PUBLIC SPACES AND THEIR PERCEPTION: HAVE THESE BEEN PERMANENTLY COLOURED BY THE PANDEMIC? Singh, Ieshika; Nogia, Akash; Gajbhiye, Chaitanya; Divyansh; Hasan, Moheed; Kumar, Ritesh; Meshram, Ritvik School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi-110002, India, Guide: Kumar, Sandip ABSTRACT The COVID-19 outbreak witnessed the restricted use of public spaces worldwide. It was apparent in the noticeable views of empty city streets, parks, beaches, plazas and promenades as people either complied with the government imposed restrictions or self cautious measures. The research aims to focus on the people’s changed perception and use of the public spaces after months of complete lockdown in India and to analyze the behavioural shift of users towards these spaces. The study commences with the key definition of public spaces along with their importance in the urban context and well being of a person. Furthermore, the four parameters to analyze a public space were identified through literature review. These were namely, the social carrying capacity, user density, social interaction and risk-taking attitudes amidst and after the pandemic. The first phase of primary data collection comes through user interviews, full-scale survey and activity mapping. These methods were aimed to analyze if the user’s perception about the public space has changed. The second phase is the Delphi survey that helped to determine the areas and extent of the change in perception in the present and future. In the third phase of the research, the derived observation from the above survey was further cross-referenced with the study of primary interventions made in and to these spaces by the authorities. The result thus suggested a noticeable change in the density, usage and perception of these spaces along with the intentions and reasons for the change. This study will open avenues for academia, professionals and policy-makers in the realm of public space design. It not only explores essential questions concerning how long these impacts will be felt but also the degree to which they are unfurled in the minds of the users and designers.
Keywords: Public space, Social carrying capacity, User density, Social interaction, Human tendency, Risk-taking attitudes, User perception.
1.0 Chapter 1: ‘Public Space’ and the Onset of COVID: The COVID-19 pandemic has led to 46,90,186 loss of human lives worldwide in the last 21 months (World Health Organization, September 19, 2021) and still presents an unprecedented challenge to public health, and both physical and social infrastructure. It has a particularly negative impact on developing countries dealing with humanitarian crises or emergencies, with India being one of the most affected. In the initial stages of the outbreak, one of the major impacts of the pandemic was witnessed in the restricted use of public spaces worldwide. Ardent, H. (1958, p.22) argues about the importance of public spaces by stating that “No human life, not even the life of the hermit in nature’s wilderness, is possible without a world which directly or indirectly testifies to the presence of other human beings”. This need for social interaction indeed requires a space, forming the utmost necessity for a public space. Public spaces are at the heart of the urban city image where most of the social sharing is experienced. The experience of city life can be well evaluated from the quality, design, and accessibility of their public spaces. A year later, the relief in the lockdown restrictions brought the masses back into these spaces and on streets causing major changes in the perception and usage of these spaces, which are the basic elements of the city. Unquestionably, the pandemic has pulled back the curtains on this inequitable feature of the cities and forced us to reflect on; How has the COVID-19 pandemic impacted the public spaces in Indian cities with respect to their perception and use? The objective of this research is to understand the aftermath of the pandemic on the functionality of public spaces and to form a comparative analysis on the pre and post notion of these spaces. Likewise, the aim is to analyze the behavioural shift of users towards social interaction (if any) in these spaces, through activity mapping, time photography and user interviews. In order to apprehend the public response, it is crucial to identify and study the various forms of physical interventions made in and to the public spaces through case examples. This will lead to a detailed evaluation of the change in user density of these spaces post-pandemic due to government imposed restrictions and self-cautious measures. Furthermore, the intent of the research is also to identify the altered patterns (if any) and configurations of use of these public spaces. For the purpose of narrowing down the research and making it more precise, it is important to understand the definition and extent of the public spaces for social use. The study is therefore limited to places like commercial centres, marketplaces, parks, and plazas situated in Delhi (NCR). On the basis of density, function, and accessibility, the public spaces chosen for the study are; Commercial center: Moments mall (Kirti Nagar), Parks: Paschim Vihar District Park and Plaza: Connaught place (Inner circle). The timeline considered for analyzing the impact and the extent of change is from the initial outbreak of COVID-19 to the current time. The scope of study involves observing the user’s willingness to take risks and changing behaviour patterns towards these spaces. It also includes the study of public interventions made to these spaces after the different phases of pandemic.
