State-of-the-Art Carlos Smaniotto Costa · Ina Šuklje Erjavec

Therese Kenna · Michiel de Lange

Konstantinos Ioannidis · Gabriela Maksymiuk
Martijn de Waal (Eds.)
Survey LNCS 11380

CyberParks –
The Interface Between People,
Places and Technology
New Approaches and Perspectives
Lecture Notes in Computer Science 11380
Commenced Publication in 1973
Founding and Former Series Editors:
Gerhard Goos, Juris Hartmanis, and Jan van Leeuwen

Editorial Board
David Hutchison
Lancaster University, Lancaster, UK
Takeo Kanade
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Josef Kittler
University of Surrey, Guildford, UK
Jon M. Kleinberg
Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA
Friedemann Mattern
ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
John C. Mitchell
Stanford University, Stanford, CA, USA
Moni Naor
Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
C. Pandu Rangan
Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Chennai, India
Bernhard Steffen
TU Dortmund University, Dortmund, Germany
Demetri Terzopoulos
University of California, Los Angeles, CA, USA
Doug Tygar
University of California, Berkeley, CA, USA
More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/7409
Carlos Smaniotto Costa Ina Šuklje Erjavec
•

Therese Kenna Michiel de Lange

•

Konstantinos Ioannidis Gabriela Maksymiuk

•

Martijn de Waal (Eds.)

CyberParks –
The Interface Between People,
Places and Technology
New Approaches and Perspectives
Editors
Carlos Smaniotto Costa Konstantinos Ioannidis
Universidade Lusófona aaiko arkitekter
Lisbon, Portugal Oslo, Norway
Ina Šuklje Erjavec Gabriela Maksymiuk
Urban Planning Institute Warsaw University of Life Sciences
of the Republic of Slovenia Warsaw, Poland
Ljubljana, Slovenia
Martijn de Waal
Therese Kenna Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences
University College Cork Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Cork, Ireland
Michiel de Lange
Utrecht University
Utrecht, The Netherlands

ISSN 0302-9743 ISSN 1611-3349 (electronic)

Lecture Notes in Computer Science
ISBN 978-3-030-13416-7 ISBN 978-3-030-13417-4 (eBook)
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4

Library of Congress Control Number: 2019931991

LNCS Sublibrary: SL3 – Information Systems and Applications, incl. Internet/Web, and HCI

Acknowledgement and Disclaimer

This publication is based upon work from COST Action TU1306, supported by COST (European
Cooperation in Science and Technology).
The book reflects only the authors’ views. Neither the COST Association nor any person acting on its behalf
is responsible for the use, which might be made of the information contained in this publication. The COST
Association is not responsible for external websites referred to in this publication.

© The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2019. This book is an open access publication.
Open Access This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International
License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution
and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and
the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this book are included in the book’s Creative Commons license,
unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the book’s Creative
Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use,
you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder.
The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication
does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant
protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.
The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are
believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors
give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or
omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG
The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland
 COST

This publication is based upon work from COST Action TU1306, supported by COST
(European Cooperation in Science and Technology).
COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) is a funding agency for
research and innovation networks. Our Actions help connect research initiatives across
Europe and enable scientists to grow their ideas by sharing them with their peers. This
boosts their research, career and innovation.

www.cost.eu

Funded by the Horizon 2020 Framework

Programme of the European Union
 Preface

This book presents different challenges related to public open spaces and people, the
relationships between them and possible roles of digital technology in this relation-
ship. It is a book about a phenomenon that is increasingly being in the centre of
sciences and strategies – the penetration of digital technologies in the urban space and
related different approaches, methods, empirical studies, open questions and concerns.
It brings together research work results, ideas, discussions and experiences of different
participants of the Project CyberParks, fostering knowledge about the relationship
between information and communication technologies and public spaces supported by
strategies to improve their use and attractiveness (www.cyberparks-project.eu), that
was founded by the H2020 European Programme Cooperation in Science and Tech-
nology (COST) in the period of April 2014 to April 2018 (https://www.cost.eu/actions/
TU1306).
As a network, CyberParks opened opportunities for participants with different
professional experiences and backgrounds, coming from 31 different countries to
gather and explore, from different perspectives, the emerging challenge that digital
technology advancements and their increasing pervasiveness pose to the production
and use of public open spaces. Such endeavour called for interdisciplinary research, in
order to advance fundamental understanding on issues that go beyond the scope of a
single field of research practice.
As the main outcome of the CyberParks Project, this book aims at fostering the
understanding about the current and future interactions of the nexus people, public
spaces and technology. It addresses a wide range of challenges and multidisciplinary
perspectives on emerging phenomena related to the penetration of technology in
people’s lifestyles – affecting therefore the whole of society and, with this, the pro-
duction and use of public open spaces. CyberParks coined the term “cyberpark” to
describe the mediated public open space, that emerging type of urban space where
nature and cybertechnologies blend together to generate hybrid experiences and
enhance quality of life. The latter issue – enhancing quality of life – has been a crucial
aspect in the project, as the lure of technology should not be in place towards creating
high-tech places but rather places that are inclusive and responsive. In a cyberpark, ICT
and their devices are a driving force, media and tool, which act as a mediator between
users and the virtual and real worlds. And that in turn could fuel a greater attachment of
people to places. As a new space typology and/or as a new layer, a cyberpark has the
potential to attract people to spend more time outdoors, to challenge new ways of
outdoor activities and as interfaces to support new ways of co-creation. A cyberpark
calls to generate innovative solutions, and thus encourage also new investment, and
spur economic growth. These should be reasons enough to create more mediated public
open spaces – an assumption that was widely reflected in the Project and is now widely
addressed in the chapters of this book.
VIII Preface

The concept of cyberpark, a complex system at the crossroads of different disci-

plines, is approached from different aspects and points of view – all aiming at devel-
oping a systematic understanding of how people use media, senseable and locative
technologies in their appropriation of places, and at making sense out of a place’s new
intangible properties.
This book represents our own experiences of this journey, in a given timeframe and
financial support for networking. Given the high interdisciplinarity of the CyberParks
issues, it called for the need of a structured dialogue and a common understanding
between the disciplines. From the perspective of cyberparks, technology can be used to
“engage” users as co-creators of the production and management of public spaces.
However, it is relevant to state that the technology penetration alone will not raise an
active contribution for increasing the quality, inclusiveness and responsiveness of
public spaces – as the digital/virtual world is not a substitute of the physical place.
Technology must be coupled with “human” knowledge, towards preserving and
increasing the different benefits, functions and “interpretations” of a public space, and
towards avoiding the sameness, and bland and uninteresting places. In this process,
technology in a constant development assumes an important role in shaping the future.
Hence, the digital technologies and tools must be better understood and shaped in order
to be properly used in transforming public spaces into more inclusive and responsive
places. This leads us to the next question of whether augmented reality and senseable
places will bring more people outdoors, increase the use of public places and connect
people with nature. In short, does technology provide meaningful structures for sus-
tained actions towards increasing quality of urban life?

COST Action CyberParks: A Think Tank

The CyberParks Project has focused its attention on information and communications
technology (ICTs) as an active interface between the production of knowledge about
the use of urban public space (research purposes) and guidance for interventions
(policies and design practices). The penetration of technology in people’s life and the
use of the city is transforming our physical living space into a meditated and hybrid
place. The digital development poses a societal challenge with reflections on social
practices and on planning and design approaches to public spaces. This, in turn, might
also challenge the future development of ICTs and their devices. Four years ago we
embarked on an expedition marked by the rapid transformation of the urban landscape,
growing of pervasive and ubiquitous computing, improved data interpretation tech-
nologies and a corresponding explosion of data, etc. The CyberParks initial idea grew
to 88 researchers from 31 countries (as of April 2018). CyberParks understands itself as
a research platform on the relationship between ICT and the production of public open
spaces, and the relevance of both to sustainable urban development. As a COST
Action, CyberParks had limited researching and working activities but they were also
flexible enough to face the challenges and to provide the financial means to the ideas
that arose and discuss them – and financing is a crucial issue in research that takes up
challenges and innovation in urban development and is not a target of creating new
markets. Five working groups were tasked with dealing with relevant issues (digital
 Preface IX

methods, urban ethnography, conceptual reflection, designing a cyberpark and dis-

semination activities) aiming at providing insights and enhancing the conceptualisation
of the mediated space and of the social practices under the influence of technology.
The COST framework financed the costs for the setting up of meetings and con-
ferences, the organisation of scientific exchanges of short duration, training schools,
and publications and dissemination activities. The flexible structure and the simple
implementation and management initiatives enabled CyberParks to organise ten
working groups meetings in different European cities, send 28 researchers for short
scientific missions, and organise two conferences, a midterm in Malta in April 2016
and the Final Conference in Berlin in 2018. CyberParks was fortunate to count on the
commitment of the participants, who in every single initiative demonstrated great
motivation, dedication and vigour. The great commitment has also been a challenge for
the management, as not all participants could always be invited. The COST enabled
CyberParks to also organise capacity-building initiatives besides the aforementioned
short missions, four different training schools tackling different issues and in different
cities (Thessaloniki, Amsterdam, Lisbon and Nicosia) could be organised, in these
training schools 77 young professionals widely discussed the issues with invited tutors.
These training schools, linking up high-quality scientific networks across Europe, thus
paid particular attention to young researchers in offering a discussion forum and net-
working opportunities tailored to their requests.
CyberParks, grasping the idea of the mediated and hybrid place, investigated the
shape and scope of ICT impacts and the opportunities digital technology and mobile
devices created to improve the legibility and liveability of public spaces, as well as new
forms of integrating people’s needs into urban design processes – on these issues
participation in several international conferences and publications could be organised.
All these publications are open source and available on the Project’s website as part
of the concept of sharing knowledge. Sharing knowledge is a step towards CyberParks
leading issues: to use ICT to transform our cities into more human environment, rather
than just more high-tech and to understand that “smartness” should be people friendly
and a democratic process. Place-making, co-creation and inclusiveness to be helped
through the advances in technology are seen as an opportunity to bring people together
to engage with the production of public spaces and to create and support opportunities
and capacities for people to transact with others for a common good.

Book Structure

The chapters of this book originate from different writing teams, organised across the
five CyberParks’ working groups. A call for chapters was launched by an Editorial
Board organised to coordinate the production of this book. The Editorial Board
members were also responsible for the peer review process, and this ensured double
reviews per chapter. The two reviewers were selected according to the chapter topics.
In a final process the chapters were again reviewed by the Editors-in-Chief, who with
the Editorial Board members structured the chapters into the four parts. Each part was
coordinated by two editors who guided the development of the chapters, and now
present and discuss them in the introduction of each part. This editorial approach (peer
X Preface

review process, international and interdisciplinary writing teams) reflects the accen-
tuated internationality and multidisciplinarity of the CyberParks Project. Although this
book is not the place to discuss the influence of new technologies on a general basis, it
does, however, focus on the ability of digital technology to enhance communication
and interaction with (potential) users, as a way to transform the production and uses of
public spaces into an interactive process, enabling creative community participation
and empowerment.
By casting light on this emerging urban phenomenon – the mediated public space –
this book presents as pioneer case the relationship of people and technology with
places. It illuminates paradigm shifts, introduces new concepts, visions and future
trends, addresses challenges, new approaches, innovative tools and adaptive research
methodologies, and it provides arguments for policy design and challenges practices
for future planning of public open spaces. The spirit of internationality and in particular
of transdisciplinarity is the common thread in this book. It is a witness of an intensified
co-operation among the partners and the critical discussions to facilitate the advance-
ment of knowledge.
Altogether 24 chapters, prepared by international writing teams, are arranged under
the four broad themes:
• Part I explores the concept of CyberParks, its theoretical background and how the
notion of the mediated place evolved.
• Part II centres its focus on socio-spatial practices towards increasing the knowledge
of people and their relations with the space, since it is people who bring life to
public spaces.
• Part III focuses on programming and activating cyberparks, on what has to be done
to turn mediated spaces into places for learning, gaming and to make use of the
potential of public spaces to increase the resilience of cities.
• Part IV dealing with technological challenges and research methodologies addresses
the potential of technologies to increase the understanding of the relationship
between people and places.
The issues addressed are preliminary in nature and are intended to provide starting
arguments for further investigation in this field, in particular because of the accelerating
development of technology and constant changes in opportunities for the adoption of
devices and technology-based new products and services. The constant and accelerated
development creates a challenging environment to study the social, cultural, political
and urban impacts of digital technology advancements. The overarching intention
behind introducing concepts, perspectives and methods is not to generate a compre-
hensive inventory on the interaction of technology into the urban space but above all to
initiate a debate carefully considering crucial factors such as people, methods and
methodologies in the production of public spaces. The quest remains in how to translate
the technical development into more liveable and people-friendly environments.
 Preface XI

Outlook and Acknowledgements

We wish to thank the chapter editors for their engagement with the CyberParks Project
and with this book, the authors for their contributions, both together ensure that this
book increases the understanding of the manifold relationships between public spaces
and new technologies, their role in shaping public behaviour and sense of the common
along with insights to enhance and take forward some key conceptual theoretical and
methodological debates in the urban development and beyond. We hope that Cyber-
Parks, its findings condensed in this book, and the issues it explores can push forward
the discussion around delivering safe, inviting and inspiring public spaces for all. We
hope that the discussion started within the Project will last and will be transformed into
action, empowering people with the knowledge and tools to support the social and
physical changes needed to transform the urban environment into a more liveable and
responsible space. We must be ready to nurture the innovation that the future holds –
the future of the urban environment depends very much on actions taken today.
Finally, we want to thank the COST Programme for the trust placed in the
CyberParks network.

October 2018 Carlos Smaniotto Costa

Ina Šuklje Erjavec
 Contents

Part I The Unveiling Potential of Cyberparks

1.1 The Rationale of CyberParks and the Potential of Mediated Public

Open Spaces. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Carlos Smaniotto Costa and Ina Šuklje Erjavec

1.2 Heterotopic Landscapes: From GreenParks to Hybrid Territories . . . . . . 14

Catarina Patrício, Christoph Breser, and Konstantinos Ioannidis

1.3 Cybercities: Mediated Public Open Spaces - A Matter of Interaction

and Interfaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Stefan Zedlacher, Anna Khromova, Eva Savina Malinverni,
and Preben Hansen

1.4 Liveable Open Public Space - From Flaneur to Cyborg . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Aleksandra Djukic, Thanos Vlastos, and Viera Joklova

1.5 Exploring the Concept of Cyberpark: What the Experts Think . . . . . . . 50

Paschalis Arvanitidis, Konstantinos Lalenis, Georgios Artopoulos,
and Montserrat Pallares-Barbera

Part II Socio-Spatial Practices

2.1 Socio-Spatial Practices: An Introduction and Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

Therese Kenna and Gabriela Maksymiuk

2.2 People - Space - Technology: An Ethnographic Approach . . . . . . . . . . 76

Marluci Menezes, Paschalis Arvanitidis, Therese Kenna,
and Petja Ivanova-Radovanova

2.3 Public Space Engagement and ICT Usage by University Students:

An Exploratory Study in Three Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
Paschalis Arvanitidis, Therese Kenna, and Gabriela Maksymiuk

2.4 Teenagers’ Perception of Public Spaces and Their Practices

in ICTs Uses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
Marluci Menezes, Paschalis Arvanitidis, Carlos Smaniotto Costa,
and Zvi Weinstein

2.5 Challenging Methods and Results Obtained from User-Generated

Content in Barcelona’s Public Open Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120
Montserrat Pallares-Barbera, Elena Masala, Jugoslav Jokovic,
Aleksandra Djukic, and Xavier Albacete
XIV Contents

2.6 Social Implications of New Mediated Spaces: The Need

for a Rethought Design Approach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 137
Antoine Zammit, Therese Kenna, and Gabriela Maksymiuk

Part III Programming and Activating Cyberparks

3.1 Programming and Activating Cyberparks: An Introduction

and Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
Michiel de Lange and Martijn de Waal

3.2 Smart Citizens in the Hackable City: On the Datafication, Playfulness,

and Making of Urban Public Spaces Through Digital Art . . . . . . . . . . . 157
Michiel de Lange, Kåre Synnes, and Gerald Leindecker

3.3 Using ICT in the Management of Public Open Space as a Commons. . . 167
Georgios Artopoulos, Paschalis Arvanitidis, and Sari Suomalainen

3.4 Revealing the Potential of Public Places: Adding a New Digital Layer
to the Existing Thematic Gardens in Thessaloniki Waterfront . . . . . . . . 181
Tatiana Ruchinskaya, Konstantinos Ioannidis, and Kinga Kimic

3.5 Cyberpark, a New Medium of Human Associations, a Component

of Urban Resilience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196
Konstantinos Lalenis, Balkiz Yapicioglou,
and Petja Ivanova-Radovanova

3.6 A Spotlight of Co-creation and Inclusiveness of Public Open Spaces . . . 209

Ina Šuklje Erjavec and Tatiana Ruchinskaya

3.7 CyberParks Songs and Stories - Enriching Public Spaces

with Localized Culture Heritage Material such as Digitized Songs
and Stories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
Kåre Synnes, Georgios Artopoulos, Carlos Smaniotto Costa,
Marluci Menezes, and Gaia Redaelli

Part IV Digital Hybrids - Between Tool and Methods

4.1 Digital Hybrids - Between Tool and Methods: An Introduction

and Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
Konstantinos Ioannidis and Carlos Smaniotto Costa

4.2 Methodological Approaches to Reflect on the Relationships

Between People, Spaces, Technologies. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251
Barbora Čakovská, Mária Bihuňová, Preben Hansen,
Ernesto Marcheggiani, and Andrea Galli
 Contents XV

4.3 Modelling Co-creation Ecosystem for Public Open Spaces . . . . . . . . . . 262

Aelita Skarzauskiene, Monika Maciuliene,
and Petja Ivanova-Radovanova

4.4 Using ICTs for the Improvement of Public Open Spaces:

The Opportunity Offered by CyberParks Digital Tools . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278
Eneko Osaba, Roberto Pierdicca, Tiago Duarte, Alfonso Bahillo,
and Diogo Mateus

4.5 A Pedagogical Model for CyberParks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294

Philip Bonanno, Michal Klichowski, and Penelope Lister

4.6 The Application of Advanced IoT in Cyberparks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308

Jamal Raiyn and Jugoslav Jokovic

Author Index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323

 Part I The Unveiling Potential
of Cyberparks

Edited by Carlos Smaniotto and Ina Šuklje-Erjavec

1.1
The Rationale of CyberParks and the Potential
of Mediated Public Open Spaces

Carlos Smaniotto Costa1(&) and Ina Šuklje Erjavec2

1
Interdisciplinary Research Centre for Education and Development CeiED,
Universidade Lusófona, Lisbon, Portugal
[email protected]
2
Urban Planning Institute of the Republic of Slovenia UIRS,
Ljubljana, Slovenia
[email protected]

Abstract. Cybertechnologies are changing the world, both in terms of socia-

bility and subjectivity, and consequently how people experience the city,
appreciate urban landscape and nature, along with the way people interrelate to
each other and with the space. The penetration of ICT into urban landscapes has
increased the open space typology, adding a concept of ‘cyberpark’ to it – the
public open space where nature, society, and cybertechnologies blend together
to generate hybrid experiences and enhance quality of urban life. A cyberpark
evolves through different ways of the implementation and use of digital tech-
nologies into a new type of a connectable, real-time responsive, sharing and
integrating public place, in which, the physical dimension of a space becomes a
more dynamic and blurred form of interaction This calls for understanding such
hybrid spaces as more than a simple new spatial unit of urban tissue. This
chapter proposes a conceptual framework for a better understanding of inter-
weaving between physical and virtual spheres in public open spaces and
addresses the results of the COST Action CyberParks. It explores, in terms of
policy-making, urban planning and design, the numerous challenges and
opportunities created by digital and mobile technologies. The efforts of this
work are thus centred on the potential of ICT to increased possibilities for new
uses and elements or even types of urban open spaces, as an important added
value to the quality of life, inclusiveness, responsiveness and attractiveness of
the city. In critically addressing opportunities, the chapter shall seek to question
and challenge, the more ‘traditional’ understanding of what makes a good public
place. In doing so, it shall attempt to provide pointers towards a re-
conceptualised view of urban space design/production and (planning)
control/guidance.

Keywords: Public open spaces
Digitally mediated spaces
Hybrid spaces

Urban landscape
Urban design

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 3–13, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_1
4 C. Smaniotto Costa and I. Šuklje Erjavec

1 Digital Technology and Urban Landscape

The rapid and pervasive development of digital and mobile technologies is drastically
influencing everyday life of the average citizens, changing behaviour and interests. The
digital development, as stated by Castells (2004) is not limited to a technological
paradigm but comprises a broad process of computerisation of thought, knowledge,
culture and social organization, and these in turn affect the physical and social urban
landscape. The proliferation of smartphones and ubiquitous Internet access are changing
the way people work, learn and communicate. These also reflect in the way people use,
perceive and experience the city, along with the way they spent their leisure time. It
seems that people, especially the young generation, are attaching a growing importance
to be permanently connected, as the studies of Bocci and Smaniotto (2017), Menezes
et al. (2017) organised within CyberParks evidence. Young generation growing up in
the digital age are linked to social media, smart phones and apps, and they use and
perceive them almost as new, additional senses. No doubt that technology yields the
enormous benefits that were not available in the recent past but also confronts urban
development with new societal and spatial design challenges. Furthermore, new tech-
nologies are opening new opportunities for the production and management of urban
spaces, creating new forms of use as well as for research on public open spaces.
The CyberParks Project addresses the need for a conceptual framework for the
production of mediated public spaces in urban development - different approaches and
concerns are tackled in this book. The Project coined the term cyberpark to define a new
aspect of public open spaces, now intertwined in diverse ways by technologies. This
intertwining creates a dynamic environment and gives rise to the phenomenon of
mediated open space - where physical and the digital coexists and complement each
other. The cyberpark concept defines a digitally mediated public open space as space
where nature, society, and cybertechnologies blend together to generate hybrid expe-
riences, opening new possibilities of use and enhancing quality of urban life. To be
responsive as possible, a cyberpark is often characterised by the use of sensor tech-
nologies in a connectable space, accessible to the public through ubiquitous technolo-
gies used in sociable and sharable ways1. A cyberpark thus enables to cross borders and
to extrapolate the real world with the virtual world. It creates new ways of immersion,
use and management of public open spaces, and by adding new angles of perception and
involvement. By attaching a meaning to the public spaces, a cyberpark contributes to the
mutation of a space into a place. In this respect, a number of key issues relating to
spaces, public spaces and places need to be addressed as a background frame.

2 Public Open Spaces in the Core of Research

The work in a multidisciplinary atmosphere and tackling different aspects of the digital
development, as in CyberParks, make the call to create a common ground for under-
standing. Although it is not the intention to widely discuss a series of issues, there are

1
This definition was developed by Working Group 4 (Designing CyberParks).
 The Rationale of CyberParks and the Potential of Mediated Public Open Spaces 5

terms that merit further assessment to be understood in the scope of the Project and this
book. In CyberParks, urban landscape is considered as a complexity of various aspects,
forming different visible features of a city, as a result of land take by humans. It
includes a vast variety of natural, semi-natural and man-made/artificial environments.
From CyberParks’ perspective the special focus has been on publicly accessible spaces.
For the project use the public open space is understood in its broadest sense: It is a type
of land use, the unbuilt space or space free of large built structures, planned, designed
and managed in public interest with particular purpose, in general by a city council.
The adjective public connotes a space that is generally open and accessible to people on
equal terms. The typology of public open spaces includes spaces for mobility, recre-
ation, for the merit of their environmental benefits, and to address ecology and bio-
diversity, and public health. Among them are streets and walkways, squares, plazas,
market places, parks, green spaces, greenways, community gardens, playgrounds,
waterfronts, etc., each one playing different but vital roles in a city. A city with a wide
range of open space typology is more likely to be able to open different possibilities for
use and to fulfil equivalently the different needs, preferences and expectations (re-
sponsiveness) of different users’ groups (inclusiveness), and welcoming atmosphere for
all, not only in physical, but also in psychological and social senses, forming territorial
identity and image (Šuklje Erjavec 2010). Henceforth, the term public spaces will be
used, independent of different connotations and features they might have.
Public spaces are widely recognised as a crucial aspect of sustainability and people
friendly development of cities and play a relevant role for the quality of urban life.
There is a consensus that the creation of healthy, attractive and sustainable urban
environment not only depends on the presence, distribution, interconnection and
accessibility to open spaces, but also their usability in terms of attractiveness,
responsiveness, and inclusiveness. A growing body of research indicates their envi-
ronmental, social, cultural and economic values and benefits (GreenKeys 2008). For
CyberParks, the social quality of an open space is in the centre of attention, as they
allow people to gather together, in planned and serendipitous ways, to interact with
other people, with the community and the environment. An open space enables people
to be in public, to practice sociability on neutral ground, in green spaces to contact with
nature, providing them the ground for a variety of every day and occasional activities
and experiences. An open space is thus the place for communication, interaction,
connection and encounters, for inhabitants and visitors, as well as place to express
cultural diversity. The social interactions are important for defining a sense of place, for
contributing to people’s physical, cultural, and spiritual well-being (Šuklje Erjavec
2010), for the personal development and social learning, and for the development of
tolerance (Larice and Macdonald 2013). This is an interesting line of though as it
suggests, as Amin (2006) argued that the free and unfettered socialising in an open
public space encourages forbearance towards others, pleasure in the urban experience,
appreciation for the shared commons, and an interest in civic and political life.
Public spaces can be regarded as the soul of a city. Their qualities validate the
assumption that they reflect the attention and care by councils of the public realm. As it
is in public spaces that some of the best and the worst characteristics of urban life and
society are created, observed and reproduced (Šuklje Erjavec 2010). In fact, one of the
main factors that determines the appropriation of a place and the resulting people’s
6 C. Smaniotto Costa and I. Šuklje Erjavec

behaviour in this place, is the intrinsic connection between urban design, and more in
particular the design of public spaces. Carmona et al. (2010: 106) aptly pointed out,
that human behaviour in the public realm is largely influenced by the amenities and
facilitates provided. The design and elements provided in a public space provide
opportunities for staying, doing activities and interactions - enhancing community life,
or alternatively their absence does not enact such actions. If public spaces are not
located where people need them, if they are not safe and easy to access, if do not meet
the needs and expectations of people no one will use them. How can people value an
old tree if there is none there, or stay and enjoy the sunshine if there no benches to sit?
Such aspects are relevant if the call for getting people to be outdoors, and to lead to an
active and healthy lifestyle is to succeed. Quite conversely and for sure not future-
oriented is the development in several American cities as Crawford (2017) reports,
where benches are being teared out from the urban landscape as an effort to not offer
opportunities for vagrancy and crime, so homeless people and loiterers cannot settle.
Such development, that could be called anti-design is for sure bad for publicness and
urban life.
Such development made raise to tackle the concern on inclusiveness. No doubt,
urban societies are facing concerns due to expanding social diversification, what blurs
and dilutes the concept of cohesive society (Holland et al. 2007), and this makes the
design of public places meant to be for all in such society more difficult and chal-
lenging. Inclusiveness has to do with offering adequate and balanced opportunity for all
in the appropriation of public spaces. In fact, the concentration of unwanted, disad-
vantaged and vulnerable groups in public spaces creates a sense of insecurity and
entrapment, turning communication often difficult, as different social groups use dif-
ferent languages and have different attitudes and frameworks (Madanipour et al. 2014).
And these also make interactions more difficult.
Different appropriation patterns of children, teenagers and adults, diverging
expectations of women and men regarding public spaces, as well as dissimilar aesthetic
preferences depending on social groups (Löw 2015) put pressure on the design, pro-
duction and maintenance of public spaces. In Western Europe, inclusiveness calls
above all for making public realm more age-friendly. Tackling such differences should
however be at the same time taking the challenge for creating new opportunities. This
includes the analysis of practices of negotiating the urban environment, what in the end
leads to shaping civic and political culture. This argument endorses again a wide range
of typology of public spaces, as the more different spaces (with different sizes and
features) provided, the more opportunities people have to appropriate and enjoy,
enlivening in this way the urban environment. Jacobs (1961) also recognises that “cities
have the capability of providing something for everybody, only because, and only
when, they are created by everybody”, and this “created” must be a result of delib-
erated, pro-active urban policy.
CyberParks is addressing potentials of new digital technologies to open new
opportunities for improving inclusiveness of public open spaces from several aspects.
Another paramount issue related to the public space is the place-responsive concept. It
is related to the inclusiveness, as a public space being inclusive should meet the need,
preferences and expectations of users but also introduces a dynamic time-change frame
for a nowadays rapid changing society. Responsiveness is another aspect considered a
 The Rationale of CyberParks and the Potential of Mediated Public Open Spaces 7

crucial in CyberParks. It addresses the people friendliness of the urban landscape and it
should go beyond recreation (Turner 2004) creating “places” for new needs and
activities, new way of uses and experiences (Thompson 2002). Therefore, a public
space with its own logic and dynamism, must be able to cope with changes over time,
and has accordingly to be able to respond to these changes. The technological
advancements are undoubtedly developing a new wide range of possibilities of real
time and place responsiveness, in different ways, aspects and intensities, challenging
open space planners, designers and managers to use them within their co-creation
processes and design solutions.
CyberParks’ understanding of public spaces indicates a complex and multi-faceted
perspective, blending the physical characteristics of the space with attached values,
memories, stories, art, etc. The addition of such attachments, be them individual or
collective, is the enabler of turning a space into a place (the aforementioned mutation).
While space is related to something abstract, devoid of a substantial meaning, place
refers to how people are aware of, and attracted to a certain piece of space. A place is
thus the result of a process of identification between people and a space, which holds a
creative tension between deep experience and critical awareness.
Such broader perception of public open space as a cumulative and undivided
resource is the vital basis for its strategic planning, design and management, and now to
be enhanced by technology. For the sake of clarity and simplicity, and because it best
captures what people care most about, CyberParks adopted the concept of public open
space as drawn broadly to recognise the intersection of built-social as well as virtual
environment and their influences in the socio-spatial practices. Thus, the typology of
public spaces addressed by CyberParks encompasses both physical space and the
virtual meeting places in form of social media, those however devoted to public spaces
concerns.

3 The Potential of Digitally Enhanced Public Spaces:

Cyberpark’s Added Values

In a mediated public space, as CyberParks advocates, technology is at the same time

the fuel that drives a paradigm shift to combat the previously mentioned threats. This
raises the questions, which are also simultaneous challenges: What are the possible
benefits of enhanced public spaces? How cyberpark’s value differs from a non-
mediated public space? How to respond with innovative solutions that are smart and
interactive, while helping and attracting people to establish an active and healthy
lifestyle? Is it necessary to develop new elements, equipment or new design approa-
ches? The answers take the production of open spaces out from previously easily
demarcated planning sciences, to an interdisciplinary domain, where it can benefit from
synergies. As already noted, use of ICT as a part of public open space development is a
challenge to (re) invent, experiment, stimulate certain processes, programmes, usages,
and social interactions within public spaces, these opportunities are explored in the
forthcoming chapters.
Public space getting mediated, is developing a new layer of use, perception and
functioning, is becoming a place of extension and emplacement, i.e. a finitely real
8 C. Smaniotto Costa and I. Šuklje Erjavec

public space is becoming by grids and networks enhanced. The penetration of ICT
makes more than a clear-cut distinction of the physical to the virtual world, it trans-
forms the public space in dualities, as open and isolated, universal and particular,
juxtaposed and disaggregated, collective und individualized, raising heterotopias, the
places of otherness (Patricio 2017). The point it that the interrelations between digital
technology and cities are being mostly discussed within technology-driven visions,
smart cities policies with particular emphasis on digital infrastructure, urban data,
energy and mobility issues are playing a decisive role. Increasingly, however, more
authors emphasise the importance of people-oriented aspects, especially if the goal is to
improve inclusiveness and responsiveness of urban fabric. Backed by a people’s
centred approach CyberParks concentrates the efforts primary on opportunities and
positive aspects of the technology pervasiveness. Equitable use, flexibility and inno-
vation in appropriation of public spaces, design applications, perceptive information,
sensitive (senseable) environments are issues that guided the Project. It collected and
systematised several examples of the penetration of technology into public spaces,
these are available in the Pool of Examples2. With the Pool CyberParks seeks to
increase the understanding of the benefits of technology to enhance places in order to
achieve an added value (i.e. new outdoor experiences, new possibilities of use, new
types of spaces).
A growing body of research is concerned with the challenges and threats of
technology. Reports about technology addiction, interpersonal communication and
interaction difficulties, loneliness in a hyperconnected world, sedentary life styles, etc.
increasingly call our attention, reminding that people are losing the contact to each
other, with the environment and nature, and becoming prisoner of technology3. Yet, it
is a positive aspect that technology (still) needs user’s engagement. Technology meets
sooner or later face to face with people, and what people do (or don’t) retains ultimate,
as this ensures often that technology works (or not). However, some authors recognize
missing of the required “user engagement”, some of the mentioned reasons are:
technology gap/divide (the society is not ready for this new technology or people do
not have access to it), reward (people are unable to see the point of this new tech-
nology, it is not clear the immediate reward for using it), trust (the lack of trust on the
provider or the share/use of data, cybersecurity). These issues raise the ultimately
question, of the value of the technology if it doesn’t help to make cities more inclusive,
and public spaces more responsive. Thus, development and use of the technology
cannot be isolated from social and cultural spheres and influences. It must be re-
regarded as a tool or (a set of tools) only developed to facilitate, support and enable a
sustainable way of life. In fact, the growing technology pervasiveness is creating new
forms of social interactions and practices, mediating experiences, transforming (sen-
sory) experiences and opening novel possibilities of engagement, resulting in more
awareness on the environment conditions and quality of life. What seems for the

2
The Pool is available at www.cyberparks-project.eu/examples, and enables the searching, navigating
and adding new examples.
3
Kristen Houghton: “Prisoner of Technology Escapes” in her blog on Mar 27, 2015. https://www.
huffingtonpost.com/kristen-houghton/prisoner-of-technology-es_b_6541452.html.
 The Rationale of CyberParks and the Potential of Mediated Public Open Spaces 9

moment, to be a superficial interaction, could become the embryo of bringing more

people, especially the young ones (the future users of public spaces, and decision
makers) more intensively and more connected with the places. To achieve this need
calls to build sustainable digital-physical bridges.
Another issue to consider is that even “good” technologies will do little good if they
are misapplied or even mature too late to help avert unsustainable and hostile urban
environment. This is further exacerbated by the exceptional speed of the development
of technology, which is very difficult to harmonize in time with changes in society and
possible paces of spatial planning and development. Studying and building a theory on
the planning, environmental and social impacts of ICTs, as well as their political,
economic and cultural contexts, is not an easy task. Technical and technological pro-
gress is breath-taking, and the pace keeps accelerating, but this in turn, results in new
interrelations and interactions of people to and in public spaces.
To understand really the nexus people, places and technology it is important to
understand the difference of the time-change frame of each of the 3 factors in the nexus.
The space itself is the most permanent element of the three thus providing the frame of
physical reality. It also requires, especially in the form of greenspaces that are also very
dependent of natural processes, a long-term planning and strategic development
approach. Processes of deliberate change of place to meet new need and values of
society are usually very slow, always little behind. Urban development reality shows
that time is needed for the society to transform new needs and opportunities into
demands, values and decisions. The gap in the dynamics to react to changes in the
nexus people, places and technology is one of the greatest future challenges to be
addressed and solved in the future of cyberparks development. Public spaces can be the
stress-resilient factor against the volatility of the technological advances. Thus, the
linchpin remains the space.
CyberParks, identifies the technology as a great enabler for engaging with people,
recognises also that technology alone is never the solution. It cannot replace the
“traditional” aspects that are important for people in the use of public spaces as social
cohesion, mental and physical activities and contact with nature. However, the use of
technology as a supporting tool for increasing attractiveness, variety, inclusiveness and
responsiveness of open spaces may be of great added value for their quality and
important step further to the sustainable and people friendly cities in the future.
It is the contention of the discussion to position the cyberpark, the hybrid space, not
only a as key for a more sustainable and inclusive development, but mainly for opening
opportunities towards making urban development interactive. Yet, the real public space
demand and play a major role. Being locally rooted they offer a common ground for
transforming the use and production of public spaces based on co-creation and inter-
active activities. Social media, for example, supports in a low-priced way the inter-
action with a broad range of people, and this can result in increased interest in civic and
political life in the community. Additionally, ICT and mobile devices increased the
ways with new tools and methods of analysing the human spatial behaviour (Aurigi
2013). These goals increase perspectives but also show the multi-faced character of a
public space.
10 C. Smaniotto Costa and I. Šuklje Erjavec

4 Approaching the Cyberparks Concept - Overview

of Chapters

The first part of the book aims at broadening perspectives; it addresses different
background aspects related to the cyberpark concept. The chapters provide multidis-
ciplinary arguments and views for a better understanding the challenges of interaction
between new digital technologies, public open space design and people for future urban
development. In the chapter 1.2 Heterotopic Landscapes: from Green Parks to
Hybrid Territories, Catarina Patrício, Christoph Breser and Konstantinos Ioan-
nidis discuss the cyberpark concept from philosophical aspects. They look at public
spaces beyond their physical manifestation, through the principles of the heterotopia
and the non-place theories. The authors alert that a cyberpark by combining the
physical dimension and image with an information layer result into the hybrid con-
struct, and point out that a hybrid-place that contains the super modern potential needs
to be further explored.
The estimated impact of new technologies on the future urban development if
further explored in the chapter 1.3 Cybercities: Mediated public open spaces - is it a
question about interfaces, Stefan Zedlacher, Anna Khromova, Eva Savina Mal-
inverni, and Preben Hansen argue that the key focus of adding technology to public
spaces must be the quality of the interfaces. In a mediated space, so the authors, the
place itself is covered with information about itself, its history, as well as advertising,
marketing, etc. They point out that in cyberspace the ICT is opening the possibility to
provide personalised information and real time responses. In this context, the interfaces
become of paramount importance, on different levels, changing also the role of the
urban planner. On the other hand, Aleksandra Djukic, Thanos Vlastos and Viera
Joklova in the chapter 1.4 Liveable Opens Public Spaces – from Flaneur to Cyborg
discuss the aspects of quality of public open spaces, their cultural aspects and questions
of functionality, social role and liveability. The authors address the challenges of the
future development and needs of future urban society with the special focus on the
walkability of place.
The last chapter addresses aspects of multidisciplinarity and the understanding of
cyberpark by experts. Paschalis Arvanitidis, Konstantinos Lalenis, Georgios
Artopoulos and Montserrat Pallares-Barbera, in their chapter 1.5 Exploring the
concept of cyberpark: what the experts think discuss an analysis on how the concept
of a cyberpark is differently perceived by the participants of the CyberParks Project, as
they have a wide range of expertise background. The authors address the commonal-
ities and differences of experts’ views regarding both the mediated and the not medi-
ated public open spaces. This chapters contributes to further delineate the scope of a
cyberpark, mapping out its characteristics and dimensions.
 The Rationale of CyberParks and the Potential of Mediated Public Open Spaces 11

5 CyberParks’ Key Findings

Strengthening the link of the nexus people, places and technology, aiming at increasing
the quality of environment is the linchpin and hallmark of CyberParks. The interaction
between people, places and technology raises a series of conceptual complexities,
extrapolating the socio-spatial knowledge in place. The experience in CyberParks
shows that the potential for a transdisciplinary research with a people’s driven approach
has still significant potential for the future. On the one side, there is a wealth of
evidence that engaging people provoke real and sustainable changes in quality of life
and in the urban environment (Šuklje Erjavec 2010; GreenKeys 2008). On the other
side, technology is enabling new forms of space appropriation and attachment. As
Smaniotto Costa et al. (2017a, b) acknowledges, in the process of appropriation,
technology can be the fuel that keeps the attachment in motion, generating innovative
ways not only of use but also the production of public spaces. Further, as the authors
state, technology is shaping and will continue to shape people’s perceptions and social
interactions, and probably the emergence of social and political thoughts, which will
reflect not only in the way people use urban spaces but also on their needs and
requirements regarding the design and quality of these spaces. This in turn, stresses the
role of governance, as the decision-making and participatory processes must be
updated to a mediated world and real-time information systems, as further discussed in
the forthcoming chapters.
On the flip side, the lure for technology and the fast-paced technological innovation
we are experimenting nowadays calls for being attentive and be aware of the risks of a
growing reliance in technology - especially for social interactions and the provision of
personal data. Although accessing technology brings lots of reward and huge benefits
the ultimately satisfying answer to the question what the impact of the mediated space
is to transform the urban environment more inclusive and responsive cannot be
answered yet. The mediated space and cyberpark are issues therefore that will be on our
minds for a long time to come. Among the rewards the technological innovation is
bringing about as tackled in this book, the hyperconnectiveness enables the develop-
ment of new process, methods and tools of co-creation, amalgamating the dual rea-
soning of local and global. Public spaces call for a devoted approach to the
environment where they are attached and to a process riddled with conflict. It is in such
duality that the real and the virtual worlds blend, both in their symbolic function and
social significance. Even in the mediated space there is a constant negotiation of space,
now aggregated with digital inputs, meanings and significances.
The blur of global and local calls also for being attentive to place attachment, which
is the emotional bond between people and place, and is a main concept of place-
responsiveness. This calls for local programmes responsive to the users, addressing the
social dimension of technologies along with environmental resilience, further addres-
sed in this book. This places high demands and calls for creating a learning environ-
ment. A place-responsive approach should provide the space for outdoor education
programmes. CyberParks demonstrated that this is viable and sustainable achievement
and fits well with research needs. Public open spaces bear material and immaterial
features, also the mediated space consists of both – more precisely physical and virtual
12 C. Smaniotto Costa and I. Šuklje Erjavec

dimensions. The material and immaterial features are not inseparable but once tech-
nology intertwined the space, technology becomes itself also a spatial dimension,
which is not fully explored yet. Today and even more so in the future public spaces
have to meet the needs of people and be able to accommodate changes. Technology can
be a key to success.
CyberParks’ pledge is for more nature and not less technology. The mediated
places also need people – real people sharing and interacting in the same space, and not
the remote presence of them. Therefore, the call of CyberParks is towards a multi-
disciplinary perspective on preparing the urban environment to be more inclusive,
responsive, and with them more sustainable and resilient. These issues are the common
thread, that running through the whole CyberParks Project are reflected in this book.
These findings are preliminary in nature and are intended to provide a starting point
for further investigation in a field across disciplines. CyberParks casted its net far and
wide in a bid to capture insights of relevance, drawing on evidence from across a range
of disciplines and policy arenas. Further studies could include investigation via self-
reporting measures that involve subjects as social justice, co-creation and social
reporting. This would need to be supported with a broad policy context associated with
funding. Getting research funding is a perennial obstacle, especially for exploratory
issues. However, further research should endeavour to establish a relationship between
the locational of support structures, public appropriation of these structures and the
relationship with quality of life. It may also be viable to investigate the different types
of digital structures and to determine which are more attractive to the public, more
sustainable, responsible and inclusive.
CyberParks, as an exploratory project, delivers with this book key findings that
reflect the brief period covered by the Project. There remain more questions than
answers regarding the experiences and consequences of the penetration of technology
into public open spaces. CyberParks should be reviewed in some years ahead.

References
Amin, A.: Collective culture and urban public space. CCCB (2006). http://www.publicspace.org/
en/text-library/eng/b003-collective-culture-and-urban-public-space
Aurigi, A.: Reflections towards an agenda for urban-designing the digital city. Urban Des. Int. 18
(2), 131–144 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1057/udi.2012.32
Bocci, M., Smaniotto Costa, C.: Insights on the use of public spaces: leisure behaviours of young
professionals and the role of digital technologies. In: Smaniotto Costa, C., Ioannidis, K. (eds.)
The Making of the Mediated Public Space - Essays on Emerging Urban Phenomena.
CyberParks Project, pp. 109–119. Edições Universitárias Lusófona, Lisbon (2017)
Carmona, M., Tiesdell, S., Heath, T., Oc, T.: Public Places Urban Spaces, the Dimensions of
Urban Design. Architectural Press, Oxford (2010)
Castells, M.: Informationalism, Networks, and the Network Society: A Theoretical Blueprinting,
The Network Society: A Cross-Cultural Perspective. Edward Elgar, Northampton (2004)
Crawford, A.: Cities Take Both Sides in the ‘War on Sitting’. CityLab, 20 October 2017. https://
www.citylab.com/design/2017/10/cities-take-both-sides-in-the-war-on-sitting/542643
GreenKeys Project: GreenKeys @ Your City – A Guide for Urban Green Quality. IOER,
Dresden (2008). www.greenkeys-project.net
 The Rationale of CyberParks and the Potential of Mediated Public Open Spaces 13

Holland, C., Clark, A., Katz, J., Peace, S.: Social Interactions in Urban Public Places. The Policy
Press, Bristol (2007)
Jacobs, J.: The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random House, New York (1961)
Larice, M., Macdonald, E. (eds.): The Urban Design Reader, 2nd edn. Routledge, Abingdon
(2013)
Löw, M.: Managing urban commons: public interest and the representation if interconnectedness.
In: Borch, C., Kornberger, M. (eds.) Urban Commons: Rethinking the City, pp. 109–126.
Routledge, New York (2015)
Madanipour, A., Knierbein, S., Degros, A.: Public Space and the Challenges of Urban
Transformation in Europe. Routledge, New York (2014)
Menezes, M., Smaniotto Costa, C., Ioannidis, K.: Interconnections among ICT, social practices,
public space and urban design. Revista da Associação Portuguesa de Sociologia 11, 6–21
(2016)
Patricio, C.: Smart cities and the re-invention of the Panopticon. In: Smaniotto Costa, C.,
Ioannidis, K. (eds.) The Making of the Mediated Public Space - Essays on Emerging Urban
Phenomena. CyberParks Project, pp. 55–64. Edições Universitárias Lusófona, Lisbon (2017)
Smaniotto Costa, C., Bahillo Martínez, A., Álvarez, F.J., Šuklje Erjavec, I., Menezes, M.,
Pallares-Barbera, M.: Digital tools for capturing user’s needs on urban open spaces: drawing
lessons from Cyberparks project. In: Certomà, C., Dyer, M., Pocatilu, L., Rizzi, F. (eds.)
Citizen Empowerment and Innovation in the Data-Rich City. Springer Tracts in Civil
Engineering, pp. 177–193 (2017a). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-
47904-0_11
Smaniotto Costa, C., Bovelet, J., Dolata, K., Menezes, M.: Building a theory on co-creating a
Cyberpark. Lessons learnt from the COST Action CyberParks and the Flussbad Project,
Berlin. In: Smaniotto Costa, C., Ioannidis, K. (eds.) The Making of the Mediated Public
Space - Essays on Emerging Urban Phenomena. CyberParks Project, pp. 165–174. Edições
Universitárias Lusófonas, Lisbon (2017b)
Šuklje Erjavec, I.: Designing an urban park as a contemporary user-friendly place. In: Marušić,
B.G., Nikšič, M. (eds.) Human Cities - Celebrating Public Space, pp. 39–51. Stichting
Kunstboek, Oostkamp (2010)
Thompson, C.W.: Urban open space in the 21st century. Landsc. Urban Plan. 60(2), 59–72
(2002)
Turner, M.A.: Urban Parks as Partners in Youth Development. Washington, D.C. (2004). https://
doi.org/10.1037/e688712011-001

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
1.2
Heterotopic Landscapes: From GreenParks
to Hybrid Territories

Catarina Patrício1(&) , Christoph Breser2 ,

and Konstantinos Ioannidis3
1
Universidade Lusófona e CECL/ICNOVA, Lisboa, Portugal
[email protected]
2
Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria
[email protected]
3
aaiko arkitekter, Oslo, Norway
[email protected]

Abstract. This chapter develops an interest in clarifying the meaning of

cyberparks through an interrogation beyond its material preconditions. A cyber-
park, as a fold in space generated by a hybrid emergent form of co-mediated
space, is a disjunctive combination: it presupposes an encounter between open
public urban places and the use of ICT tools. Outstretched beyond its physical
manifestation as a place of encounter, a «heterotopic» reading might reveal that
the subject is displaced in many different ways, from the analogue to the digital
landscape, and from the specificity of the local to the universal of the global web.
It is in such transferences that several worlds blend, both in its symbolic function
and social significance. Impacts of such «Other Spaces» on the nature of human
being’s behaviours can be critically reflected by the consideration of the social
role of ICTs as tools of alienation through reinforced governances. Hence the
question of creating «non-places» arouses, affording both a consensual appro-
priation process and the representative commodity networks, that henceforth
includes natural, technical and human aspects and at the same time constitutes
hybrid identities at the interfaces of its users, subjects, objects and places.

Keywords: Heterotopia
Non-place
Technology
Experience
Hybrid-place

1 Setting «Other Spaces» as a Place Theory

Heterotopias are considered to be aporetic spaces: open and isolated, universal and
particular, juxtaposed and disaggregated, collective and individualized. A heterotopia is a
place of otherness inasmuch as it raises a certain ambiguity on similitude and emanci-
pation, alienation and resistance. In this regard Edward Soja said it is «frustratingly
incomplete, inconsistent, incoherent»1 in spite of him devoting an entire chapter to it in
1
Under the influence of Lefebvre Soja also said: «narrowly focused on peculiar micro-geographies,
near-sighted and near-sited, deviant and deviously apolitical» (Soja 1996: 162). However, it seems
improbable to read them as an alternative space-taking program when after all they are the outline of
an analytic. Even though heterotopias are an interruption of space continuity, this doesn’t mean an
entire intervention program.

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 14–24, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_2
 Heterotopic Landscapes: From GreenParks to Hybrid Territories 15

«Thirdspace» (Soja 1996). The term arises for the Social Sciences2 in «Des espaces
autres», a conference given by Michel Foucault in 1967 in the Cercle d’Études Archi-
tecturales, published only twenty years later3. It is a raw work left in abeyance, perhaps
even abandoned by Foucault, but powerful if we confront the public space with the new
mediations, plus the so called «Internet Galaxy»4. Although the web renders possible the
exploration of Foucault’s diverse notion heterotopia, this chapter works with it to reflect
on the potential of the possible engagement of technology with space.
«Des espaces autres» is divided in two parts: initially, Foucault sketches some
considerations about the mutations that the idea of space suffered in the western
experience, dealing with the notion of space in its abstract sense – undifferentiated and
absolute. In a second moment, Foucault approaches a heterotopology, focusing on the
nature of place, which emerges concretely and locus of differentiation5.
But why space? If the nineteenth century allowed itself to be hallucinated by time
(Foucault 1984: 752), through its relativity and how it revealed the History6, with the
experience of duration and simultaneity − recall Bergson’s work − for the twentieth
century the priority is to think of space. In the moment when the Earth is wired and
orbited by satellites, the Earth re-emerges as absolute. Foucault realizes it well,
seeking to situate space in the Western History, even before the age of networks.
Although presenting a somewhat panoramic view, it is evident to perceive how a
mutation is operated in the way one is in the space with each technical breakthrough.
The archaic space, located sometime up to the Medieval Age, corresponded to the
hierarchical set of places that differed according to the seminal oppositions between sacred
and profane, guarded (known) and open (unknown). The paradigm of the space of
localization was dominant (Foucault 1984: 753). It concerned some kind of a primitive
panic about human impotence when facing the brutality of nature, death and void. This
space expands with Galileo and with the discovery of an “infinite space and infinitely open
one” (753). The space of localization is then dissolved giving rise to the space of expansion.
Currently, it is the problem of emplacement that shatters the preceding spatial
orders precisely because the relation of propinquity between points or elements prevails
and it can be described as “ramifications”7. Foucault reveals the reticulate nature of

2
It was already used in medical sciences to characterize, for example, the abnormal location or
displacement of a tissue or of an entire anatomical structure.
3
Published in Architecture, Movement, Continuité, no. 5, currently compiled in Dits et écrits: 1954–
1988, vol. IV, Paris, Gallimard, 1994, pp. 752–762. Foucault only authorized the publication of this
text in 1984, months before his death.
4
Cf. Manuel Castells (2001) The Internet Galaxy. Oxford University Press.
5
This differentiation between space and place is, however, imprecise. For further information Cf.
Edward S. Casey (1997) The Fate of Place: A Philosophical History. Berkeley: University of
California Press.
6
Here we recall first Einstein and the Theory of Relativity, then Hegel and Marx.
7
Emphasis is given to the priority of space in the age of networks: «In a still more concrete manner,
the problem of place or the emplacement arises for mankind in terms of demography. This problem
of the human emplacement is not simply the question of knowing what relations of vicinity,
elements, should be adopted in this or that situation in order to achieve this or that end. We are in an
epoch in which space is given to us in the form of relations between emplacements». (Foucault 1984,
753–4).
16 C. Patrício et al.

space, and how this is offered to us in the form of emplacement relationships. Yet, to
discover the network is to discover the whole world scrutinized and mapped, thereby
perceiving how space is finite and how it is impossible to expand. The limit of
extension is the great anxiety of the twenty-first century at a time when the world
population is already surpassing the 7 billion people. Thus, smart cities are idealized to
manage the urban space in the face of such challenge. Even cloud storage assumes
servers, and those are based on the ground. This absolute relay on space also imposed
certain sensitivity towards place. No wonder, therefore, that the site has become a fetish
object – both in the anthropology of the progressive disappearing, taking for instance
Augé’s Non-Lieux (1992) or Jane Jacobs’ iconic Death and Life of Great American
Cities (1961) and subsequent critiques to the process of gentrification. In contemporary
art the same interest arouses – with Site-Specific or Land-Art usage of place, either in
the ethnographic turn marked in the 1990s8 or even with the current obsession with the
archive9.
Returning to “Of Other Spaces”, Foucault wants to analyse spaces that have the odd
property of being in connection with all the others, perhaps even contesting them. They
are of two types: utopias and heterotopias. Utopias are emplacements by direct or
inverted analogy with society, but without real place; “it is society itself perfected”
(Foucault 1984: 755), or perfected by force as in the case of dystopias. However, they
do not exist anywhere. Real spaces in connection with other spaces are heterotopias.
Foucault unfolds his heterotopology into six principles. The first, heterotopias of
crisis, is found in all cultures, however in its archaic form (Foucault 1984, 756): it is
reserved for individuals who are in a state of physical crisis − pregnant women,
adolescents, menstruating women, elderly. In societies where one lives in the light of
modernity, Foucault sees these heterotopias gradually replaced by heterotopias of
deviance (757): specific places where individuals, whose behaviour is not based on
normal or healthy behavioural patterns, are targeted.
As a second principle of heterotopias listed by Foucault are those whose meaning
suffers mutations through time. The categorization is resumed, and the only example
given is the cemetery, which in pre-industrialized societies is located in the heart of the
city and in post-industrial societies it is sent to the periphery. The strangest thing is that
at the moment when public life is secularized, there is a growing concern with the
packing case and the pileup of the individual’s body, whereas previously, when the
cemetery was in the centre of the city, bodies were commonly buried in mass graves.
From here we can shed some more light in a rather elusive dimension: that heterotopias
are in fact in a process of constant becoming; they do not crystallize but rather depict
themselves as snapshots of a current condition. In fact, there is a general illusion of
permanence in space, and that is unverifiable. Any attempt to control and fix it led to
conflicts.

8
Also manifested in cinema, with Jean Rouch or António Reis’s ethnofictions, to name a few. For the
aspiration to fieldwork in contemporary arts see Hal Foster’ “The Artist as Ethnographer”, in which
the novelty of the Art is based on a drive for the cultural context. Cf. H. Foster (1996) «The Artist as
Ethnographer» in The return of the Real: The avant-garde at the end of the century, The MIT Press.
9
Cf. Foster (2004): «An Archival Impulse» in October 110, Fall 2004, pp. 3–22.
 Heterotopic Landscapes: From GreenParks to Hybrid Territories 17

The third principle is one of the most important parameters to be retained: «The
heterotopia has the power to juxtapose in a single real place several places, several
emplacements that are in themselves incompatible» (Foucault 1984, 758). In this way
works the verticality or the overlapping of several plans, some of them incompatible. It
is an important feature when we talk about the new media – as a matter of fact, the
example given is the projection rectangle of the cinema (the rectangular screen). But it
is also the garden:
«The garden is a rug where the whole world comes to accomplish its symbolic
perfection, and the rug is a sort of garden that is mobile across space». (Foucault
1984, 758-9)
The fitted carpet is a portable garden … just as we now carry the whole world
inside a smartphone. That is, what the smartphone performs is a technical achievement
of what, once, was already trapped in a carpet: the whole world. And so, floating
(surfing the internet), just as when one imaginatively does with the flying carpet − a
kind of suspension occurs in time. It is possible for the subject to immerse himself in
this mobile micrography of the world and to mediate the dialectic between the
traditional/physical and the symbolic/augmented. However, this kind of mediation is
performed by a succession of displacements: as the four parts of the world were
displaced within the territory of the garden that constitutes the microcosm, the subject
is similarly displaced within the digital landscape that, in a sense, constitutes a treatise
on the future of the man/space/information relationship.
In the fourth principle Foucault presents the heterochronies, that is, heterotopias
that are related to chunks of time. They are suspensions in the experience of tempo-
rality, ideally linear. By introducing temporality here, one that is different from space’s
constitutive term permanence, we can propose a different kind of association with
human activity: the possibility of ephemeral, ever-changing and variable meanings and
the absence of solid conceptions – a limitation that applies in Foucault’s Persian
traditional garden. Fairs, thematic festivals, fake environments that condense slices of
culture, or in pure accumulation, such as libraries and museums. And what about the
internet if we think of the cloud as a mega archive?10 Being both a pedestrian-in-a-
cyberpark and an internet-user renders possible a navigation experience through a mega
archive while walking in a green public park.
The fifth principle is on the permeability of its limits. Heterotopias are simulta-
neously isolated and penetrable. There, the inside and outside are not stable categories.
It is said that you are in a heterotopia, but maybe you are already out of it. Or to access
it, one must go through certain rites of passage—one has to decline a password or your
identity to enter a certain circle when navigating in the internet. Edward Soja expla-
nation strengthens the connection between heterotopias and non-places. Following
Soja, «[…] implicit in this heterotopian regulation of opening and closing are working

10
Both, a methodological and technical solution for connecting physical and digital archive with on-
site objects had been presented during the international conference of the COST Action TU1306
CyberParks in Valletta/Malta in 2016 and is printed in: Breser, C., Zedlacher, S., Winkler, R.
(2017) The Principle of Geotagging. Cross-linking archival sources with people and the city
through digital urban places. Antoine Zammit and Therese Kenna (Eds): Enhancing Places through
Technology. Lisbon: Lusófona University Press, pp. 208–213.
18 C. Patrício et al.

powers, of what Foucault would later describe as “disciplinary technologies” that

operate through the social control of space, time, and otherness to produce a certain
kind of “normalization”» (Soja 1996: 161). New forms of sensibility and of engage-
ment are shaped and reflected by new media, but they also suppose new and more
complex forms of alienation, surveillance and governance.
Finally, Foucault evokes the heterotopias of compensation. They have an inclusive
function in relation to the space that is left outside: sometimes because they denounce
that space itself is also a space of dream and illusion, sometimes because they con-
stitute a progress − which may even be radical. At one extreme, Foucault places the
“brothels”, at the other the Jesuit villages in the colonies. Then concludes, incon-
clusively and abruptly, with the example of the ship, a floating piece of space: «[…] the
heterotopia par excellence. In civilizations without boats, dreams dry up, espionage
replaces adventure, and the police the pirates» (Foucault 1984: 762), perhaps because
when moving along the signifying chain of heterotopia – and thus floating in a space
within space – the production of symbols is also challenged. Heterotopia can thus be
seen as a signifying supplement for the product of the enhanced interactions between
perception and imagination, a mechanism of displacement from the outside: a “tool” to
move from fantasy and hallucination to the underlying order of physical space.
Thus, as shown before, heterotopias are an evanescent and non-static terrain. It is a
fold in space. A certain ambiguity leaves it opened precisely because it is a combi-
natory ground. Heterotopias can be read as marginal sites, but only because they
threaten to corrupt the closures and certainties of space as a field of continuous and
smooth representation. Foucault said in Les mots et les choses (1966) that utopia
affords consolation due precisely to its smoothness11.
Now, think of the mirror. It is a hybrid terrain, an arch-medium point between
utopia and heterotopia − «A placeless place» − hence its utopian characteristics
because it «enables me to see myself there where I am not» (Foucault 1984, 754). In
addition, it is also a heterotopia because it does present, or practice a counteraction or
refusal of the position that I actually occupy (754). The mirror leads us to an onto-
logical inquiry into the nature of the presence, there where the absence is also played.
Maybe in the heterotopia of the mirror we can find, radicalizing, the experience of the
body in the digital era. Of that hybrid body that sails in hetero-affection12.

2 The Non-place Theory

The attempt to set the «Thirdspace» (Soja 1996) and «Other Spaces» (Foucault 1984)
as a Place-Theory regarding cyberparks so far, needs – as a counterargument – further
the confrontation with the negation of place by itself, as a result of an exponential
increase of using technology and human’s introversion at the same time. When Marc
Augé published his non-place theory in 1992, yet at this time the Smartphone had not

11
Heterotopias disturb because «they secretly undermine language»: they break, entangle, desiccate,
hold, contest and undo, «they dissolve our myths and sterilize the lyricism of our sentences»
(Foucault, The Order of Things, p. XIX).
12
CF. Jacques Derrida (2000) Le Toucher, Jean-Luc Nancy, Paris Galilée.
 Heterotopic Landscapes: From GreenParks to Hybrid Territories 19

been invented and the Internet had not been opened to commercial use.13 The con-
ceptual background of this theory could not have been influenced so by these two basic
developments for today’s use of ICTs. His theory has been recently mentioned in
several discussions, but so why is it also important for our reflection on the concepts of
cyberparks and the use of ICTs?
One interesting aspect of this theory deals with individualization and introversion
as a kind of social change, long before we have got used to our mobile devices and long
before a discussion of their impacts on our lives have been critically started. The social
roles of such medial apparatuses as well as the question about how they changed our
behaviours have to be discussed therefore exhaustively as a next step of a deeper
understanding for Augé’s theory and for the quality of a cyberpark. The term «su-
permodernity» (Augé: 1994, 39ff.) arouses to characterize the second half of the 20th
century—the increasing excess of objects information and events in time and space.
Industrial mass productions led to an ever-growing consuming world, while new mass
transport infrastructures changed experience of extension. Non-places, such as high-
ways, supermarkets, airports, etc., are logistical platforms that assist the circulation of
subjects and objects. The definition of a non-place however bases mostly on anthro-
pological studies of human behaviours in a network of practices or moving elements in
space – mainly based on Michel de Certeau’s definition of space (1980). Augé’s theory
is largely influenced by a delineation of the anthropological term of place, thus its
identity, relations and history. A non-place refers to the absence of these aspects, but
mostly by missing recognition of human interactions; there relations are constantly
being constituted newly and managed by its «instructions of use»: directions, advices,
instructions and prohibitions.

3 Cyberparks as Non-places?

The last decades, in a digital landscape in which the materiality and physicality of
things give place to the impression drawn from protocol-based representations (com-
putational images, animations or texts), we impose upon space a topological dislocation
technique that has, quite literally, a reversible logic. In an interesting way, and from
Arnheim’s perception-and-response to the analogue stimuli evolving conception, the
digital dimension brings in a significant effect on this traditional process retaining at the
same time its humanist terms – that is the active and personal aspects found within. The
heterotopic displacement, reacting to the loss of the analogue materiality, seems to
inaugurate a reversed way: from the observer’s responses to data elements, the mind is
challenged to construct a posteriori perceptual content in the imaginary register, or
better a trace to use a rather influential laconic term for this theoretic study. As men-
tioned earlier, this content is not as deterministic as its precedent analogous one, but
can constantly resurface in alternative versions based on an exchange of conscious and

13
In 1992 the Internet has just been introduced as the World Wide Web the Swiss Tim Berners-Lee, for
one year, but has been finally opened to commercial use by the U.S. National Science Foundation
(NSF) only in 1995. The first Smartphone ‘Simon Personal Communicator’ has been invented in
1994 by BellSouth and IBM.
20 C. Patrício et al.

unconscious thought. However, the questions to be asked evenly concerning cyber-

parks are the following: Are Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs)
able to transform non-places into places by enhancing the quality of identity, relations
and history, or inversely do they promote parks becoming non-places? Which roles do
ICTs play in the eyes of Augé’s ‘supermodernity’—do we speak about tools of
alienation through reinforced governances or are these tools made for liberating their
users through the support of their individualisation as well as their emancipation?
The question of cyberparks becoming a non-place through ICTs leads firstly to a
reflection on the conceptual background of Augé’s theory. His pre-smartphone and pre-
internet understanding of ‘supermodernity’, obviously seems to be a further step, a
superlative of modernity, that is historically influenced by a futuristic understanding of
modernity – but with a different connotation. When he speaks about ‘supermodernity’
as excesses of information, time and space his historical understanding of modernity
partially seems to follow the idea of Filippo Tommaso Marinetti – but in a negatively
way. In the ‘manifesto del futurismo’ of 1909 Marinetti glorifies speed and technolo-
gies, and refuses history, moral and any institutional knowledge14. Regarding the many
different movements of the beginning 20th century, Augé’s ‘supermodernity’ bases just
on a reduced and basically negative connoted sight on some social phenomena of what
modernity is seen today – as well as just on some (anthropological) aspects of places
too.
It is unarguable that industrial progresses have enormously been determining social
changes since the 19th century and the digital turn now offers even more by influencing
people’s behaviours. But what Augé actually does not consider is the existence of
neither hybrid nor heterotopic places (Reisinger 2013) and history. So, it might be a
difference of understanding for identity-based attributions that could be seen as a
consensual appropriation process by the users (Fade: 2008) that were always related to
each other what makes it difficult to define such non-places at all. This way of inter-
pretation leads us further to see ICTs not as tools of a supermodern concept any more,
that speed up cognitive processes and enlarge extent spatial experiences as an expense
of remaining qualities and human interactions. But in this context ICTs serve as
intermediaries that do not have any functional role, but constitute within new identities,
such as a hybrid identity in a network between users and subjects in place.

4 ICTs as Intermediaries of Hybrid Spaces

Like in physical public open spaces, the space of the CyberParks combines an image or
spatial layout with its overlapped information layering into a hybrid construct. How-
ever, reminding the anthropological definition of place, that must enclose identity,
relation or history, are ICTs dealing with one of these aspects? Such a dualistic concept
of place or non-place tempts us to see technical progresses proportional opposite to

14
Le Figaro, 20th February 1909, pp. 6–8. “Noi siamo sul promontorio estremo dei secoli[!].. Perchè
dovremmo guardarci alle spalle, se vogliamo sfondare le misteriose porte dell’Impossibile? Il
Tempo e lo Spazio morirono ieri. Noi viviamo già nell’assoluto, poichè abbiamo già creata l’eterna
velocità onnipresente.”
 Heterotopic Landscapes: From GreenParks to Hybrid Territories 21

interpersonal progresses, as the following statements: The use of ICTs prevents us to

speak with each other, or: The excess amount of virtual offers interferes our social life.
By seeing ICTs as part of an intermediary network, communication has just been
shifted to another space, which yet could not be considered by Augé. Ignoring moral
assessments of personal interacting - that by the way would be an aspect of a non-place
- it should be noticed that ICTs transform a place not into a non-place but into a
Hybrid-Space, in which elevated forms of interactions still take place. This alternative
understanding for the relation between the technical and the social does not recognise
them separately any more. But is this construct an oxymoron?

5 The Possibility of an Experienced Hybrid-place

Hybrid places as described above have become part of the cultural development not
only of our public open spaces’ heritage but also of our own elevated mechanisms of
thinking and understanding space and place. The rising number of online cutting-edge
technologies that undertake the task of dislocating place from the analogue of coor-
dinate relations to the digital landscape and virtual reality of categorical relations15 is a
demonstration of this mode of hybrid terrain. The analogue of space, being a park or a
square, is a timeless patrimony. It is a constitutive dimension that seems to deeply
preserve itself to heterotopia as an engenderment of the materiality and physicality of
its form. It is the traditional medium, Foucault’s Persian garden in other words, by
which the logic of space’s symbolic systems in the poetic world of Gaston Bachelard,
are transformed into material variations, allowing thus the reasoning human mind be
attached to the sensible world. The analogue is the forefather; that necessary element
which social aspects are tied up with in order to lend themselves to further dialectical
investigations that extend beyond the practical function of space’s form. It is the
common starting point from which we are infused in even more complex conceptions
of either geometric or symbolic order - to mention one example, Rudolf Arnheim’s
symbolic readings of forms seized upon the field of the analogue and its visual qualities
as a way to project them “as images of the human condition” instead. The relation
between the technical and the human seems an oxymoron. But a more careful approach
can remove this arbitrary viewpoint. The question about the oxymoron blending and
the roles of ICTs in cyberparks as tools of alienation through reinforced governances or
for liberating people through the support of their individualisation and emancipation
can be answered shortly by defining those medial apparatuses as intermediaries that
change our identities to hybrid identities in place for which we cannot speak about non-
places any more. But we can talk about places neither! In a ‘modern’ way of thinking -
that might refer to futuristic concepts too - we would have seen ICTs influencing our
behaviours and enhancing the quality of places. (Super)modernity as increasing
excesses of information, time and space has become suitable for the separation of time

15
Support for the workings of the coordinate and categorical relations as well as their correspondences
to the analogue and digital can be found in studies on the representation of the visual information in
subject’s mind. See Hugdahl and Westerhausen. (2010). The Two Halves of the Brain: Information
Processing in the Cerebral Hemispheres: MIT Press.
22 C. Patrício et al.

and space, the separation of nature and technology, the social and the non-social. In a
non-modern way (Latour 1997) that ontologically does not distinguish between human
beings and non-human beings, between natures and technologies we see them con-
stantly creating new, hybrid identities. In exclusion of a (super-)modern understanding
that differences between the social, technology and nature it is difficult not to overcome
the awareness of being governed through one of those actors. When Latour speaks
about the missing possibility of controlling ‘the other’, such as the other (virtual) space,
the other culture or even the changing climate as a common challenge (Latour 1997,
p. 192), we are asked to reassemble what modernity divided. Then we definitely cannot
see ICTs as separate tools with a mandate for directions, advices, instructions and
prohibitions too, but as parts of new common identities that are not governed nor by the
user neither by technology.
In this way a cyberpark is neither a place nor non-Place but a hybrid-place, where
relations, history or identity are constantly being constituted newly by a consensual
appropriation process between all the actors – humans and non-humans. This emerging
form of appropriation can be seen as the human’s dateless quest for meaning and
reason – within the hybrid form itself this time. It does not matter if there is Internet or
a smart phone available. Neither technology nor nature enhance the quality of place nor
increase possibilities for human interactions so. Interactions and thus the assessment for
increasing the quality of places can accordingly start with a differentiated under-
standing for the roles of nature and technology, that see them not as parts of a common
space but as parts of a common identity that create non-dualistic networks including
hybrid or even heterotopic places too.
Nowadays, ICT mediated formations are useful dimensions to outdoor experience.
They can certainly be seen, on one hand, as “decorative follies” for the public open
space, but, on the other, they work in the field of emerging and new forms of topos’
sense. From the previous, it became noticed that the distinction between the Euclidean
space and the Hetero topos was critically touched by Foucault. From this starting line
and point of view, technologically mediated spaces as hybrid terrains function differ-
ently from Euclidean spaces. A critical approach beyond the utilitarian features of
outdoor digitally accessed and retrieved information and an exploration on the influ-
ence of such features on what remains after the end of the experience – that is, the
memory of hybrid spaces – seems to become a necessary tool in understanding the
range of a cyberpark as mediated spaces beyond their Euclidean discipline and as
relevant to the meanings constructed and apprehended during their spatial experience.

6 Conclusion

Here, we have to admit that the above question made already a valuable contribution to
the previous discourse on non-place; and now will continue to preserve its immense
value within this last one. It somehow shows that meaning-ascription, being an intrinsic
part of the mnemonic function of human experience, retains a significant role to hybrid
spaces as well. A cyberpark, as all other similar immaterial artefacts that feed from
virtuality and the digital dimension, cannot escape from it. Moreover, a cyberpark will
use meaning ascription regularly.
 Heterotopic Landscapes: From GreenParks to Hybrid Territories 23

While from 2014 to 2018 the TU1306 CyberParks Network envisioned the future
of open green spaces, the possibility of introducing their heterotopic dimension has
been considered either through the Euclidean perspective (in which it makes little
sense) or simply taken at the word of ICT developers and programmers. The possibility
of a cyberpark to carry and construct different kinds of meanings as compared, at least,
to the analogue space itself contains a plethora of heterotopic undertones, or as it is
sometimes argued, supermodern potential, that needs to be further explored. The
Network suggested that human, space and digital environment can perfectly co-exist;
and that the contact between them can extend far beyond the narrow field of “seeing”
and “perceiving”. This is a phenomenological plane initially sketched out by the
TU1306 Network acknowledging that many of the aspects out of CyberParks inter-
mediary network are issues submerged to a mneme/meaning dialectic. They are
interpretative entities of the lived, perceived and conceived hybrid reality. We thus
claim that cyberparks are, in a sense, symbol-systems themselves giving “concrete
expression to concepts of values, meanings and the like” (Rapoport 1977: 192) through
technology.
The COST Action CyberParks attempted to explore further the argument that the
intermediary dimension of such systems has practical applications in the design
strategy for experiencing non-places pertaining to questions like ‘’can mediated places
deliver up a meaning?’’ or ‘’can digital landscapes conciliate symbolic signs with
peculiar urbanistic issues?” Questions whose answers are not useful to be presented
dogmatically here, but at least were implied by the structural technique of the appa-
ratus itself. Resorting to Ricoeur (2004), cyberparks are, after all, nothing but symbols
in a fundamental level, which are systems of relationships that relate the human con-
dition with space and elements of the digital and immaterial world.
The digital moment has passed. Roy Ascott

References
Augé, M.: Non-lieux. Introduction à une anthropologie de la surmodernite. Éd. du Seuil, Paris
(1994)
Bachelard, G.: The Poetics of Space. Beacon Press, Boston (1994)
Cresswell, T.: Place: A Short Introduction. Blackwell, Oxford (2004)
De Certeau, M.: L’Invention du Quotidien, vol. 1. Arts de Faire, Paris (1980)
Foucault, M.: Dits et écrits: 1954–1988, vol. IV, pp. 752–762. Gallimard, Paris (1994)
Latour, B.: Nous n’avons jamais été modernes. Essai d’anthropologie symétrique. Éditions La
Découverte & Syros, Paris (1997)
Le Figaro, 20th February 1909, pp. 6–8. “Noi siamo sul promontorio estremo dei secoli!.. Perchè
dovremmo guardarci alle spalle, se vogliamo sfondare le misteriose porte dell’Impossibile? Il
Tempo e lo Spazio morirono ieri. Noi viviamo già nell’assoluto, poichè abbiamo già creata
l’eterna velocità onnipresente.”
Rapoport, A.: Human Aspects of Urban Form: Towards a Man-Environment Approach to Urban
Form and Design. Pergamon Press, New York (1977)
24 C. Patrício et al.

Reisinger, N.: Vom Stationsplatz zur Shopping Mall. Der Bahnhof als Ausdruck eines
veränderten Lebensgefühls. In: Morscher, L., Scheutz, M., Schuster, W. (Hrsg.) Orte der Stadt
im Wandel vom Mittelalter zur Gegenwart. Beiträge zur Geschichte der Städte Mitteleuropas,
vol. 24, pp. 313–329. StudienVerlag, Wien, S. (2013)
Ricoeur, P.: The Rule of Metaphor. Routledge, New York (2004)
Soja, E.: Thirdspace: Journeys to Los-Angeles and Other Real-and-Imagined Places. Blackwell,
Oxford (1996)

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
1.3
Cybercities: Mediated Public Open
Spaces - A Matter of Interaction and Interfaces

Stefan Zedlacher1(&), Anna Khromova2, Eva Savina Malinverni2,

and Preben Hansen3
1
Institute of Art History, University Graz, Graz, Austria
[email protected]
2
Facoltà di Ingegneria, Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
[email protected], [email protected]
3
Department of Computer and Systems Sciences (DSV), Stockholm University,
Stockholm, Sweden
[email protected]

Abstract. In the near past, sources of information about public open spaces
were: people, the place itself and historical archives. Accordingly, the informa-
tion could be obtained by interviewing the visitors, by reading some poorly
equipped signs on monuments or by research in libraries. Today, a new source
appeared: The place itself covers its own information by the mean of the growing
of the ICT (Information Communication Technologies). In addition, the infor-
mation can be personalised in a way each people can access it individually. Ten
years ago, a left-over newspaper on a park bench was a compact piece of
information. Today, the newspaper resides on a smartphone in our pockets. In the
future, the park bench will still be there, but dramatically changed to an IoT
(Internet of things) object, bringing information to the people. Therefore, there is
the need to re-think the park bench as an interface. A simple, fundamental point
is: the quality of the interface rules the quality of the information. With a special
focus on the latter, this chapter discusses how the classical model of the city is
enhanced with the senseable city concept and how digital information influences,
adopts, transforms and re-configures different objects in urban areas.

Keywords: Mediated spaces
Interfaces
Design methods
Senseable city

1 Introduction

In his 2002 motion picture Minority Report, based on the same name novel by Philip K.
Dick from 1990, the director Steven Spielberg leads his main actor through a public
open space (POS). In this 20-seconds scene, the actor gets, while escaping from prison, a
lot of personalised advertising while the people around him are informed that he is a
volatile criminal. The whole place with its infrastructure (screens, entrances, etc.) seems
to be real-time responsive to the (fictional) situation - even to the operations elsewhere,
shown in the scenes before and after. The phenomenon is the change of the POS to an
innovative cyber one, in agreement to new concepts like smart city (Gibson et al. 1992;

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 25–37, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_3
26 S. Zedlacher et al.

Hollands 2008). To answer the question “Which interactions is a POS in Cyber Cities
capable for?”, the analysis of city planning processes is a good starting point.

2 Theoretical Framework

In agreement with the vision shared by George Kubler in his book “The shape of time”
the city design can be interpreted as a series of ideas in the history of human thinking,
divided into four groups (Barnett 2016): Modern city design (Chandigarh), Traditional
city design (Rome, Paris), Green city design (Surabaya) and System city design
(Dubai). The main idea is that these listed concepts are not opposed to each other or
mutually exclusive, rather they interplay with each other, being each one periodically
more or less important (according to the duty of the project).

2.1 The Intelligent City Concept

The intelligent city concept is incorporated in the smart city, e.g. a city that is affected
by technology, and also the self-organising city, which is without technologies but has
a strong flexibility of the urban structure. The paradigm of smart city concept is based
on interlacing the technological systems and human intelligence with the aim of better
results and improved productivity. In the intelligent city concept, two types of approach
can be identified: the top-down and the bottom-up. Both of them are aimed to support
human needs by the mean of technology, but while the first one proposes solutions
coming from the head of any organisation centre, the second one directly comes from
the final users. Both types of systems have four components: Sensors, Collected data,
Predictive models and Interfaces.
Here, a main difference between fiction and the real world arises: The fictional story
from the introduction only takes the top-down city-concept in account. Talking about
the top-down approach, the target is organising urban facilities in the cities to get better
response for collective needs (energy management system, traffic control and incident
management). The Bjork Ingals Group proposed to BMW to organise a competition
having the title: The city of the futures (B. I. Group 2017). The winner of the project
presented how people and cars can share space without frightening each other. The
intelligence resides both in the vehicle and in the environment through sensors and
lightning. Basically, the self-driving car informs the environment about its intentions,
e.g. to sensors hidden in the pavement. Then, the latter creates a safe zone called area of
influence for pedestrians, where no vehicles are allowed to enter. It has to be remarked
how such a smart streets concept can make public open spaces safer for citizen. Passing
to the bottom-up approach, it can be sufficient to integrate intelligent systems, that make
the city perform better, instead of fundamentally rethinking the city design. Interfaces
are the key component for this integration. Bottom-up examples like Copenhagen Wheel
(Superpedestrian 2018) or Stuttgart’s Luftdaten (2018) demonstrates that it is not nec-
essary to adjust the city with new static sensors. Equipment that are already around
(bicycles, clothes, baskets) could be used for data collecting process as a Mobile Sen-
sors. Additionally, equipping bicycles with sensors effectively turns a city into an
interface that collects data in real-time. The integration of such kind of bottom-up
intelligence in the city and its surfaces could upgrade the quality of citizen life.
 Cybercities: Mediated Public Open Spaces 27

The paradigm of Self-organising city concept performs a kind of urban play-ground

where planners use techniques that don’t impose a preconceived plan: the citizen freely
share their ideas and projects with each other and, mostly important, with planners. The
city is seen as an organism that doesn’t need to follow any human master plan for
growing and functioning. The role of the planners is to guide the existing self-organising
concepts in the urban environment. Tracing back this concept to the idea of Metabolism
in the ‘60s, a Japanese group of architects (e.g. Kisho Kurokawa’s Helix City Project)
fused ideas about architectural mega-structures with those of organic biological growth
(taking inspiration from the recently discovered DNA). Continuing the chronological
time-line, the Hungarian architect Yona Friedman made his contribution in designing a
mobile architecture that he called a Spatial Infrastructure (Friedman 1956). In that
experimental project the user plays a key role in the city design process. The citizen was
allowed to freely use the mobile city’s structural system according to his needs and
wishes, which is perfectly in line with the self-organising city concept. In the same
period the rising of cybernetics in the field of communication and technology impacted
on the architects’ methods and visions (Pask 1969). The main concept is based on the
notion that intelligence lies in its capacity to learn from feedbacks. That new vision
shifts the role of planner in the design process and opens the necessity to bring new
technologies that can help machines to react to a real-time stimulus. By applying this
concept to the planning process, an interesting question arises: Could the cities and their
buildings learn from their usage and auto-correct themselves into an optimal configu-
ration and anticipating future uses? Also, computer programmes as the SimCity series
games (Jonathan Burnett) or the MVRDV Function-mixer (Hartog 2006) shown a good
example of how technologies bring new visions in urban planning. The virtual simu-
lation of urban environment explores the use of computer-generated scenarios for
having a support in taking decisions and planning solutions. This involvement helps
people, municipalities and communities to find optimal configurations. But, projects
from the intelligent (smart) concepts are mainly top-down and ignoring the existence of
interfaces at all. Although they have sensors, predictive models and collected data which
are also parts of the fictional city concept from Minority Report.

