1. Sankey 1
ECOLOGICAL URBANISM
A response to the Emergence of the Global City
By William Sankey
[www.williamsankey.com]
Spring 2011
This document is a working draft produced as part of an independent study at the Harvard Graduate School
of Design with Lecturer Gareth Doherty.

2. Sankey 2
THE PROBLEM OF DISCERNING “GOOD”URBANISM
The first decade of this millennium has crystallized many of the emergent
problems confronting humans and their environments. These issues ranging from socio-
economic (inequality within nations between the affluent and the working masses,
resource-driven warfare), environmental (climate change and hastening urbanization),
and cultural (the proliferation of global culture in business, music, architecture and
other aspects at the expense of local culture and histories) are ostensibly discrete
1
.
However, the convergence of these problems is manifest in the constructed and utilized
human settlements and environments. This paper hopes to demonstrate that Ecological
Urbanism offers a cogent strategy for linking the physical environment to the underlying
processes which it embodies.
Given these issues, the question of what constitutes good urbanism—
particularly against this backdrop—is unclear. Thought on the topic among leading
thinkers and builders of the urban realm has maintained a physical bias. There exists an
awareness of the other factors which shape and influence the development of our
urban environments; nonetheless, these factors are subordinated to the physical aspect.
Landscape urbanism proponents profess the virtues of design around the horizontal
ground plane without a firm position on sprawl. City Beautiful and neotraditional
urbanism proponents (most recently represented by their New Urbanism descendents)
evangelize about the merits of higher densities and walkability. In effect, both these
competing ideologies begin with a highly physical diagnosis. One emphasizes the
landscape and the other focuses on building. The underlying processes become
secondary motivators of urban prescriptions.
1
The essay “Three Ecologies” by Felix Guattari serves as a preamble for the Ecological
Urbanism paradigm by exposing the rising disequilibrium between humans and nature

3. Sankey 3
A quick glance at the global financial centers like New York City and London
reveal strikingly divergent urban typological patterns. Even so, they have
accommodated underlying economic, migration and cultural processes that are
comparable. If these processes and latent factors were adaptable to distinct urban
constructed contexts, then should the physical realm be preeminent when considering
the question of what comprises exemplary urbanism? This essay argues that Ecological
Urbanism does not present itself as a series of design guidelines and modes of
approach; rather it demands a nuanced interpretation of the visible and invisible forces,
flows, and processes which underlie cities of widely divergent physical forms.
and between groups of humans distinguished along social, economic, and religious lines
in the modern period of globalization. (Guattari 1989 (2000))

4. Sankey 4
COLUMBIA, MARYLAND: An
experiment by James Rouse for
a new city. Columbia was
founded in 1967 in response to
the civil strife and social
discord that had inflamed
urban centers in the 1960s, the
increasing anonymity posed by
suburban life and the
degradation of the urban
experience by the ubiquity of
the automobile. Today, the
problems of post-war urbanity
have been further exposed and
complicated by the advance of
globalization. The stakes are
higher; the answers still
elusive.
(Photo by William Sankey)
JEFFERSON PARISH, LOUSIANA:
A once-placid street in a
suburb of New Orleans in the
aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.
The destruction epitomized the
potential consequences of
development below sea level
and reliance on rigid man-
made systems (like levees) in
the face of indomitable natural
forces.
(Photo by William Sankey)

5. Sankey 5
GLOBALIZATION AND GENERICISM
Today the meaning of place has been supplanted by a realization that the
immediacy of a space no longer exists disparate from the every other place
2
. Essentially,
the definition of a place—particularly a city—has been subsumed by the near-constant
intersection of that place with information, externalities and self-consciousness of itself
in relationship to other places. Cities and the places within them (neighborhoods, parks,
shopping centers, pockets of nature left by sprawl, etc.), therefore have grown
increasingly generic as the notion of urbanism has simultaneously become globalized.
Metropolises that only a century ago were shaped by their relationship to the networks,
flows, and geographies of their hinterland now link into the networks, flows, and
geographies of territory that stretches across oceans and around the world. As the
range and diversity of their purview has extended, the reconciliation these forces at the
formerly localized level of place has become more nonspecific or one-size fits all.
On the one hand, the twin pairing of genericism and globalization, especially
the end stage in which it is reflected physically in the constructed environment, can be
traced to the proliferation and adoption of best—some might say worst—practices as
well as the cultural hegemony of a globe-trotting coterie of city builders (architects,
planners, landscape architects, and developers) along with multinational corporations
and the government policy elites that have recommend subsidies for them (Fainstein
2
Karsten Harries draws a similar conclusion in the chapter “Space and Place” of his text
The Ethical Function of Architecture. Here, Harries’ assertion is similar to the “loss of
identity” and liberation critique of place in modernity discussed by Koolhaas (see later in
this essay). (Harries 2000)

