid and intensive urbanisation.



Luke Veldhuizen 3RD YEAR BLA

an technology be used to help capture and implement the ephemeral and intangible qualities unique to an indigenous people? Can it be dynamic and flexible enough to work with the shifting moods, thoughts, and feelings of a variety of stakeholders? Discussion with Ngati Huri of Pikitu Marae revealed affinities and reverence for key local landmarks, features and memories of their past. This became the starting point to utilise the shapes and patterns of the land; modified by the ephemeral influences in order to produce a concept. Through the combination of fixed and variable influences, multiple relationships between points cause, patterns to be generated, varied, and tested. Alowing the design to meet Ngati Huri’s criteria such as, being appropriate for slope and elevation, optimised for dealing with water-accumulation, East-facing buildings and to preserve view shafts to important cultural landmarks. Designed with the Marae as the central focal point, all housing in the design was situated within 200 metres either side of it. Symbolically and literally, the Marae is at the centre of all life; therefore for the Ngati Huri People this was the first and primary driver to all design moves. All paths and patterns designed for this site were influenced and drawn from the shapes, forms and waterways of the land. With the concept of the river as the original ‘highway’ mode of transportation, the natural curves of the river were taken and


simplified to create a smoother curve, interpolated through four nodes to achieve a land network pattern inspired by the ancient means of travel. For the people of Pikitu, the influence and importance of Wharepuhunga (their mountain) was an obvious choice to draw influence from. Further, the remnant bush and the cave art were chosen to represent, respectively earth (native bush standing strong amongst volcanic destruction) and the cosmos (cave star paintings). The cave paintings chosen as a reference not only because of the teaching and learning that occurred there, but to the master waka navigation (by star position), the cosmological history and birthplace of the people and their voyage to Aotearoa. Beginning with a grid, squares were programmed to become larger at the central Marae point (1), followed by adding rotational influences (2) as a base to investigate layout possibilities in the resultant negative-space resonance or gestalt-image (3). By adding further points of influence (the Marae, the Mountain, and Cave Art) and manipulating the relative ‘weight’ of each attractionpoint, and or including other points of interest dynamically, new gestalt patterns were produced (4), influencing how planting and paving was located within the developed area. By tying the patterns of the land and the water, together with the influences of spiritual and sacred places, the overall design made for the people of Ngati Huri emerged.





Al Newsome 3RD YEAR BLA

mbiguous urban public space, often created by a layered process of circumstance, is able to give us its specificity, its uniqueness (or indeed its sameness or monotony) because of the nature of its accessibility. We can all see it and, to some extent, engage with it. By giving us this access it has already yielded some of its emergent capabilities, even at only a glimpse. It may however, be accessible, but is it a ‘successful’ space? If we are willing and able to harness this emergent personality to allow the idea of a city as a mesh of interconnected systems, pressures and processes to guide our design thinking we may have the opportunity to go lighter, faster, and cheaper into possible treatments for our urban surfaces. By doing so we could also be more effective as designers rather than using ‘top down’, monolithic approaches which are not only financially costly but also prone to ‘design by committee’ ‘one size fits all’ drawbacks. By studying the relationships between various factors, for example politics, economic ebb and flow, ecological, cultural and scientific changes, can we potentially avoid large scale mistakes and genuinely design for the future? In the case of Chancery Street/Bacon’s Lane in Auckland’s CBD, an opportunity was seen in a small network of unloved streets. Surrounded on all sides by some of New Zealand’s most visited and valued public landscapes, yet itself the victim of precisely the kind of inattention that emergent design is aimed at overcoming. Few would argue that the CBD of 2035 will look as it does now. The snapping synapses of change will brush aside once immutable truths. In 20 years the massive car parks that dominate Chancery Street may well be legacy buildings with alternative uses and the

cheek by jowl, claustrophobic passages which characterised the site in the 19th century may once again come to the fore. Of course there is the chance that it may not change but it is precisely for that reason that there must be a way of testing out that theory without risking millions of dollars. Designing for the future means taking that constant layering of use and dis-use into account. Small scale and localised, rather than large and overwhelming. While we can be influenced by and leverage ideas from its locality, what gives Chancery Lane its identity should be something that only Chancery Street can give, not something imported from another street or place no matter how local or international. No one factor has led to changing emphasises in Auckland CBD. For example, Takutai Square and Britomart have risen out of the ashes of historical foreshore reclamation, dilapidated bus station and ambiguous ‘other’. What has led to the re-focussing of attention away from areas such as High Street is arguably many things but none of them act singularly, they emerge, as do the spaces they create. In regard to Chancery Street, again, rather than repave and ‘upgrade’ as per O’Connell Street or ‘build it and they will approach’, another way of tackling this street’s lack of purpose is to help define it by its use, by encouraging people to engage with it. It has the ability to leverage off the very things which currently frame its lack of use, O’Connell Street and pre-upgrade Freyberg Square. However, it can only do this with help, through bringing both visual indicators and street events based on appropriate and imaginative use of the sites topography and existing linkages to give purpose to Chancery Street.





Tosh Graham 4TH YEAR BLA

he ambitious and polemic nature of this design resulted from the use of Māori prophecy as a driver. The historical narrative derived from the two chosen prophecies was then developed into a set of design moves to create five monuments that honor the pre and post-colonial history of Auckland and its people. The locations of the monuments have significant relevance to the prophecies and it is projected that the monuments will build recognition of the significance of these sites. For Māori, knowing your whakapapa is essential to your identity since it expresses who you are. By giving recognition to Auckland’s historical past and the whakapapa of the city, a point of reference emerges that will define the city. This enables the city to move forward with a clearer vision of the future. To use the words of the legendary musical prophet Bob Marley, “in this great future, you can’t forget your past … [because] if you know your history, then you would know where you’re coming from”. While it is admirable to have aspirations of making Auckland the ‘world’s most livable city’, we should not lose sight of what we are living for and how we can achieve that. The proposed concept could result in Auckland City becoming more livable through intangibles such as pride and ownership. Therefore, the uniqueness of this project comes about due to the process used, which investigated indigenous prophecy as a means of analysing sites to generate designs imbued with respect and acknowledgment of Auckland’s cultural history. These monuments would create a point of difference that defines the city and New Zealand’s identity would be expressed to the world through these iconic structures, lifting and promoting the idea of cultural awareness, cooperation and unity.




Saja Yacoob 4TH YEAR BLA

ow can key factors help to create strong links between a river and town? Water pollution has a huge impact on Aucklanders’, as we are the guardians of a unique environment. Human activity and Aucklands rapidly growing population creates increased pressure on our land and water environments. Therefore, we as landscape architects must play a part in reducing the negative impacts of pollution within these environments. There is a disconnection between landscape, water, people and place. The lack of connection has huge impacts on these systems; currently there is lack of biodiversity, which is one of the biggest issues that the harbour faces. Subsequently making the river isolated, enclosed, ignored and polluted. As of 2011, the environmental state of the harbour has been labelled ‘nearing crisis’ and in ‘significant decline’, due to shrinking fish and shellfish stocks, increased sedimentation, declining water quality and competition for resource use and development, with “99% of the rivers in the catchment [being] polluted.” The common emerging theme within our water environments is negative, with ninety nine percent of the catchments around the Kaipara Harbour being blocked, low in vegetation, as the kauri forest is long gone, currently replaced with dairy farms that are affecting the water quality around these zones. As landscape architects our goal is to create connections and interactions between and within space, it is not just about restoring an area or regenerating recreational use, or making it ‘pretty’. It is about the interaction between the people and their environment, those that are predicted and those that emerge.


The principle design of the site was to enhance the area where humans, land and water can blend, to benefit and support each other as one environment. Creating a connection where all the three elements work in harmony within the Helensville site. The sites water environment is so isolated and disconnected from the city, and like people say “no one will fix the problem, unless they see the issue�; the intention of the study was to create awareness within the community. Expressing the urgency for people to relate to and understand the river. As well as witness what is happening and what harm is being caused; this may help them to learn and recognise what they can do to help their environment and community. The design idea was to generate an environment where people help water, water helps land and land helps people, creating a relationship beneficial to all. The design implemented six over-arching themes, aesthetic, cultural, educational, restoration, physical and mental wellbeing and social cohesion. The use of these methods within the site created a successful, flexible design; a design that answered and solved the problem, of how we can enhance and improve water quality in our streams, rivers, and harbours through structural connection, and landscape, through public awareness? The over-arching design themes and the connection created between the people and the water, formed the water sensitive design.


THE EMERGENCE OF A NEW LANDSCAPE Rachel Butler 4TH YEAR BLA Refer to page 116 for footnotes



his negotiated study project questions the role landscape architects have in the preparation of management plans for Pacific World Heritage sites by utilising a mapping methodology to explore the potential outcomes of mixing conservation with tourism and exploring the role these have in the landscape. The 1990s marked a turning point in how we view culture; this is when, following much debate over previous recognition standards, UNESCO criteria for assessing and recognising cultural landscapes expanded to include living landscapes or those which have been modified by humans. Such recognition resulted in an increase in nominations for cultural sites particularly in the Asia Pacific region, such as Tongariro National Park which before 1993 had only received World Heritage recognition for its natural values. The nomination of these sites brought about the new issues of how we interact with and manage cultural landscapes, where the values for which they are inscribed are not necessarily able to be mapped or otherwise formally identified. This also leads to problems when it comes to the management of the site, as it is a


lot harder to design for the future when a traditional way of life still takes place on the site. The 1960’s and 70’s were fundamental in the recognition of heritage but they were heavily focused on built heritage of outstanding architectural design or connection to the rich and famous such as monuments, buildings and archaeology, or what Richard Engelhardt referred to as the three P’s; princes, priests and politicians.1 1962 marked the birth of UNESCO’s role in landscape conservation, starting with the Recommendation Concerning the Safeguarding of Beauty and Character of Landscape and Sites which in turn led to the adoption of the World Heritage Convention in 1972. This convention served the purpose of safeguarding cultural heritage and providing protection and recognition at a global level.2 The original convention document defined cultural heritage as works of man or the combined works of nature and man. It wasn’t until 1992 when this was officially adopted and the way UNESCO recognised cultural landscapes expanded to include organically evolved and continuing landscapes as well as associative cultural landscapes.

Sites are given World Heritage status to protect them for future generations to enjoy. The prestige of being recognised helps to raise awareness among governments and people for heritage preservation. But one of the key requirements of a site receiving designation is that it must cater for tourism, which often results in the commoditisation of culture or damage to the natural S S CE environment. Despite extensive knowledge about sustainable G C A TIN research into case studies including Tongariro National CH tourism, AN L P D S E Park has Rhighlighted the lack of integration between conservation OA LE DG S SE andCproviding for recreation. Regulations must be imposed if the ES AC education in sustainable behaviour is to continue and the reasons A for restrictions toAbe RE understood. N

was the coastline of Tiavea, an area that had previously been abandoned in favour of higher ground due to risk of coastal erosion. Application of the management actions to the site started to delineate zones across the landscape. But by factoring in the issue of seasonality in tourism, each zone started to reshape itself for multi-functionality and changed the relationship between them. In order to produce a cohesive design that fit for its place in Samoa, a degree of ephemerality was called for. This blurred the boundary between development and site, giving potential for the site to develop and change between seasons and from year to year. The final design accounts for conservation and the cultural values of place; including mythology, planting and land use by setting aside areas for the continuation of these practices.

E E RD OM GA LC E N Sustainable Tourism for World Heritage Anne Drost W in “Developing TIO sites” suggests that GAtourist codesNEcould achieve a similar effect, A O OP Zguidelines. acting as tourist She goes on to say that PR management AL R G more work is requiredLto By using the design investigation between tourism and IN TU identify appropriate levels of tourism, U NT C A I “although World Heritage sites are increasingly threatened conservation, the management principles generated changed L by human R P S AGpreservation may depend upon the T intervention, their after assessing the outcomes achieved when compared with the NU development A A T 3 ND BI A of a harmonious relationship with tourism”. goals for the entire site. The final management structure for the A H P NA site included objectives and strategies concerning development, U K L FA WAmissing While this is all relevant and important, what seems to landscape actions specifying design interventions to improve S Dbe S R CE CH OA intangible from the nomination is the recognition of the Bmore conservation efforts and policies that specify the development C A UR H H C storiesD C for tourism. While the final outcome for objectives takes on a aspects of culture; the evolution of land over time, the A E BE relating to formation, the mythology and genealogy that Dtrace similar quality to the normative management structure, it is ON N A the evolution of the people over time. the development of landscape actions and policies that suggest AB

The case study for this project is a site nominated for World Heritage status as a mixed cultural and natural landscape; Fagaloa (Uafato, Tiavea region) located in the northeast corner of Upolu in Samoa. The site has been inhabited for 3000 years and was one of the first areas of settlement in Samoa. Part of its World Heritage designation comes from it being a living cultural landscape. The land is still worked in a traditional manner and they operate under the system Faa’Samoa (a matai-chief system governing body). The site has steep topography that defines access and village boundaries. Infrastructure is restricted to the confines of villages, road access between villages is limited and also comprises a large conservation area, home to some of Samoa’s most endangered fauna. The project began with the mapping of three elements key to the project; culture, conservation and tourism. This led to the production of 12 management actions for the site and the start of definition of potential zoning. The next phase was a design investigation, exploring the transect between the three elements in respect to how some of the 12 actions began to manifest in the landscape. That investigation highlighted some of the other issues facing tourism development such as seasonality. This process explored the key elements of the people and their culture including mythology and land use, the ability to further develop conservation projects on the site and the potential for tourism as an additional form of income for the villages at minimal cost to the environment. It then narrowed down to applying those three elements together on a site to observe how they function together, while exploring how some of those management actions would manifest on the landscape. The chosen site for that phase

the value of the management plan. It uses design analysis and investigation to develop and test the management plan while also showing how it can be implemented. This project has highlighted the importance of using a landscapebased approach in the formation of management plans. This includes the analysis and mapping of tangible and intangible values that are inscribed on the landscape, or as Patricia O’Donnell questions in “Thirty years of landscape rescue”: “Whose heritage is it? What values do they ascribe to it? How do the material, tangible heritage and the immaterial, intangible heritage relate?”.4 The traditional response to producing management plans treats nature E in the case of Asian and culture as two individual entities.ONBut EZ and Pacific culture they need to be Gmanaged as inseparable beingsNE LA ZO because the lifestyle of the people strongly integrates theERtwo. VIL F F U Management plans have the opportunity to incorporate design K KB AL EE into them, instead of generating them based on Ca RWorld Heritage W D R A rulebook, using design thinking provokes deeperOinteractions B between landscape elements. The outcome of this project hopes to highlight the importance of encouraging a stronger dialogue between conservation attempts S ES and the ability to use and perceive tourism in a beneficial light, CC A challenging the role landscape architects have in the management H AC of cultural landscapes. BE




Patricia Morrison 4TH YEAR BLA

his project focuses on improving health and wellbeing in the suburbs by the use of transcendent values and contemplative landscape interventions. We live in an economically driven society, where the typical suburban pattern is highly organised around motor vehicles and ignores the potential of the suburbs; a more walkable neighbourhood for the benefit of health and wellbeing.

Exploring one of the most deprived suburbs in Auckland called Favona, the creation of ‘The Green Thread’ links the community facilities and existing contemplative spaces such as the coastal edge, pocket parks and the roads; the main connection network. The enhancement of spaces within the network will evoke feelings of the spiritual, emotional and physiological which have a positive effect on the physical wellbeing of people. The first area within the network that was explored and enhanced was a pocket park; which all suburbs have access to, but within the Favona area this park is severely under-utilised as it lacks in basics such as seating areas and overall recreation facilities. The pocket park was enhanced for the purpose of relaxation and contemplation, encouraging a peaceful state of mind for the improvement of health and wellbeing. The fall in height of the surrounding fencing to the park blurs the boundary between private and public, bringing about a passive surveillance and attracting locals into the park. This unifies the idea that people should be more connected with their surroundings and more importantly their connection with nature. Allowing the emergence of increased health and wellbeing to arise from the utilisation of this space.





o deal with Auckland’s housing crisis Special Housing Areas (SHA’s) have been earmarked throughout a predominantly large expanse of green field sites across rural South Auckland. One of the real issues with this fast track legislative and development process, is that previously the development of such areas has been conducted in an unsustainable manner. Lacking nearly any form of social or environmental benefit to a wider context. This project was an investigation into how a proposed Special Housing Area, located on the urban fringe of South Auckland could act as a key role model for a new form of sustainable development that Auckland could adopt. This project focuses on 28 hectares of Papakura’s ex-golf course, designated for the development of 350 dwellings. The geographical location of the site between the foothills of the Hunua Ranges to the east and upper stretches of the Manakau Harbour to the west, creates a large expanse of low lying land known as the Drury Floodplains. Up to 75% of the site destined for development is located within this Floodplain, including an intersecting large scale stream system. It in a state that is currently unsuitable for development. Experimentation

with on-site hydrological management through a natural approach, compared to conventional methods of channelling water through man made interventions was explored in the initial investigations. The driving concept behind the formation of the design was to re-shape the land prior to that of its construction of a golf course and simply create a weaving catchment system based on the structure of a natural stream tributary as found in nature. With reference to existing low lying contours, the arteries of this native vegetated catchment extend and intersect through the lowest points of the site where several water retention ponds occur, holding and filtrating water before its return to the stream. An extent of board walks and timber platforms have been integrated throughout the wetland for passive use which integrates with the residential development. The geographical location of the site and this naturalising approach to the land ties back to the site, acting as a connecting ‘green finger’ into the lower stream system that flows from the Hunua Ranges into the upper basin of the Manakau Harbour. When it came to development options, a Dutch form of architecture has been adopted for the dwellings that fulfils a European style and simplistic form. A mix of both single dwelling and joined terraced housing has been proposed featuring off grid living options such as photovoltaic solar cells for electricity, in-ground tanks for rain water collection and large skylight windows on the roof to maximise natural lighting. This form of European architecture and sustainable living alternatives has been heavily featured across numerous cities throughout Holland, Germany, Denmark and Austria in small and large scale developments since the mid 90’s. Current Auckland City trends such as decentralised methods of development that are not dependent on the city ‘s gridded infrastructure provide an opportunity to explore this. Development options along with closely knit road and pathway networks have been integrated into the site around the natural catchment system, where all land has been re-shaped to allow the natural catchment of water. Where it is generally the case that landscapes are designed and constructed to fit around the existing built urban form this project seeks to fit the built urban form around the landscape. This project highlights the importance of how landscapes can act as an underlying system for beneficial social growth while also serving as an environmental node to the wider context.



mergence as a theory has an intrinsic inference of time. Unpacked, the concept alludes to the way in which a set of pressures or new understandings give rise to a new thinking, method or an imminent need for design. It is an exploration of how time has the ability to reveal the way that a system changes, therefore the way we should respond as landscape architects. At a basic level emergence can be reduced to a generative framework; defined units within a specific environment, that evolve to develop specific outputs with immediate consequences for design. Simply; reactions within time, that have the ability to change the output of needs and requirements. The challenge arising from emergent theory is a need to design static systems that are tangible entities for construction, which have an ability to present a platform for new emerging behaviours of a population or ecosystem. Within a city, emergent behaviours occur on many scales, both sanctioned and unsanctioned. A city that enables transition and progression holds adaptability as a mark of success, but how do we allow for the ‘correct’ emergence? What behaviours and actions are

appropriate? It becomes a question of accepting standard solutions, or allowing entirely different concepts, with the ability to transition with a population. To define a new concept of city progression. Auckland is a city where space is at a premium and continually needs to be activated, even in the most marginal of urban environments to ensure citywide vibrancy and productivity. In Auckland the way that space is transitioned is becoming something surrounded by a slow growing sense of exploration and free thought. The city’s governance and communities are becoming more comfortable with pop up and temporary solutions, with temporary street vendors, markets and events - allowing programmatic reappropriation with sanctioned activity. What is more interesting is the way that unsanctioned emergent behaviours occur in a city and the spaces that enable it. More specifically for this project, the way that accommodation alternatives have been expressed in Auckland with vehicle inhabitation. An activity that has been deemed inappropriate in many locations, but one, given the current context of Auckland’s housing issues should be explored to determine if it provides a solution to Auckland’s housing crisis.

This project is an experiment into the way that marginal and transitional spaces can be activated to contribute to housing, with a diverse offering of spatial and financial configurations to develop a viable, transitional community that exists in new and exciting ways within Auckland. Working to locate an answer to the research question, “how can accommodation alternatives be inserted into developing urban landscapes as a response to Aucklands housing crisis?� The exploration of terrain vague spaces and their existence in Wynyard Quarter was pivotal to the premise of this project. This landscape typology validated temporary, transient interventions, therefore an admission that failure was acceptable, due to the condition of termination of activity at some point to allow the realisation of the Wynyard Development Plan. The way that terrain vague spaces are currently appropriated in Auckland contributes little to the future visions for Wynyard Quarter, therefore this reimagination of the temporary sets a precedent for the permanent activities to come, suggesting that high quality ideas are necessary even at the predeceasing stages of development.