2.2 The Cyborg-Society and the Senseable City Concept

“Permit man’s existence in environments which differ radically from those provided by
nature as we know it” (Clynes and Kline 1960: 29–33) was the starting point for
rethinking the concept of the human body and its extensions and possibilities. This new
way of thinking gave the perspective for the first cyborg project: “cyborg is a hybrid
capable of more than either the biological or the mechanical system alone can do, with
a correspondingly expanded range of possible habitation” (Ratti and Claudel 2016:
42–49). The tools and all innovations people have been aware, allowing humanity to
survive in extreme conditions that they otherwise could never adapt. Serving as an
additional option to the biological presence defines us as a kind of cyborg. “Human
progress was marked by the gradual externalization of functions, from stone knives and
axes that extended the capacity of the hand to the externalization of mental functions
with the computer.” (Picon 2004: 114–121). If in the past the innovations were created
as an enhancement of the physical body, today they are mainly used as an extension of
28 S. Zedlacher et al.

the possibilities of the mind: “… digital technologies have become a dynamic extension
of our bodies and minds, demanding a constant and two-way cybernetic exchange in a
way that our traditional (one-way) extensions, such as clothing or axes, have never
done” (Ratti and Claudel 2016: 42–49). Interesting aspects appeared, as the deep
natural involvement of technological system into human environment. “We […] are
provided with two types of bodies … the real body which is linked with the real world
by means of fluids running inside, and the virtual body linked with the world by the flow
of electrons” (Ito 1997: 132). Smartphones became the strongest connection between
the two bodies and so recognised as an interface. It additionally extends humans
memory and logical capacities in such a marked way that the person is not considered a
simple human anymore but kind of an upgraded version of it: a post-human. “A new
entity that is born with technology rather than acquiring it … where each individual’s
mental and social existence is enable, sustained and improved by technologies.” (Ratti
and Claudel 2016: 42–49).
The main technology mentioned are the so-called smart-devices. They are changing
the way people think about a city and its infrastructure in a radical way: thanks to the
rising of digital networks what before was passive is now active, so every aspect of an
urban reality should now be able to be interfaced with smartphones. In simple words, a
modern city should give the post-humans an environment suitable for them. With the
rising of smart-devices still both methods from the intelligent city in the senseable city
concepts, could be found. But with different notion:
– Tracking as the top-down method where the information is gathered and visualized
for decision-makers, stakeholder, city council or researcher (Ratti et al. 2007).
– Interaction as the bottom-up example with, e.g. QR codes (Foth et al. 2015). The
interaction includes human to human, human to companies (marketing) or
authorities (information) or human to machine while the layer that carries the QR
code is differently (i.e. cloths, streets, buildings, etc.)
The senseable city concept pushes further the interactivity of this innovative way of
thinking about POS. In a short period, places became a breathing, living entity acting on a
large-scale with the inhabitants (what we previously defined as cyborgs). The latter will
create, plug into and interact with this new entity, and so, digital spaces will be naturally
interacted and above all spontaneously born onto POS. This reality was, among others,
mentioned and explained by Mark Weiser, ac-cording to which the interfaces would find
no places anymore since everything will be intimately absorbed into the city. Allowing
then a complete merging between the digital and the physical spaces a “new way of
thinking about computers in the world, one that takes into account the natural human
environment and allows the computers themselves to vanish into the background.”
(Weiser 1991: 1). Another realisation of the senseable city concept can be found in the so-
called boards, e.g. interactive screens disseminated all along the cities (Fig. 1) where POS
infrastructure are transformed into intercommunicating interfaces, away from smart-
phones. Basically, these new generation billboards are in effect web browser applications
capable of all the tracking and advertising functionalities known from any desktop
website. So, what was oriented towards a single user before is now becoming public: a
desktop browser turns to a public display where advertises take place, all integrated into
the POS. This scene of the 2002’s Minority Report became reality.
 Cybercities: Mediated Public Open Spaces 29

In summary, the senseable city concept can be resumed as the “Technology recedes
into the background, and interaction is brought to the fore. Buildings and public open
spaces can be simple-rather than voluptuous and shocking – but even more integrally
vibrant and living” (Ratti and Claudel 2016: 62–73).

Fig. 1. Graz city information terminals (Source: authors. 2017)

3 Interaction Design and Interfaces

Although, as widely discussed in the previous sections, the city of the future com-
pletely neglects the necessity of having an interface between citizen and spaces (since
the digital and the physical domains are perfectly interlaced between each other),
nowadays they still are of fundamental importance since the progress is still making the
first steps toward such reality. A brief overview of the basic concepts of interactions
and of the various kinds of interfaces will been given in the present section.

3.1 Basic Concepts of Interaction

One of the aims of interaction design is to create an interface that makes efficient and
user-friendly for a user to interact, operate and manage a digital or physical electronic
device. Basically, this means that there should be some kind of input to achieve the
desired output. Within interaction, there are several crucial and important concepts that
30 S. Zedlacher et al.

need to be considered in a design process, in which the interaction between a human

and a device (physical or digital) is a vital component. Interaction and design for
interaction in physical or blended (Benyon 2014: 420–425) POS may also be viewed
and understood as explicit interaction or implicit interaction. Explicit interaction usu-
ally builds on the classical desktop screen-based interaction metaphor. This often result
in that the human need to cope with different technological issues in order to achieve a
certain goal. In contrast, implicit interaction design puts the human in the foreground
and the technology in the background. These are important aspects of interaction in
(blended) mediated spaces since that may have the possibility to entangle and embed
into our daily activities in both urban and rural environments. Some important concepts
are that may apply to design of POS, mediated or not:
– Dynamics – This concept refers to indications of current and changing modes and
states and how a device, components or system adapts to different contexts, situ-
ations, tasks, people etc. (Buxton 2010; Löwgren and Stolterman 2004).
– Temporality – It refers to the concept of time. In design it can concern, for
example, the extension over time, the duration of an interaction, the immediacy of
the interaction activity, the delays and pauses within an interaction, the segmen-
tations of an interaction, the separation and connection of several interaction
sequences, the pace and rhythm of an interaction, and the periodicity (Buxton 2010;
Löwgren and Stolterman 2004).
– Interactivity – The interactivity generally refers to how users and (digital and
physical) artefacts initiate and respond to different actions including action open-
ings, turn-taking by humans but also by tasks of a device, and closures (Löwgren
and Stolterman 2004).
– Sequentiality – One very important aspect of designing for interaction refers to
how interactions are ordered and structured; the flow of different actions and tasks
to be accomplished, how courses of events are planned and how much freedom,
control, guidance, support etc. are built into activities with the service, components
or system (Benyon 2014; Löwgren 2002).
– Context of use – This concept refers to placing the planned activities, objects,
services or system in specific social and physical contexts which exemplify the
artefact in use (Gedenryd 1998; Ozenc et al. 2010; Suchman 1985).
Different interaction design qualities are defined by Lim et al. (2007: 246) as
something that appears only in (inter)action: “The interaction gestalt also has to be
designed in a way that will evoke the desired user experiences. The designer has to
anticipate how a certain gestalt will be experienced by a user, and that anticipation has
to be translated back into ideas on how the gestalt should be shaped”. In interaction
design in general, Lim et al. (2007) define different qualities that may apply for the
context and situation in which people interact in POS. The authors also talk about the
“…the interaction gestalt…” that it need to be considered and approached in the design
process as well. The “gestalt” is very important since it is to evoke the desired user
experience. This means that the designer needs to anticipate how users in a POS can
experience a certain gestalt. So, when designing for interactions, this anticipation needs
to be translated back into ideas on how a “gestalt” should be shaped and formed.
Löwgren (2002) proposes to think about interaction design in terms of specific use
 Cybercities: Mediated Public Open Spaces 31

qualities. Use qualities are certain properties of a digital design that are experienced in
its use situation or context. According to the author, such qualities transcend the
specific design. At the same time, it offers a certain language to be used when talking
about design. Furthermore, the author suggests a set of qualities that design of public
open spaces needs to consider: motivation, interaction per se, social aspects of the
object or systems, structural qualities, meaning-making.

3.2 Types of Interfaces

The role of a user interface is to give to the final user a dedicated platform to control
generic software (that, in turn, has been defined on hardware). Although in the recent
past the concept of interface was limited to the engineering world, nowadays, thanks to
the use of sensors in multiple fields (applications in medicine, architecture, landscape
planning etc.), it has to be used and understood in a broader meaning. The way users
interact with interfaces depends on the interface in use. While the most common one
has been for decades the simple textual command line interface, nowadays a huge
variety of interfaces are available, where all the senses of the human body have been
exploited. Generally speaking, the available kinds of interfaces are:
– Voice User Interface (VUI) - In this first kind of interface, the human voice is the
vehicle through which the information is carried from the user to the software.
Various challenges are currently being addressed in the developing of such inter-
faces, all more or less related to the voice recognition issue, that allows a more
functional voice-controlled interface. In turn, the interaction re-quired with this kind
of interface is quite natural since it doesn’t require any-thing else than the vocal
command of the user.
– Tangible User Interface (TUI) - As the name suggests, this kind of interface is
based on a physical medium that stands between the user and the software. The
latter can be a door, a spoon, or in general an available object in an urban space.
Although the TUIs are relatively new, numerous examples can be found in
museums, architecture (Wang et al. 2017a), furniture and clothing, and this remarks
the importance of such a kind of interface. An interesting aspect regards the
experience that the user gets from the just introduced interface: the more playful and
active way of interacting facilitates a more creative and learning effect (Wang et al.
2017b).
– Natural User Interface (NUI) - While a TUI exploits tangible objects to create a
way of communication between the software and the user, a NUI reaches the same
result making use of gesture (Li et al. 2016) and eye-interaction. This results in a
more natural way of interacting.
– Brain Computer Interface (BCI) - Finding its place in the borderline of the
scientific progress, the BCI is probably the most interesting and appealing kind of
interface that can be found today. The interaction between the user and the software
is here carried out by the mean of electric impulses running through the brain and
collected by the mean of electrodes. The BCI will make possible to control robotic
arms, machines etc. in a large variety of application areas (medical, industrial, etc.).
32 S. Zedlacher et al.

Such kind of innovation will, in addition, help many people with disabilities in
improving their life in a huge number of situations.
– Cross-Object User Interfaces (COUI) - Cross-objects user interfaces is a literally
new term that describes user interfaces spatially distributed across object surfaces in
the physical world and the virtual reality in a similar way. In contrast to tangible
user interfaces, COUIs are inhabited in physical or virtual objects in flexible ways
and are compatible with multiple and different interaction methods (Sun et al. 2018;
Li et al. 2017).
Starting with the smartphone in the previous chapter we hopefully verified with this
chapter the huge variety of possible interfaces for the POS. In the next chapter we
combine the city design methods mentioned, the types of interfaces and the evolution
of POS to a possible explanation.

4 The Ternary Structure of a POS and Its Scientific

Rationalities Interpretation

According to the city design methods previously explained, the reality of a POS has
changed over the last decades. They are not interpreted as physical spaces, but rather as
entities that embrace different dimensions into the same system. In fact, according to
the vision of Stanley Milgram (Milgram et al. 1992), space is made not only of physical
characteristics, but it has also a mental image that lives in human mind. One step
further in Philip K. Dick’s vision from Minority Report, it is a visual, digital repre-
sentation of an individual view on a common base (the POS).
A simple yet effective way to describe POS is the ternary system of Nature, Culture
and Geist (Khromova et al. 2016), where:
– Nature is the environment in its essential form, i.e. without any human interference.
– Culture is any expression of human’s creativity, that can be differentiated into
tangible (materials and artefacts) and intangible (values, traditions, beliefs, etc.).
– Geist is the source of human’s creativity itself; it defines human’s goals, objectives
and lines of action that modify the nature towards the realization of what we defined
culture (Fig. 2).
To understand this complex approach of POS, the three-different kind of scientific
rationalities (Stepin 2008) will be introduced: the classical, non-classical and post-non-
classical. The first kind of scientific rationality, the classical rationality, deals with what
we may call simple systems, where all properties of its parts define the whole system.
They are delimited against external components like space and time and their elements
are causal deterministic. Such systems are essentially a mechanical combination of their
components, whose interactions are completely neglected. Essentially, “the classic
rationality approach analyses it by simply considering the properties of its different
sections for then adding them up together to get the global overview of the set”
(Khromova 2018: 28–33). For example, McLuhan’s (1964) vision of a social system
made only of unidirectional interaction between the mass of people and the source of
 Cybercities: Mediated Public Open Spaces 33

Fig. 2. The public spaces ternary structure: Geist, Culture and Nature (Source: authors)

information (as television or radio) is efficiently described by the mean of the just
introduced first kind of rationality.
When dealing with large systems including autonomous subsystem having a huge
number of interactions between each other, the classical rationality approach becomes
obsolete. It leads to the second kind of scientific rationality, the non-classical. With an
integrated “control-block” the system has a build in feed-back loop for its elements and
subsystems. The feedback of each element runs into a simple programme whose output
determines the behaviour of the system. This ongoing reproduction of organised ele-
ments could be found in society (social objects), nature (organisms) or populations of
any kind. The whole is more than its individual parts. A multicellular organism pro-
vides one of the best examples of a right application of the non-classical rationality.
Nowadays design of POS is strongly related to the non-classical rationality concepts
since the aim in creating harmony by considering all the components of the POS itself
(Khromova 2018).
The last kind of scientific rationality, defined as post-non-classical, relates to sys-
tems evolving themselves through self-regulating. This kind of system is “characterized
by the development that leads from one self-regulation type to another. Each newly
developed level causes back effects on earlier formed ones and restructures them, the
system thus acquires a new integrity. The system changes as new levels emerge, with
new relatively autonomous subsystems being formed there. Openness, exchange of
34 S. Zedlacher et al.

energy and information with the surrounding are key attributes of complex, self-
developing systems. A modern city with its services exemplifies it. The self-regulating
aspect is represented by the huge variety of different agencies such as the communal
office, the land registry office, services for the city, etc., whose usefulness would vanish
without a proper interaction with all other public authorities such as health services,
police stations, etc. The post-non-classical rationality finds its applications in many
recent projects aimed to update the city. One of the best examples is given by the
Futurecraft project (Ratti and Claudel 2016), where planners don’t provide anymore a
fixed, pre-conceived and so strict indication about what their vision of the city-design
of the future will be. Basically, conditions, scenarios and consequences are shared and
discussed. This method supports public debates and spreads ideas and alternatives
where people construct new values and guides to POS design. By turning classical
design of urban space upside-down, planners (not exclusively) called this approach
mutations. Such mutations will then grow, evolve and finally end up in creating tan-
gible artefacts (pre-interfaces) in the reality of the city. An example implementing the
post-non-classical method is the Trash Track project from MIT senseable city lab,
“where cheap tags equipped with GPS localization are applied to rubbish and a full-
scale urban demonstration was created to test it. As a result, subsequent discussion
and debate has led to systemic improvements by waste management companies, start-
up companies that produce trash trackers, and, most importantly, citizens where
inspired to reduce waste and to recycle” (Ratti and Claudel 2016). Switching back to
our topic of interest, a synergetic urban landscape like a POS equipped with ICT may
be represented by the post-non-classical scientific rationality.
One should also notice that, according to what has been said and to the examples
that has been given, the three proposed approaches for describing and interpreting a
generic system don’t abolish nor replace each other. Contrarily to what one can think,
the post-non-classical vision, although clearly more complete in respect to the classic
one, is not always the best choice since sometimes its complexity can be completely
avoided, resulting in a much immediate and practical interpretation of the system under
investigation.

5 Conclusions

With the ternary system of public spaces, the co-existence of bottom-up and top-down
methods in senseable city systems are proven. Which one of the scientific rationalities
(between the classic, non-classic and post-non-classic) is more suitable to a POS
equipped with ICT strongly depends on the attitude of the planner. This fact also
remarks how each new type of rationality doesn’t imply the rejection of the previous
one, but only completes our set of tools for analysing any kind of system, from the
simplest ones (where the classic kind of rationality is preferred) to the more complex
ones (where the post-non-classical is often the right choice). The tools could be part of
the interfaces.
Currently, interfaces that support tracking and interaction are not reduced to
smartphone. Rather they harness IoT and possibly change to tools for analysing and
interaction. We have also shown that the interfaces, beside mobile devices, are deeply
 Cybercities: Mediated Public Open Spaces 35

underdeveloped in their usage for a cyberpark, compared with their possibilities. But,
comparing Mark Weiser’s vision for computer[s] for the 21st century (Weiser 1991),
the have developed further. The way disseminating information from the cyberspace to
the user, i.e. the interfaces and their different types, is being a real-time connection
between city-planner and all the other components of the cyber-area. The role of city-
planners (and their computers!) in a senseable city has to be redefined.
Further work has also to be done in order to deeply investigate what may be the
weak points of the conception of cyberparks, such as the growing information pollution
and peoples experience with the (digital) urban environment. According to that, the
political structures and decision-making process must be updated to a real-time
information system. Therefore, additional efforts should also be put in realizing a
structure where individuals can choose how much they want to be involved in the cyber
dimension, according their needs and comfort. The ground level for this structure could
be the total absence of the cyber interaction and a balanced synergy between personal
will and pre-built scenarios. Realtime, reactive POS, by the way described in the
beginning, are possible, but nevertheless they lack the connection between their users,
their inherent systematics and the quality of interfaces. Minority Report with the vision
of Philip K. Dick is only a shadow of today’s capabilities.

References
B. I. Group, 17 September 2017. http://audi-urban-future-initiative.com/blog/bjarke-ingels-group.
Accessed 21 Aug 2017
Barnett, J.: City Design: Modernist, Traditional, Green and Systems Perspectives. Routledge,
New York (2016)
Benyon, D.: Designing Interactive Systems: A Comprehensive Guide to HCI and Inter-Action
Design. Addison Wesley, Harlow (2014)
Buxton, B.: Sketching User Experiences: Getting the Design Right and the Right Design.
Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (2010)
Clynes, M.E., Kline, N.S.: Cyborgs and space. Astronautics 14(9), 26–27 (1960)
Foth, M., Brynskov, M., Ojala, T.: Citizen’s Right to the Digital City: Urban Interfaces,
Activism, and Placemaking. Springer, Singapore (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-
287-919-6
Friedman, Y.: (1956). http://www.yonafriedman.nl/?page_id=225. Accessed 13 May 2018
Gedenryd, H.: How Designers Work - Making Sense of Authentic Cognitive Activities.
Cognitive Science, Lund (1998)
Gibson, D.V., Kozmetsky, G., Raymond, W., Smilor, R.W.: Smart Cities, Fast Systems, Global
Networks. The Technopolis Phenomenon. Rowman & Littlefield, Lanham (1992)
Hollands, R.G.: Will the real smart city please stand up? City 12(3), 303–320 (2008)
Hartog de, H.: MVRDVs 3D urban design, 10 November 2006. https://www.archined.nl/2006/
10/mvrdv%C2%92s-3d-urban-design. Accessed 3 May 2017
Ito, T.: Tarzans in the media forest. In: 2G, no. 2, p. 132 (1997)
Khromova, A., et al.: Is the mediated public open space a smart place? Relationships between
urban landscapes and ICT, The Cost Action TU 1306 CyberParks. SCIRES-IT (SCIentific
RESearch) and Information Technology, pp. 17–28 (2016)
36 S. Zedlacher et al.

Khromova, A.: Are the Urban Parks becoming Cyberparks? The Developing of Public Open
Spaces: ICT tools to support the landscape planning process (Unpublished thesis) UNIVPM
(2018)
Li, X.A., Hansen, P., Lou, X., Geng, W., Peng, R.: Design and evaluation of cross-objects user
interface for whiteboard interaction. In: Streitz, N., Markopoulos, P. (eds.) DAPI 2017.
LNCS, vol. 10291, pp. 180–191. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-
58697-7_13
Li, X.A., Lou, X., Hansen, P., Peng, R.: On the influence of distance in the interaction with large
displays. IEEE J. Disp. Technol. 12(8), 840–850 (2016)
Lim, Y., Stolterman, E., Jung, H., Donaldson, J.: Interaction gestalt and the design of aesthetic
interactions. In: Proceedings of the 3rd Conference on Designing Pleasurable Products and
Interfaces, pp 239–254. ACM Press, New York (2007)
Löwgren, J., Stolterman, E.: Thoughtful Interaction Design - A Design Perspective on
Information Technology. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2004)
Löwgren, J.: The use qualities of digital designs. complete draft 1.0, 21 October 2002. http://
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.196.4873&rep=rep1&type=pdf. Acces-
sed 13 June 2018
Luftdaten, 12 January 2018. https://luftdaten.info. Accessed 23 May 2018
McLuhan, M.: Understanding Media: The Extensions of Man. McGraw-Hill Book Company,
New York (1964)
Milgram, S., Sabini, J.E., Silver, M.E.: The Individual in a Social World: Essays and
Experiments. McGraw-Hill Book Company, New York (1992)
Ozenc, F.K., Kim, M., Zimmermann, J., Oney, S., Myers, B.: How to support designers in
getting hold of the immaterial material of software. In: Proceedings of the 28th Annual CHI
Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Atlanta, Georgia, 10–15 April,
pp. 2513–2522 (2010)
Pask, G.: The architectural relevance of cybernetics. Architectural Design, September issue No
7/6, 494–496 (1969)
Picon, A.: Architecture and the virtual: towards a new materiality? Praxis 6, 114–121 (2004)
Ratti, C., Claudel, M.: The City of Tomorrow: Sensors, Networks, Hackers, and the Future of
Urban Life. Yale University Press, New Haven (2016)
Ratti, C., Sevtsuk, A., Huang, S., Pailer, R.: Mobile landscapes: graz in real time. In: Gartner, G.,
Cartwright, W., Peterson, M.P. (eds.) Location Based Services and TeleCartography. Lecture
Notes in Geoinformation and Cartography, pp. 433–444. Springer, Heidelberg (2007). https://
doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-36728-4_31
Stepin, V.S.: Types of systems and types of scientific rationality. SATS 9, 27–43 (2008)
Suchman, L.A.: Plans and Situated Actions - The Problem of Human Machine Communication.
Xerox, Palo Alto (1985)
Sun, L., Zhou, Y., Hansen, P., Geng, W., Li, X.: Cross-objects user interfaces for video
interaction in virtual reality museum context. Int. J. Multimedia Tools Appl. May 2018 (2018,
forthcoming). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-018-6091-5
Superpedestrian, 21 March 2018. https://www.superpedestrian.com/tech. Accessed 5 June 2018
Wang, Y., Luo, S., Liu, S., Lu, Y., Hansen, P.: Crafting concrete as a material for enhancing
meaningful interactions. In: Kurosu, M. (ed.) HCI 2017. LNCS, vol. 10271, pp. 634–644.
Springer, Cham (2017a). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58071-5_48
Wang, Y., et al.: AnimSkin: fabricating epidermis with interactive, functional and aesthetic color
animation. In: Mival, O., Smyth, M., Dalsgaards, P. (eds). Proceedings of the 2017
Conference on Designing Interactive systems, Edinburgh, UK, pp. 397–401 (2017b)
Weiser, M.: The computer for the 21st century. Sci. Am. 265(3), 94–104 (1991)
 Cybercities: Mediated Public Open Spaces 37

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
1.4
Liveable Open Public Space - From
Flaneur to Cyborg

Aleksandra Djukic1(&) , Thanos Vlastos2, and Viera Joklova3

1
Faculty of Architecture, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
[email protected]
2
Department of Geography and Regional Planning,
National Technical University, Athens, Greece
[email protected]
3
Slovak University of Technology, Bratislava, Slovakia
[email protected]

Abstract. Open public spaces have always been key elements of the city. Now
they are also crucial for mixed reality. It is the main carrier of urban life, place
for socialization, where users rest, have fun and talk. Moreover, “Seeing others
and being seen” is a condition of socialization. Intensity of life in public spaces
provides qualities like safety, comfort and attractiveness. Furthermore, open
public spaces represent a spatial framework for meetings and multileveled
interactions, and should include virtual flows, stimulating merging of physical
and digital reality. Aim of the chapter is to present a critical analysis of public
open spaces, aspects of their social role and liveability. It will also suggest how
new technologies, in a mixed reality world, may enhance design approaches and
upgrade the relationship between a user and his surroundings. New technologies
are necessary for obtaining physical/digital spaces, becoming playable and
liveable which will encourage walking, cycling, standing and interacting.
Hence, they will attract more citizens and visitors, assure a healthy environment,
quality of life and sociability. Public space, acting as an open book of the history
of the city and of its future, should play a new role, being a place of reference for
the flaneur/cyborg citizen personal and social life. The key result is a framework
for understanding the particular importance of cyberparks in contemporary
urban life in order to better adapt technologies in the modern urban life needs.

Keywords: Liveability
Walkability
Mixed reality
Quality of life
Cyborg

1 Introduction

Real reality, Amplified reality, Augmented reality, Mediated reality, Augmented virtu-
ality, Virtualized reality, Virtuality. These are versions of a real world which is enriched
by the accelerating influence of a new digital world. A new reality, or meta-reality, which
appears to be both complex and attractive, is created, particularly for young people.
Digital world is penetrating almost in every aspect of the ‘real’ life. The result is a mixed
reality which could make our everyday life pleasant, educating and inspiring for
addressing consciously and responsibly the problems of the planet. It will also provide
© The Author(s) 2019
C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 38–49, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_4
 Liveable Open Public Space - From Flaneur to Cyborg 39

conditions for helping us to communicate, to meet and to coordinate our coexistence.

Mixed reality will bring future sustainable city closer to its citizens. They will no more
act as passive spectators but rather as active players and participants for the city’s
development. Mixed reality will contribute to the implementation of a user centred
planning for cities belonging to everybody, with no exclusions. They will be liveable,
accessible and fair, true public cities with fewer inequalities and socially cohesive.
Public spaces are the right environment to enjoy with all the senses. Images,
sounds, colours and smells are qualities that can be felt because the attention doesn’t
focus on how to avoid cars but freely turns to what really touch the heart of the user.
They offer a richness of experience, possibilities for action and leisure (Stevens 2007).
Furthermore, open public spaces are places of collective presence, communication,
gatherings and celebrations, or political rallies. Lefebvre’s pointed that “the city is the
imprint of the society in space”, by which he perceives space as a product of thought
and action, but as well as an instrument of control and expression of power (Lefebvre
1991). Everyday routine takes a break in public spaces. They are places of rest, places
where work stops, where you can chat without an agenda, where kisses and hugs
deserve a place. Public spaces are places of pauses where the mind and body relax.
What differentiates open and closed public spaces is that visitors to the former are there
without a specific reason, they are not oriented towards a certain activity, they simply
relax, look around at passers-by. In open public spaces, one can find again his/her
freedom, which the function and aesthetics of closed spaces has taken away from
him/her. It is a fact that, since antiquity and until today, architecture tried to integrate
man from the open to the closed space, in order to discipline and control his thoughts
and emotions. Naturally, modern architecture is today bare of ideology and symbolism,
as is our era, its only aim is functionalism and to impress. The result is in stereotyped
industrialised products and places, without an identity.
Open public spaces are only attractive for users if there is a certain concentration of
people. When an osmosis between open spaces and the city occurs – it is an osmosis of
the human presence in the streets with the human presence in public spaces. This way,
public spaces being connected with the movement of pedestrians and cyclists in the
streets, give them the opportunity for some pauses, meetings and mutual experiences
with their visitors. In the second half of the 19th century, trade gained great importance
in the cities again. This time it becomes part of the fun and lifestyle of the higher strata
of civil society. Open public spaces, especially those with shopping activities, became
the most important places in the city for leisure time. The open public spaces were
reviving and becoming places of gathering. At the same time, at the beginning of the
20th century, large shopping centres, partially or completely covered open public
spaces, were developed mainly in Western European countries, providing comfort from
weather conditions (such as arcades in Paris in the late 19th century and many
department stores in the cities of Europe). The appearance of department stores was
preceded by exhibitions (Gandl 2007). The protected areas of department stores
become a prototype for the middle class to purchase and spend free time. In contrast to
that, spending time on the street, connected with the cultural urban phenomenon, the
flâneur, who is an unconscious youth, artist or writer, with bohemian behaviour, that
conducts days in cafes and on the street with a cynical view of the world around him,
was first proposed by Charles Baudelaire in 1863. In the middle of the 19th century,
40 A. Djukic et al.

spending time or gathering on the street was incriminated and was considered immoral
for women. “The presence of unprotected women on the streets represents a threat to
male power and male weakness. Despite the fact that men in power did everything to
limit the movement of women in cities, it is impossible to completely remove them
from open public places. Women continue to gather in the city centre and within
factories” (Watson and Gibson 1995: 61).
Unlike open-air public space, shopping at a department store has been considered
acceptable. Department stores could fulfil the most of their wishes. They were, in fact,
closed worlds - small towns. They influenced the closure of small shops and con-
tributed to the formation of a new zone of the city, a “pleasure zone”, as the customer
was characterized as someone who is looking for satisfaction, material goods, per-
formances and public life (Rappaport 2000).
In the first half of 20th century, after the proclamation of the Athens Charter of
1933, the avant-garde of architecture and urbanism, led by Le Corbusier, Gropius and
Jacobs advocated for a radical transformation of the city. They insisted on a trans-
formation with a thesis that “chaotic and disordered cities with many social problems
should be rationally rearranged and clearly organized, with a dominant influence of
technology” (Bridge and Watson 2002). The strongest influence on these attitudes had
Le Corbusier, who insisted on introducing the legibility and transparency in urban
areas. Implementation of these values would be carried out by uniform zoning (zoning
plan). Emphasizing the importance of urban open space as a “large central open space
that allows spectacular order and vitality” (Forty 2004: 140), the social value of the
street is negated, as well as its historical and cultural value, significance and archi-
tecture. Followers of modern architecture were advocated for abolishing of the social
function of the streets. Furthermore, they were trying to invent and create such a form
that would be fully able to replace the street with a new infrastructure built for cars and
not for the human presence. Certain architects and theorists of architecture and urban
planning did not agree with such theses. Christopher Alexander was an opponent of
this “street theory”, believing that the streets should be shaped and arranged in such a
way to keep the passers-in as long as possible. Jane Jacobs emphasized the central role
of the streets (especially commercial) in establishing the urban life of the community,
arguing that multifunctionality is supported by the mechanism of “self-regulation of
street life” and that thus increases the level of security (Jacobs 1995). Mies van der
Rohe, as a supporter of functionalism in architecture, observed that the social values
and construction technology should be placed before form and that all structures and
facilities should be subordinate to their function and purpose of (Forty 2004: 165).
Theorists-rationalists, Lash and Friedman, believed that the streets should have an
exclusively traffic function and serve to the fastest way of transport of people and
goods from one point to the other (Lash and Friedmann 1992). These thoughts were
also the imperatives of modernist planning and consumer capitalism, who sought to
transform the symbolic shopping streets into functional spaces that maximize con-
sumption and facilitate transit (Fyfe 1998). The ideology of fascism has supported ideas
(called neo-classical) about straight and wide avenues that would provide a fast flow of
traffic and a sufficient amount of sunshine and ventilation. They should be designed in
accordance with the principles of public morality dictated by the state. One of the most
famous projects realized during the fascist period is the reconstruction of Via del Mare
 Liveable Open Public Space - From Flaneur to Cyborg 41

in Rome (Kostof 1973). These principles were implemented also in Brasilia in 1960,
where only high-speed avenues were constructed, as well as cul-de-sac residential
streets, while the social dimension of the streets was completely neglected. Walking
was undervalued in the same way that the historical city was scorned worldwide. The
objection against the latter didn’t concern its architecture but its public character. The
construction of many shopping centres in the prefixes of US cities, and also in West
European cities was supposed to replace trade at main or local streets. Practically,
shopping malls have become surrogates of the shopping streets of the city centre
(Crawford 1992).
In 1980’s open public spaces were in a focus of architects and urban designers
again. The urban concepts of car free cities and New Urbanism have been launched and
influenced the concepts of planning and designing of open public spaces. The urban
design has been oriented towards the users’ needs trying to achieve “more collective
and more responsible city”. Walking and cycling have been again observed as an
‘active’ type of transport, as they obviously serve the important values of quality of life.
After the signing of the Alborg (1994), most European cities, signatories of this treaty,
plead for upgrading sustainable mobility and favouring pedestrian and bicycle move-
ment, with the goal to promote sustainable urban development. This is additionally
based on the launching of numerous initiatives and activities throughout Europe which
promote pedestrian movement.

2 Cultural Aspects of Open Public Spaces

Cultural aspects of open public spaces are result of the overlapping of morphological
and functional characteristics. These characteristics create the identity of the open
space. Cultural context as the main factor of identity is an unavoidable part of col-
lective memory with its incorporated signs (Djukic 2011).

2.1 Morphological Framework of Open Public Spaces

The physical character of space is the product of a physical form, or as Kropf says,
“The most important part of our perception of the character of space is the physical
fabric of the place” (Kropf 1996; Hall 1996). He adds that the previous thesis is an
axiom of urban design, urban morphology and landscape architecture, and that, in
essence, this concept has now been rehabilitated as a valid planning method. Cullen
(1961), while exploring the psychological and emotional aspects of the experience of
urban ambiance, also pointed to the importance of the perception of morphological
characteristics of the city by the user, while passing along the streets and paths. As
users of open spaces, we mostly observe objects that define them as part of a wider field
of view. Most often, we rarely enter these objects, but after leaving this scene, even if
we move fast, along our movement, we can easily bring judgment about the character
and quality of that space (Bentley et al. 1985).
In a study that examined the positive effects of urban design (done by the CABE -
Commission for Architecture and Built Environment and DETR 2001), in the section
dealing with urban design, the quality of open public space is measured by the number
42 A. Djukic et al.

of users and their flow through the selected space. It is concluded that the number of
users is directly dependent on the physical characteristics of the subject area (urban
structure, the relationship between the block, the street and the plot, the intensity of the
activity, the type of objects, the facade, the details and materialization, the street front
and the streetscape/landscape).

2.2 Functionality
Open public spaces are used by different protagonists, often of subtle values and views.
However, managing these spaces is extremely complex and produces a series of
problems (Sennett 1974). These problems are mostly related to the conflicts between
activities and their intensity, as well as the regime of functioning (Djukic 2011). Open
public space has the function of moving, gathering and retaining users (pedestrians,
vehicles). On the one hand, the content of the activity indirectly influences the character
of the place, and on the other hand the formed physical structure determines the
functions and defines the contents in objects that are built along its boundaries (Djukic
2011). The current physical structure determines the future physical structure that will
take its place in the future. In the book The Death and Life of Great American Cities,
(Jacobs 1961), the author deals with the phenomenon of urban life and highlights the
significance of the streets and open public spaces for the livelihoods of cities, com-
paring them with the heart of the city. She also noted that the key role of open public
space is in accepting pedestrians and in their animation (both the local population and
the visitor). The basis of vital life in the street is the diversity of both physical forms
and functions and activities in it. Furthermore, the quality of the physical structure of
the city refers to its connection with functions (primarily in the ground), the dimension
of the blocks (primarily the shredding), the position of the front door (direct access to
ground floor facilities), possibility of choosing the path for pedestrian traffic, etc.
(Djukic 2011).
The concept of Jane Jacobs was supported by the group of professors from Bartlett
School of Architecture and Planning in 70’s. One of the results of this research was the
space syntax method (B. Hillier and J. Hanson) which was focused on the social and
physical aspect of open urban spaces. Space syntax uses quantitative methods
(counting of pedestrians and vehicles) to get connections between the built space, the
functions and liveability of open public spaces. In this way, the urban vision of Jacobs
was confirmed on several occasions and the space syntax authors have come up with
two very important conclusions: that it is necessary to study the space first, and then
start with the design, and that the intensity of the network of pedestrian movements has
the main role to its significance. In later research (80’s of the 20th century), Hillier
identified types of street networks that support the life of open-air urban spaces
experimentally (based on everyday experiences, behaviours, events, and especially
between psycho-spatial quality, pedestrian movements, possible encounters, informal
and formal social structures), in a world which enables us to understand the dynamics
of open spaces.
 Liveable Open Public Space - From Flaneur to Cyborg 43

2.3 Cultural Context as a Result of Morphological and Functional

Characteristics
Anthropologists believe that textual and collage metaphors were crucial in the creation
of culture, and that the world was established by the principle of symbols, myths and
rituals, which certain groups connect in appropriate circuits ideology (Ellin 1999; Levi-
Strauss 2001; Geertz 1964). Similarly, sociologist Suttles (1973) claims that commu-
nities were formed differently, because they were educated by different people, and that
the task of the anthropologist was to decipher the messages they left recorded in the
cities. This multifaceted space, with respect to multiculturalism and multi-ethnicity, is
one of the foundations of modern thought in the field of urban design of open public
spaces. Therefore, we can claim, that cultural heritage carries a spiritual message of its
time and we cannot observe it outside the temporal and spatial framework. Open public
spaces were formed in different periods of time, with different cultural and socio-
political frameworks, from different social strata, in different ways. Different social
groups were even excluded from public spaces in particular periods and cultures (in
ancient Greece, free women were forbidden to walk freely in open public spaces, in
New York in the 19th century “women and children were subjected to short-term arrests
if they were without male escort. The streets were perceived as a place of sexual
danger.” (Fyfe 1998). In the 19th century, up to this day, the open public spaces were
considered as a place of conflicts, and the streets were regarded as a place of sexual
danger and scene for political events (public protests and political struggles). The
cultural context implies socio-cultural characteristics of the ambience, and therefore the
open public spaces are the parts of the city that its inhabitants are the most often
identified with.
At the same time, open public spaces are the main city stage for the social events
(Djukic 2011). Observed from the sociological aspect, the problem of the modern city
is in the inability of its citizens to identify themselves with the environment in which
they live, which affects the psycho-physical state of the individual. This problem is a
consequence of citizens’ dissatisfaction with the exaggerated insistence of architects
and urbanists in a universal language or style in architecture, which negates historical
experiences and local traditions. According to Baudrillard, the “aesthetics of break-in”
was fashionable with previous patterns of fashion and social behaviour, while at the
same time nurturing “the destruction of traditional forms”. The discontent of the
inhabitants caused by their inability to identify with certain urban areas (usually new
residential areas) has sometimes culminated, leading to the alienation of individuals
and various social deviations (suburbs of Paris, housing estates for social housing in
England). Good architecture does not usually include good open spaces on which it is
leaning, and good open public spaces, squares and streets can be framed with quite
average architectural achievements.
Many authors refer to the “soul of the city”, which is considered as a structural
connection between the city and its inhabitants, and which as a historical category
marks memory. Halbrouck pointed to the interaction between the city and its inhabi-
tants, stressing the fact, that groups of people who have settled some space, adapt and
44 A. Djukic et al.

change that space to their own ideas, but at the same time they adapt themselves to the
space, closing within the boundaries they have formed (Djukic 2011). The picture of
the external environment and the character of the relationship that the group has built
up among each other, have a significant effect on the image that this group forms on
itself. (Boyer 1995). Christina Boyer states that the unity between the past and the
future is in the very idea of a city which permeates them, “as memory recalls the life of
one person”, and in order to realize the idea, it must shape reality, but it must also be
shaped in its own way. These processes, which are recorded in individual urban units,
monuments and our performances and the experiences of integrally possessing iden-
tities and continuity, explain in part the reasons for embedding bribes into the foun-
dations of the city (Boyer 1995). According to Jung, the most important urban spaces
and myths about them are inherited from our predecessors. We borrow them from the
image of collective consciousness. And the Norbert-Schulz theorist emphasises
familiarity, as a sense of belonging to some space, which is formed even in our
childhood and which we carry in ourselves for the rest of our lives. It enables us to feel
more comfortable in a certain area, to get better and to accept it as an integral part of
our own memory image.
Physical forms are the product of cultural and social reflections on the one hand and
individual aspirations of investors and architects on the other. However, open public
spaces without users, activities and social contacts, are as scenes without actors and
performances (Djukic 2011). The complexity of the relationship between the form and
the open public space stems from the cultural and sociological patterns, but also from
the inherited physical frames. It is difficult to determine what is older - the form or
function, and what is necessary to start first, to activate the second.

3 The Qualities of Open Public Spaces – Toward Liveable

City

Liveability is one of the key factors of the quality of the urban environment. Renowned
Dutch architect, urban planner and humanist Jan Gehl, who was the creator of vital
public spaces with human scale in cities like Copenhagen, New York and Melbourne,
said: “Urban design is all about the human dimensions. Not about cars, industry or
business. The quality of life has to be on the first place, followed up by space and
buildings – other way round it does not work. If people perceive positively the city for
their life, everything else will come gradually’’.
Walkability, as one of the factors of liveability, can be defined as a measure of how
friendly an area or a city is. The idea of “walkable” neighbourhood conjures up a pre-
19th century, holistic view of health and well-being, combining notions of citizenship,
civic life, democracy, resiliency, spiritual health, beauty, and social justice (Kashef
2016). The walkable neighbourhood has been associated with trust and social
engagement (Leyden 2003) as well as sociability (Brown and Cropper 2001). Some
people have negative perceptions on walking whether it’s because they don’t feel safe,
or the pedestrian network is not adequate developed, absence of sidewalks, or because
 Liveable Open Public Space - From Flaneur to Cyborg 45

of climate comfort (usually thermal). One of the most important benefits of walking is
improved quality of life. It could provide that city become a better place to live by
helping people become healthier, encouraging social cohesion, decrease air pollution
and provide people who do not drive a car an easy and safe walk to their destination.
At the very core of good urban design is a deep understanding of how residents live
in the apartment block, district, neighbourhood, city and region. Quality of life is
currently a new differentiator, cities compete in quality of life, providing its residents in
habitability and liveability. Once the sufficient level to ensure the health, housing,
employment, education, services and security is achieved, the quality of habitability is
directly connected with the feelings of happiness and fulfilment of meaning of life. The
most vulnerable part of the population must be taken into account, children, pensioners,
economically, socially or physically disadvantaged. Liveable cities provide the full
potential of possibilities and opportunities for people’s lives and meaningful devel-
opment of their families.
The concentration of pedestrians is one of the key factors for a successful walkable
- neighbourhood and a city. According to many authors there is a strong connection
between the experiences of urban space and presence of people using it (Gehl 2010;
Jacobs 1995; Lynch 1974; Hiller and Henson 1984). It is related with the people’s
activities, cognitive experiences and also depends on the way people interact between
each other. In that regard, Whyte considers that the number of the people in urban
space is not the only important fact, it should include time they spend in the place, as
well as the fact if they come alone or in groups (1980). Quality space and critical mass
of users are prerequisites for processes in which small events can blossom (Jacobs
1995) and on the other hand, it is the main precondition for successful public space.
Walkability is defined by Abley and Turner (2011) as the degree that the urban
environment is friendly to its users. According to Leslie et al. (2006) walkable is the
place which, due to its characteristics, encourages people to walk. As Litman (1999)
argues these characteristics are safety, convenience, comfort and the quality of pave-
ments. For Hess and Farrow (2010) walkability is measured according to the attrac-
tiveness of pedestrians. Pivo and Fisher (2011) define the same parameter as the degree
that inhabitants of an area are encouraged to reach by foot their close destinations.
Walkability depends on the population density of an area, the mixite of land uses, the
connectivity of the networks, the distance of principal destinations, the width of
pavements, the distance between successive crossings, the topography of the urban
landscape, the feeling of safety, the aesthetics of architecture etc. Walking and standing
are the two sides of the same coin.
How to make our cities walkable is a crucial issue for Sustainable Urban Mobility
Plans. These are the 21st century Combined Urban and Transport Plans which replace
conventional planning. Their purpose is to reduce speeds and the number of cars in the
streets, to enhance walking and cycling and to increase the role of public transport
(Fig. 1). The vision for the city of tomorrow is to transform the streets in places to live and
to socialize. This is a huge infrastructure and technological challenge (Vlastos 2014).
46 A. Djukic et al.

Fig. 1. Plan for widening the pedestrian network (car-free streets) within the historical center of
Belgrade. Source: author Ana Delipara, in Folic M., Vukmirovic M (2016) “Projekat IME:
Identity_Mobility_Environment of the City of Belgrade”. City of Belgrade Communication
Office, Belgrade.

4 Future of Open Public Spaces or Are the Cyberparks

for Cyborgs?

What is the future of open public spaces? How they can become more vibrant and how
they contribute to the liveability of a city? Although citizens in surveys which had been
done in Belgrade during 2005 and 2016 have been concerned about the decrease of the
quality of open public spaces, especially of the parks, the number of the open public
space within the cities usually remains the same. Furthermore, some open public spaces
are changing in a positive way, as it concerns technology. During the last three dec-
ades, ICT becomes the crucial part of our everyday life. ICT systems in cities, pro-
viding and ensuring low-cost internet access in open public spaces, are an indicator of
development and the well-being of citizens (Djukic and Aleksic 2016). As Souza e
Silva (2006: 262) has already pointed out, contemporary cities are ‘hybrid spaces’
where ICT, overlapping physical urban and information space, create hybrid space.
People use social networks on everyday basis and interact in both the physical and
virtual realms, gathering formally or informally in order to exchange information and
knowledge, disseminate practice and experiences, and erase various kinds of limita-
tions (Stupar and Djukic 2014). Citizens are also becoming interactive participants in
the process of collaborative planning and design of the spaces they use. While the main
role of an open public space is still to provide physical social contact between people -
a place where they can rest, recreate and enjoy the environment – e-networks have
opened up additional channels of communication and diffusion and become a new tool
for the continuous development of such locations (Stupar and Djukic 2014). Users
acting as consumers of places can use ICT to participate as active contributors to the
process of urban design or as critics of open urban space.
 Liveable Open Public Space - From Flaneur to Cyborg 47

‘A cyborg is a cybernetic organism, a hybrid of machine and organism, a creature

of social reality as well as a creature of fiction’ (Haraway 1991: 149). Cyborgs use
provided data and function according to them. Is the cyborg-flâneur a modern flâneur
who adapts to a new technology? Mitchell introduced the cyber flâneur in 1996 in his
writings ‘I am an electronic flâneur. I hang out on the network … The keyboard is my
café’ (p. 7). Cyborg flâneur explains how citizens use and inhabit the hybrid space. He
is searching for pleasure and joy, while involving in activities associated with flaneur
(games, virtual tours, online shopping, sharing social or Facebook status, virtual
contacts with others) which allow the illusion of a certain freedom in hybrid space –
virtual reality.

5 Conclusions and Future Developments

The street has a history. Going out onto the street we leave behind us our private space
and become part of the public and social sphere. Far from the protection of the private,
we let go, we are open and free to communicate. We could easily avoid this by quickly
getting into our car or a taxi. Instead, we are transported into a different world. Walking
and cycling combine the personal and collective experience. The street is also an open
public space where should be space for the citizens to stand and being present.
Qualities of the street like accessibility, safety, comfort, attractiveness are crucial for
liveability and social cohesion. Implementation of ICT’s in open spaces and streets is
crucial to enhance the above qualities. ICT’s turn open spaces into digital places which
are environments of socialization that compete with physical places. Technology is a
new experience, and among other things, it is an urban game – playable city – which
can transfer you anywhere, to any city. With augmented reality applications on the
internet Cyborg-flaneur will live the city directly or indirectly, autonomously or col-
lectively. He could even play with it. New communication technology will contribute
greatly in this direction. Tomorrow’s digital public city, a city of information,
exchange, dialogue, meeting and playing will constitute a social field of liveliness and
inspiration.
Cyberparks will become a new real and simultaneously digital world of places
where the community will be connected with the local and the wider. In these places
the live and digital exchange of information will be combined, and new social and
political experiences will be acquired. The planet is becoming more unified, financially
and culturally and is developing explosively under the umbrella of a new social digital
public space of communication and exchange, which is the internet. In reality
tomorrow, this will become our new home. Internet will be present everywhere, we will
all share the same information and distance will count for nothing when it comes to
exchange. As travellers on the web and citizens of the world we will know a lot about it
since we will move intensively and therefore, we will be informed about everything
that is happening. We will become more conscious about dangers the planet faces. The
open public spaces of the city of tomorrow will be places for people prepared to discuss
and find collective solutions. Cyborg-flaneur will be the citizen of tomorrow searching
for pleasure and joy and solutions for surviving in our complex new world.
48 A. Djukic et al.

References
Abley, S., Turner, S.: Predicting Walkability. NZ Transport Agency, Wellington (2011)
Alborg, C.: Charter of European cities & towns towards sustainability (1994). http://ec.europa.eu/
environment/urban/pdf/aalborg_charter.pdf
Bentley, I., Alcock, A., Murrain, P., McGlynn, S., Smith, G.: Responsive Environments – A
Manual For Designers. Butterworth Architecture, Oxford (1985)
Bridge, G., Watson, S.: A Companion to the City. Blackwell Companion to Geography, Oxford
(2002)
Boyer, M.C.: The City of Collective Memory. The MIT Press, Massachusetts (1995)
Brown, B.B., Cropper, V.L.: New urban and standard suburban subdivisions: evaluating
psychological and social goals. J. Am. Plan. Assoc. 67(4), 402–419 (2001)
CABE: The Value of Urban Design: A Research Project Commissioned by CABE and DETR.
Thomas Telford, London (2001)
Crawford, M.: The world in a shopping mall. In: Sorkin, M. (ed.) Variations on a Theme Park:
The New American City and The End of Public Space, pp. 3–30. Hill and Wang, New York
(1992)
Cullen, G.: Townscape. Architectural Press, New York (1961)
De Souza e Silva, A.: From cyber to hybrid: mobile technologies as interfaces of hybrid spaces.
Space Cult. 9(3), 261–278 (2006)
Djukic, A.: Keeping the Identity of the Main Streets in Vojvodina Towns in the Process of Urban
Renewal (Doctoral dissertation, unpublished). Faculty of Architecture, Belgrade (2011)
Djukic, A., Aleksic, D.: Mixed reality environment and open public space design. In: Vanista
Lazarevic, E., Vukmirovic, M., Krstic-Furundzic, A., Djukic, A. (eds.) International
Academic Conference: Places and Technologies 2016: Keeping up with Technologies to
Improve Places- Cognitive City, pp. 761–769 (2016)
Ellin, N.: Postmodern Urbanism. Princeton Architectural Press, New York (1999)
Fyfe, R.N.: Images of the Streets. Routledge, London and New York (1998)
Forty, A.: Words and Buildings. Thames & Hudson, London (2004)
Gandl, S.: Glamur. CLIO, Belgrade (2007)
Gehl, J.: Cities for People. Island Press, Washington (2010)
Geertz, C.: Ideology as a cultural system. In: Ideology and Discontent, vol. 5 (1964)
Hall, A.C.: Design Control: Towards a New Approach. Butterworth Architecture, Oxford (1996)
Haraway, D.: Simians, Cyborgs and Women - The Reinvention of Nature. Free Association
Books, London (1991)
Hess, P.M., Farrow, J.: Walkability in Toronto’s High-Rise Neighbourhoods. University of
Toronto, Toronto (2010)
Hiller, B., Henson, J.: The Social Logic of Space. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
(1984)
Jacobs, J.: The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Vintage Books, New York (1961)
Jacobs, A.: Great Streets. MIT Press, Massachusetts (1995)
Kashef, M.: Urban liveability across disciplinary and professional boundaries. Front. Arch. Res.
5(2), 239–253 (2016)
Kostof, S.: The City Shaped – Urban Patterns and Meanings Through History. Thames and
Hudson, London (1973)
Kropf, K.: Urban tissue and the character of towns. Urban Des. Int. 1(3), 247–263 (1996)
Lash, S., Friedmann, J.: Modernity and Identity. Blackwell, Oxford (1992)
Lefebvre, H.: Writings on Cities. Blackwell, Oxford (1991)
 Liveable Open Public Space - From Flaneur to Cyborg 49

Leslie, E., Butterworth, I., Edwards, M.: Measuring the walkability of local communities using
geographic information systems data. In: Walk 21-VII, Melbourne, Australia (2006)
Levi-Strauss, C.: Myth and Meaning. Routledge, London (2001)
Leyden, K.M.: Social capital and the built environment: the importance of walkable
neighbourhoods. Am. J. Public Health 93(9), 1546–1551 (2003)
Litman, T.A.: Traffic calming benefits, costs and equity impacts. Victoria Transport Policy
Institute, Victoria (1999)
Lynch, K.: Image of a City. The MIT Press, Massachusetts (1974)
Mitchell, W.J.: City of Bits: Space, Place and the Infobahn. MIT Press, Cambridge (1996)
Pivo, G., Fisher, J.D.: The walkability premium in commercial real estate investments. Real
Estate Econ. 39(2), 185–219 (2011)
Rappaport, E.D.: Shopping for Pleasure: Woman and the Making of the London’s West End.
Princeton University Press, Princeton (2000)
Sennett, R.: The Fall of Public Man. Faber & Faber, London (1974)
Stevens, Q.: The Ludic City: Exploring the Potential of Public Space. Routledge, New York
(2007)
Stupar, A., Djukic, A.: Vis-à-vis communication? The digital and physical spaces of interaction
in the contemporary city. In: Schrenk, M., Popovich, V., Zeile, P., Elisei, P. (eds.)
International Scientific Conference “REAL CORP 2015 - Plan Together - Right Now -
Overall: From Visions to Reality for Vibrant Cities and Regions”, pp. 687–693 (2014)
Suttles, G.: The Social Construction of Communities. University of Chicago Press, Chicago
(1973)
Vlastos, T.: Les limites de la marche. Recherche – Transports – Securité, 30, 35–45 (2014)
Watson, S., Gibson, K. (eds.): Postmodern Cities and Spaces. Basil Blackwell, Oxford (1995)
Whyte, W.H.: The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Conservation Foundation, PPS, New York
(1980)

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
1.5
Exploring the Concept of Cyberpark: What
the Experts Think

Paschalis Arvanitidis1(&) , Konstantinos Lalenis1 ,

Georgios Artopoulos2 , and Montserrat Pallares-Barbera3
1
University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece
[email protected], [email protected]
2
The Cyprus Institute, Nicosia, Cyprus
[email protected]
3
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Cerdanyola, Spain
[email protected]

Abstract. The chapter aims to provide a contextualisation of the cyberpark

concept as this is perceived by a wide range of experts in public space and
information technologies. To do so it makes use of a questionnaire survey
conducted with the participants of the CyberParks COST Action, which col-
lected their views on a number of aspects concerning both the mediated and the
not mediated public open spaces, such as: their elements and qualities, the
facilities they should offer, the activities they should facilitate, the type of space
and location that are most suitable to accommodate them, their appropriate size
and manner for their development, their target user group and other aspects of
their configuration. The analysis brings out the commonalities and differences in
experts’ views regarding the mediated and the not mediated public open spaces,
and, as such, it contributes to specify further the cyberpark concept, mapping
out its characteristics and dimensions. This should enrich the ongoing dialogue
within the literature and facilitate interactions between relevant, yet fragmented,
scientific disciplines in the area to inform the production and appropriation of
both mediated and the not mediated public open spaces.

Keywords: Experts
Views
Diversity
Survey

1 Introduction

The idea of a technologically augmented public open space (POS) has been seen in a
very positive way by some people, but with scepticism by others. People perceive
parks, plazas, squares, etc. as places to enjoy for leisure, sometimes for work, but rarely
as places specifically designed to bring together the ‘real’ with the ‘virtual’ and to offer
digital interaction and cyber experiences to people. This chapter gets involved in this
discussion and attempts to elucidate the concept and characteristics of such a space,
termed as ‘cyberpark’ (Smaniotto Costa et al. 2017). To do so, the chapter makes use
of a survey conducted with various experts on the issue. These are the participants of
the COST Action TU 1306 CyberParks. The questionnaire that is used has collected

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 50–66, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_5
 Exploring the Concept of Cyberpark: What the Experts Think 51

their views on a number of cyberpark and public space aspects, aiming to bring out the
commonalities and differences in their opinion and, as such, to explore the idea and
specify the peculiarities and characteristics of cyberpark, in comparison to POS which
are not enhanced with information and communications technology (ICT). Analysis of
these data is very important given the variety in scientific backgrounds and training of
these people (including social scientists, artists, urban designers, information tech-
nology professionals, communication specialists, etc.) and consequently the diversity
of their views regarding what a cyberpark might actually be.
In a nutshell, the chapter aims to provide, in a more systematic, organized and
structured way, a contextualization of the various dimensions of the ICT mediated
POS, vis-à-vis POS that are not enhanced with technology, which emerge due to
different perspectives, disciplines, backgrounds, etc. of the related experts. Of course,
this chapter is not a conclusive piece of work on the issue; it simply presents a first
attempt to explore the terrain and to introduce new elements from the expert’s per-
spectives in understanding the concept of cyberpark and the important role ICTs play
to POS in the twenty first century.

2 From CyberParks (COST Action) to Cyberpark (Concept)

COST Action CyberParks participants have different cultural/national backgrounds and

professional experience (in research, policy making, urban design, arts, etc.), and come
from various scientific fields (ICTs specialists, spatial planners, urban developers,
geographers, sociologists, anthropologists, economists, communication professionals,
etc.), having different education and viewpoints on the issues of production, use and
management of POS. This is certainly an advantage for a COST Action, since it
provides a stimulating environment for sparking ideas, synergies and cross-fertilisation
between different scientific disciplines, but it brings out the diversity that exists in the
terminology, perspectives and, perhaps, understanding of what cyberpark is or it should
be like.
At the beginning of the CyberParks project the concept of cyberpark was relatively
vague; a subtle idea that new technologies are able to play an important part in the
development of POS into intelligent spaces, where urban (mainly natural) landscape and
digital environment blend together to provide services that enhance the quality of life. It
is interesting to observe the evolution of the constituent concepts, the interpretations
given, and the focus placed by the participants as the project went through. At the kick-
off meeting of the project (Brussels on April 2014) the main objective was to:
…create a research platform on the relationship between information and communication
technologies (ICTs) and the production and use of public open spaces, and their relevance to
sustainable urban development. The impacts of this relationship will be explored from social,
ecological, urban design and methodological perspectives.
52 P. Arvanitidis et al.

This lead, in a second CyberParks meeting (in Barcelona on November 2014) to the
provision of the following working definition concerning cyberpark:
A cyberpark is a designed ecosystem of living processes and technologies. It comprises an
outdoor green or blue space interacting with a digital intelligent environment. It usually
contains living beings, plants, trees, and water features, many of which are integrated with
computerised sensors, haptic technologies and virtual objects. Its features can vary widely. For
example: It can be used for a range of purposes such as exercise, leisure, social interaction,
relaxation and many other activities. It may be public or private. It can be found in urban,
suburban, rural, coastal and wilderness areas. It can consist of a large area of land not
covered with buildings, roads, or sports facilities, or a dedicated small area in such places as
streets, squares, buildings (courtyards, roofs), or disused thoroughfares like the New York
Highline. It can also be a beach, ocean, lake, river, or wetland.

We see that the concept evolves to perceive cyberpark not simply as a techno-
logically blended place, but as an ecosystem; the definition deepens on the specifics of
the constituent elements, such as outdoor green or blue space; it highlights the ICT
connection; it sets forth the diversity of virtual object present in a cyberpark; and
emphasizes the flexibility of the concept, to be seen as a working definition which
could serve different objectives and agents, from academics to public and private
institutions and users. In time, the many understandings of the concept started con-
verging to a more concise meaning of what a cyberpark is:
A cyberpark is a new type of urban landscape where nature and cybertechnologies blend
together to generate hybrid experiences and enhance quality of life. The attributes of a
Cyberpark (referenced from the Smart Cities initiative) could be defined by the use of sensor
technologies in a connectable space, accessible to the public through ubiquitous technologies
used in sociable and sharable ways where the virtual is made visible or augments the land-
scape. ICT can be used in this context to give or gather information, to aid co-creation of space,
to allow crowd sourcing of information and opinions, and to allow affective sharing or self-
monitoring of activities. Hardware may be embedded in the environment in the form of
responsive sound or lighting systems, control systems, kinetic objects or artworks, passive
sensor technologies and display systems. We recognize that the use of such affordances will be
qualified by such considerations as the time of day, the duration of the visit, the weather and
temperature, location, season, individual or group engagement, age, gender, purpose of visit
and the topology and size of the space. (Agora 2017)

Currently, it is important to emphasize the complexity of the cyberpark concept and

its relation to quality of life in which “the virtual is made visible or augments the
landscape.” In this sense work is needed to identify cyberpark’s specific characteristics
and peculiarities that distinguish it from the general category of POS. These are
attempted in the following section.

3 Exploring the Understanding of the Cyberpark Concept

3.1 Research Concept and Methodology

This section discusses how CyberParks Action participants perceive the notion of
cyberpark and its dimensions, vis-à-vis other, more conventional, POS, i.e. POS that
 Exploring the Concept of Cyberpark: What the Experts Think 53

are not enhanced with technology. Data was collected through a questionnaire survey
that explored a number of issues, such as: the elements and qualities of both cyberpark
and POS, the facilities they should offer, the activities they should facilitate, the type of
space and location that are most suitable to accommodate them, their appropriate size
and manner for their development, their target user group and other aspects of their
configuration.
Established studies in the area, such as the one by the Project for Public Spaces1,
have observed that in order to be relevant and occupied (i.e., be sustainable and alive),
a POS must:
– Encourage the sociality and socialisation of its users, by being hospitable, friendly,
interactive, multi-thematic, collective, familiar, etc.
– Offer a variety of uses and related activities, by being pleasant, lively, unique,
useful, local and sustainable.
– Provide comfort and an attractive image, by being safe, clean, “green”, providing
places to sit and rest but also paths for walking, being pleasant, encouraging
intellectual pursuits, being attractive and showcasing local historical moments.
– Be accessible and hospitable to all, by providing continuity with the urban fabric,
proximity, connectivity, being easily readable and recognisable, convenient, and by
not excluding any social group.
These considerations have been taken into account for the construction of the
questionnaire that contributed to this chapter. Also, the authors acknowledge that POS,
with its complexities, indeterminacy, and abundance of possible interactions, when it is
accessible by the wanderer, local or tourist, offers a sensual experience. This became a
point of entry for the development of both CyberParks and cyberpark, as it is further
discussed in other chapters of this book. The enriched appropriation of citizens to
public space and to data overlaid on physical space, and most importantly, the
enhanced capacity for both individual and collective action for the management of the
POS, are considered some of the added values over conventional public space.
The questionnaire developed consists of three parts containing 24 questions where
participants were asked to choose from a list of options and to evaluate specific
characteristics of both cyberpark and not mediated POS, on a scale of 0 (denoting
strong disagreement, negative opinion, etc.) to 10 (denoting strong agreement, positive
opinion, etc.). In particular, the first part of the questionnaire informs the participants
on the purpose of the research and ensures the anonymity of participation. The second
part gathers socio-demographic information, such as gender, age, nationality, discipline
of specialisation, and occupation. Finally, the third part records views regarding the
number of cyberpark’s and POS’s aspects examined. Survey questions were pre-tested
in a pilot study enabling fine-tuning of the instrument.

1
The Project for Public Spaces is a non-profit organisation for study, design and education with the
goal of creating sustainable active public and collective spaces for the strengthening of community.
The organisation was founded in the United States in 1975 and since then has studied more than
3,000 communities in 43 countries; see <http://www.pps.org/about/>.
54 P. Arvanitidis et al.

The survey was conducted in April 2017 during the CyberParks’ Working Groups
Meeting. Questionnaires were distributed in person by the members of the research
team and asked to be completed on the spot. In order to increase response rate and
quality, participants were given the choice of their responses to be recorded by the
researcher, or, should they wish, to complete the questions by themselves on their own
time. Questionnaires were collected, validated, and then coded and analysed to generate
a number of statistics illustrating the respondents’ answers on the issues raised.

3.2 Composition of Respondents

From a targeted population of 48 experts that participated in the Ancona meeting of the
project (where our data were collected), 44 validated questionnaires were acquired
(91.7%). The gender composition of the respondents was about 63.6% male and 36.4%
female. The average age was about 47 years, with the youngest expert being 30 years
old and the oldest 69. The respondents are from 22 countries all over Europe and Israel,
but higher participation was from Italy (5 respondents), Portugal (5), Spain (5), Poland
(3) and Sweden (3) (see Fig. 1). The vast majority of the respondents (90.0% of the
sample) hold a PhD, whereas the rest have completed postgraduate studies (9.1%).
Their knowledge base is informed by 13 academic disciplines (Fig. 2), ranging from
spatial planning and urban design, to information technology and various social science
subjects (sociology, anthropology, economics, etc.). Most of the participants are aca-
demics (67.4%), some work in the private sector (16.3%), others in the public sector
(11.6%) and a few are freelancers (4.7%).

Fig. 1. Origin country of respondents

 Exploring the Concept of Cyberpark: What the Experts Think 55

Fig. 2. Specialization of respondents

3.3 Analysis
Firstly, the participants were asked to specify which one of the three constituent ele-
ments, that is, space, people and technology, is the principal feature of cyberpark and
POS. As Fig. 3 shows, experts regard that people is the central element of both, but
whereas in POS technology plays a rather minimal role, in cyberpark this becomes the
second most important component, followed by space, which comes last in array.

Fig. 3. Importance of constituent elements

56 P. Arvanitidis et al.

In addition, participants were invited to identify five keywords that best define the
concept of cyberpark. Their responses are classified on the basis of the three constituent
elements and are presented in Table 1 below. As becomes evident, from the 53 key-
words provided by the experts, information and communications technologies (ICTs)
constitutes the distinctive one that characterises cyberpark (identified by 23 people).
Public space (here mentioned for short as POS) is the second one (identified 14 times),
followed by enhanced and interactive space (both identified 9 times). Digital and
inclusive space, come next, along with cooperation and community (8 times). Figure 4
offers a visualisation of these data, where the importance of each keyword (in terms of
the times it has been identified) is represented by its different size in the graph.

Table 1. Cyberpark keywords

Space People Technology
POS (14) Inclusive (8) ICTs (23)
Enhanced (9) Cooperation (8) Interactive (9)
Innovative (7) Community (8) Digital (8)
Hybrid (7) Communication (4) Wi-fi (5)
Open (5) Well-being (4) Virtual (4)
Green (6) Connectivity (3) Apps (3)
Quality space (2) Experience (2) Information (3)
Facilities (2) Free (2) Augmented (2)
Modern (2) Users (2) Smart (2)
Added value Work (2) Important (2)
Diversity Planning (2) Inevitable
Dynamic Activities Sensors
Functionality Bottom-up Valuable
Glocal Enabling Energy provision
Heterotopia Engagement
Heuristic Identity
Temporarity Learning
Accessibility Playing
Security Resilience
Story-telling

Next, respondents were asked to identify the most important qualities of the spaces
under investigation. Figure 5 presents the results. We see that information transmission
is perceived to be the most important quality of cyberpark (a feature that is ranked very
low in conventional POS), followed by safety and space quality, both of which are
regarded as quite important qualities of good POS. Interestingly, the existence of
natural environment and greenery is regarded as an essential quality of POS, but not
that much of a cyberpark.
 Exploring the Concept of Cyberpark: What the Experts Think 57

Fig. 4. Word-cloud of cyberpark keywords

Fig. 5. Qualities of spaces

From a list of facilities that public spaces could offer, experts were asked to choose
those that are most necessary to cyberpark and to POS. As Fig. 6 illustrates, internet
facilities, interactive information and places to work are essential for cyberpark, and of
rather low importance to POS. In turn, places to sit and facilities for visitors in general,
including facilities for specific groups (such as disadvantaged citizens or children), are
regarded as most important for POS.
58 P. Arvanitidis et al.

Fig. 6. Facilities provided

Turning to the activities that the public spaces under examination should facilitate,
experts indicated that relaxing, socializing and communicating with people constitute
the most important functions that a cyberpark should offer (Fig. 7). The first two are
also the two main activities that POS also facilitate, along with strolling and leisure.
Interestingly, educational, work and communicate facilities are ranked quite high in
cyberpark (fourth, fifth and third, respectively), but very low in POS, which are mainly
appreciated for their recreational and leisure role.

Fig. 7. Facilitated activities

 Exploring the Concept of Cyberpark: What the Experts Think 59

The next question asked respondents to assess what types of places are best for each
of the spaces examined. Figure 8 presents the findings. We see that mainly parks,
followed by squares, historic sites and river banks and canals, are the most suitable
places for deploying both cyberpark and POS, whereas cemeteries, parking-spaces and
sport-fields are the least appropriate for both. Spaces that are regarded as suitable to
host a cyberpark, but are not that appropriate for POS, are leftover or vacant spaces
(ranked fifth), as well as bus and railway stops and stations (ranked eight). In turn,
experts believe that places which could better accommodate a cyberpark, rather than
conventional POS, are institutional public spaces (like, university campuses, libraries,
church and school yards), internalized ‘public’ spaces (such as, interior of
shopping/leisure centres and retail space), and any other space with public access. We
note with interest that CyberParks experts do not confine cyberpark to outdoor
locations.

Fig. 8. Suitable spaces

Next, we asked the specialists to specify, which locations are best for a cyberpark
vis-à-vis POS. As Fig. 9 illustrates, city centre and downtown are most appropriate
places for cyberpark. City centre is also a good location for POS in general; however,
downtown locations are not regarded as suitable. Third in line comes sites within
neighbourhoods, which is seen as a quite good location for the development of all POS
as well.
60 P. Arvanitidis et al.

Fig. 9. Suitable locations

The appropriate size of both cyberpark and conventional POS was another issue
explored with the experts. As Fig. 10 makes evident, medium and small size spaces are
most appropriate for a cyberpark, whereas for POS medium to large size should be
sought. Of course, what constitutes small or large size of space is a relative and rather
subjective measure (which might differ between different disciplines or exerts), how-
ever the answers we received provide an indication that size could be a characteristic
that distinguishes cyberpark from conventional POS.

Fig. 10. Suitable sizes

Figure 11 presents the results concerning the target population of both cyberpark
and POS. We see that city dwellers are the main target group of both spaces. Moreover,
a cyberpark should focus on servicing tourists and visitors (ranked second), and the
youth (ranked third), whereas POS should primarily target local residents living nearby.
Intriguingly, we also see that elderly people is a legitimate target group for POS, but are
not regarded that can take advantage of the special facilities that a cyberpark can offer.
 Exploring the Concept of Cyberpark: What the Experts Think 61

Fig. 11. Target population

The development and maintenance of public space constitutes a major issue,

especially during the times of economic crisis, where local authorities are facing
increased financial problems and difficulties. The question that follows examines who
the experts reckon should bear the costs of providing and maintaining the spaces under
investigation. Four options were given: the users of the spaces, all citizens, the local
authorities with the municipality, and the private sector. As Fig. 12 depicts, the vast
majority of experts agree that local authorities should undertake such costs, for the
development and maintenance of both cyberpark and POS. However, in contrast to
POS, experts seem to be open to other sources of finance when the question turns to
cyberpark. Interestingly the 13.6% of the respondents regard that the private sector
could contribute to the provision and maintenance of cyberpark and 9.1% is willing the
users themselves to bear part of these costs.

Fig. 12. Provision and maintenance

62 P. Arvanitidis et al.

The final set of questions explored the views of experts on various characteristics of
cyberpark. In particular, the participants were asked to evaluate a number of statements
concerning the value and specific aspects of cyberpark development, using an eleven-
point Likert scale, ranging of 0 (strongly disagree) to 10 (strongly agree). The state-
ments were the following: (1) cyberparks are essential to a city, (2) they are costly to
create, (3) they are costly to maintain, (4) they increase the welfare of the citizens,
(5) controlled access should be applied, (6) security cameras should be used, (7) en-
trance fees should be applied, and (8) the users should contribute financially to their
creation and maintenance. Table 2 presents the results. We see that the majority of
experts believe that cyberpark places are quite important to the city (mean: 6.7, with
most of respondents favouring the highest values); although they are costly in their
development and maintenance (means respectively 6.3 and 6.0) they increase sub-
stantially the citizens welfare (mean: 7.3). When the question turns to issues of security,
experts seems to be somewhat divided; although many are sceptical on applying
security cameras and access control (most respondents are favouring the lowest values),
there are a few who feel that such an approach would overall benefit cyberpark spaces
(as the high standard deviation reveals). As regards the application of entrance fees and
financial contribution by the users, respondents are rather reserved to both (means 1.5
and 2.1, respectively), corroborating the previous finding that cyberpark is essentially a
public good and the local authorities should be those to bear its costs.

Table 2. Views on aspects of cyberpark provision

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 N Mean Stand.
(%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) (%) dev.
Essential to a 0 0 2.4 2.4 7.1 28.6 7.1 7.1 28.6 2.4 14.3 42 6.7 2.1
city
Costly to create 0 2.4 4.9 9.8 7.3 22.0 7.3 7.3 9.8 17.1 12.2 41 6.3 2.6
Costly to 0 0 11.9 4.8 7.1 19.0 11.9 16.7 16.7 0 11.9 42 6.0 2.4
maintain
Increase welfare 0 0 0 2.4 2.4 14.6 17.1 14.6 22.0 7.3 19.5 41 7.3 1.9
Control access 16.7 9.5 16.7 2.4 2.4 19.0 7.1 4.8 7.1 9.5 4.8 42 4.2 3.3
should be
applied
Security cameras 23.3 11.6 2.3 2.3 2.3 18.6 7.0 2.3 14.0 7.0 9.3 43 4.5 3.6
should be
applied
Entrance fees 54.8 19.0 0 2.4 7.1 11.9 0 2.4 0 2.4 0 42 1.5 2.3
should be
applied
Users should 46.3 12.2 7.3 7.3 7.3 2.4 12.2 0 2.4 2.4 0 41 2.1 2.6
contribute
financially
 Exploring the Concept of Cyberpark: What the Experts Think 63

4 On Cyberpark and Public Spaces

As mentioned above, the CyberParks Action defines cyberpark as “… a new type of

urban landscape where nature and cyber technologies blend together to generate
hybrid experiences and enhance quality of life. … ICT can be used in this context to
give or gather information, to aid co-creation of space, to allow crowd sourcing of
information and opinions, and to allow effective sharing or self-monitoring of activi-
ties” (Agora 2017). This conception underlines the unique character of a cyberpark,
functioning as a distinct entity and offering more than the mere sum of its major
components, i.e. ‘cyber’ and ‘parks’. Having this in mind, it is worth probing into the
views of CyberParks participants2 as concerns the main characteristics, conditions and
functions of this new hybrid space. Such an exercise is quite important for the for-
mation of a theoretical notion that aspires to adequately persuade policy makers, local
authorities, and the public, in order to be effectively implemented and well accepted by
stakeholders.
Bearing the above in mind, it is useful to distinguish the “points of agreement”, or
“strong points” of experts concerning the notion of cyberpark, and compare it with
equivalent points concerning POS in general. As “points of agreement” or “strong
points” we refer to the responses of various questions, which scored 20.0% or more in
frequency, compared to the rest of the responses to the specific question. For cyber-
park, these were:
– Importance of constituent elements: people (59.1%)
– Cyberpark keywords: Technology/ICT (43.4%), Space/POS (26.4%)
– Suitable locations: city centre (29.1%)
– Suitable sizes: medium (58.3%)
– Target Population: city residents (26.0%), tourists (24.9%)
– Provision and maintenance: authorities (65.9%).
In the categories of Qualities of space, Facilities provided, Facilitated activities, and
Suitable spaces there were no responses which clearly dominated the opinions of
experts.
At the same time, looking at the equivalent responses for the POS, the same
categories of questions gather high percentages of most preferred responses, and fur-
thermore, the first preferences of these categories were the same as in cyberpark. More
specifically:
– Importance of constituent elements: people (68.2%)
– Suitable locations: city centre (27.2%)
– Suitable sizes: medium (42.9%)

2
All CyberParks participants are considered, by definition, to be experts on the issues examined here
(i.e. the relationship between POS and ICTs), since this is a prerequisite form their participation in
the COST Action. However, as discussed, CyberParks participants might understand and approach
cyberpark slightly different, due to their different scientific discipline, theoretical background,
occupation, nationality, etc.
64 P. Arvanitidis et al.

– Target Population: city residents (23%), locals (22.2%), which is almost double
than tourists (13.5%)
– Provision and maintenance: authorities (65.9%).
In Qualities of space, Facilities provided, Facilitated activities, and Suitable spaces
there were no responses which clearly dominated the opinions of experts (as was the
case in cyberpark).
The category of Cyberpark keywords had no equivalent in POS. One could note,
though, a sign of contradiction in experts’ responses in this category, compared to the
ones in Importance of constituent elements. So, although people are recognized as the
most important element for cyberpark, in comparison to space and technology, the
most “favourite” keywords belong to the categories of technology (ICT) and space
(POS). At the same time, keywords of the category of technology gathered 61 pref-
erences, the space category 54, and the category of people 45 preferences.
In the categories of no responses of high occurrence (Qualities of space, Facilities
provided, Facilitated activities, and Suitable spaces), coincidence of the same answers
in the first places of preferences in cyberpark and POS was recorded in Facilitated
activities [socialize with 10% of opinions in cyberpark (sharing the first place with
relax and communicate) and 13.3% in POS], and in Suitable spaces (Parks with 13.7%
of opinions in cyberpark and 17.6% in POS), while in Qualities of space, safety was a
close second (10.3%) in cyberpark [first being information transmission (11.75%)],
and first (11.21%) in POS (with the same percentage of opinions with natural
environment).
Conclusions drawn from the above are that for experts, a cyberpark retains the
“strong” characteristics of POS. It is worth noticing that, besides these common
“strong” characteristics there were no other “strong” ones, either solely for a cyberpark
or for POS. So, for experts, a cyberpark has to share significant common ground with
POS, and ideally, both should have people as the most important constituent element,
they should be in the city centre, being of a medium size, having city residents as their
target group, and having authorities (municipality, etc.) responsible for their provision
and maintenance. Experts also tend to think, in lower percentages, that both cyberparks
and POS should be safe, with socializing as the most important facilitated activity, and
preferably in parks.
Looking for elements distinguishing cyberpark space from conventional POS, there
were no coincidences in the first three categories of facilities of high occurrence in
responses between cyberpark and POS in the category of Facilities provided, and –
expectedly so – internet was the prime preference for the former with 15.9% of
responses, with places to sit being the prime equivalent for the latter with 12.5% of
responses. The responses of high occurrence in this category (internet, interacting
information, and places to work for cyberpark, and places to sit, facilities for disad-
vantaged, and facilities for visitors for POS) show a differentiation of the character of
cyberpark from this of POS, the former being more “informatic” with the latter being
closer to social values and aspects. This is perhaps the reason why experts see suitable
places for cyberparks to be leftover spaces, bus/railway stations and stops and
 Exploring the Concept of Cyberpark: What the Experts Think 65

internalised public spaces of rather medium to small sizes. Moving to the Accommo-
dated activities, cyberpark’s role is perceived in facilitating communication, education
and work, whereas POS is appreciated mainly for its recreation and leisure aspects. As
such, it is not surprising that in the categories of Target population, elderly people are
almost ignored in cyberpark (presumably because this group is expected to use ICT at a
lesser degree than young people3) whereas in Provision and maintenance, the private
sector is seen as a possible provider of cyberpark in a much higher percentage that the
equivalent in POS. This is also verified in the category of Cyberpark keywords where
ICT, POS, interactive, and enhanced were considered as better characterizing a cy-
berpark. As discussed above, all these belong to the categories of technology, and
space, while the category of people gathered keywords with lower preferences of the
former.

5 Conclusions

This chapter comes to provide, in a more systematic and organized way, a contextu-
alization of the various dimensions of the cyberpark concept, which emerge due to
different perspectives, disciplines, backgrounds, etc. of the 84 experts involved in the
CyberParks COST Action. We believe that such analysis would enrich the ongoing
dialogue within the respective scientific community, and facilitate interactions between
relevant, yet fragmented, research in various scientific areas and countries. From the
analysis we conducted, a number of points drawn should be highlighted.
First, cyberpark is perceived as a specific type of POS, characterised by enhanced
provision of information technology that advance modern life. However, as any type of
POS, cyberpark is a space aiming to serve the needs of real people, by combining
recreation and leisure along with connectivity, interaction and community develop-
ment. Second, although most POS areas are suitable for the deployment of a cyberpark,
such spaces might be more relevant in specific sites and locations that best serve its
purpose. Leftover spaces, bus and railway stops and stations, institutional public spaces
and internalized ‘public’ spaces in downtown and city centres seem to be appropriate
such locations. Third, cyberpark, though a bit costly in development and maintenance
(due to the ICT element that it adds to the conventional POS), are appreciated for
adding value to modern cities. On these grounds, local authorities should opt for their
provision and should bear these costs as it is argued that these cyberpark spaces would
increase citizens’ welfare and the quality of urban life overall.

3
This might be due to lack of dexterity or need on the part of the elderly to use ICTs, at least as
compared to the younger generations. Surely, it seems that technology, from computing to cell
phones, is not designed having the elderly in mind.
66 P. Arvanitidis et al.

