Exploring research priorities in landscape architecture: An international Delphi study

Sustainable management of the building stock: A Delphi study as a decision-support tool for improved inspections

“…Although the panel of experts in this study was established via direct invitation, the R1 response rate is slightly above the mean for web surveys (34%) (Shih & Fan, 2008), whilst the R2 response rate (final response rate = 80%) exceeds the said 70%. Assessing that participation rate is seen as a gap in previous Delphi studies, for such data are difficult to find in Delphi survey write-ups, as observed by Meijering, Tobi, van den Brink, Morris, and Bruns (2015). Nonetheless, a drop-out rate of 20% may be deemed to be low and attest to the commitment assumed by panelists after R1.…”

Strategies for integrating water management and spatial planning: Organising for spatial quality in the Dutch “Room for the River” program

“…Finally, our research highlights the pivotal role of the landscape architect (Paths 2 and 3), both in terms of designer and guardian of spatial quality – especially to prevent the tendency to see spatial quality as a “costly luxury” in the face of limited budgets and time – and as boundary spanner between the different interests and policy sectors involved in spatial flood risk strategies. Although this dual‐role of the landscape architect as designers of landscape interventions and process managers is started to be recognised in the literature (Meijering, Tobi, Van den Brink, Morris, & Bruns, ; Van den Brink & Bruns, ), current landscape architecture research still largely focuses on the traditional role of the landscape architect as the designer. An avenue for further research is to analyse how the dual‐role can be effectively implemented.…”

Le grand paysage, révélateur des enjeux de la formation en architecture de paysage

“…Animée par des valeurs environnementales, sociales et esthétiques (Thompson, 2002), l'architecture de paysage aurait pour finalité la création, l'amélioration, le maintien et la protection de places fonctionnelles, esthétiques, plaisantes, signifiantes, soutenables et appropriées pour les besoins et objectifs des individus (ECLAS, 2010), et ce dans tous les types de milieux et à toutes les échelles (Gazvoda, 2002 ;Williams 2014). Aussi, un consensus se dégage-t-il quant au fait qu'un tel projet commande une large gamme de pratiques (ECLAS, 2010) relevant certes de la planification, de la conception et de la gestion des paysages (Herlin et Stiles, 2016 ;Meijering et al, 2015 ;ECLAS, 2010, etc. ) mais aussi de l'évaluation scientifique (Donadieu et Aggéri, 2011), de la médiation (Donadieu, 2009) et de l'accompagnement (Paquin et al, 2014).…”