Duffy, F (2008) Linking theory back to practice. Building Research & Information, 36(6), pp. 655-658. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The Building Research and Information special issue 'Developing Theories of the Built Environment' (volume 36(3), 2008) explores the epistemology that underpins design research and the built environment. This commentary considers alternative models and processes of research that can assist with addressing the complexity and vast theoretical territory constituting the built environment. The continuing disciplinary fragmentation within universities and the separation of much university research from real data and from the needs of practice have been disastrous. A clear need exists for integrating knowledge across disciplinary boundaries and for crossing the chasm between university-based research and the users of research in practices. Important precedents provided by the Tavistock Institute, Space Syntax and Building Use Studies illustrate the virtues of combining field-based research, theory and practice, and demonstrate real benefits. Increasing recognition is necessary of the interdependence and linkage between the realms of practice and university-based research. It is vital to energize data that exist within practice through new, more flexible institutions and new, more inventive modes of research.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | design research; epistemology; phroensis; practical wisdom; professional practice; research capabilities; research infrastructure; research policy |
| Index terms: | space syntax, professional practice, building research, boundaries, fragmentation, research policy, built environment, complexity, interdependence, linkage, epistemology |
| Subjects: | urban design, economic and policy analysis, research management, organizational analysis, systems engineering, knowledge theory, property law, infrastructure and transport systems, professional development, business |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Engineering Principles, Design Practice, Legal Issues, Research Practice, Organizational Design, Business Strategy, Information Management |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCT |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here