2.0 Chapter 2: Decoding the ‘Public Space’: The study explores the understanding of the key definitions of public spaces and their inevitable role in a person’s life and the city as a whole. Public space has always sculpted and enhanced the urban fabric with its diverse functions as a marketplace, meeting points, platform for exchanging cultural and political debates, a media for urban rejuvenation; and with its varied forms as forums, squares, plazas, streets, and parks. “It is in these public spaces that human exchanges and relationships, the diversity of use and the conflicts and contradictions of society are manifested.” (Lara Caccia, Urban Development Specialist at WRI Brasil). This notion of the form and function of public space has been modified throughout history. According to Dacheux (2012), there is confusion between the scientific use of the concept of public space and its daily use. Due to the difference in meaning, the entire concept is also debatable for its users. Habermas (1989) explored the concept of public space in terms of economics, sociology, and politics asserting that public space is formed by the communication between space and social existence. Public space is an inseparable part of the city, giving opportunities to its residents to interact with others without concealing personal differences. Thus, we can say that public space is described by the majority of users as easily accessible, open to all and belongs to the public. Due to the pandemic, we are currently in the midst of unprecedented restrictions in the use of public spaces across the world. The impact of the pandemic has not only been on every individual, foreseeing a diverse behavioral pattern but also on the spatial capacity of these public spaces. Four parameters were identified and studied in a hierarchical order to analyze the functioning of a public space at an elemental level. 2.1 Carrying Capacity of a Public Space: Carrying capacity is said to be the ability of natural and man-made systems to support the demands of users (Mansouri Daneshvar et al., 2017). The greatest population that a habitat area may support without compromising its function or lowering its supplemental capacity is referred to as ecological carrying capacity. However, social carrying capacity is defined as the highest number of visitors that may be accommodated without creating irreparable environmental damage or a significant reduction in visitor satisfaction. While the ecological carrying capacity forms a framework for the integration of physical, socio-economic and environmental systems into sustainable urban planning, the social carrying capacity poses an impact on an individual’s intuitive sense of spatial capacity. Whyte (1980) in his book “The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces”, addresses that spaces appear to have a natural carrying capacity. He mentions that “what attracts people to a place is the existence of other people at this place.” But in his study on the office buildings in New York, he observed that people would collect only close to a certain maximum capacity. Through his central theme of self-congestion, he contemplated that users would not stay in a place if that space was too close to its capacity. He proposed that every individual has an intuitive feeling of “what too many” appears.
This observational study indicates that COVID - 19 would definitely amend our intuitive capability of what is the optimum number of people for a particular public space and whether large spaces would have stringent spatial boundaries to accommodate a certain population. 2.2 User Density: Restrictions on the use of public spaces and adoption of social and physical distancing have been a vital factor in reducing the transmission of COVID - 19 virus (Honey-Roses et al., 2020). Density is one of the parameters that defines the efficiency of a public space. Optimal user density in a public space implies optima utilization of space. However, the behavioural change of people after the pandemic has resulted in a decline in the number of users visiting a public space, either due to administrative restrictions or self-cautious measures. The presence of people in a public space is often interpreted as the public space is functioning and is healthy (Gehl and Svarre, 2013), but we witnessed that the pandemic created a situation where the high density of public space was not ideal. According to the theory of evolutionary biology, evolutionary changes are not gradual and cumulative but occur in specific moments (Gould and Eldredge, 1993). COVID - 19 is one such moment that re-defines what is normal and what is radical. Even the emerging virtual public spaces have led to a decrease in socialization and changed the characteristics of the urban spaces. Hence, it is evident that there is an impact on the general perception, evaluation, and usage of these spaces before, during, and after the pandemic. 2.3 Social Interaction: Public spaces enable people to socially interact, make new relations, participate in various sports, cultural and artistic activities, and to enjoy nature. Public spaces have a major contribution in the psychological and physical well-being of people. Hillier and Hanson (1984) mentioned that the denser the element/ structure/ point connects with the pathways, the more it encourages social interaction. Jacobs (2016) defined the importance of social life in cities by emphasizing the role of street life in encouraging social interaction. In addition, he also revealed that streets, footpaths, the area around doorways, steps in front of houses, etc., are vital spaces where social interaction between different households grows and eventually develops casual contact between people living in the locality. COVID - 19 pandemic has dramatically changed the nature of our social interactions. This environment can