A key moment of understanding that enabled the actuation of this project, was the simple notion that land is valuable. There is a price on terrain vague, just like there are huge returns to be made out of current re-appropriation techniques of parking and storage; councils will never enable land use unless there is revenue to be generated or there are quantifiable outcomes benefiting the rate payer to constitute a public goods project. Therefore to present a viable scheme there needed to be a realisation of monetary actuation, to determine who fronts the capital expenditure and who contributes to the operational expenditure. This was a key reason behind transitioning the scheme into parallel alignment with public space as opposed to situation within it, in order to define and understand tenure, land investment units and attributable profit. What has resulted is a business concept that makes use of a digital platform to implement camp ground and body corporate management models to situate a transitional community and appropriate structural advancements on Auckland’s readily transitioning Wynyard Quarter.


ABSTRACT Climate change is a complex problem of global proportions that forces designers to fundamentally reconsider the shape of development for our society. The highly variable conditions cities will face in the future will demand designers to incorporate ideas of the antifragility. Collaborative design efforts best guide future urbanism to sustain and enhance future functionality in exposed coastal environments, encouraging life at the coastal edge. The antifragile landscape confronts the fear of rising sea levels as an opportunity for safer, greener cities that are more equitable, livable and competitive. This is a challenge and an opportunity we cannot afford to ignore.



hen I think about my childhood, some of the most vivid memories I hold are those spent exploring the sandy shoreline of my hometown. Looking out across the Indian Ocean, the descending sun would disappear at what seemed like the edge of the Earth. The cool salty breeze, warm soft sand and the continuous breaking of waves triggered all my senses. This was my playground. Today as a landscape architect, I find myself highly intrigued by the issue of climate change induced sea-level rise, which threatens the longevity of my home and fond memories. By the end of the 21st century, a gradual rise in temperature by approximately +0.9°C to +5.4°C is expected to cause sea levels to rise between +1m and +3m globally.1 With 38% of the human population living within 100km of tidal waters2, design for coastal settlements will become a critical new focus for urbanism. Yet the complexity of this problem demands renewed emphasis from designers on just how to turn the theory of dynamic and adaptive systems into a practice of city-building

In addition to scientific analysis, the severity of climate change has been made dramatically clear in recent years through coverage in digital media. Rising sea levels will change topographic datum and threaten population patterns around the globe, where heavily populated areas are directly affected. For a number of the Pacific Islands, populations will be forced to abandon their countries for safer destinations. However, sea-level rise is a global issue and questions the sustainability of mega cities as well. Several of the highest density cities, such as Mumbai and Shanghai, will face this critical issue and may potentially be rendered uninhabitable. It has forced the Maldives to seriously consider relocation of almost 400,000 citizens, since the atolls that support the nation reach their peak elevation at around 2.5m.3 The question of where one-third of the Mekong Delta’s 17 million population ends up, if submerged is a concern. Even the most conservative estimates predict that at least one-fifth of the delta will be inundated.4 Rapid climate change is threatening to overwhelm infrastructure that in the past had allowed cities to cope with inundation and surges.

ANTIFRAGILITY If permanent inundation is a likely occurrence, then as designers we may see this is an opportunity to collaboratively engage in design to define the future sustainability of important economic, environmental and social elements. Simplifying this approach is Nassim Nicholas Taleb, a Lebanese scholar in risk management, well-know for his concept of the Antifragile. Traditionally, a fragile system is often recognized as vulnerable, and in the event of disaster, is often degraded and broken. The antifragile is not a solution, but it encourages a new way of thinking. It goes beyond robustness, and explains that something does not merely withstand shock and disturbance, but actually improves because of it. It is achieved by encouraging a high degree of redundancy within a system. To exercise this idea in the coastal landscape, the Antifragile approach can be achieved by integrating resilience, exploring opportunities for future adaptability and understanding important ecosystem dynamics to best implement these ideas. The Antifragile landscape may redefine the form and shape of shorelines to ensure the long-term sustainability of important elements that have made coastal living so desirable. FUTURE SPECULATION With the idea of Antifragility at the forefront of design speculation, experimentation has focused on the idea of re-imagining the coastal edge in light of a changing coastal environment. Critical site investigation at Eastern Beach revealed opportunities for potential adaptation to increase resilience in the local community. Coastal parklands were redesigned to channel flooding into treatment

areas, which were treated through an extensive range of tolerant native vegetation. What was achieved was a unique collection of interconnected parkland that provide opportunities for recreation and well being, while supporting coastal accessibility and longterm residential investment. As well as sustaining local ecological significance and providing valuable assets for local community. To further investigate the integration of resilient adaptation in coastal communities, ongoing analysis of the Whangateau Harbour has revealed important criteria for design including existing liveability, local culture, future development, biodiversity and important environmental conditions. If flooding is a likely occurrence in the future, these areas will need to incorporate a high level of redundancy to limit the damage induced by disturbance, ultimately following the approach of the antifragile. To achieve this, design interventions have extended on the findings at Eastern Beach, exploring the principles and dynamics of land reclamation. The implementation of offshore structures work to slow water at the coastal edge, minimizing erosive tidal behaviour and increasing sediment deposition. Working with the natural behaviour of the harbour, land is reclaimed overtime in calm coastal conditions. In the event of storm surge, the obtained sediment is eroded and distributed along the wider coastline, effectively nourishing adjacent beach and cliff environments. Offshore implementation along with flood-park development, will likely bring change to the coastal experience, but ensures the longevity of coastal communities, importantly retaining coastal investment and accessibility while also enhancing ecological integrity.




he New Zealand ambition to live by the water has defined how we have settled within our landscape. This presents an interesting dilemma when confronted with the current research surrounding coastal hazards and sea level rise. The tension between coastal hazards and settlement is a global issue but as an island nation New Zealand has a particularly high number of sites that face these challenges. The Waikanae and Paraparaumu coast has had its own share of problems arise from New Zealand’s coastal settlement legacy. New Zealanders longing to live and holiday by the coast have encouraged widespread coastal subdivision; often located in nearshore areas vulnerable to coastal hazards. This problem has been ongoing but is notably embodied in the Kapiti Coast District Council Coastal Hazard Report released to the Kapiti public in 2012. The report revealed that 1800 of Kapiti’s beach front properties are at risk of coastal flooding with housing around the Waikanae River being particularly endangered. In cases such as this, options presented to residents are often limited to holding back the waters or the looming threat of managed retreat. Yet this does not have to be the case, this project explores the design challenge of remaining in the flood zone. In doing so the research has provided a platform for discussing a new way of living that does not have to banish us from the coast. It questions how landscape architects might negotiate ways in which we retain housing, while also responding to the increasing coastal risk? Perhaps it is a matter of how we settle the coast? What form might this take?

The present coastal settlement of Waikanae and Paraparaumu is comprised of long formations of housing running parallel to the coastline. This structure is problematic as it diminishes the importance of community while exposing beach front housing to coastal hazards. Through analysing this formation, it was determined that by simply adding additional connections from the coast to the first line of stabilised backbones, it would alleviate much of the threat. To support these new connections, streets were incrementally realigned in the site to accommodate ease of access to high ground. An expansion of wetlands into the lowland backyards and a series of water towers on the backbone system became an important part of a new suburb wide water management strategy. While also supporting communities in emergencies, the stabilised back-dunes also became a cultural focus, with schools and community centres, catalysing the development of smaller neighbourhood hubs. Emergence in this project was an important concept driving the opening up of the often rigid design thinking associated with vulnerable coastal settlements. It allowed the understanding of flooding and coastal hazards as not just an engineering problem, but an opportunity to re-think the way in which we settle our coastlines. Ecological variability in our coastal landscapes should not simply become a design constraint but a challenge for us to explore new alternatives from the status quo.







n 1938 an American by the name of Stanley Hart White applied for a patent for his vertical garden structure and concept. This was duly granted and nothing more was heard about it, until recently. The emergence of vertical gardens as landscapes was brought about by growing legislation to control the quality of air in urban areas and so architects started looking for ways to increase greenery in dense urban spaces. The French botanist Patrick Blanc fascinated by how plants survived and adapted to peculiar situations, in particular vertical surfaces, came to the rescue. Blanc’s approach was that plants do not need soil. He claims soil is nothing more than a mechanistic support. He suggested that water and the many minerals dissolved in it, together with light and carbon dioxide to conduct photosynthesis, are the only essential things to plants. Blanc’s assessment was that plants in the wild are growing on vertical surfaces and wherever water is available; in tropical forests, in temperate mountain forests and that the plants can grow on rocks, tree trunks and soil-less slopes. In Malaysia for instance, out of the 8,000 known species about 2,500 are growing without any soil. Thus if you think of a cliff with plants growing on it; what you have is a vertical structure with a medium where the plants can establish their roots and support themselves while also getting the required nutrients for growth. Therefore the idea of a living wall is nothing more than a wall completely covered in vegetation. Modern day vertical gardens attempt to simulate the same environment and can do this in a number of ways. One approach is to create large scale rigid structures which are incorporated into the infrastructure of architectural designs. They are used to clad buildings, (both indoors as well as outdoors), along with other landforms such as tunnels, slopes and walls. The majority of systems have evolved from the Blanc hydroponic style, no longer utilising soil as the growing medium, but using layers


of inert growing mediums with nutrients provided via irrigation. These gardens are commonly referred to as ‘artificial green walls’. Other variations which utilise soil as a growing medium have emerged and these are typically referred to as ‘natural green walls’. The benefits of soil based vertical gardens is that these types of gardens have a greater impact upon the biodiversity of the environment and allow a greater variety of plant environments to be established, providing natural habitats for both additional flora and fauna. This form of urban gardening is often designed as an art form to decorate buildings in cities and has been hailed as one way to make cities more enjoyable, healthier and ultimately greener places. From this a new science has emerged on how humans need nature to be healthy and happy. Biophilia is the term which literally means ‘love of life or living systems.’ It was first used by Erich Fromm to describe a psychological orientation of being attracted to all that is alive and vital. Edward O. Wilson, the American biologist, introduced and popularized the biophilia hypothesis in his book, Biophilia (1984), where he defines biophilia as “the urge to affiliate with other forms of life”. The hypothesis suggests that there is an instinctive bond between human beings and other living systems. He proposed the possibility that the deep affiliations humans have with other life forms and nature as a whole are rooted in our biology. Research into this area is providing some interesting findings correlating human health with a proximity to nature. Studies shows the emotional and psychological benefits of nature is mounting and can result in reduced stress, improved recovery from illness, enhancement of cognitive skills and academic performance, assistance in moderating the effects of ADHD, autism and other childhood illnesses. All these values are in addition to the immense economic value of the ecological services provided by natural systems.

Hanging Gardens recognizes the need for biophilic workplaces, for healing gardens in hospitals, for homes and apartments that provide abundant daylight, natural ventilation, plants and greenery. However less attention has been focused on the city or urban scale, despite the fact that the planet continues an inexorable trend in the direction of urbanization. The agenda is one that must extend beyond conventional urban parks and beyond buildingcentric green design. It is about redefining the very essence of cities as places of wild and restorative nature, from rooftops to roadways to river fronts. It is about understanding cities as places that already harbour much nature and places that can become, through bold vision and persistent practice, even greener and richer in the nature they contain. These factors have stimulated urban design and modern architecture to focus an increasing amount of attention on these areas to ensure that the quality of life is maintained in urban areas. As a result vertical spaces are being viewed with new interest and ‘living walls’ and ‘vertical gardens’ have become generic terms for these types of spaces. On the broader scale, health and climate change concerns are driving increasing amounts of legislation regarding the quality of the environment. According to Tim Flannery in his book ‘Here on Earth’, CO2 levels peaked naturally about ten thousand years ago around 265 parts per million. CO2 slowly began to increase and around 1800 it stood at 280 parts per million. It is suggested that this rise was due to the growth in agriculture, in particular rice production. Over the past 200 years, humans have increased the CO2 in the atmosphere by a whopping 30%. The excess has come from two sources, 40% from the destruction of forests and the rest from burning fossil fuels. James Lovelock believes that 9 out of every 10 of us living in this century will die from climate impacts, leaving a population clinging in refuges in places such as Greenland and New Zealand. If we could reverse the deforestation trend and by 2050 restore between 8 and 17 percent of what we have destroyed, then between forty billion and two hundred billion tonnes of CO2 could be captured in the growing rainforest. It is sometimes claimed that if humanity became extinct the earth would look after itself. That may be true in the very long term, but in the shorter term disaster would befall many species and ecosystems. That is because they have been so deeply compromised and only human efforts keep them functioning properly. The Australian Wildlife Conservancy, along with the Aboriginal land holders, keep dozens of species from extinction. In New Zealand and many other islands, species are kept in existence only through

the most careful protection from introduced pests. Even in the UK, active management is required to preserve species. As the pace of climate change increases and as urbanisation intensifies, to the point where for the first time in human history, more people live in urban areas than in the rural environment, our efforts to protect nature will become more critical. What makes the emergence of vertical gardens so interesting, is that gardens were originally used as mediators between the rural an urban environments where there was once the city and then the garden. This concept changed in 1857, when Olmstead led the movement, with his plan for Central Park to have the garden in the city. The garden was seen as the solution to the ills of the unhealthy industrial city. In the second half of the 20th century Ian McHarg started the rise of the landscape ecology movement. This led to the concept of the garden as the city and placed the landscape at the forefront of future cities. This reliance on a beneficent ecology to control human activity fell short of improving human interactions. Cities require density and a legible civic purpose. Diminishing natural resources, rapid climate change, energy efficiency and population growth are delivering compelling economic arguments for dense forms of urban development. So now we are back to the garden in the city. As a result, the designed landscape, ecology, urban planning and the architectural form are now equal partners in the making of a city as part of the larger strategy of urban, environmental, economic and social regeneration. Within the urban fabric, designed landscapes must now mediate between the urban architecture and the larger landscaped ecological infrastructure and this must be an imaginative, sustaining and biophysical intervention to rejuvenate the urban culture with the idea of nature. Vertical gardens have a significant role in the dense urban environments to bring gardens back into the city, as Olmstead advocated way back in the mid 1800’s. Vertical surfaces of buildings are part of the public realm and provide vast amounts of square metres that cannot be used by other disciplines, except art. These spaces must be maximised to manage water runoff, urban temperatures, noise, insulation, air quality and of course aesthetically, to bring the much needed garden back into the city for the preservation of biodiversity as well as for human wellbeing.




Refer to page 116 for footnotes

ccording to the Quality of Life in New Zealand Cities Survey 20141, population growth and change in our cities impact on the relationships people have with others and their sense of belonging to an area. Informal networks and how people connect with others are important factors for strong communities and social cohesion, which in turn supports social and economic development in our cities. While a recent study by Auckland Council found that the majority of Aucklanders aged over 50 are satisfied with their lives, health and living standards, and are engaged with their families and communities, there are some challenging trends emerging. Increasing uncertainty amongst the older population around housing affordability, income security and personal security are feelings that many Aucklanders can relate to. What is more confronting are results which highlight that over half of the survey sample were lonely; depression was a factor for a significant minority, and too many experience everyday discrimination because of their age.2 Auckland’s population aged 65 years and over is projected to more than double between 2006 and 2031. Over 320,000 people aged over 65 will be living in the region by 2031, and of these, over 40,000 people will be aged 85-plus.3 As the size of Auckland’s older population increases, so does the need for Residential Aged Care Facilities (RACFs); the way we have traditionally designed RACFs – sprawling single-level dwellings, set into park-like grounds no longer satisfies either the market demand for independent lifestyle-lead care nor Auckland Council’s desire for a compact city.

These problems are not unique to Auckland or New Zealand. Globally the relationship between the design of RACFs and the surrounding environment is becoming a focus of attention as the world’s population grows and ages. As highlighted by the UK Design Council4, a child born 50 years ago had a one in ten chance of reaching 100; a child born today has a chance greater than one in four; due to better nutrition, healthcare and safety. However, this does not necessarily imply increased mental or social fulfilment as Chief Design Officer Matt Hunter notes: “As our bodies weaken, so can our sense of purpose in life as well as our social networks… We have added years to our lives, but now we need to add life to our years.” The links between the social and the physical environment however, have been neglected in empirical and theoretical research in the field of Environmental Gerontology, the study of the interaction between the older person and their social, natural and psychological environments.5 There are very few examples of the use of community gardening specifically targeted towards older people sharing knowledge with younger generations. The US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)6 has produced a fact sheet on Elder Accessible Community Gardening, which highlights three community gardens that cater for the elderly. Cultivating Community Through Gardens: pairing gardeners (e.g., young-with-old and experienced-with-inexperienced) provides increased accessibility to community gardens and strengthens the communities where the gardens are grown. Knowledge of effective gardening practices can be passed from generation to generation, along with cultural information about the meaning of food and plants to different people from different times.

In response to the prevailing conditions, Garden of Knowledge aims to improve the quality of life for older people by establishing community gardens inside a residential aged care facility. As part of Committee for Auckland’s Future Auckland Leaders programme the project facilitates a partnership between local youth groups and a RACF. The project reduces social isolation and provides an outlet for cognitive and physical stimulation, with additional benefits such as increased interest amongst residents in the content and style of meals provided (raw, fresh from the garden) and participation in wider sustainability initiatives (waste reduction, composting). By bringing young local volunteers in to assist residents with getting out and working in the gardens, the transfer of knowledge is twofold: the younger people learn practical gardening skills from the residents, while the older people learn about what is happening in the lives of today’s younger generation. Located in Elizabeth Knox Home and Hospital in Epsom, the pilot project has received great enthusiasm and support from staff, residents and volunteers from St Cuthbert’s College and St George-Epsom scouts. To establish the trial gardens a community build day was held to construct four new wheelchair accessible garden beds and refurbish two existing planter boxes. The day was intentionally structured to be non-prescriptive, allowing for interactions between young and old to occur and decisions to be made by the participants. While the beds were not exactly built to plan and plants were put in using the ‘throw-it-in-and-see’ approach, what emerged empowered all those involved. The typical role of an older person, particularly one residing in a care facility, is that of a submissive agent and a receiver of information. Transforming this role to a provider of information and leader of group decision-making has not always been easy during the trial period. Physical factors such as ill health, inclement weather and unfinished ground surfaces limiting access, have at times hindered the project. Leaving the students and residents to their own devices early on was a deliberate move to allow selfdetermination. However, the unstructured nature of the project has occasionally resulted in lack of direction, certainty and confidence. At these times, communication was key. Reassurance that what has emerged and is being done is ‘right’ is often all

that is needed; after all there is no singular right or wrong way of gardening. The communication has been in the format of thematic workshops for residents and students to actively participate and record the knowledge gained for future reference, facilitated by the Garden of Knowledge team. As a result, a loose seasonal structure for gardeners to follow and the production of templates to fill in and record the successes of various crops has been developed. The compilation of a garden library will assist in the seasons to come. In terms of community participation, this project demonstrates that the best intended plans cannot be forced upon people. In saying that, a framework (or parameters) needs to be made clear in order to reach an objective. A second community day was held to celebrate the coming of spring and the successes of the project; activities were planned, morning tea was provided and thank-you gifts were purchased. Despite the thoroughness of the run-sheet for the day, turnout was low; this proved that the balance between providing and engaging is difficult to achieve and that the best results occur when the ideas are generated together. Providing direction and structure that allows for flexibility and spontaneity is a matter of scale. Too specific becomes instructive, too broad becomes inertia. Defining a range somewhere in between these end points allows multitudes of possibilities to emerge. The emergence of possibilities is something taken for granted when we are independent and full of health, but preciously appreciated in what can be the routine-ness of life in an aged care facility.

