Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 2014, volume 41, pages 512 – 533 doi:10.1068/b39097 The typological process and the morphological period: a cross-cultural assessment J W R Whitehand School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, England; e-mail: J.W.R.Whitehand@bham.ac.uk Kai Gu School of Architecture and Planning, University of Auckland, Private Bag 92019, Auckland, New Zealand; e-mail: k.gu@auckland.ac.nz Michael P Conzen Committee on Geographical Studies, University of Chicago, 5828 S University Avenue, Chicago, IL 60637-1583, USA; e-mail: m-conzen@uchicago.edu Susan M Whitehand School of Geography, Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, England; e-mail: J.W.R.Whitehand@bham.ac.uk Received 6 June 2012; in revised form 18 March 2013; published online 14 March 2014 Abstract. The concepts ‘typological process’ and ‘morphological period’ have received surprisingly little empirical substantiation despite their familiarity to many urban morphologists. They are examined here in two contrasting cultural areas—England and the Shanghai area, China—over the period from the mid-19th century to the late-20th century. Sequences of ordinary residential building types are recognized in the two areas: for example, historical series of terraced house types in England and historical variations on the lilong development unit in the Shanghai area. Periods characterized by different types and connections between those types are identified. The areas are different in both their building types and their periodizations but commonalities in their processes of change, including those related to the spread of Western fashions, are found. The difficulty of uncovering the mechanism of the typological process whereby one form type is succeeded by another reflects major problems of assembling the requisite data. Many more comparative studies, including between contrasting cultural areas, are needed. Keywords: building types, historical change, cross-cultural comparisons, data problems, England, Shanghai 1 Introduction One of the major questions in any field, not least in endeavours to understand the development of urban form, is how to explain the course of change. In urban morphology much energy is devoted to studying physical changes in the urban landscape. In terms of scale, such study ranges from examination of individual plots and buildings, or even parts of plots and buildings, to the configuration of entire urban areas, or even constellations of urban areas. Considerable efforts have gone into accounts of the physical characteristics of these changes. More than a few of these studies have drawn to varying degrees on the concepts of either the ‘typological process’ or the ‘morphological period’, though rarely the two in combination. If the increasing international usage of these concepts is to be justified, their empirical substantiation needs closer examination. This paper is a contribution to this task. Studies of changes to urban form have been based on various kinds of records of the state of the urban landscape at different times. The sources of information that allow comparisons over time to be made include maps and plans, photographs, archaeological excavations, and