6. Sankey 6
2001). The rise of global capitalism and trade has facilitated this transaction of
knowledge and installed its own degree of standardization
3
(Ricouer 1965 (1955)).
Yet what is significant here is not the lost of identity as it relates to a sense of
place. This is another architecture discussion altogether. In his 1995 essay “Generic City”
Rem Koolhaas demonstrated that the modern detachment of identity could in fact be
liberating
4
(Koolhaas 1998). Instead, the pervasion of a global homogenized response to
site-specific problems with the goal of responding to global issues at the expense of
local factors has precipitated socio-economic dysfunction and inequality, environmental
degradation and other problems. What occurs is a negative feedback loop in which
global-level genericized actions foster deleterious impacts on the local level which
because of the political and multi-national corporate governance of the world system
require global-level responses
5
. And these global level responses risk becoming generic
and ill-tailored answers that induce other problems.
At the outset of his introductory essay “Why Ecological Urbanism? Why Now?”
Mohsen Mostafavi references a series of articles on sustainability printed in the
Guardian in 2007. The three narratives encounter a variety of themes like the
connection between the Iraq War, the escalating price of oil and the environmental
devastation caused by open-cast mining for tar sands oil in Alberta, Calgary (Mostafavi
2010). What Mostafavi alludes to—but does not mention specifically—is that each of
3
French phenomenologist Paul Racouer used the term “universalization” to have a
similar meaning. He cited the paradox between the struggle to attain modernization
versus the lost of a cultural past that accompanies this quest. The position of this essay,
however, is that the cultural past continues to exert an influence on the present through
a constructed environment (architecture) that spans generations.
4
In his essay “Generic City”, Koolhaas hails the lost of identity for cities in the
contemporary period as an escape from the influences of history and spatial position in
relationship to the center city and other spaces. His reading of the “generic” with
positive connotations is at odds with a more critical realization of the importance of
identity and place in the constructed environment.

7. Sankey 7
these narratives expose the globalized nature of the formation of place as not only a
localized physical environment but also an underlying convergence of visible and
invisible dynamic flows and processes with reaches that extend worldwide.
5
This is a hallmark of the Integrated World Capitalism system which Guattari suggests
emerged after the industrial capitalism period and wrought a number of social,
environmental, and cultural problems. (47)

8. Sankey 8
FINDING THE SINGULARITY OF PLACE IN THE ERA OF GLOBALIZATION
As a contrast to the genercizing tendencies of globalization, the treatment of
each place as unique presents an opportunity to construct an environment and world
order in which the resolution of places on the local level might in fact be a more
sustainable framework that reinforces the strength of the global system through the
strengths of its component parts. We can derive this singularity of a place by careful
analysis and interpretation of its natural environment, culture and society, and
economic basis
6
. The natural environment might be understood as the climate and
microclimate of a site as well as the biodiversity and its interaction with geological and
hydrological systems. Culture and society might be defined as representing the
collective consciousness, social networks, migratory movements and traditions of a
community inhabiting a place
7
(Frampton 1983). Lastly, the economic basis describes
the form of economic system, the actual mix of industries, and the relationship between
production, the people, and the landscape
8
(Doherty 2010). While all of these facets of
place might be adulterated by globalization to some extent, a degree of variation and
uniqueness almost always remains.
6
These factors represent a distillation of ideas presented in the wide-ranging essays in
the Ecological Urbanism reader as well as a consideration of Guattari’s “three ecologies”
(social ecosophy, environmental ecosophy, and mental ecosophy).
7
Kenneth Frampton in his essay “Towards a Critical Regionalism: Six Points for an
Architecture of Resistance” traces an interesting connection between culture and
nature as key elements that have been missing from the formation of place in modern
architecture. Frampton points to the tabula rasa tendencies of a machine age, in which
the subtlety of local topography or sunlight entering a building or temperature in a
room can be forced to conform to the will of a universal architecture and culture.
8
The intersection of these three factors which participate in the formulation of
singularity of place are exemplified in the essay by Gareth Doherty on Bahrain in which
he examines the historical, cultural, social and economic legacy of date palms and the
reappropriation of their meaning during the rapid urbanization period after 1970. In the
desert kingdom of Bahrain, these orchards epitomize the power of nature to engage
with constructed human settlements and offer new interpretations of place.

