DU&P JOURNAL PRESENTATION
Urban Design and Landscape, DU&P, ISSN 0717 – 9758, is an electronic publication of the Center for Architectural, Urban and Landscape Studies CEAUP, situated in the Faculty of Engineering and Architecture. It is included in the record of periodic publications of Universidad Central de Chile. Published biannually in Spanish, in electronic pdf format (Portable Document Format). It has endured uninterruptedly since its inception in April 2005, and it is freely accessible on the World Wide Web at the site http://dup.ucentral.cl/. Editorial guidelines are available on the journal's website.
DU&P is indexed by:
• DOAJ, Directory of Open Access Journals.
• Latindex, Regional Online Information System for Scientific Journals from Latin America, the Caribbean, Spain and Portugal.
• Sherpa/Romeo Publisher copyright policies & self-archiving.
• ISSN, International Standard Serial Number. International Centre.
• Dialnet
• MIAR, Information Matrix for Journal Analysis.
• CRUE, Conference of University Rectors Spanish.
• ROAD, Directory of Open Access Scholarly Resources.
• ERIHPLUS, European Reference Index for the Humanities and Social Sciences
• ARLA, Association of Latin American Architecture Magazines
• Design Researchers Network
• Portal of Chilean Academic Journals
EDITORIAL BOARD
Legal Representative
• Patricio Silva Rojas
Presidente de la Junta Directiva de la Universidad Central de Chile..
Directors and Editors-in-Chief
• Marco Valencia Palacios
• Walter Imilan
COMITÉ EDITORIAL N° 47: Metodologías Otras
Walter Imilan
CEAP-UCEN.
Paula Hernández
Doctor (c) en Doctorado en Territorio, Espacio y Sociedad, Universidad de Chile.
Consuelo Sánchez
Doctor (c) en Doctorado en Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco, Chile.
Manuel Corvalán
Doctor (c) en Doctorado en Territorio, Espacio y Sociedad, Universidad de Chile. FIA-Universidad Arturo Prat.
EDITORIAL TEAM DU&P MAGAZINE N° 47
• Dra. Virginia Arnet. Facultad de Humanidades, Universidad de Alcalá, España.
• Dr. Javier Figueroa. Facultad de Ingeniería y Arquitectura, Universidad Central de Chile.
• Dra. Ximena Galleguillos. Universidad Tecnológica Metropolitana, Chile.
• Mg. Griselda García. Universidad Nacional de Cuyo, Argentina.
• Dr. José Hayakawua. Universidad Nacional de Ingeniería, Lima, Perú.
• Profesor Martin Hoelscher. University of Applied Sciences and Art, Suiza.
• Dr. Walter Imilan. Facultad de Ingeniería y Arquitectura, Universidad Central de Chile.
• Mg. Alberto Nanclares. Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura Universidad Politécnica de Madrid.
• Dr. Zysman Neiman. Universidad Federal de São Paulo, Brasil.
• Profesor Pere Sala i Martí. Observatorio del Paisaje de Cataluña, España.
• Dr. Lucas Períes. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba, Argentina.
• Mg. Alfonso Raposo. Facultad de Ingeniería y Arquitectura, Universidad Central de Chile.
• Dr. Mario Sobarzo. Departamento de Filosofía, Universidad de Santiago de Chile.
• Dr. Jorge Vergara. Facultad de Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de Valparaíso, Chile.
• Dra. Ana María Wegmann. Facultad de Ingeniería y Arquitectura, Universidad Central de Chile.
GRAPHIC DESIGN: Sebastián Chandía.
ENGLISH TRANSLATION: Patricio De Stefani.
STYLE CORRECTION: Matías Sánchez.
COVER PHOTO: Consuelo Gonzalez Pavicich
Cover photo description: A photo taken on April 20, 2024, during the "Other Methodologies" gathering, which explored the territorial transformations of the Colina commune associated with extractivism. The photo shows a wall of earth that separates opposing realities of the city, as a material expression of territorial fragmentation. The event was led by Sergio Iriarte and Gabriela Salinas, who appear in the photograph, along with other members of the NGO Investiga Colina.
JOURNAL CONTACT
Postal Address: Central University of Chile. School of Architecture and Landscape. Av. Santa Isabel 1186 5th Floor. Commune of Santiago. Santiago de Chile. Official contact email with readers: ceaup@ucentral.cl
INTRUDUCTION
¿Por qué metodologías otras?
