• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.40 no.3
• /
• pp.22-31
• /
• 2012

This study was prompted by the recognition that the tenn "Community design" has recently been used in diverse practical fields without prior discussion about its underpinnings, a potentially problematic state of affairs. Based on these problems, this study studied the special quality about the concept of community design. Community design can be discussed from two perspectives. The first views community design as a design that concerns the community, an inhabited area populated with people who have common interests, at least in part because of geographic proximity to each other. The second sees community design as a movement that started in the 1960s and places a great importance on democratic decision making, communication, and collaboration. This study will focus on the latter. This branch of community design encompasses an advocacy planning approach, in which design professionals represent deprived communities in their resistance against comprehensive redevelopment. This was associated to the wider social protest movements of the mid and late 1960s. In the 1970s, this branch of community design was developed alongside community design centers, which provided local-level technical assistance to the communities on a number of issues, such as design and planning. The discussion about community design started in earnest from the early 1980s. A review of the literature m community design reveals several characteristics. First, community design deals with the relationship between the physical environment and several aspects of a region, including the social and cultural. Second, it involves community participation, which many scholars believe is the core of community design. Specifically, community design has been characterized by increased participation and democratic debate and decision making. The Third is about communication methods. Since the 1960s, diverse methods had been developed to promote communication effectively. Finally, community design must consider the relationship between designers, who typically value aesthetics and efficiency of form, and the needs of the community with which they are working. Indeed, some scholars believe that this relationship is generally contentious, although the designer can also be thought of as the facilitator of the community's needs. As community design practice becomes more prevalent, a review of the foundation of institution and policy and the role of experts is also needed. The community design movement bas been theorized ex post facto through diverse discussion that has sought to ascribe meaning and direction to its practice. In other words, the relationship between this theory and practice is cyclical. Therefore, this study can contribute to the virtuous circle.