May 2016 EDRA Connections

2016 May

contents

In this issue

01 02 05

The enchanting world of architecture, planning and design presents us with creative physical realms intended for our use and enjoyment. The Vitruvian principles of Firmitas, Utilitas, and Venustas typically guide such creative processes in a sense of universality of space production. Environments designed on such a foundation are deemed perfect and infallible. However, we note that the stance is focused only on the mere physicality of design and only on the end-product. Through the past several decades, EDRA has been repeatedly questioning that steep notion - if stability, functionality, and beauty of a designed environment are just enough. We ask: can physical dimensions of everyday spaces be sufficient to satisfy as complex a phenomenon as human experience?

What is the nature of human experience in designed environments and what are the hidden dimensions of such experiences that need to be unearthed? In what ways can actual users influence and shape the production of space in order to create better experiences? How must the spotlight shift from the mere physicality of a space to encompass people and their meanings embedded in that space?

The EDRA Connections Issue 7 looks at these questions. Four scholars present articles that emphasize the importance of human experiences that can lead to more meaningful space production, ranging from interiors of organizational spaces and heritage environments to urban space use.

Inviting the Uninvited: Dr. Jessica Cook shares how a poor urban community in Delhi, India, is marginalized and left out of the decision-making processes of a railway line construction that affects their livelihood in several ways. She stresses the importance of including the entire community in the planning practices so that their voices - and experiences - are heard and incorporated in the planning decisions.

Meanings of Heritage: Dr. Jeremy Wells points to a current problem in heritage conservation efforts and proposes a compelling change. Orthodox regulatory approaches consider only the physical fabric of a historic building as important for historic preservation. However,

In this Issue

by Nisha A. Fernando, Editor Planning participation: What happens in the “un-invited” space?

by Jessica Cook A reflection on environmentbehavior research and the 50th anniversary of the National Historic Preservation Act

by Jeremy C. Wells

08 12

What social sensing technology can do for workplace design

by So-yeon Yoon Cross-sector collaboration to understand active transportation in St. Louis, Missouri

by Alicia Manteiga, Elizabeth Simons, J. Aaron Hipp, Kevin Neill, and Cheryl Valko

A publication from the Environmental Design Research Association A publication from the Environmental Design Research Association

01

by Nisha A. Fernando heritage also intrinsically involves people’s meanings linked with such buildings and therefore such meanings must be made an essential component of heritage conservation regulations.

Innovation by Social Interaction: In her article based on an ongoing research, Dr. So-yeon Yoon discusses how business environments concentrating on innovation can benefit from increasing social interactions and collaborations. Social sensing technology can provide tangible and objective data on informal interactions that can lead to more effective workplace designs leading to innovation.

Collaboration for Active Transportation: Ms. Alicia Manteiga and her team conducted a study where annual counts of bicycling and walking activities led to collaborative efforts to develop and expand networks of trails and paths in St. Louis, Missouri. The study identified specific ways paths and trails are used by both cyclists and pedestrians and resulted in graphic representation of the detailed findings that can be used by neighborhood advocacy groups.

We will continue to strengthen our focus on the significance of human experiences in design at EDRA47 Raleigh, Innovation:: Shifting Ground. Many opportunities await to share your thoughts and wisdom with other EDRAites throughout the conference.

I thank the first editor of EDRA Connections, Dr. Tasoulla Hadjiyanni, for her tireless efforts in making EDRA Connections a quality publication of EDRA. I am honored to serve as the new editor of this important member platform. If you are interested in publishing in EDRA Connections, please submit your 1000-word essay to me.

Looking forward to seeing you in Raleigh!

Nisha A. Fernando, Ph.D. is the Editor of EDRA Connections and a Professor of Interior Architecture, University of Wisconsin-Stevens Point. She can be reached at Nisha.Fernando@uwsp.edu.

Planning participation: What happens in the “un-invited” space?

2016 May

02

by JEssica Cook

from two months to multiple generations with 50% pilot study found that farmers were in a The United Nations Human “Societal groups present for a decade or more. More than half farmed on state of unease; many were distressed Settlements Programme (UNwhose historical less than 1.6 acres, but land size ranged from less than while some were in the process of HABITAT) recognizes community experience has been half an acre to eight or more acres. Rent was the most being displaced or had recently lost participation as an essential marginalization from common (nearly 50% rented land), with share-cropping land (Cook, Oviatt, Main, Kaur, & Brett, component of sustainable planning politics and decisionsecond (nearly 1/3 shared input costs and profits equally 2015). Although the DDA has a policy and development (UN-HABITAT, making may not have with the landowner in place of rent). A few families that supports community engagement 2010). However, engaging owned their land and others simply lived there without in development projects, in reality it communities can be difficult because a clear sense of their paying any rent. often falls short on public inclusion they are dynamic, multi-cultural interests as a group, While the majority of households were involved in (Ahmad, Balaban, Doll, & Dreyfus, entities and represent many voices nor of an agenda for agriculture, less expected was the range of agricultural 2013; Datta & Jha, 1983; Rao, 2010).