References
Agora Cyberparks (2017). http://cyberparks-project.eu/agora/forums/topic/extended-definition-
based-on-discussion/. Accessed June 2017
Smaniotto Costa, C., Martínez, A.B., Álvarez, F.J., Šuklje-Erjavec, I., Menezes, M., Pallares-
Barbera, M.: Digital tools for capturing user’s needs on urban open spaces: drawing lessons
from cyberparks project. In: Certomà, C., Dyer, M., Pocatilu, L., Rizzi, F. (eds.) Citizen
Empowerment and Innovation in the Data-Rich City, pp. 177–194. Springer, Cham (2017).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47904-0_11

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
 Part II Socio-Spatial Practices

Edited by Therese Kenna and Gabriela Maksymiuk

2.1
Socio-Spatial Practices: An Introduction
and Overview

Therese Kenna1(&) and Gabriela Maksymiuk2

1
University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
[email protected]
2
Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland
[email protected]

1 Introduction: Socio-Spatial Practices

We are now firmly in a digital era and technologies are ever-present. Since the
introduction of new digital technologies and ICTs, such as smart phones, the literature
has presented some contrasting analyses of the socio-spatial practices and impacts that
have resulted from the uptake of new technologies in urban public spaces. On one
hand, there is a particular set of debates that have expressed concerns that the intro-
duction of digital technologies, especially personal ICTs, is leading to a greater
withdrawal from urban public spaces. For example, the work by Hampton and Gupta
(2008) and Hampton et al. (2010) examined uses of ICTs in urban public spaces. They
concluded that people who were using technology in public spaces were not actively
engaged in the public spaces and were merely “silent spectators”. This allowed for a
‘public privatism’ and created concerns for a widening of the gaps between public and
private and a decline of public spaces. These sorts of findings create concerns for the
diminishing value of public space in a traditional sense, for the declining significance
of public spaces in the digital era, and for the potential of ICTs to generate and increase
social inequalities, as well as reduce opportunities for encountering ‘others’ in the city.
Somewhat contrary to such studies are a number of recent examples of the ways in
which social media, smart phones and other platforms are used to encourage physical
gathering in public squares, citing examples such as the Arab Springs, anti-austerity
protests in Europe, and the Occupy movement that quickly spread globally (Dieter and
van Doorn 2013). In these instances, the gatherings in public spaces can be recorded
through video and photography and uploaded in real time to the Web, transforming
individuals into a collective to address political issues (Dieter and van Doorn 2013). What
emerges as apparent then, following Willis (2007, p. 160), is that wireless communication
technologies such as smart phones can enable ‘multiple social realities’ to occur in a single
place. While we are witnessing evidence of the potentials for ICTs, like smart phones, to
create new social spaces, this is primarily through the use of social media and technologies
to create new political functions for citizens and public spaces via gathering and protest.
The contrasting perspectives offer a snapshot of some the ways in which new
technologies, especially ICTs, are thought to be transforming the nature of social

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 69–75, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_6
70 T. Kenna and G. Maksymiuk

relationships and of socio-spatial practices in urban public spaces. One criticism that
has emerged from some of the recent research is directed towards the inadequacies that
current social research methods present when researching in the digital era. Digital and
online methods are now increasing in popularity, albeit in limited ways. Social net-
working sites such as Facebook and Twitter are being used to conduct social research
and as such are opening up the production of knowledge and new ways of under-
standing. In particular, online spaces, such as Twitter and Facebook, are being
increasingly used as digital data sources for researchers where content analysis of the
data, that is publicly available on such sites, is being performed (see Dowling et al.
2015). Latham (2014, p. 111) noted how social media technologies and websites have
become a rich source of data, with things like Twitter forming ‘micro-diaries’ of lived
experience. Latham notes, however, that researchers are only beginning to explore the
potential of social media technologies to generate electronic diaries of everyday lives.
That is, the use of digital spaces and social media platforms for research activities and
as data gathering spaces is relatively new. A paper by de Freitas (2010, p. 640) that
reviewed current research on the implications of ICTs for the city and everyday social
life, noted that the increasing prevalence of digital realities opens up new opportunities
for imaginative research techniques such as interviews conducted via social networking
sites or real-time archiving of field-notes in 140 characters or less on Twitter, which can
be additions to the more established research methods for social sciences researchers.
A recent article by De Jong (2014) reflected on the use of one online space, Facebook,
as a site for storytelling in research. De Jong’s (2014, p. 1) research with festival
participants used the online space of Facebook. This research project ultimately con-
cluded that Facebook “has the potential to allow for different ways of knowing that
cannot be ascertained in more orthodox research spaces”. As De Jong (2014) argued,
there is a strong need to re-imagine the ways in which various online spaces may be
incorporated as sites for methodologies (p. 2). The Chapters in Part II contribute to
these emerging literature and debates by offering novel perspectives on both research
methods for analysing the socio-spatial practices in urban public spaces in the digital
era, and empirical data into emerging socio-spatial practices and outcomes.
Beyond these two sets of debates, there is emerging research and literature on the
ways that ICTs can be used in urban professions, such as urban planning and design.
Here, the research to-date is exploring the potential opportunities that might exist when
ICTs are used in urban planning, especially for the ways in which ICTs can lead to
more user-friendly or people-centred urban spaces, as well as more inclusionary urban
planning, design and development processes, that are bottom-up, rather than top-down,
and open to diverse socio-spatial practices. ICTs in urban environments deal with
several issues, i.e. citizen activism, governance or urban planning. For all these issues,
ICTs give a possibility for ‘electronic’ versions of activities or actions that traditionally
had been organised in physical realities. Thus nowadays, we face a specific duality of
virtual and physical as, for example, citizen activism can take the form of e-activism,
governance can be changed with e-governance and even democracy can be outlined as
e-democracy. The case studies and examples showing that new technological solutions
increase in general the participation and public engagement in urban issues are
numerous, but at the same time there are contrary opinions that omnipresent new
technologies can cause the exclusion of some users. The findings of research performed
 Socio-Spatial Practices: An Introduction and Overview 71

by Yeh (2017) on participation with Taiwanese citizens, reveal that they are willing to
accept and use the ICT-based smart city services, and that the access to ‘e-services’
resulted in higher quality of life being achieved. Also, work by Soomro et al. (2017)
presenting results from an EU FP7 project called ‘urbanAPI’, in which 3 different ICT
applications addressing diverse aspects of participatory urban governance were tested
in four countries, show that the studied applications are useful tools especially for:
enhancing spatial planning assessments, activating public participation and ‘commu-
nicating proposed plans to different stakeholders and identifying key development
issues which can provide crucial inputs in planning and decision making processes’
(p. 419). On the other hand, according to recent findings of Ertiö and Bhagwatwar
(2017) nowadays citizens are more interested and capable to use and benefit from
online platforms that facilitate urban planning. Furthermore, Mueller et al. (2018)
argues that even though the last decades in urban design research are characterised by a
focus on smart cities, actualised through advanced technological aspects of cities,
nowadays we are aware that a good infrastructure and sustainable energy supply do not
make liveable cities alone, but we also need a citizens’ input and feedback. This
approach of harnessing information from urban users is greatly enhanced by ICTs and
is essential for reaching a responsive city (p. 181). The recent Swedish studies show
that the outdoor mobile augmented reality tools facilitate on-site multi-stakeholder
urban design and gathering of crowdsourced data, and thus ‘mobile and cloud-based
computing technologies open up possibilities for multi-stakeholder inclusion in urban
planning’ (Imottesjo and Kain 2018, p. 1). However, as stated above quite opposite
findings are also present. For example, the Finnish study on the appropriation process
of two public computing infrastructures in the City of Oulu, a municipal WiFi network
and large interactive displays, showed that while the use of the WiFi network has
grown steadily, the use of the displays has been declining (Ylipulli et al. 2014).
Positioned within these recent debates and the emerging literature, the Chapters in
Part II offer some discussions and case study research into the ways new technologies,
such as Twitter and participatory GIS, can offer urban planning and design profes-
sionals useful tools for understanding social behaviours, attitudes and diverse socio-
spatial practices, which will ultimately enable more inclusive design, planning and
decision-making processes, as well as more inclusionary urban public spaces.

2 Urban Ethnography

The chapters in Part II are also the result of the working group on urban ethnography in
the CyberParks COST Action TU1306. The aim of this working group was to bring
together knowledge about the uses of new technologies in public spaces and to create
new understandings of the relationships between public spaces and social behaviour in
the digital era, in order to understand how to best connect technology with public
spaces for socially sustainable outcomes. The working group was concerned with
theoretical and methodological approaches, as well as novel research findings. The
leading questions for the working group were: What is known about the relationship
between new media use and spatial practices? What do people want from public space?
72 T. Kenna and G. Maksymiuk

Does this differ by socioeconomic status, gender, age? What technological develop-
ments are most likely to enhance current user behaviour or develop new user beha-
viours? Essentially, the improvement, through Information and Communication
Technologies (ICT), of the quality of urban life, the inclusion and social participation in
the design of public open spaces (POS), and the development of tools for studying and
supporting urban planning, were basic goals for the working group.

3 Overview of Chapters

The Chapters in this section of the book fall into three broad categories. Firstly, are
those concerned with the generation of novel empirical data on the emerging socio-
spatial practices resulting from the increased uptake of ICTs within urban public
spaces. Secondly, are papers that focus on the need for methodological development to
be able to capture the new socio-spatial practices in the digital era. Finally, there are
two papers that focus on the contributions of ICTs and new technologies to urban
professionals.
The first chapter 2.2 by Marluci Menezes, Paschalis Arvanitidis, Therese Kenna
and Petja Ivanova-Radovanova is entitled ‘People-space-technology: an ethno-
graphic approach’. This chapter is concerned with ethnographic research method-
ologies in the digital era. In particular, this chapter questions the utility of current
ethnographic approaches and develops a new framework to guide researchers under-
taking research relating to peoples use of technology in urban space. The authors argue
that in the digital era, ethnographic research is required to capture, explore and
understand the cyber-social phenomena and dynamics in a multifaceted, hybrid, tri-
angulated and cross-referenced way, which makes the research more complex and
perhaps more stimulating. By providing an integrated framework for the analysis of the
relationships between people, space and technology, the authors of this Chapter argue
that the ethnographic approach is enriched, as is our knowledge of socio-spatial
practices in urban public spaces.
Following this, in chapter 2.3 Paschalis Arvanitidis, Therese Kenna, and Gab-
riela Maksymiuk explore university students use of ICTs in university public spaces,
entitled “Public space engagement and ICT usage by university students: an
exploratory study in three countries”. The research in these locations examined how
university students perceive and use the public spaces on their university campuses,
and how they now use personal technologies, such as smart phones, within these
spaces. Importantly, the research in this Chapter is based on data that was collected
from an online questionnaire, and thus new digital methods were used in this study.
The research is conducted in three geographic locations: University College Cork in
Cork (Ireland), the University of Thessaly in Volos (Greece), and the Warsaw
University of Life Sciences in Warsaw (Poland), which has allowed for novel insights
into the differences and similarities that arise in these differing contexts.
The work presented by Marluci Menezes, Paschalis Arvanitidis, Carlos
Smaniotto Costa and Zvi Weinstein entitled ‘Teenagers’ perception of public
spaces and their ICTs practices’ (chapter 2.4) focusses on a cohort of the population
who are deemed to be tech-savvy and thus heavily intertwined in the debates about the
 Socio-Spatial Practices: An Introduction and Overview 73

new socio-spatial practices in urban public spaces in the digital era. In this chapter, the
authors shed light on the perceptions and practices of adolescents, as obtained via
structured interviews with teenagers living in Hannover (Germany), Lisbon (Portugal),
Tel Aviv (Israel) and Volos (Greece). The study is small-scale and offers some pre-
liminary results that are argued to be indicative of possible wider trends and attitudes.
In particular, the authors articulate how young people from distinct sociocultural
contexts perceive and use both public spaces and digital technologies, and thus they
identify teenagers emerging socio-spatial practices.
The chapter 2.5 by Montserrat Pallares-Barbera, Elena Masala, Jugoslav
Jokovic, Aleksandra Djukic and Xavier Albacete is entitled “Challenging methods
and results obtained from user-generated content in Barcelona’s urban open
spaces”. This chapter examines user-generated content from Twitter users in Barce-
lona, Spain. The research examined the spatial signatures that result from the twitter
uses in different public open spaces in Barcelona. It is argued that the analysis of the
data offers insights into new social behaviours that are emerging in public spaces and of
a range of multifunctional uses within the public spaces. The authors argue that user-
generated content (UGC) provides useful resources for academics, technicians and
policymakers to obtain and analyse results in order to improve lives of individuals in
urban settings. They argue, similar to the emerging debates in the literature noted in the
introduction, that there are new methodologies and new data sources, such as Twitter,
that can offer new insights into socio-spatial practices in urban public spaces and thus
these new insights can better inform urban planning practice.
The final chapter 2.6 in Part II by Antoine Zammit, Therese Kenna and Gabriela
Maksymiuk, entitled “Social implications of new mediated spaces: the need for a
rethought design approach”, examines the ways in which ICTs can be utilised as
tools for enhancing urban planning and design process for more inclusionary urban
public spaces. In this Chapter, case studies are presented from three European urban
contexts – the UK, Poland and Malta – where research has been conducted into the use
of participatory digital mapping for citizen participation in urban planning and design.
Here, ICT tools such as PGIS, or SoftGIS, are discussed for their abilities to engage a
wider range of social groups in planning and design processes than might be obtained
through more traditional methods of participation, such as written submissions or face-
to-face meetings. Ultimately, new technologies have allowed for an expansion of the
tools and methods available for participation in urban planning and design processes,
thus allowing urban professionals to have access to a greater range of socio-spatial
practices and behaviours. This will essentially allow for the design of more inclusive
urban public spaces, designed with a diverse range of social groups and users in mind.
Each of the chapters in Part II offer new contributions to knowledge relating to the
use of digital technologies in urban public spaces, the methodologies for understanding
the new relationships and practices, and the applications of new technologies in the
design of urban public spaces. Chapters 2.2 and 2.5 present strong arguments for the
need for new research methods to analyse the people-space-technology triad. Chap-
ters 2.3, 2.5 and 2.6 offer examples of the ways in which digital methods can be used to
analyse new socio-spatial practices and attitudes in urban public spaces. Beyond the
methodological contributions, the work in Chapters 2.3, 2.4 and 2.5 all offer new
insights into the lived experiences of new technologies in urban public spaces, albeit
74 T. Kenna and G. Maksymiuk

through small-scale pilot studies and preliminary analyses. Importantly, the work in
Chapters 2.3 and 2.4 has strongly argued for the need to develop research that spans
different social and cultural contexts, as this enables us to reveal the differences and
similarities that can occur in the uses, perceptions and relationships between technol-
ogy, people and urban space. Further, the work in chapters 2.5 and 2.6 highlight the
ways that new technologies can be harnessed for urban design and planning, by using
tools such as Twitter and PGIS to understanding a wider range of socio-spatial prac-
tices than traditional methods might allow, and ultimately allow for a more inclusive
planning and design process and outcome. In all, the chapters in Part II contribute to
emerging debates in the literature.

References
Ertiö, T.-P., Bhagwatwar, A.: Citizens as planners: harnessing information and values from the
bottom-up. Int. J. Inf. Manage. 37(3), 111–113 (2017)
De Freitas, A.: Changing spaces: locating public space at the intersection of the physical and
digital. Geogr. Compass 4(6), 630–643 (2010)
De Jong, A.: Using Facebook as a space for storytelling in geographical research. Geogr. Res. 53
(2), 211–223 (2014)
Dieter, M., van Doorn, N.: Urban Social Spaces: Tactical Media in the Hybrid City’. New Media
Theories - Research Essay (2013)
Dowling, R., Lloyd, K., Suchet-Pearson, S.: Qualitative methods 1: enriching the interview.
Prog. Hum. Geogr. 40, 1–8 (2015)
Hampton, K.N., Gupta, N.: Community and social interaction in the wireless city: Wi-Fi use in
public and semi-public spaces. New Media Soc. 10(6), 831–850 (2008)
Hampton, K., Livio, O., Sessions Goulet, L.: The social life of wireless urban spaces: internet
use, social networks, and the public realm. J. Commun. 60, 701–722 (2010)
Imottesjo, H., Kain, J.H.: The urban cobuilder – a mobile augmented reality tool for crowd-
sourced simulation of emergent urban development patterns: requirements, prototyping and
assessment. In: Computers, Environment and Urban Systems (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.compenvurbsys.2018.05.003
Latham, A.: Using diaries to study urban worlds’. In: Ward, K. (ed.) Researching the City: A
Guide for Students. Sage, London (2014)
Mueller, J., Lu, H., Chirkin, A., Klein, B., Schmitt, G.: Citizen design science: a strategy for
crowd-creative urban design. Cities 72(Part A), 181–188 (2018)
Soomro, K., Khan, Z., Ludlow, D.: Participatory governance in smart cities: the urban API case
study. Int. J. Serv. Technol. Manage. 23(5/6), 419–444 (2017)
Willis, K.: Sensing place – mobile and wireless technologies in urban space. In: Meier, L., Frers,
L. (eds.) Encountering Urban Places: Visual and Material Performances in the City. Ashgate,
Aldershot (2007)
Yeh, H.: The effects of successful ICT-based smart city services: from citizens’ perspectives’.
Gov. Inf. Q. 34(3), 556–565 (2017)
Ylipulli, J., Suopajärvi, T., Ojala, T., Kostakos, V., Kukka, H.: Municipal WiFi and interactive
displays: appropriation of new technologies in public urban spaces. Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Chang. 89, 145–160 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2013.08.037
 Socio-Spatial Practices: An Introduction and Overview 75

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
2.2
People - Space - Technology: An Ethnographic
Approach

Marluci Menezes1(&) , Paschalis Arvanitidis2 ,

Therese Kenna3 , and Petja Ivanova-Radovanova4
1
National Laboratory for Civil Engineering – LNEC, Lisbon, Portugal
[email protected]
2
Department of Economics, University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece
[email protected]
3
Department of Geography, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
[email protected]
4
Association for Integrated Development and Sustainability, Sofia, Bulgaria
[email protected]

Abstract. CyberParks aims at advancing knowledge on the relationship

between information and communication technologies and the socially sus-
tainable production and usage of public open spaces. Such research necessitates
a solid methodological base. Urban ethnography brings together a number of
perspectives and approaches to deal with cultural and social aspects of urban
life, and as such it is able to provide an integrated methodological framework for
the study of technology-public space relationship. The ethnographic approach
means, by definition, an in-depth, micro-scale look at the phenomena under
concern. However, the technological dimension makes the relationship between
people and space more complex. This is not simply because an additional layer
of analysis is added; it comes as a result of the emergence of multiple con-
nections between the real and the virtual. From an ethnographic perspective, this
requires the researcher to capture, explore and understand the cyber-social
phenomena and dynamics in a multifaceted, hybrid, triangulated and cross-
referenced way. This makes ethnographic research much more complicated but
more interesting as well. The current chapter attempts to outline such an ana-
lytical framework to guide empirical research on the issues. This framework
draws on the public space literature and adds the technological dimension
brought in by the CyberParks project. We argue that this enriches the ethno-
graphic approach providing a more integrated framework for the analysis of the
relationship between people, space and technology.

Keywords: Ethnographic perspective
Methodological framework

Micro-scale
Social hybrid dynamics
Cyber phenomena

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 76–86, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_7
 People - Space - Technology: An Ethnographic Approach 77

1 Introduction: Capturing the Social Cyber Phenomenon

in Urban Public Spaces

The improvement, through Information and Communication Technologies (ICT), of

the quality of urban life, the inclusion and social participation in the design of public
open spaces (POS), and the development of tools for studying and supporting urban
planning, constitute basic pursuits of the CyberParks project. Certainly, all these pre-
suppose and necessitate a clear and coherent view of the relationship between people,
space and technology, and the dynamics of their links. Questions that come to the fore
include: What kind of public spaces, people, practices and needs are we talking about?
How does the introduction of ICT affect both space and people? How are POS design,
planning and usage affected by the osmosis of the real with the virtual? What kind of
new experiences, discourses, practices and expectations would emerge in such world?
Ethnography is a methodological perspective that can shed light on all these
questions. This is due to its ability to explore “understudied regions of society” and to
“illuminate the unknown” (cf. Didier Fassin, in Low 2016: 2), placing emphasis on
people and their preferences, practices and experiences. Such oriented ethnography can
provide a base to the study of socio-spatial questions, and the development of
knowledge about the people-space-technology relationship. In that direction, we follow
Low (2016) to conceive space as a site of culture, to draw on the notion of spatial-
ization1 that takes under proper consideration the multiple, translocal and unequal
social processes of production and construction of space2, and to use ethnography as an
approach for the understanding of people’s living within space.
The notion of spatialization of culture (Low 2016) allows us to consider that people
create spaces through their bodies and behaviours, discourses, emotive and affective
aspects, as well as through their mobility and trajectories. Space is thus embodied and
endowed with meanings, just as everyday patterns, movements, and trajectories occur
in specific places and landscapes. Thus, ethnography of socio-spatial questions is
oriented towards capturing place making. In summary, these issues contribute to the
reciprocal incorporation of the material and the experiential.
However, constituting ICT as a tangible dimension of the social (Castells 2001)
leads to the emergence of complex socio-spatial experiences, generating a multiplicity
of connections (and disconnections) between real-real and virtual-real. This is not
simply because an additional layer of analysis in added, giving rise to a dualism
between the real and the virtual. In fact, the complexity is the result of the emergence of
new relationships between the real-real and the real-virtual, in which cybernetic reality
increasingly becomes a tangible dimension of the social. From an ethnographic per-
spective, this requires the researcher to capture, explore and understand the cyber-social

1
By spatialization we mean the physical, historical, affective and discursive production and
localization process of social relations, institutions, representations and practices in space.
2
By social production of space, we consider the factors – social, economic, ideological and
technological - that contribute to the creation and materialization of a setting. The social construction
of space is here considered as the phenomenological and symbolic experiences that take place in
space, being mediated by the change, conflict and control process (Low 2000a, b).
78 M. Menezes et al.

phenomena and dynamics in a multifaceted, hybrid, triangulated and cross-referenced

way. It should be pointed out, however, that the methodological perspective advocated
here is not ethnography of the virtual space. It is rather an approach to capture the
richness of the relationship between people, space and ICT. In other words, we are
interested here in an ethnographic analysis of socio-spatial issues related to urban
public spaces, taking into proper account the technological element and the changes it
leads to. That is, in particular, it is intended to finding ways to help answer questions,
such as: What is known about the relationship between new media use and spatial
practices? What do people want from an ICT enhanced public open space? How do
these requirements differ by socioeconomic status, gender and age? What technological
developments are most likely to enhance current user behaviour or develop new user
behaviours?
On these grounds, the current chapter provides introductory methodological and
applied guidance for doing ethnography with a focus on the triptych people-space-
technology. In achieving this objective, the arguments presented here place emphasis
on the following aspects: (1) the ethnographic issues that the CyberParks project
presents and the challenges they put to the scholar of the contemporary urban phe-
nomenon; and synthetic explanation of what an ethnographic approach means,
emphasizing the importance of capturing the phenomena under study from a micro-
scale and a close and deep perspective; (2) an ethnographic analytical perspective seen
through the lenses and objectives set by the CyberParks project, namely: to bring more
people into POS; suggest urban design responses that are closer to people’s needs and
interests; increase people’s participation in the design of POS; improve the planning
and urban design processes; and to develop an ethnographic analytical framework on
the main dimensions about which specific studies will be carried out.

2 Ethnographic Perspective to Capture

the Cyberpark Phenomenon

The urban ethnographic perspective to CyberParks analysis aims to advance under-

standing of the relation between space-people-technology and its dynamics, through
cultural and sociological fieldwork and by employing various theoretical and
methodological approaches. In particular, it brings together knowledge about the use of
new ICT in POS, enhances understanding of POS and of human behaviour in the
context of new media, and offers advice for appropriate ways in employing technology
within public spaces. To do so, researchers should observe uses of technology within
space as well as behaviours in space of all people, including those using and those not
using technology. But in what sense can an ethnographic perspective help us to clarify
and understand the people-space relationship and its links with technology?
The first aspect to consider is the unquestionable influence of ICT in the growing,
accelerated and unequal transformation of society and, as such, of urban contexts. What,
in the first instance, hinders the design of public spaces in a manner that is more
inclusive, participative, healthy and connected with the needs and desires of the people?
That is, there is a lack of knowledge about the relation between people-space-technology
in order to think and to create POS that are more suitable to people, despite the fact that
 People - Space - Technology: An Ethnographic Approach 79

there is a proliferation of studies in the contemporary public space literature. This is

because the majority of such studies are of a macro-analytical nature and, in many cases,
the design of space is privileged to the detriment of the understanding of the relationship
between people and space, even if digital technologies are included in this connection.
What we argue is that in order to capture and better understand the socio-spatial issues
with proper emphasis on the ICT dimension, it is important to carry out smaller, more
intensive and comprehensive studies, and pervade by dense descriptions.
The above, we advocate, provides a more precise approximation and increases the
possibility of producing useful practical (and theoretical) knowledge of the relationship
between people-space-technology. The adoption of an analytical prism close to and
within the social practices in public space can even be an important contribution to
answer the many questions that arise in the context of living, thinking and acting in the
city. This is because, this approach of ‘close and inside’ can also be associated to the
idea of proximity and assiduity with the study contexts; it makes possible to detect
sociocultural regularities and patterns, but it also contributes to overcoming the most
visible expressions of the contemporary city, in large part associated with its multiple
fragmentations and transformations. Such a perspective collaborates to recognize space
as a significant reference for people and on that basis enables us to capture the social
daily rhythms of space use and appropriation, and explore how these dynamics define
behavioural scenarios, routes, points and landscapes. This, in other words, resonates the
importance of micro-geographies (Barker and Shoggen 1973; Wicker 1979; Rapoport
1980; Low 2000a, b). We believe that the role of micro-geographies and the local
context are both within the leading factors for urban development on different scales,
including national, international or EU level, such as the differences of existing local
institutions’ policy frameworks could cause differences in the development of urban
policy processes (Dukes 2010) and the difference in knowledge on public needs and
preferences at the local level, which could lead to difficulties in applicability of modern
technologies in public open space, relating to the needs of the public (Radovanova and
Radovanov 2017). There is, therefore, a role that ethnography can play in capturing
practices, always in transformation, but which define a variety of socio-spatial contexts.
This is through the close approach to socio-spatial phenomena, which helps us to
capture subtleties and distinctions (Geertz 1973). But, on the other hand, from a set of
ethnographic experiences, the analysis should be complemented by a more distanced
approach. This contributes to giving meaning to what is not yet part of integrated body
of knowledge (cf. Lévi-Strauus, in Magnani 2009: 153).

3 Cyberpark: What Can Be Analysed

from an Ethnographic Perspective?

An ethnographic approach to the people-space-technology triptych presupposes

attention to the three poles, privileging the study of the relationship between them.
Rather than considering social actors, spatial contexts and ICTs as separate elements,
disseminated and subjugated to a macro and homogeneous urban order, it is essential to
explore the dynamics through which the three constituent elements of the triptych are
related, generating specific meanings, places and landscapes.
80 M. Menezes et al.

We are interested in going further from previous analyses in the field which, having
an interest in answering certain objectives, do not correspond to what is primarily
intended by an ethnographic approach. In the close and inside ethnographical approach,
the objective is to provide a framework that contributes to awareness and guide
scholars in capturing and understanding the less well-known aspects, though often
seemingly obvious, singularities, patterns, etc., of the people-space-technology rela-
tionship. From a multidimensional point of view, the ethnography will be of interest to
reconcile different levels of interpretation and scales of analysis: from the daily
experiences of people in living spaces to those of a socio-historical nature; from social
practices, discourses and representations, to aspects of the production and circulation of
images and imagery; from planning ideologies to intervention techniques and urban
design. In the idealized ethnography design, we suggest here (see Fig. 1) that the
relations someone might intend to study, pivot around five linked points or questions of
interest: Who are the users? How do they use the space? When do they use the space?
Where, i.e. which places do they use? and What do users do (and what artefacts they
use) in the spaces?

Fig. 1. CyberParks ethnographic approach: capturing the relationship between people-space-

technology. Source: adapted from Menezes and Smaniotto Costa (2017)

Through ethnographic methods, the aim is to capture the relations between

everyday micro-geographies in the use and appropriation of space, the use (or not) of
technological artefacts and objects, the practices and socio-spatial representations, and
the established relations between spaces, behaviours and environments in the
 People - Space - Technology: An Ethnographic Approach 81

constitution of urban places and landscapes (Menezes and Smaniotto Costa 2017)3.
These relations are still central to understanding the meaning of lived spaces and the
constituted spatialities considered important for urban design and planning as envis-
aged by the CyberParks project.
Having this general framework in mind, Fig. 2 presents the main dimensions
research should address providing also the specific content (or objectives) of each
dimension. In particular, we argue that the triptych people-space-technology can be
ethnologically analysed along three dimensions, all of which keep the human element
to the forefront while exploring the nexus of the other two (i.e. POS and ICT). The first
dimension concerns the use and appropriation of POS by people.

Fig. 2. Dimensions that capture the intersections between POS and ICT. (Objective: to identify
the role of people-space-technology aspects of interactions).

Figure 2 focuses on the relationships between the socio-demographic characteristics

of the users, on the one hand, and the physical, spatial, environmental and functional
characteristics of the POS on the other, and it aims to capture the richness of deployed

3
Of course, the realization of an ethnography is not alien to the more specific subjects and interests of
the researchers, nor to their theoretical and conceptual options, which should be presented and
discussed, which then defines the techniques and instruments to be used (and that can be many, for
example, observation, interviews, questionnaires, photographs, behavioural maps, etc.).
82 M. Menezes et al.

behaviours and practices in the use and appropriation of POS. The second dimension
brings into play the ICT element, placing emphasis on the way it affects space and social
practices. In particular, it focuses on the relationships between ICT usage (of devices,
artefacts, etc.) in POS and the dynamics of their interaction, aiming to capture the effect
ICTs have on people’s behaviour and practises in POS. The last dimension concentrates
on meanings and representations of these relations. It aims to capture the richness of
values, images and meanings (social, economic, symbolic, environmental, etc.) people
attach to POS vis-à-vis their needs and levels of their satisfaction, and to evaluate the
contribution of ICT (services, equipment, artefacts, etc.) in the fulfilment of those needs
and the enhancement of POS attractiveness to the public.
Having identified the main dimensions of inquiry, the next step is to specify the
variables of analysis and the kind of information that needs to be sought. Figures 3, 4
and 5 present these for the first, second and third dimensions respectively. It should be
noted that our intention here is not to provide a full check-list of the relevant variables
and information required, but rather to eclectically outline indicative aspects in order to
convey our rationale and to clarify our perspective.

Fig. 3. Aspects that capture POS social use and appropriation (the first dimension).

The framework provided in this chapter has to be seen as holistic view towards
public open space development within the scope of “triptych” approach for better
understanding people-space-technology relationships. With regard to the first
 People - Space - Technology: An Ethnographic Approach 83

dimension of our approach, we envisage two sets of variables that need to be con-
sidered (see Fig. 3). The first concentrates on the social aspects of the users and the
physical and temporal elements of their POS use. Information that needs to be collected
concerns: the socio-demographic characteristics of the users (age, gender, education
level, etc.), which provide the profile of the users, socio-cultural attributes (e.g. life-
style) to allow for a description of the way users use the POS; social relationships (e.g.
level of socialisation), which delineate the relationships between users in the POS; and
use patterns (e.g. aspects of exclusion or heterogeneity); which outline the ways space
is used and appropriated. In regard to the physical aspects of space, one needs to
examine the location and accessibility characteristics of the POS, the composition of
space (e.g. shadowed-sunny places), its service and functional characteristics (e.g.
equipment, facilities and services available) and its environmental elements (vegetation
cover, flora and fauna, etc.). The temporal element, finally, concerns the time of the
study (hour, day and season) and the weather characteristics associated with it (tem-
perature, humidity, etc.). The second set of variables we suggest concentrates on the
practices and behavioural patterns of space usage. These concern the ways that space is
used by the visitors (walking, strolling, sitting, exercising, etc.), the pattern of their
accessibility, the frequency, regularity and intensity of the use, and the degree of
territorialisation that may emerge (e.g. patterns of social or digital exclusion).

Fig. 4. Aspects that capture POS-ICT use and socio-spatial practices (the second dimension).

Moving to the second dimension of our framework, we place emphasis on ICT

artefacts and objects of use (see Fig. 4). Here researchers need to record the types of
devices and applications visitors used (smart phone, laptop, etc.), the artefacts,
equipment and facilities the space provides to users (e.g. Wi-Fi access, furniture to
electrically charge devices), the purpose of device and artefact use (e.g. for recreation,
communication, work), the patterns of such use, and finally, the frequency and timing
of the ICT use.
84 M. Menezes et al.

Fig. 5. Aspects that capture the POS social meaning and representations (the third dimension).

In the third dimension of our approach we perceive two key sets of variables that
need to be examined (see Fig. 5). The first refers to the memories and perceptions of
space, and the second to users’ needs and levels of their satisfaction. With regard to the
former, information that needs to be collected concerns: the social memories and
meanings space connotes (i.e. how people perceive space and their social relationships
in space); the images and imaginaries space conveys to different types of users and
actors involved (e.g. planners, politicians, etc.); perceptions of security, safety and
quality of space (noise, pollution, etc.); and, elements of space attractiveness to users
(physical, environmental, digital, social, etc.). Turning to the second set of variables in
this dimension, aspects that need to be considered include the level of users’ satis-
faction from all elements of space (physical, environmental, social, digital, functional,
security, etc.), as well as their needs and their requirements. Last, but not least, users
could and should provide the researcher with their ideas and suggestions of how space
can be improved (in all of its aspects: physical, environmental, functional, etc.) and
 People - Space - Technology: An Ethnographic Approach 85

particularly with reference to its digital dimension. This concerns the provision of
technological tools, artefacts, facilities and services that would improve POS quality
and enhance social inclusion and participation.

4 Discussion and Conclusions

Given that a cyber reality has become a tangible dimension of the social world, it
makes it more complex to conceptualise, capture and analyse socio-spatial phenomena,
namely the social uses and needs of urban public space. This, on the one hand, implies
that we need more agile and interdisciplinary approaches to research in this field. On
the other hand, the broad dimension, continuous and accelerated growth of the
cybernetic phenomenon, in parallel with urban transformation processes, require the
production of more focused knowledge (micro-scale) with attention to specific situa-
tions and to people. The ethnographic perspective, although not the only available to
such kind of inquiry, helps, to a great extent, to analyse and understand all such
aspects. This stems from its proper emphasis on the spatio-temporal character of the
social phenomena, enabling to formulate and further develop more comprehensive
theories. We also strongly argue for the need to continually place people at the centre of
our analyses, to best understand the people-space-technology triad. Thus, we advocate
for a people-centred approach to research that seeks to understand the ways people use
POS, ICTs and engage in a range of social behaviours within such spaces. As such, we
feel that the framework presented in this Chapter makes a novel contribution to
knowledge in this field and enhances our ability to achieve various goals in our
explorations of contemporary understandings of the interactions between people, space
and technology. One further aspect of our thinking that remains crucial to any research
project, is a recognition that investments in, and developments of, CyberParks, are
context specific and that CyberParks occur differently in different geographic locations,
and will serve different purposes, as well as have different forms and functions within
these locations. The inherent versatility of different locations calls for more call detailed
and comprehensive studies to be carried out, as well as comparative research.
In this sense, the ethnographic framework we attempted to assemble in this article
can be used for both the development of scientific knowledge on contemporary urban
phenomena and for the provision of advice in urban design and planning. Certainly,
such a framework cannot incorporate (and definitely we did not intend to do so) all
aspects that can (or should) be studied in the context of the relationship between
people, space and technology. That would be extremely difficult (if even possible)
given the variety of disciplines, theories and perspectives involved, let alone that such
an endeavour would be contrary to the spirit of the ethnographic approach itself. Yet,
we attempted to pinpoint and incorporate elements we regarded as essential and per-
tinent to the aspects that emerged during the CyberParks project. What we wish to see
is how this framework approach will continue to illustrate the value of cyberparks to
different stakeholders, partners and politicians to ensure that it continues to form part of
the discussion of planning delivery mechanisms and lead to wider establishment of a
modern type of public open space, along with the more traditional forms of landscape
investments.
86 M. Menezes et al.

References
Barker, R., Shoggen, P.: Qualities of Community Life. Jossey – Bass Publishers, London (1973)
Castells, M.: The Internet Galaxy: Reflections on the Internet, Business and Society. Oxford
University Press, New York (2001)
Dukes, T.H.: The role of local context: explaining the policy process of the URBAN programmes
in Amsterdam and the Hague. Urban Res. Pract. 3(3), 159–176 (2010)
Geertz, C.: The Interpretation of Cultures. Basic Books, New York (1973)
Low, S.M.: On the Plaza – The Politics of Public Space and Culture. University of Texas Press,
Austin (2000a)
Low, S.M.: Culture in the modern city: the microgeographies of gender, class, and generation in
the Costa Rican plaza. Horiz. Antropol. 6(13), 31–64 (2000b). https://doi.org/10.1590/s0104-
71832000000100003
Low, S.M.: Spatializing Culture: The Ethnography of Space and Place. Routledge, New York
(2016)
Magnani, J.G.C.: Etnografia como prática e experiência. Horiz. Antropol. 15(32), 129–156
(2009). https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-71832009000200006
Menezes, M., Smaniotto Costa, C.: People, public space, digital technology and social practice: an
ethnographic approach. In: Zammit, A., Kenna, T. (eds.) Enhancing Places Through
Technology, pp. 167–180. Edições Universitárias Lusófonas, Lisbon (2017). ISBN 978-989-
757-055-1. http://cyberparks-project.eu/sites/default/files/publications/cyberparks_enhancing
placestechnology.pdf
Radovanova, P., Radovanov, A.: Urban development in respect to social media – the
applicability of the Amsterdam city in other European cities. In: Zammit, A., Kenna, T. (eds.)
ICiTy: Enhancing Spaces Through Technology, pp. 129–138. Edições Lusófonas, Lisbon
(2017)
Rapoport, A.: Cross-cultural aspects of environmental design. In: Altman, I., Rapoport, A.,
Wolhwill, J.F. (eds.) Environment and Culture, pp. 7–46. Plenum, New York (1980)
Wicker, A.: An Introduction to Ecological Psychology. Brooks/Cole Publication, San Francisco
(1979)

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
2.3
Public Space Engagement and ICT Usage
by University Students: An Exploratory
Study in Three Countries

Paschalis Arvanitidis1(&) , Therese Kenna2 ,

and Gabriela Maksymiuk3
1
University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece
[email protected]
2
University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
[email protected]
3
Warsaw University of Life Sciences, Warsaw, Poland
[email protected]

Abstract. The new mobile information and communications technologies

expand human connectivity to reconfigure public spatialities and to give rise to
novel needs for, and practices of, public space usage. The research in this
chapter focuses on university students to explore how they perceive and use the
public space of university campuses and how they use personal information and
communications technologies in it. This allows for an identification of emerging
patterns and practices of university public space usage, along with preferable
characteristics, designs and ways of management. Data are collected from three
case studies, the University College Cork in Cork (Ireland), the University of
Thessaly in Volos (Greece), and the Warsaw University of Life Sciences in
Warsaw (Poland), enabling us to spot similarities and differences in the above
trends, that would be attributed to culture and local conditions and lifestyles.

Keywords: University public space

Information and communications technologies
University students

Cross-cultural analysis

1 Introduction

One dominant and momentous trend is emerging as a defining hallmark of the con-
temporary era: the rapid global diffusion of personal information and communications
technologies (ICTs), including mobile and smart phones, personal laptops and tablets
devices (see Graham 2002). This rapid diffusion and uptake of personal ICTs presents a
new societal challenge for cities of increasing diversity and inequality as social life in
the city becomes increasing (yet perhaps unevenly) mediated by personal digital
devices. The introduction of mobile personal digital technologies – such as mobile
phones and personal laptops and tablets – is transforming the ways in which people use
and engage with urban public space, as well as encounter others within those spaces

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 87–108, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_8
88 P. Arvanitidis et al.

and engage in social interactions and activities. While it is widely held that the
introduction of ICTs has resulted in significant changes to the organisation of cities,
public spaces and everyday social life (Graham 2002; Aurigi and de Cindio 2008), it
remains that there is little research into the exact nature of the socio-cultural trans-
formation resulting from personal ICT usage in the city and urban public spaces.
The current chapter draws on a wider research project undertaken by the research
team aiming to investigate how university students engage with personal ICTs and
urban public spaces, especially within a university campus, or what we call, University
Public Spaces1 (UPS), as a way of engaging with critical debates concerning young
people’s social and digital engagement and encounter. This was performed through a
comparative study in three different geographical regions of Europe (North, South,
East) to ascertain differences based on geographical and cultural context, via the
development of new digital social science research methods (online questionnaires).
More specifically, the chapter is guided by the following objectives:
1. To explore the perceptions and attitudes of university students towards UPS. This
objective included questions such as: What types of UPS do students use and
engage with the most? How do university students use UPS? What features or
attributes of the UPS do they value the most? Are they willing to participate in UPS
management and maintenance?
2. To explore perceptions, attitudes and patterns of ICT usage among university stu-
dents. This objective involved a series of sub-questions, such as: How intensively
do university students use ICTs? What kind of devices and services are used? What
activities do university students engage in whilst using ICTs? How they make use
of ICTs when they are in UPS?
For the needs of the chapter, we reflect on preliminary analysis of the data to offer
some initial observations regarding university student use of ICTs and UPS in uni-
versities at three European cities: Cork (Ireland); Volos (Greece); and Warsaw
(Poland). Following this introduction, the chapter moves to explore some of the key
literature in this field of research relating to ICT usages in urban public spaces, as well
as on university campuses. This is followed then by a discussion of our research
methodology, an introduction to our case studies, and preliminary analysis of the data.
The chapter concludes with a discussion of the key findings.

2 New ICTs and the Usage of UPS

The proliferation of personal ICT devices has led scholars (predominantly in com-
munication studies, as well as urban studies) to speculate about their exclusiveness,
their perceived contributions to increasing privatisation and privatism in urban society

1
UPS is a kind of semi-public space, in the sense that it is owned or controlled by a public institution
and it is partially, but not entirely, visible to and open to the use of the general public. Such spaces
include, for example, university gardens, green spaces, walkways and entrance ways to university
buildings (outdoor spaces), as well as indoor spaces such as student centers, refectories, or common
areas within university buildings like the library.
 Public Space Engagement and ICT Usage by University Students 89

(i.e. their role in widening the gap between the public and private realms), their con-
tribution to the reduction of encounters with ‘others’ or the stranger and reduced chance
encounters (Hampton et al. 2010; Hampton and Gupta 2008; Hatuka and Toch 2014;
Leyshon et al. 2013). For example, Hampton et al. (2010) studied people’s use of Wi-Fi
on personal mobile devices in public and semi-public spaces in a number of North
American cities. This work found that although the availability of Wi-Fi in public
spaces increased peoples use of such spaces, they were found not to be active par-
ticipants in the social activities of the public spaces (i.e. they were ‘silent spectators’).
The research concluded that the use of wireless internet on personal mobile digital
devices in these spaces afforded a public privatism whereby people engaged in private
personal activities and their private social networks whilst in public space, thus they
were not active participants in public space. Further, the work of Leyshon et al. (2013)
examined how young people locate themselves in the city through their use of GPS-
enabled mobile phones. This research was partly concerned with the role of GPS-
enabled mobile phones in young people’s way-finding and exploration through the city.
While the study found that the young people were less like to ‘get lost’ in the city and
had greater confidence in exploring new places as a result of their GPS-enabled mobile
phones, they also found that the mobile devices proved a distraction from their sur-
roundings in that they were less inclined to observe or engage with the surrounding
urban environment. Findings, such as those from the aforementioned studies, create
concerns for the diminishing value of public space in a traditional sense, for the
declining significance of the city and urban spaces in the digital era, and for the
potential of ICTs to generate and increase social inequalities, as well as reduce
opportunities for encountering ‘others’ in the city (Valentine 2008). It is generally these
themes that the undertaken research sought to explore in relation to university students
and their uses of public spaces on the university campus.
Boren (2014) noted that there were now more mobile devices globally than people,
making the mobile phone one of the fastest diffusing technologies in history with over
seven billion mobile devices in global circulation. According to Leyshon et al. (2013),
young people own many of these mobile devices and, as such, there are ongoing
investigations into how new technologies are ‘changing young people’s behaviour,
social relationships, attention spans, time expenditure and privacy’ (pp. 587–88). Given
that young people are thought to be one of the most ‘tech-savvy’ segments of society
with almost constant connectivity to digital devices, as well as constituting a significant
target market for tech company products and innovations, we focussed our research on
young people, mostly notable university students (predominantly aged 18–25).
There have been very few studies of how students actually use, perceive and
evaluate campus green spaces (Speake et al. 2013), and furthermore there have been no
research of how students use ICTs within university public spaces. Among topics
discussed in previous studies related to campuses, there are: campuses studied as public
spaces (Gumprecht 2007), campus green spaces and their positive influence on quality
of life (McFarland et al. 2008) and campus as a tool for promotion of university
(Griffith 1994). In his research, Gumprecht (2007), for instance, outlines that attractive
and lively campuses enhance students’ experience of academic life, create memories
and build loyalty among fellow students. Griffith (1994), in turn, reports that a choice
of university often depends on the prospective student’s perception of the campus.
90 P. Arvanitidis et al.

The studies of Speake et al. (2013) explored students’ perceptions and use of
university campus green spaces - the case study of Liverpool Hope University. Their
findings reveal that the vast majority of students both use and is pleased about green
spaces, and believe there are important for the image of the university and make an
essential component of the campus environment. Besides, the authors of this study
underline that university campuses need various types of green spaces in order to
satisfy the multifarious needs of students. However, they haven’t considered applying
of ICT as example of such solutions, yet. In terms of social functions, the campus was
described by surveyed students as place for “meeting people”, “chatting with friends”,
“waiting for classes” or “simply for socialising” (Speake et al. 2013: 24). Furthermore,
among most popular activities undertaken by students in UPS, the authors of quoted
paper list: relaxation, eating or drinking, studying or sport.

3 Exploring ICT and UPS Usage in Three Case Studies

3.1 Research Concept and Methodology

This section discusses how university students perceive and report to use UPS and ICTs
in three case studies across Europe: The University College Cork in Cork, Ireland, the
University of Thessaly in Volos, Greece, and the Warsaw University of Life Sciences in
Warsaw, Poland. Data were collected through an online questionnaire survey that
explored students’ views, attitudes, stances and behaviours towards UPS and ICTs,
examining a number of issues, such as: the qualities and facilities available in UPS, the
ways and intensity of UPS use, the social interactions taking place, the student’s will-
ingness to contribute to UPS management, the kind of ICT devices and services used,
the intensity of their use and the activities students engage in through ICTs.
The questionnaire used consists of seven parts containing 56 questions of all kinds:
measurement, dichotomous, ordinal, as well as Likert-type ones scaled from 1 (denoting
strong disagreement, negative opinion, etc.) to 5 (denoting strong agreement, positive
opinion, etc.). In particular, the first part of the questionnaire informs the participants on
the purpose of the research and ensures the anonymity of participation. The second part
records views regarding the condition of the UPS they use most (qualities, facilities, etc.)
and the way these are used (intensity, activities, social interactions, etc.). The third and
fourth parts assess respectively how students use ICTs generally in their life and in
particular when they are in UPS (devises, services, ways of use, etc.). Part five examines
aspects of UPS management and the willingness of students to get involved in this. The
sixth part examines the social life of the students and their stances towards other people
and institutions. Finally, the last part gathers socio-demographic information, such as
gender, age, nationality, discipline of study, and economic status.
The survey took place in the second quarter of 2017. Questionnaires were dis-
tributed electronically by the research team, via Google forms, to university students.
Apart from the initial invitation to participate in the research, students were notified two
more times (through emails) to complete the developed questionnaire. This increased
substantially the response rate and the quality of the survey. Responses were then put
together, validated, coded and analysed to generate a number of statistics illustrating
the respondents’ answers on the issues raised.
 Public Space Engagement and ICT Usage by University Students 91

3.2 Description of the Cases

University College Cork (UCC) is the second largest tertiary education institution in
the Republic of Ireland and the largest higher education institution in Cork city. UCC
has approximately 20,000 full-time students, which includes 14,000 undergraduate
students and 4,000 Masters and PhD students (www.ucc.ie, 2017). Physically, UCC is
a large campus to the western edge of the city centre of Cork. The main campus boasts
a number of UPS, such as the main student centre, the amphitheatre, president’s garden
and various boulevards and spaces within buildings (Fig. 1). UCC recently introduced
high-quality free Wi-Fi throughout the University Campus, via EduRoam, so students,
visitors and staff have access to high-quality internet at all times.

Fig. 1. Map of the UCC campus (Source: https://www.ucc.ie/en/media/academic/languagecen

tre/UCC_campus_map_Edition1_2010-new.pdf; Accessed on 1st July, 2017)

The University of Thessaly (UTH) is one of the new public universities in Greece
having been founded in 1984. It is comprised of eighteen Departments organized in six
Schools. UTH has more than 10,000 undergraduate students, 1,500 postgraduate and
1,000 PhDs (www.uth.gr, 2017). The University is located in central Greece (in
Thessaly region), operating campuses in five cities: Volos, Larisa, Trikala, Karditsa and
Lamia. The administration and most of the Departments (twelve of them) are deployed
in Volos, and UPS is scattered all over the city (Fig. 2). UTH provides high-quality free
Wi-Fi throughout its campuses and buildings, so all academic community and visitors
have access to high-quality internet at all times.
92 P. Arvanitidis et al.

Fig. 2. Map of the UTH locations in Volos city (Source: own construction)

Warsaw University of Life Sciences (WULS) is the oldest and the largest life
sciences university in Poland and the third largest higher education institution in
Warsaw (in terms of number of students). WULS has approximately 25,000 full-time
students and 1,200 academics (www.sggw.pl, 2017). The university campus is located
in the southern part of Warsaw and it covers an area over 70 hectares, which makes it
the biggest university campus in Warsaw. The campus is divided into 2 parts - the Old
Campus, which is a historical park with an arboretum and Neo-Renaissance architec-
ture and the New Campus, where new university buildings, students’ dormitories and
sport centre are located. The WULS campus consists of a wide array of public spaces
and recreational facilities, such as an old park and arboretum, vast lawn areas for
picnics, a grill zone and faulty courtyards (Fig. 3). WULS very recently introduced a
free Wi-Fi in selected parts of the campus and buildings provided by EduRoam, and in
the near future the whole campus area is planned to be covered by a high-quality
internet at all times.
 Public Space Engagement and ICT Usage by University Students 93

Fig. 3. Map of the WULS campus (Source: http://www.sggw.pl/en/contact__/sggw-campus#pretty

Photo; Accessed on July 2nd, 2017)

3.3 Composition of Respondents

A total of 172 responses were received, of which 168 (97.7%) were valid. Of those,
about 41.4% were from students of THU (Greece), 32.0% of WULS (Poland) and
26.6% of UCC (Ireland) (see Fig. 4). The nationality of the respondents was mainly
Greek, Polish and Irish, but there were few originating from other countries too (see
Fig. 5). Their gender composition was about 68.9% female and 26.9% male, whereas a
4.2% of the students selected the option “prefer not to say” (see Fig. 6). The average
age of our sample was about 22.7 years, with the youngest being 19 years old and the
oldest 47. Their chosen subjects of study were various, though the majority were
students of economics, landscape architecture, geography, spatial economy and arts
(see Fig. 7). The respondents’ economic conditions were, on average, about moderate
to low (Fig. 8).
94 P. Arvanitidis et al.

Fig. 4. Origin country of respondents

41.4%

32.0%

23.7%

0.6% 0.6% 0.6%

German Greek Irish Italian Polish Slovakian

Fig. 5. Nationality of respondents

68.9%

26.9%

4.2%

female male prefer not to say

Fig. 6. Gender of respondents

 Public Space Engagement and ICT Usage by University Students 95

41.9%

20.4%

11.4% 10.8% 11.4%

3.6%
0.6%

Geography Arts other Economics Landscape Spatial Tourism

(UCC) (UCC) (UCC) (UTH) architecture economy and
(WULS) (WULS) recreation
(WULS)

Fig. 7. Field of study of respondents (major)

Fig. 8. Economic condition of respondents (income)

3.4 Analysis
On a scale of 1 (least positive) to 5 (highly positive), students were firstly asked to
evaluate a number of qualities with reference to the UPS they use most, these are: their
aesthetics, natural environment (greenery), safety, tranquillity, overall space quality
(e.g. cleanness), the vigour of their social environment, whether they provide a sense of
community and whether they have a unique or special character. Figure 9 presents the
results (average scores) both for the total sample and for each specific case, making
clear that UPS in all universities examined are in general of good quality (most quality
scores are above 3). At a rather medium level to all UPS is tranquillity, perhaps due to
the fact that these places are quite lively and busy urban spaces. In Greece, UPS seems
to suffer from low quality natural environment (greenery), something that is typical to
all cities in the country in general (Arvanitidis and Nasioka 2017). However, Greek
students seems to be quite happy with the overall quality of space.
96 P. Arvanitidis et al.

Fig. 9. Qualities of UPS

The next question examined the facilities that UPS offer. In particular, students
were asked to assess (on a scale of 1 to 5) whether the UPS they use most provides
quality facilities for visitors (e.g. toilets, parking, etc.), places to sit and work, internet
facilities, places with interactive information, facilities for energy provision, facilities
for recreation and commercial activities (e.g. refectory, vending machines), and maps.
Figure 10 depicts the average scores acquired (both for the total sample and each case
study). In general, we see that a low assessment of UPS in WULS is made in terms of
adequate places to work and of spaces with interactive information, that latter of which
is also the case in both UCC and UTH. Recreational facilities are of shortage in Volos’
UPS. Internet provision facilities are valued quite highly in UCC but rather low in
WULS. Overall, comparing the three case studies, it seems that the students of UCC are
the most contented with the UPS of their university, something that can be attributed to
the overall design of the university space.
 Public Space Engagement and ICT Usage by University Students 97

Fig. 10. Facilities of UPS

The following question attempted to gauge how content students are with UPS. We
asked them to specify (on a scale of 1 to 5) whether the UPS they use most are
appreciated by their peers, whether they think that UPS advance the quality of student
life, the degree of their overall satisfaction they receive, and whether they believe that
there are improvement that need to be made in UPS. Figure 11 illustrates the findings.
As can be seen, all students are generally quite happy with the UPS they use (all
average scores are above 3). As before, the most satisfied are the students in Cork.
Students in Warsaw are happy too, but to a lesser degree, highlighting the need for UPS
improvements.
98 P. Arvanitidis et al.

Fig. 11. Evaluation of UPS

A set of questions explored how students actually use the UPS. Firstly, we
examined how often students visit the UPS they use most. Figure 12 portrays these
patterns. We see that of the three cases under study, UCC students are those who visit
UPS more intensively; the majority (31.1%) use UPS multiple times a day. Polish and
Greek students, in contrast, are less frequent users, the majority of which (33.3% and
45.7%, respectively) uses UPS more than three times a week (but not every day).

Fig. 12. Intensity of UPS use

 Public Space Engagement and ICT Usage by University Students 99

With regard to the activities undertaken when in UPS, as expected, most students
go there to work/study and to socialize with their fellow students (Fig. 13). This for the
Polish students is combined with drinking (coffees, soft drinks, etc.), eating (snacks,
sandwiches, etc.), relaxing and strolling, whereas Greek students spend more time on

Fig. 13. Activities undertaken in UPS

100 P. Arvanitidis et al.

rather private activities, such as surfing the internet, catching up on social media and
checking the emails. Interestingly, spending time alone is not a favourable option for all
three student groups examined.
A number of subsequent questions explored how university students use ICTs, both
in general and when they are in UPS. Figures 14 and 15 respectively present data on
which personal devices respondents use and the intensity of their employment in the
course of a single day, whereas Fig. 16 shows where people access the internet the
most. As expected, smartphones, followed by laptops, are the devices used the most by
all students; tablets are the least used technological devices. Desktop computers are not
very popular in all cases examined, but students of UCC seems to use them at a higher
degree as compared to students of UTH and WULS. Respondents access the internet
mainly at home and on campus, both of which are places where students naturally
spend most of their time. Irish and Polish students, as compared to Greeks, are more
connected in every place (always connected), whereas Greeks seems to use the internet
higher, compared to others, when they are at shops and retail outlets. As expected, all
students use the internet in their daily life; since none of the respondents selected the
option “I never use the internet”.

Fig. 14. ICTs used in everyday life

 Public Space Engagement and ICT Usage by University Students 101

Fig. 15. Intensity of ICTs use in everyday life

Fig. 16. Internet use in everyday life

Turning to technologies usage in UPS, Fig. 17 depicts how often personal mobile
devices are used by the students. As before, smartphones are the principal instrument
used, followed by laptops. Greeks, as compared to Irish and Polish students seem to
use, at a lesser extent, both laptops and tables when they are in UPS. Polish students, in
turn, use their tablets to a higher degree, in comparison to the other two groups. Internet
use in UPS is quite popular (Fig. 18); the majority of UCC students are always con-
nected (53.5%), whereas both WULS and UTH students use it quite a lot (50% and
38.6% of them respectively). Interestingly, of the three groups examined, Greek stu-
dents seems to be those that use the internet the least when they are in UPS, as one out
of three (that is about 30%) reports that they use it only occasionally.
102 P. Arvanitidis et al.

Fig. 17. Intensity of ICT use in UPS

Fig. 18. Internet use in UPS

The questions that follow focus on management issues concerning UPS. First, we
examine students’ perceptions and attitudes towards ICTs and UPS and their maintenance
(Figs. 19 and 20), then we move to assessments of stakeholders’ capability to efficiently
manage the UPS (Fig. 20), and finally we explore students’ willingness to contribute to
the provision, maintenance and improvement of the UPS by volunteering personal time
(Figs. 22 and 23) or offering a small part of their income (Figs. 24 and 25).
To shed light on views and stances towards UPS and ICTs we asked students to
evaluate (on a scale of 1: strongly disagree, to 5: strongly agree) the following state-
ments: (1) UPS are absolutely essential to the university campus, (2) internet and Wi-Fi
provision is absolutely essential to UPS, (3) students (i.e. users) should be heavily
 Public Space Engagement and ICT Usage by University Students 103

involved in UPS design, (4) students (users) should be heavily involved in UPS man-
agement, (5) security cameras should be applied in UPS, (6) controlled access should be
applied in UPS, and (7) people should contribute financially to the creation and main-
tenance of UPS. As Fig. 19 reveals, all students believe that both UPS is necessary to the
university campus and that Wi-Fi provision is essential to UPS. Turning to issues of user
involvement in UPS design and management, students are rather neutral. In comparative
terms, more prone to get involved are those of WULS and the least those of UTH. This
might be related to the educational background of both; the former are studying (in
majority) landscape architecture (so UPS design presents a challenge), whereas the latter
are mainly students of economics. In regard to the issue of controlling access in UPS,
students seem rather negative. Free UPS access for everybody is certainly what they
prefer (though Greeks to a lesser degree), whereas students appear less negative (as
compared to the controlled access) to the question of applying security cameras in UPS,
with the Irish being more tolerant (in relation to Greeks and Polish) to such a devel-
opment. Moving to the matter of financial contribution for the creation and maintenance
of UPS, students are unanimously opposed to it.

Fig. 19. Attitudes towards UPS and ICTs

This brings us to the question of who should pay for the costs of UPS. Figure 20
depicts the answers given by our sample. Clearly, the university is held responsible for
the provision of this service and to a lesser degree the city and its administration;
certainly such costs should be not born by the students.
104 P. Arvanitidis et al.

Fig. 20. Paying the costs of UPS

Moving to assessments of stakeholders’ capacity to manage UPS, Fig. 21 shows

that respondents believe that the university is the most capable of doing so.
Provocatively, Polish students value very high student clubs and associations for their
ability to perform the task (actually higher than the University). A special body created
for this job is assessed relatively higher in Ireland, and the city authorities score
relatively higher in Greece. Interestingly, the private sector scores last in all cases
examined.

Fig. 21. Capability for UPS management

 Public Space Engagement and ICT Usage by University Students 105

Finally, we examine the willingness of students to contribute in the provision and

maintenance of UPS, by either donating money or volunteering some of their spare
time to help look after the resource. Figures 22 and 24, corroborating our previous
findings, reveal that students are reserved (to a degree) to help look after UPS and
rather unwilling to offer money towards their improvement and maintenance. Of those
willing to contribute, Greeks seem a bit more keen (compared to others) on providing
both time (on average 3.96 h) and money for UPS management, and Polish are more
reserved to both options (on average the hours that are willing to volunteer are 2.22).

Fig. 22. Willingness to help look after UPS

Fig. 23. Willingness to help look after UPS – hours volunteered

106 P. Arvanitidis et al.

Fig. 24. Willingness to contribute financially for UPS

Fig. 25. Willingness to contribute financially to UPS – percentage of income offered

4 Conclusions

This chapter has explored how university students perceive and use UPS and ICTs in
three cases across Europe: The University College Cork in Cork (Ireland), the
University of Thessaly in Volos (Greece) and the Warsaw University of Life Sciences
in Warsaw (Poland). Data were collected through an online questionnaire survey that
explored students’ self-reported views, attitudes, stances and behaviours towards UPS
and ICTs, examining a number of issues, including the qualities of and facilities
available in UPS, the frequency of UPS use and the activities performed, the kind of
technological devices and services employed and the intensity of such usage, as well as
student’s willingness to participate in UPS maintenance and provision. This allows to
identify practices of UPS usage and emerging patterns of engagement with people and
space, along with preferable designs and ways of management. Moreover, the three
 Public Space Engagement and ICT Usage by University Students 107

case studies examined enable us to spot similarities and differences in the above trends,
i.e. between North Europe (Ireland) vs. South Europe (Greece) vs. Central/East Europe
(Poland), that should be attributed to culture and local socio-economic conditions and
lifestyles.
The analysis we conducted, though preliminary and descriptive in nature, revealed
a number of points which we highlight thereafter. First, mutatis mutandis, all univer-
sities examined provide good quality UPS, with adequate facilities, that advance
contemporary student life. An issue perhaps exists in Warsaw, where students report
problems with the internet facilities and a relative shortage of places to sit and work.
Second, students appreciate the UPS available and use them quite a lot in their
everyday life as places to meet, interact and collaborate with their fellow students, as
well as spaces where, taking advantage of the Wi-Fi facilities available, they can resort
to study and work, to search for information and to communicate with the rest of the
world. As such UPS play a key role in strengthening students’ interaction and
socialisation and reinforcing their technological acquaintance and literacy. Third,
smartphones constitute the principal ICTs device that students use, both outside uni-
versity and when they are in UPS, satisfying their needs for wireless connection at any
time and place. Fourth, despite the importance of good-quality ‘wified’ UPS in con-
temporary life, students seem rather reluctant to take part in their improvement and
management, approaching it as a kind of public good which the University is obliged to
provide at no (extra) cost to the user. This explains, in part, why they are also unwilling
to accept measures of UPS surveillance and controlled access, which though they will
increase security and protection of property and life, they would presumably jeopardise
their freedom of expression and movement.

References
Arvanitidis, P., Nasioka, F.: Urban open greenspace as a commons: an exploratory case study in
Greece. Öffentl. Sekt. 43(1), 19–32 (2017)
Aurigi, A., De Cindio, F.: Augmented Urban Spaces: Articulating the Physical and Electronic
City. Ashgate, Aldershot (2008)
Boren, Z.D.: There are officially more mobile devices than people in the world. The Independent,
Tuesday 7 October 2014. http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/news/
there-are-officially-more-mobile-devices-than-people-in-the-world-9780518.html. Accessed 7
Oct 2015
Graham, S.: Bridging urban digital divides? Urban polarisation and information and commu-
nications technologies (ICTs). Urban Stud. 39(1), 33–56 (2002)
Griffith, J.C.: Open space preservation: an imperative for quality campus environments. J. High.
Educ. 65(6), 645–669 (1994)
Gumprecht, B.: The campus as a public space in the American college town. J. Hist. Geogr. 33
(1), 72–103 (2007)
Hampton, K.N., Gupta, N.: Community and social interaction in the wireless city: wi-fi use in
public and semi-public spaces. New Media Soc. 10(6), 831–850 (2008)
Hampton, K.N., Livio, O., Sessions, G.L.: The social life of wireless urban spaces: internet use,
social networks, and the public realm. J. Commun. 60(4), 701–722 (2010)
108 P. Arvanitidis et al.

Hatuka, T., Toch, E.: The emergence of portable private-personal territory: smartphones, social
conduct and public spaces. Urban Stud. (2014). https://doi.org/10.1177/0042098014524608
Leyshon, M., DiGiovanna, S., Holcomb, B.: Mobile technologies and youthful exploration:
stimulus or inhibitor? Urban Stud. 50(3), 587–605 (2013)
McFarland, A.L., Waliczek, T.M., Zajicek, J.M.: The relationship between student use of campus
green spaces and perceptions of quality of life. Hortic. Technol. 18(2), 196–319 (2008)
Speake, J., Edmondson, S., Nawaz, H.: Everyday encounters with nature: students’ perceptions
and use of university campus green spaces. Hum. Geogr. 7(1), 21–31 (2013)
Valentine, G.: Living with difference: reflections on geographies of encounter. Prog. Hum.
Geogr. 32(3), 323–337 (2008)

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
2.4
Teenagers’ Perception of Public Spaces
and Their Practices in ICTs Uses

Marluci Menezes1(&) , Paschalis Arvanitidis2 ,

Carlos Smaniotto Costa3 , and Zvi Weinstein4
1
National Laboratory for Civil Engineering – LNEC, Lisbon, Portugal
[email protected]
2
Department of Economics, University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece
[email protected]
3
CeiED Interdisciplinary Research Centre for Education and Development,
Universidade Lusófona, Lisbon, Portugal
[email protected]
4
Israel Smart Cities Institute, Tel Aviv, Israel
[email protected]

Abstract. The new information and communications technologies are

expanding human connectivity, reconfiguring urban spatialities and generating a
kind of social space that spans real and virtual, personal and impersonal, private
and public. As a result, the space and time boundaries become blurred, giving
rise to novel needs for, and practices of, public space usage. However, the ways
in which these new practices affect public space engagement and public life in
general, remain yet unclear. In addition, variations might exist due to differences
in local culture and conditions, or due to specific lifestyles and behaviours
favouring isolation and privatism or, at best, interaction only with close friends
and kin. The above issues become even more critical for young people, who
born in a digital era are able to handle new technologies with utmost ease. This
chapter sheds light on the related perceptions and practices of adolescents.
Structured interviews were applied to eight teenagers living in Hannover
(Germany), Lisbon (Portugal), Tel Aviv (Israel) and Volos (Greece) to gather
focused, qualitative and textual data. It examines how young people of distinct
sociocultural contexts perceive and use both public spaces and digital tech-
nologies. This enables to identify emergent logics, needs and patterns of
socialization and public space engagement placing specific emphasis on the role
information technologies can play in them.

Keywords: Spatial practices of teenagers
Teenagers and public spaces

Use of digital technologies
Methodological contribution

1 Introduction

The term “adolescent” is used in this work to mean anyone between the age of 14 and
16 years, and is used interchangeably with other terms “teenager” and “young people”.
Adolescence, marking the passage from childhood to adulthood, is a crucial stage of
human development. It is a period of life with substantial changes on the biological,
© The Author(s) 2019
C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 109–119, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_9
110 M. Menezes et al.

physical, cognitive, emotional and social fronts, that move teenagers towards a more
mature sense of self and purpose. Adolescents learn how to develop and manage
healthy relationships with their peers, family and other members of their social sphere,
to fully understand abstract ideas and to develop their own opinions, beliefs and
viewpoints along with an increasing ability to understand their environment. This
personality and identity development is accompanied by a call for independence and
privacy, along with establishment of close relationships with peers and other people
beyond family (ACS 2013). Thus, parent attachment and adult supervision decrease
and gradually teenagers come to expand their social circle of friends and acquaintance,
being free to decide on their own, how, with who and where to spend their time.
However, unlike adults, teens have limited control of private space, both in their homes
and schools, making them to resort to public space or to cyberspace both for their
isolation and social interactions (Childress 2004). Yet, little research has explored how
these young people approach and use both public space and the new technologies that
enable them to enter the virtual space, let alone the links between the two.
With the broad penetration of digital technologies and new media devices the world
has increasingly become hyper-connected, melting together the real and virtual worlds
and this makes the call to identity and address the complex, multi-causal, and even
sometimes contradictory, relation of social life and spaces, termed here as urban spa-
tialities (Menezes and Smaniotto 2017). Teenagers of the 21st Century are born in a
cybernetic era and are able to handle new technologies with utmost ease (Boyd 2014).
Moreover, they are not only highly digital-literate people, but also constitute the citi-
zens, users and policy makers of tomorrow. It is therefore important to explore their
perceptions, preferences, behaviours, practices and needs of both public spaces and
technology. Such knowledge is expected to shed light on how (“smart”) cities would,
or should be developed in the near future, taken under proper consideration the views
of teenagers.
On these grounds, this chapter comes to elucidate the aforementioned issues,
examining the perceptions and practices of teenagers (14–16 years of age), using
informal interviews structured in the form of a questionnaire with eight adolescents
living in Hannover (Germany), Lisbon (Portugal), Tel Aviv (Israel) and Volos
(Greece). It examines how teenagers of different sociocultural contexts perceive and
use public spaces and ICTs, in an attempt to identify emergent logics (and needs) of
socialization and public space engagement. This enables also to explore, in a prelim-
inary manner, the links between public space and the use of ICTs. Obviously, a study
of eight people does not intend to obtain a statistical representation; it simply aims to
identify specific aspects and patterns of teen behaviour to guide future research on
related issues.

2 Teenagers, Information Technologies and Public Space

ICTs have greatly changed society and how people work, learn, communicate and
interact, and increasingly the way they spent leisure time. This trend will continue to
proliferate, as the digital realm is getting more and more ubiquitous in our lives
(Bahillo et al. 2015). Computers, internet and mobile devices became ordinary part of
 Teenagers’ Perception of Public Spaces and Their Practices 111

life, even stronger in teens’ lives. They use ICT devices to communicate, for social
interaction and learning, and increasingly for entertainment. RSPH (2017) notes that
91% of teens use internet mainly for social media and acknowledges a causal link
between, and a negative impact of, internet intensive use and the physical and psy-
chological health of young people, especially of females, causing anxiety, depression
and the like. While teens are quite confident with ICT use (digital literate), very little is
known about their behaviour and needs on public places and the role technology can
play in this relationship.
For many readers it may come to a surprise that young people are among the most
frequent users of public space (Travlou et al. 2008). This is partly due to the fact that, as
minors, they have no formal (legal) rights to spaces of their own (Childress 2004),
something that makes them to depend on public space both for their isolation and social
interactions (Lieberg 1995; Worpole 2005). Thus, parks, squares, alleyways, sidewalks,
and the like, become the appropriated places whereby adolescents resort to stay private,
as well as to meet and to interact with their friends and peers (Matthews 1995; Depeau
2001). As a result, these places are imbued with their own cultural values and mean-
ings. This suggests, at least, the need to examine public space in the way young people
understand, approach and appropriate it.
Despite the fact that public space plays an important role for adolescents physical,
mental, emotional and social development and well-being (Robinson 2000), teenagers’
appropriation of public space is usually seen in particularly charged ways, attributing
these public spaces a sense of “difference” in relation to adults’ space (Jupp 2007;
Lieberg 1995). Thus, young people are seemingly invisible in the urban landscape
(Travlou et al. 2008); they are excluded from the dominant “adult” public space
through controls and rules, afforded only with “leftover” or “token” spaces (Matthews
1995; Childress 2004), which are usually not sufficient to their needs (Lieberg 1995). In
their attempts to contest adults’ spatial domination and to declare their independence,
adolescents develop their own “micro-geographies” in space (Matthews et al. 1998).
That is, they resort to alternative patterns of public space usage and leave their own
markers (e.g. graffiti) as symbolic gestures of resistance to adult hegemony (Bell et al.
2003; Valentine 1996; Matthews 1995). These actions are sometimes seen as threats to
the safety of other user groups (ACS, 2013), giving rise to conflicts and generating
stricter controls on the part of the adults (Livingstone et al. 2015; Bell et al. 2003). At
least partly, due to these restrictions, young people’s spatial freedom and mobility
appears to be decreasing, and teenagers retreat to virtual space (through mobile phones
and the internet) and/or to semi-public spaces (such as, the indoor space of
shopping/leisure centres, libraries, churches, etc.) as a new experiential place for iso-
lation and interaction (Childress 2004). The latter study highlights an increase in the
sedentary lifestyle, raising further concerns about youngster’s obesity and related
health risks, let alone the devastating effects on their personality and well-being due to
disconnection from the natural environment and from nature in general (Louv 2008).
The way cities, the build environment and open spaces are designed, and function
affect people’s life. There is a growing body of evidence illustrating how spatial
planning and urban design impact on public health, sociability and well-being. An
environment that encourage people to walk, cycle, move physically and exercise leads
to increased social interactions and healthy relations with one other (Smaniotto Costa
112 M. Menezes et al.

2016). This highlights that urban planning decisions have a key role to play in com-
bating growing levels of obesity and helping prevent lifestyle related diseases, through
facilitating physical activity and social interaction (COB 2011). ICTs’ place in these
processes is also significant. As scholars (e.g. Hampton and Gupta 2008; Hampton
et al. 2010; Hatuka and Toch 2014) have pointed out, ICTs affect public space use and
design enabling involvement in outdoor social practices, and public participation and
empowerment. Thus, a vast spectrum of innovative ways of public space engagement
becomes a possibility, where ICTs constitute a resource to be used in the production of
more responsive, liveable and inclusive urban environment (Smaniotto et al. 2017). On
these grounds, it is paramount to explore the role and impact of ICTs on public spaces
from a teenagers’ point of view.
All the above, and especially the apparent invisibility or, perhaps, disappearance of
teens from public spaces and their alleged antisocial behaviour, make a call for an inter-
generational dialogue and further study on the issues (Lieberg 1995). With a view to
initiate such a forum where adolescents can articulate their needs, preferences, views,
concerns, etc. regarding urban public spaces, the present exploratory study aims to
introduce some aspects that stand out from the perspective of eight adolescents living in
different sociocultural contexts of four distinct cities.

3 ICTs and Public Space: The View of Teenagers

3.1 Study Methodology

The questionnaire used was composed of two main blocks of questions: The first block
concerns the interviewees’ profile, containing 34 (mostly closed) questions, which
collected socio-demographic data, information on the different ways’ ICTs are
employed, how free time is spent, and public spaces are used, in addition to other
aspects of interviewees’ social life. The second set of questions, all open, gathered
opinions on public spaces (quality, frequency of use, etc.) and how the ICTs could
increase their use by the respondent and their friends and peers. The last question of
this block asked for additional comments regarding all aspects of the issues raised. The
initial idea of this question was to initiate further discussion in the form of informal
conversation within the topics of study.
In order to implement the process of inquiry, each one of the authors identified (and
then interviewed) two adolescents who were, somehow, part of the interviewer’s wider
social network in the cities they live. This choice enabled to speed up the process of
inquiry and fostered the establishment of more relaxed conversations-interviews, that
made the collection of information not only easier but also oriented it towards more in-
depth and qualitative kind of data. The process of inquiry took place between May and
June 2017.

3.2 General Information About Interviewees and Their Families

The following information presents key demographic characteristics, composing the
profile of the eight adolescents participated in the study:
 Teenagers’ Perception of Public Spaces and Their Practices 113

• The majority of interviewees (six in number) are female, the only two boys are each
from Hannover and Tel Aviv.
• The interviewees are between 14 and 16 years old (two girls of 14, one boy and two
girls aged 15, and one boy plus two girls are 16 years old).
• Seven of them are in the secondary school (five attend the 9th grade and two in 10th
grade, one in 8th grade).
• Six of the interviewees live in a household composed of three to four people, one
respondent, from Lisbon, lives in a household of five, and one from Tel Aviv in a
household of six persons.
• Except for a single case (Tel Aviv), whose mother completed only primary edu-
cation, all other parents have a university degree; out of these seven, four have
completed postgraduate studies (two mothers from Lisbon and Volos, and two
fathers from Hannover and Volos).
• Except for one parent who is retired (Lisbon), all other parents are currently
employed. In terms of professional occupation, there are six people who are highly
educated professionals, e.g. doctors, engineers, etc. (three parents from Lisbon and
three parents from Hannover), two mothers working in service and sales sector
(respectively in Hannover and Tel Aviv), five people are employed in education
(one mother from Tel Aviv and four parents from Volos), one is a businessman
(from Hannover); and for the remaining two people (from Lisbon and Tel Aviv)
such information have not been provided.
• Five of the adolescents identified themselves as belonging to a household with
moderate to high income, and the other three indicated their family income to be
moderate to low (one from Tel Aviv and two from Volos).

3.3 Study Results

Regarding how the eight interviewees use ICTs and related devices, as expected, all
adolescents have some kind of digital devices at home and, in particular, some of them
are for their personal use. The following information presents synoptically our findings:
• Smartphones: all household members of respondents from Hannover and Tel Aviv
and one from Lisbon have own personal smartphones. In the other families some
members do not own a smartphone, presumably the too young ones, these are one
family member in Lisbon and two family members in Volos.
• Desktop computer: with the exception of two cases, one in Lisbon and in Hannover,
all families had at least one desktop computer. Notably, a respondent from Tel Aviv
reported of having two desktops at home.
• Tablets: four of the cases reported of not having a tablet at home (Hannover,
Lisbon, Tel Aviv and Volos). One case (Hannover) reported having four tablets in
the household, one for each member of the family. Interesting is also the case of a
Lisbon family mentioning that there is a tablet in the household, but it is not
working. The last case, a Volos family of four people counts on two tablets.
• Laptop/Notebook: all households report that there is at least one laptop/notebook
available. In two families (one from Hanover and one from Lisbon), all members
114 M. Menezes et al.

have for their own such a device. The second family from Lisbon reported four
notebooks for five people.
• Other technological equipment: with the exception of one case from Lisbon and the
two cases of Tel Aviv, all other families stated that there is at least one such device
in the household, namely: N2DS and Kindle (in one case from Hannover), iPod,
SmartWatch and mp3 (one case from Lisbon), and mp3 player (one case from
Volos).
Teenagers were also asked about the use of GPS through the ICT devices they own.
Three of the interviewees (one from Tel Aviv, Volos and Hannover) replied that they
did not make such use. All others reported that they use this function mainly for
locating and consulting transport services. All teens have reported they have internet
access at their homes and at school (both Wi-Fi and cable connection), and they use it
for research purposes and for obtaining all kind of information.
Adolescents were asked to identify from a list of seven places (home, school, other
family members’ home, friends’ home, shopping centres, public spaces, and public
transport) where they access the internet most. Unfortunately, only in Lisbon the
question was answered as expected; in all other cases this question was unsatisfactory
answered, preventing us from drawing comprehensive conclusions on the issue. For
example, the respondents from Hannover marked the places where the internet are
accessed (with no identification of relative importance between the places), whereas the
respondents from Tel Aviv and Volos indicated the importance of some, but not all of
the places (presumably only those used). In any case, the answers indicate the
following:
• Home: Except for one case (Tel Aviv), all other interviewees have selected this
option. Moreover, the two cases of both Lisbon and Volos, reported “home” to be
the most frequent place for accessing the internet.
• School: The two interviewees from Hannover marked this as a place of frequent
internet access, whereas all responders from Lisbon identified “school” as the
second place of importance. The other cases, i.e. in Tel Aviv and Volos, teenagers
reported that they use the internet for research, without however providing further
information on where they access to it.
• Other family members’ home: Only the cases of Lisbon and Volos have place
identified as important; in Lisbon it came as second, while in Volos it was classified
fourth and fifth most frequent way to access to internet. One of Hannover’s
respondents selected this option (but without ranking its importance); and for the
cases of Tel Aviv no answers were delivered.
• Friends’ home: This place was selected by two interviewees, one from Hannover
and from Tel Aviv. This option was select as first and second place in Volos, and
the fourth and the fifth in Lisbon.
• Shopping centre: This place was marked by one case in Hannover and by another in
Tel Aviv. In Lisbon, it was marked as the third and last rank.
• Public spaces: It was ranked second and third in Volos, fifth and fourth in Lisbon. It
was marked as important by one of the Hannover teenagers.
• Public transport: This place was ranked as last and third in importance by teenagers
of Lisbon and fourth of Volos. One interviewee from Hannover ranked it too.
 Teenagers’ Perception of Public Spaces and Their Practices 115

The frequency of internet connection was explored in the next question, revealing
that teenagers have access to Wi-Fi internet services to a great extent. Both respondents
from Volos, one from Lisbon and one from Tel Aviv reported that they are always
connected, whereas the other two respondents from Lisbon and Tel Aviv and the one
from Hannover, indicated that they stay connected several times during a day. Notably,
only one interviewee (from Hannover) replied to have internet access only a few times
a day. Turning to the question of how many hours the internet is used every day by the
teenagers, the majority of interviewees mentioned to use it between four to seven hours,
and only two of the respondents (from Tel Aviv and Volos) use it about one to two
hours per day. Moreover, these answers allow us to spot the following findings:
• Girls specify that they spend more time using the internet than boys (to note,
however, that only two boys participated in the study);
• Internet time used for email communication seems to be quite lower relative to time
spent in other activities, especially those related to social network/media;
• Regarding the time teenagers spend connected to the internet for recreational
activities has been mentioned most often.
The next set of questions explored how teenagers spent their free time. First, on a
given list of activities (watch TV, go for a walk, stay at home with friends, play
computer games, listen to music, study, read books, access social networks, other) the
teenagers are asked to rate on a scale of 1 (low) to 7 (high) what they usually do in their
free time during the week. The results show that the majority of the adolescents spend
most of their free time in playing computer games and in studying (both answers scored
equally high), and in listening to music (scored third). Apart from these, other preferred
activities that are high scored are: watching TV (indicated by one respondent from
Hannover and one from Tel Aviv), book reading (mentioned by the other respondent
from Hannover), accessing social network (selected by one teenager from Tel Aviv and
one from Volos) and walking (indicated by the same respondent from Volos).
The second question explored which places from a given list (shopping centre,
cinema, theatre, museum, concert/festival, club/association, urban park, square, garden,
or other) teenagers visit most during their free time. It becomes evident that semi-public
places and, in particular malls, cinemas, museums and theatres, score top in the pref-
erences of respondents. Interestingly, public open spaces, such as squares and parks,
score lower, but above other places of social gathering such as festivals, clubs or
associations. These findings corroborate the arguments raised in the literature that
adolescents tend to withdraw from public spaces and to resort to semi-public spaces as
the new rhetorical and experiential landscape. Regarding the individual responses,
teens from Hannover are more into spending time in festivals and clubs, Lisbon’s
teenagers are more into theatres and museums, Tel Aviv respondents spend time in
parks and shopping centres and in Volos in cinemas and squares.
Teenagers were also questioned about their practices and behaviour in public
spaces. They have been asked on the frequency they go to a public space, how much
time they usually spend there, what they do there, and with who they go. As regards the
first question, the answers show that four out of eight teenagers visit public spaces
every day (the two teens from Lisbon, one from Hannover and one from Tel Aviv);
others mentioned to go only on weekends (both from Volos) or sporadically (one
116 M. Menezes et al.

respondent from Hannover and one from Tel Aviv). With regard to the time spent in
public spaces, three respondents (the two from Tel Aviv and the one from Hannover)
replied that they go to the public spaces for an hour or less per day, others that they stay
between two to four hours a day (two from Lisbon, one from Hannover and one from
Volos). One adolescent (from Volos) replied that during the summer she stays in parks
and squares about six hours per day. The interviewed teens expressed to go to the
public spaces mainly to meet with friends (seven out of eight), to walk (six respon-
dents), to relax and rest (five respondents), to picnic (three respondents), to read and
study (three respondents), to practise sports and exercise (two respondents) and to
attend events and play games (two people in each category, respectively). All teenagers
mentioned to go to public spaces with their friends and some with family members (the
two from Lisbon, one from Hannover and one from Tel Aviv).
Finally, a number of questions explored what teenagers think of public spaces and
the role ICTs can play in increasing their use. The first question is about the teens’
judgment upon the public space suitability for the needs of adolescents. Respondents
were generally positive; the two teens from Tel Aviv answered with “definitely yes”,
highlighting the fact that the parks they use have sections that enable privacy and
isolation. This approval was also shared by the teenagers from Hannover and Lisbon,
as they answered with “rather yes”. On the other hand, adolescents from Volos were
not satisfied with the public spaces, reporting a number of problems and deficiencies
they see in these places. This builds the bridge to the next question: what teenagers do
think is missing in these places and what should be done to increase the usability for
young people. The teens from Tel Aviv reported no problems, as they are satisfied with
the public spaces they have. Furthermore, three teenagers highlighted problems of dog
fouling (one each from Hannover, Lisbon and Volos), others pointed out issues of
maintenance and cleanliness (one each from Lisbon and Hannover, and the two from
Volos), two have highlighted the need of more natural elements and pleasant envi-
ronment (one each from Lisbon and Hannover), the girl from Hannover brought out the
need of coffee shops nearby green spaces, one of the Lisbon girls stressed the absence
of drinking water in parks, and the one from Volos asked for more events and cultural
activities in public spaces. Remarkably, three of the interviewees (two from Volos and
one from Hannover) highlighted the lack for privacy for teenagers and emphasised the
need for special places within parks, where adolescents (as well as other people with
special interests and needs, as children) can claim for themselves, places where they
can loiter, hang out and interact with their friends and peers. The third question of this
block asked if ICTs can improve public space usage, and if so, what kind of ICTs
would be most supportive. Six adolescents, out of eight, replied to this question (the
two who did not are from Hannover), all in a positive manner. Three teens highlighted
the need of providing online information (the girl from Lisbon and two from Tel Aviv)
related to public-space facilities and functions (such as, the available public-space
qualities and the activities that can be performed in them, and the availability and
frequency of public transport). The two teens from Volos stated that high quality Wi-Fi
would be very helpful, it would improve communication and coordination between
teenagers, and eventually attracting more young people, making “these spaces more
fashionable”. They also suggested the development of special apps attached to public
spaces (like Pokémon-go).
 Teenagers’ Perception of Public Spaces and Their Practices 117

4 The Lessons Learnt: Discussion and Conclusions

This small-scale study outlines the view of eight teenagers living in different cities:
Hannover, Lisbon, Volos and Tel Aviv, to provide some insights on teenager’s per-
spectives and on their ICT practices in relation to public open spaces. Teenagers as
Digital Natives belong to the “Z” generation, a generation born completely within the
technological age having a true global culture with quite uniform characteristics.
That said, it is almost natural that ICTs are scored very high in the preferences of
teenagers interviewed. If there are any differences among them, these should be
attributed to the local conditions in each country, the standards of living, differences in
education, culture, degree of ICTs penetration and provision of quality public spaces.
Even so the results let us to draw the following conclusions:
• Teenagers are using intensively the most advanced tools and particularly smart-
phones, which become a very common device among more and more youngers of
any gender.
• Differences in socio-economic status do not matter, both lower and higher economic
levels use ICTs to a similar degree. Of course, some parents are more cautious (and
protective) with regard to how their children should engage with technology, and in
these cases, teens have to negotiate the access to digital media and technology.
• ICTs devices are acquiring the status of “humanized friend” among the adolescents.
ICTs become not only the everyday companion of teenagers but in some cases their
‘best friend’, substituting other friends and peers.
• Possession of smartphones and other mobile devices gives teenagers a kind of social
status, prestige and acceptance by their peers. It is also a medium for showing off,
or, as Veblen (1899) terms it, for “conspicuous consumption”.
• Internet, especially wi-fi, is a companion of teens and they use it in diversified
situations, needs and contexts, and through different devices. This means that
providing wi-fi in public spaces can be a way to lead more young people to get
outside and maybe engage with the city and nature.
• Equipped with advanced ICT services, public spaces would attract teenagers, but
yet this requires the provision of “private” and retreat places they need for doing a
number of activities, e.g. getting together, for entertaining themselves and for
practicing sports, etc.
• This reinforces the need to better prepare public spaces to meet the needs and
preferences of teenagers. Their activities in public spaces, as reported, are common
across to all four cities examined.
• “Good” public spaces can play an important role in teens’ socialisation. As Chil-
dress (2004) has shown, teens need to mark “their” places (with graffiti, skate-
boarding or even loitering). This calls for providing teenagers a legitimate and
unchaperoned public space, designed in such a way as to make them feel welcomed.
• Teenagers do miss useful information regarding amenities in open spaces and
especially about facilities aimed at young people. This becomes an opportunity for
technologies to provide such information, motivating teenagers to be more outdoors
and forget for a while the gaming indoors.
118 M. Menezes et al.