9. Sankey 9
A fourth dimension of place is time; particularly as it is encapsulated in the
“time lag of architecture” which Alan Colquohoun described (Colquohoun 2002). History
which informs the present is often fluid—it stands to be ignored, exaggerated,
misunderstood or misappropriated. However, architecture as a vestigial reminder of
history is not; it is congenital and inherited, a tangible fact of a place that cannot be
merely erased except through enormous effort. And thus, even though architecture is
the lagging resultant of underlying processes that drive urbanism, it is also perhaps the
clearest influencer of the future constructed environment. Therefore, it is the
confluence of these four agendas and facets—natural environment, culture and society,
economic basis and architecture—that form the skeleton around which urbanism
develops.
With that said, this basis allows us to approach urbanism as a creation which
we are responsible for such that it accounts for the specificity of place but also
understands its position within the context of globalization. Critical regionalism
9
(Shannon 2006)—the forerunner to Ecological Urbanism—foresaw the problems which
now plague our cities but in the end it underestimated the unyielding advance of
globalization and its concomitant forces.
9
Kelly Shannon views Critical Regionalism introduced by Alexander Tzonis and Lfance
Lefaivre in 1981 as a “preamble” to landscape urbanism. In a sense, however, critical
regionalism might be viewed a predecessor to most of the post post-modernist theories
regarding urbanism in that it recognizes the disregard for place as in the contemporary
city. New Urbanism (neotraditional town design), landscape urbanism and ecological
urbanism all seek to respond to the loss of the capability of architecture to deal with the
place-defeating influences of modern society.

10. Sankey 10
LONDON AND NEW YORK
The modernist mantra that form follows function has rational credence. By
contrast, to believe that function follows form with respect to the urban environment
defies the material evidence of the constructed environment all around us in the age of
globalization. Take global cities New York and London as a case study. They are
emblematic of a trend in which financial and human capital has pooled in key global
cities around the world which anchor global capital markets while yielding tremendous
political, cultural and media influence (Foreign Policy [magazine]; A.T. Kearney; Chicago
Council on Global Affairs 2010). As early as 2000, a report “London-New York Study: The
Economies of Two Great Cities at the Millennium”, pointed out the convergence of
these cities in many respects. “London and New York, despite striking differences in
their historic past and with very contrasting forms of local governance, have developed
economies that, at the century’s turn, are at an extraordinary point of symmetry.” The
report highlighted numerous parallels. The most important was the positioning of the
two cities as global hubs for finance, advanced business services, media,
communications, creative arts, entertainment and design. It also noted the near-
simultaneous attrition of older manufacturing and distribution facilities, the similar
demographic trajectories with influxes of immigrants, and a comparable labor pool
(Corporation of London June 2000).
What is familiar here is the convergence of these attributes of singularity of
place. Is it surprising then that the two most global cities also compete for the position
as the two most generic? In terms of economic basis, an elite class of financiers chases
worldwide capital flows while a permanent underclass remains confined to earn a
meager subsistence through employment in low-wage service industries. As for the
natural environment, any semblance of native ecological and hydrological systems has