(Irvin & Stansbury, 2004; Maginn, change. This may types and practices. Furthermore, agriculture was The Metro construction served as an 2007). Poor and marginalized require the creation of rarely the sole livelihood. It was interesting to learn that opportunity to look inside a marginalized communities present a unique spaces of their own, whenever there was a community need and a profit community and capture their diverse challenge to planners because they within which to begin to be made, there was a person to supply it. All basic social networks and development are difficult to reach for a variety of a process of becoming needs could be met within the physical boundaries of beliefs and behaviors. reasons including lack of time due aware of their specific the community. I also witnessed the dynamic nature of While this community looked to long work hours, non-permanent circumstances as a the community as it changed in response to local needs homogeneous from the outside, the residence, illiteracy and/or language group and articulating through supply and adaptation. For example, the number data demonstrated that it was quite barriers, or a history of exclusion diverse from within. I interviewed leading to difficulties in participating an agenda for action 165 adjacent households between in the decision-making processes. to address the specific March 2013 and February But their homes and livelihoods inequities that they 2014 and found variability in are often tied to the same places face.” responses. The descriptive data development projects target, which (Eyben, Kabeer, & show that three-quarters of the makes them a particularly critical Cornwall, 2008, p. 16). households practiced some form population to include in sustainable of agriculture, but one-quarter planning practices (Kabeer, Mahmud, did not. Non-farming households & Isaza Castro, 2012). More than either depended on the larger farming community just acknowledging the complexities and challenges by providing services (rickshaw drivers, small to involving the public in planning and development shop owners, bicycle repair, etc.,) or they lived projects, in my doctoral dissertation I focused on the on the cheap/free land and worked in nearby “un-invited space,” where those who are not even neighborhoods in construction, as domestic considered as part of “the public” face the tidal wave of help, or sold produce in the market. Two-thirds planning hegemony. of families migrated from the same rural village, This paper presents a case study of urban farmers but one-third came from several other villages. facing land development in Delhi, India. At the time of Family composition ranged from nuclear (husband, research, the Delhi Development Authority (DDA) was wife, kids) or small multi-generational or mixed constructing a new line of the Delhi Metro (railway (grandparents, parents, children), to large extended network) on land actively cultivated by this particular Housing development on farmed floodplain land.

Photo by Jessica Cook (2011) families (ten or more relatives). Tenure ranged group of farmers (approximately two square miles). A A publication from the Environmental Design Research Association

Planning participation: What happens in the “un-invited” space? (continued)

Metro construction through farmed floodplain land.

Photo by Jessica Cook (2014).

Large apartment complex constructed on farmed floodplain land.

Photo by Jessica Cook (2013).

A publication from the Environmental Design Research Association

of small shops along the metro construction corridor increased. Farmers began selling small items, food, and chai to construction workers and were enjoying the (albeit temporary) extra income.

It became clear that there was vast diversity within a seemingly homogenous, poor and marginalized community farming on government-owned floodplain.

That diversity matters because although they are outside the invited space of planning and development decision-making, they are directly affected by - and directly impact - land use change, for better and for worse. The livelihoods of most families were threatened by construction of the metro and other future potential development; but some families also profited (through small shops, etc.,) although only in the short-term, with possible future loss of livelihood. If this community were invited to the table, some would oppose while others would support development.

Without knowing the inner spectrum of social diversity and complex economic dynamics within a community, planners, designers, and government entities cannot assume that support or approval of a project is only positive (vulnerable households sacrificing long term security for short term benefit), nor should it be assumed that opposition cannot be resolved in a mutually beneficial way. There is a critical need for invited formal spaces (and inclusion at official meetings or hearings) for such populations. However, inviting them to the table is not feasible; as the farmers are considered squatters and not legitimate citizens, they are purposefully excluded from the political system.

So Where is the potential to create space for such marginalized groups? How can they find a collective voice and who will actually voice it? Where are the connection points or points of entry into such communities? Landlords often have an influence on farmers and could serve as a potential connection point for organizing different within-community groups.

However, connections through landlords could also put some farmers at greater risk—landlords who illegally rented land might evict the family or dramatically increase the rent.

2016 May

03

The implication of this research is that community engagement cannot be satisfied with simple inclusiveness. Participation must begin with a space for collective deliberation and awareness-building so that marginalized groups can figure out what their needs are. If they have never been asked, they probably do not know.

