Visualization, participation and rhetoric: The discursive power of landscape design representations in participatory processes

Abstract

Visual landscape design representations facilitate communication and knowledge exchange during participatory planning and design processes. The production of representations is considered to be a discursive act: actors and institutions construct knowledge with a certain authority and credibility through the use of visual expression. We aim to study the context in which the production of representations is embedded and how this context manifests itself in the communicative qualities of design representations. We present a visual discourse analysis of landscape design representations, employing empirical examples from the transdisciplinary design competition Rebuild by Design. The analysis uncovers interdependencies among three components of the visual discourse: the arrangement of participatory processes, media interactivity and the visual rhetoric embedded in the composition and style of the image. A conscious use of these discursive components could help prevent miscommunication, manage participant expectations and increase the validity of participatory design process outcomes. Design visualization / visual discourse analysis / participatory design / visual rhetoric / rebuild by design introductionAs intermediaries in participatory design processes, landscape architects 'provoke situations of exchange and dialogue between a place and a public'. 1 Landscape architects and planners facilitate such exchanges of knowledge among scientific experts, stakeholders and local inhabitants through visualization, by either letting participants draw or by mediation of the designer. 2 The act of drawing is seen by Catherine Dee 'less as a technique, and more forcefully as an experimental method'. 3 By extension, the ability of participants to draw and their level of access to the production of visualizations shape the influence of those participants on the outcomes of planning and design projects. Besides drawings, landscape architects and planners use various kinds of visual representations to facilitate the communication of design ideas among project participants. 4 These design representations are not considered as neutral communication devices. 5 Especially the conscious and unconscious use of increasingly accessible digital visualization technologies by spatial designers has become an important topic of scholarly debate. 6 For example, it is argued that digital technologies enable designers to think at higher levels of complexity and to achieve different solutions in terms of systems, form and materiality. 7 However, Karl Kullmann also notes the limits of some digital media for designing and representing landscape designs. Digital media, and the skills required to use them, may contribute to increase the distance between the producers and viewers of the image. Instead, 'loose-realism' techniques such as digital freeform collages and montages should aim to retain control over the medium while enjoying the benefits of its modern visual styles. 8 The nature of participatory processes not only consists of consensusdriven faci...

Learning to Design with Stakeholders: Participatory, Collaborative, and Transdisciplinary Design in Postgraduate Landscape Architecture Education in Europe

“…Such courses could, for example, address the differences and similarities between the participatory, collaborative, and transdisciplinary traditions in landscape architecture (and beyond). Furthermore, the use of various kinds of visuals in collaborative settings [9], the variety in participatory tools and techniques [62], and the critical choices that have to be made in structuring and organizing workshops, charrettes, or other kinds of interactive design processes [63] are valuable subjects to teach future landscape architects. Theoretical and methodological courses could also pay attention to knowledge on the conditions and processes that enable the uptake and implementation of ideas and proposals developed in co-creation processes [64,65].…”

“…Various scholarly publications indicate that participation and collaboration with non-designers (communities, specialists, companies, special interest groups, etc.) in design and planning projects can take different forms, and calls for specific knowledge and skills [7][8][9]. Many experienced landscape architects have learned such knowledge and skills in practice [10], but what about current graduates in landscape architecture?…”

Smart City Thailand: Visioning and Design to Enhance Sustainability, Resiliency, and Community Wellbeing

“…It seems, then, that community consultation (or participatory planning, or what we term here "familiarity" with community) should be incorporated as an important element of Smart City planning (or the bottom-up approach, as noted above), with Allahar [24] concluding that "The success of building smart cities has been traced by some scholars to depth of community engagement and level of citizen participation". Certainly, there is a history of participatory planning in water and community-based natural-resources management, landscape architecture, and urban planning [40][41][42][43][44][45], although Swapan [46] identified a number of barriers to community participation in the planning process, particularly for cities of the Global South. Simonofski et al [47] also observed that while the technological aspects of the Smart City have been thoroughly explored, the civil-community role has often been neglected in the literature.…”

Mind the Gap: Towards a Typology of Climate Service Usability Gaps

“…Frames are mental constructs that enable audiences to perceive and value climate change problems and solutions in their own way, highlighting specific aspects and downplaying others [31]. Means of (visual) communication have the discursive power to frame their content in a certain way, and thus re-frame the perception of that content by its audience [32]. Attuning the purpose of climate change communication to specific audiences requires the communicator to formulate their message-the third element-with a particular frame in mind.…”

“…However, the use of these visual modes and channels adds further levels of complexity to climate change communication. Images are prone to unchecked distribution when they are not accompanied by their original descriptions to provide a frame for interpretation [32]. Instead, audiences are left to interpret climate services based on their own mental frameworks.…”