41st IAHS WORLD CONGRESS

Sustainability and Innovation for the Future

13-16th September 2016
Albufeira, Algarve, Portugal

LIMITATIONS, CRITIQUES AND INCONSISTENCIES OF THE

SPACE SYNTAX METHODOLOGY
Mihai Racu1*

1: Department of Architecture
Faculty of Architecture and Urbanism
Technical University of Cluj-Napoca
72-76 Observatorului Street, 400363 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
e-mail: mihai.racu.arh@gmail.com, web: http:// www.fau.utcluj.ro

Keywords: Space Syntax, limitations, critics, digital analysis

Abstract: In the 1960’s, Jane Jacobs was defining in her book “The Death and Life of
Great American Cities” the streets as being ”the heart of urban life”. Jacobs was saying
that the streets should be full of activities and she was suggesting some qualities that they
should have in order to encourage these activities: small blocks or a multitude of route
choices, qualities that are linked with the street pattern.
In the second half of the 1970’s, a group of researchers from The Barlett School of
Architecture (University Coledge of London), started to develop Jane Jacobs’ ideas. They
started from the premise that the urban space and the street pattern, analysed at a city
scale, are playing a determinant role in creating animated and attractive streets. In their
book, “The Social Logic of Space”, Bill Hillier and Julienne Hanson were looking at the
“social meaning of spatial patterns and at the spatial meaning of social patterns”. Later,
using the steps forward made by the computer technology, Bill Hillier together with a group
of researchers developed the ideas from “The Social Logic of Space” in a series of analysis,
among which the space syntax method is the most well-known.
Lately the Space Syntax method became very well-known and widely used, with applications
in architecture and urban planning but since it is using abstract models of the built
environment and a series of quantitative data it is subject to a series of limitations and it
has been criticize as being “deterministic”.
The aim of this article is to evaluate these limitations and how they might influence the way
we are understanding very vivid environments, each characterized by their own distinctive,
particular characteristics such as scale, integration in larger systems etc. We will look at
the way data is gathered in order to use it, at the way is represented, at different spatial,
functional and cultural aspects overlooked by the method in order to understand how much
can we rely on it in research, evaluation and planning.
 Mihai Racu

1. INTRODUCTION
“Frequent streets and short blocks are valuable because of the fabric of intricate cross-use that
they permit among the users of a city neighbourhood. Frequent streets are not an end in
themselves. They are a means towards an end. If that end- generating diversity and catalysing
the plans of many people besides planners- is thwarted by too repressive zoning, or by too
regimented construction that precludes the flexible growth of diversity, nothing significant can
be accomplished by short blocks. …The means by which they work (attracting mixtures of uses
along with them) and the results they can help accomplish (the growth of diversity) are
inextricably related. The relationship is reciprocal.” [1].
„Street connectivity” appears in several of the definitions of urban sprawl. In the general sprawl
index the street factor is determined using as input data the block dimensions because may
authors consider to be impossible to quantify the degree of connectivity or curvature in
metropolitan street networks (due to the availability of data in national sources) [2].
A longer street or a street that intersects several other streets should have a higher street factor
because it brings together more people [3]. Also a street with longer perspectives, that is easy
to recognize should have a higher rank, a higher potential of maintaining people attention.
In „The Death and Life of Great American Cities” [1], book that can be considered a work of
urban phenomenology, Jane Jacobs was seeing the streets as being „the heart of urban life”, that
they should be full of life, hosting the pedestrian activities of residents and visitors [4]. Jacobs
was pointing a series of qualities of urban fabric that might animate and increase the street
attractiveness among which we find the block dimensions (if they are smaller, they make the
city easier to be walked by pedestrians) or the possibilities of choosing between a variety of
paths.
Starting in the second half of the 1970’s, a group of researchers from the Barlett School of
Architecture (University Coledge of London) started to develop Jane Jacobs’ ideas in an
„empirical manner” [4]. Starting from the premise that, seen at the city scale, the urban space
and street configuration play a determinant role in creating animated and attractive streets. Bill
Hillier and Julienne Hanson are analysing „the social content of spatial patterns and the spatial
content of social patterns” [5]. Their research later developed into the now well-known Space
Syntax Method.
This paper aims at shortly presenting the Space Syntax method and pointing to a short series of
inconsistencies found in the available literature or by applying the method in the author’s
research of urban systems in Romania [6].