References

Ahmad, S., Balaban, O., Doll, C. N. H., & Dreyfus, M. (2013). Delhi revisited. Cities, 31(0), 641-653. doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. cities.2012.12.006 Cook, J., Oviatt, K., Main, D. S., Kaur, H., & Brett, J. (2015). Reconceptualizing urban agriculture: An exploration of farming along the banks of the Yamuna River in Delhi, India. Journal of Agriculture and Human Values.

Datta, A., & Jha, G. (1983). Delhi: Two decades of plan implementation. Habitat International, 7(1/2), 37-45.

Eyben, R., Kabeer, N., & Cornwall, A. (2008). Conceptualising empowerment and the implications for pro poor growth: A paper for the DAC Poverty Network. Retrieved from Irvin, R. A., & Stansbury, J. (2004). Citizen participation in decision making: Is it worth the effort? Public Administration Review, 64(1), 55-65.

Kabeer, N., Mahmud, S., & Isaza Castro, J. G. (2012). NGOs and the Political Empowerment of Poor People in Rural Bangladesh: Cultivating the Habits of Democracy? World Development, 40(10), 2044-2062. doi:10.1016/j.worlddev.2012.05.011 Maginn, P. J. (2007). Towards more effective community participation in urban regeneration: The potential of collabortive planning and applied ethnography. Qualitative Research, 7(1), 25-43.

Rao, U. (2010). Making the global city: Urban citizenship at the margins of Delhi. Ethos, 75(4), 402-424.

UN-HABITAT. (2010). Planning sustainable cities: UN-HABITAT practices and perspectives.

Jessica Cook recently completed her PhD in Health and Behavioral Sciences as an NSFIGERT PhD Fellow in Sustainable Urban Infrastructure Systems at the University of Colorado Denver. She conducted her dissertation research in India as a 2013-2014 Fulbright-Nehru Research Fellow affiliated with the School of Human Ecology at Ambedkar University Delhi. She currently works as a research consultant and can be reached at: jessica.a.cook@ucdenver.edu.

A reflection on environment-behavior research and the 50th anniversary of the national historic preservation act

2016 May

05

by Jeremy C. Wells Fifty years ago, the U.S. Congress passed landmark legislation that recognized and helped protect historic resources. Among other things, the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 created the National Register of Historic Places, helped every state to get its own historic preservation office, and mandated reviews of federal undertakings for their impact on historic resources. Much of the doctrine catalyzed directly or indirectly by this law - such as the way we deem properties to officially be historically significant or not, and guidelines for how to treat historic buildings - has been adopted at all levels of government and the private sector.

While a remarkable accomplishment in 1966, the laws created and catalyzed by the NHPA are showing their age today. Germane to EDRA is the fact that these federal laws utterly fail to address person-place interactions and evidence from environment/behavior research.

At first glance, the relationship between historic preservation/heritage conservation and EDRA may seem tenuous, but there is, in fact, a strong, logical connection between the goals of the organization and this field of practice. Historic preservation laws are unique in that they require the valuation of place for the public good. In other words “historic places” must be separated from “non-historic places” via laws and regulations that are always assumed to be in the public interest. That’s how the Supreme Court sees it: the aesthetic regulation of historic districts is constitutional, in part, because it benefits people—a lot of people—to the extent that private property owners must adapt.

The problem in this system, however, is that while historic preservation laws recognize the public good, they reject (or deny) the sociocultural and experiential meanings of the very public for whom this activity is supposed to benefit. As such, the regulatory system for historic preservation in the United States (and much of the world) is based on historical positivism and the narrow perspectives of art and architectural historians and historians. As Thomas King (2009) has written A publication from the Environmental Design Research Association

that overlap with the regulatory extensively, our regulatory environment While historic environment. The reason for this is very adept at paying lip service to situation is two-fold: 1) this body of the public in terms of how and why preservation laws research often fails to address how historic places are recognized and recognize the its theoretical precepts can result conserved, but if a community wants public good, they in solutions that can be practically a place conserved because they think reject (or deny) applied by practitioners, and 2) little it’s important and the art historians do or no collaboration exists between not agree, then it is unlikely to receive the sociocultural critical heritage studies researchers official recognition. The orthodox system and experiential and legal researchers Lixinski (2015). of heritage conservation is therefore meanings of the To provide some context, while inherently biased towards conventional environment-behavior research very public for experts and against communities includes a significant body of work (Smith, 2006). whom this activity that addresses design guidelines, it These issues are why I created the is supposed to also largely fails to address the ruleEDRA Historic Environment Knowledge benefit. As such, making process and the creation of Network in 2008: to catalyze the use of empirically based laws, statutes, and social science evidence that could then the regulatory ordinances. influence practice, policy, and potentially system for historic Built heritage practitioners also the regulatory environment itself. But preservation in lack generalizable/transferable this idea is not new, dating back at the United States knowledge about the psychological, least to David Lowenthal’s publication ethnographic, and experiential of The Past is a Foreign Country in (and much of the dimensions of the historic 1985. Since this seminal publication, world) is based environment that are required to researchers in heritage studies have on historical provide a proper context for effective defined a novel heterodox approach to interpretation and communication theory and practice based on the social positivism and with stakeholders (Wells, 2015). sciences that is critical of the dominant the narrow Professionals in built heritage system of expert rule and positivistic, perspectives of art conservation often refer to their work top-down processes that characterizes and architectural as the “management of change,” orthodox built heritage theory and which recognizes the impossibility practice (Avrami, Mason, & Torre, 2000; historians and of truly preserving or fixing, in time Carman & Sørensen, 2009; Gibson historians. and place, the physical characteristics & Pendlebury, 2009; Green, 1998; of a heritage object or landscape, Harrison, 2013; Lixinski, 2015; Low, especially when such objects 1994; Smith, 2006; Waterton & Smith, must have a use. Conservation, therefore, becomes a 2010; Winter, 2013). process of making “good” decisions in the necessary Heritage studies scholarship, however, has had interventions made to buildings, structures, places, and little impact on the day-to-day practice of conserving landscapes in order to sustain their existence. the historic environment, especially in those aspects

