See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/264814112

Design-related research in landscape architecture

Article  in  J of Design Research · January 2012

DOI: 10.1504/JDR.2012.051172

CITATIONS READS

31 14,042

2 authors:

Steffen Nijhuis Inge Bobbink

Delft University of Technology Delft University of Technology
74 PUBLICATIONS   473 CITATIONS    12 PUBLICATIONS   56 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Landscape characterization View project

Circular Water Stories, development of a Visual Water Biography method to reveal peoples engagement with water in a cyclical and circular way through stories View
project

All content following this page was uploaded by Steffen Nijhuis on 19 December 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

J. Design Research, Vol. 10, No. 4, 2012 239

Design-related research in landscape architecture

Steffen Nijhuis* and Inge Bobbink

Department of Urbanism,
Delft University of Technology,
Faculty of Architecture,
Julianalaan 134, 2628 BL Delft, The Netherlands
E-mail: s.nijhuis@tudelft.nl
E-mail: i.bobbink@tudelft.nl
*Corresponding author

Abstract: This article introduces a research strategy for landscape architectonic

design. It describes a systematic approach where design research and
research-by-design are combined. Design research is considered to be an
indispensable step in research-by-design. Together they constitute a heuristic
approach for knowledge-based and creative design, and include plan analysis,
comparative analysis, experimental design study and design study. Taken
together these modes of research are termed design-related research. The
development of design-related research in landscape architecture is regarded as
crucial for understanding the formative elements of landscapes and for the
development of planning methods and design strategies. In this respect
landscape architectonic design actually can be seen as a form of research. The
presented research strategy is applicable in related spatial design disciplines
such as urban design and architecture, and therefore a contribution to the field
of design-related research.

Keywords: design-related research; landscape architecture; landscape design;

research strategy; heuristics; ontwerpend onderzoek; research through design;
knowledge-based design; research-by-design; plan analysis; experimental
design study.

Reference to this paper should be made as follows: Nijhuis, S. and Bobbink, I.

(2012) ‘Design-related research in landscape architecture’, J. Design Research,
Vol. 10, No. 4, pp.239–257.

Biographical notes: Steffen Nijhuis is an Assistant Professor of Landscape

Architecture at the Department of Urbanism at Delft University of Technology.
His PhD research entitled ‘Mapping landscape architectonic compositions with
GIS’ focuses on the application of geographic information science in landscape
architecture research and design. The core of his work deals with theories,
methods and techniques in the field of landscape architecture and urban
design: design research, research-by-design, visual landscape assessment and
visual knowledge representation. He is Leader of the research programme
‘Architecture and Landscape’, Series Editor of RiUS and Advisor to
governmental and regional authorities in the Netherlands. He also leads design
studio’s in MSc and post MSc programmes.

Inge Bobbink is Associate Professor of Landscape Architecture at the

Department of Urbanism at Delft University of Technology. Her PhD
research entitled ‘The language of the Dutch ‘polderboezemwater’, looking for
landscape architectonic challenges of the water system’ clarifies the complexity
of the water management system and its formative possibilities. The research

Copyright © 2012 Inderscience Enterprises Ltd.

240 S. Nijhuis and I. Bobbink

will help designers and civil engineers to face the transformation of the system,
due to climate changes. She is the Leader of the research programme ‘Dutch
Landscapes’. She is the Coordinator of the educational programme of the
‘Landscape Architecture’ master track. She also leads design studio’s in MSc
and post MSc programmes.

1 Introduction

In recent years ‘research-by-design’ (in Dutch: ontwerpend onderzoek) is an often used

term in the disciplines of spatial planning, urban design and landscape architecture. It
usually refers to a particular research method or heuristic (way of knowing) in spatial
design. The central position is that design can be considered research or a culture of
thinking, as put forward by Schön (1983), Zeisel (2006/1981) and Cross (2006).
However, when design is regarded as research the interaction between design and
research becomes an important issue, especially regarding aspects of integrity and
validity (Groat and Wang, 2002; Milburn et al., 2003; Klaasen, 2004; KNAW, 2010;
Deming and Swaffield, 2011). As pointed out in the seminal work Ways to Study and
Research (De Jong and Van der Voordt, 2002) the rationale is to be found in a research
strategy that systematically combines research inquiry and design thinking. Also the
Frascati Manual (OECD, 2002) offers a clue in this direction by its definition of
practical-scientific research:
“Original investigation undertaken to acquire new knowledge […] directed
principally towards a specific practical aim or objective.”
Thus, landscape architectonic design can be considered practical-scientific research when
it is aimed at the systematic acquisition of knowledge directed to specific practical
objectives. This implies a relationship between research and design where research is
seen as an activity to create verifiable knowledge that predicts or explains the physical,
behavioural, aesthetic and cultural outcomes of design (Chenoweth, 1992; Chenoweth
and Chidister, 1983).
There is a wide range of literature available on the relationship between research and
design in landscape architecture (e.g., Steinitz, 1990; Chenoweth, 1992; Lawson, 1992;
Benson, 1998; Thwaites, 1998; Zube, 1998; LaGro, 1999; Armstrong, 1999; Milburn et
al., 2001; Milburn and Brown, 2003; Von Seggern et al., 2008; Gobster et al., 2010;
Deming and Swaffield, 2011; Thering and Chanse, 2011). However, Duchhart (2011)
shows that consistent and systematic elaborations on design-related research strategies,
combining research and design, are scarce in the field of landscape architecture as well as
in urban design. There are only a few serious attempts, such as: Steinitz (1990)
introduced a six-level framework that organises questions related with landscape design
problems; Milburn and Brown (2003) described general models for the relation between
research and design in landscape architecture; Milburn et al. (2003) provided criteria of
research quality; Klaasen (2007) reflects an urban planning/design perspective on
research-by-design; and Nassauer and Opdam (2008) present a model where fundamental
research is the foundation for design guidelines in landscape architecture.
This article introduces a research strategy that systematically combines
design research (i.e., analysis of existing designs or precedents) and research-by-design
 Design-related research in landscape architecture 241

