Role of Space Syntax in Landscape Approach Analysis

Document Type : Original Research Article


1 Ph.D Candidate, Department of Architecture, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor, Faculty of Architecture, University of Tehran, Iran.

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Architecture, Tabriz Branch, Islamic Azad University,Iran.


Problem statement: Space syntax is a theory and method that recognizes the space configuration and enables its analysis. Space syntax expresses the intrinsic features of space tangibly and quantitatively by studying space quantitatively. It makes this method more practical and increasingly important. Also, no model can calculate the landscape’s subjective and objective aspects by computational and measurement methods in the landscape area. Given that the space syntax theory is a quantitative method that not only addresses the physique but also considers the social issues, such as activities, it seems that it has the capabilities and capacities that can help us evaluate the landscape. This research seeks to achieving the specific components of the landscape to fill in the gaps and weaknesses of conventional measurement methods and quantitative study of the landscape’s objective and subjective aspects and wants to answer the question that, How can the syntax method of space be used for landscape analysis?
The current study addresses the content analysis to recognize the space syntax and its fundamental theories and concepts using a mixed method of descriptive-analytical and deductive explanation. These concepts are then analyzed along with the landscape concepts to achieve the space syntax efficiency in the landscape. The landscape is a subjective-objective phenomenon. The landscape features depend on the objective (physical features of space) and subjective features (meaning). The subjective factor is classified into two groups of visual and drama groups, which have different measurement and evaluation methods and capabilities. The visual factors are perceived reflectively and sensually, and drama factors depend on the rational process and establishing a relationship between its different parts. Space syntax can be used to analyze some of the landscape factors and has a deficiency in analyzing others. The objective factors of the landscape can be studied using space syntax due to their syntax feature. However, the more semantic the factors, the more inefficient is the method of space syntax for recognizing and analyzing space.


Abbaszadehgan, M. (2002). Space Syntax Method in The Urban Design Process, Yazd City. Urban Management, (9), 64-115. 
Alehashemi, A. & Mansouri, S. A. (2017). Landscape; A Shifting Concept; The Evolution of the Concept of the Landscape From Renaissance. Bagh-e Nazar, 14 (57), 33-44. 
Cullen, G. (2016). The Concise Townscape (M. Tabibian, Trans.). Tehran: Tehran University Press.
Dalton, R. (2003). The Secret is to Follow Your Nose. Route Path Selection and Angularity. Environment and Behavior, 35 (1), 107–131.
De Koning, R. E., Van Nes, A., Ye, Y. & Roald, H. J. (2017). Strategies for Integrated Densification with Urban Qualities: Combining Space Syntax with Building Density, Land Usage, Public Transport and Property Rights in Bergen City. Proceedings of the 11th Space Syntax Symposium. Lisbon: Instituto Superior Técnico.
Dhanani, A., Tarkhanyan, L. & Vaughan. L. (2017). Estimating Pedestrian Demand for Active Transport Evaluation and Planning. Transportation Research, Part a: Policy and Practice, (103), 54–69.
Doxiadis, C. A. (1968). Ekistics: An Introduction to the Science of Human Settlements. Oxford: Oxford University. 
Dwimirnani, P. & Karimi K. (2017). Space after Dark: Measuring the Impact of Public Lighting at Night on Visibility, Movement, and Spatial Configuration in Urban Parks. Proceedings of the 11th Space Syntax Symposium. Lisbon: Instituto Superior Técnico.
Fordham, F. (2011). An introduction to gung’s phychology (M. Mirbaha, Trans.). Tehran: Jami.
Grout, L. & Wang, D. (2005). Research Methods in Architecture (A. Eynifar, Trans.). Tehran: Tehran University Press. 
Hamedani Golshan, H. (2015). Space Syntax, a Brief Review on its Origins and Methods in Architecture and Urban Design Case Study: Brojerdi-ha Mansion, Kashan, Iran. Honar-ha-ye Ziba - Memari va Shahrsazi, 2 (20), 85-92.
Hargrove, W.W., Hoffman, F. M. & Efroymson, R. A. (2004). A practical map-analysis tool for detecting potential dispersal corridors. Landscape Ecology, (20), 361–373.
Hillier, B. & Hanson, J. (1984). The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hillier, B. (2007). Space Is the Machine: A Configurational Theory of Architecture. London: Space Syntax.
Jacobs, J. (2007). The Death and Life of Great American Cities (H. R. Parsi & A. Aflatouni, Trans.). Tehran: Tehran University Press.
Jeong, S. K. & Ban, Y. U. (2011). Developing a topological information extraction model for space syntax analysis. Building and Environment, (46), 2442-2453.
Jiang, B. & Claramunt, Ch. (2002). Integration of space syntax into GIS: New Perspectives for urban morphology. Transactions in GIS, 6(3), 295-309.
Karimi, K. & Parham, E. (2012). An evidence informed approach to developing an adaptable regeneration programme for declining informal settlements. In Greene, M., Reyes, J., & Castro, A. (eds.), Proceedings: Eighth International Space Syntax Symposium. Santiago: Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile.
Kepes, G. (1989). Language of Vision (F. Mohajer, Trans.). Tehran: Sorush.
Kim, Y. & Shin, W. (2007) A study on the correlation between pedestrian network and pedestrian volume according to lanel use pattern. 6th International Space Syntax, Symposium Istanbul.
Lynch, K. (2019). The Image of the City (M. Mozayeni Trans.). Tehran: Tehran University Press.
Mansouri, S. A. (2004). An Introduction to Landscape Architecture Identification. Bagh-e Nazar, 1(2), 69-77. 
Marcus, L., Giusti, M. & Barthel. S. (2016). Cognitive Affordances in Sustainable Urbanism: Contributions of Space Syntax and Spatial Cognition. Urban Design, 21 (4), 439–452.
Maureira, V. & K. Karimi. (2017). The Everyday and the Post-Disaster Urban Systems as One Thing: A Configurational Approach to Enhance the Recovery and Resilience of Cities Affected by Tsunamis. Proceedings of the 11th Space Syntax Symposium. Lisbon: Instituto Superior Técnico.
McCahil, C. & Garrick, N. (2008). The Applicability of Space Syntax to Bicycle Facility Planning. Transportation Research Record. The Transportation Research Board, (2074), 46–51.
Pakzad, J. (2019). An Intellectual History of Urbanism. V. 2. Tehran: Armanshahr.
Paul, A. (2011). Axial analysis: a syntactic approach to movement network modeling. Institute of Town Planners, India Journal, 8(1), 29–40.
Penn, A. (2008). Architectural Research. In Knight, A. & Ruddock, A. (Ed.), Advanced Research Methods in the Built Environment. US: Wiley-Blackwell.
Raford, N., Chiaradia, A. & Gil J. (2007). The Role of Urban Form in Cyclist Route Choice in Central London. London: Space Syntax.
Shen, Y. & Karimi, K. (2016). Urban Function Connectivity: Characterisation of Functional Urban Streets with Social Media Check-in Data. Cities, (55), 9–21.
T. Hall, Edward. (1396). The Hidden Dimension (M. Tabibian, Trans.). Tehran: Tehran University Press.
Tischendorf, L. & Fahrig, L. (2000). On the usage and measurement of landscape connectivity. Oikos, (90), 7–19.
Vaughan, L. (2007). The spatial syntax of urban segregation. Progress in Planning, (67), 205–294.