The term “porosity” refers to the idea of interconnectedness between the spaces and institutions of ports, cities, and their surrounding areas. While porosity refers to the overall interconnectedness between different entities, an interface specifically refers to the point of contact and interaction between the same two entities. This paper goes beyond the idea of an interface and emphasizes a continuous network of port-related spaces and practices that shape the port cityscape. It also provides a historical perspective on the evolution of port/city boundaries. Additionally, this paper explores maps and conceptualizes port city porosity on both sea and land sides, measures, and reconsiders porosity in these regions. The thematic issue opens questions for further research such as: Can the interconnectedness between port and city areas, along with maritime pockets in the city and surrounding territory, enhance the resilience of port city activities? Does the existence of porous borders between port and city allow for easier transitions? The idea of transitions is particularly relevant in the context of the dynamic and ever-changing nature of port and city activities. As economic, social, or environmental conditions shift, there may be a need for both the port and city to adapt and evolve. The degree of porosity between them can play a role in facilitating or hindering these transitions.
| Published in | Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning (Volume 9, Issue 3) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.larp.20240903.12 |
| Page(s) | 64-72 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Porosity, Port City Interface, Transitions, Waterfront, Division, Segregation
| [1] | Boubacha, E. (1997). L’interface ville/port: Espace- système en mutation, l’exemple de Nantes [The port-city interface: Changing spatial system, the case of Nantes, Postgraduate thesis, University of Nantes]. |
| [2] | Chaline, C. (Ed.). (1994). Ces ports qui créèrent des villes. [These ports that created cities]. L’Harmattan |
| [3] | Carola, Hein., (2021). Planning for Porosity: Exploring Port City Development through the Lens of Boundaries and Flows. Urban Planning, 6(3), Article 4663. |
| [4] | Tan, T.‐Y. (2007). Port cities and hinterlands: A comparative study of Singapore and Calcutta. Political Geography, 26(7), 851–865. |
| [5] | Krośnicka, K. A., Lorens, P., & Michałowska, E. (2021). Port Cities within Port Regions: Shaping Complex Urban Environments in Gdańsk Bay, Poland. Urban Planning, 6(3), 27–42. |
| [6] | Aouad, D., & Kaloustian, N. (2021). Sustainable Beirut city planning post August 2020 port of Beirut blast: Case study of Karantina in Medawar district. Sustainability, 13(11), Article 6442. |
| [7] | Alemany Llovera, J. (1991). Los puertos españoles en el siglo XIX [Spanish ports in the 19th century]. Ministerio de Obras Públicas y Urbanismo. |
| [8] | Alemany Llovera, J. (2010). La transformación de los puertos desde la revolución industrial [The transformation of ports since the industrial revolution]. Portus, 19(May), 16–17. |
| [9] | Yehuda Hayuth (1982). The Port-Urban Interface: An Area in Transition. Published by: The Royal Geographical Society (with the Institute of British Geographers). |
| [10] | Hoyle, B. S. (1996). Cityports, coastal zones and regional change: International perspectives on planning and management. Wiley. |
| [11] | Hoyle, B. S. (1989). The port‐city interface: Trends, problems and examples. Geoforum, 20(4), 429–435. |
| [12] | Bollens, S. A. (2012). City and Soul in Divided Societies. London and New York: Routledge. |
| [13] | Calame, Jon and Charlesworth, Esther (2009) Divided Cities: Belfast, Beirut, Jerusalem, Mostar, and Nicosia. Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press. |
| [14] | Peter Marcuse and Ronald Van Kempen (Eds.)Of States and Cities: The Partitioning of Urban Space (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002). Leonard Nevarez, New Money, Nice Town: How Capital Works in the New Urban Economy (New York: Routledge, 2003). |
| [15] | Davie, M. (2001). Beyrouth un siècle et demi d’urbanisme [Beirut: A century and a half of urbanism]. Publication de l’ordre des Ingénieurs et des Architectes de Beyrouth. |
| [16] | Andrade, M. J., Costa, J. P., Jiménez-Morales, E., & Ruiz-Jaramillo, J. (2021). A city profile of Malaga: The role of the port-city border throughout historical transformations. Urban Planning, 6(3), 105-118. |
APA Style
Samarani, S. (2024). Exploring Port City Porosity and Flows within Port Regions: The Case Study of Port of Malaga and Port of Beirut. Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning, 9(3), 64-72. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.larp.20240903.12
