— Deepa Mehta

Spent some time at the 2010 ICOMOS International Symposium.  The theme focused on Cultural Heritage and Sustainable Communities bringing together development people, conservation people, academics, and practioners.  Reconnected with mentors and colleagues.  Met some people who were researching and working on overlapping interests.  Laurie Zapalac is working on some remarkable projects.

Half Moon Bay, CA

Kula, HI

I presented at GLOBELICS 2009 on rural industries (mud brick architecture) and economic development.  Mainly, I learned a tremendous amount from a world community of academics researching innovation in new and interesting ways.

As it happens, I was lucky enough to spend some quality time with my grandmother in Bombay.  I videotaped her telling stories of her childhood, talked to her about my life as a newlywed in California, and had a lovely time celebrating Diwali here.

This week I was invited to give a talk at the Stanford Archaeology Center.  I spoke about historic preservation and urban development in the Hadhramaut region of southern Yemen.  In this region, the predominant urban form is mud-brick architecture, a tradition that provides jobs even today.  Designated World Heritage Cities have global means of protection – ranging from structural to infrastructural to organizational.  Surrounding cities are not so well supported by local, regional, or national policy, and demand on informal economic chains.  My paper/talk explored these dynamics and how policy can better support existing industries that are labor-intensive (creating the need for jobs) and require specialized forms of knowledge (skills) that are in demand (housing needs to be built or updated).  Especially in the developing context, how can infrastructure, ICT, and other services be incorporated into historic urban forms?  When half of the world’s population lives in some form of earthen architecture, what can we learn from the industry?

Although not an economics or urban planning department, the Heritage group at Stanford regularly talks about the topic of tradition vs. modernity.  As archaeologists and anthropologists working with living heritage and heritage ethics, they are regularly confronted with the associated tensions and possibilities of this area of inquiry.

Here is a copy of my presentation:

We recently moved to Mountain View, right to the heart of Silicon Valley.  Living on the same block as Mint.com and Mozilla is surreal, but then so was living in the West Village.  So, it doesn’t really mean anything.  Except that it is pretty cool.  I am stoked to be here and to learn whatever I can along the way.  Incidentally, we also recently started watching the hilarious Parks and Rec, Amy Poehler’s take on a parks and recreation department (natch!) in a small town.  Strangely, the two experiences (the new digs and new tv show) complement each other well.

The silver lining: lots of sunshine, year-round swimming, and lots of beautiful bike-riding and lemonade days ahead.

Amidst an international economic downturn, museums everywhere are struggling to maintain their audience.  Although much farther down on the list than infrastructure, housing and education, museums have a vital role to play in the cultural memory of a city.  Museums with long-held beliefs about patronage and membership are quickly shifting gears to keep up with what looks like a drastic shift in audience participation.

What are museums doing to stay relevant and important? What kinds of questions should museums ask their visitors in order to gauge demand? At this time, it is important to hear Nina Simon’s clarion call: “Museums can’t manufacture relevance to audiences.”

Good urban planning has a lot to do with history, legacy, and community.  In practice, the interdisciplinary sector stands somewhere between science, art, and politics/ideology.  Effective planners are concerned with planning for people – places, transit, housing, and other intermodal systems that work.  At times, there is a certain cross-polination between the urban design/planning and the interaction/user experience community.  The two fields seldom talk to each other.  Although this is definitely changing – some interpolated examples include DIYCity and new research on data-driven decision-making for cities.

The benefits of looking through several lenses and utilizing two or more relevant methodologies can help triangulate results.  I recently came across IDEO’s Human-Centered Design Toolkit.  This systems-based approach to social + cultural research brings together ethnographic and community planning methodologies to centrifuge data for successful product design and delivery.  It helps organizations figure out which questions to ask, what to focus on, and how to interpret the results quickly and productively.

I instantly thought about planning.  Does planning emphasize design?  As planners, how do we hone the craft of effective process design?  (Notice the word effective).  It is true that planning does, to an extent, come with its own set of systems and toolkits – from design principles, codes, zoning and LEED, to name a few.  And it is also true that planners practice various means of rapid engagement (design studios, charrettes, and scenario planning in addition to open-source mapping, creative citizen guides as well as other inventive, scalable location-specific and issue-specific materials).

The closest thing to IDEO’s toolkit is the Community Needs Assessment.  This inquiry is often a  ”first step” for a majority of community development projects.  Though assessments dive in and engage in participatory research, others take on a cursory approach.  While many of the goals are the same (to understand, to ask the right questions, etc.) of these so-called assessments, socioeconomic and community planning processes often come across as flat and uninspired.

Perhaps borrowing methodologies from the user/interaction design space can actually improve the planning process.

The museum aims to encapsulate the past, present, and future representations of time and space.  As such, museums can generously contribute to shaping local identity.  As destinations and cultural harbingers museums also serve as venues for family and group gatherings and public programs often in conjunction with iconic architecture, cultural districts, unique dining experiences, nearby public parks and ad hoc outdoor spaces.

I have visited the Metropolitan Museum of Art regularly since I was just a kid, and each visit was always enhanced by the crowded steps of the museum.  Passersby and foreigners alike gather to take a breather from the magnanimous home of some of the world’s greatest art and inspiration.  Some journal, while some merrily enjoy ice cream cones looking out over Museum Mile.  Some record memories with photos, while some simply enjoy a quiet moment.  The streets are invariably lined with musicians and pigeons as well as hot dog and ice cream trucks.  Central Park lays to the side, as do a number of restaurants in the vicinity.  But of course, we all love sitting on those graceful steps – perhaps soaking in a bit of building’s history and meaning.

The spaces, exhibits, programs, and experiences inside a museum are only enhanced by what we see and is available outside – however simple and seemingly forgettable.