A reflection on environment-behavior research and the 50th anniversary of the national historic preservation act (continued)

2016 May

06

Lixinski, L. (2015). Between orthodoxy and heterodoxy: The troubled Given this context, however, there preservationleadershipforum.org/whyrelationships between heritage studies and heritage law.

I created the is much confusion about what it is do-old-places-matter/), the other federal International Journal of Heritage Studies, 21(3), 203-214. we are really trying to conserve. Both leader in heritage conservation, the EDRA Historic Low, S. M. (1994). Cultural conservation of place. In M. Hufford (Ed.), heterodox and orthodox preservation/ National Park Service, has shown little Conserving culture: A new discourse on heritage (pp. 66-77).

Environment conservation theories emphasize a interest in addressing these issues.

Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Knowledge focus on continuity, but as opposed Currently, we need more research Muñoz Viñas, S. (2005). Contemporary theory of conservation. to the continuity of fabric, heterodox that explores people, place, and Amsterdam: Elsevier.

Network in 2008 Schofield, J. (2014). Who needs experts? Counter-mapping cultural theorists (Breglia, 2006; Muñoz Viñas, behavior in the historic environment to catalyze the use heritage. Farnham: Ashgate.

2005; Smith, 2006; Zancheti & Loretto, and a framework for converting these of social science Smith, L. (2006). Uses of heritage. London and New York: Routledge.

2012) direct that the focus should be empirical findings into policy and, Waterton, E. & Smith, L. (2010). The recognition and misrecognition evidence that could on conserving the social, cultural, and eventually, laws and rules. The goal of community heritage. International Journal of Heritage Studies experiential meanings associated with of this endeavor should be the clear then influence 16 (1), 4-15. this fabric. Taken to its logical extreme, recognition that heritage conservation Wells, J. (2015). Making a case for historic place conservation based practice, policy, the fabric of a heritage object can should, first and foremost, benefit on people’s values. Forum Journal of the National Trust for Historic and potentially change so long as the sociocultural people.

Preservation, 29 (3), 44-62. the regulatory meanings associated with the object Winter, T. (2013). Clarifying the critical in critical heritage studies.

References are conserved. A “good” decision International Journal of Heritage Studies, 19(6), 532-545. environment itself.

Avrami, E., Mason, R., & de Torre, M. L. (2000).

Zancheti, S. M., & Loretto, R. P. (2012). Dynamic integrity: A new then becomes one that conserves Values and heritage conservation. Los Angeles: concept to approach the conservation of historic urban landscape the sociocultural meanings of place Getty Conservation Institute.

(HUL). In Textos para discussão no. 53 (pp. 1-11). Olinda, Brazil: rather than the fabric of place. It is Breglia, L. (2006). Monumental ambivalence: The politics of heritage.

Centro de Estudos Avançados da Conservação Integrada. therefore incumbent upon the built heritage practitioner Austin: University of Texas Press. to recognize, gather, interpret, and understand a broad Carman, J., & Sørensen, M. L. S. (2009). Heritage studies: An array of stakeholder meanings associated with place. outline. In M. L. S. Sørensen & J. Carman (Eds.), Heritage studies: Methods and approaches (pp. 11-28). Routledge.