ACS Style
Samarani, S. Exploring Port City Porosity and Flows within Port Regions: The Case Study of Port of Malaga and Port of Beirut. Landsc. Archit. Reg. Plan. 2024, 9(3), 64-72. doi: 10.11648/j.larp.20240903.12
AMA Style
Samarani S. Exploring Port City Porosity and Flows within Port Regions: The Case Study of Port of Malaga and Port of Beirut. Landsc Archit Reg Plan. 2024;9(3):64-72. doi: 10.11648/j.larp.20240903.12
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.larp.20240903.12,
author = {Samer Samarani},
title = {Exploring Port City Porosity and Flows within Port Regions: The Case Study of Port of Malaga and Port of Beirut
},
journal = {Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning},
volume = {9},
number = {3},
pages = {64-72},
doi = {10.11648/j.larp.20240903.12},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.larp.20240903.12},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.larp.20240903.12},
abstract = {The term “porosity” refers to the idea of interconnectedness between the spaces and institutions of ports, cities, and their surrounding areas. While porosity refers to the overall interconnectedness between different entities, an interface specifically refers to the point of contact and interaction between the same two entities. This paper goes beyond the idea of an interface and emphasizes a continuous network of port-related spaces and practices that shape the port cityscape. It also provides a historical perspective on the evolution of port/city boundaries. Additionally, this paper explores maps and conceptualizes port city porosity on both sea and land sides, measures, and reconsiders porosity in these regions. The thematic issue opens questions for further research such as: Can the interconnectedness between port and city areas, along with maritime pockets in the city and surrounding territory, enhance the resilience of port city activities? Does the existence of porous borders between port and city allow for easier transitions? The idea of transitions is particularly relevant in the context of the dynamic and ever-changing nature of port and city activities. As economic, social, or environmental conditions shift, there may be a need for both the port and city to adapt and evolve. The degree of porosity between them can play a role in facilitating or hindering these transitions.
},
year = {2024}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Exploring Port City Porosity and Flows within Port Regions: The Case Study of Port of Malaga and Port of Beirut AU - Samer Samarani Y1 - 2024/09/29 PY - 2024 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.larp.20240903.12 DO - 10.11648/j.larp.20240903.12 T2 - Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning JF - Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning JO - Landscape Architecture and Regional Planning SP - 64 EP - 72 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2637-4374 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.larp.20240903.12 AB - The term “porosity” refers to the idea of interconnectedness between the spaces and institutions of ports, cities, and their surrounding areas. While porosity refers to the overall interconnectedness between different entities, an interface specifically refers to the point of contact and interaction between the same two entities. This paper goes beyond the idea of an interface and emphasizes a continuous network of port-related spaces and practices that shape the port cityscape. It also provides a historical perspective on the evolution of port/city boundaries. Additionally, this paper explores maps and conceptualizes port city porosity on both sea and land sides, measures, and reconsiders porosity in these regions. The thematic issue opens questions for further research such as: Can the interconnectedness between port and city areas, along with maritime pockets in the city and surrounding territory, enhance the resilience of port city activities? Does the existence of porous borders between port and city allow for easier transitions? The idea of transitions is particularly relevant in the context of the dynamic and ever-changing nature of port and city activities. As economic, social, or environmental conditions shift, there may be a need for both the port and city to adapt and evolve. The degree of porosity between them can play a role in facilitating or hindering these transitions. VL - 9 IS - 3 ER -
Department of Architecture and Landscape Architecture, Boston Architectural College, Boston, USA
Information