PROJECT TEAM: Heather Wilkins, Landscape Architect, Boffa Miskell Courtney Kitchen, Architect, Ignite Architects/ NZ Institute of Architects Emma Dent, Auckland University, Development Manager, Faculty of Medical and Health Sciences Greg Nelson, Environment Support Manager, The Warehouse Daniel Williams, Engineer, Northern Regional Manager, Hawkins Rakel Liew, Major Events Manager Auckland Tourism, Events and Economic Development (ATEED)



Refer to page 116 for footnotes

s design practitioners who work within the realm of Papatuanuku and Ranginui; the issues of climate change and growing populations confront us. What are emerging and future issues which will begin to challenge architecture, landscape architecture and design practitioners here in Aotearoa New Zealand? 175 years since the signing of the Treaty of Waitangi, how do we as design practitioners engage with Māori (iwi, hapū, marae, whanau)? Have the NZIA (New Zealand Institute of Architects) and NZILA (New Zealand Institue of Landscape Architecture) made much progress over the past 20 years in engaging with the Treaty and Māori design practitioners? Further more would this have happened without Māori design practitioners driving this ‘bicultural’ partnership? I recently discovered an article, ‘Relish the difference’, in Architecture New Zealand, dated March/April 1994, in which Rau Hoskins discusses biculturalism with Mike Barns, Tony Ward and Peter Maher. I would compare this group to an architectural version of the Māori activist group Ngā Tamatoa, who stood up for Māori rights in the 1970s. I very much admire the perspective of the 1994 article and how it cuts to the chase: “In terms of the Treaty, we shouldn’t be sitting here talking to you today about the need to promote architecture in your magazine or talk about it, you should be able to look out the window and its there” states Barns; and “whoever controls the resources controls the culture,” states Ward. “The notion of biculturalism is meaningless unless you have equality of access and control over resources – without this, partnership cannot exist.” Mike Barns explains that Māori people are acquiring a large proportion of the natural resources in this country and suggests: “Within twenty years, Māori are going to own a large proportion


of the public assets, probably around 30%. Why are we churning graduates out the architectural schools who know nothing about Māori as clients?” Ward, however, is also hopeful about the future of Māori architecture stating, “We’re talking about a different way of approaching design, where what results emerges from the people themselves, and the architect is merely the vessel whereby that happens; the servant of the people, the mouthpieces of the people... not separate from them. Part of them, bound into them, intimately connected with their culture, loving it, valuing it for its difference.” Therefore the question is, has there been progress since this 1994 ‘bicultural architecture’ discussion? In terms of Māori architecture being more visible, we have people like Rau Hoskins and Rewi Thompson at the forefront of that, the airing of the Whare Maori television documentary series, ‘Te Hononga’ Māori architectural studio at UNITEC. The recent Venice Biennale kaupapa led by David Mitchell, Rau Hoskins and others, Deidre Brown’s Maori Architecture book, the Te Aranga Māori Design Principles, Ivan Mercep and Tūhoe descendant Brendan Himona’s landmark Te Kura Whare - Tūhoe’s living building. Along with the steadily increasing number of Maori architectural graduates. In terms of landscape architecture, specifically Dr Diane Menzies article ‘Whose Place?’ in the 2013/2014 X-Section Journal No. 3 suggests there is still plenty of work to be done within the landscape profession here in Aotearoa. With Menzie stating “if the profession fails to extend beyond tokenism by recognising other cultural values in practice, then those from non-western cultures are likely to turn their back on the profession. This is already occurring in New Zealand where some Māori perceive landscape architects as unresponsive and disinterested in Māori cultural values”. I know the recent 2013 IFLA World Congress seems to have been a catalyst

for more meaningful engagements between the NZILA and Māori landscape practitioners here in Aotearoa, with people such as Phil Wihongi, Damian Powley and Josephine Clarke being able to voice their perspectives on a global stage. Brendan Himona and I also attended a critique for a landscape studio earlier this year at Unitec, led by Phil and others, focussed on a papakainga development for Ngāti Rauwaka ki te Tonga down in the South Waikato. However if you take people like Rau and Phil Wihongi from the equation and other Māori practitioners, would there have been as much progression? I would suggest that not as much would have been achieved without Māori driving this. The recent Memorandum of Understanding between Nga Aho (Māori design practitioners) and NZIA is a perfect case in point; if it was not for Māori practitioners pushing for this, then it would not have happened. I do not think we will see a big shift until we see the changing of the guard across the board, be it in education, the NZIA and NZILA and the design profession; including gaining more Māori architects and landscape architects, skilled in both Te Ao Māori and Te Ao Pākehā, in positions of influence within architectural practices. To really achieve buy in we need more Māori architects and landscape architects changing things from the inside of established practices, such as in Jasmax; practitioners who can influence the wider industry. This can also be achieved in the architecture schools, within Auckland Council, Nga Aho and, hopefully, the NZIA and NZILA coming on board. This will assist in ensuring the Te Aranga Māori Design Principles are a recognized engagement and design framework throughout the architecture and design industry. Both Māori and non-Māori designers will better engage with iwi, mana whenua and Māori clients. This should see a change in the built environment, with outcomes becoming more refined over time.

cultural consultants (not if Māori concepts were embedded within architectural education). More time would be spent in the articulation of Māori architecture and design, rather than the current status quo of constantly educating and up skilling others. Māori architecture and landscape architecture would also move towards the development of Māori design language specific to a rohe or a tribal area, much in the way the language or even carving styles can be traced to a certain area, iwi and carver. In the not too distant future Tūhoe will have a team of architects, landscape architects and engineers, etc; clearly engaged in their unique Tūhoe world view, with the right skills and knowledge to lead the design of a range of commercial and residential developments. There also should be a place for tohunga whakairo, master carvers to form an integral part of the design process. We can return to more traditional Māori practices whereby architect, landscape architect, engineer, builder and carver were one in the same or, at least, arrive at a position where these experts work collectively, rather than in isolation. So what could be an ongoing vision for Māori architecture and landscape architecture over the course of the next 20 years? Both Māori and non-Māori as architectural and landscape practitioners will reach a cross roads of sorts. An opportunity exists to let go of past mamae, hurt, prejudices, distrust, insecurities, and in some cases racist and narrow minded views and embrace the new opportunities that exist within the exiting new world of the Te Aranga Māori Design Principles era and the growing post treaty settlement iwi driven economy.

The other big influence will be iwi themselves. Māori tribal organisations, who are leading projects (not just there to make up the numbers or be problematic stakeholders as some would believe) are demanding that our built environment reflects Māori values. There is no reason why there should not be more purposebuilt tribal, cultural centres and iwi-led commercial projects. Ultimately, I’d love to see more built environment projects where there are Māori clients, stakeholders and Māori designers with a kaupapa Māori (purpose). Rau spoke of this in a recent Unitec research publication; he defined Māori architecture as “anything that involves a Māori client with a Māori focus”.1

From a Māori perspective we need iwi, tertiary institutions and industry bodies such as the NZIA and NZILA to recognize the value of investing in architectural students and graduates. We also need our Māori graduates to carry on in the footsteps of both Māori and Pākehā architectural practitioners such as Rewi Thompson, Rau Hoskins, Phil Wihongi, Josephine Clarke, Brendan Himona and Ivan Mercep; as well as becoming the next generation of Ngā Tamatoa , Māori architectural and landscape activists creating new pathways for Māori within both industries. For our treaty partners, I would suggest you get on the waka while you can or you might get left behind. And if you are smart, you will start hiring and supporting Māori architects and landscape architects, graduates and students with the knowledge that Aotearoa New Zealand is quickly changing, and that a large number of property developers, clients, key stakeholders, and potential business partners will be sophisticated, educated and culturally connected Māori.

What is exciting is that I do not think this is too far away. I can think of at least 10 Māori graduates – with a range of tribal affiliations and of various levels of experience, who in the next five to 10 years will reach a point where they can lead the design of a range of projects. Why should there not be an architectural and design practice of the scale of Jasmax with Māori aspirations at its focal point and with Māori architects and designers leading the way?

No reira ka mutu enei whakaaro whakatoi mai i tēnei tamaiti nō Te Tai Tokerau, i roto i ngā kupu rongonui o te rangatira nei a Tamati Kruger. To conclude and to symbolise the opportunity that exists for us all, I leave you with a proverb that was recently used by Tūhoe chief negotiator Tamati Kruger: “Let these words guide our way to a greenstone door - tatau pounamu - which looks back on the past and closes it, which looks forward to the future and opens it.”

Alongside this, and with the best resources and technical expertise, I think iwi would be keen to work with a practice like this. There would be no longer a need for a constant dialogue and translation of Māori concepts between mainstream designers and Māori 81



Refer to page 116 for footnote

any of us know the expression, ‘green is good’, but how many of us recognise that a landscape can also be good for our health? Growing evidence demonstrates that landscapes are a proven aid to health and wellbeing. It achieves this, not just by providing outdoor places designed to keep us physically fit and healthy; landscape can also help us address the more hidden areas of good health management. For example, for children well managed landscapes can aid learning and help them develop social, cognitive and emotional behaviour. Within the adult population they can help alleviate symptoms of Alzheimer’s, dementia, stress and even depression.1 Having good quality landscape around people and the places they work is certainly ‘good for us’ and is an invaluable investment. I recently visited the USA where I had the opportunity to see many new and innovative landscape designs. Speaking with landscape and healthcare professionals it was quite evident that many are championing investment into the concept of ‘landscape of health’. As part of this movement, therapy gardens are being built with increasing frequency in healthcare settings.2 Therapy gardens are green spaces that have been specifically designed to meet the physical, psychological and social needs of the people using the garden, as well as their caregivers, family members, friends and employees. These healing environments are not just limited to hospitals, they can be found in a variety of settings including nursing homes, retirement communities and hospices. As early as 1993 the American Horticultural Therapy Association (AHTA) were developing best practice and evidence based design principles around the design of these therapeutic gardens. The American Society of Landscape Architects (ASLA) now has an independent group of people dedicated to increasing the awareness and importance of therapeutic gardens.3


During my trip I visited Portland, Oregon where I was fortunate to meet with Teresia Hazen, M.Ed., HTR, QMPH. Teresia is a leading professional in Therapeutic Garden Design and management and is the coordinator of the Therapeutic Gardens and Horticultural Therapy for Legacy Health System. She oversees several therapeutic gardens throughout Oregon and Washington states and was kind enough to give me a guided tour of several of the gardens at Emmanuel Medical Centre, including ‘The Children’s Garden & Childrens Terrace’ and the ‘Randall Burns Garden.’ The Emanuel children’s garden was designed in 1996 through a phased construction approach, the final stages opening in 1999. Over 19 disciplines were involved in the development stages of this garden. These ranged from Speech Therapists to School Teachers, Spiritual Care staff and Landscape Architects, all of whom had very specific goals and needs for the garden setting. The goal for the design team was to create a therapeutic and restorative garden with the main focus on paediatric patients, their families and the healthcare professionals that are involved with the treatment of these patients. Conditions within the gardens were supportive to ensure it was a safe, secure and comfortable environment. The gardens offered a universal design to accommodate the needs of outpatients, ambulatory children and their families to siblings that need to ‘run off steam’. At times the garden was also required to provide for adult patient rehabilitation therapy and programmed activities. In a few instances the gardens are set aside as the location for patients to peacefully pass away in a natural and peaceful setting – away from the sterile hospital rooms.

Key design interventions ensured children and their families were provided with a place to play and explore in a home-like setting. Year round rehabilitation is undertaken in the garden, therefore the built structure of the garden had to be modified to improve accessibility including stairs, ramps and inclines, providing opportunities for cognitive and physical activities. Wheelchair users also had to be incorporated as well as seating being provided to support those with decreased balance as well as places for other users to sit. There were areas for walking and break out zones for solitude and gathering. The plant media used in the garden ensured four seasons of sensory stimulation. The latest edition to legacy gardens is the Children’s Terrace, located on the second floor. This garden provides wonderful views of the children’s garden below. Following similar design process to the children’s garden below this garden provides diversions and solitude to patients, staff and other hospital visitors. This stage of the Legacy Emmanuel project was supported with a $560,000(USD) grant from the TKF Foundation (Annapolis, Md.)4, a philanthropy dedicated to the creation of spaces that provide opportunities to connect with nature. Discussions with Teresia and the benefactor highlighted the important commitment to clinical research these projects require. Often a large percentage of the funding received for these therapy gardens is allocated for research and data collection. In one particular instance three PhD students were involved in data collection at one such garden. Data collected regarding the use of the garden along with subsequent interviews with patients and family was aimed at gathering evidence to prove the health benefits of these spaces and to ultimately elevate the recognition of these gardens in the healthcare industry as exemplar models as well as being able to influence standards in ongoing practice. Teresia hoped this research would be able to influence those at the highest level in the American Health System where there is still an underlying need for many to understand that nature heals. The research aims to demonstrate the fact that these gardens are a cost effective (initial investment plus ongoing maintenance) mechanism when it comes to measuring the dollar value of health. So the question needs to be asked,where does this leave us in New Zealand? The implementation and use of ‘Green’ space is largely ignored in New Zealand mainstream, public health and practice. Therapy gardens are few and far between in our hospitals and those that are available often lack the scientific design rigour executed in those gardens incorporated into American healing environments. Due to the rising costs of healthcare and the increasing challenges that physical and mental health services are facing alongside the global phenomenon of an aging population there is undoubtedly an opportunity to review how we in New Zealand view the use of green space in the healing process. Landscape architects can play a role individually and collectively by utilising salutogenic design principles. Designing spaces that focuses on health and wellbeing as well as providing good quality, safe and functional spaces not only have a positive effect on human health, they also carry significant economic and ecological benefits.




hat role can Landscape Architecture play in increasing the adaptive capacity of coastal settlements and ensuring the ongoing viability of both social and ecological systems? Historically human inhabitation has been focused around bodies of water; in New Zealand particularly, access to our coastlines is considered a birthright.1 The threat of potential sea level rise is putting increasing pressure on coastal environments. Human intervention into coastal landscapes is having a significant effect on the stability and health of our coastal environments and their ability to respond to change.2,3The increasing demand for coastal property has seen economic incentives take precedence over the ecological and environmental values, and increasingly coastlines are being overtaken by large-scale developments. The need to develop a resilient and mutually beneficial relationship between these dynamic coastal zones and the human inhabitation is becoming increasingly apparent. The current models of response to threats to coastal inhabitation are predominantly ‘retreat’ or ‘blockade’.4 The Netherlands are the most widely recognized exponents of the ‘blockade response’ with complex systems of dykes and reclamations.5 More recently with the increasingly noticeable effects of climate change and sea level rise, managed ‘retreat responses’ are becoming more common.6 Moving back to more stable ground and leaving the edge to its own devices neither addresses the history of human inhabitation of the coastal edge nor deals with the vulnerable nature of the coastal system appropriately. The discussion around the occupation of dynamic landscapes needs to move away from one of control and mitigation and toward greater symbiosis. Climate change is increasing the intensity and frequency of coastal threats; therefore coastal communities need to be better equipped to respond to them. Design-led approaches that acknowledge both human inhabitation and the dynamic nature of the coastal environment are imperative if we are to continue to live the ‘kiwi dream’ of beach holidays in coastal landscapes. The worldwide trend to develop sensitive and ephemeral barrier formations on our coast highlights, in particular the development style and financial investment that is under threat from climate change and sea level rise.


Open space is critical in providing a buffer between coastal processes and coastal settlements. The recreational and natural amenity these spaces provides value to the community while also increasing the flexibility of the natural environment. Most importantly these open spaces, if planned and designed appropriately, can play a crucial role in absorbing coastal threats and increasing the value of the settlements. Both urban design and landscape architecture deals with a complex range of stakeholders, often with opposing views. This makes these disciplines appropriate lenses for addressing the tensions and challenges involved in responding to climate change and its impacts to coastal settlements. With design as the interface between the conflicting needs of ecological and socioeconomic systems, a more symbiotic relationship between them can be created. There needs to be a greater understanding of the role that humans can play as part of the holistic system and not as the primary component. In the socio-ecological system adaptability can be defined by “the collective capacity of the human actors in the system to manage resilience”.7 Our way of life is completely integrated into, and reliant on the continuing health and resilience of all inter-related systems both natural and man-made. Building adaptive capacity within coastal settlements will increase their resilience and create space within the community for the absorption of gradual changes, while also providing a platform for faster recovery in the event of any larger scale disturbances. Nicholls and Klein propose five approaches to proactive adaptation to climate change: 1. Increasing robustness of infrastructural designs and longterm investments 2. Increasing flexibility of vulnerable managed systems 3. Enhancing adaptability of vulnerable natural systems 4. Reversing maladaptive trends 5. Improving societal awareness and preparedness8

These approaches are tangible; they represent actions and ideals that are accessible and have sufficient definition to form a framework against which a design process and outcomes can be assessed. They deal with both social and environmental issues and cover concepts explored by both the International Panel for Climate Change (IPCC) and the Resilience Alliance. Proactive adaptation needs to embrace the concept of redundancy in resilience thinking by providing for change, in both social and physical realms without being specific about the form that it may take to build adaptive capacity. Adaptive capacity is about latency and flexibility creating space for responsive adaptation within the socio-ecological system. The link between resilience, or adaptive capacity building and design, needs to be further explored, so that resilience can be given an accessible face that engages community interest, for reasons other than simple necessity. The relationship between socio-economic and ecological systems on the coast is fraught with misunderstandings and one-sided arguments. Design, and in particular landscape architecture ,plays a critical role as the interface between ecological needs and socio-economic needs and wants; with design as the interface the relationship can be symbiotic. The strategies developed in response to the issues identified in the design studies provide a platform for finer-grained design moves that will interface the natural environment values with those of the settlement community. Robustness of social capital, economic value and long term investments can be developed through the creation of high value social spaces that encourage community interaction and social capital building. Building and maintaining a strong sense of place and community identity relies on strong public spaces and high value natural character that the community is closely engaged with. Community engagement in and responsibility for the interlinked ecological systems that characterize the sand spit community is important; particularly in settlements where the majority of the population is temporary. Social capital drives economic and social investment and leads the way for robust infrastructural designs that support and enhance the natural environment. Flexibility in the man-made environment, as well as in the natural systems is critical for increasing adaptive capacity. Space must allow for changes, both ecologically and socially driven, to ensure the continued viability of coastal sand spit settlements. This must also be achieved in ownership and management responsibilities, to allow for greater diversity in both the social and ecological systems. Encouraging shared responsibility and ownership creates space for change in both the ecological and built fabrics, providing greater flexibility in all elements of the physical environment and socio-economic and ecological systems. This space allows the design to absorb changes in the environment.

Adaptation is a response to change; and adaptive capacity is the space that is made to allow for changes. Space is not just a physical phenomenon, it can be created through social awareness to accommodate changes without being adversely disruptive. Creating space or tolerance is part of building robustness and increasing flexibility. A strong foundation, built from robust social and ecological capital, and supported by robust infrastructural designs, provides a framework within which change can happen without disrupting the sense of place or social character. Adaptive capacity is about absorbing and responding to change. Adapting allows gradual change and growth of the entire socioecological system concurrently. Enhancing the natural systems through regeneration, conservation programs and public awareness of the value of natural processes and eco-system services, is an integral part of increasing their adaptive capacity. Identifying and reversing maladaptive trends in development, land management, infrastructural designs and societal attitudes is recognised worldwide. However the process of changing habits and short-term-goal driven attitudes is complicated. The importance of creating an attractive package is obvious. Society is more likely to buy into wholesale changes if the changes are wrapped attractively in ‘added value’ and ‘increased surety’. Awareness builds preparedness; the strength of infrastructural and social systems is critical in response to potential threats that will be exacerbated by climate change. The natural environment has been responding and changing for millennia. The impact of coastal threats affects the social and built fabric most severely. If coastal settlements are to increase their adaptive capacity then awareness of, and preparedness for, potential threats is critical. Adaptive capacity is achieved through creating open space. Open space allows flexibility, which in turn ensures a robust coastal system. Design is a medium for generating space, which can both mediate and encourage symbiosis between, the wants and needs of the community and the ecological imperatives of the natural environment. Successfully designed open spaces within our coastal environment can perform environmental services and social ones, creating and supporting the interaction of natural and man-made systems to ensure the ongoing resilience of the coastal settlement.





ities are, and will continue to be, a defining feature of our civilisation.1 There are not many cities that have the opportunity to re-establish themselves; to wipe a slate clean and start-over. Christchurch has had this opportunity forced upon it and whilst it is implausible that a nation would ever willingly choose to do so, it is now a reality that ignites an enthusiasm for the visionary re-making of a city. The story of the Christchurch re-build to date is well-publicised, well-researched and well-debated; where there has been so much loss, so much sorrow and suffering, establishing how to start again will inevitably (rightly so) invoke a passionate discussion as to what is ‘the best foot forward’. It is the outcome from 100,000 voices that has prompted just that. The CCC’s (Christchurch City Council) award winning ‘Share an Idea’ initiative identified that Cantabrians wanted “a greener, more accessible city with a compact core and a stronger built identity”, where the cyclist, pedestrian and public utility is prioritised over the motorist and city-sprawling development. In formulation of the Christchurch Central Recovery Plan, CERA, CCC, Ngāi Tahu and industry specialists established Anchor Projects and precincts within the city’s core that are essential to creating a social, economic and cultural capital; with their aim to attract people permanently back to the city centre. Recognising that the recovery of a modern city centre is reliant upon 21st century landscape architecture and a high level of collaboration between these specialist skills and stakeholders, one of the first above ground infrastructure projects commissioned was Phase 1 of An Accessible City; a project to reinstate a transportation network with streetscapes that change the way people move through and occupy their central city. Projections in growth indicate that unless travel is shared across modes, the city centre will become gridlocked. Christchurch is historically a car city, with most people living outside the centre in low density sprawl that continues to spread to new, more seismically stable sites. The car is more than taken for granted; it is central to existence in Christchurch. The effects of traffic in the city centre prior to the quakes was a barrier to the delivery of active transport infrastructure, as well as the prosperity of streets blighted by the one-way system, resulting in the rise of Christchurch’s doughnut ring of malls, and subsequently the decline of the city centre. Thankfully, Christchurch is also a cycle city, with high commuter and recreational cyclist volumes; if more cycle infrastructure was offered, it would be taken up. While the bus continues to be perceived by many as the ‘low quality travel option’, patronages are high. It is not difficult to imagine demand increasing as the central city is rebuilt and repopulated with businesses and residents. An Accessible City Phase 1 developed by the City*Sense team (AECOM, Aurecon, Jasmax and specialist consultants), consists of three streetscape packages for the development of Hospital Corner, Cambridge Terrace/Durham Street and Manchester Street. This is both a public realm project and a transportation project that will enable a three-fold increase in public transport and cycle movements by 2041, as well as making Christchurch’s city centre more walkable and easier to cycle within a new 30km/hr zone. It will also provide developer and investor confidence that will fuel the rebuild, especially on Manchester Street; of which 90% has been demolished.




