By exposing “hinterlands within the centre,” the paper shows that urbanisation patterns are more complex and multifaceted than typically assumed. Through questioning and reevaluating traditional conceptual frameworks and assumptions, we can uncover hidden dimensions of lived experience and create new possibilities for inclusive and sustainable co-existence.

In their paper ‘Characterising Centre-Hinterlands: Transition Design as a Framework for the Assessment of Urban Futures’, Michael Louw, Daniel Elkin and Gerhard Bruyns refer to an “inversion of meta-categories” in the classification and understanding of territories as urban or rural; coupled with this inversion is a reevaluation of how we perceive and understand spatial relationships. Through such reevaluation, they conceive of the notion of “centre-hinterlands”—places which, despite being located within urban centres, contrast sharply with their surroundings in terms of socio-economic conditions and infrastructure.

This inversion of meta-categories serves as a reminder of the dynamic nature of our relationship with space. Whereas normative dichotomies—centre-periphery, exterior-interior, or global-local—conceptually structure our understanding of space, their inversions reveal the inherent ambiguity and fluidity of spatial boundaries. This highlights how our conceptual frameworks impose artificial distinctions on the world; it prompts us, in turn, to question our assumptions and reevaluate our understanding of the world and to explore new possibilities for understanding our shared, lived environments—to explore new possibilities for co-existence.

These inversions, then, disrupt habitual modes of analysis. By exposing “hinterlands within the centre”, urbanisation patterns are shown to be more complex and multifaceted than typically taken. This challenges preconceived notions of what constitutes the urban and the rural, disrupting established hierarchies and revealing hidden dimensions of lived experience which aren’t captured by static, normative models which often oversimplify or generalise complex social dynamics..

It is through this perspective of challenging normative stances and reevaluating established frameworks that the paper places transition design as “a differentiated take on the normative stances of ‘static’ design methods.” And it is through this perspective that the prioritisation of “agent-agency” called for by the paper can be read. Referring to the capacity of individuals or groups (agents) to act and bring about change (agency) within their socio-economic context, the prioritisation of agent-agency contrasts with more passive or static approaches to design or development, which may overlook the active role of local actors in shaping their own futures. Prioritising agent-agency involves recognising and activating the potential of individuals and communities to enact meaningful change. Transition design, in this way, can be understood as instrumental to fostering inclusive and sustainable development pathways; by acknowledging the diversity of lived experiences within communities and the multifaceted nature of socio-economic challenges, this approach reveals hidden dimensions of lived experience, which, to quote Terry Irwin (as does the paper), serves to to “inspire and inform the design of short- and mid-term solutions” through “speculative, long-term visions of sustainable lifestyles [which] fundamentally challenge existing paradigms.”

Read Louw, Elkin and Bruyns' paper ‘Characterising Centre-Hinterlands: Transition Design as a Framework for the Assessment of Urban Futures’ here.

Works also mentioned

Irwin, T., 2015. Transition Design: A Proposal for a New Area of Design Practice, Study, and Research. Design and Culture, 7(2), pp.229-246.

What We're Reading in the Studio: Louw, Elkin & Bruyns' ‘Characterising Centre-Hinterlands: Transition Design as a Framework for the Assessment of Urban Futures’