Operationalizing Comparative Urbanism

Chapter 2 reviews the debates around comparative urbanism as critique of urban theory, and provides a structured analysis of its underlying premises. Despite the consensus around the parochialism of urban theory, these divergent premises imply different consequences for actually doing research. In operationalizing comparative urbanism, this chapter explains the mixed qualitative methods an experimental way forward is offered, focusing on comparative urbanism’s theory building agenda. The goal of threading together Beijing and Berlin is to thwart the idea of archetype, rejecting the distinctions of original and borrowed urbanisms, and decentering the primary reference points of urban scholarship. The mixed methods and position of the researcher is discussed along with some definitions about cases, sites and “art space.” The chapter shows how the lens of comparative urbanism is employed as a methodologically-oriented critique that addresses how sites are compared, rather than what is compared.