Elements of a ‘complete street’ approach have been adopted for these packages, which portion the road corridor between all transportation modes, favouring walking and cycling as well as efficient bus movements, over other vehicles. Their intended purpose is to create a safer, more convenient and accessible travel corridor for all. In utilising this approach, the planning has enabled Manchester Street to be widened, allowing the addition of three lines of trees, and putting distance and objects (such as parked cars, rain gardens, tree and bus stops) between transit lanes and pedestrian pathways. The packages include a mix of separated cycle lanes and shared cycle-pedestrian surfaces, and improved bus infrastructure has seen the addition of architecturally iconic ‘super stops’ at Manchester and Tuam Streets, dedicated bus lanes and signalisation that ‘gate’ the buses ahead of other traffic.


‘Complete streets’ have been successfully adopted across the US, with the integration of environmental design, in particular, addressing negative environmental impacts associated with both stormwater quality and quantity, seen typically in traditional streets. With Te Papa Otakaro, the Avon River nearby and precious ground water never far from the surface, all three packages have incorporated passive storm water treatment as a key feature. This strategy was implemented through providing ecosystem services as well as opportunities to green the city, 225 street trees and 4000sqm of rain gardens will be indiscernible from garden bed plantings, to subsequently achieve a high level of nutrient cycling detention and visual amenity. The adoption and intuitive use of these complete streets will be the measure of their success. With their intended purpose to create a safer and more attractive transportation environment for pedestrians and cyclists and encourage the use of public transport, they respond to the demands of the Recovery Plan. The test in the long term however, will be in determining how effectively they will respond to greater challenges faced by established cities around the world; congestion, crime and vandalism, lifestyle amenity, ease of use for young, ageing and disabled users, and addressing the rich-poor divide.


Where An Accessible City Phase 1 was the first landscape-driven project for above ground infrastructure, Te Papa Otakaro, the Avon River Park was the first Anchor Project; also landscape-driven. Incorporating the Margaret Mahy Family Playground, Victoria Square and the East Frame public realm, these projects have the ability to reinforce landscape as a highly valued part of the rebuild. Underway in conjunction with the South Frame, the General Hospital, Burwood Hospital, the Criminal Justice and Emergency Precinct, Metro Sports Centre, the new Conference Centre, Performing Arts Precinct, the Earthquake Memorial and Cathedral Square. Along with the Retail Precinct and many other commercial developments such as The Terrave and Stranges Lane; these projects will stand apart as a dense collection of some of New Zealand’s most innovative urban landscape projects. They will have been designed and built within a short 5 year window. These projects will inform a completely new public realm that will be the image of the city’s heritage, and its cultural and physical landscape, and like Napier, willmark an important period in the evolution of the city. Whereas Napier is all about a discernable architectural style, Christchurch will be about its urban landscape. The continuation of this momentum, and aspiration to achieve ‘a brighter, better’ city however, will be the measure of how influential 21st century landscape architecture practice has been for the success of Christchurch’s reimagining.






ABSTRACT Treaty settlements in Aotearoa New Zealand have not only changed the economic base of MÄ ori groups, but have also provided a catalyst for social, political, cultural and environmental change. The post-settlement period is already proving to be more complex, dynamic and relational than previously. Emergence is often perceived to be most applicable to landscape and the environment. Reading cultural dynamics as emergent might be useful in the inevitable indigenous/non-indigenous encounters in this new environment in the future.





n his comprehensive text on the theory, historical evolution and application of open systems, non-linearity, complexity and emergence, Emergence in Landscape Architecture, Rod Barnett writes: Emergence in landscape architecture takes place in, and partly enables, multiple forms of existence. Non-material features such as concepts, information and desires will have causal effects in the material world of forces and particles, fish and insects, which means these non-material events are accorded an ontological reality. Such immaterial features include human mental structures and events like conceptual schemes, plans, intentions and emotions, as well as socially constructed elements such as games and commodity prices. In effect, landscape architecture requires an emergentist pluralism.1 This paper explores an aspect of this pluralism in the emergent encounters in the indigenous/non-indigenous environment in Aotearoa New Zealand. It argues that this relationship is dynamic, not static, and that the new post settlement environment creates a great variety of different social, economic, political and even environmental influences. It further suggests that these circumstances will have a range of significant impacts on the non-indigenous peoples of Aotearoa New Zealand. This paper is not intended to be an overview of the indigenous/ non-indigenous relationship, but to interrogate its nature in terms of emergence. In addition this is a personal account, that of a descendent of settler New Zealanders. I quote a number of personal sources, including contributors to a Landscape Architecture class at Unitec, Landscape of Aotearoa. If my interpretations seem inaccurate I apologise. I am reminded of anthropologist, Joan Metge’s experience of delivering talks on Māori for a local audience in Kaitaia. One local Māori said afterwards: “we recognise ourselves in what you say, though we would have put it differently.”2 At a recent Indigenous Content in Education Symposium in Adelaide (ICES 2015)3 Glenn Wood from Griffith University said to me that a perception from that side of the Tasman is that New Zealand is in a process of ‘indigenising’. Putting such hyperbole aside, there is a perception that this country is more progressive than others in the area of relationship with its indigenous peoples and is undergoing considerable change as a result. So, what can be said of the current state of the relationship between indigenous and non-indigenous in Aotearoa New Zealand? And further to that, what might be surmised to involve the future of this relationship? INDIGENEITY I use the term indigenous/non-indigenous as a more precise, and hopefully more meaningful, term than bicultural, which has gained many indeterminant and vague meanings. What is meant by indigenous? This is not as straightforward as a simple binary response. Indigeneity is becoming a more complex notion, involving a complex set of identities. Many of us Aotearoans are directly connected to both worlds. A significant number of people, possibly almost as many people as identify as Māori, have

genealogies (whakapapa) which include both indigenous and settler origins. Others, like myself, lie ‘between’ both groups, in something that could be described as a pivotal position: my ancestors (tīpuna) are Scottish and English; my descendants are Māori. Indigeneity itself is too simplistic to be described as a singular entity or type in Aotearoa New Zealand. Although Pākehā have often, at least in the past, considered Māori as one people, Māori generally tend to identify more as members of iwi or hapu or iwi and hapu. Again there are also Māori who do not do so, especially those who have lived in cities away from marae of origin for generations, or who have loose or only partial connections to such groups or places. This might also apply, in yet another permutation, to those who have lived all or most of their lives overseas. If the definition of the term indigeneity in reference to Māori is this complex and fragile, it makes for a very wide range of potential associations, situations, backgrounds, attitudes, interests, approaches, desires, needs, etc. Any assumptions have little or no validity. Then what does non-indigeneity embrace as a term? It too is more complex than merely ‘other’ to indigenous. The other to Māori has usually been termed Pākehā. This term usually refers to a certain racial or cultural category perception, usually European New Zealander, perhaps initially as defined by Māori, and quite commonly more specifically British European. Pākehā itself as a term no longer comfortably describes a very large number of non-Māori living in this country, if it ever did. Auckland alone has more than 200 ethnic groups according to a New Zealand Herald article last year.4 Among Pākehā or others of many generations in New Zealand, some consider themselves to be indigenous, most likely with some disapproval from most Māori, especially as the term tangata whenua has significant resonance and particular associations of identity and indigeneity. Tangata whenua: from a Māori perspective this is much more than New Zealandness. It relates to a particular place for a particular group: an iwi or hapu rohe (territory). Natalie Robertson has described the nuances and complexities of the group and this place of belonging.5 When outside her iwi territory she identified herself by her iwi and the accorded landscape features of mountain (maunga), river (awa) and sea (moana). When within the rohe of her iwi, she identified with a more local group (hapu) and its identifying landscape. This concept of tangata whenua provides Aotearoa New Zealand with its own very particular kind of indigeneity. For Māori the term tauiwi possibly represents best those of us who are non-Māori or non-indigenous as a whole. TREATY/TIRITI In 1840, whether they knew it or not, Māori signatories to the Treaty of Waitangi (te Tiriti o Waitangi) were ceding sovereignty to the British Crown. From this date European settlers, mostly British at the time, began to move to the most far-flung British colony, already settled and occupied by groups originally from East Polynesia, whether they were aware of this extant occupation when



they left home or not, and whether they chose to acknowledge this fact or not, once they had arrived. This colony has undergone many changes over the last 175 years, predominantly in the model of European colonies emerging into post-colonial states. It could be said that these were islands of Southern Polynesia that now form a nation state in the manner of a Westminster democracy. During much of the these years Māori struggled to retain their land, speak their language, maintain control over their culture, and reverse some of the most pernicious consequences of being colonised. This was largely invisible to the Pākehā world until 1970s. This struggle has been well documented in Dr Ranginui Walker’s Ka Whawhai Tonu Matou: Struggle Without End.6 Some of this struggle was pan Māori, some iwi or hapu based, and some competitive, as with the claims to the Māori Land Court. Part of the struggle involved an attempt to procure redress for land lost and Treaty violations by the Crown.7 Throughout 19th and early half of 20th centuries, wars to resist land sales, confiscations (raupatu), the compulsory conversion of land tenure from customary communal ownership to individual title through the Native Land Court, set up in18658, the long drawn out processes of this court to prove ownership rights (which often forced Māori to camp for weeks at a time where the court was held), and appropriations of land under the Public Works Lands Act 1864, left Māori communities in turbulence and dislocation, often ultimately permanently. All the while, European settlers were staking land claims, ‘breaking in’ land, establishing thriving communities and creating the institutions of a nation state, which would afford peace, safety, stability and prosperity. As Richard Hill has summarised: With a huge array of controls available, and supported by almost all Pākehā, the state sought to undermine and eventually destroy both Māori collective politico-social organisations and indigenous cultural identity and distinctiveness: this is what the ‘greater good’ required.9 Some minor settlements to redress the violations of the Treaty by the Crown began in 1920s mainly over confiscated lands (raupatu). The process of facilitating a more thorough compensation process began in earnest with the establishment of the Waitangi Tribunal in 1975. This was to address the grievances associated with these violations, and provide evidence for redress. Giselle Byrnes, who was once a researcher with the Waitangi tribunal has criticised the tribunal for remaking history.10 Nevertheless, the Waitangi Tribunal has demonstrated the significant scope and scale of Treaty breaches and injustices to substantiate the settlement process. It should be stated that Byrnes is a supporter of the Waitangi Tribunal process. Her argument is with the veracity of the evidence in terms of the accuracy of the historical record, and the judgement of nineteenth century actions in late twentieth century terms. TREATY SETTLEMENTS Most, but not all, iwi and hapu have reached a Treaty settlement with the Crown, or are in negotiation to do so. The settlements began with a fisheries quota in 1989, followed by the Sealords deal in 1992, both of which were pan-Maori in nature, then Waikato in 1995 and Ngai Tahu in 1996. It is now 20 years since these first 92

settlements were agreed upon. For iwi entities there were some teething issues in the first few years in the new governance and business environment, which received some press. What did not were the slow, clumsy, negligent or resistant responses from the non-indigenous bodies, whether government, local government, media or business. It is perhaps the latter which responded most readily when they saw the investment opportunities in the assets held. As a consequence, the first two iwi with settlements, Waikato Tainui and Ngai Tahu, now have assets worth a billion dollars each. Last of all has been the public, though this is understandable given the poor quality of knowledge, historical or cultural, that this public is exposed to or avails itself of. It should be noted that the government set the ground rules for the settlement process, especially over the nature of Post Settlement Governance Entities (PSGEs), required of iwi for the settlement agreements and packages to proceed.11 Despite one party to what are termed ‘partnerships’ coming to the negotiating table with pre-negotiating terms, most iwi have acknowledged the current political reality and agreed to take part. Even though the settlements mostly constitute less than 1% of the value of the assets lost through no or little fault of theirs, iwi know this will provide an asset base with which they can start over again. POST SETTLEMENT ENVIRONMENT So these settlements are a new condition for PSGEs and their iwi/hapu. Some have had 20 years to adapt, others have yet to conclude Treaty settlements and receive monies or land or both, and make decisions on the use of their new assets. There is great responsibility in achieving a balance between the protection of their new assets, welfare for their member constituents, and guardianship (kaitiaki) of their lands, waterways and other taonga. Commentary in the media is sometimes focussed on why more is not being done by these iwi authorities to address the health, welfare or living standards of their members. Why would iwi and hapu not take their responsibilities seriously? It can only be patronising for tauiwi or anyone else to say how any one group (iwi or hapu) should use this resource. Afterall, both Crown and nonMāori were willing to strip their assets and leave them in poverty as a people. It could be argued that such a challenge could have some validity if the returned assets were in reasonable proportion to what had been taken. Are these settlements full and final as the Crown claim? Given that the assets received to date constitute less than 1% of the total confiscated or acquired through the deliberate destruction of communal ownership, it might not be surprising that King Tuheitia has made public a claim over land beyond Tamaki Makaurau (Auckland) on behalf of Waikato Tainui. The fact that it appears to infringe on other iwi claims is perhaps an unfortunate by-product of the settlement process. It is likely that the settlement process is one that will cause greater competition than has been the case over the last century or so of more or less pan Maori collaboration in the struggle to attend to the grievances. A new governance structure has emerged in the post settlement period for co-management of assets. This has applied to land,

waterways and islands which were once owned by the Crown or local bodies and managed by government ministries, such as the Department of Conservation, or regional authority entities. An example of this is Tūpuna Maunga o Tāmaki Makaurau Authority, the co-management group made up of representatives of Auckland City and 13 Auckland iwi. Co-management is likely to require a stronger presence of Māori land (whenua) values, such as mana whenua (authority over and responsibility for land) and kaitiaki (guardianship), but likely to also extend to management tools such as rahui (temporary restriction). This concept – rahui – is one of the management tools which is aligned with care for the environment (kaitiaki). It is symptomatic of a conservation ethic: when resources are under threat for a variety of reasons, controls are exercised on that resource. This is in contrast to the preservationist ethic which is the guiding principle of the Department of Conservation. The preservationist ethic, designed to protect the remaining small representative intact ecological patches, is a logical response to the wholesale conversion of New Zealand’s environment to pastoral agricultural and exotic forestry production. Sonny Tau’s recent harvesting or purchase of kereru may not have been a prudent way to alert us to the dichotomy of these 2 approaches.12 Nonetheless, prudency would dictate that it is a dichotomy about which we must have meaningful conversations. To what extent are we willing to engage in these conversations? To what extent are we willing to consider the indigenous position on matters? In Auckland (Tamaki Makaurau) the new Unitary Plan has invoked a resource consent notification requirement for a number of sites of interest to tangata whenua. Two of these occur on Paritai Drive, causing the residents to take the matter to court recently.13 A resource consent application for further site development might be considered a small price to pay for living on land that had been gifted by this tangata whenua.

majority enjoys. That is the New Zealand project”.15 There is no doubt this project is a long term one, but judging by its present state, its shape is morphing quite rapidly. We should also recognise the possibility that any of us might find our particular identities - indigenous, non-indigenous or any hybrid - in the minority. Discomfort is often a condition of post-colonial societies, as it is also of emergent conditions if our expectations are of stasis. In the recently released documentary film The Price of Peace16 on the police invasion of Tuhoe and the trial of the group known as the ‘Urewera Four’, Tame Iti and his co-accused claimed they were engaging in learning traditional iwi knowledge, while the Crown charged them with terrorist activities. The defense lawyer, speaking after the trial said: “[We have] two strong cultures in this country and the two cultures don’t talk easily together.” Even the website of the Ministry for Culture and Heritage has this to say: “If Māori and Pākehā had at times talked past one another, in the late 20th century they were at least facing the issues. People in New Zealand should only worry if the talking ends”.17 We will have divergent opinions and robust debate, but it would be useful if both are informed. Ideally the New Zealand project has us all engaged in action as well as talk. We are all on this waka together. Like all emergent conditions there will be swells, storms, doldrums, and the need to change tack. It will be better if we all man the sheets or paddle in unison, rather than fight over the steering. And far better in the waka than out.

CONCLUSION While it is likely that a majority of non-indigenous New Zealanders are now in accordance with the principle of settlements to redress the wrongs done to Maori over the last century and a half, these recent examples of issues in the public spotlight indicate that there is considerable misunderstanding of te ao Maori (Maori world view) still and that there continues to be resistance to a shared approach to issues. Post-settlement has delivered a newly emergent cultural environment, and the great variety of permutations of these settlements and the contingent iwi circumstances provide for enormous diversity. It would be useful for non-indigenous New Zealanders to gain at least a passing familiarity with the current situation. New sets of causal effects will make it even more complex. Our country is small and we live cheek by jowl. Increasingly the hybridity of our indigneity is becoming more complex and more inclusive – those who will be able to whakapapa to a Maori ancestor are likely to form a majority at some future stage.14 So it probably behoves all of us to consider the potential identity of our descendants. John Roughan said in a New Zealand Herald article recently: “A treaty-based shared state, which ours has to be, may be better if it can satisfy the need of indigenous minorities for the ethnic pride, cultural security and national identity that the 93

A NEW PERI-URBAN AGRICULTURAL SYSTEM FOR AUCKLAND Shoujun Chen, 1st YEAR MLA & Nikolay Popov, MLA, UNITEC Refer to page 117 for footnotes

ABSTRACT With population growth predicted for Auckland, there will be a rise in the food production required to feed the city. 1 Auckland is already the country’s largest customer of food markets, but the fossil fuel based agricultural system in Auckland is still vulnerable to urban growth and climate change. In order to provide sustainable future for our next generation, the emergence of peri-urban agriculture provides opportunities to improve the city’s food resilience and develop local food system in Auckland. This article will survey various planning concepts for peri-urban agriculture development and evaluate their applicability on a specific site - Special Housing Areas (SHAs) in Belmont.




ew Zealand is known worldwide for its primary industries. Auckland is the heart of the country’s food processing industry.2 In the last few decades, the rapidly expanding population in Auckland has accelerated the demand for housing development, which led to urban sprawl. As a result, an increased number of small scale horticulture, viticulture and orchard enterprises have been converted to housing, industry and commercial use.3 Due to the rapid displacement of agriculture, Auckland has lost 8.3 percent of its most productive soil resources.4 Peri-urban agriculture refers to “production units close to town, which operates intensive semi- or fully commercial farms to grow vegetable and other crops”.5 In Auckland, the peri-urban agriculture is present in the periphery of current urban areas, which are located between the build-up areas and Rural Urban Boundary such as Kumeu, Belmont and Hingala. The emergence of peri- urban agriculture is usually regarded as a premium in Auckland’s food system because most of the land devoted to agriculture is located in rural areas.6 However, with increasing levels of climate change and loss of soil from urbanization, New Zealand’s agricultural industry suffers unprecedented challenges.7 This paper will argue that to be a sustainable food system, a new peri- urban agricultural system should be created in Auckland region. INDUSTRIALIZED AGRICULTURE & LOCAL FOOD SYSTEM Auckland has a vision to transform a fossil fuel-dependent, high energy-using and waste society to a sustainable low carbon city.8 However, based on the data from Acres9, only around 1%, or 124,000 ha out of the 12,500,000ha of productive agriculture land is certified organic in New Zealand. Most of the land still involves fossil fuel dependent mechanization and the extensive use of fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides. As a result, over 3000 tons of pesticides are used in industrialized agricultural system every year and most of them are well known to cause cancer and birth defects.10 Furthermore, according to the data from New Zealand Organic Market Report11, almost 92% of New Zealand grown produce is exported to overseas markets. The distance food travels from farms to consumers (also called Food Miles) intensifies the usage of fossil fuels, traffic congestion and climate change. An economically strong agriculture may be able to limit the loss of land to urban growth but industrialized farming, especially adjacent to urban areas seems very vulnerable to urban sprawl. The loss of investment and the demand for settlements in periurban areas intensifies the tendency to subdivide agricultural land for residential and commercial land uses that will not be beneficial to local sustainable development.12 On the other hand, in the last 10 years, the rise in popularity of farmers markets and ‘buying locals’ has brought a growing public awareness of the social, environmental and economic impacts of the local food system. Farmers markets have emerged as an alternative option for distribution and retail in New Zealand. There are now over fifty farmers markets operating around the country, with an estimated

$30 million worth of produce sold through them annually. This has led to a small number of direct marketing initiatives, which have been established by small to medium scale organic growers in urban and peri-urban areas.13 Therefore, the local food system has been accorded a stronger vitality and a sustainable future. It is clear that the existing agricultural models have not been able to meet the demand for a sustainable low carbon development in Auckland.14 However, the success of farmer markets, government supports and fertile soil provide a particular opportunity to redefine the role of peri-urban agriculture in the culture, economy and ecology of Auckland. So, how can we enable agriculture to adapt to these huge opportunities and challenges in peri-urban areas and if the urban growth is unavoidable, how can we built a sustainable connection between agriculture and expanding urban settlement? A SUSTAINABLE FARMING - CENTRED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Historically, farming in cities is not a new phenomenon. The direct connection between food production and residents in city plays an important part in human history. Before the advent of the railroad, rapid urbanization and industrial agriculture, the main food resource in the city was from the local rural areas. In modern society, many planners believe that the country and the city are completely separate entities, and the idea of a rural land use such as farming in an urban area seems laughable. In developed countries, as the value of land for agricultural use decreases, the value for urban development increases and the local growers are gradually replaced by global food suppliers.15 Large-scale urban and peri-urban agriculture have disappeared in the last century as food production has moved to intensive industrial agriculture and farmland is consumed for urbanization. GREEN BELTS & GREEN WEDGES In contemporary urban planning there two types of approaches that try to prevent urban sprawl. The ones that try to limit urban sprawl and preserve agricultural land alone, and the ones which attempt to adapt to urban sprawl and create agricultural land within urban development. The first of the main approaches is the concept of ‘Green Belt’. This planning concept was invented by Ebenezer Howard in the early twentieth century.16 Rowe defines Green Belt as “a swath of land around a city which is protected from development and construction.”17 Land uses in Green Belt range from farmland and parkland to the construction of urban wetland. Due to the strong adaptability of the Green Belt concept; it has been applied into limiting urban growth in many cities with various degrees of success. Vitoria-Gasteiz is one of the cities that applied Green Belts in order to limit its growth. With the unprecedented expansion, Vitoria-Gasteiz met a series of hazard, such as energy waste, air pollution from transport and the loss of vegetation in peri-urban areas from

444 95

the demand of industry,housing and infrastructure. As a response, government built a green belt around the city. This green belt, as a buffer zone between urban and rural areas, was supposed to limit urban sprawl and protect the vegetation around the city.18 However, the agricultural land use in this Green Belt did not succeed and was replaced by golf courses, schools, sport fields and public utilities. This was probably due to residents need recreational space rather than productive farmland. The second planning concept is called ‘Green Wedges’ and consists of preservation regimes of green corridors that penetrate deep into the city. This concept is advocated by Andres Duany.19 Duany argues that productive landscape can be regarded as an essential element of urban infrastructure, just like transport and water supply systems in the city.20 Unlike the Green Belts, the Green Wedges would be more adaptable to site-specific needs and work with urban development. The general idea is that city and agricultural land uses will become integrated, the direct connection between food production and consumption will be rebuilt and as a result the residents would want to protect the land voluntarily.21 It is clear that although Green Belts are able to protect natural resources and slow urban sprawl, the demand for housing and open spaces still exist and protecting land does not mean saving farmland.22 The main function of the Green Belt is to separate rural and urban areas, but a sustainable local food system cannot be built without the integration of agriculture and people’s daily life. The residents of peri-urban Auckland have weak relationships with small-scale food production then peri- urban land will be easily lost to development. On the other hand, sustainable agriculture is “an integrated system of plant and animal production practices having a site-specific application that will over the long term”.23 The purpose of Green Wedges is to strengthen the connection between the agricultural elements and a city’s environment, society and economy and save the farmland from urban growth. The specific demand of peri-urban agricultural system is to balance the relationship between housing development and food production. As a result, Green Wedge model is a better application that contributes to a sustainable future in peri-urban areas.