(i.e., study through design) into a coherent research approach for landscape architectonic
design, developed at the Faculty of Architecture, Delft University of Technology
(Steenbergen et al., 2002, 2008; Nijhuis et al., 2011). Hence, the presented design-related
research strategy is general in nature it is also applicable in related spatial design
disciplines. The article aims to contribute to the advancement of spatial design disciplines
in two ways:
1 it offers an alternative view on the relation between research and design by
combining them in a particular strategy for knowledge-based design
2 by providing a systematic framework to evaluate the relation between spatial
research and design.
The article starts with introducing landscape architecture as design discipline, operating
in different degrees of intervention and visual representations as important tools. Next,
the research strategy is introduced elaborating on the systematic relation between design
research and research-by-design. Consequently, these domains of design-related research,
the involved modes of research and their relations are discussed. Finally we evaluate the
presented research strategy in the light of some other opinions on design-related research.

2 Landscape architecture as design discipline

In the Encyclopedic Dictionary of Landscape and Urban Planning [Evert et al., (2010),
p.509] landscape architecture is defined as:
“A profession and academic discipline that employs principles of art and the
physical and social sciences to the processes of environmental planning, design
and conservation, which serve to ensure the long-lasting improvement,
sustainability and harmony of natural and cultural systems or landscape parts
thereof, as well as the design of outdoor spaces with consideration of their
aesthetic, functional and ecological aspects.”
Within this broad definition of landscape architecture there are three areas of activity:
landscape planning, landscape design and landscape management (Stiles, 1994a, 1994b;
Thompson, 2008). Landscape planning is concerned with the long-term development
and preservation of natural and cultural landscapes by implementation of strategic
goal-oriented concepts and allocation of types of land use. Landscape design deals with
form and meaning and is concerned with the organisation of a physical, functional and
aesthetic arrangement of a variety of structural elements to achieve desired social,
cultural and ecological outcomes. Landscape management is concerned with the
conservation and enhancement of the long-term beneficial use of landscape resources as
well as its heterogeneity, character, and beauty (Evert et al., 2010; Vroom, 2006). These
activities overlap and address different levels of scale. They require a multi-layered
understanding of landscapes: their spatial structure, history, (relational) context, as well
as the ecological, economic and social processes involved (Marot, 1995; Prominski,
2004). This implies that there is a wide range of possibilities available for knowledge
acquisition in landscape architecture. Deming and Swaffield (2011) point out nine groups
of suitable research strategies: descriptive strategies (e.g., direct observation, social
surveys), modelling and correlation strategies (e.g., descriptive and synthetic models,
simulations), experimental strategies (e.g., preference studies), classification schemes
242 S. Nijhuis and I. Bobbink

(e.g., typology, taxonomy), interpretative strategies (e.g., discourse analysis, formal

analysis), evaluation and diagnosis (e.g., parameters and norms, landscape assessment),
engaged action research (e.g., participatory action research), projective design (e.g.,
design experiments, design operations), and logical systems (e.g., pattern language).

2.1 Form as object of knowledge

The basic premise of this article is that landscape architectonic design can be considered
an important object of knowledge and research in landscape architecture, as put forward
by Steenbergen and Reh (2003, 2011) and Steenbergen et al. (2008). We elaborate on a
selection and combination of design-related research strategies for formal plan analysis,
typology, projective design experiments and evaluations. The focus is to understand the
formative elements of the (urban) landscape and the development of design methods and
strategies aiming at interventions in and directing landscape transformations. In
landscape architectonic design landscape is interpreted as a two- and three-dimensional
composition of natural, cultural, urban and architectonic elements in relation to ecologic,
social and economic parameters and can be understood by means of morphological
research (Steenbergen and Reh, 2003; Steenbergen et al., 2008). In this type of research,
as initially proposed by architectural and art historians such as August Schmarsow
(1905), Paul Frankl (1968/1914) or Henri Focillon (1992/1948), formal analysis is
considered an important source of knowledge. According to this way of thinking, content
and form of landscapes are related. Content is everything that comprises the landscape
architectonic object; its physical, biological and cultural substance. The form involves the
way in which the parts are assembled into a composition (Steenbergen et al., 2008).

2.2 Degrees of intervention

In landscape architectonic design different degrees of intervention can be distinguished,

which provides an ‘urban perspective’ on the landscape. Steenbergen and Reh (2011)
proposed the Trias Architectonica, the three crucial realms of landscape architectonic
design: architectural landscapes (explicit landscape architectonic spatial forms and
types), cultural landscapes (implicit landscape architectonic spatial forms and types of
the cultural landscape) and urban landscapes (implicit or explicit landscape architectonic
spatial forms and types of the urban landscape). These realms are ordered hierarchically
according to the degree of design intervention, often related to their spatial level of scale.
However, the research strategy presented here is applicable in all realms of landscape
architectonic design.