2. A SHORT DESCRIPTION OF THE SPACE SYNTAX METHOD

„Space Syntax … is a set of techniques for the representation, quantification, and interpretation
of spatial configuration in buildings and settlements. Configuration is defined in general as, at
least, the relation between two spaces taking into account a third, and, at most, as the relations
among spaces in a complex taking into account all other spaces in the complex. Spatial
configuration is thus a more complex idea than spatial relation, which need invoke no more
than a pair of related spaces.” [7].
2
 Mihai Racu

With the development of computing techniques, Bill Hillier developed, together with other
researchers, the ideas from “The Social Logic of Space” [5] in a set of configurational analysis
out of which the “space syntax” method is the most well-known. Carlo Ratti defines it as a
“non-discursive architectural theory” [8]. The result is a “design philosophy” as the author sees
it based on the idea that architecture and urbanism, in both formal and spatial aspects, are
fundamentally configurational; the way in which certain elements stay together is more
important than the elements themselves [9].
Space syntax analysis tries to fill in a gap and to help understanding and visualising an evasive
construct of spatial patterns by representing hierarchies that establish between the elements of
a system.
Initially focused on analysing the patterns of pedestrian mobility in cities, the Space Syntax
method evolved in other directions, as traffic simulation, reducing the level of pollution,
evaluating criminal risks or evaluating the commercial potential of certain areas in the city.
Recently, the method started to be used more often as a prediction tool to evaluate opportunities
of development [8].
There are three types of space syntax analysis: the node analysis (the model used is a
connectivity graph with nodes and lines (Figure 1), the axial analysis (the model is composed
of straight lines - Figure 2) and the isovist analysis (based on the visual field depth analysis -
Figure 3). At the base of this method is the degree of integration in the system using the
constructs of intelligibility and navigability as seen in Figure 2). Integration is understood as a
measuring unit that shows, for a specific space, how many other spaces are connected with it.
If we think about a building, the entrance hall has the highest integration value, being connected
with all the other spaces in that building. The further we go, the integration value decreases.
Thus, an integration value, or depth, can be associated to any point in the system, in relation
with any other (based on the number of elements trough which they are connected).
Intelligibility is a construct based on a series of empiric research regarding the way cities are
perceived. Hillier is illustrating this construct using two generic urban configurations (Figure
3). The two situation are composed basically of the same elements (building blocks) but
arranged in a different way. The image on the left seems to be more “urban” while the one on
the left where the blocks have been slightly moved, seems to have a less urban appearance [9].
Ones intuitions regarding the character of the two spaces are confirmed when looking at the
resulting analysis. The image shows the number of points in space visible form each point. If,
in a space in the city we have a wider view, we are more likely to have a better understanding
of that space, it becomes intelligible. Connectivity, together with intelligibility, are two
characteristics of space that make cities easier to get around in, introducing the construct of
navigability of the urban space, suggesting how viable are these areas in terms of circulation.

3
 Mihai Racu

Figure 1. Node analysis. Source: www.ntnu.no

Figure 2 - The visualisation of integration patterns using the space syntax method. Source: Space is the Machine.
A configurational theroy of architecture

4
 Mihai Racu

Figure 3 - Spatial inteligibility visualisationi using the visibility analysis. Source: Space is the Machine. A
configurational theroy of architecture.

The areas highlighted in the system indicate fluxes, regions or spaces with a higher probability
of encountering other people, translated in a higher potential for social interaction [10].

The Space Syntax method can be considered revolutionary in two aspects. First of all it shows
the actors involved in urban planning that first of all they should address space and only after
form. The second one is that they should first understand the circulation system of a settlement
as a whole [4].

