The field of urban design has generated a substantial body of scientific research across areas such as health, walkability, sustainability, and space syntax. However, the field still lacks a systematic and formalised framework to support cumulative scientific progress. Its interdisciplinary nature is sometimes misperceived as a barrier to strengthening its scientific rigour. This paper explores how clinical medicine, as an interdisciplinary field with established standards of scientific rigour, can provide lessons for urban design. Clinical medicine maintains rigour through peer review, evidence hierarchies, professional organisations, patient feedback, and expert leadership. Although the two fields are distinct in scope and disciplinary foundation, this paper uses clinical medicine as an illustrative example to show how selected principles of scientific rigour can help urban design become a more evidence-based field and less dependent on creativity and artistry.This paper does not characterise urban design as unscientific, and it recognises the substantial rigorous scholarship already present in the field. It calls for stronger mechanisms to consolidate knowledge and support accountable and cumulative progress across urban design research and practice. Setting a clear direction and advancing bold proposals for the field is nevertheless difficult, particularly because the undefined interdisciplinary nature of urban design often leaves it unrecognised among other spatial disciplines. We therefore anticipate criticism and encourage urban design scholars to engage with this discussion and contribute alternative perspectives and refinements.
Koohsari et al. (Tue,) studied this question.