2.3 Visual thinking and communication

Within this academic context visual representations such as drawings, maps and
models are fundamental tools in landscape architectonic research and design. Visual
representations are vehicles for visual thinking and visual communication in which
different types of media can be employed, ranging from hand drawing to digital
geographic information systems (GIS). Visual thinking implies the generation of ideas
through the creation, inspection, and interpretation of visual representations of the
 Design-related research in landscape architecture 243

previously non-visible (knowledge discovery), while visual communication refers to

effective distribution of ideas in visual form (DiBiase, 1990). Thus drawings, maps and
models – and the involved actions: research by drawing, mapping and modelling – are
not only suitable for understanding and depicting a (future) reality, but are also
instrumental for recording, analysis, manipulation and expression of ideas, forms and
relationships available in two and three-dimensional space (Nijhuis, 2010).
There are actually three phases in the landscape design process during which visual
representations become crucial (cf. Appleyard, 1977; Lawson, 2008):
1 exploration and analysis of situations, designs or precedents, to provide an accessible
information base on which to make (design) decisions
2 design generation, to develop the main ideas and testing them
3 presentation and public communication.

3 Research in landscape architectonic design

In order to engage in the different realms of landscape architectonic design, design

research and research-by-design are combined in a systematic way for knowledge-based
and creative design. Design research concerns analysis of existing designs or precedents,
and research-by-design concerns study through design. In fact the two research domains
cannot be seen apart from each other: design research is an indispensable step in
research-by-design. From this point of view we can consider this a form of heuristics, a
research approach that lead to new discoveries and inventions by following a sequence of
methodical steps (Steenbergen et al., 2002).
The process of design research and research-by-design consists of the following
modes of research: plan analysis, comparative analysis, experimental design study and
design study (cf. Steenbergen et al., 2002, 2008). Here designs are not made intuitively,
but based on study (experimental design study), recording, examination and evaluation
(plan analysis and comparative analysis). Taken together these modes of research are
termed design-related research. Because of the interaction between design and research,
the borderline between both is not always well defined. The research domains and modes
of research are positioned in Figure 1.

Figure 1 The research domains of design research and research-by-design and the involved
modes of research

Source: Adapted from Steenbergen et al. (2008) and

De Jong and Van der Voordt (2002)
244 S. Nijhuis and I. Bobbink

3.1 Design research: analysis of existing designs or precedents

As objects of our material culture landscape architectonic designs embody a great wealth
of spatial design knowledge. They carry knowledge – available to every one – about how
to satisfy certain requirements and how to perform certain tasks (Cross, 2006). In
particular, by studying landscape architectonic designs we can acquire knowledge of the
possible relationships between conceptual thinking and the three-dimensional aspects of
landscapes (Steenbergen and Reh, 2003). Design research is about analysing existing
designs or precedents in order to acquire object specific or typological design knowledge
(acquired through comparative analysis). Two modes of research can be recognised: plan
analysis and comparative analysis.

3.1.1 Plan analysis

Plan analysis is about analysing a landscape or a landscape architectonic design in such a

way that acquired insights can be used creatively in a design study. Plan analysis includes
the analysis and description of all aspects (or layers) of the composition of a chosen
landscape or landscape design in a known context. Not only its form is involved, but also
its function and the way it has been made. As a result we acquire specific knowledge
from an determined object in a determined context. In order to understand landscape
architectonic compositions we can distinguish four general layers that lay out the relation
between the various aspects of the architectonic form and its perception in a systematic
way: basic form, spatial form, metaphorical form and programmatic form (Steenbergen
and Reh, 2003; Steenbergen et al., 2008).

• Basic form: The basic form is the way in which the topography of the natural
landscape or the man-made landscape is reduced, rationalised and activated in the
ground plan of the design (Figure 2).

• Spatial form: Spatial form is the form and functioning of three-dimensional

landscape space, which creates a spatial dynamic. This might be, for example, the
framing of a landscape or urban panorama, or the construction of a spatial series
along a route, making the route a picturesque landscape composition (Figure 3).

• Metaphorical form: The metaphorical form is the way in which iconographic and
mythological images and architectonic structural forms are connected with one
another and with elements from nature, such as water, the relief and vegetation. It is
the systematisation of various references to origins and to other worlds (Figure 4).

• Programmatic form: The spatial programme leads to a functional layout in relation

to patterns of movement (Figure 5).
By doing so we can grasp the principles that constitute the design. It provides the basis
for a deeper understanding of the landscape architectonic composition. Therefore we can
consider these design products the most important source of spatial design knowledge (cf.
Frankl, 1968/1914; Shepherd and Jellicoe, 1925/1993; Franck, 1956; Eisenman, 1963;
Franck and Schneekloth, 1994).
 Design-related research in landscape architecture 245

Figure 2 Basic form analysis of the Beemster, a lakebed polder in the Netherlands

Note: The analysis puts forward the geometrical construction as a relationship between
the original, natural lake and the superimposed occupation grid, establishing a
modular system and alternating pattern of parcellation, drainage canals and roads.
Source: Steenbergen et al. (2009)

Figure 3 Spatial form analysis of the Piazza San Marco, Venice, Italy (see online version
for colours)

Notes: The GIS-based visual analysis from the ‘inside-out’ (as an observer moving
through it) reveals the gradual change of visible space by moving forward entering
the square. The sequential stacking of individual fields of view (isovists) shows
that the space is gradually opening out over the whole piazza in a staged sequence.
Source: Nijhuis (2011)
246 S. Nijhuis and I. Bobbink

Figure 4 Metaphorical form analysis of the water at Chatsworth, England (see online version
for colours)

