Question
hi. I am student styding in an architecture college. In the present semester we have been given a topic in our seminar on "liability of innovative concepts in urban planning". Firstly i didnt undertsand properly on what things i would have to focus on this topic...what sources or things i should look for it and how can prepare a seminar on this topic.   

Does it include all the concepts of settlement which had been practiced in past and would happen in future? i mean i just dont know how to proceed with it!...can you plese help in guiding about this topic?...it would be really a great help!

Answer
I like to define my terms, so everybody is on the same wavelength when we come to discuss any topic like this.

Liability is the state of being legally obliged and responsible.  Indebtedness: an obligation to pay money to another party, or the quality of being something that holds you back.  

In the most general sense, a liability is anything that is a hindrance, or puts individuals at a disadvantage.  

Urban planning is also a 搒quishy?phrase that can mean all sorts of things to different people.  For the Architect, it抯 the built environment, to the Landscape Architect; it抯 the spaces between these elements and the interaction of people in & through these 搒paces?  For the Planner, it抯 the interplay of resources, economics, human behavior, and the 揵ody politic?

In regard to innovation in urban planning, I would think there are several obligations and responsibilities for striking out into a new direction卍epending on who is performing this planning function, and the all-important * WHY *  (Why change things?  Why do it differently, this time?, etc).   One area worthy of research.

There is always safety in numbers, if for no other reason, that to be able to blame somebody else when things go horribly wrong.  Conversely, you will discover it is human nature to take full credit for a team success - usually the most vocal and gregarious member.  Just watch the current political debates to see this in action!  

The question is actually quite a negative or cynical perspective on the practice of urban planning, but sadly is the reality in the real world.  Must a bold idea be weighed by its negative impact, alone?

My Step-father was the director of planning for a * MAJOR * metropolitan area of the US, and in the late 60抯 when he suggested an urban concept that was new & innovative, he was personally and viciously attacked as a 揷ommie?and worse ?a 揾ippie?  40 years later, his 搑adical?ideas are used in large metropolitan areas all over the * WORLD *卆nd considered 揷utting edge? (I won抰 bore you with it, here).   Time changes perspective - Another area worthy of investigation.

All this to say, that, 揟here is nothing new under the sun?  People resist change, and embrace it when they are motivated by the two greatest emotions: fear & greed.  Where the 搇iability?falls in the soul of man, you抣l have to discover匢 suspect it is somewhere in ones own level of political/economic/behavioral threshold for pain or appetite for gain (not just monetary).

Finally, I would think the TRUE cynic would say that the ultimate 搇iability?in planning is that there are OTHER people involved in the process.   (Possibly, a third area of research)

Maybe, you could look for urban ideas that 揻ell flat?  Or, you could look for ideas that are now commonly accepted, but where once considered 搉uts?

It is up to you to find your way, here. I think the topic is broad enough so your professor won't be bored to tears by twenty identical presentations.

Best of luck on the research - Hope my little diatribe wasn't too long.  And thank you so much for reading all the way down to here!

~M