Systems Thinking

  • Alexandra Jayeun LeeEmail author
Part of the Advanced Sciences and Technologies for Security Applications book series (ASTSA)


How architects have come to be largely absent in disaster recovery activities compared to some of the other sectors in the medical, the legal, and even the engineering fields can, in part, be explained by how architects have responded to industrialization, which transformed how cities developed.


System Thinking Wicked Problem Design Thinking Disaster Research Human Centered Design 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Alexander DE (2007) Misconception as a barrier to teaching about disasters. Prehospital Disaster Med 22(2):95–103. doi: 10.1017/S1049023X00004441 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Arnstein SR (1969) A ladder of citizen participation. J Am Inst Planners 35(4):216–224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ban S (2011) Shigeru Ban Lecture. School of Architecture and Planning Podcast, Auckland, New Zealand, 3 Nov 2011Google Scholar
  4. Boano C, Hunter W (2012) Architecture at risk? The ambivalent nature of post-disaster practice. 1(1):1–13. doi: 10.5618/arch.2012.v1.n1.1 Google Scholar
  5. Bogner A, Littig B, Menz W (eds) (2009) Expert interviews in interpretive organizational research. Palgrave Macmillan, NYGoogle Scholar
  6. Bordass B, Leaman A (2013) A new professionalism: remedy or fantasy? Build Res Inf 41(1):1–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Buchanan R (1992) Wicked problemd in design thinking. Des Issues 8(2):5–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Burgess PG (1983) The role of the architect in society. Carnegie-Mellon University, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  9. Charlesworth ER (2006) Architects without frontiers: war, reconstruction and design responsibility. Architectural Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  10. Churchman CW (1967) Wicked problems. Manage Sci 4(14):141–142Google Scholar
  11. Coyne R (2005) Wicked problems revisited. Design stud 26: 5–17. doi: 10.1016/j.destud.2004.06.005 Google Scholar
  12. Cox M (2010) Bayview rural village: a case study. Public Interest Design Institute, AustinGoogle Scholar
  13. Cross N (ed) (1984) Developments in design methodology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  14. Cruz T, Tate J (2010) Design Ops—a conversation between Teddy Cruz and Jonathan Tate. In: Choi E, Trotter M (eds) Architecture at the edge of everything. MIT Press, London, pp 75–83Google Scholar
  15. Davidson CH, Johnson C, Lizarralde G, Dikmen N, Sliwinski A (2007) Truths and myths about community participation in post-disaster housing projects. Habitat Int 31(1):100–116. doi: 10.1016/j.habitatint.2006.08.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fisher T (2000) In the scheme of things: alternative thinking on the practice of architecture. University of Minnesota Press, MinneapolisGoogle Scholar
  17. Habraken NJ (1972) Supports, an alternative to mass housing (trans: Valkenburt B). Architectural Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. Jenkins P, Forsyth L (2010) Architecture, participation and society. Routledge, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  19. Kaye L (2011). Making the ideal more real. Architect 30–31Google Scholar
  20. Marshall KD (1973) President’s address to annual meeting. J NZ Inst Architects 50(6):162–163Google Scholar
  21. McKnight J, Block P (2010) The abundant community: awakening the power of families and neighborhoods. Berrett-Koehler Publishers, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  22. Nussbaum B (2007) Are designers the enemy of design? Accessed 21 June 2011
  23. Perry RW (2007) What is a disaster. In: Rodriguez H, Quarantelli EL, Dynes RR (eds) Handbook of disaster research. Springer, New York, pp 5–9Google Scholar
  24. Peterson J, Carter M, Cary J (eds) (2010) The power of pro bono: 40 stories about design for the public good by architects and their clients New York. Metropolis Books, NYGoogle Scholar
  25. Pilloton E (2010) Are humanitarian designers imperialists? Project H responds. Accessed 21 June 2011
  26. Protzen J-P, Harris DJ (eds) (2010) The universe of design: Horst Rittel’s theories of design and planning. Routeledge, AbingdonGoogle Scholar
  27. Ray N (2005) Architecture and its ethical dilemmas. Taylor & Francis, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. Rittel HWJ, Webber MM (1972) Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci 4(2):155–182Google Scholar
  29. Rittel H, Grant DP, Protzen J-P (1984) Second-generation design methods. In: Cross N (ed) Developments in design methodology. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  30. Schilderman T (2010) Putting people at the centre of reconstruction. In: Lyons M, Schilderman T, Boano C (eds) Building back better: delivering people-centred housing reconstruction at scale. Practical Action Publishing, Warwickshire, pp 7–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Spector T (2001) The ethical architect: the dilemma of contemporary practice. Princeton Architectural Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  32. Stallings RA (2007) Methodological issues. In: Rodriguez H, Quarantelli EL, Dynes RR (eds) Handbook of disaster research. Springer, New York, pp 55–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Swett RN (2005) Leadership by design: creating an architecture of trust. Greenway Communications, AtlantaGoogle Scholar
  34. Till J (2009) Architecture depends. MIT, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  35. Turner J (1972) Freedom to build: dweller control of the housing process. Macmillan, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  36. Ward C (1996) Talking to architects: ten lectures. Freedom Press, LondonGoogle Scholar
  37. Watkin D (2001) Morality and architecture revisited. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.RichmondUSA

Personalised recommendations