PERMACULTURE PRINCIPLE ‘Permaculture’ was proposed by Bill Mollison in the middle 1970’s, and refers to “Consciously designed landscapes which mimic the patterns and relationships found in nature, while yielding an abundance of food, fibre and energy for provision local”.24 The permaculture system not only minimizes energy requirements, but also establishes a low requirement for maintenance because it is self-fertilizing, self-watering, self-mulching, self-pollinating, selfhealing and highly resistant to pests. The Permaculture principle has been widely used in Green Wedges, which includes allotments, city farms and community gardens, school and private gardens, eco-village farms and urban-rural interactions.25 According to Semenov’s research26, Cuba drastically changed its industrial agricultural system applying permaculture principles and became self-sufficient in the past twenty years. After the collapse of the Soviet Block in 1989, Cuba lost 75% of its petrol supply and 78% of its chemical supply, which limited the use of industrial farming equipment, and broke the distribution chain that was needed to deliver food to the markets. As a result, the Cuban government applied permaculture principles to rebuild the relationship between farming activities and people lives. They believed that food production infrastructure could be woven into the residents’ lives, with interventions that range in size from backyard organic gardens to large peri-urban farms. By the year 2000, urban agriculture in Havana covered 12% of the city’s land, provided 70% of city residents’ vegetable requirement with the local residents. He claims that Havana has become an exemplary model of sustainable agriculture, a precedent that demonstrates both the opportunities and challenges for the transference of urban and peri-urban agriculture to other regions. In summary, permaculture theory can provide a good solution for the integration of nature, people and agriculture if integrated with Green Wedge Model. If the relationship between people and agriculture takes an important role in maintaining and developing local food system in peri-urban areas, a feasible approach could be to create a farming-centred residential areas based on permaculture principles. To evaluate the applicability of Green Wedges and permaculture principle, Special Housing Areas (SHAs) in Belmont was selected


from because of its long farm history and uniquely productive soils. Belmont is located at the west side of Pukekohe, which produces a significant proportion of fruits and vegetables for Auckland and Hamilton.27 In addition to this, Auckland Council intends to make Pukekohe a satellite town that can accommodate 50,000 dwellings, majority of which on productive soils. Special Housing Areas is one of Auckland Council strategies to build more affordable and accessible housing within Rural-Urban Boundary. That means Belmont is in the process of having a large amount of its land re-zoned for housing development.28 The loss of farmland will result in the city having to import food from other regions, and will inevitably mean unsustainable food price and resources for Aucklanders. As a result, the SHAs in Belmont provide an opportunity to explore ways to integrate peri urban agriculture and residential development. LOCHIEL PARK How could we build a sustainable local food system? Following the permaculture concept, it is necessary to understand and analyze needs and resources in local food system. There is a need to calculate the balance between daily food requirements and the area that can provide the same amount of food.29 According to Barber30, the total food energy requirement per person in New Zealand is 5.8GJ per year, and vegetables contribute 10 percent of total energy of the average household. In addition, food productivity for vegetables per square meter of garden plot per year is 0.007GJ. So if it is possible to calculate the energy demand for Belmont, we could know the way to organize the land resources between productive landscape and settlements in the community. Based on the plan from Housing Accords and Special Housing Areas Auckland Order31, 720 new dwellings will be built within 90 hectare of Belmont’s SHAs. After calculating the population and food energy requirement, it is clear that at least 17.9 hectare of the land within the site need to be protected for creating a sustainable local food system. In 2004, the South Australian Government planned to transform Lochiel Park in suburban Campbelltown into a compact housing development set within natural parklands, which aimed to improve the connections, integration and relationships between the natural and built environment. The building development was restricted to 4.25ha within the 15ha site, which almost doubled the housing

density from the Adelaide average of 13 dwellings per hectare. Meanwhile, the rest of land included over 10 hectares of open spaces urban forest, wetlands and a variety of recreational areas which provided education, ecological and visual amenity. The food forest and allotments in Lochiel Park were the heart of the community because they were the places where community can be outside, engage with nature, and socialized as they raised their own food and sustained their lives. Lochiel Park showed the benefits of compact urban development where greater emphasis was placed on creating a more dynamic and higher quality public and food producing space, which facilitated more frequent interaction with neighbours and the creation of a community rather than just a collection of houses.32 Based on experience from Lochiel Park, the building areas in Belmont’s SHAs could be restricted to 30.6 hectare within 90 hectare site, which double the housing density from Belmont average of 13 dwellings per hectare. And the rest of land will include over 40 ha of open space for recreation, education and biodiversity, which aim to build a strong relationship between nature and residents. Therefore, it is possible to build a sustainable agricultural system with compact housing development in SHAs of Belmont. CONCLUSION In summary, the existence of agricultural system in Auckland is suffering huge challenges from urban growth and climate change, peri-urban agriculture will certainly play a more important role in Auckland food system. In order to build a sustainable food system, it is necessary to transform fossil fuel based agricultural system into a locally-based, sustainable model which emphasizes the connections between agriculture and residents. With the help of Green wedge model and permaculture principle, a farmingcentered residential development will harmonize with peripheral urban growth and lead to a new agricultural revolution. A further study will focus on how to make the local food system integrates with the local society, ecology and economy in SHAs of Belmont.

Figure 1: Peri-urban areas in Pukekohe33 Figure 2: The Green Belt of Vitoria-Gasteiz34


WHAT IS BOTTOMUP DESIGN? Fiona Ting, 4TH YEAR BLA & Peter Griffiths, BLA PROGRAMME LEADER Refer to page 117 for footnotes

ABSTRACT There is a substantial body of research that points to energy descent. 1,2,3,4,5 In lieu of this, other significantly different forces could drive a number of changes to current thinking in landscape architecture. Examples of these include local food production, communitydriven design, and localised wastewater management. While most landscape practice continues to be implemented through topdown process, for example, council driven city projects such as the shared space upgrades to Fort Street in Auckland, in general the theory on this subject suggests bottom-up design as an alternative approach that could address this emerging future in ways more relevant to end users. 6 While landscape architects have begun to grapple with these issues, for example, Chris Reed of Stoss and James Corner of Field Operations, there seems to be a ‘gap’ between theory and practice in the discipline. Through a research by design process a number of principles that describe characteristics of bottom up design have been discovered. These are explained in the text and conclusions are drawn with regard to their possible use in landscape practice.



• Social Design; and

ver the past three decades there has been a shift in understandings of ecological systems, and consequently, the paradigm in which landscape architecture is understood.7 Sometimes referred to as the new ecology, this new paradigm has emerged from an array of interrelating fields such as systems theory, complexity science, ecological science and the humanities. In landscape and ecological theory it is noted that ecological systems are complex, open, non-linear and exhibit emergent or bottom-up behaviour. While landscape theory has adopted this new understanding of complex systems, in particular the concept of emergence, what this means for landscape practice is much less widely understood.

• Agency of the Designer


Emergence is a characteristic of complex systems and can be described as the result of a system and its many interacting parts self-organising to produce novel and unpredictable behaviour, which can “have the effect of either transforming it or producing some completely new system”.8 Another way of framing emergent behaviour is ‘bottom-up’. If complex systems evolve by emergent adaptations, it could be argued that the best bet for intervening in a system is by leveraging this bottom-up behaviour. NEW PRACTICE The landscape theory suggests a real enthusiasm and drive for bottom-up design methods, with some emphasizing the need for implementation9 and learning by interacting directly in the system. As Jane Woolf writes, “Though design professionals and scholars have made a wide range of interesting proposals that capitalize on landscapes’ fluctuating tendencies, there has been much less conversation about the challenge of implementing such ideas.”10 Facing a chicken/egg scenario, designers want to know how to ‘do’ bottom-up design before doing it, however perhaps the best way to learn a practice is by doing.11 As a response, the author has investigated what a bottom-up design method is, what its implications are and how to do it, using a research by design process elucidating findings by iteration, experimentation and doing through drawing. BOTTOM-UP DESIGN IN LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE In this section, it is argued that there are a number of reasons underlying the ‘gap’ between landscape theory and practice, which are explained using five overlapping frameworks for understanding bottom-up design in landscape architecture. The purpose of these frameworks is to challenge landscape architects and designers to critically question and understand the assumptions and context they work from and within. These frameworks are: • Complex vs. Complicated Systems; • Top-down Thinking, Bottom-up Action; • Reform, Revolution and Emergent

COMPLEX VS. COMPLICATED SYSTEMS While landscape theory has adopted complex systems as a way of understanding the landscape, there is little acknowledgement of other types of systems that behave in vastly different ways, and enable a more thorough understanding of complexity as comparison. The Cynefin framework12 is an incredibly clear conceptualisation of the different types of systems, which include complex, complicated, simple and chaotic systems. Each of these exhibits different behaviour, and necessitates a different practice for effectively interacting with the system. A complex system, for example, cannot be fully understood and relationships between cause and effect can only be perceived in retrospect. This means designers must interact directly in or probe the system, learning and responding as you go. A complicated challenge by comparison, as Zaid Hassan emphasizes, is one in which “the problem and the solution are clearly defined… confusing adaptive, or complex challenges with technical [or complicated] challenges is a classic error”.13 The design projects that follow on from the landscape theory on bottom-up design often fall into this trap of treating the landscape as a complicated phenomenon that can be understood and controlled, rather than a complex system that can only ever be influenced and directed. A planning approach to design regularly mistakes emergent behaviour for complicated ‘problems’ to be ‘fixed’ with more policy, planning or prediction. In actuality, emergent behaviour is an unavoidable characteristic of complex systems, and it is more dangerous to ignore this reality or try to predict or prevent this behaviour than to respond to it as it arises.14 TOP-DOWN THINKING, BOTTOM-UP ACTION The framework of ‘top-down thinking, bottom-up action’, a restatement of ‘think global, act local’ in systems terms15, provides another way of understanding this gap between theory and practice. Top down thinking is characterised by an ability to step back and view a system as a whole, prioritising connections rather than breaking the system down into smaller and smaller components in order to understand it. When combined with topdown thinking, bottom-up action is not acting without context; it is based on an understanding of the whole and utilising ‘leverage points’, where small-scale changes can influence the larger systems in which they are a part. While landscape architects have a long history of top-down thinking, the framework within which the profession practices, and the viability of many if not most landscape architectural projects is firmly rooted in top-down action for “validity, funding and implementation”.16 Top-down action that relies on governmental or corporate buy-in and funding is inherently compromised, and the road from planning to implementation is long and full of surprise dead-ends. In addition, there is evidence to suggest that even



when large-scale actions are achieved, such as policy change or large conservation projects, these actions can have limited effects or equally large-scale, unintended and problematic consequences on the system as a whole.17,18,19 This limitation is expanded on further in the following section. REFORM, REVOLUTION AND EMERGENT The Reform-Revolution-Emergent framework offers a useful conceptualization for understanding how designers and landscape architects engage in complex socio-ecological systems or landscapes. When framed in this way, it becomes easy to recognize that landscape architecture as a method for societal transformation typically engages in complex systems by trying to ‘Reform’ the status quo – be it through public policy or through the upgrading of an existing streetscape. The emergent approach to social transformation is analogous to bottom-up action. Where there is scepticism from top-down governmental and funding bodies (and some landscape architects themselves) around trying a new methodology, especially one that is rooted in experimentation and relinquishing control, bottomup movements such as tactical urbanism and social innovation20 are dedicated to using experimentation to create new parallel ways of practice. As Buckminster Fuller famously said, “You never change things by fighting the existing reality. To change something, build a new model that makes the existing model obsolete”.21 While landscape practice is mostly concerned with the reform of existing systems (such as transport, green infrastructure and public space), deep change in this context comes slowly, if at all. The ReformRevolution-Emergent framework firmly places emergent and bottom-up action as the most effective way to bring about systemic change. SOCIAL DESIGN The landscape theory around emergence and bottom-up design speaks at length in relation to ecological systems, referencing biological concepts and natural processes such as succession22 and morphogenesis23. Some literature extends and applies this understanding to social systems, and points to the need for a bottom-up approach which accounts for social processes in landscapes, rather than just ecological. However there has been distinctly less engagement with bottom-up design in highly urban and social contexts, both in theory and practice. This is reflected in the projects that have engaged with bottom up design, particularly at a large scale, which have been more successful when concerned with ecological processes.24 On the other hand there ar projects that may have fully intended to engage in urban challenges in a bottom-up manner but lacked the social design tools for successful implementation. Such projects range from the local and current, such as Kai Auckland25, and the international and past, such as the Koolhaas/OMA Downsview Park proposal Tree City.26 Typically, the social processes which landscape practice has engaged with have been those that are outward and visible manifestations of an already-built urban realm. These include, how people use space (most often this refers to recreationally but can include a “wide range of social and cultural functions, from annual 100

festivals to casual encounters”27, how people and vehicles move through space, and how long people stay in the space. However, the emergent and bottom-up processes that contribute to urban space are also those deeply concerned with the creation of place, not just the use of it. Participatory design has perhaps emerged in recent times to address this niche. Designers under the broad movement of Tactical Urbanism have perhaps had the most success in employing bottom-up participatory design in the urban realm, however this has often been limited to a small scale, such as the block or the street. Conversely, where top-down organisations have co-opted the incremental method of bottom-up design for large-scale projects, the final outcome is generally business-as-usual. This can be exhibited by the permanent redesign for the trial-based pedestrianisation of Times Square, New York, which has just concluded its $55 million reconstruction. The framework of social design offers a more focussed and ambitious lens for understanding how designers might engage with the more fundamental social processes which create landscapes. AGENCY OF THE DESIGNER The frameworks of Complex vs. Complicated Systems; Top-down Thinking, Bottom-up Action; Reform, Revolution and Emergent; and Social Design all contribute to a metanarrative about the level of agency a designer holds. It goes beyond the willingness of the designer to let go of what the built outcome might look like, or to ‘compromise’ their expertise by enabling community participation. From ideas of complexity to emergence to scale, all subvert the post-Enlightenment ideology of humans as historical change-agents.28 Confronting this paradigm requires accepting the limits of human design, and it is only then, paradoxically, that designers can wield bottom-up design as a tool for change. WHAT IS BOTTOM-UP DESIGN? Bottom up design can be explored through doing or drawing. In order to do this one must first be concerned with the idea that the re-making of landscapes is entwined with the perception of where we live. Every landscape has existing relationships embedded within it. And every project has a set of, for want of a better word, criteria associated with it. Doing and drawing require us, as designers, to configure these relationships with a projects criteria in some way. The act of ‘doing’ this allows for unexpected events to occur. With an inquisitive, drawn29, and designed focus, thoughtful and responsive landscapes may emerge that strengthen bonds between people and place. A series of sites within the Mt Roskill suburb in Auckland, New Zealand are utilised as testing grounds for a bottom-up approach to the implementation of some existing community projects. From this investigation, a set of principles has been formulated by the author which underpin bottom-up design. It is important to note that, through design, the outcome of this project has been an interrogation of a bottom-up approach rather than a designed outcome, although this is a by-product of the research.

PRINCIPLES 1. Bottom-up design occurs over time, with implementation and then feedback being key stages of the design process, not end goals 2. Bottom-up design thrives off change and uncertainty, working in partnership with forces that will inevitably shape a project in unpredictable ways 3. Bottom-up design is inclusive of the people directly affected by the challenges it is seeking to address 4. Bottom-up design is concerned with building social capital 5. Bottom-up design utilises the small scale 6. Bottom-up design is visionary The following section will elaborate on each of these principles, referring to knowledge that has come out of fields such as landscape theory, complexity science, systems theory, ecological science and design theory. PRINCIPLE1 Bottom-up design occurs over time, with implementation and feedback being key stages of the design process, not end goals. “Designing with time is a little different from designing in space. The design thinker has to be comfortable moving along both of these axes.”30 In recent times, understandings of design have coalesced around a concept that can be loosely described as iterative design. This can be observed in the rise of various overlapping design movements such as design-thinking, human-centred design, tactical urbanism, social labs, action-research, and research-by-design. While some of these terms and movements have gained traction relatively recently, the process of iterative design itself is far from new. For millennia, communities have employed iterative design in shaping their world, with some fantastic urban realm examples having been charted by Mike Lydon and Anthony Garcia in Tactical Urbanism: Short-term Action for Long-term Change.31 Beyond human communities, iterative and bottom-up design can be observed in ‘natural’ or non-human systems such as the ecological systems dealt with in landscape architecture. PRINCIPLE 2 Bottom-up design thrives off change and uncertainty, working in partnership with forces that will inevitably shape a project in unpredictable ways. “There are no cheap tickets to mastery. You have to work at it, whether that means rigorously analysing a system or rigorously casting off your own paradigms and throwing yourself into the

humility of Not Knowing. In the end, it seems that power has less to do with pushing leverage points than it does with strategically, profoundly, madly letting go.”32 Where a planning-based approach views emergent behaviour as ‘problems’ to be ‘fixed’, a bottom-up design process feeds off change and uncertainty. As bottom-up design is a process, which occurs over time, the design outcomes therefore hold the capacity to respond, adapt and strengthen over time. This process is facilitated by emergent ‘events’, which force the designer(s) to respond in ways that could not have been predicted before the event occurred. This general type of design process has been described as adaptive ecological design, adaptive management and designed experiments.33 Many if not most of these approaches are derived from resilience theory, either directly or indirectly.34 To understand this using a landscape example of an emergent ‘event’: a flood (which is often utilised in explaining resilience theory). If a community garden experiences a flood event, damaging or destroying intensive garden beds, a bottom-up design process could respond in any number of ways. The community may choose to build raised bed structures in the affected areas to mitigate any future flooding. They may choose to reconfigure the garden beds using small cut and fill operations, moving the intensive garden beds to higher ground, and converting the affected area into informal infiltration areas, planting species adapted to wet conditions, such as banana or taro. The community may look further up the catchment where a swale could be implemented. Or there may be a need for storm water devices with larger holding capacity, which could require the community to look at responses at scale. This might include looking at the origin of the overland flow paths and responding at the source. In a bottom-up design process, what the flood event facilitates is not a more robust design outcome, as this would mean a garden that resists future flooding to a high degree. It is not a more resilient design outcome, as this would translate to a garden that is capable of bouncing back to its original state after a flood. In a bottom-up design process, what actually happens is that the garden changes state and benefits from the flood event. PRINCIPLE 3 Bottom-up design is inclusive of the people directly affected by the challenges it is seeking to address. The theory and practice of participatory design has gained traction in planning and design disciplines. This can be understood as an emergent response to the failing of urban planning and design practice to address social issues in an adequate manner. In particular, the planning-based approach generally does not take an inclusive approach in the design and implementation of solutions to urban challenges.35 Joi Ito states, “the only way these solutions work is when they’re developed in partnership with the people actually affected by these problems”.36



This has driven the need for a new practice that goes ‘beyond consultation’; one that recognises and values people as active participants in their urban and public realm.

projects to be accomplished in the same manner. This example makes clear that the process of building social capital is perhaps more important the traffic calming outcome itself.