Notes: The analysis points out the relation between the archetypical treatment of the
water and its symbolic value of life and death (i.e., well, spring, streaming river,
bridge). These are translated into an aqueduct, a cascade, a rectangular canal pond,
a fountain, and a fish pond.
Source: Bobbink (2012)

Figure 5 Programmatic form analysis of Central Park, New York, USA (see online version
for colours)

Notes: The analysis reveals a particular functional zoning in the park with a
centre-oriented zone, a forest, two sport zones, a water reservoir and a local park
zone. Within these zones a more refined grouping of programmatic elements can
be distinguished.
Source: Steenbergen et al. (2008)
 Design-related research in landscape architecture 247

3.1.2 Comparative analysis

Comparative analysis or typological research includes the comparison of several
landscape architectonic designs to reveal the relationships to one another and their
convertibility, by means of distinguishing composition elements, composition schemes
and transformations (i.e., adaptations and transformations of the type, or evolution and
differentiation of the type) (Steenbergen et al., 2008). In this phase knowledge of
determined objects becomes detached from the context (generic) and applicable to other
contexts. Comparative analysis is characterised by a process of generalisation by focusing
on, and limiting oneself to, essentials and leaving out particulars. As a result we find
spatial types or principles. Klaasen (2007, p.476) puts it like this:
“In the case of [landscape architectonic] design a scientific approach involves
the dissociation of objects of design from a specific design context, i.e., the
designing of [spatial compositions with certain diagnostic characteristics] –
resulting in [types or principles] that in spatial-ecological and/or socio-cultural
and/or economic-technical terms are independent of a specific situation. By
leaving aside characteristics of specific contexts one can focus on essentials –
from simple ones like universal spatial organisation principles to more complex
ones that include some contextual characteristics, and therefore might not be
universal, but certainly are non-localised.”

Figure 6 Example of a generic composition scheme of Italian Renaissance villa as a result of

comparative analysis of various specific villas by Palladio

Notes: The analysis revealed a number of classic standard elements (i.e., tympanum,
loggia, stairs), which were used in various forms and combinations as summarised
in the scheme. A precise interaction exists between the way in which the
composition elements are adapted and employed and their effect in the landscape.
Source: Steenbergen et al. (2008)
248 S. Nijhuis and I. Bobbink

In comparative analysis we can compare compositions in order to make types or

principles visible in their relation to the physical, social and cultural problem posed. The
type or principle is regarded as a formal scheme which is derived from reducing the
whole of variants into a common basic form (Steenbergen et al., 2008; Nijhuis, 2010)
(Figure 6). As a result we acquire generic spatial design knowledge reflected by different
possible spatial solutions, which can be applied in other contexts as well. It offers as it
were a ‘toolbox’ for the landscape architect providing an overview of available spatial
types or principles.

3.2 Research-by-design: study through design

Research-by-design is about study through design using knowledge acquired by design
research. We can identify two important modes of research: the experimental design
study and design study. The former is about application and transformation of types and
principles, while the later is about modelling and expression: the actual design study.
Here the suffix ‘study’ is used to indicate that knowledge is generated by thoroughly
thinking through a problem, carrying out experiments and collecting, processing and
analysing data (looking for something that does not exist yet) as opposed to ‘research’ in
its narrow meaning of empirical form of study (De Jong and Van der Voordt, 2002).
In research-by-design, the researcher links the formal characteristics of the object
under investigation and a new problem or situation. The purpose is to investigate these
characteristics and identify their possibilities using ‘generalised knowledge’ (spatial
design principles or types) which can be put to use in the design study (Steenbergen et al.,
2008; Nijhuis, 2010).

3.2.1 Experimental design study (transformation)

Experimental design study includes experiments in which particular composition
elements or composition schemes from other objects are isolated and placed in another
determined context. Experimental design study is generating knowledge and
understanding by studying the effects of actively and systematically varying design
solutions in a specific context. If this is done in order to investigate the context, we can
speak of experimental transformation of the topography. If the accent lies on the
transformation of the composition element or the composition scheme itself, we speak of
experimental transformation of the type (or principle). A number of actual design
experiments are devised through which the given space can be investigated. An
experimental design study consists of taking composition elements, or a composition
scheme, from a suitable precedent and applying them in the situation under investigation.
By analysing the internal rules of this composition and taking them as the basis for a
critical consideration of the problem, one can discover how a new design-in-the-making
relates to the known precedent by studying or ‘testing’ different possibilities
(Steenbergen et al., 2008; Nijhuis, 2010) (Figure 7). The choice of the (isolated)
composition elements, types schemes is conscious and transparent. The chosen elements
or schemes should carry verifiable or documented knowledge about how to satisfy certain
requirements or how to perform certain tasks.
 Design-related research in landscape architecture 249

Figure 7 Design experiment for a landscape park and related buildings in Amsterdam-Sloterplas,
the Netherlands (see online version for colours)

(a)

(b)

Notes: Figure 7(a): Experimental transformation of the topography derived from the
English landscape garden Stourhead (Wiltshire, UK), where separate landscape
elements are linked through the visual continuation of avenues and views
across empty intervening spaces. Figure 7(b): For the buildings in the park an
experimental transformation of the classic Italian villa into a high-rise tower.
Here intermediary generic spatial forms that mediate between the villa (i.e., piano
nobile, loggia, terrace) and landscape where mounted, transformed and rescaled
within the framework of a high-rise tower, in order to give the tower an active
relation with the landscape.
Source: Steenbergen et al. (2008)
250 S. Nijhuis and I. Bobbink

