In this Comment for the journal Planning Theory and Practice, James Duminy and Susan Parnell call for greater clarity in the terms and genealogies of the ‘new’ sciences of the urban.
The authors appeal to those observing and participating in the latest manifestations of ‘city science’ to recognize the intellectual and practical inheritance of their urban craft, while also callin on planners and social scientists to move beyond longstanding debates of previous decades, and to engage more meaningfully and productively with new analytical approaches to understanding and intervening in urban processes.
They argue it is only through sustained intellectual engagements that we can hope to develop the new sciences of the city as an art, and to respond effectively to the global nature of the urban challenges that confront us.