prevent, hinder and limit people’s behaviour. The containment measures by the authorities ensured that the public places were completely shut down during the pandemic. The pandemic declaration caused a fundamental shift in human behaviour around the world, independent of any government lockdown measures (Chan et al., 2020). Physical characteristics of a space have a direct impact on behaviour patterns which further affects social interaction. However, the pandemic has developed a risk of whether people should use that space or not. 2.4 Human Risk Attitudes, Related Behaviour Patterns: Risk-taking attitude is an important element of human behaviour as it determines a range of decision-making strategies and contributes to people’s ability to navigate a complex, uncertain, and dangerous world, where risk looms large (Chan et al., 2020). After the outbreak of COVID - 19, it is certain that the public spaces have been impacted in
a way that the human perception towards these spaces has changed. This change is majorly due to the shift in human behaviour and thus impacts the usage of these spaces. Accessing public space poses some sort of risk, however the willingness to take that risk is subjective and depends on the various factors. We judge risk differently based on the physical distance between ourselves and a given source of danger, i.e., we feel safer if the danger is further away, and we are less likely to monitor it over an extended duration (Wakker, n.d.). Although the shift in behaviour patterns was evident and real, this change did not take place overnight; rather it was adapted in stages in sync with the chain of events. According to a survey by Chan et al. (2020), during the first period, it was observed that social distancing and work from home were starting to make an impact on restricted commute. Whereas, there was a second wave of behavioural shifts as more people reduced their travel, shopping or lost their jobs, or were in lockdown. Although, we do observe an interesting shift in how risk attitudes affect public interaction across these three categories as they all exhibit a slightly positive trend in the period before the announcement, but they all shift to a much stronger negative risk trend after the announcement. However, humans are very social animals, and over time, the lack of social interaction is likely to erode some individuals’ willingness to comply with social distancing or lockdown regulations. This may lead to a re-evaluation of how people perceive the risk of transmission. Risk-loving regions are also less likely to adjust their behaviour based on external stimuli, such as the WHO announcement of classifying COVID - 19 as a pandemic (Chan et al., 2020). During the outbreak of the pandemic, these parameters were impacted and the role of public space has been altered. They were officially declared as ‘risk zones’, but as an immediate response to the healthcare crisis, there were a number of temporary interventions made in and to these spaces. 2.5 Primary Interventions and Response: Adapting to the situation is not just about maintaining individual safety but also about interventions that can respond to the public requirements of safety and convenience. While most handbooks and guidelines are being written with a perspective of the west, these ideas cannot be applied to the Indian context. In India, several advisories and public health interventions have been done by the policymakers since the relief in restrictions. People eventually recovered streets and public places as emergency lifelines for the city. The maidans (city open grounds) and neighbourhood open spaces acted as foci of pandemic operations like as food distribution, medical clinics, improvised markets, and other requirements, while streets aided channel the movement of emergency vehicles and other necessary services. This situation provided a unique circumstance for city-scale experiments regarding accessibility to these public spaces, while immediate responses showed the transformative power of tactical urbanism. “It is imperative to rethink how open spaces and our streets, that underwent a conversion into emergency spaces, remain flexible while offering safe distancing to users. Tactical Urbanism is one such jugaad (innovative process) to achieve this in a systematic and cost-effective way. Commonly known as guerrilla or pop-up urbanism, it includes low-cost, temporary changes to the built environment, enhancing neighborhoods and uplifting public spaces. These temporary changes can eventually be tweaked through user feedback and be made permanent.” (Tactical Urbanism, n.d.)
In the field of public space design, amongst the most critical questions is how long these effects will last and how pervasive they will be. It may take years before we can determine how the global epidemic has affected public space planning and design. This pandemic has the potential to be a defining moment in India’s urban development if we draw the right lessons and translate them into lasting change. 3.0 Chapter 3: The Expedition, the Information and the Analysis:
Table 1: Analysis Matrix Source : Authors
Research PHASE 1
PHASE 2
Analysis
Data collection
First stage of Analysis
Activity Mapping Pilot Survey Full Scale Survey User Interviews
Understanding and analyzing if the user’s perception has changed.
Delphi Survey
Second stage of Analysis
Creating a more detailed questionnaire to understand the extent and the future perception of change.
More precise idea of the levels and nature of changes. Understanding of the user’s perception in future and usage of these spaces.
PHASE 3
Primary response towards public spaces
Third stage of Analysis
Studying the Interventions and changes made to these public spaces through case examples.
Understanding the response and future usage of the spaces along with the intentions and reasons for change.
