Critical responses to the Los Angeles School of Urbanism

Michael Dear*, Andrew Burridge, Peter Marolt, Jacob Peters, Mona Seymour

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

7 Citations (Scopus)


This article reviews critical responses to the Los Angeles School of Urbanism that have appeared in the urban studies literature since 1986. Common categories of complaint include the accusation that L.A. scholarship lacked sufficient evidence to support its claims and that the language and rhetoric of the School were hyperbolic. Some criticism was also decidedly personal and discipline-specific in tone. Constructive engagement with the L.A. School was evident in the growing corpus of empirical and theoretical comparative urban research. In particular, recent research work of the "New Chicago School" reveals several concordances with the L.A. School.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)101-112
Number of pages12
JournalUrban Geography
Issue number2
Publication statusPublished - 2008
Externally publishedYes


  • Comparative urbanism
  • Los Angeles School
  • New Chicago School


Dive into the research topics of 'Critical responses to the Los Angeles School of Urbanism'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this