When we hear headlines like "the city must have fair density" or "15-minute neighborhoods," time and density are just numbers. However, it is essential to understand that they remain only numbers until they are contextualized within the lived experience of people in their territory. We can no longer postpone the obvious reality that a number, a standard, a benchmark, or a goal is merely a tool to facilitate the necessary conversations regarding the management and governance of our territorial environments.
We can no longer pretend that we can construct a total and unique description of a territory, its inhabitants, and the relationships between them and other communities. Thus, the discussion must center on the territory itself, not on specialized measurement. An interpretive effort is essential to both identify the nature of the evidence regarding the territory and to understand the frameworks that allow for its correct analysis. This involves identifying and clarifying concepts derived from reality, in terms of their association with and applicability to the reality of coexistence. In other words, this is a search for the operational breadth that measurement strives to achieve. The challenge is not to separate a supposed reality from the evidence of people's experiences and their individual realities. Evidence can indeed be shown to be relative to the relationships it concerns while simultaneously possessing a total reality. Put differently, evidence can hold different values depending on the relationship to which it is linked. While the world is one, life experiences within a territory are as diverse as the people and the temporary emotional states they find themselves in. This is the most appropriate factor that should unite territorial management; what must be replaced as a form of control is the criterion of "total reality"—life determined by standards.