3.2.2 Design study (modelling)

Finally, the design study is a new composition of a landscape, as a proposition in
which methodical use is made of design research and experimental design studies (cf.
Steenbergen et al., 2008). Here the applied (general) principles or types become specific
to the situation under investigation and becomes its own particular expression. Design
study is generating knowledge and understanding by studying the effects of actively and
systematically varying both design solutions and their context.
The ultimate goal is to come to a possible and knowledge-based design which can be
put into practice as its ultimate test. In preparing a design study, systematic use is made
of plan analysis, typological research and goal-oriented design experiments (Figure 8).
Working in this manner could be compared with heuristics, a scientific approach that
leads to new discoveries and inventions by systematic methods. Design thus becomes a
form of heuristic research, geared to exploring a possible future and the methodical
discovery of the right composition (Steenbergen et al., 2008; Nijhuis, 2010).

Figure 8 Design study for an nature observatory in De Biesbosch, the Netherlands (see online
version for colours)

Notes: This design study is based on typological knowledge derived from various classic
landscape architectonic composition schemes and is the result of a series of
experimental design studies. Student work by: Ioannis Tsoukalas, Mai Yoshitake
and Robert Mayr, design studio Villa Urbana, TU Delft, 2009.
Source: Nijhuis et al. (2012)
 Design-related research in landscape architecture 251

3.3 From specific to generic knowledge, from generic to specific knowledge

The succession of the activities in the domains of design research and research-by-design
implies an incremental process, where the former informs the latter in an iterative
process. So, knowledge acquired from plan analysis becomes the basis for comparative
analysis, knowledge acquired from comparative analysis the basis for experimental
design study (reflective inquiry), and knowledge acquired from experimental design
study is the basis for the (final) design study. In fact, every activity can be considered
research focused on acquiring spatial design knowledge which informs the next activity.
It is characterised by the generalisation of specific spatial design knowledge in a
determined context, making it applicable to other design contexts, using design
experiments to test the spatial possibilities and finally, the design study as an possible
expression of an integral design (Figure 9).

Figure 9 Design research and research-by-design as incremental and iterative process

Plan analysis Comparave analysis Experimental design study Design study

specific knowledge generic knowledge generic knowledge specific knowledge

Design research Research-by-design

Note: Every mode of design-related research acquires particular spatial design knowledge
which informs the next activity: from specific knowledge to generic knowledge,
from generic knowledge to specific knowledge.
Source: Nijhuis (2010)

4 Discussion: design-as-research

The described approach considers landscape architectonic design to be a form of

research. It provides a model for the interaction between research and design in a
systematic and consistent way. Since academia in landscape architecture address various
research and design interactions (i.e., Milburn and Brown, 2003) reflection on the
presented approach is useful. Duchhart (2011) provides a helpful overview of different
design and research combinations which are currently used and labelled as ‘research-by-
design’. However, for the sake of clarity we prefer to use the label ‘design-as-research’ as
a container of design research and research-by-design, distinguishing analysis of
precedents from research through design. Both are considered to be a form of research
combining strategies of research inquiry and design thinking. Design-as-research implies
a certain relationship between research and design. There are three possible combinations
(Frayling, 1993; Duchhart, 2011):
252 S. Nijhuis and I. Bobbink

• research feeds the design process with the ultimate objective to improve the quality
of the designed object and increase its credibility: research-based-design

• designs (or the process of designing) are used as a vehicle to make spatial problems
visual and spatial (‘framing’) and to generate solutions: design-based-research

• research undertaken on existing designs (or their representations) as a knowledge

basis for future design: design research-based-design.

4.1 Research-based-design and design-based-research

In research-based-design landscape architectonic design is considered to be an object or
goal-oriented interdisciplinary approach that breaks down complex problems into sectors
or compartments (which are studied by single specific disciplines) or themes (that are
subject of an object-oriented or goal-oriented approach) which can be investigated
individually (Antrop, 2001). The design is informed by specialised knowledge
(quantitative and qualitative) which is delivered as building stones to the design process
(i.e., What is the visual character of an area?; How much water storage do we need?)
Research is here seen as delivering the knowledge needed to create a proper design and
increase its credibility.
In design-based-research the design is exploring the spatial consequences or
possibilities of, for example, abstract planning or political options and choices, in a visual
way. Here design is regarded as a reflective inquiry or ‘journey of discovery’ (Short,
2008). Von Seggern and Werner (2008, p.35) regard design to be an important generator
of knowledge by arguing:
“A design never appears from nowhere, it always connects at different levels
with something pre-existing (spatial, experiential, social, technical or related to
particular people) and transforms these in a broad sense that allows room for
future possibilities and potentials, into something new – regardless of whether
fundamentally new or (just) new in that context.”
Designing means to search for ideas and is closely related with inventing something. It
draws up a proposition of possible answers to a question, and translates an idea into
something that can be read or understood (Von Seggern and Werner, 2008). The spatial
design helps setting the problem by ‘naming’ the things that will be attended to, and
frame the context in which they will be attended (framing of thoughts) (Schön, 1983). It
provides a context for conversation, observation and construction, not only in spatial
terms but also in cognitive terms (Nijhuis and Stellingwerff, 2011).