Walter Imilan
CEAP-UCEN. INVI-Uchile. ORCID 0000-0002-2478-8176
• wa.imilan@gmail.com
Paula Hernández
Doctor (c) en Doctorado en Territorio, Espacio y Sociedad, Universidad de Chile. https://orcid.org/0009-0000-7020-2335
• paula.hernandez.c@ug.uchile.cl
Consuelo Sánchez
Doctor (c) en Doctorado en Ciencias Sociales, Universidad de La Frontera, Temuco, Chile. Orcid: https://orcid.org/0009-0004-2042-9792
• consuelo.sanchez@ufrontera.cl
Manuel Corvalán
Doctor (c) en Doctorado en Territorio, Espacio y Sociedad, Universidad de Chile. FIA-Universidad Arturo Prat. ORCID 0000-0001-8499-4871.
• macorval@unap.cl
This special issue seeks to publish works that propose other approaches to rethink the very act of researching, and with it, expand the tools for territorial research.
Dominant methodologies, rooted in positivist and rationalist thinking, establish a hierarchical and unidirectional relationship between the researcher and the researched. Heirs of modern science, they conceive of the subject as a neutral observer who distances themselves from their object, reducing complex experiences to quantifiable and replicable data (Merchant, 1990; Grosfoguel, 2007). In this framework, "data collection" implies accessing an external world through standardized procedures, as if reality could be captured by ignoring its mediations. In contrast, authors like Arturo Escobar (2016) propose understanding research as a space of encounter, where knowledge is not extracted but emerges from interactions among humans, non-humans, and territories. Tim Ingold (2011), for his part, describes it as "making with" the world: a process of active correspondence with materials, environments, and participants.
The instrumental logic of positivism not only separates subject and object but also makes invisible knowledge that resists measurement: intuition, affectivity, embodied experience, and situated knowledge (Murdoch, 2006; Escobar, 2014). It is becoming increasingly evident that these methods are insufficient to address the multiple forms of knowledge that arise from how communities inhabit and respond to their human and more-than-human environments.
Unlike standardized protocols, other methodologies demand bodily presence, sensitivity to the unforeseen, and a willingness to learn through error. Classic concepts such as topophilia (Tuan, 1974)—the affective bond with places—or Genius Loci (Norberg-Schulz, 1980)—the unique spirit of a territory—underline the importance of inhabiting what is being studied, far from the distant gaze of the traditional researcher. This critique has been enriched by perspectives that question Cartesian dualisms (mind-body, culture-nature) and advocate for a relational understanding of reality. Donna Haraway (1988), with her notion of "partial objectivity," and Silvia Rivera Cusicanqui (2015), with her critique of colonialism in knowledge production, emphasize that knowledge is always situated: mediated by bodies, emotions, and power relations.
Researching from this approach demands collaborative and sensitive methodologies, capable of avoiding extractivist dynamics even within participatory frameworks like action research. Other methodologies are experiences that reframe research as a dialogical process, without losing sight of the need—as Cooke and Kothari (2001) warn—to critically reflect on power. Otherwise, the same hierarchies that are meant to be challenged are reproduced.
This openness has led to the development of arts-based research methodologies, which are useful for exploring complex, ephemeral, or affective phenomena (Law, 2004). Practices such as sensory ethnography (Pink, 2009), practice-based research (Nelson, 2013), or visual and performative strategies recognize that knowledge transcends the textual: it emerges from the visual, the auditory, or the corporeal. Video diaries, affective cartographies, or approaches from mobility (Merriman, 2014) and non-representational geographies (Vannini, 2015) have expanded the ways of capturing territorial experiences.
Methodologies are neither neutral nor separable from theory. In normal science, methods are subordinated to pre-established categories; in contrast, other methodologies allow knowledge with its own logic to emerge. However, the innovation this suggests is not without tensions within academia. As Rivera Cusicanqui (2015) points out, academic institutions often marginalize knowledge that does not conform to Eurocentric standards. Thus, creative methodologies are political gestures: they disobey dominant epistemologies and validate community, intuitive, or non-verbal knowledge.
The shift towards the relational reclaims the artisanal in research but faces a paradoxical challenge: the advancement of artificial intelligence. While the artisanal values slowness, improvisation, and co-presence, AI promises to accelerate processes, standardize data, and minimize human intervention. How can situated knowledge be preserved in a world where algorithms analyze thousands of interviews in seconds? Other methodologies are not a resistance to AI per se, but they are a space for practices that prioritize transformative encounter over the academic productivism driven by technologies.
Additionally, this issue includes CEAUP NEWS and PUBLICATION REVIEW sections.
.
