ABSTRACT
The very definition of the geographic area to be examined or treated constitutes a critical element in the determination of what will ultimately be done there. In good planning practice, that area is deduced from analysis of a study area, whose own boundaries, however, are too rarely conceptualized. In legislation, the relevant geographic area is generally simply defined by quantitative demographic or economic criteria, without reference to a broader examination of the locus of the problem or the resources for its treatment. For architects, the area of concern is often simply the parcel owned by the client, sometimes with one eye on immediately surrounding physical structures. And yet little attention is generally given to the method of defining the area that should substantively be of concern. Though the definition of that area can make a major difference in the result, the conceptualizations involved are very much under-theorized.