4.2 Design research-based-design

The research strategy as presented in this article is an example of research-based-design.
This approach actually combines the former two approaches, but stresses the importance
of knowledge contained in existing precedents. In this respect it is truly a design-oriented
approach where design research and research-by-design are combined into a coherent and
systematic approach for knowledge-based landscape architectonic design. Knowledge of
spatial types and principles acquired from thorough analysis (design research: plan
analysis and comparative analysis) is the basis for experimental design studies and the
design study itself (research-by-design: experimental design study and design study)
 Design-related research in landscape architecture 253

which generates knowledge which can be used in new designs. However, the main
point of this approach is to test composition elements and schemes with respect to the
original precedent and the rules and conditions that are applied in its transformation that
make it suitable to the intended new functions and programmes (Steenbergen et al.,
2002). The design study occupies the same position in design research-based-design as
the hypothesis in empirical research, a testable, coherent and simple as possible ordering
of a number of phenomena. The hypothesis in empirical research can be regarded as a
‘knowledge-based design’ as well (of course not necessarily in a spatial way).
The ultimate test of the design study entails putting it into practice. In this regard the
term ‘hypothesis’ has a particular charge and tension; when applied to design-related
research the term ‘proposition’ is more appropriate to creative speculation
(propositional as in ‘what if…?’), rather than signifying a determined, directional, or
causal relationship.
The discussed heuristic is applicable to the different degrees of intervention in
landscape architectonic design. We find applications of this research strategy on
architectural landscapes in De Wit and Aben (1999), Steenbergen and Reh (2003) and
Nijhuis (2011). Applications on cultural landscapes are exemplified by Steenbergen et al.
(2009) and Bobbink (2009, 2012). And an application on the urban landscape in
Steenbergen and Reh (2011). Although in these studies the emphasis is on design
research, the long tradition we have applying research-by-design in academic design
studio’s proof that the systematic relationship between both domains offers a powerful
research strategy for knowledge-based design. Examples can be found in Steenbergen
et al. (2008) and Nijhuis et al. (2012).

4.3 Research integrity and validity

The presented approach is guided by the intention of adding to the scientific body of
knowledge. The unique agency of the design process is used for generating research
outcomes. In this respect design research as well as research-by-design can be regarded
as research because it can produce knowledge about the world through its purposes,
protocols, and outcomes (Deming and Swaffield, 2011). Although the proposed research
strategy involves traditional research activities (i.e., analysis, evaluation), they are not
equivalent to quantitative or qualitative research, at least as they are understood by
scholars in other disciplines. There is a difference between informed personal responses
to a specific design problem and formulating a research problem that is more broadly
defined, systematic and generalisable (LaGro, 1999). The design-based research as
described is a process of abduction (Klaasen, 2004; Schöbel, 2006), an investigation on
‘what might be’, using verifiable knowledge derived from analysis of suitable precedents.
This exploration is undertaken in a systematic way to increase the understanding of the
relationships between the world as it is and the possibility of what it might become
(cf. Deming and Swaffield, 2011).
In this process general research criteria such as: truth value (internal validity or
credibility), applicability (external validity or generalisability), consistency (reliability,
stability, or dependability), transparency (objectivity), significance, efficiency, clarity and
originality guide the development of the design-related research project (Groat and
Wang, 2002; Klaasen, 2004; Deming and Swaffield, 2011). Note that in a practical
science such as landscape architecture and related spatial design disciplines, the essential
validity question is not ‘is it true’, but ‘does it work according to the aims’ (Klaasen,
254 S. Nijhuis and I. Bobbink

2004). How well the criteria are achieved will differ in each research project. However,
the research strategy can be elaborated by describing and developing more specific
criteria for every methodical step for means of evaluating and communicating design
qualities. Also more standardised and transparent protocols for evaluation of the results
can be incorporated, providing for a more conscious feedback loop.
To ensure the quality of the process and output, peer-based evaluation remains a
crucial mechanism and constituent element of the approach (KNAW, 2010; Milburn
et al., 2003; Armstrong, 1999; Bowring, 1997). Milburn et al. (2003, p.125) stress the
importance of peer-based evaluation by stating:

“The assessment of [research] quality is necessarily a peer-based evaluation

process especially in highly differentiated and interdisciplinary fields such as
landscape architecture.”

Without a coherent and strong disciplinary background to provide a depth of inquiry

upon which to draw, researchers are dependent on the referee system to establish
confidence in the quality of information used in the design-related research and its output.
Furthermore, the referee system eliminates the need for a constant checking of the results
and theories advanced by others, and thereby allows researchers to devote themselves to
novel and creative inquiries (Zuckerman and Merton, 1971).

5 Concluding remarks

As we have seen the described research strategy establishes a solid ground for
knowledge-based design in landscape architecture. Spatial design knowledge acquired by
design research and research-by-design is the fundament for conscious and creative
design in landscape architectonic design. It systematically combines research inquiry
with design thinking. Typological design knowledge merges with specific quantitative
and qualitative input in a journey of discovery, where the design is the vehicle to draw up
propositions of possible spatial possibilities. This research strategy is applicable to related
spatial design disciplines such as urban design and architecture.
The development of the research domains of design research and research-by-design
(including their modes of research) is crucial for designing new topographies by
integrating new programmes into the ‘genius of place’ and time, and with regard to the
continuation of spatial quality and cultural identity of the landscape. Within this
framework, the formal composition of a landscape or landscape design is not an accident
or incidental phenomenon, but the result of a developmental process. All morphogenetic,
technological, functional and also cultural and ecological aspects are expressed in that
form; the form of the landscape includes all other aspects and is the expression of their
organisation. Knowledge of the landscape form becomes even more important to the
extent that the programme becomes more general, global or uncertain. Then the
landscape form gives one something to hold on to in order to be able to ‘steer’ the
process and to be able to test the transformations for an insight into the physical qualities
of the place.
 Design-related research in landscape architecture 255