Table 2: Research Phase plan Source : Authors
3.1 Primary case study The general idea of the study revolves around the usage of public spaces and change in user perception (before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic). It is therefore critical to understand the definition and extent of the public spaces for social use. Our major form of data collection is through primary online surveys which suggest that the general trend in looking at a public space is in the direction of easy-to-access, open to public physical spaces like commercial centers, marketplaces, parks, and plazas. Hence, in order to validate the collected data, we aim to conduct primary research in Commercial Centre - Moments Mall in Kirti Nagar, Parks - Paschim Vihar District Park, Plaza - Connaught place (Inner circle). The basis of our selection of these spaces constitutes of many factors based on different criteria which are discussed below:
Diversity in type Three spaces of different usage
Variation in Scale and Accessibility A building/group of buildings, a linear street market, an open green space surrounded by residential areas, a plaza being a landmark in the city.
Variation in enclosure type and built form Open Greens, Semi-Open: Plaza, Closed Commercial Center : Malls, Open Commercial Center: Street Shops.
Diversity in ownerships Single/Multiple/Chain ownerships in a space under a company / private: Malls, Single ownerships in a space under government: Marketplaces and plaza, Open spaces under government: Parks. Variation in peak visiting time
Diversity in Purpose of visit Commercial / Recreational / Combination of both.
Variation in neighbourhoods in Delhi West Delhi: Commercial Center, Central Delhi: Plaza and Marketplace, South East Delhi: Park.
3.1.1 DATA AND FINDINGS FROM KIRTI NAGAR To understand the user density at different times of the day in the present scenario, activity mapping was done on weekends as well as on weekdays. In the diagrams below, the intensity of circles represent the density of people. Weekdays
10 am Very low
12 pm low
6 pm low
2 pm medium
8 pm low
4 pm medium
10 pm Very low
Weekends
10 am low
12 pm low
6 pm medium Fig 1: Density Mapping Source : Authors
2 pm low
8 pm low
4 pm medium
10 pm Very low
3.1.2 Time photography (Moments Mall, Kirti Nagar) Photographs were taken at different times of the day by the author to understand the density and the usage of the spaces. This time photography method provides us with clear visuals of how this particular space is being used by the crowd at different times of the day.
10:00 am
02:00 pm
04:00 pm
06:30 pm
Fig 2: Time Photography (Moments Mall) Source : Authors
3.1.3 KEY FINDINGS On weekdays, the peak crowd was observed between 2 PM and 4 PM, whereas on weekends, the peak was observed between 4 PM and 6 PM. In the morning and late evening, the crowd was observed to be at a minimum level. Also another observation was the presence of empty shops due to the less crowd density. Similar data findings and study were done at Connaught place and Paschim Vihar District Park.
3.2 Full Scale Survey A sample space of 10 participants in the form of pilot survey was analyzed to test the relevance of the questionnaires and parameters. Participants belonged to a dynamic user group of public spaces including business, shop owners, workers, students etc. On the basis of close reading of scholarly articles and results of the pilot survey, we revised the questionnaire to conduct a full scale survey. 3.2.1 KEY FINDINGS
Fig 3: Age groups Source : Authors
Fig 4: Change in Public spaces Source : Authors
The survey involved people of various age groups with the majority user group ranging from 21 to 30 years.
Most of the people agreed that there has been the most change in interaction among people.
According to received responses, the most preferred options for public spaces were marketplaces, weekly markets, parks, shopping centers and metro/bus stations. On the contrary, amusement and water parks, public pools and heritage monuments are LESS perceived as public spaces. Q. Is visiting public spaces a health risk now?
Q. Are you willing to take that risk?
Combined result of responses
Fig 5: Risk Attitudes Source : Authors
Around 89% confirmed the increased risk in visiting the public space and 65% said they are willing to take that risk. An important inference from this question is that though people identified the change in risk, there was a portion of 35.8% of people that refused to visit these spaces due to the mental impacts posed by the pandemic. The main reasons for taking the risk to visit a public space comprised of daily purchases, fitness and mental health, and in case of a medical emergency.
3.3 KEY FINDINGS OF THE DELPHI SURVEY With the findings from the online survey, a Delphi survey was then circulated with precise questions and objective responses that enabled the derivation of more quantitative results.
Fig 6: Age Groups Source : Authors
The age group of participants included 16 -25 to with major contributors being of the age group 21-25. The response to the question regarding their engagement in social interaction despite restrictions was recorded according to the age groups as shown in the given diagrams. Q. To what extent are you willing to engage in social interaction despite social distancing/ restrictions in public places? Responses by different age groups:
Fig 7: Age Groups Source : Authors
Age group 16-20
Age group 21-25
Age group 26-30
Age group 30+
3.3.1 Cumulative Results from the Delphi Survey Q : To what extent are you willing to take the risk to visit public spaces ? The responses suggested that only in the case of medical emergencies, people of the age group 16-20 and 21-25 will tend to take risks extensively. People of age 26-30 said they will take moderate risk to visit public spaces only in case of medical emergency and purchase of daily essentials.