In a normative civic project there is normally the need to engage in a consultation process; the designer is often required to ‘tick the box’ that shows that a consultation process has been undertaken. In a bottom-up approach this engagement between interested and affected parties is what drives design decisions. This attribute is described by Tim Brown who states that, “Society needs a new approach to innovation that aligns the needs of human beings and the natural world”. “Design thinking which builds on the ways designers conceptualize their work, can provide that approach, and it is not limited to designers”.37


To fulfil this principle of bottom-up design, social design skills such as communication, facilitation, mediation and organisational ability demand a place in the landscape architect’s toolbox. Designers perhaps need to learn to relinquish control of what the built outcome looks like, and instead focus energy and skills on how to seed, manage and measure the social processes by which the built outcomes are generated.

There have been a number of theorists to discuss the role of scale in urbanism, though it is often viewed only through the lens of physical scale, and not organisational scale. Where New Urbanism critiques the vast scale produced by modernist planning, often referencing a loss of “human scale”42, landscape urbanism seems to argue for a full immersion into the complex, large-scale ‘megaproject’ nature of our cities today, with the critique placed more on the false dichotomy of ‘landscape’ and ‘urbanism’.43 While New Urbanism heavily attributes the scale of cities to the age of the automobile, both movements seem to be less concerned with the broader impact of the age of cheap energy on the scale and nature of today’s cities.44 Bottom-up design is concerned with the question: how will both the physical and organisational scale of cities adapt to a changing age of energy availability?



Bottom-up design is concerned with building social capital.

Bottom-up design is visionary.

Adjacent to the participatory design movement, there has also been a rise in theory and understandings of social capital38, and how this concept can influence and direct urban planning and design practice.39 There is a growing appreciation of the role social capital plays in all communities. While landscape architecture has a long history of exploring the connections between people and their places, social capital provides one of the most coherent frameworks for understanding the importance of community’s role in the creation of places.

It is accepted that large-scale, top-down projects will always face constraints. Most often the constraints restrict a project to operating within the current (business-as-usual) paradigm. This often results in a project perpetuating the current paradigm, rather than offering solutions which challenge the status quo.

In Understanding the Social Dimension of Sustainability, authors Dillard, Dujon and King describe the social aspect of sustainability, in part, as: “the processes that generate social health and well-being now and in the future”.40 They go on to explain, “the processes are both a means to, and an end of, social sustainability. Indeed, for the social aspect of sustainability in particular, processes may often be more important than outcomes”.41 This can be understood by using a landscape example of a project for social sustainability, such as a neighbourhood traffic calming project. A guerrilla traffic calming project achieved by a community engaged in a participatory design process (i.e. bottomup design) may be far more socially sustainable than ‘best practice’ traffic calming measures designed and implemented from the top-down. Social capital offers a way of qualifying the difference between these two processes, which both achieve a traffic calming outcome. One of these processes builds social capital, while the other does not. A bottom-up design process builds the capacity for community to work together, and in doing so reinforces the pattern for future


Bottom-up design utilises the small scale.

Such top-down projects may or may not begin with a strong vision, however it is without question that because they are dependent on governmental or corporate buy-in and funding they are inherently compromised, sometimes due to vested interests in maintaining the status quo. Rather than trying to implement a top-down solution that by its very nature must operate within the current business-as-usual constraints, bottom-up design starts with a vision – and takes adaptive, incremental but sure steps towards that vision. Bottomup design is nimble and flexible enough to work on the fringe of what is currently acceptable and what will be the new norm as large scale forces continue to change around us. Vision is a powerful and necessary element to bottom-up design. Donella Meadows, one the world’s foremost systems analysts, articulates, “In my experience that path is NEVER clear at first. It only reveals itself, step by step, as I walk along it. It often surprises me, because my computer and mental models are inadequate to the complexities and possibilities of the world. Holding to the vision and being flexible about the path is the only way to find the path.”

CONCLUSIONS While the principles and the conclusions that follow read in a sequential manner, with each building off the one before it, in actuality there are innumerable accounts of overlapping, interconnecting and reinforcing; such is the nature of complexity. As the sections ‘An Emerging Practice’ and ‘Bottom-up Design in Landscape Architecture’ posited, the larger context within which landscape architecture operates is changing rapidly. It is important to note that the section ‘What is Bottom-up Design’ highlights just a few of the understandings and practices that have emerged to fill the new niches that are opening the way for a bottom-up approach. These include: 1. Designers need to interact directly in the complex systems in which they are trying to affect change. This means designing by doing, rather than by planning. Designers must again adopt iteration and experimentation as the primary means of designing in the urban realm, as it has historically existed up until the most recent 100 years of the planning paradigm. Designers need to discard assumptions and predictions about the landscapes they are working within, and instead adopt a learning-by-doing approach to finding things out about a landscape. These localized findings can inform further interaction and intervention in a landscape and it’s comprising and encompassing complex systems. 2. Within this process of iterative and experimental design that occurs over time, designers will need to work within a context of change and uncertainty, using this to their advantage. Rather than a robust practice which would merely cope in the face of uncertainty, and rather than a resilient practice which would only bounce back to a previous state after unexpected events, a bottom-up practice welcomes uncertainty into its toolbox. Any unexpected events must be treated as opportunities and in turn be interpreted as the emergent ‘existing landscape

conditions’ which form the basis of the analysis phase that is so fundamental to landscape architecture practice. Beyond offering opportunities for learning about and reading a landscape, the opportunities for design are also expanded by uncertainty (not reduced, as a planning approach would interpret it). Rather than a practice that tries to ignore or prevent emergent behavior, bottom-up design enables unexpected events to become opportunities for coming together to learn, design, build social capital and grow stronger overall. 3. Designers need to engage in the social processes that create the urban realm, rather than those which are outward and visible manifestations of an already-built urban realm. This has to happen not necessarily at the policy level, but at the fundamental and most systemic level of behaviours, attitudes and values. This can be achieved by coming together and working with the people who are most affected by the urban challenges designers are trying to address. 4. Social capital is both a necessary ingredient for and a product of working in this inclusive, bottom-up manner. The building of social capital then becomes a primary goal for designers, with the resulting capital feeding back into future projects. 5. Social capital is built primarily at the peer-to-peer level, which points to a certain (small) scale of urbanism which designers need to engage with. 6. The small-scale character of bottom-up design both allows for and is a manifestation of a practice that pushes the boundaries of the status quo. A visionary, nimble, and flexible practice is one that will be able to navigate an emergent future, at the fringe of our current business-asusual paradigm.



ABSTRACT This paper discusses how a green network for regional Auckland could emerge from a close study of both the ecological and social forces at work in contemporary New Zealand urbanism. The paper begins by reviewing the importance of a green network in the shaping of a regional city structure and maintaining the Auckland lifestyle. The authors develop a methodology based on two sets of criteria; environmental and social. Three case studies are developed, ranging in scale from the regional through to the local to test the design methodology. The paper concludes by suggesting that by guiding the emergence of a green network in the greater Auckland Region, the growing population will gain both a new enlarged public realm and ensure the continuation of the existing Auckland lifestyle.



ompared with other major cities in the world, Auckland has a unique urban-nature relationship and a high quality lifestyle. One of the most distinctive features of Auckland is the balanced interaction between the urban and natural environments, that is manifested as decentralized urban districts integrated with a large range of green parks.1, 2 Another element of Auckland’s identity is the traditional kiwi lifestyle, characterised by separate dwellings with their own gardens. Although Auckland has some serious urban challenges to face, including high house prices and worsening traffic congestion, the current green network of parks provides Aucklanders a high quality urban life with relatively limited crowding, minimal pollution (in comparison to many cities, especially in the Asia region), scenic beauty and easy access to outdoor spaces. However, the increasing population and on-going urban expansion is challenging these advantages. Firstly, Auckland’s population is expected to grow significantly in the mid-term. According to the proposed Auckland Unitary Plan, the city’s population will grow from the current 1.4 million people to 2.4 million by 2040.3 This will cause more pressure on both environmental and urban structures. Secondly, the continuing urbanization process may continue to 2100.4 This will mean that Auckland and its surrounding towns will keep growing after the current proposed Auckland Unitary Plan expires, which could potentially result in greater pressure on existing green spaces. These spaces are both public land such as parks and private land like farms and forestry. They are located both within the proposed RUB and outside, within the greater Auckland region.


Recent research has shown that cities and towns in the upper North Island, from Whangarei to Hamilton and Tauranga, have been growing as strongly as Auckland.5 These regional towns and cities are expanding, getting ever closer to the boundaries of the greater Auckland city. The existing green spaces that Aucklanders value so much are coming under threat from this development. An example is the recent urban growth of Pokeno. Pokeno is now a burgeoning suburban town with large milk processing factory. The traditional green farmland of the north Waikato has been subsumed by the development of an Auckland suburb. The recent sale of a large farm in Wellsford for subdivision is another example of how the traditional green spaces of the Auckland landscape are changing northward as well as southward. Given this seemly inexorable development, there is a need to urgently preserve the fragmentary existing public green space and to plan to retain and conserve private green space in the greater Auckland region, while allowing for future urban development. AUCKLAND REGIONAL CITY THINKING The research frames these issues within a review of recent international thinking on designing green networks from an environmental and social perspective. Three themes were reviewed around the research question; the regional city form, green networks and lifestyle urbanism.

THE REGIONAL CITY The concept of a regional city or city-region could be described as, “the presence of a core city linked by functional ties to a hinterland”.6 The framework of a city-region is a network of different-sized settlements. A number of urban spaces surround and related to a bigger centre city, they are hierarchized by their size, related location, and distribution of functions.7 The development of city region is a process of decentralization. Peter Hall describes how a population is decentralized from cities to their suburbs, and then moved outside to smaller towns.8 During this process, cities play the core role within larger city region. With continuous development, smaller cities and towns are incorporated into even larger ‘mega-city regions’. 9 Within the city-region context, studies of individual cities or towns are not enough to understand regional urban forms or to plan regional urban futures. To achieve this goal a whole city region has to be studied.10 THE GREEN NETWORK Worldwide design practices shows that a green network is an essential element in shaping regional urban forms, in terms of providing ecological sustainability and maintaining a resilient environmental structure.11, 12, 13, 14 A green network is made of different kinds of green space; public and private, native and exotic and of different scales, from regional parks to tiny fragments within larger urban developments. Green space also plays a critical role in enhancing the quality of individual life, especially acting as a sub-centre divider, a development direction guide, as a retrofitting tool, and as green infrastructure.15, 16, 17, 18 Moreover, the accessibility to public green spaces, both parks and beaches, is one of the three key elements of the kiwi lifestyle, that include relatively low urban density and mixed dwelling types. LIFESTYLE URBANISM Lifestyle refers to people’s urban life quality, which could include dwelling type, transport preference, green space accessibility and convenience of services. There is a lot of research that discuss the relationship between people’s lifestyles, urban planning, and the provision of green space. However, there is not much research discussing the relationship between lifestyles and a regional cities spatial form. The New Zealand lifestyle is widely praised and is a key attraction for overseas people. Bogunovich and Bradbury argue that Aucklanders lifestyle will affect the development of a regional urban structure. They suggest that Auckland will become the “world’s lifestyle capital”.19 Bogunovich and Bradbury connect the regional city phenomenon and lifestyle urbanism.20 Based on the recognition of low-rise urban development pattern along SH1, they propose an alternative vision for Auckland 2040, a 100 kilometres linear conurbation. Their speculative development plan proposes a sustainable and resilient structure for Auckland’s regional growth. The project outlined in this paper acknowledges the linear city concept, and extends it further to a 230 kilometre long city beyond Auckland regional boundaries and the current planning time frames.

444 444


METHODOLOGY To facilitate this research, a specific methodology was developed. Through site visits, mapping and analysis, two investigations were established to guide the following design work. The first investigation, based on environmental criteria, explores how green networks can shape a regional city’s structure in both planning process and government policy. The investigation also provides measurements and specific design techniques for the development of a green network. In order to build an ecologically and socially effective green network, the research suggested that there is a need to not only maintain existing green spaces but also to create new green spaces. Strategies to increase the size of existing reserves and to encourage ecological linkages were explored to extend potential green spaces.21, 22, 23 The second investigation was based on developing social criteria through an investigation of an Auckland suburb; Remuera. Remuera, a traditional Auckland suburb, was chosen as an urban development model because of its low-density character and the easy and close connection of dwellings to green space. Based on an analysis of census data and maps of Remuera, three main conditions were identified; population density, dwelling types and green space accessibility. These conditions were used as ways to help a potential urban area to emerge in a future green belt. Data on the selected conditions was analysed and mapped through GIS (Geographic Information System) software, one of the most powerful tools for understanding complex landscape and urban conditions.24 GREEN NETWORK FOR A REGIONAL AUCKLAND How a green network might manifest at three scales; a regional Auckland, the Warkworth-Silverdale zone and the Puhoi village, was explored as case studies to test the research proposition. REGIONAL AUCKLAND The Regional Auckland study area covered Auckland, part of Northland, the Waikato and the Bay of Plenty. The study particularly focusing on a 10km buffer zone along SH1. This is the area identified by Bogunovich and Bradbury as being the infrastructure spine of a new linear regional city. As well as the main transport corridor, this route also contains other essential infrastructural services; the national electrical grid, main gas pipes and potable water. Infrastructure drives contemporary urbanism, the location of these services again emphasises the inevitability of urban development along this corridor. With this urban growth also comes the desirability of an established green network of public spaces for the recreation of the new citizens and to impede the tendency for sprawl. The study found that existing green spaces along the corridor, including public conservation sites, native forests and water bodies, where limited and fragmented, it would be difficult to link them into a contiguous ecological network. However through a GIS analysis, a large number of private green spaces were recognized as having the potential for extending the existing public green network These areas are characterised as; exotic forests, steep land, flood plains and rivers and streams. The research 106

suggested that a regional green network could be established in the greater Auckland region by purchasing or encouraging the gifting of private land, and developing a revegetation process in conjunction with the repairing and regenerating the existing public green spaces. From Whangarei to Hamilton, six green networks were identified as buffers between future urban developments. REGIONAL GREEN NETWORKS - THE GREENBELT Because of the dual nature of the proposed green network, both as an ecological corridor and as a constraint on urban sprawl, the term green belt was introduced. The idea of the green belt, a park network around an urban settlement, is a well-known trope in 19th century urban planning. Six greenbelts are proposed, these would become a new green network along either side of the SH1. Five of the new greenbelts would be forest parks, and one would be a water park. Through a purchase and revegetation programme, the suggested green belts could expand to two or three times their current size. The largest proposed green belt would provide a green network from Warkworth to Silverdale, which would be nearly 15km along SH1. The shortest green belt would be made up of existing parks from Silverdale to Auckland, with a length of about 2.7km. The water green belt would be located from Tuakau to Huntly, including Lake Whangape, Lake Waikare and a small amount of forest. The location of the green belts are; Green Belt A, Waipu Gorge Forest and the Bynderwyn Hills. Green Belt B. Sunnybrook Reserve and the Dome Valley. Green Belt C, Pohuehue Reserve and Nukumea Reserve. Green Belt D. Coatsville Reserve and the Long Bay –Okura Marine Reserve. Green Belt E. Lake Whangape and Lake Waikare. Green Belt F. Taupiri Range and the Hakarimata Range. (See the Green Network Plan for details) THE WARKWORTH AND SILVERDALE GREENBELT From the regional green network analysis, a greenbelt in the Warkworth-Silverdale area was identified (see the WarkworthSilverdale Greenbelt Plan for details). In addition to the green space criteria developed from the first case study, another set of green space design strategies were used to shape an ecologically effectively green network. The key strategies used in this case study include; buffering existing green spaces, re vegetating potential green spaces, planting existing river/road corridors, and rezoning land use The research suggested that through a carefully designed purchase process over 20 years, a public green space network could be built along the Puhoi Valley, located in the middle of the W/S greenbelt. This public park would be about 10 km long, adjacent to the Puhoi River and connecting the hinterland with the coast. Through the installation of camping grounds, walkways, recreation sites and car

parks in the new park more social opportunities would be made available as well as improving the ecological value of the site. The W/S green network would provide more space for both native species and human social activities. This case study suggests that through careful purchasing, gifting and a revegetation process, more land could be converted for use as public green spaces. For example, potential land for a green network, such as land with excessive slopes or land that could flood is not valuable. By using a GIS based planning methodology, critical sites can become identified and either purchased or landowner can be helped to gift the land. This makes the creation of a future green network more cost effective than buying the land in the future. An example of land that has been gifted by private land owners recently in the Auckland region is the 196 hectares of the Mangawhai North Forest gifted for a conservation reserve in 2014. The land included beach frontage, wetlands and dunes, and the Te Arai Stream. This gift, part of a property development deal, will combine with existing DoC and Council owned reserves to make up over 500 hectares of contiguous public coastal land south of Mangawhai. PUHOI TOWN The Puhoi village case study focuses on a smaller scale project to show how urban development could emerge within a proposed greenbelt. Social conditions from the Remuera study were used to generate urban and landscape strategies for Puhoi’s future structure. Important conditions included: allowing for an average population density of about 40-60 people/ha; determining the proportion of single houses to flat/apartments of around 7 to 3; allowing a maximum distance from each house to an adjacent green space of about 500m. Through the modelling of these unfolding conditions north of the Old Town, the research suggested that the population in Puhoi could increase 4 fold while maintaining the historic town centre. Through a continuation of the environmental strategies developed in the large scale modelling; a new green space for the town was identified on the north side of the Puhoi River. This new green space would not only enhance the existing native environment, but would also make a strong connections between the historic town and the new town. Based on the existing topography and hydrological networks three green corridors would emerge across the new urban zone, linking the northern green space to the southern green belt. The design of residential gardens would be considered as a core element to be surrounded by new building clusters. Pathways instead of roads have priority to connect houses to gardens and parks (see the Puhoi Master plan for details). The emerging urban /landscape strategy for Puhoi suggests that a new town could develop with the construction of a green network. The new green space and ecological corridors would not only support a high quality built environment, but would also ensure a good quality of life with easy access to the native environment.



CONCLUSION Given the current and future pressures on the greater Auckland region, the preservation and expansion of the current regional green space network would provide an important way to protect both the regions high quality environment and important lifestyle. Research findings from this project suggested that an enhanced and enlarged green network would not only offer the growing population of Auckland a new regional green network but could also provide more desirable urban land for a growing Auckland. The result of these two operations will enhance the quality of life for future citizens. A regional green network would dramatically increase the accessibility to public green space for people living in the projected new cities and towns along the SH1 spine. Current towns around Auckland are mostly surrounded by private farm land or forests. By purchasing some of this private land, identified in the GIS mapping process, and encouraging a revegetation process, a large scale green network would start to be established. Citizens in the new towns and cities would have easy access to the new public green space network, all planned to be no more than 5km away from the new urban centres. The new green network would offers people a variety of outdoor activities, passive recreation and meet other social needs. By preserving native ecotones, native species will be helped to move and migrate. Through the protection of public conservation sites, native bush and water bodies, plus establishing linkage through corridors from hills to the sea, the numbers of wild plants and animals could be increased. Their movement would


enhance a resilient ecosystem and increase biodiversity, which are fundamental to the preservation of the Auckland regions native environment. A green space network in the greater Auckland region would also prevent urban sprawl. Facing the persistent urban growth trend along SH1, cities and towns like Albany and Silverdale have almost connected together. The proposed green space network could contain some of the cities and towns on more or less their existing sites, while allowing new developments within the proposed green network. Urban sprawl threatens green space, it better to plan an effective green network around which future urban development can occur. Preserving green space in the greater Auckland region is not anti-development, but will rather result in better urbanism by identifying suitable sites for smart urban development instead of letting sprawl occur. This research project suggests that a new green space network can contribute to improving the living environment of the new Auckland citizen. The new green networks will dramatically increase the access to green space for people living in the new cities and towns of regional Auckland while at the same time limit the growth of those town and cities thus preserving the enviable Auckland lifestyle.