11. Sankey 11
been banished to the metropolitan peripheries, masked by concrete and mechanical
infrastructural systems. The singularity afforded place by nature is hardly discernible.
Both cities are concrete jungles. Both cities are generic.
However, one element of singularity of place that remains is time (and history)
manifest through architecture and the constructed environment. Two views of both
cities—cross-sectional and plan—reveal very different urban morphologies. In New
York, spire-pointed buildings leap skyward into a vertical dimension rarely replicated at
such a scale in anywhere else. From the ground plane, these skyscrapers cluster into a
tightly composed grid system that shifts and transforms across its five boroughs like
running lines on a sheet draped over a varied terrain. In London, the extreme densities
and stark verticality of its cross-Atlantic counterpart are moderated. Streets and blocks
contort irregularly as they zig-zag across the cityscape. A phenotypical reading of
London and New York presents two cities that may have little in common with one
another. Their architecture and constructed environments express unique outcomes. Is
it not a wonder, then, that genotypically-speaking (concerning the economic basis, the
demographic profiles of the population and other non-physically realized traits in the
constructed ground) these cities almost seem the same?
10
The adaptability of the processes and flows which underpin the urbanism of
London and New York across a range of urban typologies suggests that defining what
constitutes good urbanism for the 21
st
century should consider the processes and
dynamic flows first—the urban genotype, not necessarily the landscape or architecture.
It is the interpretation of these processes through the physical environment that will
produce the most environmentally and socially sustainable future for our cities.
10
A project begun by the Fundación Metrópoli researches the implications of physical
form and structure on their economic competiveness and socio-cultural cohesion.
(Vegara, Dwyer and and Kelley 2010)

12. Sankey 12
MIDTOWN MANHATTAN
(Photo by William Sankey)

13. Sankey 13
A VISION FOR ECOLOGICAL URBANISM
What we need is an ecological urbanism, a truly “new” urbanism, a forward-
looking prescription for the global city. In the past, the environment could be
understood as an immediate juxtaposition between the city and nature. The countryside
and hinterlands functioned to support and sustain cities. Today this is not necessarily
the case. Cities sustain each other; the sustenance and consumption which city dwellers
require derive from harvests thousands of miles and climates away. Ecological
urbanism, however, has several fundamental traits which distinguish it:
(1) It encourages the overlap and intermingling of natural/biotic systems
alongside constructed typologies and patterns (Bava, et al. 2010) (Kwinter
2010)
(2) It has inherent global implications and relationships that transcend its
immediacy (e.g. trans-cultural readings of a space, influence of global
capital flows, or the impact on global climate and environments (Hodson
and Marvin 2010),`
(3) Ecological urbanism mitigates the cold calculative economics of capitalism
and other socio-economic regimes. It is independent of these socio-
economic regimes with meaning and impact that function across socio-
political barriers (Cohen 2010) (Wacquant 2010).
(4) Ecological urbanism is neither a vertical nor horizontal approach. Its
variegated expressions respond in a pragmatic fashion that is flexible to
programmatic, environmental, and aesthetic needs of the economic and
social context,

14. Sankey 14
(5) At the local level, ecological urbanism creates or reinforces a mental
coherence of a place not predicated solely on false memories expropriated
from foreign places and times for commercial purposes
11
.
Together, these principles constitute a set of criteria for ascertaining which
types of projects might best be described as Ecological Urbanism. To be clear, ecological
urbanism is not simply the oft-repeated and increasingly vague framework described by
the moniker “sustainable” design. Sustainable design has become the design equivalent
of a gimme much like the mechanical climate control building systems of the early 20
th
century, which eventually became standard building technologies and not design drivers
(Banham). Instead, the five principles outlined capitalize on opportunities presented by
the confluence of natural systems, human socio-cultural traditions, economic factors,
and history as memorialized in architecture and infrastructure. Out of these factors and
given the context of an interconnected world, ecological urbanism offers a novel mode
of approaching the challenges of urbanism and has the potential to offer a new
aesthetic for the constructed environment.
Two projects at different scales provide insight into the nuances of ecological
urbanism and how it might be achieved. These projects include the High Line in New
York and the plan for the London Estuary Region. These projects and plans do not
11
The insertion of ersatz culture or history on a site has become common. One only
needs to look at the proliferation of “main street” shopping center types which feign to
represent the authentic public realm and layering of histories found in town centers
(with “civic” sculptures purchased from a catalog embellishing the spaces and faux
façade more impressive than those at DisneyWorld), but in reality only seek to enhance
profit margins and foot-traffic by providing the context of genuine place and belonging
for shoppers. Likewise, the New Urbanism movement has been undermined by
scenographic proclivities which hearken back to traditional architecture as a way of
relating to the culture and history of a place—even though this architecture and its
components are misplaced in history, geographically and climatically quite often. The
selling of the false image of place by developers drives value and sales. This is nothing
more than an extension of the “mass media serialism”—which pretends to represent
egalitarianism—addressed by Felix Guattari in his essay “Three Ecologies”.