This shift in heritage conservation to heterodox Jeremy C. Wells, Ph.D., is an assistant Gibson, L. & Pendlebury, J. (Eds.), (2009). Valuing historic approaches means that in the future, the role of the professor in the Historic Preservation Program environments. Surry and Burlington: Ashgate Publishing. heritage practitioner moves from controlling meanings in the School of Art, Architecture, and Historic Green, H. L. (1998). The social construction of historical significance. associated with the fabric to facilitating the gathering Preservation at Roger Williams University, USA In M. A. Tomlan (Ed.), Preservation of what, for whom? A critical and interpretation of meanings from people as well and a Fulbright scholar. He is interested in how look at historical significance (pp. 85-94). Ithaca, NY: National as empowering communities to recognize, treat, and people perceive, value, and interact with historic Council for Preservation Education. interpret their built heritage and cultural landscapes. environments and how this experience is similar Harrison, R. (2013). Heritage: Critical approaches. New York: Built heritage practitioners will therefore need to to the experience of natural environments with Routledge. collect and interpret these meanings with more depth a focus on place attachment. He can be reached King, T. F. (2009). Our unprotected heritage: Whitewashing the and consistency than has been happening to date destruction of our cultural and natural resources. Walnut Creek, at jwells@rwu.edu.

CA: Left Coast Press. using efficient and pragmatic social science tools that do not currently exist. Ultimately, the assumptions upon which orthodox conservation has been based, including the National Historic Preservation Act, will The Historic Environment Knowledge Network will explore the creation of these applied become increasingly challenged in the future. While social science tools for built heritage conservation practice at a special day-long intensive the National Trust for Historic Preservation has recently at the EDRA47 conference in Raleigh on May 18, 2016. More information on this intensive been exploring these issues, such as Tom Mayes is available online. Please join us for this important session and help influence the future of “Why Do Old Places Matter” project (see http://blog. heritage conservation.

A publication from the Environmental Design Research Association

What social sensing technolog can do for workplace design

2016 May

08

BY So-yeon Yoon

Under a new landscape of inherently global, digital, fast-paced, and competitive business environments, organizations recognize that innovation is critical to success. Increasingly, organizations recognize the significance of the physical setting for fostering personal interaction and innovation in the workplace.

The correlation between interactions, performance and workplace innovation has been a goal and driving force behind many of today’s leading companies’ work environments. While the notion that innovative ideas and insights are likely to come from unstructured and serendipitous encounters in hallways and cafeterias has become widely acknowledged, executives as well as designers want evidence to support their investments in new workplace design and to assure that such new approaches are effective. When it comes to measuring workplace design, companies in the past have generally focused on efficiency—cost per square footage.

Recently, new social sensing technology has been adopted to analyze how workers communicate with each other, leading to better organizational performance.

Social sensing technology has the potential of informing and validating how to design workplaces that encourage people’s face-to-face interaction with one another.

With the support of ASID (American Society of Interior Designers), a team of workplace design researchers at the Cornell University sought to demystify the link between physical attributes of the workplace and personal interaction, performance, and innovation by using emerging social sensing technology. The focus was to assess levels of connectedness, collaboration and workplace creativity facilitated by the workplace environment. While the data analysis is currently continuing, this essay summarizes that research to date.

Social Sensing Technology We make informed guesses about what makes people happy and effective by observing them interacting with other people and reacting to physical settings, sometimes accompanied by surveys and interviews.

A publication from the Environmental Design Research Association

Students at the Cornell University wearing social sensing badges work in teams for design challenges.

Recent advances in sensing technology allowed a team of MIT researchers to develop electronic wearable badges to capture hidden factors of natural behavior and communication patterns that researchers’ observations or managers’ metrics simply could not capture. While the most common source of data for human analytics in workplaces is the employee satisfaction surveys, social sensing data provides more robust and objective data than what surveys may yield.

The science of social sensing technology answers the fundamental question of why seemingly similar teams in a business setting either achieve excellent results or struggle with performance, by producing big data that demystifies the art of team building. Studies have confirmed that the key to high performance lies in the manner in which a team communicates rather than the content of discussions. Data consistently demonstrate that the communication pattern is the most important predictor of a team’s success. As three key elements of successful communication, Pentland (2012) identified ‘exploration’ (interacting with people in other social groups), ‘engagement’ (interacting within your social group in reasonably balanced doses) and ‘energy’ (interacting with more people). Case studies (Pentland,

2012) have shown how small behavior changes –from at what lunch table people sit to when they take a break– can make people more productive, creative and happier.

Social sensing technology detects such patterns of communication. Social sensing badges collect data on individual communication behavior—speech tone, body movement, to whom and how much they talk—using four types of measures to capture different dimension of social interaction: infrared, Bluetooth, microphone, and accelerometer. In two to six weeks’ time, the badges generate over 100 data points per minute to map communication behaviors of large numbers of people in the same workplace. Previous studies using social sensing technology repeatedly report that more encounters are linked to more positive outcomes. The likelihood of encounters can be increased by promoting activities for exploration, engagement, and energy.