References
Antrop, M. (2001) ‘The language of landscape ecologists and planners. A comparative content
analysis of concepts used in landscape ecology’, Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 55,
No. 3, pp.163–173.
Appleyard, D. (1977) ‘Understanding professional media. Issues and a research agenda’, in
Altman, I. and Wohlwill, F. (Eds.): Human Behavior and Environment, Plenum Press,
New York.
Armstrong, H. (1999) ‘Design studios as research: an emerging paradigm for landscape
architecture’, Landscape Review, Vol. 5, No. 2, pp.5–25.
Benson, J.F. (1998) ‘On research, scholarship and design in landscape architecture’, Landscape
Research, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp.198–204.
Bobbink, I. (2009) Land InSight. A Landscape Architectonic Exploration of Locus, Sun Publishers,
Amsterdam.
Bobbink, I. (2012) Water InSight, Sun Publishers, Amsterdam.
Bowring, J. (1997) ‘Research by design: the refereed studio’, Landscape Review, Vol. 3, No. 2,
pp.54–55.
Chenoweth, R. (1992) ‘Research: hype and reality’, Landscape Architecture Magazine, Vol. 82,
No. 3, pp.47–48.
Chenoweth, R. and Chidister, M. (1983) ‘Attitudes toward research in landscape architecture: a
study of the discipline’, Landscape Journal, Vol. 2, No. 2, pp.98–113.
Cross, N. (2006) Designerly Ways of Knowing, Springer-Verlag, London.
De Jong, T. and Van der Voordt, T. (2002) ‘Criteria for scientific study and design’, in De Jong, T.
and Van der Voordt, T. (Eds.): Ways to Study and Research, pp.19–30, Delft University Press,
Delft.
De Wit, S. and Aben, R. (1999) The Enclosed Garden, 010 Publishers, Rotterdam.
Deming, E. and Swaffield, S. (2011) Landscape Architecture Research. Inquiry, Strategy, Design,
John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken.
DiBiase, D. (1990) ‘Visualization in the earth sciences’, Earth and Mineral Sciences, Vol. 59,
No. 2, pp.13–18.
Duchhart, I. (Ed.) (2011) An annotated bibliography on Research by Design (ontwerpend
onderzoek), Wageningen University and Deltares, Wageningen and Utrecht (report).
Eisenman, P. (1963) ‘The formal basis of modern architecture’, PhD thesis, University of
Cambridge, Cambridge, MA.
Evert, K.J. et al. (Eds.) (2010) Encyclopedic Dictionary of Landscape and Urban Planning,
Springer-Verlag, London.
Focillon, H. (1992/1948) The Life of Forms in Art, trans. Hogan, C.B. and Kubler, Z., Zone,
New York.
Franck, C. (1956) Die Barockvillen in Frascati. Ihre Gestaltung aus den landschaftlichen
Gegebenheiten, Deutscher Kunstverlag, S.L.
Franck, K.A. and Schneekloth, L.H. (Eds.) (1994) Ordering Space. Types in Architecture and
Design, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
Frankl, P. (1968/1914) Principles of Architectural History, trans. O’Gorman, J., MIT Press,
Cambridge, MA.
Frayling, C. (1993) ‘Into, through, and for research: research in art and design’, Royal College of
Art Research Papers, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.1–5.
Gobster, P.H., Nassauer, J.I. and Nadenicek, D.J. (2010) ‘Landscape journal and scholarship in
landscape architecture: the next 25 years’, Landscape Journal, Vol. 29, No. 1, pp.52–57.
256 S. Nijhuis and I. Bobbink

