From Theory to Practice

  • Vítor OliveiraEmail author
Part of the The Urban Book Series book series (UBS)


The seventh chapter focuses on a fundamental issue for the field of urban morphology that has been receiving increased attention in literature, the passage from description and explanation of the morphological phenomena to the definition of prescriptive guidelines for the production of new urban forms. Two eminently practical activities that can benefit from morphological support are identified: urban planning and architecture. While the first is a potential receptor of morphological theories, concepts and methods developed for the city scale, the second would be informed by morphological approaches developed for the building scale.


Architecture Building typology Theory and practice Urban morphology Urban planning 


  1. Cataldi G (1998) Designing in stages. In: Petruccioli A (ed) Typological process and design theory. Aga Khan Program for Islamic Architecture, Cambridge, pp 159–177Google Scholar
  2. Cataldi G, Maffei GL, Vaccaro P (2002) Saverio Muratori and the Italian school of planning typology. Urban Morphol 6:3–14Google Scholar
  3. Dursun P (2007) Space syntax in architectural design. In: Proceedings of the 6th international space syntax symposium. Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, 12–15 June 2007Google Scholar
  4. Hall T (2008) The form-based development plan: bridging the gap between theory and practice in urban morphology. Urban Morphol 12:77–95Google Scholar
  5. Hillier B, Greene M, Desyllas J (2000) Self-generated neighbourhoods: the role of urban form in the consolidation of informal settlements. Urban Des Int 5:61–96CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Karimi K (2012) A configurational approach to analytical urban design: space syntax methodology. Urban Des Int 17:297–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Karimi K, Parham E (2012) An evidence informed approach to developing an adaptable regeneration programme for declining informal settlements. In: Greene M, Reyes J, Castro A (eds) Proceedings of the 8th international space syntax symposium. Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago de Chile, pp 3–6Google Scholar
  8. Karimi K, Amir A, Shafiei K, Raford N, Abdul E, Zhang J, Mavridou M (2007) Evidence-based spatial intervention for regeneration of informal settlements: the case of Jeddah central unplanned areas, In: Proceedings of the 6th international space syntax symposium. Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, 12–15 June 2007Google Scholar
  9. Kropf KS (1993) An inquiry into the definition of built form in urban morphology. Dissertation, University of BirminghamGoogle Scholar
  10. Kropf KS (1996) Urban tissue and the character of towns. Urban Des Int 1:247–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kropf KS (ed) (2001) Stratford-on-Avon District Design Guide. Stratford-on-Avon District Council, Stratford-on-AvonGoogle Scholar
  12. Kropf K (2016) Handbook of urban morphology. Wiley, LondonGoogle Scholar
  13. Larkham PJ, Chapman D, Morton N, Birkhamshaw AJ (2005) Stratford-on-Avon District residential character study. Stratford-on-Avon District Council, Stratford-on-AvonGoogle Scholar
  14. Mairie d’Asnières-sur-Oise, Samuels I, Kropf K (1992) Plan d’Occupation des Sols. Mairie d’Asnières-sur-Oise, Asnières-sur-OiseGoogle Scholar
  15. Maretto M (2013) Saverio Muratori: towards a morphological school of urban design. Urban Morphol 17:93–106Google Scholar
  16. Marzot N (2002) The study of urban form in Italy. Urban Morphol 6:59–73Google Scholar
  17. Menghini AB (2002) The city as form and structure: the urban project in Italy from the 1920s to the 1980s. Urban Morphol 6:75–86Google Scholar
  18. Muratori S (1944) Storia e critica dell’ architettura contemporanea. Centro Studi di Storia Urbanistica, RomaGoogle Scholar
  19. Oliveira V (2014) Morfologia urbana: investigação científica e prática profissional. A Obra Nasce 8:97–109Google Scholar
  20. Oliveira V, Silva M, Samuels I (2014a) Urban morphological research and planning practice: a Portuguese assessment. Urban Morphol 18:23–39Google Scholar
  21. Oliveira V, Pinho P, Mendes L, Patatas T, Monteiro C (eds) (2014b) Our common future in urban morphology. FEUP, PortoGoogle Scholar
  22. Samuels I (1993) The Plan d’Occupation des Sols for Asnières-sur-Oise: a morphological design guide. In: Hayward R, McGlynn S (eds) Making better places: urban design now. Butterworth, Oxford, pp 113–121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Samuels I (1999) A typomorphological approach to design: the plan for St Gervais. Urban Des Int 4:129–141CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Samuels I (2013) ISUF Task Force on Research and Practice in Urban Morphology: an interim report. Urban Morphol 17:40–43Google Scholar
  25. Samuels I, Pattacini L (1997) From description to prescription: reflections on the use of a morphological approach in design guidance. Urban Des Int 2:81–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Whitehand JWR (2006) Towards a more integrated approach. Urban Morphol 10:87–88Google Scholar
  27. Whitehand JWR (2009) The structure of urban landscapes. Urban Morphol 13:5–27Google Scholar
  28. Whitehand JWR (2010) The problem of separate worlds. Urban Morphol 14:83–84Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculdade de EngenhariaUniversidade do PortoPortoPortugal
  2. 2.Departamento de ArquitecturaUniversidade Lusófona do PortoPortoPortugal

Personalised recommendations