Connectedness, Collaboration and Creativity in Workplaces The Cornell workplace design research team studied effects of different physical attributes such as layout, computer technology factors, and acoustics, in varying contexts, from active learning classrooms to large,

What social sensing technolog can do for workplace design (continued) open-plan offices. The 3C framework was proposed to address key contributors -Connectedness, Collaboration, and Creativity - in high-performance workplaces using sociometric data to understand the interaction and communication patterns among organization members, as well as the related physical attributes in the workplace. We found that social sensing data often confirm what is observed or reported in accompanying surveys to support design guidelines by decision makers. The dynamics of teams with varying energy and interaction levels were detected to convert the social sensing data into quantifiable and measurable outcomes -- the 3Cs. Connectedness was defined as positive interactions with the physical setting’s interior attributes, directly or indirectly contributing to creativity. Interior attributes were categorized based on four factors: ambient factors (e.g., acoustics, luminosity, air quality, temperature); spatial factors (e.g., form, shape, layout, views); symbolic factors (e.g., plants, color, furniture, artifacts, materials); and Human Computer Interaction factors (e.g., communication information technology). Social sensing badges can capture where and how interactions occur in the workplace.

Collaboration has been promoted among industry leaders, including Google, Apple, Facebook and recently Yahoo, by mixing workers from different groups in shared spaces and overlapping movement paths (Lehrer, 2011). While our understanding is still forming on factors in organizational and environmental design that would most accelerate creative innovation, it is established that various types of interactions and collaborations serve as catalysts for creativity and innovation in knowledge workplaces. In addition to energy, exploration and engagement via tone of voice, face-to-face interaction, and adjacency data can be obtained by social sensing badges.

As creativity outcomes, the objective performance and subjective satisfaction data can be gathered from the participants and managers in each workplace.

Creative outcomes vary by tasks and workplaces. A widely recognized instrument such as KEYS (Amabile et al., 2005) can be used to measure a variety of factors, including affect, rewards, and motivation.

A publication from the Environmental Design Research Association

2016 May

09

Social sensing badges used to test the effects of different collaboration settings Closing Comments Social sensing technology gives us the ability to effectively capture big data and create clear understandings of the interactions and communication patterns of members with the environment. The numerous capabilities of social sensing technology allows for research to quickly advance in the investigation of connected, collaborative, and creative workplace designs.

Researchers, however, using social sensing technology should take precautionary steps when introducing the study to individuals and organizations.

A major concern for speech privacy may arise, even though researchers emphasize that audio measures only include speech volume, speed, duration, and pitch.

Additionally, knowing that they are in a research study, participants are often concerned about their behaviors being monitored and perhaps intentionally interact more with others to ensure they are providing data that is conducive with the study. Observations of the organizational dynamics prior to data collection may be a way to ensure that the data captures the naturalistic work environment.

Literature in Environmental Design Research informs what physical features support specific performance outcomes. By combining the social sensing data with organizational or design goals, it is possible to test,

demonstrate and improve the designed workplace’s effect. The use of data can only be as powerful as the type of data we collect; sociometric data provides the power to quantify and visualize the effect of the office space not as real estate but as a communication tool.

References

Amabile, T. M., Barsade, S. G., Mueller, J. S., & Staw, B. M. (2005), Affect and Creativity at Work, Administrative Science Quarterly, 50 (3), 367–403.

Lehrer, J. (2011). The Steve Jobs Approach To Teamwork,” Wired Magazine.

Pentland, A. (2012). The New Science of Building Great Teams.

Harvard Business Review. April 2012.

Waber, B., Magnolfi, J., & Lindsay, G. (2014). Workspaces That Move People: Today’s offices don’t encourage us to mingle—but that’s what creativity and productivity demand. Harvard Business Review. October 2014.

So-Yeon Yoon, PhD. Associate Professor and Director of DUET Lab (Design-User ExperienceTechnology),Department of Design and Environmental Analysis, Cornell University. She can be reached at sy492@cornell.edu

Cross-sector collaboration to understand active transportation in St. Louis, Missourri

2016 May

12

BY Alicia Manteiga*, Elizabeth Simons, J. Aaron Hipp, Kevin Neill, and Cheryl Valko

Physical activity plays an important role in chronic disease prevention and is influenced by one’s built environment (Adlakha et al., 2015). Individuals who incorporate travel-related physical activity, such as bicycling or walking, into routines are more likely to meet physical activity recommendations (Badland & Schofield, 2008). Proximity to and condition of trails can help cultivate such physically active lifestyles (Kaczynski, 2014).

Volunteer counts of residents bicycling and walking on designated trails or streets are a common method city and regional agencies (e.g., Metropolitan Planning Organizations) and active-transportation advocacy organizations employ to determine bicycle and pedestrian activity. These counts are often conducted annually on the same day or same season, and can be used to leverage increased funds for trail and bikeway expansion as well as to highlight areas of greatest need (“Guidebook on Pedestrian,” 2014). Count data information is also helpful to a variety of stakeholders, including urban designers, transportation planners, bicycle and pedestrian advocacy groups, and physical activity researchers (“National Bicycle and Pedestrian,” 2009).