This small study, due to its limited sampling and resources did not address risks of
a digital technology addiction by teenagers, this is an issue that has been increasing
being investigated. However, an aspect that becomes clear in the relationship of ado-
lescents with technology, is the speed of the changes in a teenagers’ life, be them
physical, mental, sentimental and social. These continuous and accelerated changes
provoke also changes in their perspectives. The same adolescent interviewed in May
might manifest him/herself in a different manner compared to, say, six months later.
This goes also in line from a technology perspective, the rapid and continuous digital
development poses a continuous challenge for those interested in the nexus people,
places and technologies. We cannot stop changes, but we can try to understand these
and inform and educate teenagers, and especially in a co-creation process engage
young people in the production of more inclusive and responsive public open spaces.

Acknowledgement. This work has been supported by the Cost Action TU1306 – CYBER-
PARKS (www.cyberparks-project.eu) and by C3Places – Using ICT for Co-creation of Inclusive
Public Places (European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant
agreement No 693443) – www.c3places.eu.

References
ACS, Australian Computer Society Inc: Digital Technology and Australian Teenagers:
Consumption, Study and Careers (2013). www.acs.org.au
Bahillo, A., Goličnik Marušić, B., Perallos, A.: A mobile application as an unobtrusive tool for
behavioural mapping in public spaces. In: García-Chamizo, J.M., Fortino, G., Ochoa, S.F.
(eds.) UCAmI 2015. LNCS, vol. 9454, pp. 13–25. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.
1007/978-3-319-26401-1_2
Bell, S., Ward Thompson, C., Travlou, P.: Contested views of freedom and control: children,
teenagers and urban fringe woodlands in central Scotland. Urban Forest. Urban Green. 2, 87–
100 (2003)
Boyd, D.: It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens. Yale University Press, New
Haven (2014)
Childress, H.: Teenagers, territory and the appropriation of space. Childhood 11(2), 195–205 (2004)
COB, Childhood Obesity Prevention: Growing up healthy - discussion framework for a
childhood obesity prevention strategy. Nova Scotia, Ca (2011)
Depeau, S.: Urban identities and social interaction: a cross-cultural analysis of young people’s
spatial mobility in Paris, France, and Frankston Australia. Local Environ. 6(1), 81–86 (2001)
Hampton, K.N., Gupta, N.: Community and social interaction in the wireless city: Wi-Fi use in
public and semi-public spaces. New Media Soc. 10(6), 831–850 (2008)
Hampton, K.N., Livio, O., Sessions Goulet, L.: The social life of wireless urban spaces: Internet
use, social networks, and the public realm. J. Commun. 60(4), 701–722 (2010)
Hatuka, T., Toch, E.: The emergence of portable private-personal territory: Smartphones, social
conduct and public spaces. Urban Stud. 53(10), 2192–2208 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1177/
0042098014524608
Jupp, E.: Participation, local knowledge and empowerment: researching public space with young
people. Environ. Plann. A 39(12), 2832–2844 (2007)
Lieberg, M.: Teenagers and public space. Commun. Res. 22(6), 720–744 (1995)
Livingstone, S., Cagiltay, K., Ólafsso, K.: EU kids online II dataset: a cross-national study of
children’s use of the Internet and its associated opportunities and risks. Br. J. Educ. Technol.
46(5), 988–992 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12317
 Teenagers’ Perception of Public Spaces and Their Practices 119

Louv, R.: Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature deficit Disorder.
Algonquin, Chapel Hill (2008)
Matthews, H.: Living on the edge: children as outsiders. Tijdschr. voor Econ. en Soc. Geogr. 86
(5), 456–466 (1995)
Matthews, H., Limb, M., Percy-Smith, B.: Changing worlds: the microgeographies of young
teenagers. Tijdschr. voor Econ. en Soc. Geogr. 89(2), 193–202 (1998)
Menezes, M., Smaniotto Costa, C.: People, public space, digital technology and social practice:
an ethnographic approach. In: Zammit, A., Kenna, T. (eds.) Enhancing Places Through
Technology, pp. 167–180. Edições Universitárias Lusófonas, Lisbon (2017). ISBN 978-989-
757-055-1. http://cyberparks-project.eu/sites/default/files/publications/cyberparks_enhancing
placestechnology.pdf
Robinson, C.: Creating space, creating self: street-frequenting youth in the city and suburbs.
J. Youth Stud. 3(4), 429–443 (2000)
RSPH, Royal Society for Public Health: Status of Mind - Social media and young people’s
mental health and wellbeing. London (2017). https://www.rsph.org.uk/our-work/policy/
social-media-and-young-people-s-mental-health-and-wellbeing.html
Smaniotto Costa, C.: A framework for guiding the management of low-impact mobility towards
making room for sustainable urban green infrastructure. J. Traffic Logist. Eng. 1(4), 74–82
(2016). https://doi.org/10.18178/jtle.4.1.74-82
Smaniotto Costa, C., Bahillo Martínez, A., Álvarez, F.J., Šuklje Erjavec, I., Menezes, M.,
Pallares-Barbera, M.: Digital tools for capturing user’s needs on urban open spaces: drawing
lessons from cyberparks project. In: Certomà, C., Dyer, M., Pocatilu, L., Rizzi, F. (eds.)
Citizen empowerment and innovation in the data-rich city. STCE, pp. 177–193. Springer,
Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-47904-0_11
Travlou, P., Owens, P.E., Thompson, C.W., Maxwell, L.: Place mapping with teenagers: locating
their territories and documenting their experience of the public realm. Child. Geogr. 6(3),
309–326 (2008)
Valentine, G.: Children should be seen and not heard: the production and transgression of adults’
public space. Hum. Geogr. 17(3), 205–220 (1996)
Veblen, T.: The Theory of the Leisure Class: An Economic Study of Institutions. Random House,
New York (1899)
Worpole, K.: No Particular Place to Go? Children, Young People and Public Space.
Groundwork UK, London (2005)

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
2.5
Challenging Methods and Results Obtained
from User-Generated Content in Barcelona’s
Public Open Spaces

Montserrat Pallares-Barbera1(&) , Elena Masala2 ,

Jugoslav Jokovic3 , Aleksandra Djukic4 , and Xavier Albacete5
1
Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Bellaterra, Spain
[email protected]
2
SiTI - Higher Institute on Territorial Systems for Innovation, Turin, Italy
[email protected]
3
University of Nis, Niš, Serbia
[email protected]
4
University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia
[email protected]
5
University of Eastern Finland, Kuopio, Finland
[email protected]

Abstract. User-generated content (UGC) provides useful resources for aca-

demics, technicians and policymakers to obtain and analyse results in order to
improve lives of individuals in urban settings. User-generated content comes
from people who voluntarily contribute data, information, or media that then
appears in a way which can be viewed by others; usually on the Web. However,
to date little is known about how complex methodologies for getting results are
subject to methodology-formation errors, personal data protection, and relia-
bility of outcomes. Different researches have been approaching to inquire big
data methods for a better understanding of social groups for planners and
economic needs. In this chapter, through UGC from Tweets of users located in
Barcelona, we present different research experiments. Data collection is based
on the use of REST API; while analysis and representation of UGC follow
different ways of processing and providing a plurality of information. The first
objective is to study the results at a different geographical scale, Barcelona’s
Metropolitan Area and at two Public Open Spaces (POS) in Barcelona, Enric
Granados Street and the area around the Fòrum de les Cultures; during similar
days in two periods of time - in January of 2015 and 2017. The second objective
is intended to better understand how different types of POS’ Twitter-users draw
urban patterns. The Origin-Destination patterns generated illustrate new social
behaviours, addressed to multifunctional uses. This chapter aims to be
influential in the use of UGC analysis for planning purposes and to increase
quality of life.

Keywords: User-generated content
Big data
Twitter
Public open spaces

Spatial analysis

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 120–136, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_10
 Challenging Methods and Results Obtained from User-Generated Content 121

1 Introduction

The implications of User Generated Content are changing the daily life of people.
Everyone is involved, but some institutions have stored the data and the power to
exploit them. We can contribute to make this power more democratic and available to
improve the life of people. This chapter has the goal to do it. The objective of this
chapter is to deepen the study on user-generated data (UGD, User Generated Content,
UGC) for exploring new methodologies that could support and improve the under-
standing of spatial patterns for urban planning and design of open spaces in urban
areas. This chapter aims at taking a step forward form current literature. It provides, on
the one hand, three methods for social science analysis using Big Data; and, on the
other hand, it expects to motivate the possible outcomes of UGD coming from three
Information and Communication Technologies (ICT) platforms into policy driving
strategies, where results can be used to improve quality of life. This chapter examines
the spatial pattern of UGD in three public open spaces in Barcelona: Enric Granados
Street (Carrer Enric Granados), Forum (Fòrum de les Cultures) and Barcelona
Metropolitan Area; and the spatial patterns generated by weekday and by hourly
interval in order to study the further insides of how users construct different configu-
ration in visiting a city. Methodologically, we have used two different platforms
(Twitter and WAY app). Twitter, the web social network is currently used by 284
million of monthly active users (Twitter Inc. 2015). Twitter provides large amounts of
data georeferenced. Although only a part of the entire urban population uses Twitter,
the remaining data are a useful source to analyse the location of people in the city are
and why there is more activity-clustering in places vs. others. The second platform is
the app WAY Cyberparks, an application developed by DeustoTech Mobility within
the COST Action TU1306 – CyberParks (Bahillo et al. 2016, 2015; Masegosa et al.
2015). This GPS-based platform focuses on the use of ICT for understanding and
collecting data on the use of urban open spaces.
The possibility to communicate worldwide through common smartphones opened
up new perspectives and interaction pathways to individuals, who very quickly
responded with a massive use of social network platforms and applications. Since most
smartphones include Global Positioning System (GPS), if activated, outgoing data from
each device can be geo-referenced. Thus, the large amount of data can be geo-located
with a time reference. The consequence is the constant production of “Big Data”
(Targio et al. 2015; Snijders et al. 2012) which can be overlaid on maps and analysed
by mathematical, semantic techniques (Language detection API 2016), and by means
of spatial analysis methods. Substantial works on the nature of geography have dis-
cussed the spatial pattern formed by many purposes of analysis, since the classical
works of Hartshorne (1939), Harvey (1963), Friedman and Alonso (1964), Berry
(1973), and Chorley and Haggett (1965) among many others till nowadays. Their
relevant research on the organization and settlement of people and activities in the
human world, the regularity of distribution brought significant and worthy results
which made huge advancements in Geographical Thought and society. In 2018, UGC
122 M. Pallares-Barbera et al.

brought a new paradigm in the study and analysis of spatial patterns in Human
Geography. Related problems are more associated to find appropriate models and
methodologies to draw a good statistical sample from the population, to depurate the
data, to discriminate the data size and to analyse consistently the results.
Case studies are very specific and different POS in Barcelona. Enric Granados is
located at the urban centre, in the “Cerdà’s Eixample” (Cerdà enlargement) of Bar-
celona (Pallares-Barbera, Badia and Duch 2011). It is a residential lively, dense street
with services and amenities; Forum is located at the end of the Diagonal, very close to
the 22@Barcelona neighbourhood (Casellas and Pallares-Barbera 2009). It is mainly a
complex of buildings and cement plazas built for the 2004 Forum of Cultures exhi-
bition. For the most part, locals use Enric Granados Street, while Forum’s facilities are
used for large meetings, conventions and festivals; otherwise it is an unoccupied space.
This chapter is formulated in different sections. Section 2 analyses the state of the
art regarding uses and applications of UGC by different institutions, firms and policy
makers. Section 3 describes the case studies. Section 4 focusses on data and
methodology, while Sect. 5 is about results and discussion of them. Conclusions,
provided in Sect. 6, aim to offer insides of expected future developments for the
integration of UGC with new methodologies within contemporary spatial planning
processes.

2 Background and Related Work

The availability of big and open data is nowadays offering new opportunities for re-
thinking the human behaviour and its impact on Earth. Since these data is often geo-
referenced, its overlaying on maps provides useful information on particular organi-
zation and structure of spatial systems. Therefore, urban planning, and design, transport
planning, social sciences and human geography can benefit from their use.
Although a large number of applications and experiments constellates the landscape
of research, the academic research has barely yet found a specific own pathway within
these huge opportunities. However, relevant academic work is coming out as well as
public and private bodies have begun to use big data for their own development; for
example, NOAA Big Data Project, or DataKind for the treatment of trees in NYC.
A concise overview on the state of the art on the use of geolocated user-generated
contents in spatial planning is meant to show analysis, applications and uses.
Cities have the pressure of millions of inhabitants to increase their quality of life.
Through the introduction of ICT, cities try to cope population needs with strategies
based on an integrative framework, including management, technology, governance
and policy; a reunion of factors which some call smart city (Chourabi et al. 2012). The
concept of smart city has not a clear consensus and nor a consistent understanding
among academia and practitioners, but in this chapter, it will be used to refer to a city
with massive implications of ICT. City information is collected by sensors, tools and
applications and used on the city policy. Data-information relies on the diffuse use of
 Challenging Methods and Results Obtained from User-Generated Content 123

devices for quantifying movements, environment quality and healthiness, and energy
consumption. Private enterprises, such as the biggest technological companies like
IBM, Cisco or Siemens are also interested on data collection and analysis for their own
objectives and strategies.
Local institutions such as governments or urban planning firms use big data to
organize exhibitions with different goals. Some of them are under the idea of crowd-
sourcing, in which citizens’ digital footprint such as tweets or use of online municipal
services help city planners improve city’s design and functionality. For instance, the
Chicago Architecture Foundation (CAF) partnering with IBM (Chicago Architecture
Foundation 2014; IBM 2014; Snodgrass 2014) launched “Chicago: City of Big Data.”
Its goal was to open up a dialogue on the connection between big data and human lives
and to show how spatial systems are impacted by this information, and how relevant
each individual was to the design of their environment. The exhibition’s dashboards
were built with IBM’s City Forward platform, a free web-based “civic resource that
enables people to visualize and interact with city data” (Kokalitcheva 2014). The
methodological basis for selecting data sources used two central criteria: the data’s
availability at a large enough scale; and its capability to communicate valuable insights
about the city’s needs and flows. Then, they used complex geographic information
systems (GIS) and web-based tools to compile and visualize the data in effective ways.
Data sources consisted of over 18 million Twitter data points, with only timestamp and
location attributes, which turned into dynamic and “interactive models of city’s human
activity.” (Kokalitcheva 2014). On the broad objective of “explor(ing) the emergence
of the database as a framework for cultural and political thinking and the effects of
datafication of the world.”, the Big Bang Data exhibition (Spain) (organised by the
Centre de Cultura Contemporània de Barcelona (CCCB) and Fundación Telefónica
2015) took under consideration different topics about city’ shape and layout on the
basis of different kind of data.
Academic literature based on Twitter-use patterns has developed at different geo-
graphical scales. The spatial pattern of social networks and the threshold of their
activities have been analysed at urban scale across three cities in order to produce an
inter-urban analysis (Bawa-Cavia 2010). Diverse methods, such as attempts to
aggregate the activity on the network onto a grid (400  400 m) of dots representing
the ‘walkable’ cells showed the threshold walking distances in urban areas (O’Sullivan
and Morral 1996). At wider scale, human flows are gathered, extracted and analysed in
geolocated social media data through different instruments. An example is FlowSam-
pler, an interactive interface for visual analysis of flows in geolocated social media data.
It adopts a graph-based approach to infer movement pathways from spatial point type
data and expresses the resulting information through multiple linked visualizations to
support data exploration (Chua et al. 2014). Additionally, it allows characterizing
places in base the “density” of arc traces and keywords within the local groups. Big
data also helps to study prescription planning such as to plan routes of buses and
subways to satisfy public demand in several cities around the world (Fisher 2012).
124 M. Pallares-Barbera et al.

Through the spatial analysis of UGD, we come to understand that some cities are
far more active early in the morning, while others show higher activity at night or on
weekends (Neuhaus 2011). The Centre for Advanced Spatial Analysis (CASA) at
University College London (UCL) Twitter-use monitored several cities over a week to
determine patterns in temporal activities and learn about spatial networks. Other
analyses on UGD and available data from social networks - Twitter, Facebook, Flickr
and Instagram - captured information about citizens’ feelings, citizens’ uses, citizens’
comfortability and conditions of problematic situations. Funded by the German
Research Foundation, the “Urban Emotions” project (Heidelberg and Kaiserslautern
Universities) tested UGD by checking whether the emotions measured correlate with
the subjective assessments in the social media. “People as Sensors” used measures
emotions and stress levels, such as “unsafe bike paths, traffic jam stress, frightening
underpasses” (Heidelberg University 2014). Therefore, measurements of citizens’
emotional responses to their environment were made with by the use of sensors, similar
to a wristwatch “that allows us to measure skin conductance, body temperature and
variations in heart rate that change, for instance, when someone is startled” (Resch et al.
2015). Differently, but also tracing emotions, the exploration of how people express
excitement online show a regular pattern; in which as much higher levels of excitement
and more intense the flurry of messages in the collective, the shorter the messages
become (Senseable City Lab and Ericsson 2015; Szell et al. 2014). Emotional bursts
become faster and more impulsive online than offline. Many associated questions and
outcomes become still unanswered, such as: “Are people doing this independently, or
in response to seeing other short messages? Are we following the herd? Could we use
these insights to learn more about financial bubbles by measuring more impulsive, less
rational responses? And can we design better communication services?” (Lanzerotti
et al. 2013).
Nevertheless, cautions have to be taken in considering the use of big data. There are
many positive aspects on big data analysis, but many fears can be raised too. The
obvious one is the intrusion on in the private sphere of our lives. In addition, putting
data culture at the centre of decision-making and on the way of interpreting the world
opens up many possibilities and involves numerous risks. The main danger of data-
centrism is that it encourages the idea that whatever the problem, the answer lays in
data. This important discussion escapes the goal of this chapter.

3 Case Studies

The several big data methodologies presented in this chapter are better understood if
different geographical scales are used for analysis. Besides the metropolitan area of
Barcelona, two very diverse morphological and social POS are chosen: Enric Granados
and Forum (Fig. 1).
 Challenging Methods and Results Obtained from User-Generated Content 125

Fig. 1. Location of two case study areas in Barcelona

Enric Granados is within the consolidated historical city; and connects the Diagonal
Avenue with a foundational building of the University of Barcelona. Differently from
Rambla de Catalunya and Passeig de Gràcia, which are parallel to it, the Enric
Granados width is slightly more than 20 m and hosts several leisure activities mostly
for neighbours and local people. The urban transformations that followed the Olympic
Games in 1992 changed the role of this street in the urban hierarchy. From a traditional
car-oriented road, it became a pedestrian that is a user-oriented space. This was made
possible by modifying the car mobility of the street.
The Forum rises on the old industrial Poblenou, an urban district that was renewed
during the end of the twentieth, beginning of the twenty-one century; and hosted the
Universal Forum of Cultures (2004) (Casellas, Dot-Jutgla and Pallares-Barbera 2012).
Forum is where the Diagonal Avenue meets the Mediterranean Sea. The new character
of the area is pointed by a number of new architectures, with building, skyscrapers
designed by very famous architects. Nevertheless, the functional connectedness of the
whole area is inexistent. The large paved esplanade provides a sense of incompleteness
with no seats, nor trees, nor shadows.

4 Data and Methodology

The several methods used in this chapter are based on geo mapping. Focus is placed on
intensity and concentration of users in open public spaces. Data was collected using 3
different ICT methodologies in 3 periods of time in Barcelona. First, Twitter data was
collected by SiTI (Higher Institute on Territorial Systems for Innovation, Torino) during
126 M. Pallares-Barbera et al.

the period between January the 12th and 18th, 2015. Second, Twitter data was compiled
using TSE (Tweeter Search Engine) application in January from the 13th to the 20th,
2017. Third, WAY app gathered data in November 27, 2014 (COST Action 1306 2014),
with a selected group of users moving in and between the two case study areas.

4.1 Twitter Data Information

Twitter is used by only 23% of the total population in the U.S.A. Its data-base is open
for free use and can provide very large amount of records and information, including
attributes on time and location of each single tweet (geo-referenced points and the
given radius are settled only when sender is geotagged (Poblete et al. 2011; Krumm,
Davis and Narayanaswami 2008; Haining 2003)). Each message can be downloaded
and stored on a personal database through Twitter REST API (Twitter REST API
2016). Some of the characteristics of the database include: the text, time and date, the
nick-name of the sender, the eventual name of the receiver, and the latitude and
longitude from sender (Table 1).

Table 1. Data records of a single tweet

Message User from User to Date Lat Lon

D
@ Outside - Wed Jan 07
Calvin Harris albasancho95 fjdh 08:55:20 +0000 41.47267 2.27114
http://t.co/14oG7mPxwE 2015
Wed Jan 07
Nos aventuramos a las zaidas-
08:55:18 +0000 41.52691 2.229489
rebajas... Tengo miedo xD phyxiated
2015
Fri Jan 09
#cyberparks #TU1306 e_frola 10:29:08 +0000 41.50982 2.229217
2015
………. ….. ….. ….. ….. …….

For each single user, it is possible to collect other specific data, which can be joined
to previous one. This data is listed below.
• User ID
• Name
• Location
• Info given by the user
• Following
• Creation data
• Time zone
• Language
• Status message and date
• Follower ID.
 Challenging Methods and Results Obtained from User-Generated Content 127

4.2 Methodology for Data Mining for Twitter by SiTI,

January 12–18, 2015
The total amount of records was 72,257 Tweets, of which 67,251 (93.07%) were
georeferenced. Among these, only 2,802 (4.17%) records were from users who passed
across one or both of the two case study areas within the city. The following six steps
were used: first, we elaborated Twitter data in Excel; second, we imported Twitter data
in ESRI Arc Map; third, we used information about time and coordinates of data from
Cyberparks App to trace plausible paths of single users (or group of users); fourth, we
worked the information about time and coordinates of tweets to trace plausible paths of
single users (or group of users) within specific areas; fifth, we used information about
time and coordinates of tweets to trace plausible paths of single users (or group of
users) who pass through specific areas; and sixth, we used tweets information about
languages, presence of tweets for large periods (to differentiate local users from tourists
or visitors), keywords, to identify different kinds of densities within specific areas.

4.3 Methodology for Data Mining for Twitter Using Twitter Search
Engine (TSE), January 13–20, 2017
To collect, storage, process and analyse Twitter data in January 13–20, 2017 (15–
17000 tweets per day), we employed Twitter Search Engine (TSE) (Dinkic, Jokovic
and Stoimenov, 2016). It is a micro-blogging platform that provides a rich collection of
real-time commentaries which are on the Twitter REST API, which storage tweets sent
the previous week within a given radius. TSE allows collection and storage of data for
unlimited periods of time; it offers a display, analysis and execution of complex
geospatial queries of the data stored in the database. These queries are executed with
the help of relational geospatial functions offered by MySQL database. TSE functions
are correlated in terms of interrelationship between two objects determined with geo-
referenced points. TSE has the option of drawing a polygon on the map of Google by
using Google Maps JavaScript API. This polygon site must be within the area for
which information was collected. TSE also has the ability to detect the language using
web service Language Detection API (Language detection API, 2016). This API has
the capacity to detect 160 different languages and to offer 5.000 requests for free on
daily basis1. Each request must contain text and API key. The request example can be
found at the link2. Language Detection API produces results in *.json format. Response
contains array of language candidates. Each object contains language code, confidence
score and is reliable - true/false (Table 2).

1
To use this API, one has to register on their website using a valid email address. Then, the user
receives an API key; which can be used for client application and depending on the needs sends GET
or POST requests to server.
2
http://ws.detectlanguage.com/0.2/detect?q=buenos+dias+señor&key=demo.
128 M. Pallares-Barbera et al.

Table 2. Language Detection API - Response example

4.4 Methodology for Data Mining for WAY App, November 27, 2014
The WAY app (Deusto Tech Mobility 2014) is a GPS-based platform that, differently
from Twitter data, registers the users’ movements twice a second. The result is a point
database which allows building up a timeline with the full path travelled by users, with
continuity and precision. The app is conceived as a Volunteered Geographic Infor-
mation (VGI) platform where users collaborate for producing information. In partic-
ular, it collects data for better understanding the use of public open spaces in order to
improve their production and their relevance to sustainable urban development. It
collects also data on the user such as age, sex, education, job, the distance from home
and from working place, and the reason of being in a public space, such as walking,
running, reading, kids or pets. The main limit of WAY data is given by the fact that the
person who generates the data, the user, is conscious that he/she is producing data for
some specific analyst task. Therefore, it is necessary to consider that this awareness can
alter the veracity of the data. Geovisualization of these data is done by importing data
from WAY and converting the *.json file into a readable file for ESRI ArcMap.

5 Results and Discussion - Maps and Visualizations

Several spatial patterns have arisen from the planned methods analysing the use of
Twitter and WAY app. Although these initial analyses can be developed further, their
opportunities for specific additional improvements are open in future research; where
data comparisons, fitness of the methodology and so on are to be implemented to meet
diverse research structural questions.
 Challenging Methods and Results Obtained from User-Generated Content 129

5.1 Tweet Patterns in Barcelona Metropolitan Area, January 12–18,

2015 and January 13–20, 2017
The Origin/Destination (O/D) matrix and the points of twitter messages show the
centrality of the city, respect to its hinterland (Fig. 2a, b). City diversity is perceived by
the number of user languages (22 (2015) and 120 (2017)) (Table 3).

Fig. 2. Twitter messages. Barcelona Metropolitan Area (BMA) (a), and Barcelona City
(BCN) (b)

Table 3. Data collected for Barcelona

Type of analysis January 12–18, 2015 January 13–20, 2017
Number of tweets 67251 117017
Number of users 9823 10412
Number of retweets – 20208
Number of likes – 51989
Number of applications – 45
Number of languages 22 120

5.2 Tweets by Weekdays in Barcelona Metropolitan Area, January

12–18, 2015, January 13–20, 2017
There are variations in the use of the space by weekdays, and between years 2015 and
2017. 2017 has almost doubled the number of tweets of 2015; it might correspond to
the increase of tweeter users globally (Table 4, Fig. 3). In 2015, the day with less
number of tweets is Thursday, while Monday is the day with more activity. On 2017,
on Friday 17 there are fewer tweets than the rest of days. It is obvious that for statistics
analysis testing more data values would be required; these two weeks are not repre-
sentative of others.
130 M. Pallares-Barbera et al.

Table 4. Tweets by day

Day January 12–18, 2015 January 13–20, 2017
Number of tweets % of tweets Number of tweets % of tweets
Monday 10535 15.67 17295 15.00
Tuesday 9500 14.13 17122 15.00
Wednesday 9410 13.99 16542 14.00
Thursday 8649 12.86 16927 14.50
Friday 9464 14.07 15681 13.00
Saturday 10474 15.57 16533 14.00
Sunday 9219 13.71 16917 14.50
Total 67251 100 117017 100
Mean 9607 16717

Fig. 3. Tweets by days in the period January 12–18, 2015 (a), and January 13–20, 2017 (b)

Further visualization for the period in 2015 shows subsequent tweets connected by
semi-circular arches, whose radius is proportional to the spatial distance which sepa-
rates each couple of tweets (3D arches) (Fig. 4). On Wednesday 14, 2015 arches are
shorter than other days, then activities are concentrated in a smaller space within the
city centre; or Sunday 18, the activity around Plaça de Catalunya is comparatively less,
shops are closed.

Fig. 4. Distribution of subsequent tweets by each same user, January 12–18, 2015, Barcelona
 Challenging Methods and Results Obtained from User-Generated Content 131

5.3 Tweets Per Hour, January 12–18, 2015, January 13–20, 2017
City life changes during the day. Seen by number of tweets, the tendency is to increase
during the evening, decreases at night, and start increasing in the morning (Table 5 and
Fig. 5). Tweets are concentrated around axes that pass Rambla; and most of tweets
(75% in 2017) have been sent from 12.00 until 24.00, which relates to working time
and street activity (Table 5).

Table 5. Percentage of tweets by time interval

Interval January 12–18, 2015 January 13–20, 2017
0–3 6.54% 4.28%
3–6 2.52% 1.71%
6–9 8.85% 7.95%
9–12 12.77% 13.85%
12–15 15.42% 17.64%
15–18 15.05% 18.05%
18–21 19.68% 20.38%
21–24 19.17% 16.14%

5.4 Results Provided by WAY App During November 27, 2014

The results of the WAY app provide more detailed perception by users at a micro-scale
level. In one sense, WAY data is continuous and is following users’ path; while tweets
are diffuse in space and time dimensions (Figs. 6 and 7). In another sense, WAY data is
concentrated only in the two case studies, whereas Twitter data is sparsely located
around the city (Fig. 8). Finally, WAY offers very detailed information on places and
on single user’s movements, while Tweets provide general information about hierar-
chical functions in places.

Fig. 5. Tweets by time interval, in the period January 12–18, 2015 (a) and January 13–20, 2017 (b)
132 M. Pallares-Barbera et al.

Fig. 6. Visualisation of data gathered in Forum through WAY app

Fig. 7. Data collected by the WAY app in Enric Granados, Forum and in the way between both
areas
 Challenging Methods and Results Obtained from User-Generated Content 133

Fig. 8. WAY and Twitter data compared, November 24, 2014

6 Conclusions and Future Developments

The overview on the state of the art shows how spatial planning is facing a transition
presenting new challenging scenarios. The trend led by the smart city opened the
spatial planning to logic of numbers and data. City-sensors as well as UGC systems
constantly provide huge amounts of data which can be used to supply the citizens’
demands. In this context, two main branches are emerging. The first branch is a data-
oriented and technology-driven approach, which makes use of quantities for assessing
and justifying decisions. Eye-catching visualizations are the most evident outputs of
such an approach, where analysts and statistics prevail on the human experience of
professionals and experts.
The second branch uses new technologies to improve human abilities and it is
mostly used to support the decision and policy-making processes. Particular efforts are
spent in understanding how data can support can be complementary to the traditional
approach, providing new insights on spatial issues. The debate on the use of big data is
nowadays shifting from a technology-driven vision towards a more human dimension,
introducing the concepts of people friendliness and a human-to-human approach (Melis
et al. 2014). To achieve this social vision, the collaboration between different experts
such as urban planners and data analysts and designers appears essential in order to
guide them towards relevant questions and policy issues (Goodspeed 2012). Simple
visualizations offer opportunity for both horizontal and vertical communication.
134 M. Pallares-Barbera et al.

From a technical point of view, some considerations are necessary for improving
future map production. First of all, paths created using subsequent tweets are just
possible routes and probably not the real ones covered by users. A method for dealing
with this issue is necessary, and different research is being undertaking. Secondly, the
use of Twitter data is most suitable for larger scale than the micro-urban areas.
However, the continuity along space and over time provide important element for
considering their hierarchical position.
In this chapter, the analysis was limited to visualisation and maps; it did not
considered semantics, the written content of the tweets (however, a method for
experiencing has been suggested); statistical testing has not been performed. Never-
theless, the humble objectives have been stated and proved. We know that integration
of new methodologies within spatial planning processes are very relevant, such as in
the data collecting and information; defining goals, objectives and strategies and
implementation of users’ participation through crowdsourcing.

References
Bahillo, A., Aguilera, T., Álvarez, F.J., Perallos, A.: WAY: seamless positioning using a smart
device. Wirel. Pers. Commun. 94(4), 2949–2967 (2016)
Bahillo A, Diez, L.E., Perallos, A., Falcone, F.: Enabling seamless positioning for smartphones.
In: Proceedings of Conference XXX Simposium Nacional de la Unión Científica Interna-
cional de Radio (URSI), Pamplona, Spain (2015)
Berry, B.J.L.: The human consequences of urbanisation: divergent paths in the urban experience
of the twentieth century, vol. 3, Macmillan, Basingstoke (1973)
Bawa-Cavia, A.: Sensing the urban: using location-based social network data in urban analysis.
Presented at 1st Workshop on Pervasive Urban Applications PURBA 2011, San Francisco,
USA (2010)
Casellas, A., Dot-Jutgla, E., Pallares-Barbera, M.: Artists, cultural gentrification and public
policy. Urbani izziv 23(Suppl. 1), S104–S114 (2012)
Casellas, A., Pallares-Barbera, M.: Public sector intervention in embodying new economy in
inner urban areas: the Barcelona experience. Urban Stud. 46(5–6), 1137–1155 (2009)
Centre de Cultura Contemporània de Barcelona, CCCB & Fundación Telefónica (2015). http://
bigbangdata.cccb.org/en/sec-exhibition/. Accessed 12 Jan 2015
Chicago Architecture Foundation (CAF) (2014). http://bigdata.architecture.org/. Accessed 12 Jan
2015
Chorley, R.J., Haggett, P.: Trend-surface mapping in geographical research. Trans. Inst. Br.
Geogr. 37(4), 47–67 (1965)
Chourabi, H., et al.: Understanding smart cities: an integrative framework. system science
(HICSS). In: 45th Hawaii International Conference on Hawaii, USA, pp. 2289–2297. IEEE
(2012)
Chua, A., Marcheggiani, E., Servillo, L., Vande Moere, A.: FlowSampler: visual analysis of
urban flows in geolocated social media data. Presented at: International Conference on Social
Informatics, Barcelona, Spain (2014)
COST Action 1306: First working meeting at the geography department (Universitat Autònoma
de Barcelona), Cerdanyola, Spain (2014)
Deusto Tech Mobility: Public open spaces monitoring tool (2014). http://www.costcyberparks.eu/.
Accessed 12 Jan 2015
 Challenging Methods and Results Obtained from User-Generated Content 135

Dinkic, N., Jokovic, J., Stoimenov, L.: Software application: Twitter search engine, developed at
the University of Nis, Faculty of Electronic Engineering, during the Ph.D. course “Advanced
topics in data and knowledge engineering”, Nis, Serbia (2016)
Fisher, E.: Paths through cities (2012). www.flickr.com/photos/walkingsf/sets/721576290
14750905/detail/. Accessed 11 Feb 2015
Friedman, J., Alonso, W.: Regional Planning and Development. The MIT Press, Cambridge
(1964)
Goodspeed, R.: The democratization of big data. 27 February (2012). http://www.planetizen.
com/node/54832. Accessed 2 Jan 2015
Haining, R.: Spatial Data Analysis: Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge (2003)
Hartshorne, R.: The nature of geography: a critical survey of current thought in the light of the
past (conclusion). Ann. Assoc. Am. Geogr. 29(4):413–658 (1939). www.jstor.org/stable/
2561166. Accessed 2 Mar 2016
Harvey, D.W.: Locational change in the kentish hop industry and the analysis of land use
patterns. Trans. Papers (Inst. Br. Geogr.) 33, 123–144 (1963). https://doi.org/10.2307/621004
Heidelberg University: Urban design with emotions. Press Release No. 166/2014 (2014). www.
uni-heidelberg.de/presse/news2014/pm20140911_urban-design-with-emotions.html. Acces-
sed 9 Jan 2015
IBM: A new blueprint: how chicago is building a better city with big data (2014). http://
people4smartercities.com/series/new-blueprint-how-chicago-building-better-city-big-data.
Accessed 12 Jan 2015
Kokalitcheva, K.: How a swarm of data is helping Chicago re-map urban life (2014). http://
venturebeat.com/2014/05/14/how-a-swarm-of-data-is-helping-chicago-re-map-urban-life.
Accessed 12 Jan 2015
Krumm, J., Davies, N., Narayanaswami, C.: User-generated content. IEEE Pervasive Comput.
7(4), 10–11 (2008)
Language detection API (2016). https://detectlanguage.com/. Accessed 15 Apr 2016
Lanzerotti, L., Bradach, J., Sud, S., Barmeier, H.: Geek cities: how smarter use of data and
evidence can improve lives (2013). www.bridgespan.org/Publications-and-Tools/Perfor-
mance-Measurement/Geek-Cities-Data-Improves-Lives.aspx#.VLZ9BSvF9Ks. Accessed 13
Jan 2015
Masegosa, A., Bahillo, A., Onieva, E., López, P., Perallos, A.: A new optimization approach for
indoor location based on differential evolution. In: Proceedings of Conference International
Fuzzy Systems Association (IFSA), Gijón, Spain (2015)
Melis, G., Masala, E., Tabasso, M.: From the smart city to the people-friendly city: usability of
tools and data in urban planning. In: Vesco, A., Ferrero, F., (eds) Social, Economic, And
Environmental Sustainability In The Development Of Smart Cities, IGI global, pp. 363–381
(2014)
Neuhaus, F.: Twitter data - seeking spatial pattern (2011). http://urbantick.blogspot.it/2011/03/
twitter-data-seeking-spatial-pattern.html. Accessed 9 Jan 2015
Open street map community (2004). www.openstreetmap.org. Accessed 29 Dec 2014
O’Sullivan, S., Morral, J.: Walking distances to and from light-rail transit stations. Trans. Res.
Rec. 1538, 19–26 (1996)
Pallares-Barbera, M., Badia, A., Duch, J.: Cerdà and Barcelona: the need for a new city and
service provision. Urbani izziv 22(2), 122–136 (2011)
Poblete, B., Garcia, R., Mendoza, M., Jaimes, A.: Do all birds tweet the same? characterizing
Twitter around the world. Presented at CIKM 2011 20th ACM Conference on Information
and Knowledge Management (2011). www.ruthygarcia.com/papers/cikm2011.pdf
136 M. Pallares-Barbera et al.

Resch, B., Summa, A., Sagl, G., Zeile, P., Exner, J.-P.: Urban emotions—geo-semantic emotion
extraction from technical sensors, human sensors and crowdsourced data. In: Gartner, G.,
Huang, H. (eds.) Progress in Location-Based Services 2014. LNGC, pp. 199–212. Springer,
Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-11879-6_14
Senseable City Lab & Ericsson (2015). http://senseable.mit.edu/tweetbursts/. Accessed 12 Jan
2015
Snijders, C., Matzat, U., Reips, U.D.: Big data: big gaps of knowledge in the field of internet
science. Int. J. Internet Sci. 7(1), 1–5 (2012)
Snodgrass, N.: Chicago: city of big data. exhibition explores the digital age of urban design
(2014). www.architecture.org/document.doc?id=1074. Accessed 12 Jan 2015
Szell, M., Grauwin, S., Ratti, C.: Contraction of online response to major events. PLoS one, 2(26)
(2014)
Takhteyev, Y., Gruzd, A., Wellman, B.: Geography of Twitter networks. Soc. Netw. 34(1), 1–25
(2011)
Targio, I.A.H., Yaqoob, I., Anuar, N.B., Mokhtar, S., Gani, A., Khan, S.U.: The rise of big data
on cloud computing: review and open research issues. Inf. Syst. 47, 98–115 (2015)
Twitter Inc. About Twitter, Inc. (2015). https://about.twitter.com/company. Accessed 4 Feb 2015
Twitter REST API (2016). https://dev.Twitter.com/rest/public. Accessed 15 Jan 2016

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
2.6
Social Implications of New Mediated Spaces:
The Need for a Rethought Design Approach

Antoine Zammit1(&) , Therese Kenna2 ,

and Gabriela Maksymiuk3
1
Department of Spatial Planning and Infrastructure,
Faculty for the Built Environment, University of Malta, Msida, Malta
[email protected]
2
Department of Geography, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland
[email protected]
3
Department of Landscape Architecture, University of Life Sciences, SGGW,
Warsaw, Poland
[email protected]

Abstract. Departing from the traditional understanding of the social implica-

tions of urban design and the underlying notion of ‘place’, the chapter first
questions its current relevance vis-à-vis the mediated city. It examines whether
ICT has given rise to the establishment of new notions of space and place,
identifying new design challenges for cities and rethought approaches to the
production of space. In view of the latter, the chapter subsequently questions the
manner with which digital media may facilitate inclusive design of public
spaces. In order to address this objective, the chapter illustrates some interesting
empirical data emanating from literature and research projects based in the UK,
Poland and Malta. The case studies in the literature illustrate how ICTs are being
used as tools within participatory processes for the inclusive design of urban
public and recreational spaces and in order to gauge citizen/user expectations
towards urban space. The chapter finally attempts to redefine public participa-
tion through ICT and to frame the above discussion within the potentially newly
redefined role of urban designers involved in such processes. The underlying
question to be addressed in this chapter, therefore, has to deal with the manner
with which urban professionals may effectively achieve inclusive participatory
design, particularly in light of new phenomena brought about by the mediated
city and with the potential of this newly obtained and enriched data.

Keywords: Mediated open spaces
Participatory planning processes

Inclusive design
Place
P-GIS
SoftGIS
PPGIS

1 Introduction

Urban design theories that flourished between the 1960s and 1980s were particularly
concerned with the social dimension of urban design – some born through the necessity
of addressing social and economic inequalities in cities (Jacobs 1961), others seeking to

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 137–150, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_11
138 A. Zammit et al.

understand the social life of urban spaces (Whyte 1980) and others still seeking to
redefine and reconceptualise the notion of space in social terms (Lefebvre 1991). The
discussion is still central to the urban design agenda today. Numerous authors discuss
the social processes, both “formal and informal […] that shape the urban environment”
(Tonkiss 2013: 1) and, therefore, the indelible relationship between the physical urban
space and social practices. This relates to the deeper understanding of place making and
its significance in creating quality urban environments that relate to broader quality of
life considerations.

2 Changing Notions of Space and Place Within

the Mediated City

The reshaping of public spaces by mass media goes back to the early 19th century. The
introduction of newspapers activated public spaces in new ways, and cafés became
hubs for community building by providing a space for information exchange and
dialogue. With the rise of the consumer culture, new public spaces were created that
were linked with shopping and entertainment (Riether 2010) and with an increasing
role for media therein. As ICTs continue to change our social dynamics, they simul-
taneously modify the space that we use daily.
Aurigi (2005b) argues that new virtual spaces brought about by ICT may indeed
possibly replace human interaction as traditionally occurring within urban spaces, in
turn generating a new form of urbanism. Other authors, such as Graham and Marvin
(1999, in Carmona et al. 2008), contend quite the opposite – arguing that in actual fact
the traditional city is being reinforced even more as people working in IT increasingly
opt to live in urban areas in order to maintain important human contact. Carmona et al.
(2008) further argue that the need for face-to-face communication remains, reinforced
by the increasing role of ‘third place spaces’. At the same time, such face-to-face
interaction within physical places occurs in tandem with so-called “‘distant proximities’
of socialities that are mediated by ICTs” (Waltz, 2002 in Graham 2004: 241), which are
not necessarily less rich or meaningful than physical encounters. These issues are
heightened when one considers the new design challenges brought about by ICT.

2.1 The New Design Challenges

The intensive use of Internet and other digital technologies over the last two decades
has caused urban public space to transition from its (traditional) dual social role as
instrumental (providing a physical link between architecture and land-uses) and
expressive (facilitating a link between people, thus serving as places for social inter-
action) (Stadler 2013). ICT is today deeply rooted in the urban fabric of contemporary
cities worldwide (Bibri and Krogstie 2017).
Modern cities face a number of challenges including population growth, environ-
mental pressures, socio-economic and socio-cultural changes and unpredictable phe-
nomena. As more people move towards urban cities, there is increasing pressure on
resources and capacity. ICTs can allow for more innovative ways to make better use of
existing space, thus help manage resources more efficiently. Cities must be dynamic in
 Social Implications of New Mediated Spaces 139

their conception, flexibly planned, scalable in their design and efficient in their oper-
ations, and all these actions rely to a large extent on ICT and its presence in urban
systems (Bibri and Krogstie 2017). Undoubtedly, at the strategic scale of the city, ICT
has had major spatial implications. Research on the development of ICT in urban
contexts and on the ‘cyber’ dimension of cities reveals that, today, major urban
functions and activities have been blurred into almost any place in the city (Malecki
2017).
A number of spatial scientists (including Aurigi 2005a; Stadler 2013; and Malecki
2017) concur that the key design challenges for urban public spaces that must be
addressed include:
1. a problem of ‘scale’ (as with ubiquitous ICT usage the city is more than a physical
space);
2. public spaces’ accessibility issues (as the contribution of ICTs to counteract social
inclusion in public spaces is highly controversial);
3. issues of visibility vs. invisibility (as display technologies scatter urban landscape,
while ICTs are believed to be largely invisible); and
4. issues of physical vs. virtual (as online delivery of certain urban services is held
responsible for interrupting the spirit of public spaces, especially streets).
ICT has the potential to convert public space into a highly interactive environment
wherein the observer is also the participant in the collection and distribution of
information. In turn, this may produce a new type of public space that is characterised
by an active interchange between virtual and real spaces (Riether 2010). This neces-
sitates a deeper understanding of the process that is leading to the production of
physical space.

2.2 The Production of Space

Authors concur that ‘social space’ forms with each societal member’s specific rela-
tionship to the physical space (Lefebvre 1991). Its shaping requires, therefore, the input
of each citizen within the process leading to the physical product that is urban space.
Indeed, implicit to the discussion of public space and place making is the notion of
inclusive urban spaces.
A number of social movements have also spurred a newly found attitude towards
citizen empowerment and bottom-up participatory planning – issues that have become
more pronounced with privatisation (and neoliberal urban policy) that has changed the
nature of urban public space over the past decades. Some readers may consider the
above themes to be overly debated; nevertheless, they provide an important prelude to a
deeper discussion as they have taken on a new dimension in the face of the mediated
city. ICTs may provide an added value to design and planning processes – today’s
technologies may aid researchers in their study of people interacting with urban spaces,
through the application of important digital tools that collect and analyse data.
At the same time, research has also drawn attention to the fact that ICTs may be
enhancing or widening already-existing social and economic inequalities in the city,
due to the digital divide or the lack of access to technology (Kruger 1997; Graham
2004). This may have a detrimental effect on individuals, instilling a feeling of
140 A. Zammit et al.

disempowerment and alienation from the rest of society, which in turn would reinforce
existing exclusionary patterns. Kruger (1997) illustrates this through a discussion of the
electronic business culture and its tendency to be targeted towards specific sectors of
the population on the basis of affluence and social status. Graham (2004) further argues
that, particularly through sorting software techniques, specific users are identified,
targeted and marginalised as attractive or risky, profitable or not.
The other important aspect is that the more traditional understanding of ‘commu-
nity’ and ‘place’ merits considerable rethinking, as these terms are not solely territo-
rially defined. This, therefore, requires an acknowledgement that moves beyond a
(limited) physical understanding of these terms.
The transformation of urban space is challenging new forms of interaction between
different social actors and digital media. The new urban setting encompasses the
widespread availability of data and, as discussed above, the opportunities for citizens to
be the leaders, as well as the objective, of urban innovation (Cook et al. 2015). Clearly,
new strategies for citizen engagement and bottom-up planning and design practices,
themselves redefined through the possibilities offered by ICT, need to increasingly
develop sensitivities to any possible inequalities to be accessible to all. It is to this
important theme that our attention now turns.

3 Inclusive Approaches in the Mediated City

Over the past two decades, urban designers, together with other urban professionals
such as urban planners, have paid increasing attention to the issues of participation and
inclusion in their professional practice after calls to move away from top-down urban
design and planning, towards more bottom-up approaches (Watson 2014). Indeed, how
the state, and the various professional organisations involved in urban design and
development, relate to society and the public has been one of the more prominent
themes in the academic literature (Watson 2014). These recent calls were not just for a
more inclusive or participatory design process; they were also aimed at encouraging
greater focus on the people who use the city – a people-centred approach (Gehl 2010).
As a result of these calls, over the last few decades, urban designers have sought to
closely align themselves with the future users of the urban spaces and products they
design. This alignment, or relationship with the users, has occurred in differing ways
(Sanders and Stappers 2008). The first was a user-centred design approach, with the
user seen as a subject. Here, design occurs from the perspective of an expert whereby
“trained researchers observe and/or interview largely passive users, whose contribution
is to perform instructed tasks and/or to give their opinions about product concepts that
were generated by others” (Sanders and Stappers 2008: 5). Under this style of urban
design, users are included, but are generally passive participants, offering their thoughts
or opinions on already-formed ideas. Secondly, and mostly in European circles, the
participatory approach (user as partner) became increasingly prominent in urban design
during the 1970s. Under this model of urban design, people – the users – were “given
more influence and room for initiative in roles where they provide expertise and
participate in the informing, ideating, and conceptualising activities in the early design
phases” (Sanders and Stappers 2008: 5). The participatory approach allows for the
 Social Implications of New Mediated Spaces 141

users of the future urban spaces to be included in the design process, especially in
relation to the final product. However, the user-centred design approach began to lose
appeal as it was deemed that the approach could not “address the scale or the com-
plexity of the challenges we face today” (Sanders and Stappers 2008: 10) and this is
where more rounded participatory approaches, such as co-design began to fill the void,
defined as:
[…] any act of collective creativity, i.e. creativity that is shared by two or more
people. By co-design we indicate collective creativity as it is applied across the whole
span of a design process […] a specific instance of co-creation. (Sanders and Stappers
2008: 6)
This shift in discourse and terminology to ‘co-creation’ and ‘co-design’ within the
urban design profession is to ensure that the application of participatory design prac-
tices occurs “both at the moment of idea generation and continuing throughout the
design process at all key moments of decision” (Sanders and Stappers 2008: 9). It is
believed that this will ultimately reflect a ‘true’ participation by users and all relevant
stakeholder groups.
While the approaches of co-creation and co-design have gained considerable
support and traction over the last two decades, they are not without flaws. As Sanders
and Stappers (2008) highlight, some co-design approaches can be highly selective in
terms of the inclusion of users.
With the rapid infusion of ICTs in our personal and professional lives, ICTs present
a possible new method for enhancing co-design of urban spaces and for creating wider
participation from users. Lim et al. (2016) argue that “the innovations of the twenty-
first century in digital technology and media have had major influences in the way
young urbanites and future city designers think as well as experience places” (Lim et al.
2016: 638).
A range of new digital and information communication technologies are entering
the field of urban design and planning, creating new possibilities for inclusion and co-
creation in the urban design process. Fredericks and Foth (2013) note that social media
sites such as Twitter and Facebook have “grown beyond the purely ‘social’ realm and
[are] now increasingly used to cause real impact, in terms of community activism, civic
engagement, cultural citizenship and user-led innovation” (Fredericks and Foth 2013:
245). Furthermore, Evans-Cowley and Hollander (2010) suggest that research on
online citizen participation has demonstrated that ICT tools can work to enhance public
participation, so much so that in certain neighbourhoods or communities, “there is a
growing expectation on the part of citizens that there will be online participation
opportunities” (Evans-Cowley and Hollander 2010: 399). ICT-mediated participation is
therefore not something that is solely seen to be desirable; rather, it seen to be essential
by certain sections of the community.
In recent years, planning practitioners have begun to comprehend the importance of
incorporating more inclusive methods into their work. The most commonly used
method is participatory mapping with a physical map and space for discussion. Now
ICTs are used to facilitate and advance the process. Most notably, there is a growing
interest in using participatory geographic information systems (P-GIS) to engage the
public. Numerous international examples show that GIS can be used not only for
planning and managing the city, but also for including the residents in these processes
142 A. Zammit et al.

(Goodchild and Glennon 2010; Haklay 2010). The objective is to integrate bottom-up
processes in the domain of urban planning, using the full potential of citizens by
sharing ideas in the co-production of decision making. Therefore, the relationship
between decision-makers and their respective communities is continuously evolving
from closed, top-down approaches into a more interactive exchange.
The following sections discuss three examples from the UK, Poland and Malta
illustrating the implementation of digital tools that seek to enhance ICT-mediated
participation.

3.1 Participatory GIS in UK Cities: Improving Participation

in Urban Design
Recent work from three cities in the UK by Cinderby (2010) sought to understand how
Participatory Geographic Information Systems (P-GIS) could be used for more inclu-
sive urban design. A particular focus of the research was on whether or not these new
ICT tools could improve the participation of ‘hard-to-reach’ communities, which
includes (though not limited to) people from Black Minority Ethnic communities,
asylum seekers, people with disabilities, young people, older people and people living
in deprivation or on low incomes. Part of the rationale for this focus was that the use of
traditional methods of participation (such as open public meetings) “fail to reach sig-
nificant segments of communities” (Cinderby 2010: 239). The study sought to examine
whether P-GIS was an efficient tool to overcome the barriers to engagement experi-
enced by the aforementioned groups with the more traditional methods of participation.
Three case studies were used: a health walk development in the inner city of Salford,
UK; public perceptions of streets and squares in the city centre of York, UK; and the
development of transport options for one of the suburbs of Blackpool, UK (Cinderby
2010).
The research identified a range of problems that might be causing a lack of
engagement from certain groups, including: “language barriers, cultural differences,
time and ability to attend public meetings even if they were interested in the issue”
(Cinderby 2010: 240). P-GIS was explored as a way of overcoming barriers and
challenges such as these. Cinderby (2010) discusses the utility of P-GIS “to capture
local stakeholder knowledge” (Cinderby 2010: 240), arguing that “[t]he visual nature
of participatory mapping removes, to some extent, the barriers of literacy and, to a
degree, language […] that other forms of engagement, such as focus groups or ques-
tionnaires, require” (Cinderby 2010: 240). In this manner, importantly, maps become
the central element, transcending issues such as the presence of specific individuals
who might take over during public debates and meetings.
From the outset, this form of participatory engagement with mapping is viewed to
overcome barriers to engagement for a range of social groups. In the case study areas,
the researchers were involved in on-street engagement with participants. They used a
series of on-street events to take the mapping exercise to their participants, so as to
overcome issues of access to digital technologies such as computers and the Internet.
 Social Implications of New Mediated Spaces 143

For example, in the Salford case study, the on-street events were held at “a health
centre, alongside a parade of local shops and at a community fun-day event” (Cinderby
2010: 240). In this manner, “these venues allowed pensioners, children, teenagers and
young adults from a low-income community to communicate their local knowledge
and preferences for the proposed walking route to the research team” (Cinderby 2010:
241). From these on-street events, there were 120 participants and 200 comments, a
quarter of which were from hard-to-reach groups, particularly children and teenagers.
The team identified a number of advantages to the on-street approach: participants
did not need to make special arrangements for childcare, transport, and the like; the
time involved was less than 15 min; the one-on-one conversations between the
researcher and the participant meant that participants did not have to justify their
comments to their peers (as might be the case in open public meetings); and “the use of
in-situ on-street mapping allowed people to physically engage with the area in a way
that would be impossible using conventional approaches” (Cinderby 2010: 241–242).
In all, this brief discussion illustrates that in certain circumstances, the use of tech-
nologies and participatory approaches can work to overcome some of the challenges
relating to the inclusion of ‘hard-to-reach’ groups and thus widen participation in urban
planning and design processes.

3.2 SoftGIS in Participatory Management of Natural Areas

in Polish Cities
Poland’s political and economic transformation in the 1990s, which was characterised
by a shift from a centrally planned economy into a market economy, and the intro-
duction of democracy, resulted in many achievements including a more bottom-up
approach in governance. At the city level this process is actualised through engaging
citizens to be involved in planning and management of public spaces and the intro-
duction of participatory budgets allowing residents to propose projects and later on
nominate those for realisation through official voting. Many of those projects deal with
green urban spaces and public spaces. However, a civic awareness and sense of shared
responsibility for urban space is still not fully developed, and there are certain groups
of citizens that are not interested in participation at all (Maksymiuk and Kimic 2016) –
a ‘non-engagement’ attitude that is deeply rooted in the history of a post-Soviet society.
At the same time, in most Polish cities, the local authorities strive to involve dwellers in
local affairs; however, the traditional methods of participation seem to be insufficient.
The question, therefore, is whether the application of new technologies may enhance
the level of residents’ involvement in issues related to the co-design of public spaces.
Since most decisions on nature in cities have a spatial dimension, the application of
GIS offers a notable potential for public participation (Czepkiewicz 2013). Recent
research in three Polish cities carried out by the Sendzimir Foundation (2015), similar to
Cinderby’s (2010) work in the UK discussed previously, dealt with the applicability of
the SoftGIS methodology to study residents’ perception of urban green spaces and to
crowdsource their ideas and opinions on public spaces in their cities or neighbourhoods.
144 A. Zammit et al.

Fig. 1. Example of geo-questionnaire applied in the “Count on green” project. Results for
assessment of green spaces in regards to their potential for recreational and social integration
(Cracow - upper image, Lodz - bottom image). Source: Data derived from Fundacja Sendzimira
is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

The SoftGIS methodology enables a researcher to conduct a quantitative social

research, using geo questionnaires (linking internet maps and questionnaires), followed
by spatial and statistical analysis, and communicating the outcomes to planners and
officials. In this way, the SoftGIS allows the everyday knowledge and point of views of
residents, soft data, to be added to hard data about infrastructure (Report from the
Project ‘Count On Green’ 2015). The ‘Count On Green’ project resulted in around
12,500 spatial indications emanating from more than 1,600 filled questionnaires that
appeared on interactive maps of greenery in three Polish cities – Cracov, Łódź and
Poznań (Fig. 1).
The main research focus was to collect data that could be useful for the manage-
ment of green areas in each city, but also to test the SoftGIS methodology. The
residents supplied information on their favourite urban green spaces, preferred walking
routes, areas requiring better maintenance, top city districts (in term of liveability) and
they indicated the most neglected neighbourhoods. The project was advertised online
through social media channels and was also promoted alongside open cultural and
recreational events in the three cities under study. The residents could share their
opinions via an online platform. In addition, 50 volunteers gathered data about
greenery using tablets during various events for a total of 480 h. In general, the par-
ticipation of younger adults was much wider and, while it was observed that older
residents rejected the active use of new technologies on their own, they were never-
theless very receptive towards volunteers with tablets, who approached the residents
 Social Implications of New Mediated Spaces 145

individually and who helped to add the data to the maps. The local authorities of all
three cities eagerly accepted the results of the project. The above example illustrates
how research methods using digital tools such as SoftGIS may be utilised in different
ways – to first generate data on a specific topic, but also to encourage public partici-
pation among the younger generation who would otherwise avoid traditional ways of
public participation, such as public meetings or having to send written comments by
mail.

3.3 Public Participation GIS in Valletta, Malta: Hybridity

in Citizen Participation
Public Participation GIS (PPGIS) was used in Valletta to assess the impact of cultural
infrastructure generated by the European Capital of Culture 2018, as seen through the
eyes of its citizens and visitors. This research stage is part of a larger five-year study
that investigates the socio-spatial impacts of culture-led regeneration through the
inclusion of new cultural infrastructure. Understanding the relationship between
physical interventions and social changes enables researchers to examine different
dimensions that concern broader liveability and quality of life considerations (Zammit
2018).
The research centres on four pre-selected sites in the Capital chosen as pilot
regeneration projects, geographically spread around Valletta’s territory and led by
different public and private stakeholders. In particular, the study centres on the analysis
of impact due to change of uses on the surrounding neighbourhoods, with an interest in
the commercialisation of buildings and urban spaces that in turn has strong implications
for residential amenity. For this reason, it was imperative to obtain an in-depth
understanding of participants’ views, concerns and future aspirations for each of the
four neighbourhoods. PPGIS may provide a potentially rich dataset in this regard
(Zammit 2018).
In collaboration with Mapping for Change – a social enterprise within University
College London – a ‘communitymaps’ interface was adapted for use in the Maltese
Islands. The PPGIS was first piloted in a workshop held in December 2016. A few
months earlier, another residents workshop (Design4DCity), had been held in Valletta
that yielded key themes, which were chosen for the streamlined digital online interface.
The latter was tested with the participating residents through their personal devices,
followed by a physical mapping session. Participants remarked that the digital mapping
was more useful when it was preceded by a face-to-face communal discussion whilst
mapping elements of the discussion on a physical map.
A participatory mapping walkabout around the sites was subsequently held in
November 2017. The objective was to integrate the participatory mapping system to the
Design4DCity themes. Participants were presented with a paper map showing both the
site to be mapped, spaces within which to jot down comments and details of how to use
the online platform (Fig. 2).
146 A. Zammit et al.

Fig. 2. Sample of paper map used by PPGIS participants during the mapping exercise carried
out in one of the four Valletta neighbourhoods, the Biccerija. Source: studjurban.

The participants were broadly briefed on these themes as well as the importance of
their open-ended participation in data gathering. Limiting the themes to be observed by
the participants provided more definitive responses that could be free of any influence
and bias from the project coordinators. Following the PPGIS walkabout the hundreds
of collected responses were digitised and mapped (Fig. 3). Around a third of the
participants were able to map their observations during the walkabout immediately
onto the online platform and most of them also used the paper mapping method;
thereby combining both physical and digital participatory mapping. The session ran for
around an hour and enabled the participants to engage with the coordinators and fellow
participants, as well as with members of the public. It was observed that although the
physical map provides a context for discussion, participants are not always easily
adapted to the technology. Those who faced challenges with Internet access carried out
the mapping manually on paper.

Fig. 3. Digital mapping of PPGIS responses. Source: https://uom.communitymaps.org.uk/

project/design4dcity
 Social Implications of New Mediated Spaces 147

Key repeated observations were extracted for the four sites, which consequently
permitted further extraction of themes from participant responses to create specific
categories for numerical evaluation. The data for the four sites was subsequently
overlaid for comparative analysis and results from previous stages of the research,
based on an analytical framework using criteria for the same themes, were compared to
those extracted from the PPGIS.

3.4 Concluding Thoughts from the Three Examples

The awareness of communities’ conflicting interests is important for all policy areas to
be able to find common understanding and solutions to all needs. In the case of urban
planning, there are additional challenges since participants, whether urban planners or
citizens, need to comprehend and envision undeveloped urban spaces. Participants thus
need to analyse the primary values and needs of a community, and in addition translate
abstract ideas about physical space into specific proposals (Gordon and Manosevitch
2011). The introduction of powerful new ICT tools has made this visualisation possible
and easily accessible to the public. It has also opened communication within the public
and private sector, therefore changing the conventional systems and relations of gov-
ernance and citizenship. ICTs have enabled citizens to have a more active role in public
service. Consequently, public participation has become vital to the land use planning
processes.
From the three examples discussed above we may extract the following salient
points:
– The importance of the visual nature of participatory mapping that offsets literacy
and language barriers.
– The map as the central participatory element, and the possibility of everyone
equally accessing such map rather than select individuals, thus overcoming possible
barriers to engagement.
– The need for participatory planning to happen close to home – either in the areas
under analysis, or next to known places that the community may relate to and that
are easily accessible for all.
– Technology is a much more effective tool for youths than public meetings or written
submissions, while older participants still require face-to-face interaction which
may nonetheless co-exist with technology.
– The utility of physical mapping and the need to complement the digital mapping
process with a physical one, and following up with face-to-face discussions.
The examples discussed above are characterised by a combination of formal and
informal social structures in terms of the power and control in institutional settings: in
each case, there are the participants, researchers and policy makers. Involving non-
professionals in mapping should not exclude the role of professionals, as it is needed
for guidance and to assist with analysis.
148 A. Zammit et al.

4 Concluding Thoughts
4.1 Redefining Public Participation Through ICT
Public participation may be achieved through different levels of public engagement.
Digital tools, including GIS, may be applied at any level of the participation spectrum,
from informing, through consulting, engagement, cooperation, up to empowerment
(International Association for Public Participation, 2007). Similarly, Nobre (1999, cited
in Laurini 2001) outlines four levels of community participation that represent the
different scales of involving the public in the planning process: to inform, to consult, to
discuss and to share. The higher levels of participation require two-way interaction as
the public’s feedback plays a role in the decision-making process. Sharing power
decision-making, that is empowering communities, is the highest level of community
participation.
It is at this level that ICT really becomes a game-changer. Gordon and Manosevitch
(2011) introduce augmented deliberation as a “possible design solution that addresses
uniquely difficult contexts where deliberation is complicated by external factors”
(Gordon and Manosevitch 2011: 80). In addition, augmented deliberation can poten-
tially transcend other critical challenges that are normally commonplace and that hinder
the achievement of these higher levels of participation, including language barriers,
power differentials, and other communication challenges. It is here that ICTs seem to
present one of the greatest opportunities for urban planning and design – the inclusion
of social groups that would otherwise not engage in planning and design processes and
decision making. The use of ICTs, such as in participatory GIS, can ensure that urban
professionals are not simply producing urban spaces (in historically top-down ways)
but rather they are more effectively co-producing and co-designing urban space, which
will ultimately ensure that urban public spaces are designed for diverse users and
diverse needs.

4.2 A Redefined Role for Urban Designers

ICTs are becoming more and more integrated with our daily lives. They are bringing
about new social behaviours that directly impact the way users interact with their
physical surroundings, including how people interact in public spaces. Alongside
diminishing the usual interaction between people, technology has introduced a new
type of public life. Social media has allowed short term and temporary public life with
its instant messages to large audiences, drawing a mass of people to use an urban
private or public space for a short period of time. Simultaneously, traditional spaces are
being challenged to rethink the desire for new social interaction, as discussed above.
This is redefining the roles of design professionals, which requires them to think more
comprehensively and inclusively.
These continuous trend changes have challenged the conventional role of urban
designers. They can no longer deal with urban fabric as static systems but instead need
to adapt a multidisciplinary way of planning that combines traditional design skills with
a modern understanding of society’s current behaviour (Southworth 2014). Creative
rethinking has become a crucial design tool, as cities must become experiment grounds
 Social Implications of New Mediated Spaces 149

to improve the residents’ wellbeing as they continue to expand and grow. The need to
merge conventional problem-solving planning tactics with ICTs is becoming a
necessity.
It is evident that the opportunities and challenges brought about by ICT demand the
engagement of multiple actors in the creation and activation of mediated urban spaces.
In between the top-down approaches (needed for structural changes and planning of
future investment in ICT) and bottom-up, participatory and inclusive initiatives, the
urban designer has the potential to become a central figure, enabling and empowering
communities using digital tools to overcome traditional barriers and ensuring the
inclusion of this invaluable input in the preparation of strategies, objectives and tan-
gible design outcomes for the mediated city.

References
Aurigi, A.: Tensions in the digital city. Town Country Plan. J. 74, 143–145 (2005a)
Aurigi, A.: Making the Digital City: The Early Shaping of Urban Internet Space. Ashgate,
London (2005b)
Bibri, S.E., Krogstie, J.: Smart sustainable cities of the future: an extensive interdisciplinary
literature review. Sustain. Cities Soc. 31, 183–212 (2017)
Carmona, M., de Magalhães, C., Hammond, L.: Public Space: The Management Dimension.
Routledge, Oxon (2008)
Cinderby, S.: How to reach the ‘hard-to-reach’: the development of Participatory Geographic
Information Systems (P-GIS) for inclusive urban design in UK cities. Area 42(2), 239–251
(2010)
Cook, J., Lander, R., Flaxton, T.: The zone of possibility in citizen led hybrid cities. In:
Workshop on Smart Learning Ecosystems in Smart Regions and Cities, 15 September 2015,
Toledo, Spain (2015)
Czepkiewicz, M.: Systemy informacji geograficznej w partycypacyjnym zarządzaniu przyrodą w
mieście. In: Zrównoważony rozwój - Zastosowania nr 4 (2013)
Evans-Cowley, J., Hollander, J.: The new generation of public participation: internet-based
participation tools. Plan. Pract. Res. 25(3), 397–408 (2010)
Fredericks, J., Foth, M.: Augmenting public participation: enhancing planning outcomes through
the use of social media and web 2.0. Aust. Plan. 50(3), 244–256 (2013)
Gehl, J.: Cities for People. Island Press, Washington, DC (2010)
Goodchild, M.F., Glennon, J.A.: Crowdsourcing geographic information for disaster response: a
research frontier. Int. J. Digit. Earth 3(3), 231–241 (2010)
Gordon, E., Manosevitch, E.: Augmented deliberation: merging physical and virtual interaction
to engage communities in urban planning. New Media Soc. 13(1), 75–95 (2011)
Graham, S.: The software-sorted city: rethinking the “digital divide”. In: Graham, S. (ed.) The
Cybercities Reader, pp. 324–331. Routledge, Oxon (2004)
Haklay, M.: How good is volunteered geographical information? A comparative study of
OpenStreetMap and Ordnance Survey datasets. Environ. Plan. B: Plan. Des. 37(4), 682–703
(2010)
International Association for Public Participation: Spectrum of Public Participation (2007). http://
www.iap2.org/associations/4748/files/spectrum.pdf. Accessed 5 July 2017
Jacobs, J.: The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Vintage Books, London (1961)
150 A. Zammit et al.

Kruger, D.: Access denied. In: Graham, S. (ed.) The Cybercities Reader, pp. 320–323.
Routledge, Oxon (1997, 2004)
Laurini, R.: Information Systems for Urban Planning: A Hypermedia Cooperative Approach.
Taylor & Francis, London (2001)
Lefebvre, H.: The Production of Space. Blackwell Publishing, Malden (1991). English
translation/version (Translated by Donald Nicholson-Smith)
Lim, R.M., Azevedo, L.N., Cooper, J.: Embracing the conceptual shift on new ways of
experiencing the city and learning urban design: pedagogical methods and digital
technologies. J. Urban Des. 21(5), 638–660 (2016)
Maksymiuk, G., Kimic, K.: Green projects’ in participatory budgets inclusive initiatives for
creating city’s top quality public spaces. Warsaw case study. In: Marina, O., Armando, A.
(eds.) Inclusive/ Exclusive Cities, Skopje (2016)
Malecki, E.: Real people, virtual places, and the spaces in between. Socio-Econ. Plan. Sci. 58
(2017), 3–12 (2017)
Report From the Project ‘Count On Green’: A fresh look at greenery. Geo-questionnaires: a new
source of information about a city, Sendzimir Foundation, p. 11 (2015)
Riether, G.: Digital phantasmagoria: an urban space of intensified interaction. In: SIGRID 2010,
Bogota (2010)
Sanders, E.B.-N., Stappers, P.J.: Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. Co-Design 4(1),
5–18 (2008)
Southworth, M.: Public life, public space, and the changing art of city design. J. Urban Des. 19
(1), 37–40 (2014)
Stadler, R.L.: ICTS as a tool to increase the attractiveness of public spaces, K. Šešelgis’ Readings
– 2013. 5(3), 216–228 (2013). https://doi.org/10.3846/mla.2013.39
Tonkiss, F.: Cities By Design: The Social Life of Urban Form. Polity Press, Cambridge (2013)
Watson, V.: Co-production and collaboration in planning – the difference. Plan. Theory Pract. 15
(1), 62–76 (2014)
Whyte, W.H.: The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Project for Public Spaces, New York
(1980)
Zammit, A.: Assessing the relationship between community inclusion and space through Valletta
2018 cultural infrastructural projects. In: Valletta 2018 Foundation Evaluation and
Monitoring. Research Findings 2017 – Theme 3: Community Inclusion and Space, Malta,
pp. 21–35 (2018)

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
 Part III Programming
and Activating Cyberparks

Edited by Michiel de Lange and Martijn de Waal

3.1
Programming and Activating Cyberparks:
An Introduction and Overview

Michiel de Lange1(&) and Martijn de Waal2

1
Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
[email protected]
2
Amsterdam University of Applied Sciences, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
[email protected]

1 Introduction: Programming and Activating Cyberparks

Part 3 Programming and Activating Cyberparks deals with the variety of ways in which
urban public spaces can be reinvigorated through the use of digital media technologies.
As is outlined in the introduction to this volume, digital media technologies profoundly
shape the use and perception of urban public spaces. Critical observers have noted that
digital media may threaten the public nature of our cities and civic spaces. For instance,
elsewhere we have described these threats in terms of three Cs: commercialisation,
control, and capsularisation (de Lange and de Waal 2013). First, the combination of
digital media technologies and consumer culture overlays everyday urban life with a
market logic of pervasive customer tracing, quantification, and a vying for attention.
Datafication and personalized recommendation services capitalise on our habitual
everyday movements in the city, turning them into an ever-expanding string of (potential)
customer ‘touchpoints’. This affects the spatial, social and cultural dimensions of almost
every realm of urban life, from work to meeting to leisure to travel to home. Visible
illustrations include the rapidly changing appearance of high streets in most cities, or the
nature and quality of inner-city neighbourhoods coinciding with the popularity of plat-
forms like Airbnb (for more on platforms, see van Dijck et al. 2018). As a result, our
polyvocal and frictional public open spaces are being transformed into silent and
seamless marketplaces, where public interactions are reduced to commercial transactions.
Second, cities are being equipped with a range of technologies pervasive control.
Governments in the post-9/11 landscape have sought ways to monitor, react and
increasingly often also pre-emptively act to calamities in order to secure urban life
(Crang and Graham 2007; Crandall 2010). New technologies of control include crime
maps, CCTV surveillance, urban dashboards based on real-time data, and smart
algorithms and AI that can detect out-of-the-ordinary signals (e.g. loud impact noises)
and behaviour (e.g. outdoor group gatherings). Crang and Graham (2007) paint a bleak
scenario in which these technologies have turned our cities into quasi-militarised zones
aimed at maximising transparency where nothing out of the ordinary is allowed.
Third, interactions in public open spaces are increasingly characterised by the
widespread availability of personal and portable media technologies like mobile

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 153–156, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_12
154 M. de Lange and M. de Waal

phones, tablets, laptops, portable audio devices, smart watches, and so on, plus ubiq-
uitous access to networked content (e.g. Netflix, Spotify), and networked social rela-
tions through social media. This drives a tendency towards retreating in one’s personal
media bubble, which some have described as capsularisation (De Cauter 2004) or
cocooning (Ito et al. 2009).
How can we wrest public open spaces from these developments? The chapters in
part 3 suggest a range of possible approaches to this challenge. Some of the key words
in this part include playfulness, hackability, the commons, resilience, placemaking,
civic participation, local knowledge and cultural heritage. The series of chapters taken
together form a variegated and incomplete mosaic of possible entry points to engage
with this question. They are not so much answers as much as suggested venues for
further exploration and experimentation. In a sense, what connects these interventions
is an underlying drive towards making the city ‘hackable’, that is, open to interventions
and systemic forms of city-making by non-experts (de Lange and de Waal 2019).

2 Overview of Chapters

The chapter Smart Citizens in the Hackable City: On the Datafication, Playfulness,
and Making of Urban Public Spaces through Digital Art (3.2) by Michiel de Lange,
Kåre Synnes, Gerald Leindecker explores a variety of people-centric narratives as
corollaries to the dominance of technologically driven smart city visions. They argue
that smart city visions can be criticized for lacking a perspective on the inclusion of
citizens in city-making, for emphasizing efficiency at the expense of urban public life,
and for its technology-centeredness in which technological fixes for complex societal
issues are suggested. To counterbalance this dominant narrative, the authors forward a
range of alternative options. People-centric strategies include playfulness, collaborative
forms of datafication and visualization, the use of interactive (media) art and public
installations, and new types of making and hacking in the city. While none of these
narratives provide the same attractive promise of solving urban woes through tech-
nology, they do have the advantage of placing people at the forefront rather than an
afterthought. They emphasize the capacity for change that city inhabitants have.
In their chapter Using ICT in the Management of Public Open Space as a
Commons (3.3) Georgios Artopoulos, Paschalis Arvanitidis and Sari Suomalainen
argue that public open spaces (POS) are not just simply physical spaces, but should be
understood as a commons, or common pool resource. Narratives play an important role
in the formation of public open spaces as assemblages. These narratives include cul-
tural codings of a place, and the practices, users and uses that are understood as
belonging to particular places. In contemporary cities, ICT use becomes part of these
assemblages. Particular technologies and services may open up the construction of
narratives around places or provide new means through which POS can be managed.
This means that process of appropriation of public open spaces can become more open,
and pluralistic. And in turn, this could contribute to a process in which, as the authors
write, stakeholders “collectively develop institutional arrangements [..], which enable
them to ensure proper use and longevity of the common pool resource.” In the
development of that argument, the chapter contributes to the discussion of Public Open
Spaces by showing how new mobile ICT could help communities to collectively
 Programming and Activating Cyberparks: An Introduction and Overview 155

appropriate POS and bring out an understanding of these public open spaces as
common pool resources that can be managed by local communities.
In their contribution Revealing the Potential of Public Places: Adding a New
Digital Layer to The Existing Thematic Gardens in Thessaloniki Waterfront (3.4)
Tatiana Ruchinskaya, Konstantinos Ioannidis and Kinga Kimic argue for the
inclusion of ICT in place making strategies to activate public spaces. They base their
study on an analysis of the thematic gardens developed at the Thessaloniki waterfront.
These open urban public spaces were to revive the gardens existing in Thessaloniki in the
19th and 20th century that had been demolished in the urban expansions of the 1960s and
1970s. The new gardens were laid out as a string of fifteen sites at the seafront, expressing
the relationship between the city and the sea. Each garden has its own theme. Walking
through them can be experienced as a spatial narrative in which various symbolic
meanings unfold. An analysis and survey of the site found that visitors highly appreciate
this thematization. However, many users note that the gardens were often empty and
lacked a number of facilities to make them truly attractive. While the original design
didn’t include any digital amenities, the authors lay out a range of options for the
application of site-specific digital layers that could enhance the experience and usefulness
of the Gardens. They see potential in combining the themed design of the gardens with
digital narrative experiences and adding digital platforms that could be used to share
knowledge or personal experiences. Digital media thus might be used to add new sym-
bolic layers, turning the gardens in an example of hybrid read-write publishing surfaces.
Hence, the chapter gives an overview of various strategies for the hybridization of Public
Open spaces that could be beneficial for designers and policy makers.
Konstantinos Lalenis, Balkiz Yapicioglou and Petja Ivanova-Radovanova, in
their chapter Cyberpark, a New Medium of Human Associations, a Component of
Urban Resilience (3.5), analyse how the resilience of public open spaces can be
increased by integrating cyberparks into its spatial planning and policies. Urban resi-
lience is understood in two ways. First, as the capacity to absorb a sudden crisis or
disaster in the short run, and second as the capacity of cities to integrate this robustness
into infrastructures and governance in the long run. The authors underline that ‘resilient
thinking’ has become an increasingly imported concept in urban planning to update
important physical and societal systems for future adaptations. Cyberparks, as digital-
physical hybrids of public open spaces, are significant resources in urban resilience, as
they combine physical infrastructure and digitally mediated information that may aid in
disaster management. In a case study of the refugee crisis is Greece, the chapter shows
how this works in practice.
In the contribution A Spotlight of Co-Creation and Inclusiveness of Public Open
Spaces (3.6), Ina Šuklje Erjavec and Tatiana Ruchinskaya focus on co-creation to
engage a variety of stakeholders with everyday urban environments based on equality,
diversity and social cohesion. Different from public participation and citizen engage-
ment, co-creation as a method entails a special type of collaboration, an act of col-
lective creativity where people are working or acting together with others to create
something that is not known in advance. The authors then proceed to connect this
notion of co-creation to the ‘Four-D Model’, which highlights four types of civic
engagement: discover, debate, decide and do. The authors analyse the potential
strengths of digital media technologies for fostering these four aspects of civic
engagement with public open spaces in co-creation processes. The chapter also gives
an overview of a large number of digital tools available for these purposes.
156 M. de Lange and M. de Waal

The last contribution to part 3 is the chapter CyberParks Songs and Stories -
Enriching Public Spaces with Localized Culture Heritage Material such as Digitized
Songs and Stories (3.7) by Kåre Synnes, Georgios Artopoulos, Carlos Smaniotto
Costa, Marluci Menezes, and Gaia Redaelli. The chapter looks at the ways in which
technologies can contribute to archiving and accessing intangible cultural heritage. It
does so by examining a concept for a heritage app called CyberParks Songs and Stories.
This app aims to increase the understanding of European cultures through localized
storytelling. By analysing three cases that are listed as Intangible Cultural Heritage by
UNESCOs Intergovernmental Committee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural
Heritage, the authors highlight how users can contribute their own narratives and insights
to the platform. In doing so, the concept addresses the next big challenge in cultural
heritage after the digitisation phase, which is how to manage and opening up the vast
troves of data in meaningful ways and involve people in contributing content.