Groat, L. and Wang, D. (2002) Architectural Research Methods, John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken.
Klaasen, I.T. (2004) Knowledge-based Design: Developing Urban & Regional Design into a
Science, Delft University Press, Delft.
Klaasen, I.T. (2007) ‘A scientific approach to urban and regional design: research by design’,
Journal of Design Research, Vol. 5, No. 4, pp.470–489.
KNAW (2010) Quality Assessment in the Design and Engineering Disciplines. A Systematic
Framework, Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences, Amsterdam.
LaGro, J.A., Jr. (1999) ‘Research capacity: a matter of semantics?’, Landscape Journal, Vol. 18,
No. 2, pp.179–186.
Lawson, B. (2008) How Designers Think. The Design Process Demystified, Architectural Press,
Amsterdam.
Lawson, S. (1992) ‘Research’, Landscape Architecture Magazine, Vol. 82, No. 3, pp.38–46.
Marot, D. (1995) ‘Landscape as alternative’, in Vandermarliere, K. (Ed.): Het Landschap/The
Landscape, pp.9–36, De Singel, Antwerpen.
Milburn, L.S. and Brown, R.D. (2003) ‘The relationship between research and design in landscape
architecture’, Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 64, Nos. 1–2, pp.47–66.
Milburn, L.S., Brown, R.D. and Paine, C. (2001) ‘“… Research on research”: research attitudes and
behaviors of landscape architecture faculty in North America’, Landscape and Urban
Planning, Vol. 57, No. 2, pp.57–67.
Milburn, L.S., Brown, R.D., Mulley, S.J. and Hilts, S.G. (2003) ‘Assessing academic contributions
in landscape architecture’, Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 64, No. 3, pp.119–129.
Nassauer, J.I. and Opdam, P. (2008) ‘Design in science: extending the landscape ecology
paradigm’, Journal of Landscape Ecology, Vol. 23, No. 6, pp.633–644.
Nijhuis, S. (2010) ‘Landscape architecture: theory, methods and techniques’, Delft University of
Technology (internal report).
Nijhuis, S. (2011) ‘Visual research in landscape architecture’, in Nijhuis, S., Van Lammeren, R.
and Van der Hoeven, F. (Eds.): Exploring the Visual Landscape. Advances in Physiognomic
Landscape Research in the Netherlands, pp.103–145, IOS Press, Amsterdam.
Nijhuis, S. and Stellingwerff, M. (2011) ‘3D-models in landscape architecture’, in Breen, J. and
Stellingwerff, M. (Eds.): Envisioning Architecture. Conference Proceedings European
Architectural Envisioning Association, 14–17 September 2011, Delft University of
Technology, pp.197–208.
Nijhuis, S., Bobbink, I. and Jauslin, D. (2011) ‘Research and design in landscape architecture’.
Paper presented at the 4th World Conference on Design Research, IASDR2011, 18 August to
4 November 2011, Delft University of Technology, the Netherlands.
Nijhuis, S., Bobbink, I. and Jauslin, D. (2012) ‘Landscape as an architectural composition’, in
Amorosa, N. (Ed.): Representing Landscapes. A Visual Collection of Landscape Architectural
Drawings, pp.34–46, Routledge, London and New York.
OECD (2002) Frascati Manual, Proposed standard practice for surveys on research and
experimental development, OECD Publication Service, Paris.
Prominski, M. (2004) Landschaft Entwerfen, Reimer Verlag, S.L.
Schmarsow, A. (1905) Grundbegriffe der Kunstwissenschaft am Übergang vom Altertum zum
Mittelalter, Teubner Verlag, Leipzig and Berlin.
Schöbel, S. (2006) ‘Qualitative research as a perspective for urban open space planning’, Journal of
Landscape Architecture, Vol. 1, No. 1, pp.38–37.
Schön, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner. How Professionals Think in Action, Basic Books,
London.
Shepherd, J.C. and Jellicoe, G.A. (1925/1993) Italian Gardens of the Renaissance, Princeton
Architectural Press, New York.
 Design-related research in landscape architecture 257

Short, A. (2008) ‘What is ‘architectural design research’?’, Journal of Building Research &
Information, Vol. 36, No. 2, pp.195–199.
Steenbergen, C.M. and Reh, W. (2003) Architecture and Landscape. The Design Experiment of the
Great European Gardens and Landscapes, Revised and expanded edition, Birkhäuser, Basel,
Boston, Berlin.
Steenbergen, C.M. and Reh, W. (2011) Metropolitan Landscape Architecture. Urban Parks and
Landscapes, Birkhäuser, Basel, Boston, Berlin.
Steenbergen, C.M., Meeks, S. and Nijhuis, S. (2008) Composing Landscapes. Analysis, Typology
and Experiments for Design, Birkhäuser, Basel, Boston, Berlin.
Steenbergen, C.M., Mihl, H. and Reh, W. (2002) ‘Introduction; design research, research by
design’, in Steenbergen, C.M. et al. (Eds.): Architectural Design and Composition, pp.12–25,
Thoth Publishers, Bussum.
Steenbergen, C.M., Reh, W., Nijhuis, S, and Pouderoijen, M.T. (2009) The Polder Atlas of the
Netherlands. Pantheon of the Low Lands, Thoth Publishers, Bussum.
Steinitz, C. (1990) ‘A framework for theory applicable to the education of landscape architects (and
other environmental design professionals)’, Landscape Journal, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp.136–143.
Stiles, R. (1994a) ‘In search of a definition’, Landscape Design, October, No. 234, pp.44–48.
Stiles, R. (1994b) ‘Landscape theory: a missing link between landscape planning and landscape
design?’, Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 30, No. 3, pp.139–149.
Thering, S. and Chanse, S. (2011) ‘The scholarship of transdisciplinary action research: toward a
new paradigm for the planning and design professions’, Landscape Journal, Vol. 30, No. 1,
pp.6–18.
Thompson, I. (2008) Ecology, Community and Delight. Sources of Values in Landscape
Architecture, Taylor and Francis, London and New York.
Thwaites, K. (1998) ‘Landscape design is research: an exploration’, Journal of Landscape
Research, Vol. 23, No. 2, pp.196–198.
Von Seggern, H. and Werner, J. (Eds.) (2008) ‘Design as an integrative process of creating
knowledge’, Creating Knowledge. Innovation Strategies for Designing Urban Landscapes,
pp.34–63, Jovis, Berlin.
Von Seggern, H., Werner, J. and and Grosse-Bachle, L. (Eds.) (2008) Creating Knowledge.
Innovation Strategies for Designing Urban Landscapes, pp.34–63, Jovis, Berlin.
Vroom, M. (2006) Lexicon of Garden and Landscape Architecture, Birkhäuser, Basel, Boston,
Berlin.
Zeisel, J. (2006/1981) Inquiry by Design: Tools for Environment-behavior Research, Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge.
Zube, E.H. (1998) ‘The evolution of a profession’, Landscape and Urban Planning, Vol. 42,
Nos. 2–4, pp.75–80.
Zuckerman, H. and Merton, R.K. (1971) ‘Patterns of evaluation in science: institutionalisation,
structure and functions of the referee system’, Minerva, Vol. 9, No. 1, pp.66–100.

View publication stats