Great Rivers Greenway (http://greatriversgreenway.org/) is the regional parks and trails district in the Metropolitan Area of St. Louis, MO. Of interest to Great Rivers Greenway is the use of the Gateway Bike Plan network (i.e., bike lanes, sharrows, off-road trails) by an active transportation mode (walking and biking). The transportation mode of trail and roadway users contributes to the location and design of new trails and roadways.

Great Rivers Greenway conducts annual counts of bicyclists and pedestrians as part of its Gateway Bike Plan implementation strategy. A primary goal of the Gateway Bike Plan, the regional bike master plan, is to increase the number of bicyclists using the on-street and off-street bicycle networks (Otten, Dodson, Fleischhacker, Siddiqi, & Quinn, 2015). These annual counts measure plan implementation and track progress towards this goal.

The Gateway Bike Plan counts, resulting map and dissemination products present an example of an exceptional collaboration between government, private for-profit, non-profit, and academic sectors working together to understand and visualize data that is influenced by - and will in turn influence - urban design and active transportation. The primary objective of this article is to highlight this collaboration and some of the resulting dissemination materials. The purpose of the research was to understand where and how people were using the Gateway Bike Plan network.

Methods The annual volunteer count program counts bicyclists and pedestrians at designated locations of: 1) on-street bike paths and adjacent sidewalks, and 2) off-road trails, for two rush-hour increments over two days. On-street count locations are selected along current and future corridors of the Gateway Bike Plan network. All locations are identified by Great Rivers Greenway and Trailnet (http://trailnet.org/), a regional active living advocacy organization that partners with Great Rivers Greenway to recruit and train volunteers to reliably count modes of active transportation. Volunteers were recruited and trained by Trailnet in 2014. People walking and riding bicycles on area roadways and active transportation facilities at designated observation spots were counted during 5:00-7:00 PM on two days of mid-September, 2014.

A publication from the Environmental Design Research Association

Figure 1: The St. Louis annual Gateway Bike Plan counts map depicts the ratio and combined volume of people riding bikes and people walking along on-street and off-road trails during four hours of observation.

Cross-sector collaboration to understand active transportation in St. Louis, Missourri (continued)

2016 May

13

localized mode share, informing future trail construction and advocacy efforts (Kaczynski, 2014).

Data collected by Trailnet volunteers was sent to Alta Planning and Design (http:// altaplanning.com/) for year-toyear comparison and inclusion in an annual report. Partners at Washington University in St. Louis used ArcGIS to finalize maps, used Excel for complementary data analysis, and converted findings into an infographic for the public using Adobe InDesign. Great Rivers Greenway and Trailnet played the role of dissemination by sharing the maps and the infographic with local residents and public officials.

Acknowledgments This research was jointly funded by the US National Cancer Institute (National Institutes of Health) under award number 1R21CA186481, and by Great Rivers Greenway (St. Louis, MO). The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding organizations.

References

Adlakha, D., Hipp, A. J., Marx, C., Yang, L., Tabak, R., Dodson, E. A., & Brownson, R. C. Figure 2: Selection of infographic depicting where people were counted walking and bicycling during the (2015). Home and Workplace Built Environment Gateway Bike Plan Volunteer Counts Gateway Bike Plan Data Supports for Physical Activity. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 48(1), 104-107. doi:10.1016/j. and Findings amepre.2014.08.023 people were observed riding bikes (56.2%) by location.

Of primary importance to stakeholders was the volume Badland, H. M., & Schofield, G. M. (2008). Health Associations Within the city boundaries of St. Louis, the locations with of people observed riding bikes and walking at each with Transport-Related Physical Activity and Motorized Travel to a majority of bicycle users were located near the center count location. Figure 1 indicates that, in general, offDestinations. International Journal of Sustainable Transportation, of the city.

In the surrounding St. Louis and St. Charles road trails had more combined pedestrian and bicycle 2(2), 77-90. doi:10.1080/15568310601113645 Counties, there were no trends distinguished among the activity, on average, than on-street paths (an average Guidebook on Pedestrian and Bicycle Volume Data Collection. (0077majority transportation mode and location of trail users. of 131.4 off-road trail visitors compared to 102.6 on5614). (2014). Washington D.C.: Transportation Research Board.

Retrieved from www.trb.org. Accessed 3/28/16. street path visitors over the combined four hours). This Kaczynski, A. T. (2014). Are park proximity and park features related to Results and Action difference is likely due to the increased sense of safety park use and park-based physical activity among adults? Variations The collaboration between the various organizations from motor vehicles in the streets. by multiple socio-demographic characteristics. International to complete and disseminate the count findings has The data was also used to create straightforward Journal of Behavioral Nutrition & Physical Activity, 11(1), 1-24. enhanced the usefulness of this research by bringing key visual tools to communicate transportation mode National Bicycle and Pedestrian Documentation Project Fact stakeholders to the forefront of network development. as it relates to the bicycling and walking network.