References
Crandall, J.: The geospatialization of calculative operations: tracking, sensing and megacities.
Theor. Cult. Soc. 27(6), 68–90 (2010)
Crang, M., Graham, S.: Sentient cities: ambient intelligence and the politics of urban space. Inf.
Commun. Soc. 10(6), 789–817 (2007)
De Cauter, L.: The Capsular Civilization: On the City in the Age of Fear. NAi Publishers,
Rotterdam (2004)
Dijck, J., Poell, T., Waal, M.: The Platform Society. Oxford University Press, New York (2018)
Ito, M., Okabe, D., Anderson, K.: Portable objects in three global cities: the personalization of
urban places. In: Ling, R.S., Campbell, S.W. (eds.) The Reconstruction of Space and Time:
Mobile Communication Practices, pp. 67–87. Transaction Publishers, New Brunswick. (2009)
de Lange, M., de Waal, M.: Owning the city: new media and citizen engagement in urban design.
First Monday, 18(11) (2013)
de Lange, M., de Waal, M. (eds.): The Hackable City: Digital Media and Collaborative City-
making in the Network Society. Springer, London (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-
13-2694-3

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
3.2
Smart Citizens in the Hackable City:
On the Datafication, Playfulness, and Making
of Urban Public Spaces Through Digital Art

Michiel de Lange1(&), Kåre Synnes2, and Gerald Leindecker3

1
Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands
[email protected]
2
Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden
[email protected]
3
Institut für Strukturentwicklungsplanung, Wels, Austria
[email protected]

Abstract. This contribution explores concepts, approaches and technologies

used to make urban public spaces more playful and artful. Through a variety of
compelling narratives involving play and art it assists in the design of new
cyberparks, public spaces where digitally mediated interactions are an inherent
part. How can play and interactive art be used to strengthen urban public spaces
by fostering citizen engagement and participation? We propose to not only
utilise interactive media for designing urban (public) spaces, but also for social
innovation for the benefit of citizens. in cyberparks. The contribution connects
urbanity, play and games, as well as concepts of active and passive interactive
digital art as part of trends towards pervasive urban interaction, gameful design
and artification. We position this as an important part of developing human-
centred smart cities where social capital is central, and where citizens engaging
in play and art are prerequisites for sustainable communities. Using art, play and
games to foster citizen engagement and collaboration is a means to develop
social technologies and support the development of collective intelligence in
cyberparks. This is studied in concrete cases, such as the Ice Castle in Luleå,
Sweden and the Ars Electronica in Linz, from a multi-disciplinary stance
involving interaction design, digital art, landscape design, architecture, and
health proficiencies. We will analyse two cases of gameful design and one case
of digital interactive art being used to address urban issues. Rezone the game is
an interactive multimedia game developed to tackle vacancy in the city of Den
Bosch in the Netherlands. The Neighbourhood is a board game developed to
involve various stakeholders in making their neighbourhood using water as a
collective resource.

Keywords: Playful city
Games
Interactive art
Civic participation

Smart city

Parts of this chapter were drawn from de Lange (2015).

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 157–166, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_13
158 M. de Lange et al.

1 Introduction

This contribution addresses the question of how urban media digital media technolo-
gies can help citizens to gain more ownership of their environment. How can digital
data, game and new forms of creativity and art make the city hackable, that is, open to
systemic changes by ‘smart’ city-makers?
Digital media technologies have become increasingly intertwined with everyday
urban life. One only has to think of mobile interfaces, wireless networks and protocols,
GPS navigation, smart cards, camera surveillance, sensors, a large number of large and
small screens, big data and smart algorithms present in today’s cities. Such digital
media technologies affect the spatial use and design, social situations and behaviour in
our everyday urban life, and affect how we work, travel, live, spend our free time and
meet each other. This interweaving of digital and physical worlds is the starting point
for so-called ‘smart city’ policy and design agendas (see for example Hollands 2015).
Municipalities, technology companies and knowledge institutions use smart tech-
nologies to try to more efficiently organize urban processes and solve problems such as
energy and water supply, transport and logistics, health, safety and well-being, air and
environmental quality. The hope is that this improves the quality of life of people and
city governance. This is a commendable endeavour. However, there are a number of
more critical aspects about such visions.
In the first place, the term smart lacks definition and precision. Who or what are
actually ‘smart’ in smart cities? Often it isn’t the people for whom all those high-tech
solutions are being devised. Take, for example, emblematic greenfield developments
like Masdar City in the Arab Emirates and New Songdo in South Korea, smart cities
planned on the drawing board in the first decade of the 21st century. In these visions,
smart citizens do not have an active role in shaping their living environment. They are
allowed to live in an envisioned high-tech utopia designed by companies and city
governments for them, not with or by them. By contrast, already existing cities such as
Rio de Janeiro, Barcelona or Amsterdam tend to take care of this differently. Here, the
role of the municipal government is much more pronounced, and attempts are made to
allow people to play a much more active role. Still, the question remains: smart city, for
and by whom?
A second point of criticism is the underlying idea of cityness. The emphasis on
efficiency is rather unilateral. The smart city conjures up modernist images of control,
efficiency and control. As a vision on urban future it is rather totalizing and offers a
generic template with little space for local and cultural differences. Similar to the
‘creative city’ visions popular two decades ago, as a type of city marketing the smart
city offers quite a superficial narrative. Which city does not want to be creative or
smart? The smart city denies the messy and unpredictable improvisation character
make cities charming and exciting places. This messiness fosters creativity and inno-
vation and is the pedagogical foundation for learning to coexist with others in
increasingly super-diverse urban society.
Thirdly, the vision of technology as a solution machine is problematic. Many issues
in this complex world are extremely complex, challenging and ‘wicked’ (Rittel and
Webber 1973). It is naive to think that solutions come from purely technological
 Smart Citizens in the Hackable City 159

interventions. What’s more, technologically driven solutions may have side-effects that
counteract initial aims or produce perverse effects. For example, smart parking apps
that show free parking places in real-time makes car mobility as a system more
attractive. The more complex underlying issue of how urban societies can deal with
questions of traffic and mobility remains untouched. This example shows how tech-
nological solutions may in effect undermine the public debate about what kind of city
we actually want with each other. In addition, the question arises what role we think
commercial platforms should play in the current reshuffling of individual, collective
and public interests. How desirable is outsourcing decision-making power to com-
puterized systems in which algorithms make the decisions? ‘Smart’ urban technologies
reinforce trends that can be labelled as the logics of the three C’s logic: consumption
(commercialization of urban public space), control (increased surveillance in public
spaces), and capsularisation (retreat in secure private spaces while being in public)
(de Lange and de Waal 2013).
In this light, it is hopeful that a growing number of cities look for future scenarios
that do not focus so much on smart technologies but on smart urban residents. In this
contribution, we look for these human-centred stories about the smart city. These
stories are variegated but all entail people-centric perspectives on what makes a city
‘smart’ as well as ‘just’. This way, we can find answers to the question of how we can
provide more humane directions to the future of the city under the influence of digital
technologies and media culture.

2 The Data City

There is great enthusiasm about the potential to deploy big data urban for monitoring
and controlling a range of urban processes (see for example Goldsmith and Crawford
2014). Predominantly, it is companies and governments that use data to this end. In
addition, data also represent potential social value. Opening up datasets and doing
useful things with these data can be a way to make this value publicly available.
Meanwhile, urban residents too are currently measuring, quantifying and visualizing all
kinds of aspects of everyday life thanks to the emergence of mobile media and sensors
such as the Fitbit and iWatch, and popular mobile apps like Runkeeper and Strava.
Somewhere in between institutional data and personal quantified self-data, we can
discern collective data initiatives. In many places all over the world, urban residents
with sensors and networked technologies are busy generating data about, for example,
air quality. People thus form a public that works in a networked way on issues that are
of common interest to them (Gabrys 2014). Examples of this from the Netherlands are
Sensornet, a noise pollution project around Schiphol Airport (http://geluidsnet.nl), and
Urban AirQ, a project involving urban residents in measuring air quality (https://waag.
org/en/project/urban-airq). Remarkable in the Dutch context is that oftentimes civil
society organizations take the initiative to act as a link between the so-called triple helix
of citizens, companies and governments.
The role of data in the smart city is often presented as a government management
tool and business intelligence tool for companies. Governments and companies are
using data and dashboards to make decisions. The municipality of Amsterdam for
160 M. de Lange et al.

instance works with various data sources and dashboards in areas such as housing,
public health, tourist flows and energy consumption (https://data.amsterdam.nl).
Important questions include: What do we get to know about the city, and what not?
What translations will take place when data are linked together? And how does that
direct decisions in, and about, policy and management?
The data city suggests that cities can be approached as complex systems that can be
known and managed based on data and rules for rational decision making. We may
wonder to what extent data represent or construct reality? For example, crime maps can
affect our perceptions of certain neighbourhoods, and strengthen self-fulfilling ten-
dencies. It is likely that people, as well as law-enforcement, will experience and behave
differently in neighbourhoods known as dangerous. An exciting question is how data
and dashboards, in addition to rationalized control and transparency, can also con-
tribute to affective experiences of the city, serendipity, creative expressions, and col-
lective interventions. Can we use data to tell other appealing stories about (the future
of) the city?

3 The Playful City

Another narrative is that of the playful city. The relationship between cities and play
goes a long way back. The city has traditionally been a centre for entertainment, a stage
for everyday role play and drama, a place for playful learning and for subversive ludic
actions. Moreover, city simulations have been around for decades. The rise of mobile
technologies in the city combined with game culture offers opportunities to involve
people in playful ways with the city. Play and games can be used to involve people in
the planning process, with specific urban issues, to encourage meeting with strangers
and other ways of urban space use, or to allow people to temporarily allow urban space.
A Dutch example is Play the City, which offers a playful method to allow various
stakeholders to discuss the future of the city in a game setting and through game
dynamics (http://playthecity.eu). Indeed, architects and urban planners are turning to
games and play to shift the way they work on designing cities.
Play and games appeal to different audiences, like young people, who do not come
to town hall discussion evenings. Play and games offer horizons for action. In safe
environments players can experiment and practice without serious consequences. Some
game types provide insight into rules, procedures and parameters; others encourage
players to develop team-based strategies and build trust. Ranging from competition,
strategy, role play to agility games, play and games appeal to creativity, innovation
capacity, learning ability and social self-organization of people. This seems a promising
way to address and further strengthen citizen smartness. In free spaces, new imaginaries
of the future city are created.
Nevertheless, the scenario of the playful city also raises more critical questions
about, among other things, the exploitation of free labour under the guise of play,
known under the portmanteau ‘playbour’ (Kücklich 2005). Players are usually not paid
but they do provide valuable input. Other thorny issues concern the ‘spectacularisation’
of the urban public realm in the current experience economy, and the extent to which
governments and other institutional parties take seriously the outcomes of playful
 Smart Citizens in the Hackable City 161

interventions and commit themselves to firmly and sustainably anchor this in policy.
Moreover, simplistic ‘gamification’ of urban public space through external reward
mechanisms itself undercuts the autotelic quality of play itself and risks instrumen-
talising social interactions (Alfrink 2015).

4 Case Rezone the Game, Playing Against Vacancy1

At this point we take a look at a concrete case, in order to see how participatory smart
citizenship may work in practice. Rezone the Game is a project to help address the
complex urban issue of vacancy2. Two cultural organizations from Den Bosch in the
Netherlands, the Bosch Architecture Initiative and art organization Wave of Tomorrow,
collaborated with a game design school to create Rezone the Game (www.rezone.eu),
challenging players to ‘fight blight’. In the game, players work together to keep the city
safe from deterioration by salvaging real estate from decline. There are four player
roles: the proprietor (owner of real estate), mayor (representing the municipality),
engineer (urban designer) and citizen (neighbours). Rezone the Game is composed of a
physical board game with a number of 3D printed iconic buildings that represent the
neighbourhood, an augmented reality layer of real-time information about these
buildings projected on a screen, and a computer algorithm programmed to let buildings
descend into vacancy like a wildfire. A camera above registers the players’ moves by
scanning QR codes on pawns. The game engine continually adapts to changes. To beat
the system players must strategically collaborate instead of pursuing self-interests. The
game was tested during a series of events like The Playful Arts Festival (2013), and
Rezone Playful Interventions (2014), with among others the mayor of Den Bosch
playing. Major Dutch construction company Heijmans became interested. Their
involvement started a new collaboration and lead to a follow-up game concept. Part of
the motivation for the development of Rezone the Game was that it is hard to address
complex questions like vacancy through conventional means. Traditional parties
involved in urban development are not inclined to invest in initiatives with uncertain
outcomes and wait for others to take the first step. In a game, it was believed, stake-
holders would feel freer to experiment without immediate (financial) consequences.
This game informs the three elements for a human-centred smart city that have been
mentioned in the introduction: smartness, the role of technologies in civic participation,
and the notion of cityness. A ‘playful civic smartness’ is strengthened in various ways.
Players have to manage their different stakeholder roles, they must forge coalitions with
other players and quickly negotiate, they must unpack the underlying mechanisms of
vacancy and think of ways to address this issue. Rezone the Game involves all of the
play types identified by French philosopher Roger Caillois: competition, role-playing,
chance, and even dizzying speedy interactions with the computer system. The com-
petitive element exists not between players but between players and the system
(Caillois 2001). Playing together forges trust and connections between players.

1
This case description is based on de Lange (2019).
2
De Lange has been involved in this project as a paid advisor and researcher.
162 M. de Lange et al.

Real world stakeholders can meet each other in a playful atmosphere instead of at the
negotiation table. The game is fun and acts as a catalyst for ensuing discussions and
reflections among players (a crucial part of the play sessions), and even potential
follow-ups. It is a deliberately simplified artificial safe setting where real emotions and
preferences emerge. It invites people to temporarily stand in adversaries’ shoes. This
could lead to better understanding of mutual standpoints through embodied experience
and affect, instead of mere argumentation and deliberation. No longer passive users of
the city players temporarily become smart planners.
Rezone the Game helps to foster citizen engagement with the issue of vacancy. The
game was used to invite real world stakeholders around the table. This happened during
special play sessions and events such as the Playful Arts Festival (2012) and Rezone
Playful Interventions event (2013). Stakeholders met in a joyous atmosphere instead of
tense town hall meetings or around the negotiation table. Playing together allowed
relationships to form based on trust. Importantly, Rezone the Game is not a ‘solutionist’
attempt to solve a complex urban problem via technology. Playing the game helps
people to become incentivized and take ownership for an otherwise abstract issue like
vacancy. Playing makes the issue tangible through personal lived experience and
provides possible horizons for action. The game mechanics and dynamics are delib-
erately aimed at stimulating social interactions and experimentation with collective
action. Hence, we can conclude that this playful intervention strengthens a new hybrid
liberal/communal type of citizenship: people’s individual rights to the city are extended
into a collective right to the smart city.
Furthermore, Rezone the Game represents a particular take on the notion of city-
ness. A superficial reading might suggest that it is a game that helps to solve the issue
of vacancy. The underlying notion of cityness in such a view, would be one of a
playable system with citizens as productive problem-solvers. In this view, a complex
urban problem can have an optimal solution, which leads the city into a state of
equilibrium. By contrast I understand the game to actually have a deeper narrative,
which tells that urban issues like vacancy are far too complex to model, let alone solve,
by simple technological means. We suggest that the special quality of playful urban
interventions like Rezone the Game is that they act on a meta-level. Gregory Bateson
famously theorized that play always consists of a level of meta-communication. When
monkeys in the zoo engage in play-fighting they exchange signals that say that it is not
actually to be understood as fighting. In his words, we face “two peculiarities of play:
(a) that the messages or signals exchanged in play are in a certain sense untrue or not
meant; and (b) that that which is denoted by these signals is nonexistent” (Bateson
1972/1987: 141). This is precisely the strength of playful city interventions like Rezone
the Game: it questions its own solutionist promise by signalling to not actually do what
it purports to do (solving vacancy). Instead, the game impels players to stake claims
about what kind of city they actually want, to negotiate the underlying issue, and to
agree on how to address it collectively. This involves a view of the city as a commons,
a space of perpetual tension and conflict and at the same time a space that allows for
negotiation and collaboration (Foster and Iaione 2016: 288).
Understanding city life in terms of play and games stands in a long tradition (de
Lange 2015). Arguably, this connection is becoming even more important today. An
increasing number of people grow up playing games as part of their cultural repertoire.
 Smart Citizens in the Hackable City 163

They are ‘ludo-literate’: knowledgeable about how games work and what you can do
with them. We live in a playful media culture in which we are continuously surrounded
by a plethora of technologies that offer spaces for playful experimentation and shape
our understanding of the world as playful (Frissen et al. 2015). Playing means
acquiring knowledge about the world and the capacity to act in it. Therefore, truly
human centred smart cities should be playful cities.

5 The Interactive Art City

The narrative of interactive art in the city looks at urban life from the perspective of art
and culture. While the city of art has a long history - ranging from urban design-shape
masterpieces like the city of Palmanova or Brasilia to the support of public spaces
and squares by artefacts of art like the Capitol square in Rome as well as symbols
(Leindecker and Duschlbauer 2003) and the intellectual concept of the city of art
(Calvino 1972) - the new layer of interactive digital media art in urban public space is
only recently evolving.
Digital Media Art in public space has started with small interventions, and the
domain was mainly initiated from computer science. It is understood as the cross-
section of interaction with the spectators and auditors with new concepts of multimedia
art. This mandate attracted the art scene as a whole, since it is part of the concept of art
to reflect on society and how to deal with the technology challenge. A fine example of
this movement can be demonstrated by the Ars Electronica in Linz (Austria). The
yearly festival along the river Danube and the park along the classical music hall using
digital information to create a new form of space in relation with contemporary art
including music, light, digital information and live performance. The highlight of the
event, that is organised similar to a fair with a Prix Ars Electronica competition,
lectures and interactive digital art, is a public event, first held in 1979, where there is a
free public performance using various media disciplines to perform. This single event
attracts yearly up to 50.000 spectators, that become also parameters for the interaction
and can partly interfere with the performance on predefined parameters. In 2016 it was
the flight of coordinated 100 drones in direct relation and interaction with the visual
sound- cloud of the concert.

6 The Maker City

Another narrative looks at urban dwellers as creative makers of their own life world. In
order to understand this urban ‘maker culture’, we must look not only at the technology
but also at associated cultural practices and institutional arrangements. People today
use a wide variety of digital tools, like computers, semi-professional software, and 3D
printers, to design and develop new products and services. In addition, there exists a
cultural norm and practice to share this work online with others. Open standards,
licenses and platforms allow people to exchange and edit home-made files and offer
their own work. According to some therefore, we are living in the era of a ‘third
164 M. de Lange et al.

industrial revolution’ (Anderson 2012). After the mechanization and automated mass
production, the time supposedly has come in which consumers are producers and
everyone is a maker.
Many cities harbour so-called fablabs, hackerspaces, repair cafes, and hackathons:
indoor places where people ‘do it themselves’, often with the help of others. In addition
to these so-called maker spaces, there is a rich set of urban interventionist practices,
mostly outdoors on the streets. Often these interventions are organized through social
media, with catchy labels like urban acupuncture and tactical urbanism. Characteristic
is their temporary nature and sometimes subversive appropriation of public urban
space, often stemming from the desire to counter dominant discourses and practices of
commercialization, control, and cocooning in urban spaces.
Here too we see an interesting semi-institutionalized intermediate form in the so-
called ‘urban labs’, or ‘living labs’. These are designated innovation spaces for creative
experimentation, with less rules and more open frameworks. An example of such an
urban laboratory is the Buiksloterham district in Amsterdam North, where home buyers
could purchase their own lots and develop their own sustainable living space.
The maker city draws our attention to shared ‘ownership’ issues in processes of
urbanization, participation culture, and “the right to the city”. However, this narrative
also has a downside. Some people argue that digital work in a platform economy leads
to a downward spiral, a race to the bottom of precarious labour where people tend to
outcompete each other for ever cheaper rates. Others point to the underlying neo-liberal
ethics that formulates citizenship increasingly in terms of entrepreneurship and pro-
ductivity. The good citizen in the participation society manages her own business, takes
care of her neighbour, and thus generates savings and social profits.

7 Conclusion: Towards a Hackable City?

A common line in the different stories discussed above is the capacity for change that
city inhabitants have. Smart citizens take care of the future of their city. Seen in this
light, we can speak of the city that is ‘hackable’ (de Waal, et al. 2017; de Lange and
de Waal 2019). This term refers to the many similarities between original hackers
(computer hobbyists who wrote their own software for existing machines and shared
code with each other and the world) and contemporary do-it-yourself city makers, who
also provide incremental and open innovations for the city using limited resources.
With digital media they can bend, circumvent, or initiate all kinds of urban infras-
tructures, systems and services. We can see this cooperative way of city making at
work in a range of domains. For instance, in self-building, joint sensing of air quality,
and the organization of collective services from insurance to energy generation to
healthcare. The hackable city is the nexus where the production and management of
valuable resources in the data city joins the personal imagination and social drive of the
playful city and the creative do-it-yourself character of the maker city (Fig. 1).
 Smart Citizens in the Hackable City 165

Fig. 1. The hackable city model, source: www.thehackablecity.nl

The figure above provides insight into the dynamics between individual attitude
and drive, collective practice and exchange, and the system world of rules and
infrastructures. It shows how an individual ethics of self-reliance can be connected to
collective practices of knowledge sharing and exchange of resources. Reciprocity is
crucial here. The model also shows how collective interests relate to institutional
frameworks. For example, self-building groups should make plausible arguments for
their approach, which can convince institutional stakeholders to change their frame-
works. The notion of ‘hacking’ is provocative. For some, it evokes associations with
computer criminality, but its productive value lies in providing possible answers to
questions about the use of digital media for issues of public interest and for empow-
ering smart citizens to become involved in their cities. The truly smart city is a hackable
city.

References
Alfrink, K.: The Gameful City. In: Walz, S.P., Deterding, S. (eds.) The Gameful World:
Approaches, Issues, Applications, pp. 527–560. The MIT Press, Cambridge (2015)
Ampatzidou, C., Bouw, M., van de Klundert, F., de Lange, M., de Waal, M.: The Hackable City:
A Research Manifesto and Design Toolkit. Amsterdam Creative Industries Publishing,
Amsterdam (2015)
Anderson, C.: Makers: The New Industrial Revolution, 1st edn. Crown Business, New York
(2012)
Bateson, G.: Steps to an Ecology of Mind; Collected Essays in Anthropology, Psychiatry,
Evolution, and Epistemology, 1987th edn. Chandler Pub. Co., San Francisco (1972)
Bogost, I.: Persuasive Games: The Expressive Power of Videogames. The MIT Press, Cambridge
(2007)
Caillois, R.: Man, Play, and Games. University of Illinois Press, Urbana/Chicago (2001)
Calvino, I.: The Invisible City, 1st edn. Giulio Einaudi Editor, Italy (1972)
van Dijck, J., Poell, T., de Waal, M.: The Platform Society: Battle for Public Values in an Online
World. University Press, Amsterdam (2016)
Foster, S.R., Iaione, C.: The City as a Commons. Yale Law Policy Rev. 34(2), 280–349 (2016)
Frissen, V., Lammes, S., de Lange, M., de Mul, J., Raessens, J. (eds.): Playful Identities: The
Ludification of Digital Media Cultures. Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam (2015)
166 M. de Lange et al.

Gabrys, J.: Programming environments: environmentality and citizen sensing in the smart city.
Environ. Plan. D: Soc. Space 32(1), 30–48 (2014)
Goldsmith, S., Crawford, S.: The Responsive City: Engaging Communities Through Data-Smart
Governance. Jossey-Bass, San Francisco (2014)
Hollands, R.G.: Critical interventions into the corporate smart city. Camb. J. Reg. Econ. Soc.
8(1), 61–77 (2015)
Kücklich, J.: Precarious playbour: modders and the digital games industry. Fibrecult. J. 5 (2005).
http://fijive.fijibreculturejournal.org/fcj-025-precarious-playbour-modders-and-the-digital-
games-industry
de Lange, M.: The playful city: citizens making the smart city. In: Glas, R., Lammes, S., de
Lange, M., Raessens, J. (eds.) The Playful Citizen: Power, Creativity, Knowledge.
Amsterdam University Press, Amsterdam (2019)
de Lange, M.: The playful city: using play and games to foster citizen participation. In:
Skaržauskienė, A. (ed.) Social Technologies and Collective Intelligence, pp. 426–434.
Mykolas Romeris University, Vilnius (2015)
de Lange, M., de Waal, M. (eds.): The Hackable City: Digital Media and Collaborative
City-Making in the Network Society. Springer, London (2019)
de Lange, M., de Waal, M.: Owning the city: new media and citizen engagement in urban design,
waves, bits & bricks: media and the social production of urban space. First Monday 18 (2013)
de Waal, M., de Lange, M., Bouw, M.: The hackable city: citymaking in a platform society.
Arch. Des. 87(1), 50–57 (2017)
Leindecker, G., Duschlbauer, T.: The tower and the evil - a cultural retrospective of a symbol. In:
Clavaron, Y., Dieterle, B. (eds.) La Memoire des villes, pp. 323–334. Universität Saint
Etienne, Saint Etienne (2003)
Rittel, H.W.J., Webber, M.M.: Dilemmas in a general theory of planning. Policy Sci. 4, 155–169
(1973)
Schouten, B., Ferri, G., de Lange, M., Millenaar, K.: Games as strong concepts for city-making.
In: Nijholt, A. (ed.) Playable Cities: The City as a Digital Playground, pp. 23–45. Springer,
London (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-1962-3_2
Sicart, M.: Playin’ the city: artistic and scientific approaches to playful urban arts. Navig. J. Media
Cult. Stud. 16(1), 25-40 (2016)

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
3.3
Using ICT in the Management of Public Open
Space as a Commons

Georgios Artopoulos1(&) , Paschalis Arvanitidis2 ,

and Sari Suomalainen3
1
The Cyprus Institute, Nicosia, Cyprus
[email protected]
2
University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece
[email protected]
3
Häme University of Applied Sciences, Hämeenlinna, Finland
[email protected]

Abstract. The chapter defines public open space as a commons and explores
innovative ways for its management and sustainable development through the
use of new information and communication technologies. It argues that hybrid
conglomerates of space and technological interfaces provide this possibility.
Section 2 defines common pool resources and discusses issues of its manage-
ment, before it moves to identify public open space as a commons and to outline
key directives for governance. Section 3 outlines the new ICT and considers
practices and technologies that can be used in order to enhance community
identity, social interaction and user engagement in the governance of the public
open space as a commons. Finally, the last section concludes this chapter with
some remarks on the conditions under which the hybrid of a public open space
with ICT features could be approached as yet another kind of ‘soft’ type of
common pool resource.

Keywords: Public open space
Common pool resource

Spatialised cultural interaction
Open data
User engagement

1 Introduction

Public Open Space (POS) is a key element of our cities. It can be defined as outdoor
urban spaces of any size, design or physical features, which are readily and freely
available to the public for amenity, recreation, and socialisation purposes (Lemonides
and Young 1978). POS affords many benefits to urban dwellers, and provides
opportunities for relaxation, association and social interaction, which help communities
to shape their identity and to strengthen their social fabric (CABE space 2004). Yet,
most writers on public space issues acknowledge a general decline in the quality and
quantity of POS worldwide, attributing this to the lack of resources and/or vision, to
outdated working practices, and to fragmented organisational structures on the part of
the local authorities (Carmona and De Magalhaes 2006; Arvanitidis and Nasioka
2017). Along these lines, a number of scholars, policy makers and international
© The Author(s) 2019
C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 167–180, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_14
168 G. Artopoulos et al.

organizations have placed emphasis on bottom-up approaches, acknowledging (at least

implicitly) that POS is, in essence, a common pool resource (CPR) and as such users,
and the public in general, together with the local authorities and other stakeholders,
should collectively engage in its management, planning and protection (Fraser et al.
2006; Ernstson et al. 2008).
Contemporary approaches to landscape architecture make an argument for inclusive
strategies in urban design placing emphasis on the use of event spaces (Shinew et al.
2004). Recent research in psychology of space reveals how event spaces that are
incorporated in natural landscapes and ecosystems create vivid experiences and offer
the conditions necessary for creative learning and participatory action. Importantly,
these spaces should be seen as parts of, and convergent locales within, an extended
network of POS. This network is not fixed, like a snapshot of space at a specific point
in time, but rather in a process of continuous development and transformation that is
associated with the human activities that it hosts and is contextualised in space. New
information and communications technologies (ICT) and the development of visuali-
sation techniques expand human experience to enrich interaction with both people and
space (De Souza e Silva and Frith 2012).
This chapter acknowledges that most discussions in the field approach the analysis
of common resources with economic terms. The chapter expands its scope beyond
urban economics in order to engage in the discourse a more diverse approach to
considering POS as CPR. It does so by arguing that spatialised (inter)cultural
exchanges of views, habits, occupation patterns and everyday activities can be studied
as yet another set of performative capacities of the space as CPR (Gidwani and
Baviskar 2011) to be facilitated by ICT. ICT can potentially play an important role in
activating POS because the latter is characterised as being more uncertain in valuation
than exemplar cases of CPR – and therefore more difficult to be measurable or defined
by the tools and theories mentioned below. Based on this approach, the chapter defines
POS as a commons and explores innovative ways for its management and sustainable
development through the use of new ICT. By augmenting the lived experiences of a
place, they create a feeling of ‘belonging’ and ‘togetherness’ supporting the emergence
of common identities (Low et al. 2005) between users. This chapter offers some
remarks on the conditions under which the hybrid of a POS with ICT features could be
approached as yet another kind of ‘soft’ type of CPR.

2 Public Open Space as a Commons

2.1 The Common Pool Resources and the Commons

In economics, CPRs refer to goods that at one and the same time, are not amenable to
exclusion, but are subject to rivalry; the first signifying the excessive difficulty or cost
in excluding people from their appropriation, and the second that use by some com-
promises the quality and availability of the resource to other potential users. Due to
these attributes CPRs are susceptible to overuse, leading to congestion and engendering
the progressive depletion, degradation and eventual destruction of the resource;
something Hardin (1968) terms “the tragedy of the commons”.
 Using ICT in the Management of Public Open Space as a Commons 169

In the quest to resolve the quandary and avoid the inevitable tragedy, scholars have
suggested the idea of promoting the ethics of stewardship among users in an attempt to
encourage more moral and altruistic behaviour patterns that would improve prospects
of sustainability (Barclay 2004). Others (e.g. Libecap 2009), in line with Hardin
(1968), have emphasized the necessity of designating such resources with clearly
defined property rights; thus, endowing the putative ‘owners’ with the incentive and
ability to safeguard the future of these resources in their own interests. Two prospective
governance regimes have been proposed to achieve this: the first is privatisation,
allowing the attribution of all property rights to individuals (Smith 1981), and the
second, nationalisation, involving an empowered regulator (primarily the state) to
acquire and enforce all rights regarding the resource (Heilbroner 1974).
However, approaching the problem of governance binarily has attracted significant
criticism on the grounds that both proposed solutions (privatization vs. nationalization)
result in restricting the rights and actions of the actual users so as to destroy the social
relationships and values which characterize a local community (i.e. the social capital),
compromising both the long-term sustainability of the community and the effectiveness
of the use of the resource. The best-known exponent of this perspective is Elinor
Ostrom, the 2009 Nobel laureate in economics, who cites a series of empirical studies
from across the world to show how communities are able to manage CPR for them-
selves, even without the existence of individual property rights (privatization) or an
empowered regulatory authority (nationalization) (Ostrom 1990, 1992, 1999). This
view raises the possibility of an alternative and more socially acceptable governance
regime, the commons, enabling the end users to surmount the problems of collective-
action to create strong and stable institutions capable of appropriating and managing
their CPR in a sustainable manner. These institutions comprise specific social/informal
arrangements (rules, norms, practices etc.), which define and allocate rights and obli-
gations among the parties involved within an appropriate framework of legislation that
involves mechanisms allowing for effective policing, enforcement and conflict
resolution.
Furthermore, this literature (inter alia: Ostrom et al. 1999; Agrawal 2003; Arvan-
itidis et al. 2015) defines a series of factors shared by all successful collective gover-
nance regimes. These elements are categorized under five headings: the first of these
concerns the resource itself; the second category delineates the particular characteristics
of users: the third focuses on the nature of the relationship existing between the
resource itself and its users; the fourth category is concerned with the specifics of the
arrangements for governance and the institutional structures created to manage the
CPR; and the last of the categories takes into account the external environment and the
role of local and central authorities.
Put succinctly, the success of a collective governance regime is enhanced with the
collective management of the resource by a clearly identifiable community involving
interlinked stakeholders able to control the utilization of the CPR in compliance with
local needs, preferences, practices and modes of collective action (formal and infor-
mal). The essence of this perspective is instrumental approaching the commons from an
institutional or economic standpoint by concentrating on the internal nature and
structures of governance regimes and emphasizing the primacy of practical issues in
long-term CPR management and maintenance (Huron 2015).
170 G. Artopoulos et al.

2.2 The Governance of Public Open Space as a Commons

‘Public open space’ connotes an all-embracing concept to encompass the various public
spaces existing within the urban frame, that are, in general, open, freely accessible and
available for use by the population for purposes of recreation, amenity and socialisa-
tion. Thus, POS can include such spaces as parks, sports fields, playgrounds, urban
squares, plazas, the property of land trusts (school and church yards, vacant plots etc.),
the normal roads, pavements, walkways, sidewalks and the whole slew of other public
urban spaces. Access to POS is crucial for the well-being of the community by pro-
viding a variety of aesthetic, ecological, physical, psychological, and social benefits to
residents (CABE space 2004).
POS constitutes a special category of CPR, since excluding the general population
is not possible, (non-excludability), but use by some people can diminish the quantity
or quality of space available to the rest (rivalry), including non-local visitors and
tourists. This degradation of quality and/or quantity for others is a result of the ‘sat-
urated nature of cities’; the tendency to house ever larger numbers of people in rela-
tively constricted areas of the urban fabric (Huron 2015). This engenders sufficient
pressure on urban land use to force the residents into competing for the resource.
Moreover, this situation is exacerbated by a lack of investment in providing and
maintaining existing POS by local authorities (because of economic constraints,
insufficient political will or administrative problems) thus leading to the deterioration
and decline of these spaces. Avoidance of the impending ‘tragedy’ presaged by this
decline necessitates the adoption of new and imaginative solutions for managing this
developing situation. The option of a model of collective governance offers a solution.
To facilitate the collective governance of POS as a commons requires an institution
of specific arrangements (rules, norms, mechanisms etc.) to control and regulate the
use, appropriation and sustainable management of these spaces. To be effective, this
would necessitate the joint evolution and development of such arrangements by the
local community of users in conjunction with other stakeholders relying on these
resources for their well-being. Qualifying for membership in these communities could
be formally defined, or, perhaps more convivially, negotiated using ex post criteria,
including residence or the agreement of the existing membership. The spectrum of
interest groups involved in such a governance regime perform differing roles and have
different rights (defined de jure or de facto) without these being either transferable or
exclusive. Here, it is of crucial importance to underline that the practicalities of
managing such resources is a critical element predicating the success of such gover-
nance regimes, with this more dependent on providing a framework for the allocation
and enforcement of these diverse rights to the involved parties rather than on land
ownership per se (Colding et al. 2013). The manner of structuring and implementing
these rights has a crucial impact on the quality and quantity of the resulting benefits,
and thus on the incentives to sustain the arrangements for the resource (Colding and
Barthel 2013).
Our ability, as a community, for communication, becoming involved, entertaining
ourselves, even for working have been, potentially at least, enormously enhanced over
the last decade or so by innovations in ICT (McCullough 2007). The advent of wireless
networks, smart devices, on line apps, services and cloud technology have provided
 Using ICT in the Management of Public Open Space as a Commons 171

previously undreamt-of facilities for becoming informed and acting and engaging with
other people and space. The new possibilities for social interaction, networking, and
collaboration, offering, at least in theory, the formation and function of new commu-
nities of shared interest. This constitutes something with major implications for new
means of public participation and collective action (Sheller 2004; Hampton et al. 2010).
In sum, such new ICT opportunities enable a whole new gamut of innovative means for
the management of public spaces and the sustainability of collective governance. The
following section is an attempt to chart these technologies and explore the potential of
their relevance to the management of POS as a commons.

3 Public Open Space, Humans and Information

and Communication Technologies

POS is not simply physical space (Carr et al. 1993); it is rather an assemblage, a
synthesis, of space and narratives (stories) (DeLanda 2006). These narratives (Miles
2016) are mechanisms that enable indeterminate interactions between users (citizens)
and resources (space). This scheme applies to complex urban environments where
layers of human activity and the everyday life contribute to the experience of organ-
ically associated urban palimpsests. The affordances of this symbiosis, of plural nar-
ratives and spaces, contribute to the sustainable management of the city as a whole due
to their impact on the social sustainability of the communities that inhabit the city.
Social sustainability and resilience can be explored through socio-ecological sys-
tems (SES) that offer a base to analyse interaction between humans and nature in
different scales. Knowledge between social and environmental dynamics is essential for
the development of SES (Cote and Nightingale 2011). Ongoing symbiosis between
citizens and physical environment contributes narratives. Opportunities to utilize them
in dynamic management is a vehicle to develop the cyberpark concept. Firstly, artful
inquiries are used to recognize and communicate citizens´ experiences and narratives
associated to specific spaces, secondly this process offers the grounds for critical co-
reflection, through which key implications are identified and the initial conceptual-
ization if ICT tools is constructed. This process is a driver to support citizens’ agency in
social sustainability contributing also to the ecological and economical sustainability of
the space. Human adaptation to SES is continuously promoted by sharing knowledge
and cultural exchange whilst the dialogue with POS management creates novel and
resilient management (Suomalainen et al. 2017).
Arguably there is evidence of user segmentation of POS (Heritage Lottery Fund
2016), and in principle ICT add a new layer of interface – and therefore, ICT represent
yet another mediation between space and its users - but this chapter argues for the
conditions under which ICT can be used productively for enhancing a POS. These
include mostly the parameters of a new way of asynchronous dialogue and information
transmission that is performed not only between users, i.e., social aspects of spatial
occupancy (Marušić 2010) but also between the POS and its users. Ward (2014)
highlights that the “regulation of access and use of resources are of central concern to
the maintenance and sustainability of the commons”, suggesting that the latter involve
conflict between individuals, social classes and communities. Collective uses of CPR
172 G. Artopoulos et al.

are considered as an added value of a common ‘stage’ that hosts dialogue, commu-
nication and shared activities. In our case ICT render the access to the resources
associated with a POS even more sensitive to regulation. This chapter though is
occupied with this kind of POS that is characterised as open, inclusive, unplanned, of
uncertain function, or lightly regulated (Sennett 2006). Williams et al. (2009) suggest
that ICT can promote and facilitate these collective uses through digital media and
platforms (such as wikis) that enable collective management and valuation of planning
solutions. The chapter argues that in addition to interference between users of POS and
physical access to its resources by means of promoting and managing activities that are
typically highlighted by the conviviality of POS, such as leisure, sports, contemplation,
meeting and co-presence, as well as open air museum, cinema, street theatre and other
performances (Low et al. 2005), ICT could potentially contribute greatly to interpre-
tation and inference of meanings through space occupancy. These data when managed
openly, freely and creatively can facilitate engagement of users with the management
of the resources of the space, and by doing so to add value to the POS towards its
integration into a larger network of CPR (Taplin et al. 2002).
The appropriate use of ICT reintroduces physical space into the digital stage of the
contemporary technologically-enabled social network of the cities (Graham 2005). This
hybrid of spaces brings back to the cityscapes the micro- and nano-scales of relations
that enable place-making and promote social interaction and belonging. Specifically,
the framework of this approach involves the enabling of smart citizenship initiatives by
means of:
• Citizen engagement in POS management through participatory design practices and
ICT, since a sense of common purpose is induced typically by opportunities of or
threats to change things (Schmelzkopf 1995) and this commoning is a meaningful
performance of a POS;
• Citizen participation in urban monitoring and observation (congestion, noise,
pollution);
• Exploitation of ICT and geo-referenced data for urban reactivation planning and
policy making concerning important sites that have been neglected; cultural pro-
motion and give prominence to less popular tourist destinations (Dodge and Kitchin
2007).
The above areas of contribution are empowered by the capacity of said tools and
technological solutions to facilitate, and sometimes accelerate, the self-organisation of
thematic communities that form groups around topics and sites of interest, and actively
contribute relevant knowledge to the associated network. In this context the exploita-
tion of ICT can disrupt typical considerations regarding accessibility of urban com-
mons and equality of usage. As presented in Chapter 5.5, ICT integration can be
expanded in order to reach larger audiences than the stakeholders of a POS, and enable
even remote users to contribute knowledge. These crowdsourcing platforms can pro-
vide a stage for intercultural dialogue and informal contributions without the direct
control/regulation of information exchange by intermediate stakeholders (Paulos et al.
2008).
Using the capacity of ICT tools in data transfer and communication of information
of technologies such as GPS, RFID, Bluetooth, wireless beacons, surround sound,
 Using ICT in the Management of Public Open Space as a Commons 173

augmented reality and mixed reality, can enrich user experience of POS as urban
commons, by means of interaction. This becomes possible by the likes of blogs, mobile
apps for video and photo sharing, and other Web 2.0 applications (O’Reilly and
Battelle 2009) that can enhance the degree of personalisation, openness and partici-
pation of users and citizens in the management of the POS (Rheingold 2001). Their
engagement through activism, participation and smart citizenship is further facilitated
not only by the operation of large-scale screens and projections in space that are open
to everyone (Brignull and Rogers 2003) but mostly by developing virtual communities,
which can be established by the technological interfaces above (Boyer 1996).

4 Open-Ended Creative Practices of Accessing Public Data

Digital technologies stage an interface that conditionally facilitates engagement

between individuals and space (Calabrese 2009; Artopoulos 2012). This approach to
technology as an interface between individuals (urban citizens) that are strangers
(Jacobs 1961) and spaces that are occupied in habitual ways is based on the premise
that rites and habits generate feelings of familiarity and in doing so contribute to the
establishment of a sense of connection and belonging. Relevant discourse has been
largely occupied for decades with the impact of ICT on both the erosion of social
relationships and the capacity for intervention on inclusivity of POS, as well as on
intensifying the disengagement of users that are already excluded (Barlas and Çalişkan
2006; Graham and Marvin 2001; Servon and Nelson 2001).
Nevertheless, there are many examples that showcase the contrary, with the recent
cases of using social media for the communication of virtual communities of not only
activists, but also of producers, sellers etc., and socially responsible practices such as
carrotmob.org (2010), or the so-called ‘civic hacking’ (mySociety.org, 2010). Distinct
from their exploitation as a tool for social segregation, there are opportunities for ICT
to be used in a more inclusive way (Horelli and Kaaja 2002), and this chapter aspires to
contribute to this end. This section suggests that the following steps of user engagement
in co-management and co-creation (Figs. 1 and 2) could benefit from the use of ICT:
• Mapping of assets by means of spatially-distributed individual narratives, collective
meanings and geo-location of stories;
• Visualisation of real-time (observation) data, and tools for user co-development of
visualisation workflows that would be meaningful to them;
• Open-ended practices of data interpretation and enabling users to have meaningful
access to real-time data.
These parameters and aspects of ICT are necessary for software and digital plat-
forms to be explored as inclusive mechanisms for users to access POS in positive ways,
e.g., in order to increase the openness of POS to variation and multiplicity (Stavrides
2016). This understanding of ICT-enabled POS builds on the use of a cybernetic
electronic infrastructure (Batty 2013) that facilitates the engagement of the users in new
idiomatic and localized conditions of urban commons (Artopoulos and Charalambous
2017). ‘Devices’ of engagement sourced from narrative-based cultural and creative
industries, such as an ‘exploration for learning’ incentive, when integrated in
174 G. Artopoulos et al.

Fig. 1. The post-excavation management of the archaeological site of Paphos Gate in the
historic core of the last divided capital of Europe, Nicosia, has been developed in line with the
concept of cyberpark. It integrated spatially-distributed narratives and exposed users to
interpretations of these data (as shown by Fig. 2). The research team devised a real-time
interaction platform that aimed at the reintroduction of the archaeological site in the everyday life
of the neighbourhood. Expected completion of construction works: February 2018 (© Cyprus
Institute; AVL, NSCA, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign; Cyprus Department of
Antiquities; Municipality of Nicosia).

communication interfaces, can serve as a vehicle to empower users. In this approach

visitors and citizens of the city, as well individuals and communities that may be
excluded could be enabled to raise their voice and participate in the future development
of the POS (Páez and Darren 2005). These technological solutions are built on con-
ceptual devices for individuals’ entanglement with space through goal-oriented activ-
ities, such as gamification (Atkinson and Willis 2009), playful engagement and
serendipity (Wetzel et al. 2011).
Contextualised in societal challenges for the social resilience of urban space, these
approaches differ from typical, corporate visions of smart cities. The former differs
from the latter, as it interprets the user of ICT-networked information as a consumer.
Current corporate visions of smart cities focus on data-consumption and the com-
modification of access to the big-data of the city (Schnitzer 2013), and value the
citizens’ well-being by the ease of access to such resources as public transport,
infrastructure and digital media (Peugeot 2013). These visions of smart cities produce a
 Using ICT in the Management of Public Open Space as a Commons 175

Fig. 2. Using mobile ICT is a low-budget solution of user engagement in meaningful

interpretations of real-time data associated with a POS. Paphos Gate cyberpark was exhibited at
the Seoul Biennale of Architecture and Urbanism 2017, titled “Imminent Commons”, convened
on the thematic of nine Commons in 50 cities.

false sense of accessibility to what is actually a representation of the city as a (cy-

bernetic) machine, and the notion of acquiring a lightweight control over the city’s non-
interpretable complexity.
Alternatively, the approaches to ICT-augmented POS presented in the chapter are
concerned with issues of equal opportunities in accessing ‘other’ types of urban
commons (Bollier and Helfrich 2015), such as urban agriculture and community gar-
dens, timebanks and telecommunications infrastructures (e.g., Guifi.net), which are
self-regulated via collectives, fabrication labs and hackathons (Rodotá 2012). Anno-
tating physical space with digital representations of ideas, feelings, thoughts, memories
and informal narratives enables the observation, communication and visualisation of
individual tolerance, contested realities and exchange of insights through space (i.e.,
resource) exploration.
In the context of this chapter, CPR are understood in a more open definition that is
inclusive of interwoven networks of natural and social resources as well as of inhab-
itant’s cultural production mechanisms (Patterson 2010), such as ecological zones and
public spaces, air, water and infrastructure management systems, odours, and built
heritage. The latter is here defined as anything that helps us collectively understand our
present and speculate about our future conditions (http://www.heritageexchange.co.uk/,
2014). These opportunities for habitual interaction and familiar encounters are arguably
limited in contemporary urban everyday life (Gilroy 2004). The ICT solutions pre-
sented are facing exactly this challenge as they aim to augment and multiply, in a
pluralistic way, these opportunities for interaction across space and time, in the virtual
projection of plural conditions and times (e.g., historical events) on the physical space
of POS.
176 G. Artopoulos et al.

Finally, another important aspect of the presented approach regards the capacity of
said ICT tools in offering to citizens new opportunities for temporal personalisation of
POS. This chapter suggests that the use of ICT on POS should allow for the inter-
pretation of observation data by their users themselves, through the appropriate visu-
alisation interfaces. The chapter argues that associating activities that are typically
hosted by POS with individual narratives and meanings introduces additional values to
a POS which increase civic participation and could potentially benefit the function of
the larger network of POS in the city.

5 Overview and Conclusions

POS constitutes an urban commons that faces serious risk of decline (both in terms of
quality and quantity), and even destruction (the so-called “tragedy of the commons”).
This eventually leads to a degraded urban environment and a disadvantaged urban
community. The conventional CPR literature prescribes as appropriate solutions to the
problem either privatization or nationalization of the resource. However, many coun-
tries exhibit a number of characteristics (e.g., not clearly defined private property rights
on specific resources, rigid and bureaucratic institutions with deficient policing and
enforcement mechanisms, limited financial capability of local authorities, etc.), which
preclude successful implementation of such governance structures. On the other hand,
as Elinor Ostrom and other scholars have established, the stakeholders themselves can
collectively develop institutional arrangements (more socially acceptable and with
lower implementation costs), which enable them to ensure proper use and longevity of
the common pool resource. The new mobile ICT, by enhancing human connectivity
and enriching interaction, enable the reconfiguration of urban spatiality and of public
spaces, and as a consequence allow for greater degree of creativity and freedom in the
management, interpretation and valuation of the POS by its users through participation
and engagement.
Contributing to this literature, the chapter has explored issues of data accessibility,
data sharing, interoperability and mostly interpretation – and to this end data visuali-
sation – that are now deemed prerequisites for the inclusive operation of ICT in POS, in
order for the latter to be considered part of the network of CPR. Given that techno-
logical platforms and ICT are open to, and accessible by, all users, their exploitation
through accessing content and exchanging information could expand the capacity of
those areas in staging intercultural dialogue. This dynamic operation contextualises the
use of ICT in a broader effort that attempts to bridge the gap between ecological and
civic commons (Gidwani and Baviskar 2011). All these are aspects of interacting with
a POS that can be valued for its conditionally positive impact to the space by tacitly
promoting exchanges that grow new relations with the space and its users. In this
context the chapter approached the hybrid of the POS and embedded ICT solutions as a
seemingly indivisible new condition of urban commons in contemporary cities that is
capable of contributing, under the right circumstances, to the resilience of the urban
environment.
 Using ICT in the Management of Public Open Space as a Commons 177

References
Agrawal, A.: Sustainable governance of common-pool resources: context, methods, and politics.
Ann. Rev. Anthropol. 32, 243–262 (2003)
Artopoulos, G.: Prototype spatial models of interaction. Int. J. Vis. Des. 6(3), 39–56 (2012)
Artopoulos, G., Charalambous, P.: Virtual environments as a technological interface between
built heritage and the sustainable development of the city. Int. J. E-Plan. Res. (IJEPR) 8(1)
(2019). ISSN: 2160-9918
Arvanitidis, P., Nasioka, F.: Urban open greenspace as a commons: an exploratory case study in
Greece. Public Sect. 43(1), 19–32 (2017)
Arvanitidis, P., Nasioka, F., Dimogianni, S.: Water resource management in larisa: a ‘tragedy of
the commons?’. In: Filho, L.W., Sumer, V. (eds.) Sustainable Water Use and Management:
Examples of New Approaches and Perspectives, pp. 65–89. Springer, Heidelberg (2015).
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12394-3_4
Atkinson, R., Willis, P.: Transparent cities: re-shaping the urban experience through interactive
video game simulation. City 13(4), 403–417 (2009)
Barclay, P.: Trustworthiness and competitive altruism can also solve the “tragedy of the
commons”. Evol. Hum. Behav. 25, 209–220 (2004)
Barlas, A., Çalişkan, O.: Virtual space as a public sphere: rethinking the political and
professional agenda of spatial planning and design. METU J. Fac. Archit. 23, 1–20 (2006)
Batty, M.: Big data, smart cities and city planning. Dialogues Hum. Geogr. 3(3), 274–279 (2013)
Bollier, D., Helfrich, S. (eds.): Patterns of Commoning. Commons Strategy Group, Amherst
(2015)
Boyer, C.: CyberCities: Visual Perception in the Age of Electronic Communication. Princeton
Architectural Press, New York (1996)
Brignull, H., Rogers, Y.: Enticing people to interact with large public displays in public spaces.
In: Human-Computer Interaction INTERACT 2003: IFIP TC13 International Conference on
Human-Computer Interaction, Zurich, Switzerland (2003)
CABE Space: The value of public space: how high quality parks and public spaces create
economic, social and environmental value. CABE Space, London (2004)
Calabrese, F.: WikiCity: real-time location-sensitive tools for the city. In: Foth, M. (ed.)
Handbook of Research on Urban Informatics: The Practice and Promise of the Real-Time
City, pp. 390–413. Information Science Reference, Hershey (2009)
Carmona, M., De Magalhaes, C.: Public space management: present and potential. J. Environ.
Plan. Manag. 49(1), 75–99 (2006)
Carr, S., Francis, M., Rivlin, L., Stone, A.M.: Public Space. Cambridge University Press,
Cambridge (1993)
Colding, J., Barthel, S.: The potential of ‘Urban Green Commons’ in the resilience building of
cities. Ecol. Econ. 86, 156–166 (2013)
Colding, J., Barthel, S., Bendt, P., Snep, R., van der Knaap, W., Ernstson, H.: Urban green
commons: insights on urban common property systems. Glob. Environ. Change 23(5), 1039–
1051 (2013)
DeLanda, M.: A New Philosophy of Society: Assemblage Theory and Social Complexity.
Continuum, London (2006)
De Souza e Silva, A., Frith, J.: Mobile Interfaces in Public Spaces: Locational Privacy, Control,
and Urban Sociability. Routledge, New York (2012)
Dodge, M., Kitchin, R.: ‘Outlines of a world coming into existence’: pervasive computing and
the ethics of forgetting. Environ. Plan. B: Plan. Des. 34(3), 431–445 (2007)
178 G. Artopoulos et al.

Ernstson, H., Sorlin, S., Elmqvist, T.: Social movements and ecosystem services - the role of
social network structure in protecting and managing urban green areas in Stockholm. Ecol.
Soc. 13(2), 39 (2008). http://www.ecologyandsociety.org/vol13/iss2/art39/
Fraser, E.D.G., Dougill, A.J., Mabee, W.E., Reed, M., McAlpine, P.: Bottom up and top down:
analysis of participatory processes for sustainability indicator identification as a pathway to
community empowerment and sustainable environmental management. J. Environ. Manag. 78
(2), 114–127 (2006)
Gidwani, V., Baviskar, A.: Urban commons review of urban affairs. Econ. Polit. Wkly, 66, 50, 10
December 2011. http://www.epw.in/journal/2011/50/review-urban-affairs-review-issues-specials/
urban-commons.html
Gilroy, P.: After Empire: Melancholia or Convivial Culture?. Routledge, London (2004)
Graham, S.: Software-sorted geographies. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 29(5), 1–19 (2005)
Graham, S., Marvin, S.: Splintering Urbanism: Networked Infrastructures, Technological
Mobilities and the Urban Condition. Routledge, London (2001)
Hampton, K.N., Livio, O., Sessions Goulet, L.: The social life of wireless urban spaces: Internet
use, social networks, and the public realm. J. Commun. 60(4), 701–722 (2010)
Hardin, G.: The tragedy of the commons. Science 162, 1243–1248 (1968)
Heilbroner, R.L.: An Inquiry into the Human Prospect. W.W. Norton, New York (1974)
Heritage Lottery Fund: State of the UK public parks II: Public survey. Report prepared by Britain
Thinks. Heritage Lottery Fund, London (2016)
Horelli, L., Kaaja, M.: Opportunities and constraints of “internet assisted urban planning” with
young people. J. Environ. Psychol. 22(1), 191–200 (2002)
Huron, A.: Working with strangers in saturated space: reclaiming and maintaining the urban
commons. Antipode 47(4), 963–979 (2015)
Jacobs, J.: The Death and Life of Great American Cities. Random House, New York City (1961,
2002)
Lemonides, J.S., Young, A.L.: Provision of public open space in urban areas: determinants,
obstacles, and incentives. J. Am. Inst. Plan. 44(3), 286–296 (1978)
Libecap, G.: The tragedy of the commons: property rights and markets as solutions to resource
and environmental problems. Aust. J. Agric. Resour. Econ. 53(1), 129–144 (2009)
Low, S., Taplin, D., Scheld, S.: Rethinking Urban Parks, Public Space and Cultural Diversity.
University of Texas Press, Austin (2005)
Marušić, B.: Analysis of patterns of spatial occupancy in urban open space using behaviour maps
and GIS. Urban Des. Int. 16, 36–50 (2010)
McCullough, M.: New media urbanism: grounding ambient information technology. Environ.
Plan. B: Plan. Des. 34, 383–395 (2007)
Miles, A.: Telling tales of participation: exploring the interplay of time and territory in cultural
boundary work using participation narratives. Cult. Trends 5, 182–193 (2016)
Cote, M., Nightingale, A.J.: Resilience thinking meets social theory: situating social change in
socio-ecological systems (SES) research. Prog. Hum. Geogr. 36(4), 475–489 (2011)
O’Reilly, T., Battelle, J.: What’s next for web 2.0? In: Web Squared: Web 2.0 Five Years On
(2009)
Ostrom, E.: Governing the commons: the evolution of institutions for collective action.
Cambridge University Press, New York (1990)
Ostrom, E.: Community and the endogenous solution of commons problems. J. Theor. Polit. 4
(3), 343–351 (1992)
Ostrom, E.: Coping with tragedies of the commons. Ann. Rev. Polit. Sci. 2, 493–535 (1999)
Ostrom, E., Burger, J., Field, C., Norgaard, R., Policansky, D.: Revisiting the commons: local
lessons, global challenges. Science 284, 278–282 (1999)
 Using ICT in the Management of Public Open Space as a Commons 179

Patterson, O.: The mechanisms of cultural reproduction: explaining the puzzle of persistence. In:
Hall, J.R., Grindstaff, L., Lo, M.C. (eds.) Handbook of Cultural Sociology, pp. 139–151.
Routledge, Abingdon (2010)
Paulos, E., Honicky, R., Hooker, B.: Citizen science: enabling participatory urbanism. In: Foth,
M. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Urban Informatics: The Practice and Promise of the Real-
Time City, pp. 414–436. Information Science Reference, Hershey (2008)
Páez, A., Darren, M.S.: Spatial statistics for urban analysis: a review of techniques with
examples. Geo J. 61(1), 53–67 (2005)
Peugeot, V.: Collaborative ou intelligente? La ville entre deux imaginaires. In: Carmes, M.,
Noyer, J.M. (eds.) Devenirs Urbains. Mines Paristech, Paris (2013)
Rheingold, H.: Rethinking virtual communities. In: Rheingold, H. (ed.) 2001 Edition of The
Virtual Community, pp. 323–327. MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)
Rodotà, S.: Il valore dei beni communi, intervention Teatro Valle (2012). http://www.
teatrovalleoccupato.it/il-valore-dei-beni-comuni-di-stefano-rodota. Accessed 6 Jan 2012
Sennett, R.: The open city. In: Urban Age. Cities Programme, London School of Economics and
Political Science, London (2006)
Servon, L.J., Nelson, M.K.: Community technology centres: narrowing the digital divide in low-
income urban communities. J. Urban Aff. 23(3&4), 279–290 (2001)
Schmelzkopf, K.: Urban community gardens as contested space. Geogr. Rev. 85(3), 364–381
(1995)
Schnitzer, M.: Herbert Reid, Betsy Taylor. Recovering the commons: democracy, place, and
global Justice. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press 2010. Peace Change 38, 366–
368 (2013)
Sheller, M.: Mobile publics: beyond the network perspective. Environ. Plan. D 22(1), 39–52
(2004)
Shinew, K., Glover, T., Parry, D.: Leisure spaces as potential sites for interracial interaction:
community gardens in urban areas. J. Leis. Res. 36(3), 336–355 (2004)
Smith, R.J.: Resolving the tragedy of the commons by creating private property rights in wildlife.
Cato J. 1(2), 456–457 (1981)
Stavrides, S.: Common Space: The City as Commons. Zed Books, London (2016)
Suomalainen, S., Pässilä, A., Owens. A., Holtham, C.: Facilitating sustainable development
through artful inquiries. In: 2nd Artem Organizational Creativity and Sustainability
Conference Artem OCC 2017. Nancy School of art and design, ICN Business School and
Mines Nancy (2017, forthcoming)
Taplin, D., Scheld, S., Low, S.: Rapid ethnographic assessment in urban parks: a case study of
independence national historical park. Hum. Organ. 61(1), 80–93 (2002)
Ward, D.: The Commons in History: Culture, Conflict, and Ecology. The MIT Press, Cambridge
(2014)
Wetzel, R., Blum, L., Feng, F., Oppermann, L., Straeubig, M.: Tidy city: a location-based game
for city exploration based on user-created content. In: Mensch and Computer 2011:
überMEDIEN|ÜBERmorgen. Universitätsverlag der TU Chemnitz, Munich (2011)
Williams, A., Robles, E., Dourish, P.: Urbane-ing the city: examining and refining the
assumptions behind urban informatics. In: Foth, M. (ed.) Handbook of Research on Urban
Informatics: The Practice and Promise of the Real-Time City, pp. 1–20. IGI Global, Hershey
(2009)
180 G. Artopoulos et al.

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
3.4
Revealing the Potential of Public Places:
Adding a New Digital Layer to the Existing
Thematic Gardens in Thessaloniki Waterfront

Tatiana Ruchinskaya1(&), Konstantinos Ioannidis2 ,

and Kinga Kimic3
1
JT Environmental Consultants Ltd., TVR Design, Cambridge, UK
[email protected]
2
aaiko arkitekter, Oslo, Norway
[email protected]
3
Department of Landscape Architecture, Warsaw University of Life Science,
Warsaw, Poland
[email protected]

Abstract. In recent years, mobile devices have become very popular com-
munication tools that provide access to information and communication, influ-
ence people’s social behaviour and change patterns of their everyday activities.
The use of communication technologies in public open spaces has become
significant for the outdoor experiences of people and the relationship between
users and technologically mediated outdoor activities. More specifically, wire-
less digital cultures not only influence spatial layout, infrastructure systems and
moving patterns, but also require ICT-based placemaking strategies. This is
often not considered sufficiently during the physical design stage. It is important
to consider a space appropriation approach to the use of digital technologies in
public spaces, based on user requirements and the local context. This is
demonstrated with a case study of the Gardens at new waterfront of Thessa-
loniki, Greece. In this project space analysis and users’ questionnaires were
applied to relate digital space to the reality of the physical landscape as a first
stage in the design process. This approach has wider implications for successful
place making strategies. This chapter considers the possibilities of extensive
outdoor use of digital media technologies in traditional forms of spatial expe-
riences. It proposes that the new digital layer overlaying the physical space
should first be methodologically explored in a way that could advance under-
standing of the extent to which immaterial networks and relationships can affect
material planning and design dimensions.

Keywords: Added value
Mediated public spaces
Successful placemaking

Thessaloniki’s waterfront
Users

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 181–195, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_15
182 T. Ruchinskaya et al.

1 Introduction

In recent years digital cultures have not only influenced the spatial layout of public
spaces, infrastructure systems and moving patterns, but also facilitated place making
strategies, based on the local context. However, the question of the relation between
human activity, public open space and new media technology finds its significance
within the broader context that defines the social and experiential potential of emerging
forms of hybrid outdoor spaces (Ioannidis et al. 2015). Can we consider technologi-
cally mediated spaces as places which accommodate users’ preferences, activities and
behaviours? How can the user-orientated spatial requirements be addressed by the
digital overlay? Do these spaces have a structural relation with the immaterial volume
of data offered within them, a relation that can possibly transform the mediating tool
into a mechanism for shaping their content? The two-way communication between
space and people has been revealed in the work of scholars like Appleyard (1969,
1972, 1977); Lefebvre (1991) and Banerjee (1971, 2001). The social and experiential
potential of places supports possibilities for social interaction, long-lasting activities
and changes in behaviour patterns. They are products of the active relationship between
users and a place’s locale. This chapter relates to users’ appropriation and engagement
with public open spaces in the post digital age.
This hybrid landscape of physical and digital relations is investigated through the
case study of the New Waterfront of Thessaloniki, Greece. The chapter develops a
space analysis, employing a methodology based on both empirical-analytical approa-
ches (users’ questionnaires, data statistics) and focusing on explaining and under-
standing this emerging phenomenon, which relates digital space to the reality of the
physical landscape as a first stage in the design process. This methodology has wider
implications for successful place making strategies. Three thematic gardens along
Thessaloniki’s Waterfront are critically assessed for how digital enhancements can
foster future user needs, place appropriation, new experiences and added values.
Finally, the chapter proposes that the new digital layers, which are overlaying the
physical space and exceeding the physical limits of the gardens, should be method-
ologically explored in a way that could advance understanding of the extent to which
immaterial networks and relationships can affect material planning and design
dimensions.

2 Literature Overview

Place making is a multi-dimensional approach to the planning, design and management

of public spaces, which allows people to make public places more attractive and
meaningful for their lives (Anderson 2013). The place making process capitalizes on
social interactions in public places, a local community capacity to participate and
results in the creation of quality public spaces that reflect community aspirations and
contribute to people’s’ wellbeing (New Castle City Council 2012; PPS 2015).
Therefore, social construction of public places refers to the active process of connecting
communities, relating them to locations and making them meaningful for their lives
(Holland et al. 2007).
 Revealing the Potential of Public Places 183

Intangible values, embedded in the public places, and sometimes referred as a

“spirit of the place”, are layers of meanings by different communities under different
contexts (Garagnani et al. 2016). The intangible and tangible (physical) elements of
public places contribute to a community’s sense of belonging and cultural identity
(García 2013). Therefore, valorisation of public spaces should be based on their
appropriation and identification by different users and communities (CEM 2011). That
is why successful places promote sociability, things to do, they are safe, comfortable
and attractive (Gehl 2011).
There is evidence that in the age of digitalisation while people are connected in
virtual spaces, their activities in the public places are reduced (Gumpert and Drucker
2004). Therefore, digital technologies should be provided in the public spaces together
with other physical design features (for example trees, water, or other amenities),
aiming to encourage people to spend more time in public places facilitating private
time, providing flexibility of choices, promoting communications, activities, collabo-
rative practices, collective empowerment and creating experiences (Abdel-Aziz et al.
2016; Bhalla 2016; Janner-Klausner 2017; PPS 2014).
A local sense of place can be facilitated by digital tools through complex links and
interconnections between the tangible and intangible layers created in the public places,
encouraging people to personalise public places, and engage with them and with each
other (Harrison and Dourish 1996; Nisi et al. 2008). Personal meanings of public places
can be created by digital adjustment of physical surroundings, digital storytelling,
personal photos, and annotations, contextualizing in virtual space and relating to past
experiences. This approach uncovers social values of public places and allows people
to have physical and virtual possession of places.
By introducing new digital layers, public spaces are turned into “hybrid geogra-
phies”, which consist of layers of interpretations of the place, where people can re-
programme their surroundings, reflect on experiences, and redefine possibilities to
relate to objects and processes (Berry and Hamiton 2010; Morley 2003; Sappleton
2013). The interaction between these layers results in changing private and public
boundaries of people and places (Ampanavos and Markaki 2014). In other words,
digital tools capture a “cognitive landscape” of people’s perceptions about places and
provide a combined creative and combined knowledge about the place and people
(Farina et al. 2005). This knowledge overrides any time references (for example his-
torical references) of the place and allows movement through different layers of space
(Van Assche et al. 2012).
Digital tools can help to overcome distances and create sites of fantasy and
memory, turning the place into a read/write, publishing surface (Iaconesi and Persico
2011; Lughi 2013). In this context public places can be turned into “a time/space
continuum for multiple, stratified layers of information and opportunities” related to
specific place (Fattahi and Kobayashi 2009; Iaconesi and Persico 2013; Markaki 2014;
Zook and Graham 2007).
It is argued that people and places “influence each other by being part of actor
networks” and the concept of place can be framed as “an entanglement of people
and things associated by meanings and memories” (Dork and Monteyne 2011).
184 T. Ruchinskaya et al.

This mutuality of new media and urban environments is why cities are being referred to
as interfaces. For example, with no physical signs in sight, spaces can be a meeting
place, a co-working space, a weekly market, etc., which can be only discovered by
accessing digital information (Avram 2014; De Waal 2014).
A range of targeted projects have been conducted to add social values to public
spaces. For example, the Visualizing Venice project aimed to enhance the under-
standing of the city “as an on-going process of change and transformation over time”
and to communicate new knowledge about place and space to the public through
portable devices and on the Visualizing Venice website (Visualising Venice 2017). The
European Street Design Challenge project created a new urban identity for Seine-Saint-
Denis La Plaine in Paris, aiming to propose digital opportunities to support a design
idea. (ESDC European Street Design Challenge (ESDC) 2013). The Play the City
project is using game mechanics as a model for engaging stakeholders to have fun and
participate in co-creation process (Play the city 2017). The POBLEJOC installation was
a site-specific public art installation, supported by digital platforms developed in
Barcelona for San Marti district to create new pedestrian areas and public spaces
(Active Public Space 2016). The collaborative project Big Screens between the BBC,
LOCOG and UK local authorities used multimedia screens as a socialising platform
(Thomson 2012). 3D digital water curtains were instated in major cities in Spain for
public entertainment and community building (Digital Water Curtain 2017).
These projects attempted to improve individual and collective appropriation of
public places where collective appropriation aims to strengthen community’s sense of
belonging, empowerment, collaboration, public participation, community engagement
and connectivity of the people involved (de Hann 2005). The social activities that were
used in the projects included activities connected with:
• Understanding urban reality.
• Creating new and preserving old identities.
• Co-creation, including public engagement and participatory activities.
• Educational activities.
• Public entertainments.
The existing projects developed frameworks for successful placemaking by
proposing ‘hybrid geographies’, composed of layers of interpretations of the place in
digital form and perceptions of the place that digital tools can record, visualize, re-
shape and share and physical features. The following digital layers were added to the
existing urban fabric to address site-specific requirements:
• Mobile applications including applications for digital place-based storytelling, geo-
tagging, location specific digital annotations (Nisi et al. 2008).
• Urban art games (Lughi 2017).
• Co-creation platforms used for community engagement, participation and joint
activities.
• Monitoring platforms.
• Navigation platforms.
• Platforms for access to information.
• Sharing and checking in platforms.
 Revealing the Potential of Public Places 185

• Announcing & directing platforms.

• Urban media art including digital site-specific art installations.
• Multimedia experiences with participatory functions. Interactive screens for com-
munity engagement, interactive arts and play.
• Animated architecture, combining landmarks and digital platforms.
• NFC (Near-field communication) and QR (Quick Response) touchpoints
(Connecthings 2017).
It is notable that despite different urban realities, these mediated experiences proved
to be successful because they delivered a set of urban planning objectives, encouraged
interactions between people, reinforced existing urban features, and created novel
urban experiences (Han et al. 2014).
In the current study we are going to explore possibilities to adopt the framework of
adding additional digital layers to the existing urban fabric of public open spaces
(Gardens) along the waterfront of Thessaloniki.

3 Study of Gardens of New Waterfront of Thessaloniki, Greece

Addressing the current upswing of digital solutions available to facilitate the use and
attractiveness of public open spaces in relation to the new mediated reality of wireless
connectivity, data access and retrieval “on the go” (Ioannidis 2017), this chapter
explores the possibility of user centred improvements for existing public open spaces
(Gardens) along the waterfront of Thessaloniki. It analyses its physical and design
characteristics—spatial layout, greenery, landscape formations, materials - to consider
how its thematic organization can offer more than a reference device by implementing a
digital layer to enhance its experiential content. The authors are not aiming to provide
specific forms, types and techniques for human/machine interaction. However, a crit-
ical analysis of today’s’ requirements of the Gardens can provide a correlation between
traditional landscape design and architectural features (sitting facilities, meeting points,
gathering opportunities etc.) and user’s quest towards a networked-like design where
outdoor facilities and offered data can link not only people but also people with space.

3.1 Background and Original Design

In 2000, architects Prodromos Nikiforidis and Bernard Cuomo1 attempted to construct
a Garden-based narrative along Thessaloniki’s edge in an attempt to return to the city
its lost relationship with the sea. The adopted design strategy, apart from reviving the

1
Project name: Redevelopment of the New Waterfront of Thessaloniki (European Architectural
Competition, 2000. First prize. Architectural Prize 2005–2008 from the Greek Institute of
Architecture, Client: Municipality of Thessaloniki, Greece. Study period: 2001–2005. Construction:
(first phase) 2006–2008, (second phase) 2009–2013. Architectural and urban design proposal:
Prodromos Nikiforidis, Bernard Cuomo, Atelier R. Castro – S. Denissof. Design team: Paraskevi
Tarani, Efi Karioti. Cost: €18,000,000. Total surface: 74,000 m2).
186 T. Ruchinskaya et al.

sense of the 19th and 20th century gardens found in the area but lost under the pressure
of the massive urbanization process during the 1960’s and 1970’s, unfolds over space a
set of principles emerging from a continuous plot – that is a story to be told to the
visitors grounding meaningful concepts with the individual locality of space.
The constant earth fillings that occurred after the 1950s provided to the area its
main visual characteristic - a dominant and undisturbed linearity. The strategy not only
prioritizes and preserves this specificity but also elevates its experience into a new
reality that challenges its conception as the dateless impermeable border between the
city and the sea. Nikiforidis and Cuomo’s winning proposal develops further the idea of
a narrative, introverted spatial condition that runs parallel to the city’s waterfront edge
in a skilful and communicative way. They argued that their intention was indeed
the creation of a linear space with choices for entertainment, games, relaxation, education, and
culture, the linkage of different spaces with various qualities that will cover a wide spectrum of
human expression and mood, but will maintain the characteristics of unity and continuity
imposed by the character of the urban frontage itself (Nikiforidis and Castro 2001:6).

Above all, the project is lodged in a “collection of spectacles” (Loukaitou and

Banerjee 1998), masterly inserted along the city’s edge by the architects-as-tellers. The
story is extracted by what scholars like Sternberg (2000) and Gottdiener (1997) define
as “purposeful thematization” spatially manifested by the alignment of fifteen inter-
related thematic events in which “introverted green spaces for leisure, a human-centred
design, and water events, along with natural materials like wood, sand, and stone,
construct an arranged set of allegorical representations of places whose meaning is
gradually revealed, cultivated, and negotiated within the user’s mind” (Ioannidis
2011:223).
In the proposed set of purposeful thematization the formulation of the so-called
‘episodes’ is a central methodological approach and enhances, in a way, the means to
tell the story. The architects argue that:
The intention to maintain the linearity of the coastal frontage, its unity and continuity, and
leave the horizon of water along with the main promenade uninterrupted by any sort of seaside
construction, is a central one. However, the need to find meaningful points of interest during
unfolding this coastal track led to the decision to create specific interventions, like “episodes”
that thematically are always related to the notion of water. The episodes “lower” the scale of
the urban fabric creating points of rest and places to play; they signal specific points without
destroying the linear unity of the track (Nikiforidis and Castro 2001:9) [the translation from
Greek by Konstantinos Ioannidis].

The narrative sequence behind the spatial events of the fifteen Gardens is, namely, a
set of memory-recalling notions: the Garden of the White Tower, the Garden of
Alexander, the Garden of the Evening Sun, the Garden of Sand, the Garden of Shade,
the Garden of Seasons, the Garden of Odysseus Foka, the Mediterranean Garden, the
Garden of Roses, the Garden of Sculptures, the Garden of Friends, the Garden of
Sound, the Garden of Memory, the Garden of Water, and the Garden of Music. Ini-
tially, the original design proposal of the competition submission included even more
gardens, but some of them were not eventually materialised due to economic or leg-
islation reasons.
 Revealing the Potential of Public Places 187

What is rather remarkable is that, out of these themes, the architects managed, first,
to let the story make the activity patterns alongside the edge challenging the public
realm and, second, to let the users themselves make the story of the gardens told.
Therefore, tellable green spaces offering moments of visual isolation and enclosure
within various recreational uses and sport facilities narrate and connect the story of ‘the
city lost’. Their design proposal specifies adequately the ontological status of those
thematic areas, framing specific concepts behind lost images and atmospheres. By
doing this, it reconstructs the lost identity of Thessaloniki’s waterfront in a modern and
communicative way, rendering the above-mentioned notions either as real, like those of
the sand, the evening sun and the water, or as fictitious like the notions of the friend and
the music.

3.2 The Survey of the Current Use of the Waterfront Gardens

and Its Findings
In order to explore the possibility of user-centered improvements for existing public
open spaces an online Survey of the current use of the Waterfront Gardens was con-
ducted. The survey measured users’ preferences, and strengths and weaknesses of the
whole area with a focus on three of the fifteen Gardens – the Gardens of Sculptures and
of Sound and the Mediterranean Garden. The questionnaire presented 15 questions
with multiple choices and ability for the user to record his/her individual statement on a
specific topic in a narrative or descriptive format. People were allowed to express
multiple preferences. The design and responses to the questionnaire are available
online.2
The analysis of the Survey shows that the Garden of Sound was liked by 91.9% of
respondents, the Garden of Sculptures by 73.8% and the Mediterranean Garden by
56.5% of responders. A total of 62 visitors to the Gardens participated in the web-based
survey. People answering the questionnaire were mostly residents of Thessaloniki
(85.2%) and 14.8% of them were living in nearby coastal neighbourhoods. The vast
majority of respondents (61.3%) were between 15–24 years old, while 33.9% were
between 25–44 years old. It is notable that people belonging to “digital native” gen-
eration of 24–44 years old (Prensky 2001) were the dominant age group, who said that
they visit the Gardens and that the Gardens require various improvements. 37.1% Of
the respondents visited the Gardens once a week and 33.9 once a month. 60% Of the
respondents noted that the Gardens are empty for at least half of the time.
Respondents were asked to rate existing conditions of the Gardens. The connec-
tivity of the Gardens to the other part of the city was considered important by 32.3% of
respondents, ease of access to the Gardens by 27.3% of resonance and their identity by
37.1%. Specific design features of the Gardens were valued by 33.9% of respondents.
46.8% of respondents were attracted by the presence of sitting places, 33.9% liked
shade in the Gardens and 33.9% valued its greenery.

2
Survey on current use of Gardens in Thessaloniki New Waterfront (2017). https://docs.google.com/
forms/d/1O0poG3li7DJRrvlmaItkEdBAa1Z6fWaYnthEBLfF2Xc/edit#responses.
188 T. Ruchinskaya et al.

Urban thematization of the studied Gardens in terms of added meaning, value and
function were highly rated by the respondents. Natural landscapes, greenery, water
features and light were considered as attractive features of the Mediterranean and
Sound Gardens. The Garden of Sculptures attracted people by its design, though it was
noted that there is no shade there and no greenery.
58.3% of the respondents requested improvements to communications and col-
laborative practices in the Gardens. The Garden’s maintenance and landscape scored
only 1.8% and 22.8% respectively which indicates that responders would like
improvements in their management and more individual and collective empowerment
over these activities. In addition, the security in the Gardens was given by the
responders 16.1%.
The 46.3% of respondents commented on lack of provision of experiences,
entertainment and spontaneous activities in the Gardens and 40.7% of the respondents
requested day entertainment and 59.3% night entertainment. Furthermore, the 66.1% of
users wanted to see “surprises” in the Gardens. Pop-up installations were requested by
67.2% of respondents. The requirement for shops and bars were important to only
26.2% of respondents.
The original design of the Gardens did not incorporate any digital layer, which can
improve connectivity, accessibility and security as, requested by the respondents to
support new activities in the Gardens. This could attract more people and make the
Gardens more popular and successful. 39% of respondents wanted to have digital
interactions in Gardens and 39.3% wanted to have Wi-Fi hot spots in the Gardens.
Respondents pointed that they were using smartphones in the Gardens to take photos
(79.7%), to get information about the place (40.7%) and to communicate with friends
(37.3%). It is notable that 56.1% of the respondents noted that free Wi-Fi in the
Gardens will not be a main reason to go there. The analysis of empirical data related to
people’s everyday experiences in the studied Gardens, shows that they are considered
as memorable places, where local people like to return frequently. At the same time the
majority of people noted that the Gardens are under-designed and inadequately adapted
to their needs and contemporary lifestyle.
The findings of the survey on the experiences of users of the studied Gardens,
validated the authors’ initial assumptions made during their observation study held in
the area during April 2016, particularly in relation to the emptiness of many spaces
during the majority of weekdays. Therefore, the design tasks and solutions are pivotal
for the introduction of new material/physical and immaterial/digital features. In order to
enhance the Gardens’ everyday use, we need to consider the technologically mediated
approach which will support users’ needs and develop creative design strategies that
bridge the gap between the physical and digital landscape of the Gardens. Specific
strategic solutions for effective urban improvements within the existing thematic
strategy of Nikiforidis and Cuomo can be facilitated by digital solutions based on the
local context.
 Revealing the Potential of Public Places 189

4 The Proposal of the User-Centred Approach for Effective

Urban Improvements, Facilitated by Digital Solutions
in the Gardens of New Waterfront of Thessaloniki

Following analysis of the reasons for the current under use of the Gardens, we propose
a user-centred approach for re-shaping and re-designing them to achieve a set of urban
objectives that were identified in the survey. The methodological approach, the design
tasks and proposed digital layers (solutions) to facilitate these objectives to improve the
attractiveness of the Gardens of New Waterfront of Thessaloniki are summarized in
Table 1.