Fig 8: Extent to take risks Source : Authors
Q : What is the nature of changes observed in the following places during the Pandemic?
People of age groups 16-20 and 30+ years agreed there has been a maximum observed change in market places. In case of parks, only 30+ age people agreed that there has been a maximum observed change. Other than that, all the places as per all the age groups have moderately changed during the pandemic.
Fig 9: Nature of changes Source : Authors
Q : What is the extent of this change observed in these places ?
People of the 30+ age group agreed that the change in marketplace during the pandemic has been affected at the city level. In the case of marketplaces only, the age group 16-25 thinks that they have been affected at the community level. Age group 16-20 thinks that the parks and streets have been affected at the community level as compared to other age groups who think there has been only a neighbourhood level change.
Fig 10: Extent of Change Source : Authors
4.0 Chapter 4: Actual Present and Possible Future: There was an established image of the physical impact of the pandemic that was experienced through abandoned public spaces and deserted streets during the lockdown. The mental impact of the pandemic observed has been different on every individual, foreseeing a diverse behavioural pattern towards these spaces. It had led to a decrease in socialization and thus changed the characteristics of these urban spaces. Coupled with the findings of the research, it is evident that there is an impact on the general perception, evaluation, and usage of these spaces, quantitatively, before, during, and after the pandemic. The research dwells in the outcome that there was an immense change in the density of users in a space in a pandemic, where the fear of getting exposed to a virus kept people indoors and left the public spaces forsaken. But, there is a large sum of people who think that normalcy could be achieved through preventive measures and a curbed environment. This chunk is major because the public space plays a much vital role in the life of a common man than just for recreation and that for some users, the choice of visiting public spaces does not exist, and taking risks becomes mandatory. It also resonates with the theory of risk-taking attitudes as risk is important for the survival of the human species and the survival of these people depends on these public spaces. The longer the outbreak, the greater will be its impact on the design and planning of these public spaces. Urban design standards for public places are likely to involve spatial distance. In addition, rather than enormous plazas and squares, there may be a trend toward the development of a large number of small-scale public areas within walking distance. Streets are likely to be redesigned promoting more organized patterns, ensuring social distancing and increasing distinct pedestrianization. Moreover, the virtual public spaces have emerged to be new mediums for social interactions and as the pandemic gets extended, the possibility of these online spaces to change our perception towards public spaces will also increase. But, owing to our research findings, there is also a probability that it may also transform our longing for more green open spaces, promising greater sense of community with more planned design decisions. Our research provides possible starting points as a precedent framework that will lead to a better understanding and design of public spaces post COVID - 19 to facilitate appropriate strategies for designers and policymakers. All things considered, from the findings, it is apparent that the change exists, but it also forces us to reflect on whether in case if the pandemic gets severe in the coming times, will the changes observed be permanent or will it fade with time and if it fades, and how much time will it take to subdue the effects caused by the global pandemic. 4.1 Limitations of the research: The COVID-19 outbreak is recent and physical communications are almost non-existential in these times. Although researchers have started to quantify the change; this pandemic brought in our lives, the availability of research material and secondary survey data is still sparse. The primary survey conducted for the different types of public spaces was restricted to specific spaces (Delhi) and crowds due to the limited time frame and accessibility to these spaces. It
was further cross-referenced with an online survey where the maximum number of participants were found to be students in the age group of 18 to 26 years, therefore the answers may be a bit inclined in their favour and may not reflect the most reliable data. The responses collected for the majority of our survey questions are subjective, varying across different age groups and professions, bringing forth the uncertainty of a strong concluding answer to our research question. Hence, the paper is not intended to be a meticulous evaluative research, but indeed weaves a framework for future research. Within the constraints of a limited timeline, this research aims to explore all possible challenges and impacts of the pandemic on the perception and the usage of the public spaces in Indian cities. Author Contributions and Acknowledgments: This research was supported by School of Planning and Architecture, New Delhi. We express our humble gratitude towards our seminar coordinators, Prof. Dr. Ranjana Mittal, Ar. Gunjan Jain, Ar. Priyanka Kochhar and our seminar guide Ar. Sandip Kumar. We also thank the people present at Connaught Place, Moments Mall and Paschim Vihar District Park present on 15th September, 2021, 9th October, 2021 and 10th October, 2021 respectively for providing us with valuable information and all those who took out time from their daily deeds to fill our online questionnaire. References: 1. Chan, H.F., Skali, A., Savage, D.A., Stadelmann, D., Torgler, B., 2020. Risk attitudes and human mobility during the COVID-19 pandemic. Sci. Rep. 10, 19931. https://doi. org/10.1038/s41598-020-76763-2 2.