Sheet and Status Report. (2009). Retrieved from http:// Research indicates that incorporating intermediaries bikepeddocumentation.org/. Accessed 3/28/16.

The intended audience of these visual tools includes may improve the salience of research findings to policy Otten, J. J., Dodson, E. A., Fleischhacker, S., Siddiqi, S., & Quinn, E. developers and neighborhood groups interested in trail L. (2015). Getting Research to the Policy Table: A Qualitative Study makers (“National Bicycle and Pedestrian,” 2009). development and expansion. These tools took the form With Public Health Researchers on Engaging With Policy Makers.

Trails for transportation and leisure are an important of an infographic (Figure 2) and a GIS map (Figure 1).

Preventing Chronic Disease, 12, E56. doi:10.5888/pcd12.140546

At most on-street routes, the majority of users were people walking on adjacent sidewalks. By location, over the four-hour count period, an average of 80 people were observed walking (78.3% mode share) and 22 people were observed riding bikes (21.7% mode share). At all off-road trails, an average of 115 people were observed walking over the four-hour period (43.8%) and 148 A publication from the Environmental Design Research Association

contributor to physical activity in St. Louis. Figure 1 illustrates that trails and paths in the Gateway Bike Plan network are used differently depending on their geographic location and type (on-street versus off-road).

These counts and resulting products are helping make the case for resource prioritization by the identification of locations for roadway improvements and trail expansion and an enhanced understanding of the network’s

Alicia Manteiga MPH, the principal author of this article, is a program coordinator at the Prevention Research Center in St. Louis, at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri. She can be reached at alicia.manteiga@wustl.edu

14 EDRA Releases 2015 Annual Report

ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN RESEARCH ASSOCIATION 22 N Carroll St., Ste 300 Madison, WI 53703 608-310-7540 www.edra.org EDRA Connections is published two to three times a year by the Environmental Design Research Association. © 2016. All rights reserved.

EDITOR Nisha A. Fernando Nisha.Fernando@uwsp.edu 2015-2016 BOARD OF DIRECTORS Gowri Betrabet Gulwadi, Chair gowri@edra.org Lynn Manzo, Chair-Elect lmanzo@edra.org Paula Horrigan, Secretary phorrigan@edra.org Shauna Mallory-Hill, Treasurer smalloryhill@edra.org Rula Awwad-Rafferty, Ex Officio rula@edra.org Molly E. Ranhan, Student Representative mranahan@edra.org David Boeck dboeck@edra.org Emily Chmielewski echmielewski@edra.org Nisha Fernando nfernando@edra.org Robert W. Marans, Emeritus Board Member rmarans@edra.org Jennifer Senick jsenick@edra.org Marechiel Santos-Lang, Executive Director msantoslang@edra.org A publication from the Environmental Design Research Association

The EDRA Communications Committee has just released the 2015 EDRA Annual Report, a synopsis of all EDRA activity from January through December of last year. The report includes EDRA initiatives, events, and membership data, plus lists of leaders and volunteers that make EDRA the essential organization for environmental design research professionals. Here’s a quick look at 2015: we grew and diversified EDRA’s community to include 3,500 LinkedIn members, 600 Facebook and 1,500 Twitter followers! edra46 convened and for the 46th year we networked, dialogued and shared environmental design and research knowledge through papers, poster sessions, workshops, and symposia. new partners were welcomed as the Project for Public Spaces (PPS) began collaborating with EDRA on administering the yearly Great Places Awards! students engaged and were more visible than ever! They volunteered, applied for grants, attended workshops, submitted abstracts, presented at EDRA46, and garnered design and research awards. members united in voicing opposition to the National Architectural Accrediting Board’s (NAAB) proposed revisions and argued to increase, rather than decrease, knowledge related to people-environment relationships. communication & resources flowed keeping members connected with research, design trends and opportunities to participate and act. 46 years of EDRA Proceedings got posted to our website! management transitioned as we said goodbye to Coulter in McClean, VA and welcomed AMPED as EDRA’s new association management company and Madison, WI as our new headquarters and home base!

2016 priorities were set at EDRA’s Fall Board Retreat. #1: develop and engage our membership, #2: strengthen our organizational structure and capacity and #3: prioritize our programs and projects with member input.

Read the full 2015 Annual Report here.

EDRA48 will be in Madison, Wisconsin May 31-June 3, 2017. The call for papers will be announced in Fall 2016 along with a detailed conference theme. Please mark your calendars and consider submitting and joining us!