Table 1. Table identifying the urban objectives required the design tasks and the digital
solutions for improving the attractiveness of the Gardens of the New Waterfront of Thessaloniki.
Urban objectives required Design tasks Digital layers facilitating
Improvement to individual and Joint decision-making and co creation Digital tools supporting
collective empowerment co-creation practices
Improvement to communications Joint decision-making and co creation: • Dialogue incl. social
and collaborative practices • Understanding urban reality & networks, forum &
generation of ideas social media
• Refinement of ideas • Engagement with
• Creation locations
• Delivery • Sharing knowledge
• Monitoring • Data collection
• Community mapping
• Making sense of data
visualization &
discussion
• Personalising places (e.g.
annotating places)
• Storing information
• Joint decision-making
• Modelling concepts and
virtual prototyping
• Play a game and plan for
your community
• Showcase of results
• Questionnaires & direct
data-feedback from
users
(continued)
190 T. Ruchinskaya et al.

Table 1. (continued)
Urban objectives required Design tasks Digital layers facilitating
Provision of experiences, Organize events and entertainments • Collaborative practices
entertainment and spontaneous • Events
activities including: • Smart& Interactive
• Day and night entertainment furniture
• Provision for sport activities • Access to information
• Entertainment for children • Site-specific stories
• Navigation
• Modelling & prototyping
• Site-specific media
experiences
• Social Inclusion &
Accessibility
Increasing flexibility in use Organize day & night events all year • Events
round and entertainments accessible for • Site-specific media
all users experiences
• Navigation
• Collaborative and
inclusive practices
• Accessibility
Improvement personal security • Organise events • Events
• Engage people • Site-specific media
• Give community powers experiences
• Manage boundaries • Navigation
• Improve site management • User generated sense of
place
• Collaborative and
inclusive practices
• Community
management
Design improvements to: • Physical solutions • Smart & Interactive
• Shading, greenery & water features • Create additional routs and destinations furniture
• Roads and paths • Introduce and manage new experiences • Pop up installations
• Attractiveness with new boundaries • Physical and virtual
• Private & public spaces • Mobilise community events
• Accommodate all users’ needs in • Navigation
particular children & disabled • Personalising places by
people user generated content
• Site-specific media
experiences
• Collaborative practices
and inclusive practices
Improve digital accessibility: • Developing digital infrastructure & • Digital infrastructure
• Improve wireless connectivity signals strengths • Wi-Fi hotspots
• Improve digital interaction • Digital skills • Information
• Digital solutions • Site-specific media
experiences
• Physical and virtual
events
• Smart & Interactive
furniture
• Pop up installations
 Revealing the Potential of Public Places 191

The urban objectives (Table 1), identified by users, are related to improving the
inclusiveness of the Gardens including communications, collaborative practices, indi-
vidual and collective empowerment, provision of experiences and spontaneous activ-
ities, flexibility in use, personal security and design improvements. All these objectives
contribute to accessibility of the Gardens and closely relate to improving their inclu-
siveness, which is defined “as the process of improving the terms of participation in
society, through enhancing opportunities, access to resources, voice and respect for
rights” (UN 2016). It involves prioritising the needs of a community and providing
opportunities for all to participate as full members of society.
The site-specific digital layers over the existing urban Gardens are proposed to
exceed their physical limits. Types of digital layers were identified in Table 1. They are
capable to facilitate Garden specific and user orientated urban objectives, which were
identified in the Survey. These layers are contributing to creative knowledge about the
Gardens, which is shared between the stakeholders. They are useful tools to enhance
social capital and inclusiveness of Gardens, strengthen their original designed identity
and foster digital skills of the community. Digital exclusion can create disadvantage
and prevent access to proposed digital layers and social opportunities. Using digital
solutions, urban places can be easily and effectively turned into more inclusive,
attractive and alive settings. In particular the Gardens of the New Waterfront of
Thessaloniki can be turned into an interface of new media and physical urban envi-
ronment and the generators of new intelligence, which will satisfy user’s needs and
make the Gardens more attractive.

5 Conclusions

The designers Nikiforidis and Cuomo were successful in creating the linearity walk
along the open horizon of Thessaloniki’s waterfront creating a new identity of the
place, where people have every day contact with the sea and shoreline. The Gardens
were designed to provide secondary meaningful points of interest and additional
functions. The original design of the Gardens has not incorporated any digital expe-
riences overlaying the physical space.
The survey of the local users of the Gardens was a useful way of gaining a clear
understanding of the existing conditions of the use and maintenance of the Gardens,
strengths and weaknesses of the design and a variety of users’ groups. The analysis of
empirical data related to people’s everyday experiences within three main Gardens,
shows that the Gardens are considered to be memorable places, where local people like
to go frequently. At the same time respondents noted that the Gardens are under
designed and inadequately adapted to their needs and contemporary lifestyle.
Poor activities and attendance of the Gardens are influenced by a lack of diversity
of opportunities that the Gardens can offer to the local community and closely related to
improving the inclusiveness of the Gardens. The achievement of these urban objectives
will strengthen the designed identity of the Gardens and add new social value to their
existing features.
We propose site-specific digital layers to be applied over the Gardens to create
digital site-specific urban spaces, which exceed the physical limits of the Gardens.
192 T. Ruchinskaya et al.

These layers of information create a creative intelligence shared between the stake-
holders and enhance the collective creation and creativity. Digital urban thematization
of the Gardens can be facilitated by digital tools, identified in the literature review and
site-specific digital experiences, which combine digital content with physical places.
The combination of digital narrative experiences and real time events uncovers social
capital of the Gardens and their hidden meanings beyond the urban form, giving people
new insights, increasing the significance of the Gardens and encouraging community
participation. The new digital content will create digital personal stories about the
Gardens, personal augmentation of the Gardens, providing knowledge sharing, visu-
alizing and prototyping of user generated content, online sense of connection, mem-
ories and unique atmospheres in the Gardens. This approach improves the local sense
of place and its attractiveness, increases the social interaction and people’s attachments
to the Gardens.
Integration of mediated experiences with physical design solutions and giving new
media an important role in place-making, should be considered at the early stages of the
design and retrofitting process. Exploiting digital solutions, the urban places can be
easily and effectively turned into more inclusive, attractive and alive settings.

References
Abdel-Aziz, A.A., Abdel-Salam, H., El-Sayad, Z.: The role of ICTs in creating the new social
public place of the digital era. Alexandria Eng. J. 55, 487–493 (2016). https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.aej.2015.12.019
Active Public Space: Barcelona Installation – Outcomes (2016). http://activepublicspace.org/
Ampanavos, S., Markaki, M.: Digital cities: towards a new identity of public place. In: The
Mediated City Conference (2014). http://architecturemps.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/
mc_conference_ampanavos_spyridon.pdf
Anderson, E.: Placemaking: a tool for rural and urban communities (2013). http://articles.
extension.org/pages/67018/placemaking:-a-tool-for-rural-and-urban-communities
Appleyard, D.: Why buildings are known. Environ. Behav. 1, 131–156 (1969)
Appleyard, D.: A planner’s guide to environmental psychology: a review essay. J. Am. Inst.
Plann. 43(2), 184–189 (1977)
Appleyard, D., Lintell, M.: The environmental quality of city streets: the resident’s viewpoint.
J. Am. Inst. Plann. 38, 84–104 (1972)
Architectural Themes: Architecture in Greece 37 Editions: Rύcvqoma Hέlasa (2003)
Avram, G.: Turning spaces into places –weaving the digital double. In: NordiCHI 2014 (2014)
Banerjee, T.: Urban experience and the development of the city image. Ph.D. dissertation,
Department of Urban Studies and Planning, MIT Press (1971)
Banerjee, T.: The future of public space: beyond invented streets and reinvented places. J. Am.
Plann. Assoc. 67, 9–24 (2001)
Berry, M., Hamiton, M.: Changing urban spaces: mobile phones on trains. Motilities 5(1), 111–
129 (2010)
Bhalla, G.: Collaboration and co-creation: the road to creating value. Mark. J. (2016). http://
www.marketingjournal.org/collaboration-and-co-creation-the-road-to-creating-value/
CEM: Sustaining cultural identity and a sense of place – new wine in old bottles or old wine in
new bottles? (2011). https://www.ucem.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/sustaining_cultu-
ral_identity.pdf
 Revealing the Potential of Public Places 193

Connecthings: Solutions (2017). http://www.connecthings.com/solutions/#connected-city

de Hann, H.: Social and material appropriation of the neighbourhood space (2005). https://repository.
tudelft.nl/islandora/object/uuid:436408d2-e9e3-42a6-80c5-6f9878cf1332/datastream/OBJ
de Waal, M.: The City as Interface: How New Media Are Changing the City. NAi010 Publishers,
Rotterdam (2014)
Digital Water Curtain: Digital Water Curtain (2017). https://www.digitalwatercurtain.com/
Di Stasio, C.: Giant interactive wheels light up Montreal (2016). http://inhabitat.com/giant-
interactive-wheels-light-up-montreal/
Dork, M., Monteyne, D.: Urban Co-Creation: Envisioning New Digital Tools for Activism and
Experimentation in the City (2011). http://mariandoerk.de/urbancocreation/hpc2011.pdf
European Street Design Challenge (ESDC): ESDC 2013 (2013). http://streetchallenge.eu/?page_
id=611
Farina, A., Bogaertb, J., Schipania, I.: Cognitive landscape and information: new perspectives to
investigate the ecological complexity. BioSystems 79, 235–240 (2005). http://citeseerx.ist.
psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.601.9188&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Fattahi, K., Kobayashi, H.: New era, new criteria for city imaging. Theor. Empirical. Res. Urban
Manag. 3(12), 63–72 (2009)
Fredericks, J., Tomitsch, M., Hespanhol, L., Mcarthur, I.: Digital pop-up: investigating bespoke
community engagement in public spaces (2015). https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
285928221_Digital_Pop-Up_Investigating_Bespoke_Community_Engagement_in_Public_
Spaces
Garagnani, S., Arteaga, J., Bravo, L.: Understanding intangible cultural landscapes. Digital tools
as a medium to explore the complexity of the urban space (2016). http://papers.cumincad.org/
data/works/att/ascaad2016_044.pdf
García, M.: Written at the place. The intangible values of the landscape (2013). https://www.
researchgate.net/publication/282121024_Written_at_the_place_The_intangible_values_of_the_
landscape
Gehl, J.: Life Between Buildings: Using Public Space. Island Press, Washington DC (2011)
Gumpert, G., Drucker, S.: Communication Landscapers (2004). http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/view-doc/
download;jsessionid=13520C079130D5AADC7BEA1883ABD4FC?doi=10.1.1.596.7815&rep=
rep1&type=pdf
Gottdiener, M.: The Theming of America: Dreams, Visions, and Commercial Spaces. Boulder,
Westview (1997)
Han, K., Rosson, M.B., Shih, P.C., Carroll, J.M.: Enhancing community awareness of and
participation in local heritage with a mobile application. In: Proceedings of the 17th ACM
Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work & Social Computing, pp. 1144–1155
(2014). https://doi.org/10.1145/2531602.2531640. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/
262165051_Enhancing_community_awareness_of_and_participation_in_local_heritage_with_
a_mobile_application
Happich, J.: NFC concrete slabs for a smart city (2015). http://www.electronics-eetimes.com/
news/nfc-concrete-slabs-smart-city
Harrison, S., Dourish, P.: Re-placing space: the roles of place and space in collaborative systems.
In: CSCW 1996: Proceedings of the Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work.
ACM Press (1996)
Holland, C., Clark, A., Katz, J., Peace, S.: Social interactions in urban public places (2007).
https://www.jrf.org.uk/sites/default/files/jrf/migrated/files/2017-interactions-public-places.pdf
Iaconesi, S., Persico, O.: RWR Read/Write Reality. FakePress Publishing, Rome (2011)
194 T. Ruchinskaya et al.

Iaconesi, S., Persico, O.: The co-creation of the city. Re-programming cities using real-time user
generated content (2013). http://www.academia.edu/3013140/The_Co-Creation_of_the_City
Ioannidis, K.: Designing the Edge: An Inquiry into the Psychospatial Nature of Meaning in the
Architecture of the Urban Waterfront. KTH, Stockholm (2011)
Ioannidis, K.: Technologies of anthropogenic spaces: co-creation aspects in co-mediated
landscapes. In: Smaniotto, C., Ioannidis, K. (eds.) The Making of Mediated Spaces, Edições
Universitárias Lusófonas, Lisbon [on press, expected December 2017] (2017)
Ioannidis, K., Smaniotto, C., Suklje, I., Menezes, M., Martinez, A.B.: The lure of cyberpark:
synergistic outdoor interactions between public spaces, users and locative technologies. In:
Theona, I., Charitos, D. (eds.) Proceedings of the 3rd International Biennial Conference
Hybrid City 2015: Data to the People, pp. 272–281. University Research Institute of Applied
Communication, National and Kapodistrian University of Athens (2015)
Janner-Klausner, D.: Using online tools for community engagement and consultation (2017).
http://www.commonplace.is/blog/using-online-tools-for-community-engagement-and-
consultation
Lefebvre, H.: The Production of Space. Wiley-Blackwell (1991)
Jones, L., Wells, K.: Strategies for academic and clinician engagement in community-
participatory partnered research. JAMA 297(4), 407 (2007)
Loukaitou, A., Banerjee, T.: Urban Design Downtown: Poetics and Politics of Form. University
of California Press, Berkeley (1998)
Lughi, G.: Text-space dynamics. The digital media in defining new urban languages. In: NUL -
New Urban Languages. Conference Proceedings. J. Urbanism 28(2), 1–5 (2013)
Lughi, G.: Interactive Media in Urban Space. Screencity Lab. 3 (2017)
Markaki, M.: Digital cities: towards a new identity of public space. In: The Mediated City
Conference, London, UK (2014)
Morley, D.: What’s “home” got to do with it? Contradictory dynamics in the domestication of
technology and the dislocation of domesticity. Eur. J. Cult. Stud. 6(4), 435–458 (2003)
Nikiforidis, P., Castro, R.: Redevelopment of new waterfront in Thessaloniki. Competition brief
for initial study. Municipality of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki (2001)
New Castle City Council: Place Makers Toolkit (2012). https://www.newcastle.nsw.gov.au/
Newcastle/media/Documents/Community/Place-Making-Toolkit.pdf
Nisi, V., Oakley, I., Haahr, M.: Location-Aware Multimedia Stories: Turning Spaces into Places
(2008). http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.451.9997
Play the city: City Gaming Method (2017). http://www.playthecity.eu/
PPS: Technology Brings People Together in Public Spaces After All (2014). https://www.pps.
org/blog/technology-brings-people-together-in-public-spaces-after-all/
PPS: Placemaking and Place-Led Development: A New Paradigm for Cities of the Future (2015).
https://www.pps.org/reference/placemaking-and-place-led-development-a-new-paradigm-for-
cities-of-the-future/
Prensky, M.: Digital Natives, Digital Immigrants. On the Horizon, vol. 9, no. 5. MCB University
Press (2001)
Sappleton, N. (eds.) Advancing Research Methods with New Technologies. Information Science
Reference, Hershey (2013). https://books.google.ru/books?id = I_5kMPw3O-IC&pg=
PA20&lpg=PA20&dq=Barry+%26+Hamilton+hybrid+geographies&source=bl&ots=zk7_
iWSfOg&sig=UCo1fRDHP6LG2oDLPj91GtcgdPI&hl=en&sa=X&ved=
0ahUKEwiFzemzo5LUAhWhJJoKHaL8Ay8Q6AEIPDAD#v=onepage&q=Barry%20%26%
20Hamilton%20hybrid%20geographies&f=false
SEGD: Virtual Depictions: San Francisco (2016). https://segd.org/virtual-depictions-san-
francisco
Sternberg, E.: An integrative theory of urban design. J. Am. Plann. Assoc. 66, 265–278 (2000)
 Revealing the Potential of Public Places 195

Thomson, C.: BBC and the Big Screens (2012). http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/aboutthebbc/entries/

ea215929-b57e-3bb9-8d01-e0433f93fd62
UN: Identifying social inclusion and exclusion (2016). http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/rwss/2016/
chapter1.pdf
Van Assche, K., Duineveld, M., De Jong, H., Van Zoest, A.: What place is this time? Semiotics
and the analysis of historical reference. Landscape Archit. J. Urban Des. 17(2), 233–254
(2012). https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2012.666207
Visualizing Venice: Visualizing Venice (2017). http://www.visualizingvenice.org/visu/
Zook, M., Graham, M.: Mapping digital space: Geocoded internet data and the representation of
place. Environ. Plann. B: Plann. Des. 34, 466–482 (2007)

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
3.5
Cyberpark, a New Medium of Human
Associations, a Component of Urban Resilience

Konstantinos Lalenis1(&), Balkiz Yapicioglou2,

and Petja Ivanova-Radovanova3
1
DPRD, University of Thessaly, Volos, Greece
[email protected]
2
Arkin University of Creative Arts and Design, Kyrenia, Cyprus
[email protected]
3
Association for Integrated Development and Sustainability, Sofia, Bulgaria
[email protected]

Abstract. The centre point of this chapter is how to increase the resilience of
the urban environment by integrating the cyberpark in its spatial planning and
policies. Disaster prevention and preparedness are a priority in resilience, and
two major related sectors are infrastructure and information. Significant com-
ponents of prevention infrastructure in cities are public/free spaces. Public
spaces are used as refuge in cases of natural disasters (earthquakes, fires etc.),
but also as spaces of physical contact, communication, community bonding, and
provision of social services in cases of social crises (the cases of refugees).
Information, as the other major sector of prevention, may vary from dissemi-
nation of information in an individual basis, to information exchange in a col-
lective basis, the latter being of significant value in cases of prevention. The
collective basis of information exchange is further expanded and technologically
improved through Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs). This
chapter focuses on the psychological and social roles of ‘the cyberpark’ in
extraordinary events and illustrate the importance of its physical form and
spatiality. Cyberparks combines and explores the relationship between Infor-
mation and Communication Technologies (ICTs) and urban open/public spaces.
In this sense, they combine elements of both, prevention infrastructure and
information, and they constitute significant components of urban resilience.

Keywords: Urban resilience
Disaster prevention in planning

Planning for resilience
Social inclusion of refugees
Refugees and cyberparks

1 Introduction

The aim of this chapter is to discuss the necessity of cyberparks, as defined and
developed by the COST TU1306, as redundant infrastructure in maintaining resilience
of urban environment in times of crises. Resilience, for the purpose of this chapter, is
the capacity of a system to cope with disturbances and safeguard overall system per-
sistence. Disturbances are associated with disruption of the functioning of a community

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 196–208, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_16
Cyberpark, a New Medium of Human Associations, a Component of Urban Resilience 197

due to events of natural, geophysical, technological, social, or human behavioural

nature. Disaster prevention and preparedness is, thus, a priority, and can take the form
of development of rapid response capacities, or of prevention through the formulation
of a longer-range strategies and policies. Essential elements for disaster prevention and
preparedness are infrastructure and information.
Public open spaces (POS) are significant components of both, prevention infras-
tructure and locations of information exchange and management. Being part of the
urban fabric, besides their function as catalysts in the improvement of quality of life of
city dwellers, they are also used as refuge spaces for local population in the event of
disasters (earthquakes, fires, etc.). In such cases, as well as in cases of social or human
behaviour events, they also function as spaces of physical contact, communication,
community bonding, and provision of social services. The case of refugees gathering in
POS, are indicative of the above. Information may vary from dissemination to
exchange, on individual or collective basis, and it is further expanded and techno-
logically improved through Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs).
In cyberparks, on the other hand, “POS characteristics and cyber technologies blend
together to generate hybrid experiences and enhance quality of life” (Smaniotto Costa
and Ioannidis 2017). ICT can be used in this context to give or gather information, to
aid co-creation of space, to allow crowd sourcing of information and opinions, and to
allow affective sharing or self-monitoring of activities. As such, they combine and
explore the relationship between ICTs and urban open/public spaces. In this sense, they
combine elements of both, prevention infrastructure and information and they consti-
tute significant components of urban resilience. We presume cyberparks are able to
support urban resilience faster and in a more efficient way than traditional POS.
The COST TU1306 mainly explores the relationship between ICT and POS and
how this relationship can contribute, provide opportunities and support transforming
cities into more social and inclusive environments. The above definition of cyberparks
implies but does not adequately emphasize the resilience dimension of such urban
landscapes. In fact, cyberparks might be also seen as places purposely used in cases of
disturbances and disruption of the functioning of a community due to events of varying
nature. Thus, the attempt of this chapter is to contribute to the definition of a role of
ICT in planning and maintenance of the contemporary public open space in regard to
risk prevention and maintaining resilience in the urban environment.

2 Concepts, Definitions, and Relationships

2.1 Research Concept and Methodology

Cyberparks combine and explore the relationship between ICTs and urban open/public
spaces. In this sense, they combine elements of both, prevention infrastructure and
information and they constitute significant components of urban resilience. However,
firstly, there is a need to integrate the two meanings of resilience, that is, the short-term
capacity of the ‘Host City’ to absorb the crisis of the sudden event by providing
immediate safety and avoid panic by information and guidance, and the long-term
capacity of the ‘Host City’ to develop structures facing this crisis by integrating
198 K. Lalenis et al.

cyberparks into spatial planning and related spatial policies. Illustrations of the above
will be given by further analysis in case studies, covering aspects of cyberparks that
increase urban resilience to physical disasters, as well as to disasters due to human
behaviour (refugees). The latter will be given special emphasis, since it is a very recent,
massive, unexplored, and with enormous humanitarian consequences phenomenon.
In analysing the potential of cyberparks to increase urban resilience to physical
disasters the research will focus on particular sectors of Master Plans, where official
guidelines prescribe the conditions and urban infrastructure for prevention and pro-
tection of natural disasters (earthquakes, fires, floods, etc.). (Ministerial Decision
9572/1845, FEK 209/7-4-2000). In the guidelines special emphasis is given to the
uninhibited access to POS from the local population, and to the infrastructure of POS,
which should facilitate information exchange between the responsible authorities and
the population gathered in POS. The analysis will provide evidence for the adequacy of
cyberparks to cover the above needs, and proceed a step further, in facilitating com-
munication and contact between individuals, families, and groups of people in times of
massive panic, and uncontrolled emotional reactions.
Cyberparks that increase urban resilience to human behaviour disturbances and
disasters will be analysed within the frame of the refugee crisis, which “front line”
European cities are forced to sustain. The need of refugees to gather in POS for contact
and communication, and their –almost absolute- reliance in smartphones for infor-
mation exchange with authorities, NGOs, friends, and family, are documented from
various sources, these being articles in newspapers, the Internet, scientific publications,
and related TV reporting. Verification for the above will also be sought from interviews
taken in the course of research undergoing in the DPRD of the University of Thessaly
(Pyrpiri 2017). The degree that the refugees cover basic, everyday needs by the above
means indicates the state of resilience of the particular city, town, or neighbourhood.
The appropriation of POS by the refugees, and their use of ICT for information
exchange, proves the necessity of cyberparks for maintaining resilience in these cases,
and even more since cyberparks can combine POS and ICT in the same place, at the
same time.
Finally, the necessity of cyberparks as redundant infrastructure in maintaining
resilience of urban environment will also be shown by investigating the “fitness” of
cyberparks for accommodating the resilience indicators used in the Circle of 100
Resilient Cities, and more specifically, in its implementation in particular resilience
studies.

2.2 Defining Urban Resilience

In the literature, the notion of resilience has been explained with reference to different
perspectives from different fields and has attained multiple levels of meaning. How-
ever, even though resilience is defined differently according to these different research
domains, a common factor underlying each definition is the notion of disturbance and
adaptation in the context of a system, or, the ability or capacity to deal with distur-
bance. These disturbances might originate from variety of disasters and stresses (human
made or natural) and might possess slightly different meanings, however, what they
really point is some sort of internal or external change.
Cyberpark, a New Medium of Human Associations, a Component of Urban Resilience 199

Resilience is not a new concept. However, it has evolved through its application in
different disciplines with the majority of the work on resilience adapting the concept of
ecological resilience. Within the notion of smart cities, for example, there is a shift in
risk management on the city level in the sense that “resilient cities” are not in oppo-
sition to ecological modernisation, but rather a refinement. (Androbus 2011). In
ecology, resilience is related to ‘the ability to adapt to a change’ (Holling 1973; Walker
et al. 1981; Folke 2006), ‘the capacity of a system to absorb disturbance’ (Walker et al.
2004; Walker and Salt 2006), or “the capacity to change in order to maintain the same
identity” (Folke et al. 2010). The theory of resilience has been influenced by general
systems theory and complex adaptive systems (CAS), where a system is defined as
complex interaction and relationships between different agents/elements, and can be
anything that functions (Bertalanffy 1968; Holling 1973). This theory also posits that
the relationships between the agents of the system are more important than the agents
themselves. Resilience is also affiliated with other combinations of relationships, such
as vulnerability, persistence, change and transformations.
The concept of resilience in urban studies has also evolved from the concept of
ecological resilience where ‘urban resilience’ can be viewed as having the concept of
resilience applied to that of cities. Using the perspective of ecological resilience,
therefore, urban resilience is usually described as “the ability of a city or urban system
to withstand a wide array of shocks and stresses”. However, urban resilience is not only
about surviving potential risks and threats and recovery, but rather about grasping the
positive outcomes these changes and transformations might bring. Moreover, urban
resilience requires us to think in an integrated way and should incorporate other
important societal aspects. Like Folke et al. (2010) emphasize, a social perspective,
especially regarding social change, is an essential part of resilience. We should also
acknowledge the fact that creating resilient cities requires ‘resilient thinking’ to adapt to
the outcome of change.
Urban spaces, from infrastructure to open spaces, are vital agents of the urban
system and strengthened adaptable spaces can contribute to resiliency of a city. As a
matter of fact, increased ‘resilient thinking’ is initiating urban adaptation planning
within cities to update important physical and societal systems. As Montgomery (1998)
posits, adaptable urban space can “accommodate complex patterns of diversity, mixture
and economic grain”.

2.3 Infrastructure and Information as Major Sectors of Disaster

Prevention and Management. Public/Free Spaces as Important
Component and Common Ground of Infrastructure and Information
Cities and infrastructure have always co-existed where their relation has been inter-
dependent and co-evolutionary. Furthermore, along with social, political, administra-
tive, and economic forces, the transformation of social space in general and urban space
in particular is credited to the transformative power of infrastructure. As a matter of
fact, cities owe their position on the global stage to the networking of the infrastruc-
tures, which have re-organized relations among peoples, institutions, and places
(Neuman and Smith 2010).
200 K. Lalenis et al.

The meaning of infrastructure has expanded over the years, whereas traditional
meaning of infrastructure conjures up the notion of built facilities and networks made
by humans for public consumption either above or below ground. Another important
definition of infrastructure is that, as explained by Frischmann (2012), infrastructure is
a ‘resource’ that should be “accessed and used concurrently by multiple users for
multiple uses”. This explanation combined with the traditional explanation of infras-
tructure then leads to categorize infrastructure as ‘essential’. Essential resources are
indispensable for survival; however, they are context specific and go beyond access to
basic needs. Moreover, infrastructure resources conjure up the notion of a shared
community resource claiming the identity of “commons” which take on a utilitarian
character as open and accessible to life sustaining resources. Commons as a resource,
on the other hand, include public spaces such as parks, streets, sidewalks and plazas
and even extends to spaces where access by public is limited and regulated like
schools, libraries, courthouses and even privately-owned shopping malls. Considering
the above-mentioned combined definition of infrastructure as resources and commons
then summons public spaces as essential elements of urban infrastructure.
Even though, the public spaces’ spatial impact and transformative power that shape
complex systems of human activity is well perceived “it does not receive the appre-
ciation it deserves since its continuous availability is assumed and is just part of the
background…however, the importance emerges when the disaster strikes” (Frischmann
2012). The essentiality of the infrastructures, herein the public spaces, should not only
be considered for ‘good’ times, but ‘bad’ times as well. Cities are full of uncertainty
and also face major disasters, shocks and disturbances (i.e. human crises, climate
change or simply rapid demographic change). The pressure on public spaces increases
during such events, especially with traumatic events like war, destruction and devas-
tation with increased interest in public spaces. When we visit our recent history, we can
observe this pressure from how public spaces are transformed into refuge spaces (from
evacuation camps to places that serve basic human needs like temporary shelters) for
disaster management to reduce vulnerability of cities, therefore contributors to city
resilience (e.g., during the 2006 Lebanon war, Sanayeh Garden in Beirut acted as
refugee camp for 450 people who lost their homes for months).
Considering importance of the public space during ‘bad’ times as a place of refuge,
the connectivity to the rest of the world for exchange of information becomes another
essentiality. When we define public spaces as essential urban infrastructure, therefore,
we also have to take into account the deployment of information (ICT) in public spaces
and their essentiality, and how ICT promotes efficiencies and functionalities in public
spaces during crisis. As a matter of fact, public spaces are conceptualised as an
opportunity for the exchange of messages with diverse others (Lofland 1985) and it is
only natural that today cities incorporate ICT into planning of public spaces for creating
more social and inclusive environments, not only for ‘good’ times but also for ‘bad’
times. In other words, public spaces as an infrastructure resources should be considered
as spare capacity embedded in the city, or as a redundancy, which is one of the most
important factors contributing for city resilience. As a matter of fact, according to
100RC (100 Resilient City) resilient cities demonstrate seven qualities; reflectiveness,
resourcefulness, robustness, redundancy, flexibility, inclusiveness and integration.
Cyberpark, a New Medium of Human Associations, a Component of Urban Resilience 201

2.4 Cyberparks as Significant Components of Urban Resilience. The

Effective Combination of Infrastructure and Information
in Cyberparks, for Disaster Prevention and Management
ICT (information), along with infrastructure, is another force that possesses the power to
transformation in cities, or spatial impact. The power of information and its transfor-
mative power of public space is not a new concept (Hampton et al. 2015) but how this
power can contribute to urban adaptation planning approaches for resilience is an area
that needs attention. As Montgomery (1998) emphasizes, “the successful urban area-in
this case public spaces- is one which offers in-built adaptability rather than in-built
obsolescence”. Increased resilient thinking is making urban planners within cities to
update important physical and societal systems. Resilient thinking in urban adaptation
planning requires new approaches to manage resources. With resilient thinking, how-
ever, we cannot expect to tailor a ‘one size fits all’ approach to city resilience because of
the locality of the matter and different adaptability difficulties each city faces. The
challenges of adaptation planning are quite diverse, nevertheless, the top three adaptation
challenges identified are “(1) securing funding for adaptation; (2) communicating the
need for adaptation to elected officials and local departments; and (3) gaining commit-
ment and generating appreciation from national government for the realities of local
adaptation challenges” (Carmin, Nadkarni and Rhie 2012). Considering the above-
mentioned urban planning adaptation challenges, therefore, it is important we clearly
communicate the multi-dimensional benefit of public space adaptation.
As per the objectives of COST TU1306, cyberparks are proposed as spaces with a
power to transform cities into more social and inclusive environments (rather than just
being parks equipped with high technology) and as spaces offering additional oppor-
tunities to people using these spaces. As a matter of fact, these objectives with the
different approaches to manage urban resources suggested by resilient thinking lead
this research to explore some other spill-over effects of cyberparks in cities specifically
during a crisis.
When we look into the definition of resilience, especially city resilience, one of the
most important components of resilience, is access to resources. Cyberparks, as public
spaces, can be considered as a new resource within the urban adaptation planning
where infrastructure and information are combined. Cyberparks may add different
functions to public spaces (spill-overs as additional opportunities), which might also
contribute as a redundant and flexible resource to city resilience in time of crisis.
Therefore, respecting the objectives of the COST TU1306 project, public spaces
incorporated with ICT, simply cyberparks, are proposed as part of city infrastructure
resources and spaces of refuge for the people on the move (specifically for the refugees
in receiving countries) contributing for city resilience. However, before we discuss how
cyberpark can contribute to city resilience as a place of refuge, it is also critical that we
further define the boundaries of public space within the context of this chapter.
Therefore, for the purpose of this study, public spaces (cyberparks) will be defined as
information landscapes, a new infrastructure resource, to which all members of public
in a society have legal access, including people on the move, i.e. refugees, with no
limitation and regulation. After all, as Carpenter et al. (2001) states we need to establish
“of what, to what, and under what conditions” when considering resilience in a system.
202 K. Lalenis et al.

3 Cases Studies
3.1 Cyberparks Increasing Urban Resilience to Physical Disasters.
Provisions in Spatial Planning
Urban resilience, recently, has been an important element in planning, and has been
included in Master Plans, Strategic Plans, and related sectoral studies of cities around the
world. In most of these studies, public open spaces (POS), have been recognized as
significant factors in almost all forms of urban resilience. In cases of natural hazards
(earthquakes, fires), in particular, POS were treated in Master Plans as crucial elements
of the city preparedness to reduce the magnitude of disasters, even before urban resi-
lience was elaborated as a notion. They were organized as first stage refuge spaces,
where local population should be gathered in order to escape from being trapped in
buildings, to get first aid, water, food, temporary shelter, and try to get informed about
friends and relatives. In these plans, prime emphasis was given to safeguarding safety
and providing first aid. With the development and inclusion of urban resilience in
planning, other forms of resilience were also examined, and disaster prevention and
management were enriched with more elements than safety and first aid. Information and
communication were quite important among them, which, if incorporated in POS, they
are adequately covered by the definition of cyberparks, as provided by COST TU1306.
Cases from Germany and Greece illustrate how cyberparks may increase urban
resilience to physical disasters. They are derived from families of nations in spatial
planning with diverse traditions and practices, considered as occupying the two
opposite ends in the spectrum of planning policies (ESPON 2.3.2): from the Com-
prehensive Integrated and the Regional Economic (Germany) and from the ‘urbanism’
tradition (Greece). In Germany, the cities of Bonn and Duisburg have been assessed in
resilience concerning low carbon activities (Lindner et al. 2014:16). The importance of
incorporating cyber technology in their green and open spaces is highlighted, mainly
for raising public awareness in renewable energies through activities organized in POS,
including the exhibition of a GIS heat map, where the information of a solar cadastre
and the existing energy supply will be integrated, as a basis for strategic decisions. In
Greece, on the other hand, the notion of resilience became apparent in most recent
Master Plans, after 2010. The Masterplan of the city of Xanthi (47000 population,
expected to be approved by the end of 2017), has a separate chapter concerning
disasters and social crises. It was based on a sectoral plan, been provided by a national
plan coded Xenocratis (2003), but besides referring and mapping the POS to be used as
refuges of the affected population in earthquakes, floods, and fires, there was also
specific focus on climate change and social crises (massive arrival of refugees). In that,
special emphasis was given to the appropriate infrastructure of the above-mentioned
POS, which would facilitate the multi-dimensional flow of information among the
affected population and public and administrative bodies involved. It also prescribed
for a special study of immediate priority, related to the resilience of the city.
The above examples illustrate the inclusion of the notion of urban resilience in
European spatial planning, while giving special emphasis in importance of the role that
POS equipped with ICT (i.e. cyberparks) may have for safeguarding and reinforcing
resilience.
Cyberpark, a New Medium of Human Associations, a Component of Urban Resilience 203

3.2 Cyberparks Increasing Urban Resilience to Disasters Due to Human

Behaviour (Refugee Crisis in Europe)
The significance of cyberparks as a means for safeguarding and reinforcing urban
resilience can also be exhibited in the case of social crises. The recent refugee crisis is
on the forefront of international development, when the combination of natural dis-
asters, and armed conflict have displaced millions of people in Europe and worldwide.
Cyberparks are proposed as part of city infrastructure resources and spaces of refuge for
the people on the move (specifically for the refugees in receiving countries) con-
tributing for city resilience. Analysis of the relationships between a. refugees and POS,
and b. refugees and information technology will test the validity of the above proposal.
The interface between these two relationships is the relation between refugees and
cyberparks and might be considered as a measure for urban resilience.

4 The Relationship Between Refugees and POS

Refugees arrive in high numbers, fighting with the waves of the Mediterranean Sea, in
the Aegean islands and in the south of Italy. During their perilous journey, and upon
their arrival in Europe, the needs for information and communication are of funda-
mental value to them. At the same time, various elements of their lives lose in indi-
viduality and become by need, increasingly collective. Accordingly, their needs and
uses of space are transformed from individual to collective.
POS were usually among the first spaces to provide accommodation at the first
waves of refugee arrivals, and some of them were since transformed in semi-permanent
reception camps. Here, the phenomenon of appropriation of space appeared to take
interesting dimensions, which, in turn, triggered rearrangements in the urban form, and
readjusted social relations with the local communities. Examples in the main squares of
Omonoia and Victoria in Athens (Greece), and Lavov Most and Maria Louiza
Boulevard in Sofia (Bulgaria) are indicative examples of the above. The reverse phe-
nomenon was later observed in the more organized reception camps, where new POS
were co-created by refugees and the various social agents involved in the life in the
camp.
The main needs of the refugees to use and often appropriate POS was analysed in
various studies, and can be summarized in the following way: getting together, learning
about family and friends, seeking to organize their lives in the immediate and midterm
future, exchanging information, making new friends, and learning about their new
environment and how they are expected to function in it. POS can be places that
include rather than exclude. Refugees are not tucked away in a hall or community
centre, but a visible and engaged presence within the diverse mix of local residents.
(“Refugees welcome in parks” project, Sheffield University 2017).
However, there are challenges. The public realm can be a place where refugees feel
uncertain about local norms, feel unwelcome, uncomfortable or are vulnerable to hate
crime. Longstanding residents of a local area may react negatively to changing patterns
of use of public spaces, especially when ‘hanging out’ is perceived as idle loitering,
threatening, or fundamentally changing the ethos of a loved place. An increase in
204 K. Lalenis et al.

hostile architecture and management practice (implicitly acting against street sleeping)
also impacts on combine and explore. («Refugees welcome in parks» project, Sheffield
University 2017). In a series of face-to-face interviews of owners and/or shop-keepers
of restaurants and coffee places in Lavov Most area in Sofia, carried out by Ivanova-
Radovanova for the purpose of this chapter, it was found that the main concerns of the
local shopkeepers were about security and safety issues, they attributed the causes of
social disturbances to the massive arrivals of refugees, and they were asking for more
police surveillance.

5 The Relationship Between Refugees and Information

Technology

It has been observed that refugees very frequently carry smartphones, of quite
advanced technology (Lloyd (2015:2). In fact, according to Middle East Online (19-8-
2015), many migrants consider their smartphones to be more important than food. As
Gillespie et al. (2016:2) state “For refugees seeking to reach Europe, the digital
infrastructure is as important as the physical infrastructures of roads, railways, sea
crossings and the borders controlling the free movement of people”. Current research
and activities on refugee’s use of mobile technology focus largely on the following
themes: connectivity, digital tools and platforms, family reconnection, education, and
livelihoods and mobile money. In the above, one has to add that smartphones are also a
means to document the tragedy through which these people have been through.
The multiple usage of smartphones by the refugees has been documented by many
writers (Chib and Aricat 2016; Talhouk et al. 2016; Harney 2013, etc.). Gifford and
Wilding (2013) argue that if refugees are able to maintain their connections to family
and friends, which can be achieved through a variety of mobile-based apps and Social
Media applications, they may experience a greater sense of “being at home” in a
hosting country. Finally, the role of ICT in promoting social inclusion has been ana-
lyzed by AbuJarour and Krasnova (2017) in their research about Syrian refugees in
Germany. In their analysis, they construct a context framework for refugees (home
country, journey, hosting country) within which ICTs function. Three variables of this
function are derived (ICT properties, capabilities enabled by ICT, and achievements in
social inclusion) inter-influenced by indicators (immigration, family separation, new
society, and also internet, smartphones, and social media).
Besides the above, though, the use of smartphones on a mostly individual basis
suffers from significant disadvantages and shortcomings (Gillespie et al. 2016).
Technical problems included frauds in buying SIM cards which did not provide the
desired international communication, shortage of installations for charging batteries,
instability of connections, Wi-Fi access not often available, affordability of SIM cards,
profiteering of locals by selling phone charging services in extremely high prices,
and/or information gap because of language barriers. Other problems are mostly related
to gendered and generational differences in access and use, poverty, illiteracy, and
inadequacies in provision of services such as education, physical and psychological
health etc. Schmitt et al. (2016) detected and defined a «digital divide» among refugees
in the Za’atari Syrian refugee camp in northern Jordan, creating, thus, social divisions
Cyberpark, a New Medium of Human Associations, a Component of Urban Resilience 205

among the refugees. In this way, the class structure of society was transformed in the
refugee camps/communities in another class division, based on access and possession
of means of connectivity and information. This social divide becomes highly striking
considering that contrary to Syrians, Afghans and some Iraqis appear to be less well
equipped with ICT. Furthermore, the divide gets deeper as it concerns specific sub-
divisions of the above groups. UNHCR found that women, the elderly, less educated
and/or illiterate people are less likely to have access to technology, information, and
devices, echoing the findings of other, non-refugee related studies of exclusion, such as
GSMA’s Connected Women (GSMA 2016).

6 Conclusions

This contribution has explored the inclusion of the notion of urban resilience in
European spatial planning, while giving special emphasis to the role that POS equipped
with ICT (i.e. cyberparks) may have for safeguarding and reinforcing resilience.
Having also exhibited the strong relationships between a. refugees and POS, and b.
refugees and information technology – mainly smartphones – and the accruing prob-
lems and shortcomings, we conclude with an equivalent relationship between refugees
and cyberparks that can alleviate the above shortcomings and thus strengthen urban
resilience.
ICT in cyberparks is not restricted to smartphones, but it includes multiple tech-
nologically advanced means for achieving the above objectives. Furthermore, they
allow and encourage collective consumption and use of ICT, strengthening, thus, the
internal bonds of the users as a social group. The organized provision of information
and the multiple ICT tools in cyberpark infrastructures can tackle the technical prob-
lems incurred to refugees with smartphones, by guaranteeing usable means for desired
international communication, availability and affordability of installations for charging
batteries, stable and unlimited Wi-Fi access, affordability of SIM cards, and assistance
in overcoming language barriers.
With education and language skills seen as being vital to successful integration and
social inclusion, a shortage of teachers in refugee hosting places complicates current
efforts towards this objective. Here, online modes of pedagogy can potentially fill the
gap (AbuJarour and Krasnova 2017). It is argued, that this type of education is unlikely
to be as effective as in-person education, and such education services towards social
inclusion require particular infrastructures and process. Cyberparks may be equipped
by this type of infrastructure and provide a collective environment for open air
activities of educational nature for children and adults. This has been shown to be more
productive than the equivalent isolated use of smartphones by individuals. In a similar
collective vein, help for sometimes illiterate refugees could be offered by the use of
video or sound resources. Important initiatives could be the provision of legal advice
and information about language learning facilities in info kiosks, or similar information
installations. These are key areas that cyberparks could focus on.
Finally, a means of social inclusion of great importance is supporting refugees in
combining virtual and local communication. In cyberparks, it is feasible and desirable
to bring both refugees and locals together to support the integration process. The need
206 K. Lalenis et al.

to feel connected to other people is one of the primary psychological concerns of

refugees, while the stresses upon them can often lead to isolation. The design process
of POS equipped with cyber technology can facilitate communal connections.
Including local people and refugees in the design process and looking at desired ICT
and other services, cyberparks can become more relevant to the populations that live
there. (“Refugees welcome in parks” project 2017). A number of co-operative methods
for understanding public needs, civic involvement in the development of urban poli-
cies, spatial planning, and design are essential. The improvement of urban resilience
and quality of life requires participation of both, local population and refugees, their
collaboration and citizen involvement, aiming at a shift in the relative power of actors
involved. Common cultural activities with concurrent events transmitted from refugees
homelands, games between groups located in different areas and brought together by
ICT means, interaction in the common language of cyber matters between local and
refugee youths, watching sports, concerts, and cultural and political events through big
screens, (“Refugees welcome in parks” project 2017), and discussing and sharing
experiences and knowledge from distant places through ICT, strengthen the community
bonds between locals and the newcomers, and accelerate social inclusion.
BBC Media Action’s Voices of Refugees project also finds a close relationship
between resilience and the psychosocial capacity of refugees and their use of ICT. “The
analysis showed that participants who stayed in regular contact with other refugees and
who had wide communication networks were likely to be more resilient and feel less
vulnerable than those who were not connected.” (Bailey et al. 2016). Undoubtedly,
there is a recognized need to keep POS as a neutral space for practice and learning.
Further institutionalization and the development of cyberparks will support improve-
ment of accessibility of information, and empowerment of different stakeholders,
including refugees for spatial and social organization on both local level and city levels.
In order to overcome problematic encounters between planning and society, the
incorporation of a kind of self-organization in planning with support of ICTs might be a
successful next step. If cyberparks, as shown above, can retain this psychological
capacity and further enhance it by the provision of infrastructure of a more collective
nature, and of a more global use of ICT technology, which surpasses individual phones,
then cyberparks can safeguard and reinforce urban resilience in times of social crises.

References
AbuJarour, S., Krasnova, H.: Understanding the role of ICTS in promoting social inclusion: the
case of syrian refugees in Germany. In: Twenty-Fifth European Conference on Information
Systems (ECIS), Guimarães, Portugal, pp. 1790–1806 (2017)
Androbus, D.: Smart green cities: from modernization to resilience? Urban Res. Pract. 4(2), 207–
214 (2011)
Bailey, N., Hannides, T., Kaoukji, D.: Voices of refugees; information and communication needs
of refugees in Greece and Germany. BBC Media Action (2016). https://downloads.bbc.co.uk/
mediaaction/pdf/research/voices-of-refugees-research-report.pdf
Bertalanffy, L.V.: General systems theory: foundations, development, applications. New York
(1968)
Cyberpark, a New Medium of Human Associations, a Component of Urban Resilience 207

Carmin, J., Nadkarni, N., Rhie, C.: Progress and Challenges in Urban Climate Adaptation
Planning: Results of a Global Survey. MIT, Cambridge (2012)
Carpenter, S., Walker, B., Anderies, J.M., Abel, N.: From metaphor to measurement: resilience
of what to what? Ecosystems 4(8), 765–781 (2001)
Chib, A., Aricat, R.G.: Belonging and communicating in a bounded cosmopolitanism: the role of
mobile phones in the integration of transnational migrants in Singapore. Inf. Commun. Soc.
20(3), 482–496 (2017)
Frischmann, B.M.: Infrastructure: The Social Value of Shared Resources. Oxford University
Press, Oxford (2012)
Folke, C.: Resilience: The emergence of a perspective for social-ecological systems analyses.
Glob. Environ. Change 16, 253–267 (2006)
Gifford, S.M., Wilding, R.: Digital escapes? ICTs, settlement and belonging among Karen youth
in Melbourne, Australia. J. Refug. Stud. 26(4), 558–575 (2013)
Gillespie, M., et al.: Mapping Refugee Media Journeys Smartphones and Social Media
Networks. Research Report, The Open University/France Medias Monde, 13 May 2016
(2016)
GSMA: Bridging the gender gap: mobile access and usage in low and middle-income countries,
2015 (2016). http://www.gsma.com/mobilefordevelopment/wp-ontent/uploads/2016/02/
Connected-Women-Gender-Gap.pdf
Gunderson, L.H.: Ecological resilience in theory and application. Ann. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 31, 425–
439 (2000)
Gunderson, L.H., Holling, C.S.: Panarchy: understanding transformations in systems of humans
and nature. Washington, Island (2002)
Hampton, K.N., Goulet, L.S., Albanesius, G.: Change in the social life of urban public spaces:
the rise of mobile phones and women, and the decline of aloneness over 30 years. Urban Stud.
52(8), 1489–1504 (2015)
Harney, N.: Precarity, affect and problem solving with mobile phones by asylum seekers,
refugees and migrants in Naples. Italy. J. Refugee Stud. 26(4), 541–557 (2013)
Holling, C.S.: Resilience and stability of ecological systems. Ann. Revi. Ecol. Syst. 4, 1–23
(1973)
Montgomery, J.: Making a city: urbanity, vitality and urban design. J. Urban Des. 3(1), 93–116
(1998)
Lindner, S., Li, L., Müller, A.: Chinese and German city policies - analysed in the cities of
Chengdu, Bonn, Wuhan and Duisburg. Report, Ecofys, June 2014
Lloyd, A.: People are outraged to see refugees with smartphones. They shouldn’t be. Mother
Nature Network, 8 September 2015 (2015)
Lofland, L.: A World of Strangers. Prospect Heights, Waveland (1985). [1973]
Ministry of Internal Affairs of Greece: Xenocratis General Plan for Civic Protection. Ministerial
Decision 1299, FEK 423 B, 10 April 2003 (2003)
Neuman, M., Smith, S.: City planning and infrastructure: once and future partners. J. Plann. Hist.
9(1), 21–42 (2010)
Orum, A.M., Neal, Z.P. (eds.): Common Ground: Readings and Reflections on Public Space.
Routledge, New York (2010)
Pyrpiri, L.: Spatial planning and management of refugee flows. Undergraduate thesis, DPRD,
University of Thessaly (2017)
Schmitt, P., Iland, D., Belding, E., Tomaszewski, B., Xu, Y., Maitland, C.: Community‐level
access divides: a refugee camp case study (2016)
Sheffield University: Refugees welcome in parks project (2017). http://thebench-project.weebly.
com/blog/research-assistant-positionrefugeewelcome-in-parks
208 K. Lalenis et al.

Talhouk, R., et al.: Syrian refugees and digital health in Lebanon: Opportunities for improving
antenatal health. In: Proceedings of the 2016 CHI Conference on Human Factors in
Computing Systems. pp. 331–342. ACM, May 2016
Walker, B., Holling, C.S., Carpenter, S.R., Kinzig, A.: Resilience, adaptability and
transformability in social-ecological systems. Ecol. Soc. 9(2) (2004)
Walker, B., Salt, D.: Resilience thinking: sustaining ecosystems and people in a changing world.
Island Press, USA (2006)
Costa, C.S., Ioannidis, K. (eds.): The Making of the Mediated Public Space: Essays on Emerging
Urban Phenomena. Lusófona University Press, Lisbon (2017)

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
3.6
A Spotlight of Co-creation and Inclusiveness
of Public Open Spaces

Ina Šuklje Erjavec1(&) and Tatiana Ruchinskaya2

1
Urban Planning Institute of the Republic of Slovenia, Ljubljana, Slovenia
[email protected]
2
JT Environmental Consultants Ltd., TVR Design, Cambridge, UK
[email protected]

Abstract. This chapter focuses on co-creation as the way to engage different

stakeholders with everyday urban environments based on equality, diversity and
social cohesion. It presents the relationship of co-creation and inclusiveness of
public open spaces together with different aspects of co-creation related to issues
of publicness and space. It discusses why and how co-creation must take into
consideration the characteristics of the comprehensive spatial development
processes. It suggests that co-creation is a wider concept than co-design and is a
multistage process that contributes to inclusive public spaces, providing mea-
sures for social sustainability of place. This chapter argues that digital tools may
help to overcome challenges of co-creation and provide an opinion on the
contribution of digital technologies to the co-creation process by engaging
people in the design, use and management of public spaces, providing new
resources for interaction and users’ empowerment. For that it presents an
overview of the possible contribution of digital technologies to support inclu-
siveness of the co-creation processes that is structured by typologies of digital
tools and their possible interlinking with the steps of the co-creation process. To
improve the understanding of such possibilities it critically addresses strengths
and weaknesses of using digital tools for co-creation and inclusiveness and
provides recommendations for their further development.

Keywords: Co-creation
Inclusiveness
Digital tool

1 Introduction

Public spaces are defined by UNESCO (2017) as “social space that is generally open
and accessible to people”. Public spaces are regarded as democratic if they are con-
stituted with forms of participatory democracy, meaning a “variety of processes pro-
viding people’s involvement in decision-making and the rights to participate in society”
(Maduz 2010; Omtzigt 2009; Parkinson 2012).
Social inclusion contributes to provision of participatory democracy of the public
places in design, use and their management and neglecting it can have detrimental
consequences for a success of the public places (IGOP 2017). However even in the
democratic societies the exclusion can be obvious, and in many cases, has to be

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 209–223, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_17
210 I. Šuklje Erjavec and T. Ruchinskaya

addressed between the lines. Social inclusion defined as “the process of improving the
terms of participation in society, particularly for people who are disadvantaged,
through enhancing opportunities, access to resources, voice and respect for rights” (UN
2016).
Active participation in design, use and management of public spaces can be
facilitated by the following methods:
• Public participation, defined as a “two-way communication and collaborative
problem solving with the goal of achieving better and more acceptable decisions”
(Atkinson et al. 2003; Creighton & Creighton 2008).
• Community engagement is a dimension of public participation and “a process of
inclusive participation which supports mutual respect of values, strategies, and
actions for authentic partnership of people affiliated with or self-identified by
geographic proximity, special interest or similar situations to address issues
affecting the well-being of the community” (Jones and Wells 2007).
• Co-creation process as a special type of collaboration, where people are working or
acting jointly with others to create something that is not known in advance. “Co-
creation is an act of collective creativity” (Sanders and Stappers 2008).
It is notable that the co-creation method is fundamentally different from public partic-
ipation and citizen engagement. It increases opportunities for achieving social inclusion
in public places because it recognises the decision-making rights of people, produce a
new public value, promote of community self-organisation and empowerment of the
excluded. (Leading Cities 2014; Sanches and Frankel 2010). It has a potential for
overcoming the limitations of time and geography and may allow a significant leap in
the scale and influence of public involvement” (Leading Cities 2014).
Whereas public open spaces involve both spatial as well as social structures, their
characteristics are as much formed by the activities, attitudes and perceptions of people
as they are by physical setting, features and elements. Moreover, the presence or
absence of people defines the character and spirit of public place, influences its
attractiveness, and forms its visual appearance, extending the concept of co-creation
beyond planning and design activities to the area of implementation, use and man-
agement of place as well. Being public, such places should also cater for diversity of
population, allowing people of all ages, sizes, abilities and disabilities to use and enjoy
public places. Providing facilities for one group of users should result in solutions that
addresses the needs of many other groups. Aspects of equality and inclusion within
processes of co-creation are challenging.
From here the co-creation process in design, use and management of public open
spaces is investigated further as an advanced process of participative democracy and a
necessary condition of a more inclusive society. Thus, inclusiveness is considered to
underpin the philosophy of co-creation processes and is implemented through inclusive
indicators, including collaboration of uses, empowerment of community, interactivity,
connectivity, equality, accessibility, efficiency, convenience and flexibility (Design
Council 2017; CABE 2006). However, in reality it is difficult to accomplish all of
them. Thus, it is accepted that inclusiveness in co-creation process can be achieved on
an offset basis, where the achievement of several inclusive indicators compensates for,
or offsets, others.
 A Spotlight of Co-creation and Inclusiveness 211

The chapter studies co-creation processes in public spaces in its wider context and
investigates advantages of using digital tools to support co-creation activities and
facilitate inclusiveness of public places.

2 Co-creation Within the Context of Public Open Space

Initially, the term co-creation has been used as an innovation management term and a
form of economic strategy. It was defined by Prahalad and Ramaswamy as part of a
product development and business strategy as “the joint creation of value by the
company and the customer; allowing the customer to co-construct the service experi-
ence to suit their context” (Prahalad and Ramaswamy 2004). Surprisingly, it is less
common in ‘creative’ disciplines like architecture, urban planning and design. There
collaborative approaches are defined as public participation, participatory design,
cooperative design, co-design, hands-on urbanism and similar. However, such concepts
are not covering all the important and relevant aspects of the co-creation related to
comprehensive spatial development but represent its individual parts and units of the
wider context.
Co-creation for spatial development means a joint development, generation, pro-
duction and creation of new proposals of “contextual and unique solutions” that are
based on specific, local and personal knowledge and skills, potentials and opportunities
as well as problems, and obstacles of the community and place. In the Co-Creating
Cities publication prepared by Leading Cities in 2014, the co-creative process is
defined by nine key characteristics. These are: “systemic, innovative and productive,
collaborative, diverse, hierarchy-flattening, bi-or multi-directional, repeated and
intense, mutually beneficial and trusted and transparent” (Leading Cities 2014).
Co-creative techniques give communities and individuals more direct involvement
in defining their needs and priorities, collaboratively finding solutions, influencing
decisions and achieving better outcomes. This process requires a transparency of a co-
creation process as well as good, supporting tools and methodologies for information
and ideas flow among stakeholders, their interaction and mutual development of
knowledge and skills. That produces significant challenges in terms of the time and
costs required to effectively engage stakeholder groups and to create accessible rep-
resentations that help citizens in their participation and engagement. The requirement to
process a huge amount and complexity of information could create barriers for a
successful co-creation process.
An even bigger challenge is to successfully address the aspect of “common benefits
for the whole community,” which is especially relevant in the context of public open
space. To be “inclusive and collaborative” means to be a process accessible to all,
involving and equally addressing different context-related stakeholders, from public
authorities, experts, NGOs to entire publics, and foster cross-sectoral cooperation.
Therefore, it should incorporate a variety of principles, methods and tools to encourage
and support the participation and transforms stakeholders from “passive audiences” to
“active players”. Very important aspect for the long-term reliability and successfulness
is ‘credibility’. That means, that participants and all others concerned can trust and feel
confident about the aims, issues and process development and see evidence that their
212 I. Šuklje Erjavec and T. Ruchinskaya

views have been considered. This also means that all sources of information, creative
process steps and decision-making elements are transparent and verifiable within the
whole process.
To be “open and responsive” is not only sharing and deciding but also developing
and doing things, which is flexible enough to respond and adapt to social and spatial
context and change. And has no pre-defined optimum solutions or preferences. Such
approach is neither top-down nor bottom-up but shares power between government,
citizens and other stakeholders, and creates partnership for consensus.
Co-creation is also a co-learning process, in which stakeholders learn from one
another and participants assist each other to develop better solutions and improve the
quality of life and local environment of the whole community in the long-term.
Creating new dimensions of collective creativity on each stage of co-creation from
identification of the problem to implementation of results and managing outcomes,
provide people an equal opportunity to engage in the decision making, where everyone
can be creative and contribute to the place making. Integration of resources during co-
creation improves the adaptability of co-creation process. The flexibility of the process
achieved by integration of knowledge of different users and understanding that, what is
being created can be changed by the community.
To effectively use all the potentials of the co-creation approach for the development
of public open spaces, it is necessary to understand it in its broader sense. That means
taking into consideration also aspects of spatial setting and social functioning of public
open space. To achieve this, the concept of co-creating public open spaces must include
all stages of the spatial development process and address all types of related collabo-
ration activities. That is: involving end users (citizens) and other relevant stakeholders,
sharing information and local knowledge, collaborating on data gathering, expressing
opinions, needs, wishes and values, defining priorities visions and aims, decision
making as well as the placemaking with different participatory planning and co-design
activities, co-management.
When dealing with public spaces, the co-creation aspects of actual activities and
creativity of users in real time and space, may be sometimes even more relevant for
successful development of the place and its inclusiveness. Involving citizens into
implementation and management of real public open space opens another dimension of
co-creation, the dimension of actual ‘doing’. It means co-producing, the physical,
spatial solutions, interventions, values, identities, contents and messages thus co-
forming and co-developing spatial and social characteristics of place.
This wider understanding of possible acts of co-creation for public open space
development is in line with the Four-D Model for Civic Engagement, defining four
important categories of engagement: “Discover, Debate, Decide and Do” (Digital
Engagement Cookbook 2017). By the scheme bellow (Fig. 1), we present the inter-
relation between co-creation approach and open space development. It demonstrates
how co-creation extends to the “DO category”, thus the co-creating activities of
implementation, use and management of place. To better explain how the co-creation
could be applied into the comprehensive spatial development process, it presents dif-
ferent relations to some more often used aspects and methodologies.
With suitable design of place and its elements (especially when using opportunities
of new technologies) such co-creation of real places could be extended in time as its
 A Spotlight of Co-creation and Inclusiveness 213

Fig. 1. Co-creation within the timeline of the public open space development

permanent adaptability and responsiveness to users’ interventions and needs. Many

new technologies such as touch screens, interactive surfaces and elements, smart fur-
niture and other responsive environmental systems using sensors and actuators,
embedded sound and video systems, microclimate control systems and similar, are
offering a wide range of possibilities for users to temporarily or permanently change,
adapt, personalise the place or respond to it by their activities and ways of use.

3 Using Digital Tools for Co-creation and Inclusiveness

The use of new technologies in our everyday life for work, education and leisure is
becoming a reality as well as big challenge for urban development. Information and
communications technologies (ICT) and digital literacy are increasingly necessary to
engage in everyday social activities - to access public information, to bring together
different kinds of knowledge, to facilitate communication and collaboration between a
growing number of projects and initiatives, to communicate with social networks, to
spread new skills and abilities, etc. Digital transition will not automatically provide us
with inclusive society, but it can contribute to “building more equal, fairer and
empowering society provided that there is a political will”.
In the process of co-creation of public spaces, ICT can be a useful tool to overcome
challenges and to achieve inclusiveness of public spaces, providing different types of
assistance and contributing to equality and accessibility of co-creation process
(Table 1). Digital tools are suitable for all age groups; they provide different forms of
outreach to all, and an option of equal access to the internet and to important online
resources.
The combination of offline and online tools is beneficial for changing the demo-
graphics of community engagement. Digital tools can assist in learning new skills and
getting a new knowledge and sharing information. They can be especially supportive to
particular groups of people (for example disabled users and young people) as may
improve access and use of places for disabled people, encourage them to be socially
active and increase opportunities that a place can offer to them.
214 I. Šuklje Erjavec and T. Ruchinskaya

Table 1. Using digital tools for supporting different actions and activities of the co-creation
process.
Co-creation Co-creation activities Examples of specific digital tools
process actions
PREPARATION Defining problems issues Better Reykjavik, CitizenLab,
Co-creating the and aims, Defining goals Engagement HQ, Front Porch Forum,
context and starting and visions Hy.OpenInnovation, i-Neighbors,
points Public engagement MiMedellín (Colombia), NextDoor,
Choosing priorities & Nexthamburg, Our Common Place,
Setting budgets StickyRoom, Wheelmap (Germany);
WayCyberparks;
Budget Simulator, Citizen Budget,
CrowdGauge, Wejit
DISCOVER for Information, engagement, Better Reykjavik, CitizenLab,
understanding crowdsourcing Engagement HQ, Front Porch Forum,
urban reality Hy.OpenInnovation, i-Neighbors,
Spatial and social MiMedellín (Colombia), NextDoor,
analysis of the local Nexthamburg, Our Common Place,
context StickyRoom, Wheelmap (Germany);
WayCyberparks;
Engage with location, BlockPooling, Foursquare, Harvest
Community mapping, data Digital Planning, Madame Mayor I have
collection an idea (France), Placecheck (UK),
Social Pinpoint, Sparq® 3, Textizen
Poll, YouCanPlan, Whrr
Storing information Cloud, harKopen, Social Pinpoint
Making sense of data CivicInsight, Many Eyes, FixMyStreet,
VoiceYourView, Peckham Coal Line
and Kirkwood green Space (UK)
DEBATE Reporting FixMyStreet, Public Stuff, SeeClickFix
evaluation, Brainstorming Codigital, Ethel, e-deliberation,
refinement of ideas Loomio, Neighborland, Open Planet
Ideas, Stickyworld
Sharing knowledge Community Almanac, Location-Aware
Multimedia Stories, Neighborhow
Annotating places Placecheck app, Ushahidi
Visualization & discussion Lapse, Many Eyes, Spatial Media,
StickyRoom
Offline and online Consultation Manager, Quirky
experiences
Offering rewards for ideas Innocentive, OpenIdeo
DECIDE Share ideas, joint decision- Civic Commons, Flemish Living Lab
making Platform, harKopen, Innocentive,
Quirky, Loomio - Walk [Your City]
(USA), Madame Mayor I have an idea
(France), Many Eyes, M@nor Labs,
(continued)
 A Spotlight of Co-creation and Inclusiveness 215

Table 1. (continued)
Co-creation Co-creation activities Examples of specific digital tools
process actions
Minecraft (UN Programme), OpenIdeo,
Open Planet Ideas, Sparq® 3,
Wheelmap (Germany)
Voting Cityzen, Open IDEO,
Raise awareness and lobby Websites Walk Your City (USA)
governments
Budged voting Citizen Budget
DO - design a All in one M@nor Labs, OpenIdeo, Open Planet
solution Ideas
Co-design
Modelling concepts and Connect to Life, Flux Space, Lapse,
virtual prototypes Many Eyes
Site specific media Cityscape Digital, MetroQuest
experiences
Play a game and plan for Community PlanIt, CrowdGauge, Fold-
your community it, Foursquare, M@nor Labs, Minecraft
DO - delivery & Execution of the project MetroQuest, Digital Planning
implementation Showcase of results
Physical co-
implementation - public
engagement
DO - use Site specific (media) Digital installations, media screens, The
experiences Intel Connect to Life Experience
Co-creation by use
MAINTAIN Public engagement
MONITOR Questionnaires Ask Them PPF, All Our Ideas, Citizen
Direct data feedback from Space, Google forms, Granicus
users SpeakUp, Wiki surveys

There is a big choice of digital tools available for the co-creation of public spaces.
There are mobile applications, digital platforms, digital social networking websites,
social media channels, blogs, site-specific media experiences, etc. These tools support
either the whole process of co-creation of public spaces or its specific activities as
presented in the overview table.
Examples of platforms that support the whole process of co-creation of public
spaces include StickyWorld (StickyWorld 2017) and YouCanPlan (YouCanPlan 2017).
There are also more general co-creation platforms, initiated by platform owners, or
their partner organizations which could be used in any industry, for example Open-
IDEO (OpenIDEO 2017) and Quirky (Quirky 2017), Idea Connection (Idea connection
2017), CitizenLab (CitizenLab 2017), Crowdbrite (Crowdbrite Solutions 2017) and
216 I. Šuklje Erjavec and T. Ruchinskaya

EveryAware (EveryAware 2016). They can me modified to customer requirements by

their software providers. Webbased Networks (for example, Living Labs (ENoLL
2017) provide offline and online opportunities to participate in co-creation processes,
which makes the process more attractive and accessible to certain groups of users.
Digital platforms, where community members can initiate projects, connect community
members around a shared interest, collect contributions and compile these contributions
to a solution (HitRecord, Quirky).
There are city-specific co-creation projects, which use their own digital platforms
with a strong local identity aiming to empower local communities to take ownership of
changes in cities and combining online with offline approaches. OrganiCity is an EU-
funded project, for co-creative practices in Aarhus, London and Santander, challenging
mobility, air quality and urban regeneration. Zo! City was launched in 2010 in
southeast Amsterdam (Netherlands) by TransformCity. It is based on storytelling to
make the platform easy to engage with (Transform City 2015). Co-creation platforms
Medellín (Medellín 2017) and Better Reykjavik (Citizens Foundation 2017) allow
citizens to play a key part in the transformation of the city. They are designed for
citizen solutions to these city’s urban challenges. The Nooks and Crannies co-creation
project and platform focused on local improvements in Bristol (UK) for the redesign of
a link bridge and access lane (Hands on Bristol 2014). These platforms are “fragmented
and uncertain on the demand-side and lacking common standards in the supply-side”
and are not well-connected to “rapidly growing data” (European Innovation Partnership
2016). A common framework of co-creation process in cities should be established, so
it can be applied to the needs of particular cities or places.
Platforms that support the whole process of co-creation are able to provide a high
level of transparency of the process, activities and outcomes of co-creation, which
motivates users to get engaged with the project (Nambisan and Nambisan 2013). It is
argued that digital tools are successful in facilitating inclusiveness of co-creation
process in public spaces and that they are good for supporting inclusive indicators
(Table 2).

Table 2. Advantages and disadvantages of using digital tools for inclusive co-creation of public
spaces.
Indicators of Advantages of using digital tools Disadvantages of using digital tools
inclusion for inclusive co-creation of public for inclusive co-creation of public
spaces spaces
Empowerment • Assisting in giving people • Requires a moderator, manager
of community decision making powers, dialog and facilitator.
and control • Can be dominated by articulate and
• Personalize public spaces confident individuals if not
carefully facilitated
(continued)
 A Spotlight of Co-creation and Inclusiveness 217

Table 2. (continued)
Indicators of Advantages of using digital tools Disadvantages of using digital tools
inclusion for inclusive co-creation of public for inclusive co-creation of public
spaces spaces
Collaboration • Providing logistics to co-creation • Requires a moderator, manager
process, including and facilitator
understanding, improvement, • Workshops can be dominated by
and addressing urban issues articulate and confident individuals
• Provide an ability to communicate if not carefully facilitated
with social networks • Difference in participant
• Changing the demographics of confidence in their creative skills
co-creation process • Cybersecurity, targeted filtering,
• Targeting at excluded or ‘hard to fake information, gender and racial
reach groups’ bias embedded into various
• Developing a common vision and algorithms
assist to jointly create a product or
service
• Generating discussions
• Assisting in handling conflicts
• Building a sense of community
ownership
• Facilitating collaborating between
projects and initiatives
• Facilitating transparency of
decision-making processes
• Assisting in spreading of new
skills and knowledge
Efficiency • Cost & Time Effective • Requires financial sustainability
• Robust data collection, its • Cybersecurity, targeted filtering,
analysis, categorization, fake information
redistribution of information
• Provide different forms of
outreach to stakeholder groups
• Efficient way of identifying and
clarifying key issues
• Bring together different kinds of
knowledge
• Easy evaluation of a results of co-
creation
Interactivity • Interactive and engaging • Needs to be publicized to generate
• Creating debates and exchange of interest
views • Excludes those without access to
• Assisting in decipher of urban the internet
information • Difference in participant’s
• Enabling participants to express confidence in their creative skills
their creativity • Difficult to interpret participant’s
ideas
(continued)
218 I. Šuklje Erjavec and T. Ruchinskaya

Table 2. (continued)
Indicators of Advantages of using digital tools Disadvantages of using digital tools
inclusion for inclusive co-creation of public for inclusive co-creation of public
spaces spaces
• Facilitating transparency of • Cybersecurity, targeted filtering,
decision-making processes fake information
• Adding variety to consultation
• Engaging people who might not
otherwise get involved
Connectivity • Reaching a larger number of • Excludes those without access to
people the internet
• Spreading of new skills and
knowledge
Equality • Suitable for all age groups • Needs to be publicized to generate
• Providing different forms of interest
outreach to stakeholder groups • Excludes those without access to
• Attractive to particular groups of the internet
people • Difficult to be sure that all
• Respecting people privacy stakeholders or interests are
• Providing an option of equal represented
access to internet and important • Some people may feel intimidated
online resources • Cybersecurity, gender and racial
• Spreading of new skills and bias embedded into various
knowledge algorithms
Accessibility • Accessible to people of all • Excludes those without access to
abilities and backgrounds the internet
Convenience • Addressing the objectives of co- • Cybersecurity
creation
• Choosing a convenient time and
place to participate
• Providing different forms of
outreach to stakeholder groups
• Overcoming distances,
• Moving through different layers
of spaces and time
• Creating boundaries and memory
• Creating read/write publishing
space
• Respecting people privacy
Flexibility • Providing different forms of • Cybersecurity
participation, connected to
understanding, improvement,
and subversion of urban issues
• Providing different forms of
outreach to different stakeholders
• Designed for a specific purpose.
• Choosing the most appropriate
type and form of outreach
 A Spotlight of Co-creation and Inclusiveness 219

Digital tools can be used to generate citizen empowerment by improving collab-

oration, dialog and control in co-creation process of public spaces and giving people
decision making powers. At the same time, portable technologies have an ability to
personalize public spaces through users’ maps, photos, experiences, etc., which give
people a feeling of personal belonging (Iaconesi and Persico 2013).
Digital tools can improve the efficiency of collaboration in co-creation process of
public spaces. The support of digital tools in tasks that requires, scale, speed, inter-
activity, connectivity “is not a luxury, but a non-negotiable necessity” (Bhalla 2016). It
makes the logistics simpler and brings a community into contact with the co- creation
process. It provides more robust data collection and its analysis, categorization,
redistribution of information and acquiring new skills. Online dialogues are less costly,
quicker and easier to arrange, and can involve a much larger number of stakeholders
and citizens (Viegas et al. 2007; Sinclair et al. 2007).
Digital tools can be applied in layers to address different objectives of co-creation in
public spaces making the process more flexible and user orientated. For example, they
can contribute to generation of ideas, which involves understanding, discussion of urban
issues, refinement of features and co- creation (Janner-Klausner 2017; Bhalla 2016).
Technology-enabled approaches, providing different types of assistance, may
contribute to equality and accessibility of co-creation process. They are suitable for all
age groups; provide different forms of outreach to all, and an option of equal access to
internet and to important online resources. Digital tools can be more attractive to
particular groups of people (for example disabled users and young people) as they
improve access and use of places for disabled people, encourage them to be socially
active and increase opportunities that a place can offer to the users. They provide
references to culture, heritage and public art in a digital format, which is very attractive
to young people. Digital tools can assist in learning new skills and acquiring new
knowledge. The combination of offline and online tools is beneficial for changing the
demographics of community engagement.
Digital tools may encourage interactivity in co-creation of public spaces. They can
support public debates, exchanging views, interpreting urban information, and enabling
participants to express their creativity. They provide a variety of entry points to con-
sultation and transparency around decision-making processes. The application of
digital tools can provide a convenient and flexible way to co-create public spaces.
These tools allow people to choose the appropriate methodology for the project that can
be designed for a specific purpose at convenient time and place for participation, while
at the same time respecting people’s privacy. They assist in overcoming distance, to
move through different layers of spaces and time. They can create boundaries, mem-
ories and read/write publishing spaces.
There are challenges of management, both personal and digital, in using IT tools for
the co-creation of public places. Online co-creation processes require an experienced
moderator as well as a manager and a facilitator. There are differences in participant
confidence which should be considered when engaging different stakeholders in co-
creation processes. Cybersecurity, targeted filtering, fake information, gender and racial
bias embedded into various digital algorithms are challenges that should be addressed.
Exclusion from communications and lack of ICT access, defined as service exclusion
and considered as a dimension of social exclusion, are also known under the label
220 I. Šuklje Erjavec and T. Ruchinskaya

‘digital divide’ and should be resolved at the government level (Sinclair et al. 2007).
There is evidence that lack of access to ICT can foster disadvantages “in a direct way,
relating to access to services and opportunities or indirect way, relating to local rela-
tionships and social capital” (Servon and Nelson 2001; Pantazis et al. 2006). Unaf-
fordable costs, lack of awareness and trust to go online, luck of digital skills and
communications literacy can lead to self-exclusion (GOV. UK 2014). These individ-
uals are unable to participate in normal social life are “condition of ‘partial citizenship”
(Sinclair et al. 2007).

4 Discussion and Conclusions

The co-creation of public open space is a way to engage different stakeholders with the
everyday urban environment, based on equality, diversity and social cohesion. To
appropriately address all the complexities of public space development, it should be
considered a multi staged process, involving all phases of spatial development. That
means addressing all types of related collaboration activities, including citizen
engagement, sharing and interpreting information, co-learning, collaborating,
expressing opinions, defining priorities, refining ideas, making decisions, creating
common values, implementing solutions, monitoring, etc. In this way, positive out-
comes of co-creation in public spaces exceed features of the final product, a spatial
solution. It has a very strong potential to enrich the community life by creating
interaction between the community members, to develop a local sense of place through
active engagement with it, as well reducing vandalism and urban alienation.
However, it is difficult to involve diverse groups of people (e.g. academics, busi-
ness people, non-profits, public servants, citizens) with different expectations regarding
pace, style of work and timelines. The difference between experts and the general
citizens, or between scholarly knowledge and informal knowledge, can also create
conflicts and boundaries between stakeholders and undermine the legitimacy of the
process. Any inequities that exist between groups of people involved should be bal-
anced and effectively mitigated. Inclusive strategies for engaging hard-to-reach
stakeholders, continuing dialogue, establishing partnerships and carrying out collabo-
rative work should be introduced, while involving users in the process through
workshops, user generated content, data collection, prototyping, or other activities, in
order to get them engaged around the urban problem and suggest a solution.
This chapter argues that digital tools can be very useful to overcome different
challenges of co-creation. They may provide different types of assistance for all age
groups, contribute to equality and accessibility of co-creation process, enable learning
new skills and promote healthier lifestyles. The overview of available digital tools
proves there is a wide choice available for co-creation of public spaces, supporting
either the whole process or its specific activities.
Many examples collected during the Cyberparks Project indicate that digital tools
can contribute to a better understanding of public places, social networking, collabo-
ration and community involvement (Cyberparks Project 2016). Introducing a digital
layer to the existing public space for co-creation in real time and place may further
improve an inclusive dimension of public place in physical and digital terms.
 A Spotlight of Co-creation and Inclusiveness 221

‘Decoding’, ‘debugging’, and ‘hacking’ in public space are forms of participation,

connected to understanding, improvement, and subversion of urban issues, which fol-
lows the main objectives of co-creation (Dork and Monteyne 2011). They assign roles to
citizens and propose a range of activities to change the perception and reality of urban
relations. Decoding involves publishing of data and spatial knowledge and its inter-
pretation. The digital tools that can help to “decipher urban code” and “make sense of
urban information streams”, focusing on specific aspects of urban life, and making the
issues more accessible, interactive and visual. By filing ‘bug reports’, citizens can report
on urban issues by web-based forms. ‘Hacking’ public place is another way to reach the
public by creating prototypes of change and spreading them like computer viruses.
Surprisingly, the wide range of opportunities of the use of ICT is still poorly
recognized and discussed among urban planners and designers (Houghton et al. 2014).
There are many specific challenges related to the planning processes from the both
perspectives, use of ICT and co-creation. To effectively use the co-creation approach
for planning and design of public open spaces it is important to closely relate and adjust
all different aspects as well as different types of ICT tools to the particular stages of the
spatial development timeline. New projects, as for example C3Places (C3Places 2018),
are turning the focus also on planning and development aspects of quality of place,
exploring how different potentials of ICT could be better understood and integrated into
the POS development practice.
Finally, it is important to point out, that digital tools may be used also as a part of
the design of place and its elements to attract co-creation and enable permanent
adaptability and responsiveness of public open space. Many new technologies such as
touch screens, interactive surfaces and elements, smart furniture and other responsive
environmental systems using sensors and actuators, embedded sound and video sys-
tems, microclimate control systems and similar, are offering a wide range of possi-
bilities for users to temporarily or permanently change, adapt, personalize the place or
respond to it by their activities and ways of use.