15. Sankey 15
necessarily exemplify ecological urbanism, but they each offer key components that
help us to frame paradigm better.

16. Sankey 16
THE HIGH LINE
Sheathed in rust and chipping paint—a forlorn above-ground railway of a now-
dead industrial past—the New York High Line winds its way nearly 1.5 miles between
warehouses and other buildings. Historically, the economic deterioration of the Chelsea
neighborhood and Meatpacking District during the post-industrial period and its more
recent rebirth as a hub for loft apartments, art galleries, and night clubs epitomized the
flexibility of the urban fabric to absorb and function among a variety of economic
conditions and underlying processes, in essence the type of urban refunctionalization
which Andrea Branzi proposed in his New Athens Charter (Branzi 2010). The full
restoration of the streetscape and neighborhood, however, were precluded by an
infrastructural remnant, the historical residual of an industrial conveyance structure
stuck in a city in which it no longer belonged. Urbanism orthodoxy would suggest that
the removal of the rail line—the erasure of a landmark in the cultural landscape and
disposal of tons of ironwork—would increase property values of shadow-covered
storefronts. But an alternative ecological urbanism vision, transformed this site into a
novel extension of the urban realm accessible to all. Thus the value created flowed not
only into the pockets of developers and adjacent building owners, but also into the
social and recreational experiences of New Yorkers.
Perhaps equally importantly, the redesign of the High Line by landscape
architecture firm James Corner Field Operations and architecture firm Diller+Scofidio,
incorporated a rustic medley of wildflowers and foliage atop the rail line where many of
these species had already retaken the forgotten plane above the street. Architecture did
not necessarily lead; in this case, the return of nature had already demonstrated the
ecological potential of the site to exist within the dense cityscape of steel, glass and
concrete. Blooming witch hazel and aster emerged. Song sparrows, catbirds and even

17. Sankey 17
warblers flocked in. Rain waters irrigated the flora and were absorbed into the soil
reducing runoff (Ask a Gardener 2009-2011). Alongside human park-goers, the High Line
had become a model for the integration of biodiversity and human habitat
12
.
Traditionally the duality of city and nature has described the relationship
between these two landscapes. The lushness of Central Park abutting the cold, grayness
of Midtown exemplifies this separation. It has been at the center of thought on
urbanism since the widespread adoption of public parks during era of industrialization.
But in the age of the global hinterland in which the divorce of natural processes from
urban processes has exacerbated environmental and social problems, it might be better
to suggest that city with nature, a dynamic union, has greater potential to create the
conditions of good urbanism (Czerniak 2006). That is, urbanism that is good for city
dwellers but also salubrious for the greater biosphere.
In terms of placeness, the High Line reinserts a localized identity that is
associated with the climate and ecology of the region. The seasonal transitioning of
varying colors of blossoms and tree canopies and the avian songs which mark mating
and migration season reintroduce the transitory element of nature to place that is often
expunged from urban areas. The uniqueness of place reemerges; fostering not only the
resistance of place against the genericizing forces of globalization but also is palliative
and recuperative to the hardscape environment and its inhabitants (Citation needed).
12
In the essay “Return to Nature” by Sandi Hilal, Alessandro Petti, and Eyal Weizman,
they examine an abandoned Israeli military fortress near Bethlehem which became a
migratory waypoint for over 500 million birds annual. What we can learn from this
project and the High Line is that flourishing biodiversity can co-exist with “hard” human
settlement. As designers, we must find ways to facilitate this sharing of landscapes.