INSPIRING LEARNING DEVELOPING LEADERS FOSTERING UNDERSTANDING For more information on student and professional NZILA membership visit



he true beauty of emergence comes from its inherent simplicity. Emergence is not something that can be designed for; ecological and human forces shape the nature of the landscape, however an emergent approach lends itself to designs that are flexible, resilient and adaptive. Designers are often faced with the question “how can we shape the development of our society?” (Shayne Noronha, pg. 70). The journal has explored a variety of possible solutions, from large-scale 100-year concepts, to small, tactical approaches. Projects by both students and professionals, delve into how anti-fragility and the act of making resilient designs work to create spaces that will adapt and reform over time. Exploring how landscapes “have the opportunity to re-establish themselves [or] to wipe the slate clean and start over”(Mike Thomas, Jasmax, pg. 86 is a feature of many of the articles collected in this edition. The works recognise the progression of landscape architecture and its relationship with the concept of emergence. Initially it was thought that this issue would highlight how emergence as a theory can be used and implemented, however the projects that were received pushed the boundary of this relationship, allowing emergent designs, techniques and styles to be represented in this year’s journal. The current reality is that both, theory and practice are evolving, as Gary Marshall said “this emerging reality will be fundamentally different from anything we have experienced in our lifetimes, it will set the context for the future of landscape architecture.” (pg.14) The articles explain that putting thought into how a site might be used in the future, where growth might occur and about the wider contextual influences at play is an important part of accepting emergent conditions as part of a design process. Creating sites where longevity and appropriateness is considered are strengthened with the embracing of emergence. Throughout the production of this year’s journal, and with the help of international, local and student submissions, our understanding and our definition of emergence has been broadened. Emergence is a construct that informs our choices and our designs. It serves as a backbone to, developing ideas. Although we tend to design final solutions, spaces are continuously evolving, and are never in a fixed state of completion. This suggests that the design and the design process should be guided and directed by these changes. As a result this journal exposes a glimpse of ‘emergence’ and its potential to transform a space.



Department of

Landscape Architecture


17/10/14 3:31 pm




Alexander, C. (2002). Generated Structure in The Nature of Order: The Process of Creating Life. The Centre for Environmental Structure, California. 1


Alexander, C. (2002).

Lister, N-M. (2007). Sustainable Large Parks: Ecological Design or Designer Ecology? In Large Parks. Etd. Czerniak, J. And Hargreaves, G. New York: Princeton Architectural Press. 3



IDEO. (2015).


Brown. (2009).

BIBLIOGRAPHY Lydon, M. (Ed.). (2012). Tactical Urbanism: Short-Term Action; Long-Term Change, (2). New York. The Streets Plan Collective.


Lister, N-M. (2007).

Meadows, D. (2015). Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System. Retrieved from leverage-points-places-to-intervene-in-a-system/ 5


Lister, N-M. (2007).


Meadows, D. (2015).

BIBLIOGRAPHY Barnett, R. (2013). “Nonlinear Encounters: Emergence in Landscape Architecture”. Harvard GSD. Watch lecture on Barnett, R. (n.d.). Ten Point Guides to Emergence. Retrieved from the-ten-point-guides-to-emergence/


Ed. Richard McLellan, 2014. Living Planet Report 2014: Species and spaces, people and places. World Wildlife Foundation. Switzerland. 1

Daly. H. 2015. Economics for a Full World. A Great Transition Initiative Essay. http://www.greattransition. org/publication/economics-for-a-full-world 2

Bardi, U. 2014. Extracted: How the Quest for Mineral Wealth Is Plundering the Planet. Chelsea Green Publishing. New Hampshire. 3

Soil Association, 2010. A rock and a hard place: Peak phosphorus and the threat to our food security. Bristol, England. 4

Heinberg, R. 2011. The End of Growth: Adapting to Our New Economic Reality. New Society Publishing. Canada. 5

An environment externality is a cost that is suffered by a third party as a result of an economic activity - the producer and consumer are the first and second parties and third parties include any individual, organisation, property owner, resource or environment that is indirectly affected. For example when water quality is negatively affected by intensification of farming it is the down stream human and non-human communities that experience and are required to manage and adapt to the reduced quality. 6



Fleming, D. (2011). Lean logic: A dictionary for the future and how to survive it. United Kingdom: David Fleming. 1



Norman, D., A., & Verganti, R. (2012). Incremental and Radical Innovation: Design Research versus Technology and Meaning Change. Design Issues, 30 (1), 78-96. 1

Project for Public Spaces. (n.d). Lighter, Quicker, Cheaper: A Low-Cost, High-Impact Approach. Retrieved from 2

De Young, R., & Kaplan, S. (2012). Adaptive Muddling. De Young, R. & Princen, T. (Ed.). The Localization Reader: Adapting to the Coming Downshift (pp. 286298). Cambridge, US. The MIT Press. 3

Brown, T. (2009). Change by Design: How Design Thinking Transforms Organisations and Inspires Innovation. getAbstract. Harper Business (Harper Collins Publishers). 4


Project for Public Spaces. (n.d).

IDEO. (2015). IDEO: About. Retrieved from http://www. 6

Allan, J., & Marshall, G. (2013). Sustainability and the Public Realm. Griffiths, P., & X-Section Journal Team 2013. (Eds.). X-Section: Placemaking; How do we Create a Contemporary Sense of Place? (3), 14-17. Auckland, New Zealand. Unitec Institute of Technology. 7


De Young, & Kaplan. (2012).


De Young, & Kaplan. (2012).



Dr. Singh, P. [Prabhjot Singh] (n.d.). Twitter.

IPCC, 2014: Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]. IPCC, Geneva, Switzerland, 151 pp. 7

For more information see - ocean-acidification 8

For more information see – Hansen, J. Et al. 2015. Ice melt, sea level rise and super storms_ evidence from paleoclimate data, climate modelling, and modern observations that 2 °C global warming is highly dangerous. Journal Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics - http:// 9

Ceballos, G. et al. 2015. Accelerated modern human–induced species losses: Entering the sixth mass extinction. American Association for the Advancement of Science. Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License. 10

Conventional oil refers to oil that is extracted from a well on land. Global oil supply has managed to remain relatively flat since the peak in 2006 due to unconventional oil such bituminous (tar) sands, oil shale, deep sea oil and coal and gas conversion despite the capital outlay of major oil extraction companies increasing: “From 2000-2013, worldwide capital expenditures related to oil and gas production increased from $250 billion in 2000 to nearly $700 billion (both figures in 2012 dollars). Rising investment, however, has been yielding progressively smaller increases in the global oil supply”. - uploads/2014/05/Chapter2ETAcapexfinal1.pdf 11

International Energy Agency (IEA) has stated that peak oil occurred in 2006 (IEA 2010) and that the rate of global decline of conventional-oil fields is 6.4 percent per year (IEA, 2008). 12

I say ‘renewable’ as there is increasing evidence to suggest that once the hidden costs of extraction of materials, manufacturing and distribution of the components, including supporting infrastructure of energy grids, roads and in some cases batteries as well as the ongoing maintenance are accounted for the ability for these energy sources to generate a positive energy profit ratio is limited. Said another way, many of or supposed ‘renewable’ energy sources are only possible and viable because of the hidden energy subsidies they receive during extraction, production, distribution and maintenance from fossil fuels. For more information see - Our Renewable Future by Richard Heinberg 13

Hall, C. 2012. Energy Return On Investment. in The Energy Reader: Overdevelopment and the Delusion of Endless Growth Ed. Butler, T. Lerch, D and Wuerthner, G. Healdsburg, CA: Watershed Media. 14



Foss, N. 2015. The Boundaries of the Future Solution Space. The Automatic Earth Blog - http:// - Retrieved 20th August 2015 16

For example – Every additional dollar of credit creates less corresponding growth over time. In the 1980s, it took four dollars of new credit to generate $1 of real GDP. Over the last decade, it has taken $10, and since 2006, $20 to produce the same result. From Credit Supernova! By William Gross, February 2013 - - Retrieved 1st October 2015. 17

Foss, N. 2015. The Boundaries of the Future Solution Space. The Automatic Earth Blog - http:// - Retrieved 20th August 2015 18

It is estimated that credit now accounts for approximately 98% of our money supply For more information on the role of credit in our money supply see Positive Money NZ - 19

Foss, N. 2015. The Boundaries of the Future Solution Space. The Automatic Earth Blog - http:// - Retrieved 20th August 2015 20

Complexity can be measured a number of different ways including the number of differentiated agents in a system; their degree of specialization and their interconnectedness. For more inforation see The Collapse of Complex Societies by Joseph Tainter and On the Cusp of Collapse: Complexity, Energy and the Globalised Ecology by David Korowics - view_document/5-on-the-cusp-of-collapse 21

Order out of Chaos: Man’s New Dialogue with Nature by I Prigogine and I Stengers in The Wealth of Nature by J.M. Greer, 2011 22

Whites Law: Leslie White, 1943. https://en.wikipedia. org/wiki/White%27s_law 23

Tainter, J.A. 1988. The Collapse of Complex Societies. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. 24

Peak Planet and Peak Oil are effectively non negotiable because they are predicated by the laws of thermodynamics. Collectively Peak Planet, Peak Oil, Peak Debt and Peak Complexity are ‘wicked’ because “of incomplete, contradictory, and changing requirements that are often difficult to recognize [and] because of complex interdependencies, the effort to solve one aspect of a wicked problem may reveal or create other problems.” Wicked_problem 25

In 1972, the Limits to Growth study was commissioned by Club of Rome and undertaken by a group of scientists based at MIT. The study was the first study to utilize computers to model the converging the interrelationship between population growth, resource consumption, food production, industrial output and pollution. Over the last 40 years and despite multiple articles and reports dismissing its findings, the Limits to Growth ‘standard run’ / business as usual scenario, which suggests industrial output and associated economic growth will peak some time before 2020.

in Sustainable River Management. Watershed Foundation, Twizel, New Zealand.

27 in-memoriam-david-fleming/#post-2583


Fleming, D. 2011. Lean Logic: A Dictionary for the Future and How to Survive It. Claverts, England.




See Peak Planet above. For more information see also Post Carbon Institute, World Watch Institute and Nine Plantary Boundaries 29

See Peak Complexity above. For more information see also - The Long Emergency by Book by James Howard Kunstler, Collapse by Jared Diamond, Future Scenarios by David Holmgren - - and The Long Decent and The Ecotechnic Future, both by John Michael Greer. 30

See 2006 film The Power of Community - How Cuba Survived Peak Oil; Reinventing Collapse: The Soviet Experience and American Prospects by Dmitry Orlov; America Days of Destruction, Days of Revolt by Chris Hedges and Joe Sacco and any number of case studies and initiatives taking place in cities in the Rust Belt of America such as Detroit and Michigan; most South American sates and more recently, Greece and other southern European states including Italy, Spain and Portugal. 31

Greer, J.M. The Death of the Internet: A Pre-Mortem - - Retrieved 6/23/2015 32

Thayer, R. 2005. Sustainable City Regions: Relocalising Landscapes in a Globalising World, In Landscape Review - Volume 9(2). 33


Birkeland, J. 2008. Positive Development: From Vicious Circles to Virtuous Cycles Through Built Environment Design. Earthscan, London, United Kingdom. 44


Neil Challenger, “From the City That Rocks, Observations from Post-earthquake Christchurch New Zealand” (November 2010), http://researcharchive.

See Dave Snowden and the Cynefin Framework For more information see -


Greer, J.M. 2009. The Ecotechnic Future: Envisioning a Post-Peak World. New Societ Publishing, Canada

For more information on tactical approaches to design see also – Small, Local, Open and Connected or SLOC by Ezio Manzini; Antifragile by Nassim Nicholas Taleb; Adaptive Muddling by Raymond de Young and Stephen Kaplin; The Power of Just Doing Stuff by Rob Hopkins; and The Social Labs Revolution: A New Approach for Solving Our Most Complex Challenges by Zaid Hassan Alexander. S. 2013. Entropia: Life Beyond Industrial Civilization. Simplicity Institute, Melbourne, Australia. 48

Notes on E.F Schumacher’s Small is Beautiful in Holmgren, D. 2002. Permaculture: Principles and Pathways Beyond Sustainability. Holmgren Design Services, Victoria Australia. 49

Meadows, D. H. 1999. Leverage Points: Places to Intervene in a System. Hartland, VT: The Sustainability Institute. 50

Manzini, E. 2013. Small, Local, Open and Connected: Resilient Systems and Sustainable Qualities. http:// - Retrieved 05/10/2015. 51

The term ‘Post Growth Aesthetics’ is borrowed from Richard Heinburg’s article (post-) Hydrocarbon Aesthetics, in Peak Everything, 2007 – New Society Publishers, Canada. 52

Del Tredici, P. 2014. The Flora of the Future. In Projective Ecologies Ed. C Reed and N.M. Lister. Actor Publishers, New York. 53

Lyle, John T. 1994. Regenerative Design for Sustainable Development. New York: Wiley. 35

Key or ‘hub’ infrastructures are those infrastructures that maintain the operation our current global economy, they include monetary and financial system, energy flows, transport and distribution, information technology and electricity.




Braungart, M. and McDonough, W. 2002. Cradle to Cradle: Remaking the Way We Make Things. North Point Press, United States. While necessary, strategies that reduce the environmental impact of an activity or process or make it more efficient don’t generate wealth. 39

A renewable energy budget is the total amount of renewable energy available within a given site. Typically this refers to either the total amount of solar energy that falls on the site, the total amount of kinetic energy that blows through the site as wind or flows through the site as water. 40

A naturalised species is a ‘non native’ plant with reproduction rates sufficient to maintain its population over time. 41

A novel ecosystem is a spontaneous or emergent ecosystem composed from a unique collection of species responding to novel conditions. Novel ecosystems typically, but not exclusively include both exotic and native species and result from human intervention but are not directly or consciously managed by people. Over a long enough time scale all ecosystems were likely to have had ‘novel’ origins - Marris, M. 2011. Rambunctious Garden: Saving Nature in a Post-Wild World. Bloomsbury, New York. 42

This process is also referred to as ‘Ecosyntheses’ - Tane, H. 2010. The Crucial Roles of Willows 43


Wealth in this since is often referred to as ‘capital’.


William Syben, “Making Use of Vacant Urban Space: A Study of Christchurch after the Earthquakes of 2010/11” (University of Canterbury, 2012), 9, http://www.geog. Geography_420_Research_Dissertation %5B1%5D. pdf. 7


Philip Thalis, 2015



James Kay, “Framing the Situation: Developing a System Description,” in The Ecosystem Approach: Complexity,
 Uncertainty , and Managing for Sustainability, ed. David Waltner - Toews, James Kay, and Nina - Marie ELister ( N e w York: Columbia University Press, 2008); Rod Barnett, Emergence in Landscape Architecture (Oxon: Routledge, 2013), 4. 1

Arjun Appadurai, “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy,” Communication Theories 4 (2006). 2

Richard T. T Forman, Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions (Cambridge [England]; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995). 3

J. Morgan Grove and William R. Burch, “A Social Ecology Approach and Applications of Urban Ecosystem and Landscape Analyses: a Case Study of Baltimore, Maryland,” Urban Ecosystems 1, no. 4 (December 1, 1997): 259–275, doi:10.1023/A:1018591931544. 4

J. Morgan Grove, Karen E. Hinson, and Robert J. Northrop, “A Social Ecology Approach to Understanding; Urban Ecosvsterns and Landscapes,” in Understanding Urban Ecosystems: A New Frontier for Science and Education (New York: Springer, 2003), 167 – 186, www. 5

John McDonagh, “The Christchurch Earthquakes Impact on Inner City ‘colonisers’” (January 2012), http:// 6



Justin Morgenroth and Tony Armstrong, “The Impact of Significant Earthquakes on Christchurch, New Zealand’s Urban Forest,” Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 11, no. 4 (2012): 383–389, doi:10.1016/j. ufug.2012.06.003.

Challenger, “From the City That Rocks, Observations from Post-earthquake Christchurch New Zealand”; Morgenroth and Armstrong, “The Impact of Significant Earthquakes on Christchurch, New Zealand’s Urban Forest.” 11

Roy Montgomery, “Greening the Rubble in Christchurch: Civic Ecological Reclamation Efforts During a Crisis Event,” Lincoln Planning Review 3, no. 3 (March 2012): 3–13. 12

Ibid.; Challenger, “From the City That Rocks, Observations from Post-earthquake Christchurch New Zealand.” 13

Montgomery, “Greening the Rubble in Christchurch: Civic Ecological Reclamation Efforts During a Crisis Event.” 14



Blake Gumprecht, The Los Angeles River : Its Life, Death, and Possible Rebirth (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999), 127. 16


Ibid., 137.


Ibid., 138.


Ibid., 175.


Ibid., 173.

David Fletcher, “Flood Control Freakology,” in The Infrastructural City: Networked Ecologies in Los Angeles, by Kazys Varnelis (Barcelona; New York; [Los Angeles]; [New York]: Actar ; The Los Angeles Forum for Architecture and Urban Design ; The Network Architecture Lab, Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation, Columbia University, 2008). 21


Ibid., 44.



Rod Barnett and Jacqueline Margetts, “Disturbanism in the South Pacific: Disturbance Ecology as a Basis for Urban Resilience in Small Island States,” in Resilience in Ecology and Urban Design,ed.S.T.A. Pickett,M.L. Cadenasso, and Brian McGrath,Future City 3 (Springer Netherlands, 2013), 443–459, chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-5341-9_27. 24




Ibid., 448.

Charles Waldheim, The Landscape Urbanism Reader (New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2006); Mohsen Mostafavi et al., Ecological Urbanism (Baden, Switzerland: Lars Müller Publishers, 2010). 27

BIBLIOGRAPHY Appadurai, Arjun. “Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy.” Communication Theories 4 (2006). Barnett, Rod. Emergence in Landscape Architecture. Oxon: Routledge, 2013.



Barnett, Rod, and Jacqueline Margetts. “Disturbanism in the South Pacific: Disturbance Ecology as a Basis for Urban Resilience in Small Island States.” In Resilience in Ecology and Urban Design, edited by S. T. A. Pickett, M. L. Cadenasso, and Brian McGrath, 443–459. Future City 3. Springer Netherlands, 2013. chapter/10.1007/978-94-007-5341-9_27. Challenger, Neil. “From the City That Rocks, Observations from Post-earthquake Christchurch New Zealand” (November 2010). http://researcharchive. Fletcher, David. “Flood Control Freakology.” In The Infrastructural City: Networked Ecologies in Los Angeles, by Kazys Varnelis. Barcelona; New York; [Los Angeles]; [New York]: Actar ; The Los Angeles Forum for Architecture and Urban Design ; The Network Architecture Lab, Graduate School of Architecture, Planning and Preservation, Columbia University, 2008. Forman, Richard T. T. Land Mosaics: The Ecology of Landscapes and Regions. Cambridge [England]; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995. Grove, J. Morgan, and William R. Burch. “A Social Ecology Approach and Applications of Urban Ecosystem and Landscape Analyses: a Case Study of Baltimore, Maryland.” Urban Ecosystems 1, no. 4 (December 1, 1997): 259–275. doi:10.1023/A:1018591931544. Grove, J. Morgan, Karen E. Hinson, and Robert J. Northrop. “A Social Ecology Approach to Understanding; Urban Ecosvsterns and Landscapes.” In Understanding Urban Ecosystems: A New Frontier for Science and Education, 167 – 186. New York: Springer, 2003. www. Gumprecht, Blake. The Los Angeles River : Its Life, Death, and Possible Rebirth. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1999. Kay, James. “Framing the Situation: Developing a System Description.” In The Ecosystem Approach: Complexity, Uncertainty, and Managing for Sustainability, edited by David Waltner-Toews, James Kay, and Nina-Marie E Lister. New York: Columbia University Press, 2008.


Taylor, K. (2008). Landscape and Memory: cultural landscapes, intangible values and some thoughts on Asia. In: 16th ICOMOS General Assembly and International Symposium: ‘Finding the spirit of place – between the tangible and intangible’, 29 Sept – 4 Oct 2008, Quebec, Canada. Available from: www. 1

Rossler, M. (2014). World Heritage Cultural Landscapes, 1992-2012. In: K. Taylor, A. St. Clair, N.J. Mitchell, Conserving Cultural Landscapes: Challenges and New Directions. Taylor and Francis. Available from: booksdetails/9780415744058/ 2

Drost, A. (1996). Developing sustainable tourism for world heritage sites. In: Annals of Tourism Research, Volume 23, Issue 2. (pp. 479-484). Available from: www. 3

O’Donnell, P. (2008). Thirty Years of Landscape Rescue. In: VIEW magazine, Summer 2008. (pp. 10-14). Available from:

Morgenroth, Justin, and Tony Armstrong. “The Impact of Significant Earthquakes on Christchurch, New Zealand’s Urban Forest.” Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 11, no. 4 (2012): 383–389. doi:10.1016/j. ufug.2012.06.003. Mostafavi, Mohsen, Gareth Doherty, Harvard University, and Graduate School of Design. Ecological Urbanism. Baden, Switzerland: Lars Müller Publishers, 2010. Syben, William. “Making Use of Vacant Urban Space: A Study of Christchurch after the Earthquakes of 2010/11.” University of Canterbury, 2012. Geography_420_Research_Dissertation%5B1%5D. pdf. Waldheim, Charles. The Landscape Urbanism Reader. New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 2006.


P, Ward. (2009) Colin McCahon The Luminary. Retrieved from colin-mccahon/ 1


Advance - Research with Impact, Spring 2014, ‘A Maori Approach’ 1



Chalfont, G.E., and S. Rodiek. 2005. Building Edge: An Ecological Approach to Research and Design of Environments for People with Dementia. Alzheimer’s Care Today 6, 4: 341. 1

Hazen, T (2013). Therapeutic Garden Characteristics. A quarterly publication of the American Horticultural Therapy Association 21,2: 3. 2

Nature Sacred (2015) Nature Sacred Retrieved from 3



Peart, Raewyn. Castles in the Sand. Nelson: Craig Potton Publishing, 2009. 1



Hilton, M, U Macauley & R. Henderson. “Inventory of New Zealands’s Active Dunelands.” 2000. Science for Conservation 157. 2009. < upload/documents/science-and-technical/sfc157.pdf>. 2

IPCC – Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 2014. Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Geneva, Switzerland. IPCC. 1

World Resources Institute. 2009. Retrieved from: 2

Bergdoll, B. 2011. Rising Currents: Projects for New York’s Waterfront. p. 14-30. New York. The Museum of Modern Art. 3


Bergdoll, B. (2011).