References
Atkinson, T., Cantillon, B., Marlier, E., Nolan, B.: Social Indicators: The EU and Social Inclusion.
Oxford University Press, Oxford (2003). https://doi.org/10.1093/0199253498.001.0001
Bhalla, G.: Collaboration and co-creation: the road to creating value. Mark. J., 25 May 2016.
http://www.marketingjournal.org/collaboration-and-co-creation-the-road-to-creating-value/
CABE. Principles of inclusive design (2006). http://www.cabe.org.uk/files/the-principles-of-
inclusive-design.pdf
CITIZEN BUDGET. Features (2017). http://www.citizenbudget.com/
Citizens Foundation. Better Reykjavík – Connects citizens to city hall (2017). http://www.
citizens.is/portfolio/better-reykjavik-connects-citizens-and-administration-all-year-round/,
auge. CrowdGauge (2017). http://crowdgauge.org/
CitizenLab. Co-create our city (2017). https://www.citizenlab.co/product
Consultation Manager. Top 5 Online Engagement Tools, 17 September 2016. https://consulta
tionmanager.com/top5-online-engagement-tools/
Creighton & Creighton, Inc. What is Public Participation? (2008). http://www.creightonandcreig
hton.com
222 I. Šuklje Erjavec and T. Ruchinskaya

Crowdbrite Solutions. Projects (2017). http://www.crowdbrite.net/

Design Council. Inclusive Environments (2017). http://www.designcouncil.org.uk/what-we-do/
inclusive-environments
C3Places Using ICT for co-creation of inclusive public places, JPI Urban Europe, 2017–2020.
https://c3places.eu/
Cyberparks Fostering knowledge about the relationship between Information and Communica-
tion Technologies and Public Spaces supported by strategies to improve their use and
attractiveness, COST Action TU 1306, 2015–2018. http://cyberparks-project.eu/
Digital Engagement Cookbook. Digital Engagement Cookbook, Methods Directory (2017).
http://engagementdb.org
Dork, M., Monteyne, D.: Urban Co-Creation: Envisioning New Digital Tools for Activism and
Experimentation in the City (2011). http://mariandoerk.de/urbancocreation/hpc2011.pdf
ENoLL. Living Labs (2017). http://www.openlivinglabs.eu/node/1429
European Innovation Partnership on smart cities and communities (EIP). Towards Open Urban
Platforms for Smart Cities and Communities (2016). https://eu-smartcities.eu/sites/all/files/
MemorandumofUnderstandingonUrbanPlatforms.pdf
EveryAware. EveryAware Whitepaper, Enhancing Environmental Awareness through Social
Information Technologies, November 2016. http://www.everyaware.eu/wp-content/uploads/
2011/04/EveryAware.pdf
GOV.UK. Government Digital Inclusion Strategy, December 2014. https://www.gov.uk/
government/publications/government-digital-inclusion-strategy/government-digital-
inclusion-strategy
Hands on Bristol. Nooks and Crannies (2014). http://www.hands-on-bristol.co.uk/new-page-1/
Houghton, K., Miller, E., Foth, M.: Integrating ICT into the planning process: impacts,
opportunities and challenges. Aust. Planner 51(1), 24–33 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1080/
07293682.2013.770771
Iaconesi, S., Persico, O.: The co- creation of the city. Re-programming cities using real-time user
generated content (2013). http://www.academia.edu/3013140/The_Co-Creation_of_the_City
Idea connection (2017). https://www.ideaconnection.com/open-innovation-services.html
IGOP. Social Inclusion and Participatory Democracy (2017). https://www.uclg-cisdp.org/en/
observatory/reports/social-inclusion-and-participatory-democracy-conceptual-discussion-
local-action
Janner-Klausner, D.: Using online tools for community engagement and consultation (2017).
http://www.commonplace.is/blog/using-online-tools-for-community-engagement-and-consult
ation
Jones, L., Wells, K.: Strategies for academic and clinician engagement in community-
participatory partnered research. JAMA 297, 407–410 (2007)
Leading Cities. Co-Creating Cities: Defining Co-Creation as a Means of Citizen Engagement,
March 2014. http://leadingcities2014.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/co-creation-formatted-
draft-6.pdf
Maduz, L.: Direct democracy. Living Reviews in Democracy, vol. 2, University of Zurich
(2010). https://www.lrd.ethz.ch/index.php/lrd/article/viewArticle/lrd-2010-1/22
Medellín. ¡Perticipa Y Haz Parte de la Transformasion! (2017). http://www.mimedellin.org/
Nambisan, S., Nambisan, P.: Engaging Citizens in Co-Creation in Public Services: Lessons
Learned and Best Practices. IBM Center for The Business of Government (2013). http://www.
businessofgovernment.org/sites/default/files/Engaging Citizens in Co-Creation in Public
Service.pdf
Omtzigt, D.J.: Survey on Social inclusion: Theory and Policy. Oxford University, Oxford
Institute for Global Economic Development, January 2009. http://ec.europa.eu/regional_
policy/archive/policy/future/pdf/1_omtzigt_final_formatted.pdf
OpenIDEO. Active challenges (2017). https://challenges.openideo.com
 A Spotlight of Co-creation and Inclusiveness 223

Pantazis, C., Gordon, D., Levitas, R.: Poverty and Social Exclusion in Britain. The Policy Press,
Bristol (2006)
Parkinson, J.: Democracy and Public Place. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2012). https://
chisineu.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/democracy-public-spaces.pdf
Prahalad, C.K., Ramaswamy, V.: Co-creation experiences: the next practice in value creation
J. Interact. Mark. 18(3) (2004). https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/
35225/20015_ftp.pdf
Quirky. Start Inventing (2017). https://www.quirky.com/
Sanches, M.G., Frankel, L.: Co-design in public spaces: an interdisciplinary approach to street
furniture development (2010). http://www.drs2010.umontreal.ca/data/PDF/105.pdf
Sanders, E.B.N., Stappers, P.J.: Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign 4(1), 5–
18 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068
Servon, L.J., Nelson, M.K.: Community technology centres and the urban technology gap. Int.
J. Urban Reg. Res. 25(2), 419–426 (2001)
Sinclair, S., Bramley, G., Dobbie, L., Morag, G.: Social Inclusion and communication. Review of
Literature, November 2007. http://www.communicationsconsumerpanel.org.uk/downloads/
Research/LowIncomeConsumers_Research/Socialinclusionandcommunications/
Socialinclusionandcommunications.pdf
StickyWorld. Ideas Matter (2017). http://info.stickyworld.com/
Transform City. TransformCity® is the most integral and actionable urban transformation
platform (2015). http://www.transformcity.com/
UN. Identifying social inclusion and exclusion (2016). http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/rwss/2016/
chapter1.pdf
Viegas, F.B., Wattenberg, M., van Ham, F., Kriss, J., McKeon, M.: Many eyes: a site for
visualization at internet scale. TVCG: Trans. Vis. Comput. Graph. 13(6), 1121–1128 (2007)
UNESCO: Inclusion Through Access to Public Space Social and Human Sciences (2017). http://
www.unesco.org/new/en/social-and-human-sciences/themes/urban-development/migrants-
inclusion-in-cities/good-practices/inclusion-through-access-to-public-space/
YouCanPlan. YouCanPlan (2017). http://www.participatedb.com/tools/193

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
3.7
CyberParks Songs and Stories - Enriching
Public Spaces with Localized Culture Heritage
Material such as Digitized Songs and Stories

Kåre Synnes1(&) , Georgios Artopoulos2 ,

Carlos Smaniotto Costa3 , Marluci Menezes4 ,
and Gaia Redaelli5
1
Luleå University of Technology, Luleå, Sweden
[email protected]
2
The Cyprus Institute, Nicosia, Cyprus
[email protected]
3
CeiED Interdisciplinary Research Centre for Education and Development,
Universidade Lusófona, Lisbon, Portugal
[email protected]
4
National Laboratory for Civil Engineering – LNEC, Lisbon, Portugal
[email protected]
5
Politecnico di Milano, Milan, Italy
[email protected]

Abstract. This chapter offers theoretical considerations and reflections on

technological solutions that contribute to digitally supported documentation,
access and reuse of localised heritage content in public spaces. It addresses
immaterial cultural heritage, including informal stories that could emerge and be
communicated by drawing hyperlinks between digitised assets, such as songs,
images, drawings, texts and more, and not yet documented metadata, as well as
augmenting interaction opportunities with interactive elements that relate to
multiple media stored in databases and archives across Europe. The aim is to
enable cultural heritage to be experienced in novel ways, supported by the
proliferation of smartphones and ubiquitous Internet access together with new
technical means for user profiling, personalisation, localisation, context-
awareness and gamification. The chapter considers cyberparks as digitally
enhanced public spaces for accessing and analyzing European cultural heritage
and for enriching the interpretation of the past, along with theoretical ramifi-
cations and technological limitations. It identifies the capacities of a proposed
digital environment together with design guidelines for interaction with cultural
heritage assets in public spaces. The chapter concludes with describing a tax-
onomy of digital content that can be used in order to enhance association and
occupation conditions of public spaces, and with discussing technological
challenges associated with enriching public spaces with localized cultural her-
itage material.

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 224–237, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_18
 CyberParks Songs and Stories 225

Keywords: Geotagged cultural expressions
Digital cultural heritage

Historic urban fabric
Immaterial heritage
Contextual cultures

Participatory design

1 Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to discuss the theoretical and technological approach of
the CyberParks Songs and Stories concept, which aims at increasing the understanding
of European cultures and creating an intercultural bridge to respond to the need for
reflective and creative societies. It envisions to provide plural meanings and interpre-
tations of (and on) heritage to citizens through collective and collaborative methods for
semantic classification, contextualisation and augmentation of digital assets and asso-
ciated metadata by means of machine learning, social analysis, gamification and crowd-
sourcing. The proposed method has similarities to what Kontkanen et al. (2016) used
for species identification in terms of collaborative mechanisms.
To understand and inform the present by richer interpretations of the past, three
cases of socio-cultural environments are selected: Fado songs and the identity of
Mouraria neighbourhood in Lisbon (PT), oral traditions and expressions of the Patios
of Córdoba (ES) and Sami Yoiks and storytelling in Sápmi (Laponia region, SE). The
three cases are listed as Intangible Cultural Heritage by the Intergovernmental Com-
mittee for the Safeguarding of the Intangible Cultural Heritage (ICH) of UNESCO
since 1996 (Sami Yoiks), 2011 (Fado) and 2012 (Patios). The three cases are subject to
the tension between continuity with the traditions and changes, in particular those that
transform substantially the layout of the territories wherein the specific cases of ICH
have emerged. This tension undermines safeguarding and may jeopardise the conti-
nuity of the ICH. The concept does not define ICH as something frozen and perpet-
uated, which contradict the procedural nature of the production of ICH, but as socio-
cultural subjects consciously embodied in a process of enriching, enhancing and
transmitting it. The intergenerational continuum, and the spatio-temporal context of
social activity, further impact the fluidity of heritage and identity.

2 The Challenge of Accessing Intangible Cultural Heritage

The concept recognises the pressing need in contemporary societies for inclusion and
integration of information stored in individuals’ memories to the heritage archives.
Specifically understanding information regarding ICH activities as embodied by peo-
ple, communities and societies, is imperative for capturing non-institutional knowl-
edge, as well as complex semantic and conceptual knowledge, often expressed as non-
verbal practices, rites or social relations (Artopoulos and Bakirtzis 2016). In Stiegler’s
(2003) terms, humans leave traces of their histories, although not produced intending to
immediate transmit memories, they do so, for example writing, photography,
phonography and cinematography. This perspective addresses two critical challenges
of contemporary approaches to ICH: (a) facilitating access to knowledge stored in
226 K. Synnes et al.

archives, collections and digital assets; and (b) exploiting the capacity of digital tools
for enabling users to better interpret and understand the big data of ICH.
The three scenarios demonstrate the way this concept will attempt to respond to
these challenges:
Scenario – Fado songs | Joaquim is a member of a
parish council of Mouraria, which is responsible
for the development of the district. He owns a small
repair shop in the Mouraria and is very involved in
sharing the Fado at local 'Tasca' - a typical café or
restaurant - where his grandfather sometimes plays
Fado songs on a Portuguese guitar. Today Joaquim
is walking home from work and passes by a mural
made with the traditional Azulejo tiles, when his
smartphone starts to vibrate notifying him that a point of interest is nearby. He brings up his
mobile phone and the vibration becomes more frequent as he walks closer to the mural.
He stops in front of the mural and opens the mobile app to listen to the Fado song associ-
ated with it. Joaquim is reminiscent of his grandfather performing the song on his guitar,
which awakes a lot of fond memories. He remembers in particular a narrative, a story that
his grandfather tells at his favourite Tasca, which he decides to share with the community of
Fado lovers connected through the app. Joaquim writes the short story and appends a photo
of his grandfather performing the song in the Tasca. He makes a note of asking his grandfa-
ther to play it for him, so that the story can also be annotated with his performance.
Then the app suggests Joaquim to seek out similar murals associated with Fado songs lo-
cated in the area. He accepts the suggestion and is presented with an annotated path along
the way home. He stops at series of murals and associated places and is presented with not
only other Fado songs but also with additional information such as ambient soundscapes,
pictures, voice recordings and videos captured and uploaded by other users. Joaquim spe-
cifically is searching for additional information based on the Fado song played by his grand-
father and when the app returns to him an image, he discovers that there are similar Fado
songs, also related to the docks that were used in the past as harbours, located in the nearby
neighbourhoods. Through the app he can add these locations on the map as points of interest
for later, so that in his next walk around the city he can view the basins from specific van-
tage points that link back to his interests.
When Joaquim returns home, he uses the app to make a note on social media about his
experience. Through multiple loops of this activity, shared by many, a community is formed
about the docks and how to make their old uses and stories more visible to the public. Then
more users of the app contribute content to this thematic group with additional narratives,
effectively crowdsourcing a big amount of data related to the Fado and Mouraria. Eventu-
ally this common activity leads to the publication of articles by journalists that achieve to
raise the interests of local policy makers, such as Joaquim himself, and to promote tacit
arguments of the existing group of interest and researchers in the public. Finally, this action
initiates social reporting activities that highlight everyday issues in Mouraria, such as de-
structive forms of graffiti, shortage of affordable housing and job opportunities, the degrada-
tion of built heritage, as well as the ever-growing gentrification of the area. In the appropri-
ate context this community-building process can culminate in a process wherein people will
be asking to their representatives for suitable solutions to these challenges and hence, to
reviewing the existing urban policies.
 CyberParks Songs and Stories 227

Scenario – The living patio | María is 92

years old and is living all her life in a patio in
the district of Axerquía. There she spent her
childhood, marriage and own family. She lived
there with the extended family of other dwell-
ings: they share the patio as a collective space,
took care of it and in a time participated in the
competition of patios. Maria’s courtyard has
not yet been bought by new owners, and now
the houses are abandoned. Only María lives there, taking care of her plants and of the patio.
María’s daughter left the family home when she married in the 60's and went to live in a flat
with her husband. Every year, in May, Maria’s granddaughter Fuensanta returns to Cór-
doba to meet family and friends and "go to patios". Since Patios were declared by UNESCO
ICH, the patios are attracting growing interest, in special during the Festival. This can affect
the original way of living around most of the courtyards. Fuensanta arrived this year with a
mobile app installed in smartphone. She uploaded some images of her grandmother’s patio
and other old images when they took part in the patio competition. She interviewed her
grandmother about the patio, how the space was shared and the freshness of the summer
thanks to shadow and vegetation. She uploaded this to the app to share it with the Patios’
community. The app invites Fuensanta to explore the courtyard and to record other narra-
tives related to her grandmother’s and to her own life in the courtyard. They go to the laun-
dry and she records her grandmother memoirs about when there was no washing machine
and all the women used to wash by hand. María sings a song she used to sing while doing
the laundry. Fuensanta uploads a photo of the current laundry and two sound records: the
conversation with his grandmother and the song. Then they visit also the old communal
kitchen and remember some of their favourite recipes. They look at a crockery hanging in the
kitchen. They upload a photo of the crockery and hang some of the favourite recipes. The
app offers diverse functions: A) to play songs uploaded by the community members; to local-
ize in the map the sound records and the courtyards where they have been uploaded. Fuen-
santa discovers that there are other interviews of patio residents. B) to shows images and
recipes uploaded by the community members and info about stores selling local and regional
food products. Fuensanta and her sister “go to Patio” and visit some of patios, where some
of their friends still live. One of them tells them that there is an association that is interested
in creating in some patios of the Axerquía cooperative housing in right of use. Her friend
shows her the drawing of a project for renovating the patio and Fuensanta uploads it to the
application and shares it on social networks. Some people and associations interested in the
patios, not as tourist product, get in contact with her. They organize a meeting inside the
patio of their grandmother about how is living it, and upload photos, sound records and
conclusions of the debate into the application. Many other members of the community join
them, as the Instituto Andaluz del Patrimonio Histórico, which includes this new information
in the Atlas of the Intangible Heritage of Andalucia. The municipality and the government of
Andalucia add this action in Good Practices to Safeguard Intangible Cultural Heritage and
to the reports for UNESCO. Some bio-construction cooperatives and the PAX strategy get in
touch with the association and Fuensanta to participate in the patio’s rehabilitation and
select María’s courtyard.
228 K. Synnes et al.

Scenario – Sámi Yoiks | Anna is 25 years old and of

Sámi heritage, the only indigenous people of Scandinavia,
but has as so many others of her generation left her ances-
tral region of Sápmi in the far north of Sweden, Norway,
Finland and Russia. Anna is very aware of her Sámi heri-
tage and wants to learn as much as possible of her heri-
tage. She regularly visits Jokkmokk, a town above the
arctic circle, which is famous for a traditional Sámi winter
market and meeting place established early in the 17th century.
This February winter day, Anna is visiting her aunt Marja in Jokkmokk, whom she will
help sell handmade bracelets of pewter thread and reindeer skin at the market. This is an
excellent occasion for Anna to learn Sámi stories and yoiks (songs), as Marja is known for
her clear voice and keen memory. At the market, Anna notices a poster that describes the
mobile app for collectively building annotated archives of songs and stories, such as yoiks.
Anna asks Marja if she knows about it, which Marja says she does and that it is linked to the
archives at Ajtte, the Sámi museum in Jokkmokk.
Anna downloads the app after the first market day and explores it. She adds yoiks as an
interest and browses some of the publicly available yoiks. She listens to a few of them and
are asked a few reflective questions by the app. When she arrives to the market in the morn-
ing, her smartphone vibrates, and she notices that the app has identified yoiks related to the
Jokkmokk Winter Market. One of the yoiks is from the beginning of the 20th century. Anna is
very intrigued and replays the yoik for Marja to learn more about the yoik and her heritage.
Marja laughs merrily and tells Anna that it is her grandmother’s uncle PerAnte that sings
the yoik about his visit at the market one exceptionally cold winter. Marja tells her that Per-
Ante was a bear hunter and that he was widely known for his bear hides at the market plus
that his wife Sara also sang yoiks. To add information in the app about PerAnte’s yoik be-
comes their joint task during the slower periods at the market, such as adding stories of
PerAnte the bear hunter, his wife Sara and their life together. They use the app to also find
images to associate with the yoik, such as of items exhibited at the Ajtte museum and a mu-
seum in Berlin. Marja has an old photograph at home of PerAnte, Sara and their children in
front of a goathi (a traditional Sámi tent), which they later store using the app.
Marja has learnt PerAnte’s yoik when Anna returns the following summer and they agree
to use the app to capture and store a video of Marja singing the yoik in front of the remains
of the goathi at the outskirts of Jokkmokk. When they store the yoik they are asked about the
copyrights and Marja chooses to make it publically available, but not commercially free.
Two years later, Marja is contacted by a producer that wants to use her yiok as a theme song
for a film about the region, inspired by the story of PerAnte and Sara. The mobile platform
marketplace, that is associated with the app, have made it simple to find and use the stored
yioks while taking both private and commercial considerations into account. Marja accepts
and are then also invited to play a role performing the yoik in the beginning of the film.
The story of PerAnte and Sara, through the efforts of Anna and Marja, first becomes
known as a good example of documenting and promoting Sámi heritage. The story is then
used by the Sámi community to show how hunting rights have belonged to the Sámi, and the
value thereof for the heritage. The Sámi community is in minority in all four nations, but
their joint Sámi council will be able to leverage of the press coverage and public opinion to
improve the conditions for the Sámi community.

These three cases reflect a diversity of spaces, from the small scale of a historic city
structures (Patios) to a medium scale of historic urban areas and riverside cities
 CyberParks Songs and Stories 229

(Lisbon), and the large scale of outdoors, green fields and forest landscapes (in the case
of Sápmi). Further examples are discussed by Smaniotto et al. (2018).

3 Theoretical Framework and User Engagement

Cultural heritage is a key factor of European identity. Europe is a polyphonic society

and its cultural wealth and advantage stem from the safeguarding and continuity of this
diversity, which considers the pluralities of minorities (Pratt 2005). Societal changes
affect the perception of cultural heritage by European citizens. Rapid urbanization,
migration, wars and economic challenges impact European territories with ever-
growing plurality of cultures and identities that must now adapt to a new concept of
European citizenship. The importance of space for the preservation and communication
of histories and identities has been long recognized. This understanding builds on the
premise that space and landscapes contribute to the formation of local cultures and they
are the framework of European natural and cultural heritage, contributing to human
well-being and consolidating European identity (ELC). Co-safeguard, co-reflection on
and transformation of these commons (e.g., heritage assets) can arguably contribute to
the emergence of feelings of stability, continuity and belonging for people (i.e., new
and existing inhabitants).
Manovich (2001: 193) argues that: “in the information age narration and descrip-
tion has changed roles. If traditional cultures provided people with well-defined nar-
ratives (myths, religion) and little ‘stand-alone’ information, today we have too much
information and too few narratives which can tie it all together.” The idea behind this
concept is to utilise a framework of spatially - and contextually - organised narratives
that relies on semantics and machine learning in order to facilitate the analysis and
integration of everyday experiences, and the evolving memories of users into relevant
digital cultural heritage assets. It envisions to achieve this by means of: (a) multi-user
contributions, e.g., software that enables the following operations: mix, edit, reuse,
enhance and enrich data features; and, (b) exchange of information, combined with
expert input, guidance, reflection and discussion (Fig. 1). This data lifecycle in order to
function requires the engagement of the three types of actors: (1) cultural operator, who
will classify digital assets based on dedicated ontologies for each case, (2) expert users
(cultural bearers), who will contextualize digital assets based on semantic models, and
(3) common users, who will reflect on digital assets and add related meaning. This can
be seen as an incremental and iterative process, where machine learning is applied for a
high grade of automation and where these three main actors participate as part of a
crowd-sourcing methodology spurred by gamification techniques. Additional actors
will also be supported, such as the researcher (operating on the ontologies and algo-
rithms) and the administrator (administrating and upgrading the platform).
The cellular structure illustrated in Fig. 2 is based on modules for Big Data
Management (handling digital assets and associated metadata), the proposed platform
(integrating and adapting existing tools), Machine Learning (techniques for reasoning
on metadata through semantic analysis), and enabling techniques (gamification,
crowdsourcing, Arianna, and social analysis), in order to facilitate the study of socio-
cultural representations, and participant memories and interpretations that require the
230 K. Synnes et al.

Fig. 1. Data Lifecycle. The exponentially iterative process of user engagement-collection-

digestion-semantic classification-automated suggestion loops facilitates the enrichment of data
collections and reflecting on them, and thus promotes dialogue between user communities.

various groups of actors to operate feed and steer them. The interaction between the
supporting ICT and each group of actors (cultural operator, expert users and common
users) is made possible through participatory development methods (e.g., FormIT
methods1. The practical results of this interaction are illustrated in Fig. 1, in particular
the iterative and incremental augmentation of digital assets with metadata in steps 1-5-
9-13-16. Through the proposed technological and enabling solutions this iterative
process is envisioned to become catalyst in the exponential engagement of ever larger
groups of users. The use of state-of-the-art technologies, such as machine learning, and
novel combination of participation and engagement methods, such as co-creation,
crowdsourcing and gamification, not only responds to the needs of local communities,
but also promotes formation of new communities, around special cross-thematic topics
(e.g., semantics, metadata management, machine learning and gamification), and
facilitates drawing links between digital assets of intangible heritage and their relevant
tangible heritage.
The ICT platform should consider the following:
1. Digital assets, which describe an ICH (audio tracks, video clips, photos and text
notes). These digital assets will be enhanced by the (1) quantitative metadata taken
automatically from the smart device: location (where), timestamp (when), user
profile (who), the info coming from the sensors integrated into the smart device
such as the accelerometer, gyroscope, barometer, magnetometer or light intensity
(how); and (2) Qualitative metadata inserted by different users’ level such as key-
words (what). The digital assets will be grouped, related within a hierarchy, and
subdivided according to similarities and differences through a top-level ontology

1
www.ltu.se/cms_fs/1.101555!/file/LivingLabsMethodologyBook_web.pdf.
 CyberParks Songs and Stories 231

Fig. 2. Community building is the motive force of the research. By enabling this process, this
platform exploits the capacity of disparate existing digital assets and local communities in order
to document, collect, analyse and communicate users’ interpretations of European heritage.

suitably expanded to cover the selected parts of the cases’ domains. Note that
localisation of ICH assets can be obtained by a number of many methods and
techniques, such as automatically by Bluetooth (Nilsson et al. 2003) or user
interaction with maps.
2. Users’ level, each one playing different roles into the platform as explained above in
data lifecycle: the cultural operator, who will provide the 1st metadata level, i.e., the
museum that owns a fado song; the cultural bearer, who will provide the 2nd
metadata level, i.e. a fado singer; the common, non-expert user, who will provide
the 3rd metadata level, i.e., the visitor who will enrich the ICH with own narratives;
the researcher who will interact with the ontology and machine learning; and the
admin who will administrate and develop further the platform.
The ICT platform, available on cloud and accessible through computers and mobile
applications, consists of the following main components:
1. A mobile application, as the main interface between the space and the application
server. Through this mobile app a user can upload new digital assets, insert com-
ments on previous uploaded digital assets, reproduce them, and map dynamic
information on relevant site visual representations.
2. The website, as the main portal for crowdsourcing activities (Kontkanen et al. 2016)
which integrates digital assets creation and visualisation tools. The web-based
access GUI enables remote visitors to become users of data and metadata available
for crowdsourcing applications that will drive not only dissemination policies of the
cultural players involved (e.g., Museums, collections and archives) but will also
empower the system’s analytical capacity in research with the power of the many.
3. The machine learning algorithm which will produce suggestions and recommen-
dations to the users based on different criteria according to the semantic structure of
the digital assets.
232 K. Synnes et al.

4. The database, which deals with the development and execution of architectures,
policies, practices and procedures that properly manage the full data lifecycle needs
of the ICT platform (Fig. 1).

4 An Innovative Approach to ICH Interpretation

The most current need of researchers and scholars operating in the field of digital
cultural heritage is how to produce quality from quantity, how to devise critical
methodologies that produce meaning and generate knowledge out of big data. The
process of interpretation is cross-disciplinary in nature and involves various faculties of
human activity that rely on data processing, such as logical reasoning, associative
analysis, descriptive capacity, linguistics and semiotic processes, decoding, and
therefore cognition, abstraction and visualization, in order to reveal patterns and nar-
ratives, address the whole and provoke affection. After more than a decade of large-
scale digitization processes spurring from most museum, libraries and archives, the
next big challenge that all cultural heritage stakeholders are facing is to make sense, to
add value and establish methods of interpretation that are common, comprehensive,
sharable and easily applicable to the vast archives of data and complexity of digital
assets in big data.
Existing digital platforms foster collaborations among specialists instead of pro-
moting transdisciplinary research, e.g., researchers in museums, collections, cultural
and social institutions and organizations are usually establishing intra-institutional
collaborations, e.g. the H2020 e-Infrastructures Project Virtual research environment
for regional interdisciplinary communities in Southeast Europe and the Eastern
Mediterranean2. Even more so CH user communities point to the strong need for tools
that will enrich the capacity of researchers to utilize technological advances to move
beyond digitisation tools and storage of data, seeking for new tools that will enable
them to address critical interpretation problems of ICH, an area of research that due to
its context is highly transdisciplinary but has yet to invest in the digital in order to
transform its models and practices. Mobile app platforms and services already available
on the market include: Detour3 is a GPS-enabled audio guide that contains audio clips
for historical or pop culture spots around the globe. It can sync with other smartphones
that run the application so that many people experience the same audio tour at the same
time; Guidekick4 is built for the San Francisco Bay Area’s top historical destinations
with fully interactive 3D maps, music, and narrative clips. Figure 3 illustrates a pos-
sible feature of the interface envisaged by the concept using the ICH Patios de
Cordoba.
The CyberParks Songs and Stories concept builds on existing repositories (pro-
vided by the cultural operators of each case of ICH) to offer an innovative combination
of automation (using machine learning methods) and crowd-sourcing (user

2
www.vi-seem.eu.
3
www.detour.com.
4
www.guidekick.co.
 CyberParks Songs and Stories 233

Fig. 3. A possible interface for user interface with existing digital assets and user-input data,
such as a voice-over describing aspects of the community about the Patios, and a sketch of a GUI
for collecting experiential data by the users of the mobile app [right column].

contextualisation and reasoning), combining machine and human processing. This

effort is innovative in several ways:
1. Ensuring social inclusiveness to the data-knowledge-space continuum in her-
itage. Through walking, individuals interfere with physical features and obstruc-
tions, disruptions of movement, points of stasis and unpredictable situations in
space, moments that intensify lived experience. The platform captures and map
users’ interest in heritage, and through this process, enables in-depth analysis of
heritage sites’ management, everyday use and occupation along with its associated
cultural identities. The Living Lab methodology (FormIT) and its co-creation tools,
canvases and templates offer opportunities for knowledge transfer between disci-
plines and user communities (e.g., cultural institutions workers, academic
researchers, the creative industry and social groups). The concept innovates in
combining participatory techniques with advanced digital tools in order to promote
social innovation and engage individuals and groups related with specific ICH in
the development of these tools - contributing to local communities feeling owner-
ship of the tools and therefore reaching better stakes in the sustainability of the
platform. The experiences of similar projects have indicated that social innovation
can benefit from the integration of local community knowledge, while participatory
process can contribute to enhance the self-confidence and organisational structures
of local communities. Sustaining and enhancing the impact of the approach in the
long run requires developing or identifying institutions that will perform work after
the completion of such project, actively engaging the community as a whole and
particularly young people in managing the tool and working on the profitability of
the use of the tool (Zoumides 2017).
2. Crowd-sourcing for adding new meanings. The added value of the proposed
concept is that it will enable the analysis and comparison of informal narratives as
234 K. Synnes et al.

personalised interpretations (i.e., meanings). The experts’ descriptions of those

historical activities enriched by the (new) narratives will be expanded to include
pluralities and variations that up until the present there were no tools to document
and process. The enrichment of experts’ knowledge with informal understandings
and memories of cultural bearers who share a dual interest, not only in the specific
cultural heritage but also in its associated space, can contribute to increase the
understanding of European heritage.
3. Gamification for collecting interpretations and meanings. Gamification (through
usage of badges, scoreboards, etc.) and playful engagement of users through sto-
rytelling, created by heritage experts rather than the entertainment industry, as in
typical tourism-orientated mobile apps, and exploitation of collective intelligence
through the introduction of a rewarding system for users that exploits the potential
of gamification. The concept will have to give incentives to all types of users, those
who add data (and metadata); who explore, assess data (and metadata) and offer
suggestions to enrich them; and who exploit the platform. Playful user engagement
can have multiple modes of interaction, described as they will be offered to common
users inviting them to explore the associated knowledge or enrich it with their own
experiences: Interactive stories, soundscapes, guided tours, audio adventure games,
scavenger hunts, etc.
4. Machine learning for knowledge sharing and advanced searching. Automated
semantic classification, machine learning for data analytics and personalized sug-
gestions, and crowd-sourcing in service of heritage studies. A telling example of
this innovative approach is the case of users searching in the proposed platform for
a specific keyword related with a popular Fado song and being led by the automated
suggestion feature of the platform to discover a relevant event to links behaviourally
or thematically to the ICH of Patios – and this association facilitates the users to
understand the topic they queried for from another point of view. Today changes in
education and in society place new demands in learning process. Students are
expected to become autonomous learners in order to self-discover knowledge rather
than memorizing static information. They are asked to adopt more collaborative and
critical approaches to learning than before. The discussed concept can function as a
didactic platform addressed to the public that would make complex, otherwise
unattainable, knowledge accessible by opening up the educational process to
communities of the city that may be excluded, thus responding to the call for
lifelong learning.

5 Discussion

The concept introduced is highly inter- and multi-disciplinary ranging from the con-
sideration of social inclusion and gamification aspects to the application of crowd-
sourcing and machine-learning techniques. The belief is that the societal impact would
be large if such a system would be employed for enriching public spaces with localized
culture heritage material. The impacts could be:
 CyberParks Songs and Stories 235

1. Widening the access to digitized songs and stories, to which today inherently
limited to archives and museums. The potential of (mobile) Internet access to more
effectively spread cultural content and knowledge is therefore huge.
2. The meta-data collected through multiple annotation processes (expert assessments,
crowd-sourcing and machine learning) furthermore increase the searchability of the
digitized songs and stories. Content will now be able to be match to users’ context
and situation as well as be possible to match with keywords expressed in an
ontology structure.
3. Enriching the digitized songs and stories will furthermore add value to users. For
example, digitized songs and stories can be provided with additional information
and related content such as users’ own versions based on the archived content.
All in all, ICH digital assets such as digitized songs and stories can thus reach a
much wider audience and interest, promoting cultural heritage and its place in the
modern European society. The connections between the ICH digital assets and public
spaces are very important, as they provide an effective context for identifying and
promoting cultural heritage. From a technical perspective, the most prominent novelties
lye within the systemization of such a solution, but there are particular challenges
identified:
4. The data management of the ICH digital assets is complex, as they can be stored in
numerous types of archives and have various access rights. Creating one open and
homogeneous system for access to the ICH digital assets are therefore a huge
challenge.
5. In addition, user created content used to annotate ICH digital assets in archives are
often of a more private nature, such that personal integrity issues need to be
carefully considered. Users must be adequately informed; their consent retrieved
and the access control for many types of applications must be provided (including
social networks).
6. Perhaps the most challenging technical aspect is to jointly utilise expert knowledge,
crowdsourcing and machine learning in conjunction with ontological frameworks to
effectively link high quality metadata to ICH digital assets.
7. User involvement is key to the success along with applications and interfaces that
support societal processes related to the use of cultural heritage. The creation of
APIs for third party developers and the involvement of public organisations, such as
related to public places, are therefore an important challenge.
The technologies utilised to expose cultural heritage through open access to ICH
digital assets are expected to foster the development of a more inclusive and consid-
ering society that bring forth the strength of the multicultural Europe to challenge the
trends of growing ultra-nationalism in many countries.
236 K. Synnes et al.

6 Conclusions

This chapter addresses a potential contribution of an innovative methodology for

promoting intercultural dialogue beyond Euro-centred views and assumptions by
enriching European cultural expressions by means of new knowledge on heritage. It is
expected that this practice will create mechanisms that collect and diffuse the cultural
assets, e.g. of those who are not established cultural authorities or even by marginalized
categories. Through this process it is envisioned that it will safeguard European pat-
rimonies through everyday use of ICH digital assets that offer new ways to enhance the
understanding of cultural heritage. Concluding, this research aspires to build inter-
cultural bridges, by offering tools to foster intercultural dialogue, focused on spatially-
bound ICH, on immaterial heritage associated with specific locations, to construct an
inviting idea of immaterial patrimony in Europe. The technological challenges include
how to manage and provide (open) access to ICH digital assets, considering the rights
associated to these, how to produce meta-data and annotations to increase quality and
searchability, and how to engage users through third party applications.

References
Artopoulos, G., Bakirtzis, N.: Post-digital approaches to mapping memory, heritage and identity
in the city. In: Caldwell, G. (ed.) Digital Futures and the City of Today, pp. 139–156. Intellect
Books, UK (2016)
Artopoulos, G., Synnes, K., Bahillo, A., Smaniotto Costa, C., Rebernik, N.: Use of data analytics
for enriching public spaces with unique experiences of localised cultural heritage content. In:
Busch, C., Kassung, C., Sieck, J. (eds.) Kultur and Informatik: Hybrid Systems, pp. 99–112.
VWG, Glückstadt (2018)
ELC-European Landscape Convention (preamble) - European Treaty Series - Doc. No. 176
Kontkanen, J., Kärkkäinen, S., Dillon, P., Hartikainen-Ahia, A., Åhlberg, M.: Collaborative
processes in species identification using an internet-based taxonomic resource. Int. J. Sci.
Educ. 38, 96–115 (2016)
Manovich, L.: The Language of New Media. MIT Press, Cambridge (2001)
Pratt, M.L.: Arts of the Contact Zones, Profession 91. Modern Language Association, New York
(1991, 2005)
Smaniotto Costa, C., Artopoulos, G., Djukic, A.: Reframing digital practices in mediated public
open spaces associated with cultural heritage. J. Commun. Lang. 48, 143–162 (2018)
Stiegler, B.: Our ailing educational institutions: the global mnemotechnical system. Cult. Mach. 5
(2003). http://www.culturemachine.net/index.php/cm/article/viewArticle/258/243
Zoumides, C.: Community-based rehabilitation of mountain terraces in Cyprus. Land Degrad.
Develop. 28, 95–105 (2017)
Nilsson, M., Hallberg, J., Synnes, K.: Positioning with bluetooth. In: 10th International
Conference on Telecommunications, ICT2003, pp. 954–958 (2003)
 CyberParks Songs and Stories 237

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
Part IV Digital Hybrids - Between Tool
and Methods

Edited by Konstantinos Ioannidis

and Carlos Smaniotto Costa
4.1
Digital Hybrids - Between Tool and Methods:
An Introduction and Overview

Konstantinos Ioannidis1(&) and Carlos Smaniotto Costa2

1
aaiko arkitekter, Oslo, Norway
[email protected]
2
Universidade Lusófona, Interdisciplinary Research Centre for Education
and Development CeiED, Lisbon, Portugal
[email protected]
Now, with new digital intersections, digital hybrids, digital combinations, the risk is that
[space] is simply incapable of thinking of its entire repertoire … This is the moment where
elements [of space] that have never spoken or never listened are turning into communicating
elements. Rem Koolhaas, quoted from Winston (2014).

1 Introduction: The Blur of the Physical Space

If last century’s conception of open public space was understood as a performance

stage where individuals could negotiate and establish relationships not only amongst
them but also with elements of spatial manifestation demonstrating the significance of
some visual, most times, qualities, a contemporary observer will probably not make
this link. Today’s conception of outdoor space cannot escape from being injected inside
the relatively new scene of simulation which constantly changes the way people
experience the given inputs. This scene has dramatically modified the series of our
somehow culturally pre-structured views or habitual frames of reference about what is
real, virtual, represented, perceived, fragmented or holistically experienced.
In the above introductory quote by Koolhaas, the provocation implied by the use of
the words “incapability of thinking”, as opposed to “turning into communicating ele-
ments”, is largely related to the emerging conditions for the public open space in the
contemporary post-digital era and the neo-analogue mode of outdoor lifestyle. How-
ever, in what follows in these chapters, our point is not just to stress a particular trend in
the way ICT transform, rather inevitably, our outdoor living patterns, but to argue that
such an incapability opens up the opportunity to challenge the human aspect beyond
the digital, both spatially and conceptually. As of this writing, locomotional partici-
pation, agency and interactivity between the user and the digitally displayed material
projected on a mobile device seem to appear more and more often as critical intro-
ductory elements of an evolved method of (re)connecting man, space and information.
Mitchell (2004), in his influential Me ++: The Cyborg Self and the Networked City,
argues that this is a method of completing “a long project of seamlessly integrating our
mobile biological bodies with globally extended systems of nodes and linkages”. For
this session, these are not only simulation techniques that are called to somehow
respond to the digital growth of our analogue surroundings. They also offer to a method

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 241–250, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_19
242 K. Ioannidis and C. Smaniotto Costa

of decrypting that reassigns meanings and referents between man and space, between
digital and physical landscapes. In this respect, the proposed method explores different
mechanisms of awareness: tropes that manifest themselves as systems of hypercon-
nectivity in Mitchell’s (2014:58) sense and as an arsenal of emerging concepts like
those of blended spaces, digital hybrids, user empowerment or enhanced connectivism.
Some of the functional and methodological aspects out of these concepts are
highlighted in the following chapters. Within them, the term digital hybrids makes it
possible for the idea of enhancing places to detach from the “functional code” and refer
to the process whereby research techniques and methodologies can standoff from the
mute digitization of outdoor spatial experience. It could be argued that it is in book part
thanks to multidisciplinary collaborative research, like the CyberParks TU1306 Project,
that alternative forays for digitally mediated agency are currently explored. Moreover,
we can argue that the detachment from the functionality of the code and the shift in
thinking with the digital is somehow grounded upon Tomas Elsaesser’s “cinema effect”
and the “cinematic perception [that] has become internalized as our mode of cognition
and embodied experience.”1 The necessity and abundancy of outdoor wireless hotspots
and our perversely regulated culture by screen driven actions (walking in streets while
watching a mobile device for example) validate this peculiar effect and perception.
Re-situating the argument of Elsaesser in our contemporary living patterns, we are
at the threshold in which a broad range of disciplines – from architecture, design and
the humanities to ICT and media. All call for acknowledge the limits of our ability to
keep “thinking with thoughts” when there seems to be a pervasive replacement of our
thoughts by digitally moving images. The German film theorist is thus suggesting
tracing the multiple dynamics of this replacement and, in doing so, drawing on a range
of new strategies and techniques. Indeed, during the 2010 s’, new terms slip into the
practice of enhancing places – digitization, multimedia, installation, interaction,
interpretation, process-driven experiential strategies, and collective culture – to
describe new abilities to steer pathways through open public space development and
the individual participation to access, retrieve and interact with the wirelessly trans-
mitted information which scarcely existed before the 1990 s.
Today, there is a considerable number of research initiatives with similar and even
more interactive initiatives working with the making of mediated public spaces. Many
of them depend on the locomotional position and the active participation of the user,
making them promising examples for the neo-analog scene that this book prefigured at
the beginning. By just reading and exploring further some of them presented within the
previous sessions one can argue that the battle for humanizing the postdigital outdoor
landscape is about to be won. While most of them deal with the interaction between
real and virtual, arguably the epitome of the “simulation” heritage, it is no surprise that
within them the issue of the mediated place keeps blending seamlessly with the
question how the physical space can employ the digital component to motivate, engage
and inject the user to the hyperconnectivity of the information.

1
Here quoted from Reimer H. (2009). Awaiting the voice-over: the Øresund Film Commission
location database and the mediatization of architectural landscape. In Chaplin and Stara (Eds.).
Curating Architecture and the City. Taylor & Francis, p. 72.
 Digital Hybrids - Between Tool and Methods: An Introduction and Overview 243

This fourth session does not intent to equate the computational turn in placemaking as
the possibility for hybrid outdoor experiences with digital platforms and applications per
se. This has already been done by the endless online projects that everyone with a mobile
“on the go” connection can access and retrieve in many parks and squares. The turn -
heavily based on rapidly changing technologies - has already been shifted by time. The
“cinema effect” is here understood as a critique to those digital modes of outdoor activities
that revolve around the view that the offer of online information is the primary and user
engagement with space is secondary. We can thus question the passivity of the search and
retrieval powers of the “databases on the go”, accepting a research into new dimensions
formed from a neo-analog materiality. In this sense, the session attempts to inquire some
creative ways in which the intellectual properties of the man - space relationship can
reside within the structure of digitally enhanced experiences, even when traditional aspect
of our outdoor living have been filtered and transferred to a projected immaterial state.
While outdoor human tasks are in a way even more pervasively regulated by
machines, the humanistic content of the interaction often raises them in a more con-
ceptual level. Cramer (2014), writing for A Peer Reviewed Journal About Post-Digital
Research, described them as “neo-analog do-it-yourself” approaches that distant
themselves from their “post-digital” predecessors that were simply referring “to a state
in which the disruption brought upon by digital information technology has already
occurred”. Here, the term “neo-analog” doesn’t refer to a chronological descendant of
the post-digital, but to a shift that causes a new perspective to be emerged, one that
expresses itself in complex patterns of user - machine interrelated activities, interlinked
variables, and so forth. To some extent, we trace such intellectual/interactive tendencies
in different neo-analogue methodologies and projects found around the web: from
generative mindmaps, force-feedback algorithms to digital semantic relations, appli-
cations for visual music etc. Moving the issue of methodology to the foreground of a
neo-analogue environment, offers us a great challenge to question the limits of
hyperconnectivity in outdoor open public spaces.
This session situates the chapters within such a challenge and considers their
innovative character to be a result not only of technological solutions but also of a
humanistic re-orientation and re-focus. Having this in mind, it is rather critical to draw
a distinction between two central aspects of our contemporary outdoor landscape given
by man - machine convergence, a distinction according to which the digital can identify
itself as a tool and as a of method.
The first aspect, in the sense of a “diagnostic” medium to access and investigate
dimensions of the man/machine interaction, enables scholars to use the digital
dimension in order to challenge the traditional boundaries that distinguish the spatial
experience from the virtual one. Only the last decade, through transdisciplinary
researches and explorations, we have come into possession of a challenging “func-
tioning” tool with which places (and not only) have been enhanced and reactivated.
From haptic or conversational interfaces of (some) embodied intelligence to platforms
and networked systems of computers that capture and analyse inductive or deductive
user responses, the idea of the digital as a medium tool to understand the importance of
connectivity in different levels has significantly evolved the last decade. Yet it was only
during the early-2010s that the idea of enhancing the already mediated public space
received a distinctive typology: that of programming good public spaces by focusing
244 K. Ioannidis and C. Smaniotto Costa

“on the ability of digital technology to enhance communication and interaction with
(potential) users, as a way to transform the production and uses of public spaces into
an interactive process, enabling creative community participation and empowerment”
(Smaniotto Costa 2017:19). To mention an example, the CyberParks Project (2014–
2018) explored the typology of the mediated and hybrid outdoor place by investigating
“the shape and scope of ICT impacts and the opportunities opened to improve the
legibility and liveability of urban spaces, as well as new forms of integrating people’s
needs into urban design processes” (ibid:19). The second aspect of the method, in the
sense of combining an intellectual inquiry into the digital landscape, refers to the
cultivated logic beyond the tool and refers to user’s agents of decision and choice.

2 Digital Methods and Tools onto Hybrid Space

The idea of the digital as a tool to increase the understanding of different levels of
connectivity and to transform this knowledge into workings methods winged the dis-
cussions in Working Group 1 Digital Methods - of the CyberParks COST Action
TU1306. The aim of this working group was to explore the digital as tool inserted into
a research or methodology to increase the knowledge on people’s use of public spaces
(from current uses to future needs). This made the call to examine also user-behaviours
and user’s spatial needs. Within this working group scientific, technical and socio-
logical information (or opportunities) were assessed, all relevant for understanding the
interweaving of people in (and with) public spaces. Field experiments with new tools
and methodologies were undertaken in several case studies.
The following chapters in Part IV, are based on the outcomes of the Working
Group on Digital Methods. This working group had as main objectives: (1) to identify
promising working approaches with ICT-tools and promote their use/test in different
case studies; and (2) aggregate the experiences gained in the cases studies to a structure
that help to better understand the ICT-tools available. For this an integrated framework
could be useful, especially for aiding the development of people-friendly cities or the
building of the communities’ capacity to engage with their environment. The first step
consisted on defining a classification rationale and a structure to specify the different
uses and ways of penetration of technology into public spaces. This task was more
easily said than done. First, the interactions between people and places were crucial for
the CyberParks Project, and this interactions are per se a very large area of work, as
demonstrated in the diversity of the topics tackled in this book. Second, this large area
of work becomes even larger when the digital intertwines places and people relations.
Fact is that there are several ways to tackle the pervasiveness of ICTs, which is
intensified by the speed of technological development. Innovation is entering both the
market and the city at an accelerated pace (Smaniotto Costa et al. 2017), challenging
not only users but also those who want to understand their benefits in the medium and
ling term. The Working Group on Digital Methods worked out three different frame-
works – these are not mutually exclusive but can be used in complementary ways.
The first framework for an integrated approach resulted in a structure according to
the degree of users’ engagement along with the device/media/application used.
 Digital Hybrids - Between Tool and Methods: An Introduction and Overview 245

The framework is displayed in form of a tree-structure that groups the identified ICT-
technologies into four main categories: Augmented Reality, Localization Technology,
Wireless Network and Vision Technology. These four main dimensions are closely
related to spatial quality, user needs, spatial attributes and added value delivered by the
provision/implementation/availabily of ICT in public spaces. This framework backed
the research design in the case studies developed within the Project. The results of case
studies are described in several chapters of this book (Fig. 1).

Fig. 1. Shows the main structure to understand the diffusion of the digital into public spaces

The second framework is based on the matrix of the applied technology and the
added value this application results for users and uses of places. In this framework, the
technology is understood in three categories: Position Informatics, Sensory informatics
246 K. Ioannidis and C. Smaniotto Costa

and Synergetic interfaces, when implemented in public spaces these technologies can
result in several benefits (added values). The added values are listed as Enhance
publicness, Increase the performance of public spaces, Increase the production and co-
creation of public spaces, Increase the understanding on users, Increase the under-
standing on uses, Dissemination of information in/about public spaces, and the Use of
ICT as a support and challenge for new outdoors activities. This framework is used in
the POOL OF EXAMPLES2 the Project CyberParks established. The Pool offers a
wide range of examples of the penetration of technology into public spaces. Based on
the available technology (selected into the three categories), a response matrix was built
with the types of public spaces. With the Pool CyberParks seeks to increase the under-
standing of the benefits of technology to enhance places in order to achieve an added
value (i.e. new outdoor experiences, innovative ways of using places).
The third framework is built according to the purposes of the ICT into spaces. This can
be primarily structured in three major dimensions: (1) for research, i.e. as a way to produce,
collect, manage, mediate and interpret data, (2) for design, i.e. as a range of possibilities for
conceiving and/or creating public spaces, and (3) for implementation, i.e. by looking onto
the transformations of the material production of space and and/or social interaction
triggered by the continuous introduction of new hardware and software (Fig. 2). Further
insights on this framework can be obtained at Smaniotto Costa et al. (2017).

Fig. 2. Shows three modes of ICT use; highlighting the example of Geo-location services, it
demonstrates the different subsystems or components, i.e. for research and implementation.

These three frameworks evidence the need to adopt integrated frameworks, those
that enables a full overview on the benefits of technology advancements, and as noted
above these are taking place at a rapid pace, challenging users, designers and

2
The Pool is available at www.cyberparks-project.eu/examples, and enables the searching, navigating
and adding new examples.
 Digital Hybrids - Between Tool and Methods: An Introduction and Overview 247

researchers. As highlighted in this introduction, public spaces remain a timeless pat-

rimony and in Smaniotto Costa et al. (2017:172) about the quality of places, which […]
remains a central issue, even in the digital era. No one will leave their home and use a
public space, if it isn’t safe or doesn’t offer the requirements. Quality public spaces
make up the richness of urban life.”

3 Overview of Chapters

Acknowledging that digital hyperconnectivity usually offers the norms that affect
people’s behaviour and decisions, we can embark on a much larger investigation that
touches fields that are heavily defined by humanities such as response, education or
cognitive development. In this sense, and although interrelated, the “method” can be
conceptually separated from the “tool” and it is in this sense that some chapters of this
session present their working hypothesis.
In the first chapter (4.2) of part IV, Barbora Čakovská, Mária Bihuňová, Preben
Hansen, Ernesto Marcheggiani and Andrea Galli in Methodological Approaches
to Reflect on the Relationships Between People, Spaces, Technologies describe
different methodologies, backed by their rationales. The authors are convinced that the
ICT advancements can lead to increase in attractiveness of public spaces for both
citizens and visitors. Moving in and through the space and understanding its features is
still an important human activity, and as such it is susceptible to changes. In the
blended space, so the authors, designers need to create and establish interfaces and
systems that enable people to shape and achieve their goals and aspirations. These
interfaces should include and inherit different physical, digital, perceptual, sensory and
conceptual point of contact that are between people and the content that is contained
and accessible by.
Following this, in chapter 4.3 In Modelling co-creation ecosystem for public
open spaces, Aelita Skarzauskiene, Monika Maciuliene and Petja Ivanova-
Radovanova argue that the logic of ecosystem presents a valid template for a tentative
method toward the exploration of the new context and relationships between people,
places and technology. The dynamics in the co-creative ecosystem propose an alter-
native reading of embedded networks based on the process of value creation. Inquiring
the role (of actors) becomes a method by which to dislocate aspects of the network in a
manner through which we can rethink “who can offer value in space”. Their model
suggests a method of approaching the value as emerging out of “a number of entities
[that] work collectively to create mutual benefits by granting access to one another’s
resources including people, technologies, organizations and information”.
In chapter 4.4 Eneko Osaba, Roberto Pierdicca, Tiago Duarte, Alfonso Bahillo
and Diogo Mateus in the work entitled Using ICTs for the Improvement of Public
Open Spaces: The Opportunity offered by CyberParks Digital Tools, introduce the
three tools developed by the CyberParks teams: WAY CyberParks, CyberCardeto and
EthnoAlly. The functionalities and features of each tool are described and discussed on
the basis of different case studies. Backed by different technology and developed with
different purposes, the three tools open for an interaction between researchers, city
councils and users an innovative and wide range of possibilities. They offer valuable
248 K. Ioannidis and C. Smaniotto Costa

resources to make a significant contribution to the study of public spaces, enabling a

quick and efficient collection of data, essential for a better understanding the interac-
tions of people with the spaces. On the flip side, the tools allow users to get dynamic
contextual information related to space, and therefore a better knowledge about their
surroundings. The common feature of the three tools are free to use across the world.
To meet the posed challenge to better understand the benefits of mediated places,
the chapter 4.5 by Bonanno, Klichowski and Lister: A Pedagogical Model for
CyberParks, attempts to redefine the field of pedagogy as a composite neo-analogue
experience involving intra-individual cognitive, affective and conative interactions
together with inter-individual, networked, interactional processes. In their contribution,
they theorise the “society of mediated learning” with digital tools while on the move
and present a methodological insistence on “learning by combining two types of
cerebral operations: motor and cognitive control”. The authors further contend that the
hybrid environments may trigger deep learning, this in turn changes one’s competence
profile and epistemological conception. Cyberpark, the mediated place, challenge
people, so the authors: to extend their learning boundaries through acquisition of new
knowledge and skills, by sharing their understanding and by contributing to the dis-
tributed knowledge and networked experience.
The final chapter 4.6 by Jamal Raiyn and Jugoslav Jokovic, entitled The
application of advanced IoT in public spaces towards promote their safer use,
examines how IoT can be used to manage the resources in hybrid places. The central
issue of the authors is to clarify the opportunities of IoT tools in public spaces to
prevent crime and to increase the safety of users. Their analysis contributes to a broader
discussion towards their primarily interest: developing a new scheme for securing the
privacy of users in a mediated public space.
Methodological aspects of digital mediacy in public open spaces have become part
not only of our digital culture but also of our own evolved mechanisms of thinking and
understanding space and place. The rising number of online cutting-edge technologies
that undertake the task of dislocating outdoor experience from the analogue space of
coordinate relations to the digital landscape and virtual reality of algorithmic relations is
a testament to the distinction between using the digital as a “tool” and as a “method”.
Grasping the opportunities that the mediated space open is a central issue in the chapters
of Čakovská et al. (4.2) and Osaba et al. (4.4), and Raiyn and Jokovic (4.6) to some
extent. In their arguments the authors place emphasis on ICT as a tool and as method to
increase knowledge through data analysis - with different tools and through different
methods - the relational aspects between the physical places and users. Undoubtedly, the
analogue space of urban squares and green parks remains a timeless patrimony, a con-
stitutive dimension that deeply embeds itself to our cities as an engenderment of the
materiality and physicality of urban form. It is also the traditional medium by which the
logic of its symbolic systems and intellectual combinatory in the poetic world of
Bachelard (1994) are transformed into material variations, allowing thus the reasoning
human mind be attached to the sensible world. The analogue is the forefather; that
necessary element which public space is tied up with in order to lend itself to further
dialectical investigations that extend beyond the practical function of its forms.
Čakovská et al. (Chapter 4.2) argue further that space is largely build by society and it
makes no sense to conceive space without a social content, just as society does not exist
 Digital Hybrids - Between Tool and Methods: An Introduction and Overview 249

without a spatial component. This interdependency, in a continuous process, creates and

modifies spaces, while such transformed space at the same time influences the society. It
is the common starting point from which we are infused in even more complex con-
ceptions of either geometric or symbolic order - to mention one example, Arnheim’s
(2004) symbolic readings of forms seized upon the field of the analogue and its visual
qualities as a way to project them “as images of the human condition” instead. The
process and context dimensions of the network, as articulated in Skarzauskiene, Maci-
uliene and Ivanova-Radovanova’s view (chapter 4.3), epitomize the heterogeneity of the
co-creative dimension, essential for the understanding of the humanist content of the
proposed ecosystem.
However, the chapters of this part argue that in the contemporary digitally mediated
landscape in which the materiality and physicality of things give place to the
impression drawn from protocol-based representations (computational images, ani-
mations or texts), we impose upon our conception of space a topological dislocation
technique that has, quite literally, a reversible logic. In an interesting way, and from
Arnheim’s perception-and-response to the analogue stimuli evolving conception, the
(post)digital dimension brings in a significant effect on this traditional process retaining
at the same time its humanist condition - that is the active and personal aspects found
within. The displacement, reacting to the withdrawal of the analogue materiality, seems
to inaugurate a reversed method to understand man - machine interaction: from the
observer’s responses to data elements, the mind is challenged to construct an a pos-
teriori perceptual content in the imaginary register, or better a trace to use a laconic
term. This content is not as deterministic as its precedent analogous one, but can
resurface in alternative versions based on an exchange of conscious and unconscious
thought. However, is this trace enough to speak about a digitally-inspired method
beyond the functioning tool and any technological underpinnings of the displacement?
The chapters of this session suggest that the answer to this question is not an easy one
while more complicated phenomena may appear. The digital mediacy doesn’t only
refer to “functional” aspects like information visualization and its presentation as a
collection of online material. As argued by Bonanno, Klichowski and Lister (chapter
4.5), it goes into the transposition of deeper parts of the outdoor activity that take place
in human mind, in desire, in mental patterns and conscious or unconscious organiza-
tional mechanisms. These are the deeper aspects that traditionally bound spatial
experience with the subject/object relation. They are responsible for the possibility of
the mind, by the use of the digital dimension, to implicate in transformational processes
from abstract and intelligible thought to enhanced perceived relations. And in a sense,
these are the main aspects from within mediated places enact as a dialectic activity
between subject and object and begin to exist as a reflecting method outside the
physical or Euclidean space.
The shift from Tool to Method is the departure point to discuss this apparent
difficulty and the oxymoron that brings in: the digitalization and dislocation of expe-
rience that is meant to be analogue. This session is not at all about “mere digitization”
and online dissemination of information. It is about how to turn, momentarily at least, a
functional tool into a method by relating human mental activities like learning, desire,
meaning and reason acquisition to an artificial intelligence.
250 K. Ioannidis and C. Smaniotto Costa

In reading the following chapters, we have to say, the first reflex is to dismiss the
concept of a “neo-age” from a nostalgic and mimetic revival of stereotyped ways of
experiencing the contemporary public space, one that abolish space’s valuable heritage
from its injection with the digital technologies. It is an objective fact that the emerging
methodologies discussed within the following chapters approach the space-related data
as being “digital” almost by definition. Data to be collected, sorted, shared and reused
across dynamically established links between analogue (human tasks) and digital
(computational executions) methods of thinking and acting. In the age of the semiotic
web and the web 3.0, these modes are nowadays beyond interactivity. They are
intelligent forms of studying information based, for example, on users’ personal desires
and aspirations while utilising probabilistic parameters or algorithmic decision-making.
As the chapters discuss later on, the neo-analogue methodologies presented from
within the following pages propose a hybrid attitude preserving at the same time the
analogue and symbolic value of open public space within digital actions.

References
Arnheim, R.: Art and Visual Perception: A Psychology of the Creative Eye. University of
California Press, Berkeley (2004)
Bachelard, G.: The Poetics of Space. Beacon Press, Boston (1994)
Cramer, F.: What is ‘Post-digital’? A Peer Reviewed Journal About Post-Digital Research
(2014). http://www.aprja.net/?p=1318. Accessed 03 Sep 2014
Mitchell, W.: Me++: The Cyborg Self and the Networked City, p. 58. MIT Press, Cambridge
(2004)
Smaniotto Costa, C.: A framework for defining principles for inclusive mediated public open
spaces. In: Smaniotto Costa, C., Ioannidis, K. (eds.) The Making of the Mediated Public
Space: Essays on Emerging Urban Phenomena, pp. 17–24. Lusófona University Press, Lisbon
(2017)
Smaniotto Costa, C., Ioannidis, K. (eds.): The Making of the Mediated Public Space: Essays on
Emerging Urban Phenomena. Lusófona University Press, Lisbon, Portugal (2017)
Winston, A.: “Scary” Venice Architecture Biennale show has “nothing to do with design” says
Koolhaas (2014). www.dezeen.com/2014/06/05/rem-koolhaas-venice-architecture-biennale-
2014. Accessed 22 Nov 2018

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
4.2
Methodological Approaches to Reflect
on the Relationships Between People, Spaces,
Technologies

Barbora Čakovská1(&), Mária Bihuňová1, Preben Hansen2,

Ernesto Marcheggiani3,4, and Andrea Galli3
1
Horticulture and Landscape Engineering Faculty,
Slovak University of Agriculture, Nitra, Slovakia
[email protected], [email protected]
2
Department of Computer and Systems Sciences, Stockholm University,
Stockholm, Sweden
[email protected]
3
Department of Agricultural, Food and Environmental Sciences,
Università Politecnica delle Marche, Ancona, Italy
{e.marcheggiani,a.galli}@univpm.it
4
Department of Forest, Nature and Landscapes, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

Abstract. Social behaviour in public spaces has changed over the time and has
become attractive to all those involved in designing people’s spaces. Commu-
nities in different countries in Europe have shown more and more interest and
various activities have started to shape the public spaces all round the world.
The main objective of the chapter is to review development of the method-
ologies that have been used to analyse public spaces worldwide and to sum-
marize their requirements and conditions to suggest how they can be applied in
order to analyse the relationship between people and spaces, with the aim to
boost the active participation of people in design process. The chapter describes
the methodologies using ICTs, especially e-participation, mobile technologies,
GIS systems, or on the methodologies increasing the attractiveness of the public
open spaces for citizens and visitors (laser holograms, QR codes, interactive
boards, online and interactive maps, questionnaires and social interaction, etc.).
Information technology offers new potentials of citizen participation and pro-
vides a communication platform, which suppresses a barrier of non-
professionalism, allowing for distant contacts and enabling participatory pro-
cess management. Users, accustomed to communicating through ICT also in
public spaces, feel by using this tool more anonymous and less harassed to
express their opinion. Not only ICT are important in the 21st century society,
but also new ways of social media, which are accessible/open to use for larger
group of people. The institutions or municipalities could use them as semi-
official information platform, public open discuss forums or resource of the
public initiatives.

Keywords: Blended spaces
Public space users
E-participation

Playful tools
Top-down initiatives
Urban planning

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 251–261, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_20
252 B. Čakovská et al.

1 Introduction

Carr et al. (1992) regard public space as “the common ground where people carry out
the functional activities that bind a community, whether in the normal routines of daily
life or in periodic festivities”. It is the stage upon which the drama of communal life
unfolds.” For Madanipour (1996) public space is a space we share with strangers,
people who aren’t our relatives, friends, or work associates. It is space for politics,
religion, commerce, sport; space for peaceful coexistence and impersonal encounter.
Users are described by Lynch (1984) as all those who interact with the place in any
way: live in it, work in it, pass through it, repair it, control it, profit from it, suffer from
it, even dream about it.
Space and society are clearly related: it is difficult to conceive of ‘space’ without
social content and, equally, to conceive of society without a spatial component. The
relationship is best conceived as a continuous two-way process in which people (and
societies) create and modify spaces while at the same time being influenced by them in
various ways (Carmona 2003).
People’s behaviour in public spaces has become attractive not only for psycholo-
gists, sociologists, interaction design or urban geographers but also for urban planners,
architects, landscape architects and all those involved in designing people’s spaces
(Carr et al. 1992; Carmona 2003; Gehl 2011). Social behaviour in public spaces has
changed over the time. Communities in different countries in Europe have shown more
and more interest in these public spaces and various activities have started to shape
these public spaces, or even the landscape where people live. Due to this development a
new discipline of environmental participatory design emerged, devoted to researching
how built environments work for people and how people affect the public space with
their activities (Wheeler 2004).

2 People-Space Methods

The way the urban environment is designed and provides access to the natural envi-
ronment and different types of activities reflects the current priorities of the society and
its level of awareness. The assessments of the urban open spaces have been studied by
scientist, architects, planners and sociologists. Several urban design guidelines have
been published with the aim to respect the place, its functions, demands of the citizens,
improving the quality of the life and environment, support the social contacts or include
the minorities to the society and motivate and change social behaviour towards healthy
living (Miková et al. 2010; Melková 2014).
It is well known as pollution affects human health and living organisms in general.
Nevertheless, recent findings highlight that also the spatial topology and landscape
arrangements - not limited to pollution - can lead to structural and functional human
disorders. In particular, how brain neurotransmitters and limbic (emotional) systems
changes during our life (Vanderhaeghen et al. 2010) as to register environmental inputs
is being looked at by new branches of landscape ecology and neuroscience. First results
of the so-called landscape Bionomy (Ingegnoli 2015) shows how a redundancy of
neuronal connections during infancy is afterwards soon pruned around the age of 5.
 Methodological Approaches to Reflect on the Relationships 253

This suggests that the environment in which man has to live form the wider part of the
input modelling the brain concerns landscape conditions. It is inevitable that landscape
structural alterations, could lead to human hilliness, even in absence of pollution. For
the physical environment supports human behaviour, the bulk of human-space rela-
tionships are of extreme importance.
Researchers developed methods using behaviour observation, time-lapse photog-
raphy, post-occupancy evaluation surveys, and cognitive mapping (in which people
were asked to draw maps or images of how they perceived their urban environments) to
provide factual information for improved urban design (Wheeler 2004). Cognitive
mapping could be presented as mental maps or parish maps (in which people were
asked to draw maps or images of how they perceived their urban environments as well
as the open spaces (landscape in a wide sense) to provide factual information for
improving the urban design. This method also enables local people and tourists to
deeper discover the meaning of places while they enjoy all their attractiveness.
Beginning in the 1960s writers such as Jacobs, Lynch, William H. Whyte, Clare
Cooper Marcus and Danish designer Jan Gehl emphasised the need to base urban
design on study of how people actually experience and use urban environments. The
American urbanist, organizational analyst, journalist and people-watcher William H.
Whyte studied human behaviour in urban settings. He observed, and film analysed
plazas, urban streets, parks and other open spaces in New York City. All told, Whyte
walked the city streets for more than 16 years. As unobtrusively as possible, he wat-
ched people and used time-lapse photography to chart the meanderings of pedestrians.
What emerged through his intuitive analysis is an extremely human, often amusing
view of what is staggeringly obvious about people’s behaviour in public spaces, but
seemingly invisible to the inobservant (PPS 1999).
In 1980s Randolph Hester was a leader of planning process in Manteo town (North
Carolina, USA). In this process residents identified what they valued about life and
about their landscape. Hester comments that these important social patterns and places
came to be called the „Sacred Structure “by locals and inspired a plan for community
revitalization and development that was controlled by them. Planning focused on
behaviour mapping that recorded what people did and where they did it - things that
were not revealed in the standard surveys. Activities like the exchange of small talk at
the post office, hanging out at the docks, checking out the water for the tides, the
fishing, and the weather, happened in the same places every day. Daily rituals indicated
a dependence on specific places that could be disrupted by changes in land use. A list of
these was developed, and people were asked to rank them in order of their significance,
and to indicate which ones could be sacrificed in the interest of tourist facilities. From
these was published a map of places that people wanted protected from future devel-
opment (Hough 1990).
Francis (1984) has presented in his method of downtown and neighbourhood
planning the importance of traffic mapping, parking problems and pedestrian flow
mapping. Activity mapping as a useful information for planning process was proved by
Francis (1984), when he used the activity mapping in Davis town. Based on the activity
analyses the design solution was made. The study and research of Danish architect Jan
Gehl is worldwide known. In a book Life Between Buildings (2011) he has specified
and described outdoor activities in public spaces into three categories, with special
254 B. Čakovská et al.

needs different demands on the design of the place. There are pointed activities: nec-
essary, optional and social.
Necessary activities are activities appeared almost every day, not depended on the
weather conditions or willingness of the participants. These are activities as going to
work, shopping, waiting for someone, standing on the bus stop.
Optional activities represent voluntary activities, depended on the will of partici-
pants, good weather conditions and the suitable design of the outdoor open space.
For example, playing games, meeting friends, doing sports or just sitting on the
bench and relaxing.
Social activities include active or passive social interaction. They can be seen
between all age groups, between friends or people met randomly. Participants do
not need to talk necessary, they could just watch or just listen to.
On the method of direct observation and comparison of results from studies that
have been made in the urban environment, we can conclude that people in rural areas
use public spaces, like in cities (Lipovská and Štěpánková 2013). Although most of
these methods could be done in an unobtrusive way, there are time-consuming aspects,
which the professionals might consider as inefficient and out-dated. The research
published by Nassar (2015) in Egypt prove that is very important to understand human
behaviour together with the social aspects of the local community in an urban space to
create a design that increases residents’ physical activity. He mentions that there is no
perfect solution for the space: the goal is simply to create many opportunities by means
of landscape features that allow residents to perform different types of physical activity
(for different age groups).
Interesting phenomenon in Germany has been described by Schöbel (2006). While
during the 20th century, open space planning was based mainly on quantitative
arguments, the current change of attitudes and ideas in society has led to a discussion of
‘quality of the open spaces instead of quantity’. Contemporary society is experiencing
an economic change from an affluent and industrial society to a worldwide service-
based society. Analyses of the spatial reality of urban society and urban space indicate
that this change is being accompanied and increased by spatial polarisation within
cities, which in the end affects the population’s social chances. Different cultures and
social backgrounds, which meet in the cities create challenges and those must be
overcome in urban meta-cultures. Great examples are the Pallas-Park in Berlin’s
neighbourhood Schöneberg and the Park Spoor Noord in Antwerp’s Seefhoek district,
when the city councils decided to create urban parks, where the different cultures could
meet each other. In England there are many state programmes that support the local
communities and interaction with neighbourhood via community gardens and garden
education. In the Northern countries (Norway, Sweden) the social policy and state
support the residential equipment and qualitative design of open spaces with possi-
bilities to play, practise sports, meet and interact with others. Schöbel (2006) has
summarised five planning categories characterising the functions and qualities of the
entire structure of urban green and open spaces according to the research done in
Berlin. It could be applied in any other city.
The analysis of flows - such as human movements - can help spatial planners better
understand territorial patterns in urban environments (Chua 2014; 2016). Nowadays
 Methodological Approaches to Reflect on the Relationships 255

interactive visual interfaces are designed to gather, extract and analyse human flows in
geolocated social media data. Such a system adopts a graph-based approach to infer
movement pathways from spatial point type data and expresses the resulting infor-
mation through multiple linked multiple visualisations to support data exploration.

3 People-Space-Technology Methods

The World Economic Forum (2015) published the Top 10 Urban Innovations, which
reflect the digital revolution and the best way to improve a city due to increasing
number of population and more people living in urban than rural areas. The most
interesting are:
1. Re-programming the space - Cities have started to look at reprogramming their
space to get more from less: reduced its allowable urban footprint; changing the
strategy of expansion to concentration; repurposing asphalt to expand footpaths and
open space).
2. Waternet: An Internet of Pipes - Smart water management models use sensors
in network pipes to monitor flows and manage the entire water cycle, providing
sustainable water for human and ecological needs.
3. Adopt a Tree through Your Social Network - In a database trees could be
named, its growth tracked and carbon offset, and data shared through social net-
works. Each tree could have its own email address which allows citizens to report
problems and diseases and even send love letters.
4. Augmented Humans: The Next Generation of Mobility - Improved safety for
pedestrians and non-motorized transportation leads to greater adoption of public
transport, reduced congestion and pollution, better health and commutes that are
quicker. Such relatively low-cost solutions include separate bike lanes, bike-sharing
schemes, re-phasing traffic lights to fit the speed of bikes and planting trees along
the side of roads to slow traffic.

4 How the ICTs Could Influence Public Open Spaces

Online interactive community mapping is the process by which individuals jointly

create a community map using modern information and communication technologies
(ICT). Such mapping is mostly done to identify the needs and concerns of a community
living or brazen in a certain location.
Online interactive mapping is successful if at least some of the following conditions
are fulfilled, ideally all. The local community is cardinal, because they are source of
local experience and knowledge, they know best what they lack and what would
contribute to a better quality of their lives. Second condition is ICT and sufficient e-
skills. The local community must have sufficient motivation to participate in mapping.
The entire process must have a coordinator and facilitator, best representative of the
non-profit sector, scientific community or engaging civilian public. It is very important
to collect the information only regarding to the aim of mapping. The final community
256 B. Čakovská et al.

map is created by locals and is great base for local authorities to solve problems and
improve the quality of life.
Žufová (2015) presents on the example of Bratislava City when the citizens could
participate at collection of information, pointing at the problems, control the envi-
ronment. An interactive website for the citizens was established at www.
odkazprestarostu.sk, with the mobile applications TrashOut and Park4disabled.
Another possibility concerns the implementation of common ICT, e. g app’s tools, to
share the local knowledge and stories collected through the participatory process
among all citizens that takes place when folk museums (or eco-museums) are in a
building phase by a participative process involving a community. Actually, online ICT
solutions, usually pieces of software broadcasted to public through the Web called
applications or “apps” (Castells 2006; Lugano 2008) are easy to use and very popular.
This is a very important prerequisite to the ultimate designing of a sound ICT tools,
because a participative approach, traditionally build upon the delivering of a so called
“parish maps”, simply means “… a dynamic way by which communities preserve,
interpret, and manage their heritage for a sustainable development” (Chart of Catania
2007). A key issue for this kind of projects is how to funnel considerable streams of
information across and towards the local communities. Considering the widening on
the Web mass communication media (GSM, smartphones, tablets, …), the idea of
developing an ICT tools, tailored upon specific characteristics of a given public space
or landscape, could represent a useful tool to design and manage these places taking in
account all faces of sustainability (economic, ecological, social and cultural).
Nowadays, ICTs are part of everyday life and we still do not use their full potential.
This potential could be understood in positive or negative usage. To create the New
Social Place of the era of digitalisation, spaces must follow the concept of “human
information interaction”, which is a concept based on the relation between human,
space, and information technologies. Aziz, et al. (2016) define four elements of ICT:
Wi-Fi networks, digital interactive media façades, interactive public displays, and
smartphones’ applications in public spaces. These elements play major roles in the
public space in terms of culture and art; education; planning and design; games and
entertainment and information and communication. Clever use of ICTs helps to
increase the attractiveness of the space, the interaction between people as well as
between people and the space around them, which will foster the sense of place and the
sense of belonging to the space.
To this purpose, the design of the logical model of an app/tool is the first and very
crucial point to deal with. Referring to an experience led in Italy, Galli et al. (2014)
were inspired at the contents of the “Parish Map of Montacuto, Paggese and other
Acquasanta’s villages” (Ascoli Piceno, Italy). The design of this mobile app aimed to
provide “virtual scenarios” that reproduce, for example, thematic itineraries around
characteristic areas represented in the “parish maps” with the aim to show the point of
view (cultural, environmental, social) coming from communities living there. The app,
to be used on mobile devices such as GSM, smartphones and tablets, has been engi-
neered in order to offer thematic itineraries discovering the authentic local identity and
sense of place. The routes are articulated in “role itineraries”, each of them makes
visitors to feel as visit-actors, playing roles as if they were a member of the local
community, which are based on typical “local characters” of daily working activities in
 Methodological Approaches to Reflect on the Relationships 257

that territorial context. The “virtual scenarios” consist mainly of a map of the area, from
which, some itineraries can be chosen by clicking on the icons representative of the of
available “local characters”. Moreover, users can upload and share new original con-
tents, which the app makes visible to all the other members connected through social
networks. In this way the “virtual scenarios” can be updated any time users upload new
contents, bringing a continuous evolution to scenarios and a higher degree of vitality
into social community. In few words, the app orients and encourages both local people
and tourists to keep interactively a specific Parish Map alive. A similar approach could
be effectively applied to tailor each app tool on the main characteristics of every public
space, if the fundamental help of local people were actively favoured (Galli et al.
2015).
A key issue remains the development of innovative ways to manage the most
remarkable comments coming from the users (insiders and outsiders) of the app; and
how to foster the participation of administrators and land managers, in order to refuel
the debate on the sustainable development of public spaces. Hampton (2014) compared
the time-lapse photography of both William Holly Whyte and PPS to analyse human
behaviour in the public space of Bryant Park in the early 1980s to contemporary
observations by filming the same public space from similar angles. He is convinced that
mobile device users provide a number of benefits to the social life of spaces, people are
actually more likely to spend time in groups and there has been increase of women.
Even if people are alone checking the news, reading blogs, or talking on the phone, still
they are part of public space. He is convinced that design that takes technology into
consideration is paramount for the future of cities.
MediaTeam Oulu (Ylipulli et al. 2013) has studied the appropriation process of two
public computing infrastructures in the City of Oulu, Finland, a municipal WiFi net-
work (pan OULU WLAN) and large interactive displays, which should provide novel
applications and services to people. Some services enable the pairing of the mobile
phone with the display by using Bluetooth, QR codes, and SMS. Municipal WiFi has
been adopted very well and its usage is increasing rapidly. The adoption of the
interactive public displays has been slow due to unfamiliarity of the technology and its
questionable utility. Different demographic groups may experience these factors in
differing ways; for example, for young people the creativity and playfulness of the
applications was a more attractive feature than for elderly.
As the use of digital networks becomes an essential part of everyday life, a new
digital layer is added on the existing urban landscape (Markaki 2014). This information
age and the revolution have influenced the way people interact with each other and with
their surrounded physical space. Information and communication are two essential
factors of interest and attraction specific to urban environments and at the same time
they represent key factors for the progress of the city, as bringing people together and
supporting exchange of ideas generate development. Technology is only 10% of the
problem. Ninety percent of it is about how it is used to connect and for a better quality
of life. Technology is making it easier for people to connect to the places that they
inhabit. The creation of hotspots providing wireless Internet access encouraged the
return to the public, for both work and recreation. In addition, social media has a high
potential for encouraging social interaction, in virtual as well as in real life public
spaces, thus connecting them. The use of ICTs can significantly enhance public space,
258 B. Čakovská et al.

by creating access points to information and supporting education. In this sense,

augmented reality can complete the toolbox, playing a significant role in engaging
users and personalizing the urban experience.
The development of ICTs tools and the mobility of modern devices also bring new
demands regarding urban design and the way public spaces are being planned. Namely,
public spaces have to provide resources for proper functioning of gadgets (e.g., elec-
tricity, plugs). Street furniture should be able to satisfy the users’ needs through its
usage, comfort, quantity, accessibility, arrangement and aesthetics. They should be
secured to avoid collapse by natural or human forces, and they should be regularly
maintained by cleaning and repairing them. They have also to be easily adjustable in
order to accommodate different activities, and have to encourage the shift of more and
more activities from indoors to outdoors. Apart from the physical infrastructure, in
order to successfully integrate ICTs in the urban life, the community has to be trained
and prepared to embrace the change.

5 Blended Spaces – Spaces and Places for Human Interaction

and Experiences

Human-Computer Interaction (HCI) is traditionally dealing with the design, evaluation

and implementation of interactive computing systems for human use and the study of
phenomena related to humans involved in these phenomena. As such, HCI has a more
narrow approach than for example Interaction Design (ID). Interaction Design is
concerned with the theory, research and practice of designing user experiences for all
types of technologies, systems, objects and products. The process of interaction design
involves basically four activities (Preece et al. 2011): Establishing requirements;
Designing alternatives; Prototyping and Evaluation (ibid, 15). A similar, more recent
approach has been mentioned as the Human-Centered Informatics (with the same
abbreviation HCI). Human-Centered Informatics approach deals with the intersection
of the cultural, the social, the cognitive, and the aesthetic with computing and infor-
mation technology. Generally, Human-Centered Informatics deals with a more chal-
lenging area that includes the goals and activities of people, their values, and the tools
and environments that help shape their everyday lives (Bannon 2011). HCI and
Interaction Design (ID) are changing our ways of interacting and experiencing services
and objects within our daily life and in our professional life as well. This involved
designing for interaction on a broad macro-level as in our environmental surroundings
to interaction on a micro-level. Today, when deigning, interaction is considered as a
main component of the design process. Besides the focus on interaction design and
HCI issues, user experience (UX) is also getting more and more attention and across
different populations, devices and places/spaces. Thus, this means that we are moving
around in different spaces and places inhabited with both physical objects and sur-
roundings as well as interacting with digital objects and services. These spaces can be
viewed as blended spaces (Benyon 2012). Furthermore, they are to be recognised as
extended, but also as new social and cultural spaces. Finally, these blended spaces also
constitute extended conceptual spaces.
 Methodological Approaches to Reflect on the Relationships 259

User experience (UX) concerns the navigation of and within different spaces and
how people experience this. Moving in and through the spaces and understanding
spaces is an important human activity. Navigation is concerned with finding out about
an environment. Three important activities are included (Benyon and Höök 1997):
• Object identification, (understanding and classifying the objects in an environment).
• Exploration, (exploring a local environment and how that environment relates to
other environments).
• Wayfinding, (navigating toward a known destination).

6 Conclusions

Blended spaces applied in landscape design have close connection to user’s experi-
ences. As such, they can also constitute an environmental space and place that will
affect humans and human activity (Parviainen, Lagerström and Hansen 2017). Design
on a general level is very much about crafting your surroundings and often draws upon
engineering, material and creative approaches. As Benyon (2014: 21) points out, design
has been described by Donald Schön as a “conversation with materials”. Schön means
that in any type of design, designers must understand the nature of the materials that
they are working with (Schön 1983). Thus, in landscape, environmental and urban
design, knowledge and skills about both digital and physical material (Wang et al.
2017a, 2017b) is important since they surround us in our daily and everyday life.
Blended spaces are spaces, or environments, where a physical space is explicitly
integrated into a digital space. Blended spaces are conceptually close to tangible
interactions (Wang et al. 2017a, 2017b) where the physical and digital are integrated.
The purpose and understanding of designing a blended space are to enable people and
groups of people to feel present in place, interacting with content and objects through
senses and activities of the blended space (Benyon 2014).
Some challenges when designing for interaction are that designers need to think
and elaborate beyond the immediate use of a place/space and consider wider physical,
digital, cultural and social settings. Additional issues that are important is how inter-
actions change over time and locations, as well as how content is experienced through
different physical and digital objects and devices. People collaborating within physical
and digital spaces and how information is created, shared and searched for is important
(Hansen and Järvelin 2005). A further challenge is to deal with the human. People are
flexible, dynamic, traditional, creative and resourceful. However, physical and digital
‘systems’ tend to be stable, static, with predefined goals, tasks and processes. This
creates a challenge and a barrier that need to be focused on and dealt with. Since
people’s behaviour, language, feelings etc., that need to be recognized when designing
for these spaces and places. As Benyon (2014: 22) points out, designers need to create
and establish interfaces and systems that “enable people to shape and achieve their
goals and aspirations. These interfaces should include and inherit different physical,
digital, perceptual, sensory and conceptual point of contact that are between people and
the content that is contained and accessible by.
260 B. Čakovská et al.