David Seamon presents three reasons that raised his phenomenological interest in the Space
Syntax method: the first is that the urban environment, through its spatial characteristics is
influencing urban life, the second is that the method uses quantitative data in looking at the
relation between space and people to assess which spaces are more attractive and the last one
is that Hillier is identifying the kind of streets that influence urban life [4]. These streets become
a “virtual” and sometimes “latent”, “unrealised” world that is the direct result of spatial
planning [11]. This concepts of “co-presence” and “possible encounters” used by Hiller are also
present in Jane Jacobs [1] work and, recently in Jan Gehl’s [12].

3. INCONSISTANCES IN THE SPACE SYNTAX METHOD

“I argue that the belief that spatial form has no effects on people and society is patently absurd.
If this were the case then we could design any monstrosity without penalty. My proposal is that
the determinable effects of spatial form on people are both limited and precise. Spatial form, I
argue, creates fields of probable – though not all possible - encounter and co-presence within
which we live and move… “ [11].

Bill Hillier’s method was often criticised as being deterministic from the “architectural and
environmental” point of view, suggesting that the built environment has an influence on human
5
 Mihai Racu

aspects. The critics start with the opinion (wrong in David Seamon’s view) that “the built
environment is only a small part of culture and do not agree with Hillier’s idea who states that
the physical environment has a role in making human spaces what they are [4]. However, in his
work, Hillier carefully dissociate himself from deterministic ideas and avoids accusations that
might be brought to him in this direction.

Another criticism of the method developed by Bill Hillier and his collaborators is their “biased”
attitude against formal and functional dimensions that characterise the urban design and
architecture. On one hand he is right stating that this “global qualities” that come out of the
organization of a settlement should be treated before taking any small scale decision related to
architecture and function [4], but there are certain functional and formal aspects with
implications in the atmosphere of a specific place that should not be overlooked, aspects pointed
my Jane Jacobs when she said that cities need and intricate diversity and a fine grain of uses
that constantly support each other both economically and socially [1].

Seamon raises a series of questions regarding the relation between the integration or segregation
patterns that may be observed applying Hillier’s analysis method and the contrasts that mai
occur regarding the “sense of place” (referred to by the supporters of the New Urbanism): what
kind of events, meetings, sensations can be associated with integration or segregation patterns?
[4]

Carlo Ratti also stated a series of inconsistencies (mainly referring to the analysis method based
on the use of axial maps) regarding the Space Syntax method [8]. One is the fact that the
software does not consider metric date but rather changes in direction and geometry. However,
the observations referring to the regularity of the streets [13], to the ease with which a more
continuous segment offers a wider view, thus making the urban fabric more readable etc. are
still standing. One other inconsistency observed by Ratti deals with the omission of the third
dimension of the city, to be more precise the omission of the building heights, densities (Figure
4) etc. in the studied areas. The fact that the influence the street pattern has on movement is
subject to certain conditions (in some areas there are more or less buildings, more destinations
and origins of traffic or fewer) is omitted. Ratti also noticed the “loading” of the streets with
bus or underground stations, the different nature of each street, the sidewalk sizes etc. [8]. Also
we should say that the axial map is not taking into account the different land uses or building
functions, aspects that are determinant in generating traffic.

6
 Mihai Racu

Figure 4 - Images of the same area: left - Space Syntax alaysis, right - built density visualisation (housing units per hectare) -
Buna Ziua Str., Cluj-Napoca, Romania. (Source: Mihai Racu, 2015)

One last set of observations deal with the way the axial map is represented. The process is based
on drawing the map using the longest lines and the smallest number of lines (Figure 4) [8], this
possibly leading to arbitrary results [14] [15].

Figure 5 - Integration values for two axial maps represented differently (a. uniform value 3,134 and b, value that
variates between 0,919 at the corners and 1,930 in the centre). The values were calculated using Axman PPC 2.5.
(Source: Ratti 2004)

Even though the idea that space syntax is based on understanding each piece accordingly to the
position that it has in the system, when the axial map is drawn there are chosen some limits
where the representation is stopped [8] [14]. This in turn influences the results of the analysis
as we can see in the image below (Figure 5).