McFadgen, B. “Archaeology of the Wellington Conservancy: Kapiti-Horowhenua.” 1997. Department of Conservation. 2009. < documents/scienceand- technical/kapitiarch.pdf>. 3

Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner. “Omaha Coastal Compartment Management Plan.” 2003. Rodney District Council. 2009 < DistrictTownPlanning/plans/CoastalManagement/ Pages/OmahaCoastalManagementPlan.aspx>. 4

Visser, J. & Misdorp, R. “Coastal Dynamic Lowlands – The Role of Water in the Development of The Netherlands: Past, Present, Future.” 1998. Databases. documents/00000496_C4.105-108.pdf. 2009. 5



Neilsen Research (2014) Quality of Life in New Zealand Cities Survey 2014. Local Government New Zealand, Wellington. Retrieved on 20/11/2014 from http://www.qualityofl 1

Waldegrave, C., King, P. & Rowe, E. (2012) Aucklanders 50 and over: A health, social, economic and demographic summary analysis of the life experiences of older Aucklanders. Auckland Council, Research, Investigations and Monitoring Unit. Retrieved on 08/11/2014 from http://www.aucklandcouncil.govt. nz/EN/planspoliciesprojects/reports/technicalpublications/Documents/aucklanders50andoverfullreport.pdf 2

Statistics New Zealand, (2009) Mapping Trends in the Auckland Region: Chapter 8. 65+Population. Statistics New Zealand, Wellington. Retrieved on 08/11/2014 from people_and_communities/geographic-areas/mapping-trends-in-the-auckland-region/65-population.aspx


Beca Carter Hollings & Ferner.(2003)

Walker, Brian; Holling, C. S; Stephen R. Carpenter & Ann Kinzig. “Resilience, Adaptability and Transformability in Social-ecological Systems”. 2004. The Resilience Alliance. <>. 7

Nicholls, Robert J. & Richard J. T. Klein. “Climate Change and Coastal Management on Europe’s Coast.” (Eds), J. E. Vermaat et al. Managing European Coasts: Past, Present and Future. Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag Berlin, 2005. 199-225. 8


Hunter, M. (14 October 2014) Opinion: The link between design and care. Design Council, United Kingdom. Retrieved 11/11/2014 from http://www.designcouncil. 4

Phillips, J., Ajrouch, K., & Hillcoat-Nallétamby, S. (2010). The SAGE Key Concepts: Key concepts in social gerontology. London: SAGE Publications Ltd. doi: 5




McDonagh, John. “The Christchurch Earthquakes Impact on Inner City ‘colonisers’” (January 2012). http:// Montgomery, Roy. “Greening the Rubble in Christchurch: Civic Ecological Reclamation Efforts During a Crisis Event.” Lincoln Planning Review 3, no. 3 (March 2012): 3–13.


U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (September 2011)Elder-Accessible Gardening: A Community Building Option for Brownfields Redevelopment U.S. EPA Office of Brownfields and Land Revitalization. Retrieved on 08/11/2014 from bf/urbanag/pdf/elder_accessible_gardening.pdf 6



Barnett, R. (2013). Emergence in Landscape Architecture. London, UK: Routledge. p. 203. 1

Metge, J. (1976). The Maoris of New Zealand: Rautahi. London, UK: Routledge & Kegan Paul. p. xi. 2


Tapaleao, V. Auckland now more diverse than London in New Zealand Herald, March 4, 2014. 4

Natalie Robertson, a senior lecturer at AUT, in a lecture to Landscape of Aotearoa class at Unitec, July 24, 2015. 5

Walker, R. (2004). Ka Whawhai Tonu Matou: Struggle Without End. Auckland, NZ: Penguin. 6

For a representative example of the nature of land loss, see a brief summary of the Waitangi Tribunal report on the land alienation at Orakei, Auckland from 7


Ngati Whatua o Orakei: tribunals/waitangi-tribunal/resources/teaching-aids/ resource-kits/orakei/the-loss-of-the-orakei-block For a brief history of extinguishment of native title and the Native Land Court, see Stokes, E. (2002). Contesting resources: Maori, Pakeha, and a tenurial revolution in Pawson, E. & Brooking, T. (Eds.). Environmental Histories of New Zealand. Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press. pp.35-51. 8

Hill, R. (2009). Maori and State Policy. In G. Byrnes (Ed.), The New Oxford History of New Zealand. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. p. 516. 9

Byrnes, G. (2004). The Waitangi Tribunal and New Zealand History. Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press. 10

Haylee Putaranui, a lawyer in the Māori Legal Group, Te Waka Ture, with Chapman Tripp, in a lecture to the Landscape of Aotearoa class at Unitec, September 25, 2015. 11

Editorial, ‘Illegal taking of kereru likely to stir public anger’ in New Zealand Herald, June 27, 2015. Retrieved from: article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=11471893 12

Cumming, G. ‘Paritai Drive residents fighting Maori heritage designation moves’ in New Zealand Herald, July 18, 2015. Retrieved from: http://www.nzherald. 13

See: Future Maori population - summary of latest trends, Statistics New Zealand, Tatauranga Aotearoa. Retrieved from: http://www2.stats.govt. nz/domino/external/web/prod_serv.nsf/response/ future+maori+population+-+summary+of+latest+trends 14

Roughan, J. ‘Whyte lacking a Maori viewpoint’ in New Zealand Herald, August 2, 2014. 15


Webby, K. (dir.) (2015). The Price of Peace.

The Treaty debated, New Zealand History. Ministry for Culture and Heritage. Retrieved from: http://www. the-treaty-debated 17

FIGURE REFERENCES: 18 The chiefs Waikato and Hongi Hika with missionary Thomas Kendall in England, oil painting by James Barry, 1820. National Library of New Zealand Te Puna Mātauranga o Aotearoa, Alexander Turnbull Library, Wellington (Ref:G-618). James Barry - www.treaty2u.



Bart%20Acres%2 0MPlan%20Thesis.pdf?sequence=1 Auckland City Council. (2014). Low carbon Auckland. Auckland. New Zealand: Author 7


Auckland City Council. (2014).


Acres, B. (2010).

Cooper, M., Manhire, J., Dann, C., Reider, R., Morris, M., & Rosin, C. (2012) New Zealand organic market report 2012. Organics Aotearoa New Zealand. Retrieved from full%20 report%202012.pdf 10


Solely, C. (2013). An investor’s guide to the New Zealand food & beverage industry 2013.New Zealand. Ministry of Business innovation
&Employment. Retrieved from stors_guide_2013. pdf The Department of the Lands and Survey Wellington. (1977). Peri-Urban agriculture in the context of regional development. Wellington, New Zealand: Author 3

Allison, O. (2014). Urban sprawl threaten food basket. Retrieved from http:// w w w. r a d i o n z . c o . n z / n e w s / r e g i o n a l / 2 5 5 3 6 7 / auckland-sprawl-threatens- food-basket 4

Komirenko, Z. (2008). Urban and peri-uban agriculture in Kyiv (Ukraine): ”Crisis induced strategy” versus recreational resource. Retrieved from http://ageconsearch. 5

Acres, B. (2010). Opportunities for food systems planning in New Zealand. (Master’s thesis). The University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand. Retrieved from https://

FIGURE REFERENCES: Auckland City Council. (2015). The Auckland plan. Auckland. New Zealand: Author 33

Holly, H. (2012). Gearing up for the 2012 landscape urban forum. Retrieved from gearing-up/ 34

Piorr, A., Ravetz, J., & Tosics, I. (2012). Periurbanization Europe towards European policies to sustain urban-rural futures. Copenhagen: LIFE Coordinator of PLURE. Retrieved from Peri_Urbanisation_in_Europe_printversion.pdf 13



Auckland City Council. (2014).


Semenov, M. (2011). From garden city donut to an integrated landscape; an analysis of the garden city movement’s Influence on urban and peri-urban farming. Retrieved from research/garden-city- donut Rowe, J. E. (2012). Greenbelts. Journal of Urban Policy and Research, 30(1), 77-79. DOI:10.1080/081 11146.2012.654757 16


Rowe, J.E. (2012).

Aguado, I., Barrutia, J.M., & Echebarria, C. (2013). The green belt of Vitoria-Gasteiz. A successful practice for sustainable urban planning. Boletín de la Asociación de Geógrafos Españoles, 61(1), 181-193. Retrieved from 18

Arbury, J. (2005). From urban sprawl to compact city: an analysis of urban growth management in Auckland (Doctoral dissertation). The University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand. Retrieved from http://fpd-bd. com/wp- content/uploads/2011/05/thesis.pdf 19


Arbury, J. (2005).

Lepine, M., Scott, J., & Leung, E. (2004). Earth Care, People Care, Fair Shares: Rural and Urban Permaculture in the Context of Danish Society. (Doctoral dissertation). The Royal Agricultural and Veterinary University, Danish. Retrieved from http://library. Permacultu re_in_the_Context_of_Danish_Society.pdf 21

Arbury, J. (2005).

Government Printing Office. (1990). Food, agriculture, conservation and trade act of 1990. Washington, DC, USA. Retrieved from download/101-624-food-agriculture-conservation- andtrade-act-of-1990 23

Holmgren, D. (2002). Essential of permaculture. Retrieved from wp- content/uploads/2013/02/Essence_of_Pc_EN.pdf 24


Lepine, & Scott, et al. (2004).


Semenov, M. (2011).

27 Franklin Local Board. (2014). Pukekohe area plan. Retrieved from EN/planspoliciesprojects/plansstrategies/a reaplans/ Documents/pukekoheareaplan.pdf 28

Allison, O. (2014).


Holmgren, D. (2002).


Lepine, & Scott, et al. (2004).


Mateparae, J. (2013). Housing accords and special



Acres, B. (2010).




Renew SA. (2014). RSA Corporate brochure Lochiel Park. Retrieved from renewalsa/cms/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/RSA_ Corporate-brochure_Lochiel-Park.pdf 32



Auckland City Council. (2015). The Auckland plan. Auckland. New Zealand: Author

Cooper, & Manhire, et al. (2012).

housing areas (Auckland) order 2013. Retrieved from 6.html


Diamond, J. (2005). Collapse. London, UK: Penguin.

Meadows, D., Meadows, D., Randers, J., & Behrens, W. (1972). The limits to growth. New York, NY: Universe Books. Greer, J. M. (2008). The long descent: A users guide to the end of the industrial age. British Columbia: New Society Publishers. 3

Tainter, J. (1990). The Collapse of Complex Societies. London: Cambridge University Press. 4

Post Carbon Institute. (2015, January 21). Our renewable future: Or, what I’ve learned in 12 years writing about energy. Retrieved from http://www.postcarbon. org/our-renewable-future-essay 5

Smith, K., & Amidon, J. (2006) Ken Smith Landscape Architect Urban Projects, Princeton Architectural Press 6

Reed, C., & Lister, N-M. (2014). Ecology and design: Parallel genealogies. Places Journal. Retrieved from ecology-and-design-parallel-genealogies 7

Holmgren, D. (2002). Permaculture: Principles & pathways beyond sustainability. Victoria, Australia: Holmgren Design Services. 8

Barnett, R. (2007). Review: “The Landscape Urbanism Reader” by Charles Waldheim (ed.), New York: Princeton Architectural Press (2006). Junctures, 8. Retrieved from junctures/issue/view/10/showToc 9

Wolff, J. (2014). Cultural landscapes and dyanamic ecologies: lessons from New Orleans. In Reed, C. & Lister, N-M (Eds.), Projective Ecologies (pp. 184-203). New York, NY: Actar and Harvard Graduate School of Design. 10

In the case of a landscape architectural investigation design thinking and testing is carried out through drawing 11

Youtube. (2010). The Cynefin framework. Retrieved from 12

Hassan, Z. (2014). The social labs revolution: New approaches to solving our most complex challenges. San Fransisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler. 13

Taleb, N. (2007). The black swan: The impact of the highly improbable. New York: Random House 14

Holmgren, D. (2002). Permaculture: Principles & pathways beyond sustainability. Victoria, Australia: Holmgren Design Services. 15

Allan, J., & Marshall, G. (2013). Sustainability in the Public Realm. xsection Journal, 1(3), 14-17. 16

Meadows, D. H. (1999). Leverage points: Places to intervene in a system. Hartland, VT: The Sustainability Institute. 17


The Conversation. (2011). Why tech fixes - even when



they’re ‘green’ - can make matters worse. Retrieved from Grist. (2011). Jevons paradox: When doing more with less isn’t enough. Retrieved from energy-efficiency/2011-09-04-jevons-paradox-whendoing-more-with-less-isnt-enough 19

Camponeschi, C. (2013). The enabling city: Placedbased creative problem-solving and the power of the everyday. Toronto, Canada: York University. Excerpt: “’Creative communities’ guru Ezio Manzini explains, the term refers to shifts in the way individuals or communities act to solve a problem and generate new opportunities. Here, then, innovation is intended as a catalyst for social change – a collaborative process through which citizens can be directly involved in shaping the way a project, policy, or service is created and delivered”. 20

The Buckminster Fuller Institute. (n.d.). GreenWave. Retrieved from greenwave 21

Desimini, J. (2013). Wild innovation: Stoss in Detroit. Scenario Journal, 3. Retrieved from 22

Rod Barnett. (2013). The ten point guides to emergence. Retrieved from http://www.nonlinearlandscapes. com/the-ten-point-guides-to-emergence 23

See the highly publicized projects such as Detroit Future City and Fresh Kills, by Chris Reed (Stoss LU) and James Corner (Field Operations), respectively. 24

Kai Auckland is engaging Resilio Studio for its next phase, in order to address the challenge of the lack of traction it has gained as a ‘bottom-up movement’ facilitated by a top-down governmental organisation. 25

Rod Barnett. (2013). The ten point guides to emergence. Retrieved from http://www.nonlinearlandscapes. com/the-ten-point-guides-to-emergence. Here Barnett describes the main challenge with the Mau/Koolhaus Tree City proposal and the approach to bottom-up design that was taken, which ultimately led to its abandonment part-way through implementation 26

Barnett, R. (2007). Review: “The Landscape Urbanism Reader” by Charles Waldheim (ed.), New York: Princeton Architectural Press (2006). Junctures, 8. Retrieved from junctures/issue/view/10/showToc

summarises low levels of community involvement are generally accounted for in a council-driven process. Hassan, Z. (2014). The social labs revolution: New approaches to solving our most complex challenges. San Fransisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler.

Transition Milwaukee. (2014, January 17). Agency on demand? Holmgren, Hopkins, and the historical problem of agency. Retrieved from Drawing in this sense is different to a normative practice because its focus is on exploration rather than problem solving, e.g. a normative design process involves drawings that display information (survey, analysis, design) drawing in this sense is more diagrammatic and is used as a tool to gain information on how things work. 29

Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: how design thinking transforms organisations and inspires innovation. New York, NY: HarperCollins. 30

Lydon, M., & Garcia, L. (2015). Tactical urbanism: Short-term action for long-term change. Washington DC: Island Press. 31

Meadows, D. H. (1999). Leverage points: Places to intervene in a system. Hartland, VT: The Sustainability Institute. 32

Lister, N-M. (2007). Sustainable large parks: Ecological design or designer ecology? In J. Czerniak & G. Hargreaves (Eds.), Large Parks (pp. 31-51). New York, NY: Princeton Architectural Press. 33



Ferguson, G., Dakers, A., & Gunn, I. (2003). Sustainable wastewater management: A handbook for smaller communities. Auckland, NZ: Ministry for the Environment [MFE]. This handbook for communities 35




Brown, T. (2009). Change by design: how design thinking transforms organisations and inspires innovation. New York, NY: HarperCollins. 37

Harvard Kennedy School - Saguaro Seminar. (2014). About social capital. Retrieved from http://www.hks. Refer for a short definition of social capital. 38

Allan, P. & Bryant, M. (2011). Resilience as a framework for urbanism and recovery. Journal of Landscape Architecture, 6:2, 34-45. 626033.2011.9723453. As one example, this article speaks to the relationship between social capital, resilience and recovery in the context of urbanism. 39

Dillard, J., Dujon, V. & King, M. (2009). Understanding the Social Dimension of Sustainability. In Heinberg, R. & Lerch, D (Eds.). (2010). The post carbon reader: Managing the 21st century’s sustainability crises. Healdsburg, CA: Watershed Media. 40



Congress for New Urbanism. (2015). Sustainable street principles. Transportation networks. Retrieved from http:// sustainable-street-network-principles 42

Lister, N-M. (2010) Insurgent ecologies: (Re) claiming ground in landscape and urbanism. In M. Mostafavi & G. Doherty (Eds.), Ecological Urbanism (pp. 524-535) Zurich, Switzerland: Lars Müller Publishers. 43

Resilience. (2014) Want to change the world? Read this first. Retrieved from http:// w w w. r e s i l i e n c e . o r g / s t o r i e s / 2 0 1 4 - 0 6 - 1 6 / want-to-change-the-world-read-this-first 44




century. USA, UK, Australia: Blackwell Publishing.


Duder, B., Winstone, M. J., & Warren, T. J. (1969). Auckland’s historical background: Its relation to city planning: Aukland City Council: Department of Works and Services. 1


Palmer, D. (2002). Walking historic Auckland.

Auckland Council. (2015). The Proposed Auckland Unitary Plan. Retrieved from aspx?exhibit=PAUPSept13 3

Burdett, R., & Sudjic, D. . (2011). Living in the endless city : The urban age project by the London School of Economics and Deutsche Bank’s Alfred Herrhausen Society (Burdett, R., & Sudjic, D. Ed.). London: Phaidon Press Ltd. 4

Bogunovich, D., & Bradbury, M. (2012). Auckand 2040: A resilient urban region on the water. Planning Quarterly(184), 4-8. 5

Bosselmann, P. (2008). Urban transformation: understanding city design and form Washington, DC: Island Press 6

Soja, E. W. (2001). Postmetropolis: Critical studies of cities and regions. UK and USA: Blackwell Publishers. 7

Hall, P. (2014). Good cities, better lives: how Europe discovered the lost art of urbanism. UK, USA and Canada: Routledge. 8


Hall,P. (2014).


Hall, P. (2014).

Hall, P. (2002). Cities of tomorrow: an intellectual history of urban planning and design in the twentieth 11

Hall,P. (2014).

Hall, P., & Pain, K. (2006). The Polycentric Metropolis : Learning from Mega-city Regions in Europe (Hall, P. & Pain, K. Eds.). London; Sterling, VA: Earthscan. 13

Soja, E. W. (2014). My Los Angeles : From Urban Restructuring to Regional Urbanization Retrieved from aspx?p=1639080 14


Bosselmann, P. (2008).

Calthorpe, P., & Fulton, W. (2001). The regional city: Planning for the end of sprawl. Washington, DC: Island Press. 16


Hall, & Pain. (2006).

Weller, R., & Bolleter, J. (2013). Made in Australia: the future of Australian cities. Crawley, Western Australia: UWA Publishing. 18


Bogunovich, & Bradbury. (2012).


Bogunovich, & Bradbury. (2012).

Meurk, C. D., & Hall, G. M. J. (2006). Options for enhancing forest biodiversity across New Zealand’s managed landscape based on ecosystem modelling and spatial design. New Zealand Joutnal of Ecology, 30, 16. 21

Ignatieva, M., Meurk, C., Roon, M. v., Simcock, R., & Stewart, G. (2008). How to put nature into our neighbourhoods. New Zealand: Manaaki Whenua Press. 22

Kline, M., & Cahoon, B. (2010). Protecting river corridors in Vermont. Tournal of the American Water Resources Association, 46(2), 11. 23

Popov, N. (2011). GIS-Applications in design handbook. Auckland: Unitec. 24


Sam Hendrikse

Gabrielle Howdle

Gary Marshall


Jane Irwin Landscape Architecture

Brendan Kempf

STUDENT Melissa Marjo

Bela Grimsdale

Tekerekere Roycroft

Alex Luiten

Sharon Ecchleshall

James Currey

Glenn Ridley

Nick Slattery

Erica van der Zanden

Liam Winterton

Luke Veldhuizen

Alistair Newsome

Tosh Graham

Saja Yacoob

Rachel Butler

Patricia Morrison

Robert Nairn

Russell Cooper

Shayne Noronha

Caitlin Wallis

LOCAL Leigh Nicholson

Heather Wilkins

Rameka Alexander-Tuinukuafe

Julia Moore

Sibyl Bloomfield

Mike Thomas

PEER REVIEW Ian Henderson

Shoujun Chen

Nikolay Popov

Fiona Ting

Pete Griffiths

Xinxin Wang

Matthew Bradbury

X- Section 2015 - Emergence; Designing For The Future  

Edition five of X-Section Journal explores and examines the topic of emergence in the landscape through research, written or visual processe...

X- Section 2015 - Emergence; Designing For The Future  

Edition five of X-Section Journal explores and examines the topic of emergence in the landscape through research, written or visual processe...