Eder, S.J., Steyrl, D., Stefanczyk, M.M., Pieniak, M., Martínez Molina, J., Pešout, O., Binter, J Smela, P., Scharnowski, F., Nicholson, A.A., 2021. Predicting fear and perceived health during the COVID-19 pandemic using machine learning: A cross-national longitudinal study. PLOS ONE 16, e0247997. https://doi.org/10.1371/ journal.pone.0247997
3.
Gehl, J., Svarre, B., 2013. Public Space, Public Life: an Interaction, in: Gehl, J., Svarre, B. (Eds.), How To Study Public Life. Island Press/Center for Resource Economics, Washington, DC, pp. 1–8. https://doi.org/10.5822/978-1-61091-525-0_1
4.
Gould, S. Jay, Eldredge, N., 1993. Punctuated equilibrium comes of age. Nature 366, 223–227. https://doi.org/10.1038/366223a0
5.
Habermas, J., 1989. The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry into a Category of Bourgeois Society, Studies in Contemporary German Social Thought. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, USA.
6.
Honey-Roses, J., Anguelovski, I., Bohigas, J., Chireh, V., Daher, C., Konijnendijk, C., Litt, J., Mawani, V., McCall, M., Orellana, A., Oscilowicz, E., Sánchez, U., Senbel, M., Tan, X., Villagomez, E., Zapata, O., Nieuwenhuijsen, M., 2020. The Impact of COVID-19 on Public Space: A Review of the Emerging Questions (preprint). Open
Science Framework. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/rf7xa
7.
Hunter, R.F., Christian, H., Veitch, J., Astell-Burt, T., Hipp, J.A., Schipperijn, J., 2015. The impact of interventions to promote physical activity in urban green space: A systematic review and recommendations for future research. Soc. Sci. Med. 124, 246– 256. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2014.11.051
8.
In a post-COVID world, rethinking public spaces in Indian cities, and the need for spatial interventions-India News , Firstpost [WWW Document], 2020. . Firstpost. URL https://www.firstpost.com/india/in-a-post-covid-world-rethinking-public-spaces-in- indian-cities-and-the-need-for-spatial-interventions-8734241.html (accessed 9.1.21).
9.
Jacobs, J., 2016. The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group.
10. Knoblauch, H., Herbrik, R., n.d. Erving Goffman: Social Embarrassment and Social Organization. Hauptwerke Emot. 140–143. 11. Mansouri Daneshvar, M.R., Khatami, F., Zahed, F., 2017. Ecological carrying capacity of public green spaces as a sustainability index of urban population: a case study of Mashhad city in Iran. Model. Earth Syst. Environ. 3, 1161–1170. https://doi. org/10.1007/s40808-017-0364-2 12. Nagrika - City Futures: Places in our spaces [WWW Document], n.d. . Nagrika. URL https:// www.nagrika.org/covid19-response/cityfutures-placesandspaces (accessed 9.1.21). 13.
Paköz, M.Z., Sözer, C., Doğan, A., 2021. Changing perceptions and usage of public and pseudo-public spaces in the post-pandemic city: the case of Istanbul. URBAN Des. Int. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-020-00147-1
14.
Szczepańska, A., Pietrzyka, K., 2021. The COVID-19 epidemic in Poland and its influence on the quality of life of university students (young adults) in the context of restricted access to public spaces. Z. Gesundheitswissenschaften J. Public Health 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10389-020-01456-z
15.
Tactical Urbanism : An adaptive tool for safe distancing [WWW Document], n.d. . WRI INDIA. URL https://wri-india.org/blog/tactical-urbanism-adaptive-tool-safe- distancing (accessed 9.1.21).
16.
The Human Condition: Second Edition, Arendt, Canovan, Allen [WWW Document], n.d. URL https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/H/bo29137972.html (accessed 9.22.21)
17.
Wakker, P.P., n.d. Prospect Theory: For Risk and Ambiguity 109.
18.
Whyte, W.H., 1980. The Social Life Of Small Urban Spaces. Project for Public Spaces Inc, New York, NY.