18. Sankey 18
NEW YORK, NEW YORK
Views of the Highline Park in
the Chelsea neighborhood..
(Photo by William Sankey)

19. Sankey 19
THE THAMES GATEWAY PARKLANDS PLAN AND THE RISE OF AUTARKY
Across the sea, the plan for the Thames River Gateway Parklands offers a view
of ecological urbanism principles on a regional scale. On the Thames estuary region
linking London to the English Channel, British architect Terry Farrell has proposed a
strategic intervention that would create a linked chain of urban, parkland and
agricultural landscapes that would not only serve recreational and productive purposes
for London metropolitan residents and farmers, but also function to minimize the
potential threat of projected rising sea-levels due to climate change. In essence it is the
United Kingdom’s “first purpose-planned and built national park, unique in that it would
be an urban and rural park combined with its primary raison détre, anticipation of
future global warming” (S. T. Farrell 2010). Beyond this aspect of the plan, the vision
also calls for the attainment of self-sufficiency in terms of energy production and water
neutrality (T. Farrell November 2009).
The effort to achieve the limited self-sufficiency is a critical characteristic of the
Thames proposal as well as any proposal which strives towards ecological urbanism
solutions. At the architectural scale, distributed power systems in the form of
photovoltaic panels and fuels cells represent the concurrent and linked shift towards
breaking away from the volatility and potential political, environmental or economic
consequences of non-local sources of basic units of civilization (such as energy, water
and even food production). At a larger scale like the London estuary region, the pursuit
of autarky includes wind farms, agricultural farms and a host of other utilizations and
extractions from the regional landscape. On the one hand, the desire for autarky seems
ironic given the intractable advance of globalization. It is the return of the walled city of
the medieval age, except this time the barriers seek not to protect from roving bands of
vandals but to secure economic stability and self-reliance, to minimize the negative

20. Sankey 20
environmental consequences of transporting fuel and other goods from locations
thousands of kilometers from their production, and to provide a degree of security from
other nation-states in a resource scare global context (Hodson and Marvin 2010).
In effect, this autarkical outlook is ecological. It is a belief in a system in which
the component parts and systems function together for the greater health of the overall
system. Given the splintering of the global governance as a resultant of the nation-state
world order and the inability of governments to agree upon global frameworks that
might protect the environment and climate or secure the fair distribution of natural
resources for economic growth, autarky—however ironic it may seem—is the logical
means by which metropolises and nations will compete in the interdependent system of
worldwide trade and commercial transaction. The result is an ecological urbanism as
observed in the London estuary proposal that focuses inward and relies on site specific
solutions even as a city grows ever-dependent upon its connections the global processes
and flows.

21. Sankey 21
CONCLUSION
For all dystopian and apocalyptic pronouncements, it is clear that the
progression of globalization will result not in generic metropolises fraught with
environmental and social catastrophes but instead it should rationally lead to a new
theory of urbanism. This new approach to urbanism which is already underway (even if
it has not yet been codified and categorized) is predicated on the assumption that either
through good governance and social justice or through autarkical-driven motivations, an
ecological urbanism will arise. In an ecological system, the whole is greater than the sum
of the parts. That is to say, the dynamic functionally of interacting parts and systems
combine to produce an overarching structure that is always evolving yet stable, resilient
yet always vulnerable. Urbanism should function ecologically. The end will not be global
cities of utopia but a constant course correction (Guattari 1989 (2000)) and striving for
healthy, relevant architecture and cities.

