Conjecturing the Knowledge Space of “Architectural and Urban Traditions” by Utilising Text Mining and Content Analysis

The study of architectural and urban traditions has contributed to the development of a unique knowledge space and improved our understanding of the various ways in which traditions are socially constructed, spatially accommodated, transmitted, examined, and interpreted in various cultural contexts. Nonetheless, it is of equal importance to identify the discourse that refers to the methods of generating and structuring such a knowledge space, which is continuously evolving. This paper seeks to cultivate a validated theorisation of the knowledge space of architectural and urban traditions. It interrogates Traditional Dwellings and Settlements Review- TDSR and the conferences of the International Association for the Study of Traditional Environments-IASTE as the key constituents of this knowledge space; they offer a unique plethora of arguments, positions, disciplinary standpoints, and cases from around the world.

Seven lines of inquiry are established to anatomize the knowledge space of architectural and urban traditions by examining TDSR and IASTE Conference proceedings utilizing text mining and content analysis as research methods. Text mining algorithms are employed to discover patterns and trends in the vast volumes of texts while content analysis is a qualitative approach that identifies the specific characteristics of the messages conveyed by such a text. Integral to this analysis is a series of questions underlying the seven established categories including:

1) The themes associated with tradition: How has the discourse of tradition in the IASTE conference evolved over time, and how has this evolution been reflected in various themes?
2) The scale of tradition: How does the scale of the built environment affect the discourse on architectural and urban traditions?
3) The geographical location of tradition: How does the discourse on architectural and urban traditions vary across the boundaries of cultures and regions?
4) The disciplinarity of tradition: How does the discourse on architectural and urban traditions intersect with humanities and social sciences including history, anthropology, sociology,
environmental psychology, and philosophy?
5) The typology of tradition: How does the discourse of tradition in architecture and urbanism engage with different building and place typologies such as housing, vernacular settlements, community heritage, and contemporary urbanism?
6) The governance of tradition. What is the relationship between the discourse on tradition in architecture and urbanism and decision making including modern top-down governance, tribal governance, and participatory practices?
7) The investigation of tradition. What are the characteristics of various approaches employed to examine architectural and urban traditions including logical argumentation, case-based reasoning, phenomenological inquiry, and environment-behaviour approaches.

Initial results reveal that the lines of inquiry, collectively, offer an original approach which would lead to a more nuanced and informed understanding of the knowledge space of architectural and urban traditions. The investigation through text mining and content analysis would aid in the identification of patterns and correlations between the overall discourse and the seven lines of inquiry while uncovering the interconnectivity across these lines. Conclusions are drawn to instigate a validated framework for theorising the knowledge space of architectural and urban traditions.

Track: Theorizing Tradition as a Dynamic Project
Session A5: Theory and History