Abstract

The attempt to “enculture cities” is governed, in several contemporary development scenarios, by the ability of urban design practices to create milieux that are receptive to the impacts of diverse social and cultural factors. Underpinning this process, urban design practices become real life projects through steps, procedures, and considerations specific to implementation (or in a sum of words: through executive frameworks). Much research is thus needed to investigate the correlation between the characteristics of executive frameworks and the ability to furnish the culture-receptive milieux. This article attempts to answer an intriguing research question: is the failure to enculture cities caused by inherently flawed executive frameworks or by other sorts of exogenous factors? To find a scientifically sound answer to this question, the article investigates the different causes of inefficiency in executive frameworks which could prevent the social and cultural factors required to (re)shape cities from flourishing. The article seeks to achieve its aim by conducting a transversal comparison across some popular urban design practices and their executive frameworks. The practices are selected by heterogeneity while responding to different aspects of urban design. A list of criteria especially devised to meet the research aim elaborates the comparison. Then to overcome the identified causes, the article deduces a variety of considerations and demonstrates their role in fortifying the attempt to enculture cities.