22. Sankey 22
WORKS CITED
Ask a Gardener. 2009-2011. http://www.thehighline.org/about/ask-a-gardener
(accessed May 4, 2011).
Bava, Henri, Erik Behrens, Steven Craig, and Alex Wall. "Greenmetropolis." In Ecological
Urbanism, by Moshen Mostafavi and Gareth Doherty, 374-377. Baden, Switzerland: Lars
Muller Publishers, 2010.
Branzi, Andrea. "For a Post-Environmentalism: Seven Suggestions for a New Athens
Charter and the Weak Metropolis." In Ecological Urbanism, by Mohsen Mostafavi and
Gareth Doherty, 110-113. Baden, Switzerland: Lars Mueller Publishers, 2010.
Cohen, Lizabeth. "Black and White in Green Cities." In Ecological Urbanism, by Mohsen
Mostafavi and Gareth Doherty, 134-135. Baden, Switzerland: Lars Mueller Publishers,
2010.
Colquohoun, Alan. Modern Architecture (Oxford History of Art). Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2002.
Corporation of London. London-New York Study: The Economies of Two Great Cities at
the Millennium. London: Corporation of London, June 2000.
Czerniak, Julia. "Looking Back at Landscape Urbanism: Speculations on Site." In The
Landscape Urbanism Reader, by Charles (editor) Waldheim, 112-113. New York:
Princeton Architectural Press, 2006.
Doherty, Gareth. "There's More to Green than Meets the Eye: Green Urbanism in
Bahrain." In Ecological Urbanism, by Moshen Mostafavi, 174-183. Baden, Switzerland:
Lars Mueller Publishers, 2010.
Fainstein, Susan. The City Builders: Property Development in New York and London,
1980-2000. Lawrence, Kansas: University Press of Kansas, 2001.

23. Sankey 23
Farrell, Sir Terry. "London's Estuary Region." In Ecological Urbanism, by Mohsen
Mostafavi and Gareth Doherty, 482-487. Baden, Switzerland: Lars Mueller Publishers,
2010.
Farrell, Terry. Thames Gateway Core Vision. Farells, November 2009.
Foreign Policy [magazine]; A.T. Kearney; Chicago Council on Global Affairs. "Global Cities
Index 2010." Foreign Policy, September/October 2010.
Frampton, Kenneth. "Towards a Critical Regionalism: Six Points for an Architecture of
Resistance." In The Anti-Aesthetic: Essays on Post-Modern Culture, by Hal Foster.
Seattle: Bay Press, 1983.
Guattari, Felix. The Three Ecologies. Translated by Ian Pindar and Paul Sutton. New York
and London: Continuum, 1989 (2000).
Harries, Karsten. The Ethical Function of Architecture. Cambridge, Massachsetts: MIT
Press, 2000.
Hodson, Mike, and Simon Marvin. "Transcendent Eco-cities or Urban Ecological
Security?" In Ecological Urbanism, by Mohsen Mostafavi and Gareth Doherty, 208-217.
Baden, Switzerland: Lars Mueller Publishers, 2010.
Koolhaas, Rem. "Generic City." In S, Ml, L, XL, by Rem Koolhaas and Mau Bruce.
Monacelli Press, 1998.
Kwinter, Sanford. "Notes on the Third Ecology." In Ecological Urbanism, by Mohsen
Mostafavi and Gareth Doherty, 94-105. Baden, Switzerland: Lars Mueller Publishers,
2010.
Mostafavi, Mohsen. "Why Ecological Urbanism? Why Now?" In Ecological Urbanism, by
Moshen Mostafavi and Gareth Doherty, 12-53. Baden, Switzerland: Lars Muller
Publishers, 2010.

24. Sankey 24
Ricouer, Paul. History and Truth. Translated by Charles. Kelbley. Evanston: Northwestern
University Press, 1965 (1955).
Shannon, Kelly. "From Theory to Resistance: Landscape Urbanism in Europe." In The
Landscape Urbanism Reader, by Charles (editor) Waldheim, 142-162. New York:
Princeton Architectural Press, 2006.
Vegara, Alfonso, Mark Dwyer, and Aaron and Kelley. "A Methodology for Urban
Innovation." In Ecological Urbanism, by Mostafavi and Mohsen, 372-373. Baden,
Switzerland: Lars Mueller Publishers, 2010.
Wacquant, Loic. "Sustaining the City in the Face of Advanced Marginality." In Ecological
Urbanism, by Mohsen Mostafavi and Gareth Doherty, 402-405. Baden, Switzerland: Lars
Mueller Publishers, 2010.