7
 Mihai Racu

Figure 6 - The influence of the chosen limits for the studied area on the Space Syntax analysis results (Source:
Ratti 2004)

4. CONCLUSIONS
„The ability to replay the city shows that there are opportunities for researchers to propose
novel ways to describe the urban environment. However, there is a big assumption in seeing
the world as consisting of bits of data that can be processed into information that then will
naturally yield some value to people. It would lead to what we would call data-driven
urbanism, as if urbanism could be driven by data. Indeed, the understanding of a city goes
beyond logging machine states and events. In consequence, let us not confuse the
development of novel maps from previously uncollectable and inaccessible data with the
possibility of producing “intelligent maps.” [16]
This paper tries to offer a better understanding of some of the limitations encountered using
the Space Syntax method. We consider that understanding the conceptual background, the
theories and observations developed in time that lead to the development of this planning
and prediction too, together with its technical limitations are crucial in evaluating the results
and reaching a proper conclusion while using it in a specific environment.
These constrains suggest the need of interpolating the results with results and observations
resulted using other methods (also see Figure 4).
Also these limitations indicate possible areas of future development (as including land use
data or density data).

REFERENCES

[1] J. Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities, New York: Vintage Books,
1961.
[2] R. Ewing, “Smart Growth and Transportation Issues and Lessons Learned.,” in
Transportation Research Board Conference Proceedings 32, Baltimore, 2005.
[3] E. A. Gemil, “The Sequential Development and Consequent Urban Patterns,” in
Proceedings, 6th International Space Syntax Symposium, Istambul, 2007.
8
 Mihai Racu

[4] D. Seamon, “A Life of the Place: A Phenomenological Commentary on Bill Hillier's

Theory of Space Syntax,” Nordic Jurnal of Academical Research, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 35-
48, 1994.
[5] B. Hillier and J. Hanson, The Social Logic of Space, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 1984.
[6] M. Racu, The Coherence of the Urban Sprawl Areas in Romania. Methods of analysis,
Cluj Napoca: Technical University of Cluj Napoca, 2015.
[7] B. Hillier, J. Hanson and H. Graham, “Ideas are in things - an application of the space
syntax method to discovering house genotypes,” Environment and Planning B:
Planning and Design, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 363-385, 1987.
[8] C. Ratti, “Urban texture and space syntax: some inconsistencies,” Environment and
Planning B: Planning and Design, vol. 31, no. 4, pp. 487-499, 2004.
[9] B. Hillier, Space is the machine, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
[10] N. Dalton, “Configuration and neighbourhood: is place measurable?,” in Space Syntax
and Spatial Cognition Workshop of the Spatial Cognition’06 conference, Bremen, 2006.
[11] B. Hillier, “The Architecture of the Urban Object,” Ekistics, pp. 5-21, 1989.
[12] J. Gehl, Viața între clădiri. Utilizările spațiului public, București: Igloo Media, 2011.
[13] B. Hillier, “The hidden geometry of deformed grids: or, why space syntax works , when
it looks as thowgh it shouldn't,” Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design,
vol. 26, no. 2, pp. 169-191, 1999.
[14] M. Racu, “Measuring/Visualizing the Urban Sprawl An Application of the Space
Syntax Methodology on Cluj-Napoca,” Acta Technica Napocensis: Civil Engineering &
Architecture 55, vol. 55, no. 4, pp. 403-412, 2012.
[15] M. Batty, “Exploring isovist fields: space and shape in architectural,” Environment and
Planning B: Planning and Design, vol. 28, no. 1, pp. 123-150, 2001.
[16] F. Girardin, “Catching the World's Eyes,” in Decoding the City. Urbanism in the Age of
Big Data, Basel, Birkhäuser, 2014, pp. 18-27.