References
Chua, A., Servillo, L., Marcheggiani, E., Moere, A.V.: Mapping cilento: using geotagged social
media data to characterize tourist flows in Southern Italy. Tour. Manag. 57, 295–310 (2016)
Abdel-Aziz, A.A., Abdel-Salam, H., El-Sayad, Z.: The role of ICTs in creating the new social
public place of the digital era. Alex. Eng. J. 55, 487–493 (2016)
Chua, A., Marcheggiani, E., Servillo, L., Vande Moere, A.: FlowSampler: visual analysis of
urban flows in geolocated social media data. In: Aiello, L.M., McFarland, D. (eds.) SocInfo
2014. LNCS, vol. 8852, pp. 5–17. Springer, Cham (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-
15168-7_2
Bannon, L.: Reimagining HCI: toward a more human-centered perspective. Intersections 18(4),
50–57 (2011)
Benyon, D., Höök, K.: Navigation in information spaces: supporting the individual. In:
Proceedings of the Human-Computer Interaction INTERACT 1997, pp. 39–46 (1997)
Benyon, D.: Presence in blended spaces. J. Interact. Comput. 24, 219–226 (2012)
Benyon, D.: Spaces of interaction, places for experience. Synthesis Lectures on Human-Centered
Informatics, September 2014. https://doi.org/10.2200/s00595ed1v01y201409hci022)
Carmona, M.: Public Places, Urban Spaces. Architectural Press, Oxford (2003)
Carr, S.: Public space. Cambrige University Press, Cambrige (1992)
Castells, M., Fernández-Ardèvol, M., Linchuan Qiu, J., Sey, A.: Mobile Communication and
Society: A Global Perspective. MIT Press, Cambridge (2006)
Francis, M.: Mapping downtown activity. J. Arch. Plan. Res. 1(1), 21–35 (1984). http://lda.
ucdavis.edu/people/websites/francis/Mapping%20Downtown%20Activity-Francis.pdf
Galli, A., Di Clemente, M.V., Marcheggiani, E., Scoppolini, F.M.: The design of ICT tools to
strengthen the local identity in rural areas and to broaden the participation of large public to
rural tourism experiences. In: The European Pilgrimage Routes for Promoting Sustainable and
Quality Tourism in Rural Areas International Conference, 4–6 December 2014, Florence –
Italy, Proceeding, pp. 871–880 (2015)
Gehl, J.: Life between Buildings: Using Public Space. Island Press, Washington, DC (2011)
Hampton, K.N.: Technology Brings People Together in Public Spaces After All, published on
line By Project for Public Spaces on 17 July 2014 (2014)
Hansen, P., Järvelin, K.: Collaborative information retrieval in an information-intensive domain.
Inf. Process. Manag. 41(5), 1101–1119 (2005)
Lipovská, B., Štěpánková, R.: Assessing observation methods for landscape planning practice in
rural villages. Curr. Urban Stud. 1, 102–109 (2013). https://doi.org/10.4236/cus.2013.14011
Lugano, G.: Mobile social networking in theory and practice. First Monday, 13(11), 3, November
2008. http://firstmonday.org/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2232/2050
Lynch, K.: Site Planning. MIT Press, Cambridge (1984)
Madanipour, A.: Design of Urban Space. Wiley, Chichester (1996)
Markaki, M.: Digital Cities: Towards a New Identity of Public Space. London (2014)
Miková, P.: Manuál tvorby veřejných prostranství hlavního města Prahy. Institut plánování a
rozvoje hlavního města Prahy, 290 p. (2014). ISBN 978-80-87931-11-0
Miková, K., Paulíková, M., Pauliniova, Z.: Verejné priestory – ako tvoriť priestory s príbehom,
pre ľudí a s ľuďmi. EKOPOLIS: Banská Bystrica, 2010, 135 p. (2010). ISBN 978-80-89505-
00-5
Nassar, U.A.: Urban space design to enhance physical activities and motivate healthy social
behaviour in Caro, Egypt. In: Proceedings of INTCESS15-2nd, International Conference on
Education and Social Sciences, pp. 1137–1147 (2015)
 Methodological Approaches to Reflect on the Relationships 261

Parviainen, E., Lagerström, E., Hansen, P.: Composting as interior design – encouraging
sustainability throughout a participatory design process. In: DIS 2017 Companion Proceed-
ings of the 2017 ACM Conference Companion Publication on Designing Interactive Systems,
June 2017, Edinburgh, UK, pp. 167–171 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1145/3064857.3079139
Preece, J., Sharp, H., Rogers, Y.: Interaction Design: Beyond Human-Computer Interaction, 3rd
edn. Wiley, Chichester (2011)
Project for Public Space (PPS): How to turn a Place Around: A Handbook for Creating
Successful Public Spaces. Project for public spaces, New York (2001)
Schöbel, S.: Qualitative research as a perspective for urban open space planning. J. Landsc. Arch.
1(1), 38–47 (2006)
Schön D.A.: The Reflective Practitioner. Basic Books. 2 Place; Publisher? (1983)
Thwaites, K., Simkins, I.: Experiential landscape: an approach to people, place, and space.
Milton Park, Abingdon, New York (2007)
Ingegnoli, V.: Landscape Bionomics Biological-Integrated Landscape Ecology. Springer, Milano
(2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-88-470-5226-0
Vanderhaeghen, P., Cheng, H.J.: Guidance molecules in axon pruning and cell death. Cold
Spring Harb. Perspect. Biol. 2(6), 1–18 (2010)
Wang, Y., Luo, S., Liu, S., Lu, Y., Hansen, P.: Crafting concrete as a material for enhancing
meaningful interactions. In: Kurosu, M. (ed.) HCI 2017, Part I. LNCS, vol. 10271, pp. 634–
644. Springer, Cham (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-58071-5_48
Wang, Y., Lou, S., Lu, Y., Gong, H., Zhou, Y., Liu, S., Hansen, P.: AnimSkin: fabricating
epidermis with interactive, functional and aesthetic color animation, June, 2017, Edinburgh,
UK (2017b). http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/3064663.3064687
Wheeler, S.: The sustainable urban development reader. Routledge, London (2004)
Whyte, W.H.: The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, The Conservation Foundation.
Washington DC (1980)
Ylipulli, J., Suopajärvi, T., Ojala, T., Kostakos, V., Kukka, H.: Municipal WiFi and interactive
displays: Appropriation of new technologies in public urban spaces. Technol. Forecast. Soc.
Chang. 89(2014), 145–160 (2013)
Žufová, M.: Lepšie data pre lepšiu Bratislavu. In: Public Spaces Bratislava. STU Bratislava, 28
p. (2015). ISBN: 978-80-227-4355-6

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
4.3
Modelling Co-creation Ecosystem for Public
Open Spaces

Aelita Skarzauskiene1(&), Monika Maciuliene1,

and Petja Ivanova-Radovanova2
1
Mykolas Romeris University, Vilnius, Lithuania
{aelita,maciuliene}@mruni.eu
2
Association for Integrated Development and Sustainability, Sofia, Bulgaria
[email protected]

Abstract. Co-creation can be defined as the involvement of citizens in the

initiation and/or the design process of public services in order to (co)create
beneficial outcomes and value for society. Mediated public open spaces are ideal
environments for co-creation to emerge due to the involvement of the com-
munity and ICT in the knowledge creation. The aims of the research presented
in the chapter are two-fold: to conduct a mapping activity in order to collect the
insights on civic technologies promoting the creation of open public spaces
through the use of ICT and to define the critical dimensions in designing co-
creative ecosystems. The mapping strategy was conducted by evaluating the
civic technologies in Lithuania and Bulgaria. The insights from the empirical
exercise allow to draw managerial and organizational recommendations for
strengthening the collective efforts of citizens, IT developers, public and gov-
ernmental institutions in creating open, inclusive and reflective open public
spaces.

Keywords: Co-creation
Civic technologies
Community

Citizen empowerment

1 Introduction

In current societal settings influenced by globalization and ICT use, citizen engagement
in development of public spaces should be approached holistically. Co-creation entails
connections and collaboration in generation of added value for the involved actors
(Alves 2013; Lönn and Uppström 2015). Mediated open spaces are ideal environments
for the co-creation to emerge due to the involvement of entire community and infor-
mation communication technologies in knowledge creation or aggregation. Co-creation
offers an interesting perspective, as it enables the integration of a range of ICT-
mediated and offline participatory methods and creates a shared domain between
professionals and citizens. In its optimal form, co-creation has the dual benefit of
reducing public sector costs and increasing stakeholder satisfaction (Gouillart and
Hallett 2015). Co-creation of public services can lead amongst other to better allocation
of resources (Cruickshank and Deakin 2011), enhance effectiveness (Jan et al. 2012),
© The Author(s) 2019
C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 262–277, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_21
 Modelling Co-creation Ecosystem for Public Open Spaces 263

reduce service quality gaps and planning mistakes (Linders 2012) and higher trans-
parency (Bradwell and Marr 2008). Several authors (Cassia and Magno 2009; Skid-
more et al. 2006) indicate that co-creative approaches increase the trust of citizens in
public organizations. Recent literature within the co-creation of public spaces high-
lights the benefits collaboration brings by providing various examples of innovative
projects and initiatives that have engaged citizens and had successful outcomes (Giest
et al. 2016; Jacobsen 2016).
However, there is a relatively little research on the specific groups of activities that
should be undertaken in order to enhance the co-creative capacity of various initiatives.
Understanding what makes initiatives co-creative could lead to better design and
management of projects. The aim of this chapter is to offer insights on the critical
dimensions of co-creative ecosystems enhancing public open spaces based on the
previous theoretical insights and empirical investigations. The ecosystem in this
chapter refers to an interdependent social system of actors, organizations, material
infrastructures, and symbolic resources that can be created in technology-enabled,
information-intensive social systems. According to Harrison et al. (2012), “ecosystems
are naturally occurring phenomena and the metaphor may be applied to any existing
socio-technical domain, they can also be seeded, modelled, developed, managed, that
is, intentionally cultivated for the purpose of achieving a managerial and policy vision.”
The object of analysis in this framework are the civic technology platforms. It refers
to the extendible platforms and applications that enable citizens to connect and col-
laborate with each other and with the government (Clarke 2014). The scope of the
concept is wide and applicable in defining ICT-enabled technologies aimed at gener-
ation of value for the public ranging from online transparency and accountability
initiatives to e-city applications. The rapid transformation of the society influenced by
digital upheaval, budgetary pressures and evolving understanding of the citizen role in
the workings of governments lead to a collaborative governance approach expressed in
the literature on Open Government and Government 2.0 (e.g. Meijer et al. 2012;
Uppström 2014). Such understanding is based on principles of collaboration, trans-
parency and participation. Hence, in the context of proposed framework, the civic
technologies are understood as the public services provided by non-governmental
entities such as NGOs, educational organizations, individual citizens or grassroot
movements.
Over the last decades, leading business and public management scholars and
practitioners have highlighted the interactive and networked nature of the value cre-
ation both in business and in public sectors (Galvagno and Dalli 2014; Stembert and
Mulder 2012). The new channels of communication and information flow enable the
innovative involvement of the broader groups of society in collaborative activities in
the shorter amounts of time. Hence, the authors develop a theoretically-oriented
framework for conceptualizing co-creative ecosystems aimed at the enhancement of
public spaces by evaluating civic technologies tackling issues related to public spaces
in Lithuania and Bulgaria.
264 A. Skarzauskiene et al.

2 Co-creative Ecosystems: Theoretical Influences

and Conceptual Analysis Framework

The section explores theoretical influences of the conceptual analysis framework and
details the logics and elements of the model. The conceptual models help to clarify
what is known and unknown about the system and are key in interpreting research
results. The framework is built according to the guidelines put forward by Jabareen
(2009) summarized in four main directions: (1) every concept has an irregular contour
defined by its components; (2) every concept contains components originating from
other concepts, (3) every concept is considered as the point of coincidence, conden-
sation, or accumulation of its own components, and (4) every concept must be
understood relative to its own components, to other concepts and to the problem it is
supposed to resolve. In developing co-creative ecosystem framework, the authors have
expanded on previous works of Service Science approach to co-creation and PPC
analysis framework suggested by Warburton et al. (2010) aiming at evaluation of the
success of various initiatives.
The Service Science theoretical approach provides the ecosystem logic for con-
ceptual model and allows to understand the value co-creation processes in a holistic
manner (Aladalah and Lee 2015; Lusch et al. 2008; Sterrenberg 2017). According to
Meynhardt et al. (2016), most investigations on co-creation focus on micro and
collective-macro levels. Systemic approach is often missing, and isolated investigations
lead to incomplete research outcomes. Researchers at IBM and University of Cam-
bridge suggest Service Science as an alternative method and research direction to
discover underlying components of complex systems and the way they can be com-
bined (IfM and IBM 2008). Hence, the it provides a much needed clarity and guidance
for those wanting to apply principles of co-creation in managing organizations. The
central concept of the Service Science as is a service ecosystem. It consists of several or
many service systems connected by a network and Service Science focuses on value
co-creation amongst them. Service system can be defined as dynamic configuration of
people, technologies and organizations and their ecosystem can be defined as self-
adjusting system of resource-integrating contributors connected by shared structures,
social rules and mutual value creation (Akaka et al. 2013: 161).
In Service Science perspective, the value is created through three interrelated and
cyclical processes in service systems (Goda and Kijima 2015: 85): resource integration,
networking and service exchange. The Service Science suggests that value emerges
when a number of entities work collectively to create mutual benefits by granting
access to one another’s resources including people, technologies, organizations and
information. Interacting entities form service ecosystems consisting of several or many
service systems connected by a network. The entities cannot create and deliver value
alone; they can only propose value offerings to the other actors in the network and in
this way co-create the value.
The elements of the framework are based on the model suggested by Warburton
et al. (2010) who proposed that success of initiative depends on three elements – the
process (how), the purpose (why) and the context (when, where) – the PPC framework.
The PPC framework has been used in analysing open governance intelligence
 Modelling Co-creation Ecosystem for Public Open Spaces 265

(Krimmer et al. 2016), strategic change in governance systems (Hamann 2009), ICT-
enabled social changes on community/societal level (Pozzebon and Diniz 2012), and
organizational changes (Armenakis and Bedeian 1999). Figure 1 “Conceptual Analysis
Framework for Co-Creative Ecosystems” illustrates the elements and the logics of the
framework. Below detailed explanation of the framework elements is provided.

Fig. 1. Conceptual analysis framework for co-creative ecosystems. Source: developed by

authors, 2017

The first, process, element is dedicated to analysis of the actors involved in co-
creation processes – their roles and dynamics. (Voorberg et al. 2009) suggest that the
success of co-creative initiatives depends highly on the position and interests of the
involved stakeholders. Cobo (2012) states that “although collaboration has the potential
to produce powerful results, not all collaborations realize this potential. Many col-
laborations fail to produce innovative solutions or balance stakeholder concerns, and
some even fail to generate any collective action whatsoever”. Brown and Osborne
(2012) suggest that the collaboration efforts should be evaluated based on interests,
goals and motivations of diverse actors involved. McNutt et al. (2016) suggests that the
sustainability of co-creative initiatives in public sector depends on the networked
relationships between the business entities, NGOs and more informal groups of citi-
zens. The motivation to create partnerships comes from the recognition that collabo-
rating organizations can accomplish what each partner cannot accomplish alone by
maximizing the influence, creating collective resources and removing duplication of the
efforts.
The purpose element examines reasons why the initiatives have been established.
Earlier work by academics and practitioners (Emerson et al. 2011; Hepburn 2015) on
evaluating the co-creative initiatives focused primarily on the process issues, largely
ignoring the purpose of such projects. The predominant method was to examine best
practice case studies based on a set of principles, and the process was often considered
to be an end in itself rather than a means to an end. However, more attention needs to
266 A. Skarzauskiene et al.

be paid to the content of the initiatives and contextual factors that can mitigate the
effectiveness of co-creation and its outcomes in terms of the decision-makers or the
participants. The design and structure of technological solutions can give impetus to the
purposeful development towards common community good. On the other hand, if
social values of the citizens acting in a collective environment are not aligned or
coordinated and if technological decisions are implemented without scientific reasoning
in an immature environment, these technological solutions can accelerate negative
aspects of ICT and distance even more from the desirable goal of an inclusive com-
munity (Skaržauskienė et al., 2015). The context element refers to the contextual
influences of the co-creative initiatives such as social context and the networks of
collaboration and association, scale and type of the issue addressed.
The PPC elements allow to discuss the civic technologies in-depth and enables the
comparison between varying technological solutions. The conceptual framework
enhances existing research methods and models into the new context of people, places
and technology by employing the logics of ecosystem. Identified dimensions should
not be considered independently of one another. Such analysis framework will help to
come to more comprehensive assessment of what makes such initiatives successful in
engaging citizens and in enhancing public spaces.

3 Empirical Investigations on Co-creative Ecosystems

and Civic Technologies in Lithuania and Bulgaria

The conceptual analysis framework was used to evaluate civic technologies (online
platforms and applications) oriented towards enhancement of public spaces in
Lithuania and Bulgaria with the task to provide managerial and organizational rec-
ommendations for strengthening the collective efforts of citizens, IT developers, public
and governmental institutions in creating open, inclusive and reflective open public
spaces. The methods of content mapping and analysis were applied. The mapping
activity aimed at collection of data on the co-creative ecosystems in Lithuania and
Bulgaria in order to develop insights on involved actors, type of co-creative activities
and objectives and to determine the linkages and synergy between the actors. To
achieve this goal, the method of online content analysis has been employed. The
research process can be divided in to four stages: sample selection, design of the data
collection template, data collection and evaluation of the results.
The platforms in the sample were selected according the selection criteria: (1) ICT-
enabled and interactive. The platforms employ ICT solutions (i.e. online forums,
ideation platforms) to be more open, inclusive and collaborative; (2) Based in Lithuania
and Bulgaria. The platform activities aim to improve public spaces in Lithuania and
Bulgaria; (3) Orientation. The platforms may be for non-profit as well as for profit; but
their overall objectives should serve the community and improve the public spaces;
(4) Contributors. Selected platforms have capabilities to involve a large number of
members in making decisions or proposing ideas; (5) Duration. Projects with a mini-
mum of 1 year of activity; (6) Data availability. Goals, metrics, initiators are listed on
platform website; (7) Collective action. Projects allows collaboration between citizens
and/or business and/or NGO’s and/or governments. The sample was gathered through a
 Modelling Co-creation Ecosystem for Public Open Spaces 267

review of the previous studies on civic technologies, European funding databases,

municipal websites, popular blogs and through original Google searches on array of
civic engagement related terms in Lithuanian and Bulgarian. Based on the listed cri-
teria, the sample includes 13 civic tech initiatives oriented towards improvement of
public spaces in Lithuania and Bulgaria. The sample and details of the initiatives are
provided in the Table 1 below.

Table 1. Sample of civic tech initiatives

Name of the Code Country URL address Initiator
initiative of
operation
ABLE P1 Bulgaria www. Community of entrepreneurial
ablebulgaria.org/ young people
en/
Archmap.lt P2 Lithuania www.archmap.lt “Architektūros centras”,
Lithuanian Architects’ Association
and “Architektūros fondas”
asLietuvai.lt P3 Lithuania www.asLietuvai.lt Individual initiative
Cultural cosmos P4 Bulgaria https:// Team of “Kosmos” cinema, the
culturalcosmos. city of Plovdiv
com/cultural-
cosmos/
Kelionės kultūros P5 Lithuania http:// “Paveldo projektai”
keliais idomiausiosvietos.
lt/keliones
Kurgyvenu.lt P6 Lithuania www.kurgyvenu.lt “CodeIN”
mesDarom.lt P7 Lithuania www.mesdarom.lt “Mes Darom“
Millenium P8 Bulgaria www.millennium. Foundation Millenium
bg
Nemasinis.lt P9 Lithuania www.nemasinis.lt Individual initiative
pamatykLietuvoje. P10 Lithuania www. Individual initiative
lt pamatykLietuvoje.
lt
Transformatory P11 Bulgaria www. Group of young architects
Association transformatori.net/
en
Tuk Tam P12 Bulgaria https://tuk-tam.bg 8 young people used to live and
study abroad together with
Back2BG
Uspelite P13 Bulgaria http://uspelite.bg/ Superhosting.bg
Source: developed by authors, 2017

During the second stage, data collection template was designed based on the the-
oretical framework and publicly available data on selected platforms. The template is a
necessary tool in order to make data collection process uniform across platforms and to
enable patterning. The template is divided into 3 sections based on the elements in the
268 A. Skarzauskiene et al.

theoretical framework: (1) purpose element (goals, operation type, context); (2) process
element (users, initiators, funding, partners, developers, resources); (3) context element
(networks of collaborators, dynamics of collaboration). The fieldwork was done during
April–May 2017. Some categories were pre-defined based on previous chapters in
order to help data structuration and evaluation. Third stage of the empirical study is
data collection including systemic coding of textual content and semantic themes found
on the platforms by reviewing uploaded documents, outgoing links, social media
accounts, user activity and media mentions. The last stage involved evaluation and
synthesis of the results. Comparison of the research data across the cases led to the
generation of the insights on the co-creative ecosystems.
Described method has several limitations which need to be mentioned. The first
limitation is the heterogeneity of Internet data which predetermined by the differences in
content, user interfaces, semantics, structure, etc. The differences make it difficult for the
researchers collecting online data (Bouchkhar 2013). Another limitation is the sample of
platforms. It has to be mentioned that the sample is not representative of the universe of
civic technologies. Moreover, due its limited size, it does not present statistical signif-
icance. However, as the first exercise in differentiating the building blocks of co-creative
ecosystems, it can be considered as an effort of structuring the sample.

4 Analysis and Discussion of the Empirical Study Results

The analysis of the research outputs aimed at unfolding the purpose dimension (the
goals, operation type) of civic technologies aimed at enhancement of public spaces in
Lithuania and Bulgaria allowed to elaborate the types of value propositions offered for
the actors in the ecosystem. Knowing why individuals and organizations build plat-
forms, and why citizens participate in them, can guide the organizations and civic
leaders in fostering ICT-enabled platforms. The findings of analysis are illustrated in
Table 2 “The Results on Purpose Dimension”.
The goals, orientation and operation type of the platforms analysed provide insights
on the value the platforms aim to cumulate. The analysis allowed to cluster the Civic
Technologies based on the changes they are seeking in the society expressed through
the notion of value proposition. Six types of value propositions were identified in the
sample: economic, self-expression, knowledge/information, status, functional and
network. Economic value proposition refers to the pursuit of profit, savings, return of
investments for the actors involved in service system. It was identified in four plat-
forms. Self-expression value proposition was identified in all 13 platforms and deals
with contribution to the society, expression of views by the actors of service system.
Knowledge/information proposition was also observed in all the sample platforms and
refers to the aim of information dissemination between the members of service system.
The status value proposition refers to the pursuit of feeling more important by the actors
in the system and is expressed in nine platforms. Ten platforms offer network value
proposition expressed through the goals of closer partnerships, mutual benefits,
increased impact, access to greater pool of partners and supporters. The last value
proposition, functional, was identified in all of the sample platforms and refers to the
core functional benefits the service provides to the members of society.
 Modelling Co-creation Ecosystem for Public Open Spaces 269

Table 2. The results on purpose dimension

Name of the Goals of the platform Value propositions identified
platform
ABLE “…The mission is to develop a civil Knowledge/information;
society, inspire leadership, and spread functional; self-expression;
entrepreneurial culture in Bulgaria; network; status
website, social network, offline events
organization, project. Initiators met
during participation in the Bulgarian
Young Leaders Program (BYLP) and
in 2011 decided to start a non-profit to
serve as a platform for our ideas and
for positive change in Bulgaria. Since
then – with the proportional increase in
our members – our projects, our
influence, and their successes in
Bulgarian society have been growing
as well…”
Archmap.lt “…To present Lithuanian architecture Knowledge/information;
and public spaces to wider audiences in functional; self-expression;
order to increase the public interest to status
get to know the architectural heritage.
To represent Lithuanian architecture by
expanding the scope from the cities to
lesser explored regions…”
asLietuvai.lt “…To achieve the breakthrough of Knowledge/information;
Lithuanian thinking and mentality from functional; self-expression;
destruction to flourishing…” network
Cultural cosmos “…Create platform for culture and Knowledge/information;
society in partnership with functional; self-expression;
Municipality of the city of Plovdiv; network; status
Enhancement civil society; Networking
and partnership with cultural operators
and institutions from BG and
Europe…”
Kelionės kultūros “…To stimulate and motivate the need Knowledge/information;
keliais to travel in Lithuania, explore new functional; self-expression
regions and cultural objects…”
Kurgyvenu.lt “…To help the owners, sellers, buyers, Knowledge/information;
brokers, renters and other interest functional; economic; self-
parties to make real-estate related expression; network; status
decisions easier and more
intelligent…”
mesDarom.lt “…Creation of sustainable society by Knowledge/information;
uniting individuals, families, business, functional; self-expression;
initiatives and other entities in order to network; status
preserve the country and public spaces
for future generations…”
(continued)
270 A. Skarzauskiene et al.

Table 2. (continued)
Name of the Goals of the platform Value propositions identified
platform
Millenium “…Development of sustainable and Knowledge/information;
balanced regions in Bulgaria and functional; self-expression;
Europe; Enhancement of suitable network
conditions for economic development
and employment in Support for
economic development and social
cooperation between regions in
Bulgaria and Europe. Support and
creation of suitable environment for
decentralization of social services in
Bulgaria…”
Nemasinis.lt “…To collect and visualize interesting Knowledge/information;
Lithuanian public objects that are functional; self-expression
outside the scope of traditional
travellers and explorers due to the
limited accessibility and bad
conditions. It allows to expand the
understanding about the
surroundings…”
pamatykLietuvoje. “…To motivate and stimulate internal Knowledge/information;
lt tourism, find new interesting spaces functional; self-expression;
and places, share the knowledge and network; status
experiences…”
Transformatory “…The association aims to set good Knowledge/information;
Association practice, realizing common initiatives functional; self-expression;
with the specialized educational network; status
schools in the constructional and
architectural field for improving the
educational process…”
Tuk Tam “…Community of knowledgeable, Knowledge/information;
initiative and well educated Bulgarians functional; self-expression;
from all over the world. We implement network
projects and organize events in the
spheres of professional development,
education and social economy in
Bulgaria and abroad…”
Uspelite “…Since 2015 it became the most Knowledge/information;
popular positive media in Bulgaria…” functional; self-expression;
network
Source: developed by authors, 2017
 Modelling Co-creation Ecosystem for Public Open Spaces 271

The process dimension refers to the of individuals and organizations participating

in the service ecosystem, their roles and resources. The mapping activity allowed to
identify nine groups of actors involved in co-creative ecosystems–governmental enti-
ties, citizens, private organizations, NGOs, media, specialists, associations, public
organizations and international organizations. The content analysis (see Table 3 below)
of the user groups as defined by initiators showed that, in most cases, initiators define
the user groups employing very abstract terms. Also, the ‘official’ focus is on the
citizens (expressed variously e.g. young people, habitants, etc.). Non-citizen actor
groups are mostly left out of the descriptions of the platform orientation. Hence, in-
depth review of the platform content, the services they provide, funding sources and
strategic documents was conducted and resulted in identification of eight actor groups –
citizens, governmental organizations, NGOs, business organizations, media organiza-
tions, public organizations, associations, international organizations – which participate
in the ecosystem directly and indirectly.

Table 3. The results on process dimension

Name of the Types of Target groups identified by the initiators
platform initiators
ABLE Individual “…Young people and urban development professionals…”
citizens
Archmap.lt NGO and “…Professionals, amateurs, young and old, anyone
association interested in architecture…”
asLietuvai.lt Individual “…Young and talented Lithuanian all around the world…”
citizens
Cultural cosmos Individual “…Citizens of the city of Plovdiv, cultural industries with
citizens focus on young people and artists in the first stage of their
development…”
Kelionės kultūros NGO “…everyone interested…”
keliais
Kurgyvenu.lt Business “…travellers, teachers, lecturers, travel guides, families…”
mesDarom.lt NGO “…individuals, families, communities, governmental
institutions, businesses, initiatives and other movement…”
Millenium NGO “…NGOs, local authorities, business, local people…”
Nemasinis.lt Individual “…everyone…”
citizens
pamatykLietuvoje. Individual “…everyone interested in travelling”
lt citizens
Transformatory Individual “…Young people and urban development professionals…”
Association citizens
Tuk Tam Individual “…Young and well educated people in Bulgaria and
citizens abroad…”
Uspelite Individual “…Young people…”
citizens
Source: developed by authors, 2017
272 A. Skarzauskiene et al.

Six roles of the actors involved in the processes were identified – initiators, users,
contributors, partners, sponsors and intermediaries. Figure 2 below illustrates the
connections between the actors in the analyzed ecosystems. Initiators start the plat-
forms by contributing their individual and organizational resources in terms of time,
know-how, finances, etc. The roles identified can be filled by any of the actor groups
identified. Meaning that the businesses can be initiators, users, contributors, initiators,
partners and sponsors of the platforms. The same applies to the citizens and other actor
groups. The role of the user refers to the actors using the platform and receiving ICT-
enabled service. The role of the contributor is closely related to the role of user.
However, it is more interactive and refers to more interactive collaboration efforts by
means of suggesting ideas, voting, reporting issues, communicating with other con-
tributors and other ways of creating content beneficial for the active processes of the
platform. The role of partner is to share operant resources with platform initiators and
managers. The role refers to mutually beneficial relationships which are developed
without losing autonomy of individual actors. The Sponsors provide financial resources
for enabling platform activities. The sponsoring can happen in number of ways through
governmental, business funding or citizens backing up the platforms they find
important.

Fig. 2. Dynamics and roles of actors in the co-creative ecosystem. Source: developed by
authors, 2017

The role of intermediary refers to actors connecting different actors in the

ecosystem. For the society to evolve being more open and engaged, not all citizens
have to be active, not all organizations have to be active – but there is need for
intermediaries, civic leaders, active citizens who could translate the importance of
active citizenship, transparency, translate the data and make it easier for citizens and
governments to cooperate. The role of intermediary mostly refers to the individual
actors, mostly specialists with the skills and knowledge in the fields of IT, open data,
and governmental processes. The role of intermediary is especially relevant in the
 Modelling Co-creation Ecosystem for Public Open Spaces 273

context of co-creating public value. Intermediaries translate the complex public sector
information (i.e. legislation on the public spaces) and processes to the other groups in
the system and allow connections to happen easier.
The context element refers to the settings the platforms operate within. In the digital
economic era, resources and actors are embedded in networks. Therefore, the process
of value creation is depending on the absorptive capacity and ability to operate in
networks. The results of the empirical study on context dimension are illustrated in
Table 4 below and discussed in the context of the framework below.

Table 4. Results of the context dimension

Name of the Code Number of partners Type of partners
platform identified
ABLE P1 19 partners identified International organizations, NGOs,
associations
Archmap.lt P2 5 partners identified Governmental organizations,
business, NGOs
asLietuvai.lt P3 No partners identified n/a
Cultural cosmos P4 10 partners identified Associations, municipalities,
governmental organizations,
business
Kelionės kultūros P5 5 partners identified NGOs, governmental entities
keliais
Kurgyvenu.lt P6 No partners identified n/a
mesDarom.lt P7 20 partners identified Media organizations, NGOs,
business organizations, public
organizations
Millenium P8 No partners identified n/a
Nemasinis.lt P9 No partners identified n/a
pamatykLietuvoje. P10 6 partners identified Public organizations, NGOs,
lt governmental organizations
Transformatory P11 8 partners identified International organizations, NGOs
Association
Tuk Tam P12 12 partners identified Business, NGOs, public
in the platform organizations
content
Uspelite P13 12 partners identified International organizations,
in the platform business, NGOs, public
content organizations
Source: developed by authors, 2017

Although the majority of the platforms aim to increase citizen engagement, the role
of citizens is often limited to being users and contributors rather than partners (i.e.
collaborators, experts contributing operant resources) in creation and management of
ICT-enabled initiatives. In addition, the analysis of the platform connections with the
274 A. Skarzauskiene et al.

external partners shows that majority of the projects have no external partners (or they
do not declare the affiliations publicly). The role of contributor in the context of civic
technologies is especially important. The platform activities often depend on the active
engagement by the end users in contributing the content in form of ideas, opinions,
reactions and support. However, the prevalence of this role is limited in the sample
platforms. In most cases, citizens are expected to contribute in co-creating public value
through the platforms. Other types of actors are not invited to contribute a content with
the few exceptions. The results correspond with the central ideas of the conceptual
framework which suggests that organizations no longer depend on the internal
capacities to satisfy external needs. The sustainable initiatives and organizations are
required to maintain relationships with other actors in the ecosystem (e.g. partners,
competitors, governments and end users).

5 Conclusions

While traditional approaches to public engagement and governmental reforms remain

relevant, this chapter focuses towards the growing potential of networked society to
solve their social problems. It expands co-creation field and provide innovative
framework to the citizens co-initiated, heavily technology supported, and systems-
oriented co-creation approaches. A critical reflection on the co-creation practices is
relevant to evaluate how digital enabled managerial and organisational solutions
influence the quality of co-creation results, to understand what works by implementing
the co-creations methods and what doesn’t work and why. The nature of all these
problems is interdisciplinary and have to be solved under the complex manner.
The technological advancements, innovative managerial strategies, and new forms
of interaction lead to the constantly changing roles of the organizations and their
customers. The concept of co-creation is seen as an evolving framework describing the
shift from considering organizations as the definers of value to a more inclusive and
collaborative processes involving end-users and other external actors. The use of a
theoretical study of the literature on co-creation and empirical analysis of civic tech
platforms allowed to identify main building blocks and attributes of co-creative digital
initiatives in Bulgaria and Lithuania. Understanding co-creation in the public sector
through ecosystem perspective requires to rethink of who can offer value in this space.
The model suggests that the value emerges when a number of entities work collectively
to create mutual benefits by granting access to one another’s resources including
people, technologies, organizations and information. Initiatives based on collaboration
can only flourish through networks by including residents, communities, business,
governmental institutions and other actors in the act of value generation.
The co-creation of value for the public through technologies encompasses many
different interpretations and views depending researchers, developers, users, research
areas and disciplines. Therefore, various parties are likely to hold different views and
perceptions on the concept. The proposed model sheds dynamic ideas for future
researches to further identify, conceptualize and understand the underlying theories and
perspectives which strongly influence the previous, current, and future concept of co-
creation. The model needs to be tested in additional cases to further verify its validity
 Modelling Co-creation Ecosystem for Public Open Spaces 275

and usefulness in diverse settings by producing detailed longitudinal case studies.

Further research could elaborate on the applicability of the framework in diverse setting
– different countries. The maturity model of the ecosystem could be designed in order
to provide more detailed guidelines for the actor involved in how to achieve the value.
Additional work is needed to formulate measures and indicators of successful
initiatives.

References
Akaka, M.A., Vargo, S.L., Lusch, R.F.: The complexity of context: a service ecosystems
approach for international marketing. J. Int. Mark. Am. Mark. Assoc. 21(4), 1–20 (2013)
Aladalah, M., Lee, V.C.S.: Gov2.0: A Service Science Perspective. In Kankanhalli, A., Jones, A.
B., Teo, T. (Eds.), PACIS 2015 Proceedings Atlanta, Georgia: Association for Information
Systems (2015)
Alves, H.: Co-creation and innovation in public services. Serv. Ind. J. 33(7–8), 671–682 (2013).
https://doi.org/10.1080/02642069.2013.740468
Armenakis, A.A., Bedeian, A.G.: Organizational change: a review of theory and research in the
1990s. J. Manag. 25(3), 293–315 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639902500303
Bouchkhar, B.: Data sources on the Internet: towards a new and innovative solution. In: NTTS
2013, pp. 391–397 (2013)
Bradwell, P., Marr, S.: Making the Most of Collaboration: An International Survey of Public
Service Co-design. Demos, London (2008)
Brown, L., Osborne, S.P.: Risk and innovation: public management review. Public Manag. Rev.
15(2), 186–208 (2012)
Cassia, F., Magno, F.: Public services co-production: exploring the role of citizen orientation. Int.
J. Qual. Serv. Sci. 1(3), 334–343 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1108/17566690911004249
Clarke, R.Y.: Civic Tech Fuels U.S. State and Local Government Transformation. (2014). http://
www.accela.com/images/resources/whitepaper/idc-civic-tech-report.pdf
Cobo, C.: Networks for citizen consultation and citizen sourcing of expertise. Contemp. Soc. Sci.
7(3), 283–304 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1080/21582041.2012.683445
Cruickshank, P., Deakin, M.: Co-design in Smart Cities: a guide for municipalities from Smart
Cities, 1–36 (2011). http://researchrepository.napier.ac.uk/5659/
Emerson, K., Nabatchi, T., Balogh, S.: An integrative framework for collaborative governance.
J. Public Adm. Res. Theory 22(1), 1–29 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1093/jopart/mur011
Galvagno, M., Dalli, D.: Theory of value co-creation: a systematic literature review. Manag.
Serv. Qual. Int. J. 24(6), 643–683 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1108/msq-09-2013-0187
Giest, S., Koene, A., Vallejos, E.P., Pitkänen, O., Fosci, M.: Online spaces for urban citizen
engagement: a comparison of civic apps. In: Data for Policy Conference, pp. 1–6 (2016)
Goda, K., Kijima, K.: Modeling service ecosystems innovation. J. Bus. Manag. Sci. 3(3), 85–91
(2015). https://doi.org/10.12691/jbms-3-3-1
Gouillart, F., Hallett, T.: Co-creation in Government. Stanford Social Innovation Review, pp. 1–
16, Spring 2015
Hamann, R.: Strategic change in organisations and governance systems in response to complex
socio-ecological problems in Southern Africa. Synoptic Strategy Outline, pp. 1–6, November
2009
276 A. Skarzauskiene et al.

Harrison, T.M., Pardo, T.A., Cook, M.: Creating open government ecosystems: a research and
development agenda. Futur. Internet 4(4), 900–928 (2012). https://doi.org/10.3390/fi4040900
Hepburn, P.: An evaluation of the “helping hands-co-creation of a digital application for elderly
people” project, March 2015
IfM and IBM.: Succeeding through service innovation. Symposium A Quarterly Journal. In:
Modern Foreign Literatures. Cambridge, United Kingdom: University of Cambridge Institute
for Manufacturing (2008)
Jabareen, Y.: Building a conceptual framework: philosophy, definitions, and procedure. Int.
J. Qual. Methods 8, 49–62 (2009). https://doi.org/10.2522/ptj.20100192
Jacobsen, E.O.: Public spaces support social engagement and then provide the necessary buy-in
to sustain moral engagement as well, 1–21 (2016)
Jan, P.T., Lu, H.P., Chou, T.C.: Measuring the perception discrepancy of the service quality
between provider and customers in the Internet Protocol Television industry. Total Qual.
Manag. Business Excel. 23(7–8), 981–995 (2012)
Krimmer, R., Kalvet, T., Toots, M., McBride, K.: OpenGovIntelligence: Fostering Innovation
and Creativity in Europe through Public Administration Modernization towards Supplying
and Exploiting Linked Open Statistical Data (2016)
Linders, D.: From e-government to we-government: defining a typology for citizen coproduction
in the age of social media. Gov. Inf. Q. 29(4), 446–454 (2012)
Lönn, C.-M., Uppström, E.: Core aspects for value co-creation in public sector. In Americas
Conference on Information Systems , Puerto Rico, pp. 1–12 (2015)
Lusch, R.F., Vargo, S.L., Wessels, G.: Toward a conceptual foundation for service science:
contributions from service-dominant logic. IBM Syst. J. 47, 5–14 (2008)
McNutt, J.G., et al.: The diffusion of civic technology and open government in the United States.
Inf. Polity 21(2), 153–170 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3233/ip-160385
Meijer, A.J., Koops, B.-J., Pieterson, W., Overman, S., Tije, S.T.: Government 2.0: key
challenges to its realization. Electron. J. E-Gov. 10(1), 59–69 (2012)
Meynhardt, T., Chandler, J.D., Strathoff, P.: Systemic principles of value co-creation: synergetics
of value and service ecosystems. J. Bus. Res. 69(8), 2981–2989 (2016). https://doi.org/10.
1016/j.jbusres.2016.02.031
Pozzebon, M., Diniz, E.H.: Theorizing ICT and society in the Brazilian context: a multilevel,
pluralistic and remixable framework. Braz. Adm. Rev. 9(3), 287–307 (2012). https://doi.org/
10.1590/s1807-76922012000300004
Skaržauskienė, A., et al.: Social Technologies and Collective Intelligence. Mykolas Romeris
University, Vilnius (2015)
Skidmore, P., Bound, K., Lownsbrough, H.: Community Participation: Who Benefits?. Joseph
Rowntree Foundation, York, UK (2006)
Stembert, N., Mulder, I.J.: Love your city! An interactive platform empowering citizens to turn
the public domain into a participatory domain, (Section 4) (2012)
Sterrenberg, G.: A conceptual framework for evaluating e-government systems success: a service
ecosystem approach. In: 50th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences,
pp. 2529–2538 (2017)
Uppström, E.: The Promise of Public Value Co-creation in Open Government. DSV Report Series.
Stockholm. (2014). http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:697081/FULLTEXT03
Voorberg, W., Bekkers, V., Tummers, L.: The keys to successful co-creation: an explanation
using causal proces tracing. EGPA Conference, 320090(320090), pp. 1–32 (2014). http://
repub.eur.nl/pub/76034
Warburton, D., Wilson, R., Rainbow, E.: Making a Difference: A guide to Evaluating Public
Participation in Central Government. London (2010). http://www.involve.org.uk/evaluation
 Modelling Co-creation Ecosystem for Public Open Spaces 277

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
4.4
Using ICTs for the Improvement of Public
Open Spaces: The Opportunity Offered
by CyberParks Digital Tools

Eneko Osaba1,4, Roberto Pierdicca2, Tiago Duarte3,

Alfonso Bahillo1(&), and Diogo Mateus3
1
Deusto Institute of Technology (DeustoTech), University of Deusto,
Bilbao, Spain
{e.osaba,alfonso.bahillo}@deusto.es
2
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Civile, Universtitá Politecnica delle Marché,
Edile e dell’ Architettura, Ancona, Italy
[email protected]
3
Universidade Lusófona, Lisbon, Portugal
[email protected], [email protected]
4
TECNALIA Research & Innovation, Derio, Spain
[email protected]

Abstract. In the last decade, the potential of mobile devices for augmenting
outdoor experience opened up new solutions, whose value is twofold. On one
hand, users can experience new forms of interaction with space. On the other,
stakeholders can have access to the so-called User Generated Data, that is
different types of information related to public spaces that could be used to
improve their conception of space. In line with this, several digital tools have
been developed and tested within the framework of CyberParks COST Action
TU-1306 with the intention of exploring how information and communication
technologies (ICTs) can contribute to the improvement of Public Open Spaces
(POS). In this way, this chapter aims to study the relationship between ICTs and
POS, focused on the opportunities offered by three different digital tools: the
WAY-CyberParks, the EthnoAlly, and the CyberCardeto. The main advantages
of using these digital tools are: (1) the real-time data gathering, (2) maintaining
an updated database, (3) collecting traces of different activities and users’ groups
“at the same time and space”, and (4) recording their opinion and preferences,
via text, video, sound or pictures. Furthermore, the chapter attempts to analyse
distinct types of results produced by their use, based on different study cases
where the digital tool has been tested. The data obtained in these places serve to
demonstrate the features and type of data gathered. With these case studies, the
chapter attempts to highlight the main potential of each platform as related to
different stakeholders and users.

Keywords: Digital tools
Interacting with users
WAY-CyberParks

Ethnoally
CyberCardeto

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 278–293, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_22
 Using ICTs for the Improvement of Public Open Spaces 279

1 Introduction

This chapter analyses how information and digital technologies (ICTs) can be used to
improve public open spaces of our cities, and how new forms of communication can
support different disciplines, in order to better plan and develop urban areas. The
analysis is based on the work developed within the COST Action TU 1306 CyberParks.
The CyberParks Project established an interdisciplinary research platform, including
different specific groups working together to understand the dynamic relationship
between ICT and the production and use of public open spaces, and its relevance to
sustainable urban development (Šuklje-Erjavec and Smaniotto Costa 2015; Smaniotto
Costa et al. 2015). This chapter is focused on the opportunities offered by three dif-
ferent digital tools: the WAY CyberParks; the EthnoAlly; and the CyberCardeto.
These digital tools are being developed, besides providing users contextual and
interaction information, to monitor how people use public open spaces, and as an
exchange interface between users and practitioners, decision makers, authorities. They
aim to increasing the understanding of the usability of space and the call to improve it
to meet people’s needs. Additionally, all the three platforms are being developed with
the intention of enabling planners to obtain data from different users and on specific
issues related to a public open space. In this sense, the advantages of using similar
digital approaches for monitoring and planning processes can be focused around the
real-time data gathering, the maintenance of an updated database, the collection of
different activities and users’ groups ‘at the same time and in the same space”, and,
finally, to record their opinion and preferences, via text, video, sound or pictures. These
digital tools open up also the possibility to perform specific surveys.
Through this chapter, we intend to demonstrate the critical features of the three
platforms and describe the functionalities and opportunities that each one offered.
Different types of results produced through their use will be analysed, based on each
different study cases where the digital tool was tested. By describing the case studies,
our main goal is to argue about the main potential of each platform, related to different
stakeholders and users.
This chapter is organised in five sections. In sections two, three and four the WAY-
Cyberparks digital tool, CyberCardeto smartphone application, and EthnoAlly, are
correspondingly described and discussed. In the last section, the chapter concludes with
a critical discussion and lessons learned.

2 WAY-Cyberparks

The WAY-Cyberparks digital tool is one of the main outcomes of the COST Action
TU1306, and it is a result of strong international transdisciplinary cooperation between
ICTs developers, urban planners/designers/landscape architects, social and behavioural
scientists. The main objective of this digital tool is to provide support to fieldwork
activities, related to the understanding of the interactions between people and physical
space, taking advantages of the potentiality behind the given mobile technologies.
280 E. Osaba et al.

2.1 Overall Description and Potential of the Digital Tool

In a nutshell, the WAY-Cyberparks consists of a smartphone application (APP) and a
web platform, and it is developed with the intention of increasing the data and
enhancing the insights on how citizens appropriate and use open public spaces, namely
by tracking outdoor activities. Additionally, when users reach specific geographical
points, the tool allows administrators to pose specific contextualized questions. Fur-
thermore, users can also proactively send their suggestions and inquiries to the
administrators, attaching different kinds of multimedia material. This collective method
allows for the gathering of contextual feedback and significant information about the
eventual use of public spaces. Moreover, the digital tool enriches the individuals’
experience by providing contextual information and tools to socialize with others. The
objectives behind the creation of these interactive contents is to make the exploration of
public spaces more attractive and engaging, while fostering outdoor inclusiveness. By
this way, the tool becomes more attractive both for place administrators as well as for
common users. Additionally, the WAY-Cyberparks provides an off-line mode,
allowing users to use it even when internet connection is not available.
The central architecture of WAY-Cyberparks is not the app itself, but rather the
web platform where the administrator of each space can access all the available mul-
timedia material gathered through the app, such as the participant’s profile, their
answers to the posed questions, their moving patterns in the place, the speed of
movement, the stops enacted, their length, or even the weather conditions during the
activity to better understand the complex user - space relationship. The administrator is
also able to visualize information from the gathered material like the uploaded images,
videos, audios and textual notes taken by the participants.
More specifically, the data gathered by the app can be divided into two groups. The
first relates to the direct data, which includes the audio-visual material produced by the
users while directly interacting with their surroundings. The second handles the indirect
data classified as descriptive metadata. This second group of data is inferred by the app
while it is running, gathering relevant information such as user’s position, the actual
time and the user’s speed. The role of the material is important in better understanding
users’ behaviour, and to respond to their needs.

2.2 Case Studies Around the World

Up to date, the WAY-Cyberparks is specifically developed to function for many dif-
ferent cities attracting, at the same time, the attention of a remarkable number of
professionals around the globe. Amongst these profiles we find teachers, educators,
cultural heritage workers, urban planners, architects and local governments. It is being
used in more than 25 cities spread all over the world (as shown in Fig. 1(A)), in
European cities such as Barcelona, Lisbon, Ljubljana or Sofia; in Asian cities such as
New Delhi; or South American cities such as Curitiba or Popayan. All these deploy-
ments have generated different data coming from more than 430 users. It should be
highlighted that enable the digital tool for a specific place is a rapid process, coordi-
nated by the University of Deusto with the administrator of this space.
 Using ICTs for the Improvement of Public Open Spaces 281

Fig. 1. (A) WAY-Cyberparks deployments all over the world. (B)–(E) Examples of some of the
functionalities offered by WAY-CyberParks. Examples focused on the city of Barcelona.

The gathered data can be analysed in different ways by the administrators of each
site. Among the various results obtained by the processed data we can highlight the
development of behavioural heat map; the users’ movement monitoring tool and the
users’ response analysis. The first one, the behavioural heat map, is a graphical rep-
resentation of the activity carried out by the users. This graph is overlaid over the map
of the study area, indicating the places with the most registered activity. One example
of this functionality can be seen in Fig. 1(B), registered in the city of Barcelona.
The second functionality is the users’ movement monitoring tool. The main
motivation behind this monitoring tool is to trace how participants use an outdoor space
- product of detailed planning and design - by recording their responses, behaviours
and/or tracking their movement within the space. The aspects identified may help urban
planners and decision-makers to investigate some crucial dimensions that can result to
more responsive, stronger, safer and inclusive cities. An example of this functionality is
demonstrated in Fig. 1(D) and (E), in which two different situations have been pre-
sented, showing the exact position of each user at two adjacent timestamps (with a
difference of 15 min between them).
By the users’ response analysis administrators can extract statistical data from the
answers given to each question, and they can choose to receive graphical results from
any of the questions posed, as showed in Fig. 1(C). At this point, it is important to
highlight that all these functionalities can be filtered based on different criteria, such as
the gender, occupation, education or age and that all this information can be taken from
the user’s profile.

2.3 Case Study Quinta das Conchas Park, Lisbon, Portugal

In this section, we explore the case study of the Quinta das Conchas Park in Lisbon. It
was part of the activities associated with the European Researchers’ Night which took
place on September 25, 2015. The activity organised by the Portuguese team of
282 E. Osaba et al.

CyberParks (CeiED/ULHT and LNEC) set as main objective to test the digital tool
WAY CyberParks. The results were processed, analysed and presented during the event.
The workshop was attended by 15 participants who, allocated in groups, used the
mobile application WAY CyberParks. Beyond testing the tool, it was also an aim to
open the opportunity to app users to propose improvements for its development and
operation. During the event, administrators intended to collect information regarding
specific functionalities of the WAY CyberParks. These can be categorised as follows:
(1) the routes taken by each user (or group); (2) the information provided to the WAY
CyberParks suggestion box; (3) the responses to the WAY CyberParks questions related
to the visited space, and (4) a paper questionnaire on the usability and applicability of the
tool WAY CyberParks. From these four functionalities, it was however not possible to
collect the responses to the questions inserted in the application. The questions were
uploaded and working online during the event. Due to technical issues related to a
change of the hosting server of the tool, it was not possible to record the responses given
by the users. Their routes allow to understand which parts of the spaces were more used.
The Figs. 2 and 3 show an example of the route taken by a user and the behavioural map
associated. This information, combined with possible suggestions and/or answers to
questions, can show how the space is used, which areas have a greater or lesser occu-
pation and the time space associated with journeys and stays.

Fig. 2. Print screen website CyberParks (http://services.cyberparks-project.eu/): User path and

distance travelled.

The “suggestion box” was a functionality widely used by the participants, with 17
interactions in total. The sound submission feature was not used and only one video
was uploaded. Sending of suggestions was done mostly through text and image, and
the use of text with illustration (image) in the same suggestion was the most commonly
used option. Most of records are related to observing of negative points, corresponding
to 65% of interactions (11 records). This functionality allows to ease and speed
checking users’ opinions about the visited space.
 Using ICTs for the Improvement of Public Open Spaces 283

Taking advantage of a workshop with a previously registered group of people, and

in order to obtain more information about the usability of the tool WAY CyberParks a
paper questionnaire was prepared and submitted to the participants. It was provided to
participants at the end of the event. Although the objective was not to tackle the results
obtained by the tool, the users’ opinions regarding the questions launched by the
mobile application highlighted some suggestions for improvement, for example to add
the functionality to allow the discovery of something new in the park.
As for the questions that were automatically launched, the participants point out
their preference for, among other things, direct opinions while encouraging a closer
observation of the surrounding area. Some suggestions for improvement have also been
made, such as to offer the mobile application in Portuguese; the improvement of the
interface and a system of notifications of questions to be launched automatically. It
should be noted that these two main aspects highlighted by the users allowed to
significantly improve the tool soon after the workshop. Regarding the raised question in
terms of the aid that the mobile application might have given in the discovery of
something new in the Park, most users answered affirmatively, as indicated by the less
visited areas of the Quinta dos Liláses, an adjacent park to Quinta das Conchas.

Fig. 3. Print screen website CyberParks (http://services.cyberparks-project.eu/): Behavioural

map

3 CyberCardeto

The CyberCardeto application has been developed and tested in a real scenario to
validate the feasibility of the mentioned paradigm of Senseable Spaces (Rati et al.
2006; Kostankos et al. 2010; Girardin et al. 2008), in terms both of giving and getting
information to and from the users.
284 E. Osaba et al.

3.1 Overall Description and Potential of the Digital Tool

CyberCardeto is a mobile application developed with the specific aim of shaping the
paradigm of a senseable space, defining this latter as this kind of space where there is a
seamless exchange of information between the users and the technology installed on it.
In fact, the application can be used once user gets into a public space, i.e. a park, since
it provides contextual information about the environment with text and media hints.
The user is geo-localised and can see her/himself located into the map of the park. The
application is paired with sensors that have been installed in the park and that enable
the activation of notification once the user gets into the radius of influence of each
sensor. The sensors are also enabled to collect the information from the users’ device,
storing data in a remote repository for future statistical inferences. The architecture of
the application in composed of three main elements. The first one is the mobile
application, which provides contextual awareness services. The second consists of the
active sensors installed within the park having the twofold purpose of providing the
information and acquiring data. The data collection service is hence performed by a
server, which deals with the task of storing the data coming from the activity of the
users in the park. The overall architecture of the tool can be seen in Fig. 4.

Fig. 4. Overall description of the main components of the system architecture. The Application
can communicate with the sensors which provides.

The application was designed to run on both iOS and Android device and it is
available for free1,2 download. The structure of the application is very easy and user-
friendly, and it is mainly composed of a toolbar which brings the user into the main
functionalities:

1
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=it.univpm.dii.cardeto&hl=es.
2
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/cybercardeto/id1219952063?mt=8.
 Using ICTs for the Improvement of Public Open Spaces 285

• The Points of Interest (POI) which allow the user to get in-depth information about
the main attraction of the park and are divided into two main categories: natural and
historical. Once the user clicks over a POI, she/he is enabled to discover more
details in terms of the flora found in the park, as well as its background history.
Moreover, the user can express her/his attitude/preferences towards a single POI, so
that the manager of the area can understand the visitors’ behaviour within the park.
Some possible paths are also suggested, being accessible from the map function;
• The Map is designed as to be essential and simple and it is enabled for GPS
geolocation. The user can see her/his position inside the map and can also pick the
POIs to reach the associated information. The path is designed as to suggest the
POIs that are closer to her/him.
Some screenshots of the application running are depicted in Fig. 5. Inside the park,
and in order to monitor visitors’ movements, we installed active beacons arranged in a
limited area. Beacons are BLE (Bluetooth low energy) based sensor, enabling smart
devices to perform actions when they are close to them. These transmitters are com-
monly used for distributing messages at specific POIs (as in this specific case) and as
part of an indoor/outdoor positioning systems. More specifically, the beacons used for
this case study are the well-known Estimote Locations Beacons3 which are commer-
cially available sensors with a built-in bidirectional low energy BLE radio. These are
medium range location transmitters, designed to be used in both outdoor and indoor
locations. Active beacons were placed near the main “attractions” of the study area,
with the dual scope of providing notifications and collecting statistics about each
attraction. Beacons’ ping is caught by the smartphones and the application is enabled to
send data to the cloud via 3G/4G connection. This solution is particularly suitable for
such kind of services, since it allows the cross-platform development, it is of low cost
and it assures a long-life due to low battery consumption.

Fig. 5. Some screenshots of the application running. In particular on the right picture is depicted
the interaction with the beacon, once the user gets within its area of influence. The nearest POIs
are suggested.

3
https://estimote.com/.
286 E. Osaba et al.

In the next section a more detailed description of the case study specifically
designed to test the application and to validate the methodology for further investi-
gations and uses is provided.

3.2 Case Study Cardeto Park, Ancona, Italy

The specific case study has been chosen to test the functionalities of the application
within the premises of Cardeto Park in Ancona, an urban green space close to the city
centre. It is one of the biggest city parks in Ancona with an area of 35 hectares. In its
broad territory, the park includes numerous natural and historic places that attract a
great number of users every year. Additionally, its proximity to the harbour, its natural
landscape and the diverse views offered along the elevated coast makes it an attractive
destination for local, as well as for tourists. The area of the Park can be ideally divided
into three areas. The North-Western part of the Park located between the ruins of roman
Amphitheatre and the Lighthouse including a small residential area close to the new
lighthouse. The South-Eastern part of the park as a natural zone that includes places
with panoramic views, jogging paths, lawn court for running and sports, ruins of the
old Napoleonic fort, and rich botanic diversity. The middle part of the Park as an area
of blended zones, from the historic-cultural cluster of the west part to the strong
natural-botanic character of the south. This mixed-use area includes an English and a
Hebrew cemeteries, old military buildings, to be restructured and assigned to further
academic needs, and a play-ground. All these features make the Cardeto Park the
proper scenario to validate the potential of the tools in terms both of behaviour analysis
and efficiency for the visitors.
For testing the application, we chose the part located in the middle of the Park and,
as it has been explained already, includes diverse elements identified by historic,
cultural and botanic perspectives. The map of the area of interest is depicted in Fig. 4.
The testing area is a territory of 9 hectares where nature and culture are inseparable,
with two independent entrances from the city and the main road that connects the area
with all the other parts of the Park.
The mobile application was designed to guide the user along the visit path, pro-
viding contextual information through the POIs and thus promoting a close synergy
between visitors and the place. As said before, the main functionality of the application
is the contextual notification of the attraction points. Moreover, to improve the capa-
bility of the park to “suggest a path” to the visitors, beacons have been also installed in
bifurcation points leaving the user free to choose her/his own preferred path.
Notwithstanding, other functions increase the user’s experience. The localization ser-
vice allows finding attractions in a virtual map. The list of POIs proved useful for the
visitor that attempts to reach a point of interest. Discussing the cloud service, the data
have been collected in the following way: once the smartphone is permanently into the
operational range of the beacon (recording five consequent pings) the application
performs two operations. The first is to notify the users with a welcome message, while
the second is the sending of the data to the cloud automatically done after the first
step. The same criteria are adopted to discard the device once the smartphone exits
 Using ICTs for the Improvement of Public Open Spaces 287

Fig. 6. The map of the park with highlighted the study area

from the area of influence of the beacon. In this way, it is possible to collect a series of
information like the overall time spent by the users in each POI, the interaction among
groups of users, the preferred path and response to an attraction point as well as other
statistical data that can be of great value for the managing authorities and planners.

4 EthnoAlly

The EthnoAlly is a digital tool developed to facilitate the work of the ethnographic
researchers, allowing them to strictly focus on their fieldwork, while letting the tool do
the hard and necessary job of recomposing the gathered material once the experience
has finished. A large part of the ethnographic fieldwork consists in bringing together
the various materials collected during a day in the field. This is a daily activity, and it is
important to make it in a coherent and productive way. Only by this way the researcher
can generate intelligible archives or documents for further analysis and consultation. In
fact, the ethnographer needs to be capable of finding a way throughout the amount of
materials gathered in a later time, once the direct memory of the events portrayed may
have faded. Specifically, the laboriousness of this activity is especially important for
those researches performed in semiotically dense environments, or in scenarios in
which little time is left during the day to collect thoughts or materials. To help out of
this, digital technologies are rapidly entering the work of ethnographers, shaping new
ways by which they can conduct their daily fieldwork.
288 E. Osaba et al.

4.1 Overall Description and Potential of the Digital Tool

EthnoAlly is a digital tool specifically designed for conducting participatory audio-
visual ethnographic research. Succinctly explained, EthnoAlly consists of two different
elements. The first one is a smartphone/tablet app, which permits the users the col-
lection of audio-visual material. The second component is a web platform. Its aim is to
drawn information from the gathered multimedia material and to transform it into an
understandable structure for further use. These two components are connected by an
additional third element, which is the server in the cloud. This server acts as a bridge
between the web platform and the app. In this sense, the server synchronizes, archives,
and organizes the raw data gathered by the app and provides the data to the web
platform for proper visualization and analysis. The architecture of the complete digital
tool is depicted in Fig. 7.

Fig. 7. Architecture of EthnoAlly digital tool with the three different elements depicted: The
smartphone APP, the cloud and the Web Platform.

On one hand, the smartphone/tablet app, defined primarily as an audio-visual

information gatherer, is able to collect different kinds of multimedia material such as
photos, audios, videos, or text notes. All these data can be introduced by a user-friendly
interface. In line with this, it is noteworthy to mention the full commitment of the
digital tool with the user’s privacy. In this regard, all the information gathered by a
specific user cannot be seen by someone else apart from the material previously set as
“public”. Furthermore, EthnoAlly researchers have access to all the available data prior
the consent confirmation of the users while all this information is completely untied
 Using ICTs for the Improvement of Public Open Spaces 289

from any personal identification. This makes it impossible to associate the gathered
data with any specific user. Besides that, as in the case of the tool WAY-Cyberparks,
the data collected by the smartphone/tablet app can be classified into two different
groups: direct and indirect data. Direct data are these audio-visual materials that are
directly produced by the users through her/his interaction with the environment and the
application. This information represents the principal data that any EthnoAlly user can
access. Additionally, the indirect information represents the descriptive metadata. In
this sense, this material is inferred by the application while being used, even in the
background. Some examples of this indirect data are the time, the position, or even the
weather conditions. All this information has a remarkable importance for the proper
contextualization of the direct data, and it greatly helps the researcher to completely
understand the users’ behaviour and response.
On the other hand, the main component of the digital tool is the web platform4. This
platform is fed by the direct and indirect data gathered by the app and is stored in the
above-mentioned cloud server. In this sense, the server is responsible for the organi-
zation of all gathered data. Afterwards, all this material is provided to the web platform
for its proper presentation, facilitating any posterior analysis and visualization. Besides
that, the most interesting functionality of this platform, along with the possibility of
visualizing and analysing all the collected material, is the content search engine further
presented in the following subsection.

4.2 Case Study Antwerp, Belgium

In this subsection, an example of how EthnoAlly has been used in a real scenario is
discussed. In this case, the activities performed by one user in a single field work
session in Antwerp, Belgium, are described. More concretely, this case study is focused
on an interesting functionality implemented on EthnoAlly, which helps the user to
recompose all the materials collected during the fieldwork. This feature is represented
by the track - a concept related to the activity conducted by the user in a single session.
In this sense, once a user activates the track functionality, all the direct and indirect
information acquired by the app during that session is automatically associated to this
path. Additionally, the user can also attach any direct material taken in any other
moment, or through any other method or application. The end results of this process
result to a route composed by all the materials found and attached to the specific track.
Figure 8 shows some screenshots related to the track concept.
Once the work of the ethnographer has been finished, and after collecting different
information, she/he can easily view all the performed activity throughout the web
platform. As previously explained, all the collected material is perfectly contextualized,
meaning that all the information appears superimposed on the map in the exact places
where they were taken (as shown in Fig. 6, in a created track in Antwerp). Further-
more, all the information has additional contextual data associated, such as the weather
conditions or the exact time they were collected. Additionally, taking the track as an
example, the route may acquire other associated digital materials such as written notes,

4
http://cloud.mobility.deustotech.eu/ethnoally.
290 E. Osaba et al.

Fig. 8. Some screenshots of a field work session

Fig. 9. Track functionality in the web platform

photos, videos or audios, which also appear in the exact places they were gathered.
Besides that, as it is displayed in Fig. 9, all tracks can be visualized in an especially
created video mode. In this mode, the user can reproduce step by step the followed
routes. In addition, every time the route reaches a point in which a specific material has
been gathered, it is automatically shown or reproduced.
Finally, to facilitate the retrieval of different content stored in the server, the web
platform offers a user-friendly search engine. Using this engine, users can search any
kind of content by keyword, user, or time-period. In Fig. 8, for example, a search by
 Using ICTs for the Improvement of Public Open Spaces 291

keyword of any type of direct content has been made (photo, video, audio or written
note) inside the track taken in Antwerp. In this specific example, the search term was
‘street’, and one video matched with the search conditions. Additionally, searches
based on users can also be made. In this case, users can search any other participant by
introducing her/his name. Once the search is made, all the public content associated to
the quested user is displayed, as seen in Fig. 10.

Fig. 10. Search function in the web platform

5 Conclusion and Lessons Learned

The use of ICTs allows for a new approach in the development of public open spaces in
order to create more attractive and inclusive urban spaces. Throughout history, public
spaces were reflecting the identity of the city, providing - from a social point of view -
various functions. Increasingly, open spaces users have new needs, and planners have
the responsibility to adapt and respond to these needs. Through the use of ICT, the
main challenge is to promote interaction possibilities between users and decision
makers, but above all promoting the coexistence of new groups (youngsters, adult,
elderly people, tourists, researchers etc.). By enhancing public open spaces, we are
encouraging healthier living behaviours, contributing to better living conditions in
cities.
This chapter made possible a deeper understanding of the main functionalities and
opportunities offered by the three different digital platforms: WAY CyberParks; Eth-
noAlly; and CyberCardeto. It allows the understanding of the main potential of each
platform, related to different stakeholders and users. In brief, we can describe the WAY
292 E. Osaba et al.

CyberParks and CyberCardeto as tools that allow users to get dynamic contextual
information related to space. Additionally, the first one allows different type of
information to be transmitted using a suggestion box and a questionnaire available in
each location. On the other hand, EthnoAlly is a digital tool born to facilitate the work
of the ethnographic researchers, allowing them to focus strictly on their fieldwork, and
letting the tool do the hard and necessary job of recomposing such material once the
experience is finished. Being interactive tools, their use plays a relevant role not only in
the development, but also in the maintenance and improvement of public spaces. They
offer valuable resources to make a significant contribution to the study of public spaces.
The type of results produced allows a quick and efficient collection of data that may
prove essential in the development of new public spaces while improving existing ones.
Basic advantages for different kind of users can be further highlighted. To refer some,
in terms of planners and the public administration, we can foresee that a wider adoption
of ICT tools might improve the tourism sector offering an economic boost by engaging
higher numbers of visitors.
Moreover, the quality of the services can be improved, and new services can be
tailored according to users’ feedback and analysis. Finally, given the impervious layout
of a park, the ICT can contribute to overcoming the physical barriers while restoring
the vital connections and relationships between the park and the city. In addition, the
visitors can benefit from such services. With pervasive, but not intrusive, services
directly available for their own devices, users can achieve a better knowledge about
their surroundings. Given the immense potential of the tools, it is also important to
underline some possible drawbacks. Their systems are app based and are not so
widespread. This is also because the app is based on BLE technology which is not
popular so far. This presents a limitation, especially from the data collection viewpoint
that is rather contradictory since by performing statistical inference about the behaviour
of the user and the performances of the park, the bulk of data should in fact be
increased.

Acknowledgements. This work has been supported by the Cost Action TU1306 CyberParks
and the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness under the ESPHIA project
(TIN2014-56042-JIN). E. Osaba would like to thank the Basque Government for its funding
support through the EMAITEK program. The authors would also like to thank the staff of
UbiSive s.r.l. for the support in developing the CyberCardeto smartphone application.

References
Girardin, F., Calabrese, F., Fiore, F.D., Ratti, C., Blat, J.: Digital footprinting: uncovering tourists
with user-generated content. IEEE Pervasive Comput. 7(4) (2008)
Kostakos, V., O’Neill, E., Penn, A., Roussos, G., Papadongonas, D.: Brief encounters: sensing,
modeling and visualizing urban mobility and copresence networks. ACM Trans. Comput.-
Hum. Interact. (TOCHI) 17(1), 2 (2010)
Ratti, C., Frenchman, D., Pulselli, R.M., Williams, S.: Mobile landscapes: using location data
from cell phones for urban analysis. Environ. Plann. B: Plan. Des. 33(5), 727–748 (2006)
 Using ICTs for the Improvement of Public Open Spaces 293

Šuklje-Erjavec, I., Smaniotto Costa, C.: Cyberparks challenges exploring the relationships
between information and communication technologies and urban open spaces. In: Places &
Technologies, Nova Gorica, Slovenia, pp. 163–170 (2015)
Smaniotto Costa, C., Menezes, M., Mateus, D., Bahillo Martínez, A.: Podem as tecnologias da
informação e comunicação contribuírem para capacitar o conhecimento das práticas e
necessidades de uso de parques urbanos. In: XII Congresso Luso-Afro-Brasileiro de Ciências
Sociais-XII CONLAB, pp. 7705–7713 (2015)

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
4.5
A Pedagogical Model for CyberParks

Philip Bonanno1(&), Michal Klichowski2 , and Penelope Lister1

1
Department of Leadership for Learning and Innovation, Faculty of Education,
University of Malta, Msida, Malta
{philip.bonanno,penelope.lister.16}@um.edu.mt
2
Faculty of Educational Studies, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznan,
Poznan, Poland
[email protected]

Abstract. This chapter discusses the recent conceptual developments about

CyberParks and their educational potential. Key learning characteristics and
pedagogical principles will be identified through a review of learning theories
and studies from cognitive neuroscience. Relevant pedagogical models are
reviewed to develop one that describes learning in CyberParks, which will be
used to design and evaluate learning in such context. An innovative connectivist-
inspired process-oriented pedagogical model is proposed to serve as a signpost in
the process of developing adaptive expertise through which new pedagogies and
innovative uses of CyberParks address the evolving needs of citizens.

Keywords: Pedagogy
Smart city learning
Design for learning

Connectivism
Cognitive neuroscience

1 Introduction

A cyberpark – the meditated public open space - can be considered as a hybrid urban
learning space that combines natural with man-made features, the physical with the
digital, the local with the global, formal with informal learning. Citizens use it for
recreation and entertainment, to socialise, pursue healthy lifestyles, learn about them-
selves and their surroundings and participate in the development and use of their hybrid
habitat (Klichowski 2017). Digital technologies and communication systems mediate,
enhance and transform people’s interaction in a cyberpark. The emphasis in literature
about cyberparks and smart cities is more on the role of citizen-users and the
enhancement of their quality of life rather than on the role played by physical and
technological factors. Thomas et al. (2016) epitomises this in the concept of smart cities
as place, people and purpose.

2 The Educational Potential of CyberParks

Cyberpark is smart physical learning environments exploiting the affordances of dig-

ital, context-aware and adaptive devices that promote better and faster learning through
ubiquitous digital connectivity (Isaksson et al. 2017; Klichowski 2017). This enables
© The Author(s) 2019
C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 294–307, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_23
 A Pedagogical Model for CyberParks 295

learners to connect in context-aware scenarios to a wider network of knowledge,

experts and learning communities via their adaptive devices. For Hwang (2014) a smart
learning environment, besides enabling learners to access digital resources and interact
with learning systems in any place and at any time, actively provides the necessary
learning guidance, supportive tools or learning suggestions. Buchem and Perez-
Sanagustin (2013) propose four modes of learning (seamless learning, crowd learning,
geo-learning and citizen inquiry) that emerge in such contexts manifesting users’
interaction with the natural, historical, cultural, architectural and digital dimensions of
the space. For Sharples et al. (2012) seamless learning is evident when a person
experiences a continuity of learning across a combination of locations, times, tech-
nologies and social settings. Gros (2016) characterises learning in technology-enhanced
environments (like in a cyberpark) as fundamentally personal, social, distributed,
ubiquitous, flexible, dynamic and complex in nature. She states that one of the most
important features of smart learning is that the data used serves as feedback for the
learner to support personalised learning.
Hybrid environments like a cyberpark may trigger deep learning that change an
individual’s competence profile and epistemological conceptions. Interactivity extends
the zone of possibilities providing new focussed learning instances (Cook et al. 2015).
Buchem and Perez-Sanagustin (2013) contend that, when mediated through mobile
technologies and locative media, the surrounding physical and the digital environment
can be dynamically merged into augmented, ad-hoc personal learning environments.
By interacting with these hybrid environments learners develop 21st century skills
including efficient and effective access of information and knowledge, inquiry/
problem-solving, creative, collaborative and communicative competences, and the
ability to be innovative in using the surrounding habitat in culturally sensitive, globally
aware and ethically responsible ways. Through networked technologies citizen-learners
develop new interactional patterns with the various aspects of hybridity.
Cyberparks can challenge people to extend their learning boundaries through
acquisition of new knowledge and skills, by sharing their understanding and by con-
tributing to the distributed knowledge and networked experience (Klichowski 2017).
The more citizens learn about technology and learn through technology the more
empowered they become to interact with the surrounding environment. The situation is
complex as it merges different epistemologies within one learning instance or calls on
relevant epistemologies for different instances of learning. Consequently, different
theories of learning serve as conceptual lenses through which interactions cyberpark
can be analysed to identify the underlying learning principles and conditions.

3 Theories of Learning

Learning in a cyberpark is a composite experience involving intra-individual cognitive,

affective and conative interactions together with inter-individual, networked, interac-
tional processes. Anderson (2010) distinguishes between pre-net theories (developed
before the event of the internet) and net-aware theories (characterising contexts rich in
information and communication systems). Learning experience in cyberparks links to
different theories according to the situation and conditions.
296 P. Bonanno et al.

3.1 Pre-net Learner-Centric Theories

Behaviourist, cognitive, neurocognitive and socio-cultural theoretical perspectives
describe manifested internal processes and external behaviours. Yet, while behaviourist
pedagogies deliberately go no further than observable inputs and outputs, cognitivist
approaches take into account the mental models and internal processes, building on a
richer psychological understanding of learning and how it occurs (Dron and Anderson
2014). Mayes and de Freitas (2004), as well as Beetham and Sharpe (2007), describe
three theoretical dimensions of learning – the associative, the cognitive and the situ-
ative. Learning in cyberparks may include aspects of the associative approach, for
example when following prescribed learning activities to learn concepts or skills ini-
tially through basic stimulus-response conditioning and later by associating concepts in
a chain of reasoning, or associating steps in a chain of activity to build a composite
skill. The main focus is on the alignment of learning objectives, instructional strategy
and assessment. This approach to learning is not concerned with how concepts or skills
are represented internally, but how these are manifested in external behaviours and
observable learning.
In contrast, cognitive approaches emphasise modelling of the processes of inter-
preting and constructing meaning. Knowledge acquisition is the outcome of interac-
tions between new experiences and the relevant memory structures. The key cognitive
challenge is to build a framework for understanding rather than behaviouristic
strengthening of associations. It is also more authentic, contextual and social in nature,
as these aspects are perceived more appropriate for equipping learners with the skills,
they will need to participate in a constantly changing societal context (Conole 2014).
Learning in cyberparks may have a constructivist orientation promoting understanding
through active exploration of the hybrid environment. It can also involve construc-
tionist activities when learners are engaged in creating something for others to see
(Papert 1993). Learning by designing may result in effective participatory learning
approaches and of embracing ways in which the web-service-based environment offers
potential for learning (Beetham 2013).
Social constructivist learning results from achieving understanding through dia-
logue and collaboration with peer learners, tutors and experts who play a key role in
developing a shared understanding of the task and provide feedback and support on the
learner’s activities and reflections, enabling learners to reach beyond what they are
individually capable of learning. Situated learning emphasises social interaction within
a community of practice through which one develops competences related to a par-
ticular role within the community progressing from novice to expert through obser-
vation, reflection, mentorship, and legitimate peripheral participation in community
activities.
Cognitive neuroscience (in both behavioural and neuroimaging paradigms, see
Klichowski and Kroliczak 2017) provides another learner-centric framework.
Klichowski and Patricio (2017) show that learning in cyberparks combines two types of
cerebral operations: motor and cognitive control. Many times, this involves learning
 A Pedagogical Model for CyberParks 297

with digital tools while on the move (Klichowski et al. 2015; Klichowski and Smaniotto
Costa 2015). This cognitive-motor interaction requires an appropriate allocation of
cognitive and motor resources for each operation. Figure 1 shows that the human brain
does not cope well with this situation, which leads to an overload of central resources,
and thus to destabilization of the course of cognitive and motor processes, the conse-
quence of which is the weakening of both cognitive and motor tasks. Thus, using a
smartphone while walking increases the risk of falling; performing arithmetic operations
while driving reduces the accuracy of the result (Yamada et al. 2011). This effect is
called dual-task cost (Takeuchi et al. 2016) and its implication for learning in cyberparks
is that one should use technology for learning while stationary (sitting) but definitely not
while walking. Experiment realised in a cyberpark by Klichowski (2017) use the two
behavioural paradigms and the mobile electroencephalography method confirmed this.
Thus, the idea of smart and immersive learning, in a sense, has to be revised.

Fig. 1. The dual-task cost theory. The best cognitive or motor results are obtained when
separating these processes. Their interaction weakens the results of both. Source: own work
based on Pothier et al. (2014) and Yuan et al. (2016)

3.2 Post-net Networked Systems Theories

Gros et al. (2016) give three major categories of post-net networked systems theories:
theories focused (1) on the network, (2) on social-personal interaction and (3) on the
design of the network. The first category includes networked learning, connectivism and
actor network theory (ANT). For Goodyear et al. (2004) networked learning involves
the use of digital technologies to promote connections between learner-to-learner,
298 P. Bonanno et al.

learner-to-tutors and learning community-to-its learning resources. Learning and

knowledge construction is located in the connections and interactions between learners,
teachers and resources, and seen as emerging from critical dialogue and enquiry. Such a
perspective promotes learning as a social, relational phenomenon, and view knowledge
and identity as constructed through interaction and dialogue.
In line with this theory, connectivism considers knowledge as a flow through a
network of humans and non-humans (artefacts) comprising connections between nodes
that can be individuals, groups, systems, fields, ideas, resources or communities
(Siemens 2005). Downes (2006) considers knowledge residing not only in the mind of
an individual but is also distributed across an information network or multiple indi-
viduals. Knowledge and learning can be defined in terms of connections: know where
and know who are more important today than know what and know how (Siemens
2005). The connections that enable us to learn are more important than our current state
of knowing. The claim that knowledge is held in the network and that the learning is
the network is one of the most debated points of connectivism. Having transient
knowledge residing in technical networks and learning externalised into human
mediated distributed networks where it takes place and is, and not being restricted to a
single individual to be internalised, contrast with the central tenets of previous learning
theories. For Downes (2007) knowledge is literally the set of connections formed by
actions and experience. It may consist in part of linguistic structures, but other digital
media may play an important role in developing knowledge of a less linguistic, more
affective and intuitive nature. Thus, learners need to develop skills in digital, infor-
mation and media literacy, and critical thinking, alongside their understanding of how
networks work.
Making no distinction in approach between the social, the natural and the techno-
logical, ANT proposes a socio-technical account that explores ways heterogeneous
networks, of both human and non-human actors, are constructed and maintained, and
focuses on tracing the transformation of these heterogeneous networks (Latour 2005). An
actor is anything granted to be the source of an action, and is also a simplified network.
There is no difference in the ability of technology, humans, animals or other non-humans
to act. While it is possible to render social connections traceable in simple knowledge
systems, there is no means to trace these or follow the actors or their actions in complex
knowledge systems because these are uncertain, unexpected and often hidden and their
connections are varied, ubiquitous and open (Latour 2005). For Gros et al. (2016) the
main problem of this approach is that it reduces all actors into black boxes ignoring
internal actions such as reflecting, self-criticizing and detecting/correcting errors, pro-
viding an incomplete, quasi-behaviourist explanation to the intra-individual and external
interactions within hybrid environments like CyberParks.
The same authors discuss theories that focus on social-personal interaction con-
sidering learners who navigate through hybrid environments and through their own
personal networks. Learning in cyberparks can be considered as part of the overarching
lifelong and life wide self-determined learning, an approach in which learners take
control of their own learning through self-management, self-monitoring and extension
of their own learning (Tan et al. 2011). Heutagogy, another theoretical framework
under the social-personal interaction category, is defined as the study of self-
determined learning (Hase and Kenyon 2007) and developed as an extension to
 A Pedagogical Model for CyberParks 299

andragogy, or self-directed learning (Blaschke 2012). Compared to andragogy, heut-

agogy expands further upon the role of human agency in the learning process con-
sidering the learner as the key agent in learning (Hase and Kenyon 2007). Key concepts
in heutagogy are:
• The instructor facilitates learning by providing guidance and resources, fully
relinquishing ownership of the learning path and process to the learner, who
negotiates the content and modality of learning.
• Involves double-loop learning and self-reflection. Learners consider the problem,
the resulting action and outcomes in addition to reflecting upon the problem-solving
process and how it influences learner’s own beliefs and actions.
• There is a progression from andragogy to heutagogy, with learners likewise pro-
gressing in maturity and autonomy (Canning 2010). Being more self-directed,
mature learners require less instructor control and course structure; less mature
learners require more instructor guidance and course scaffolding (Canning and
Callan 2010).
• Web 2.0 design supports a heutagogical approach by allowing learners to direct and
determine their learning path and by enabling them to take an active role in their
individual learning.
The last category of post-net networked systems proposed by (Gros et al. 2016) are
theories focused on the affordances or design of the network. Learning as a network
(LaaN) theory represents a theoretical framework for personal learning environment
(PLE) models that is an emerging concept and a new vision of learning inspired by
constructivist and connectivist learning models. It puts the learner at the centre and
provides more autonomy and control over the learning experience (Klichowski 2017).
LaaN views knowledge as a personal network and as inherently social. Learners need
to be good knowledge networkers as well as good double-loop learners who can create
and maintain external networks by identifying, integrating and elaborating knowledge
nodes that can help to achieve better results, in a specific learning context. As a double-
loop learner, one develops the ability to detect and correct errors and eventually change
the theories-in-use according to the new setting.
This brief review of relevant learning theories points to key pedagogical factors that
are at play in technology-enhanced learning environments. The following pedagogical
model combines these principles for describing, designing and assessing learning in
cyberparks.

4 Toward a Pedagogical Model for CyberParks

Bonanno (2011; 2014) uses a process-oriented model based on dimensions and levels
of interactions for designing ubiquitous learning and learning within social networks.
The dimensions of interactions are subject-content, technology, data networks and
community. For learning in Cyberparks, this model can be extended by including the
physical environment as another dimension.
300 P. Bonanno et al.

Considering knowledge as distributed across networks of connections, Wang et al.

(2014) developed a pedagogical model based on the characteristics and principles of
interaction in complex connectivist learning contexts identifying three categories of
connectivist learning activities: (1) personal knowledge acquisition from networked
distributed knowledge, (2) social networked learning by building communities that
form a network for knowledge sharing and connection, and (3) complex connectivist
learning where learners prompt connection building and network formulation by
contributing to distributed knowledge, to decision-making related to complex prob-
lems, and to the development of technological and pedagogical innovations.
Researchers about online learning identified dimensions of interactions according
to technological affordances including student-teacher, student-student, student-
content, student-interface, teacher-teacher, teacher-content and content-content inter-
actions (Moore 1989; Hillman et al. 1994; Anderson and Garrison 1998). Through their
social constructivist orientation, Web 2.0 and social technologies promote various
forms of interpersonal interaction comprising group-content, group-group, learner-
group, and teacher-group (Dron 2007), as well learner-content, learner-technology and
learner-community (Bonanno 2011; 2014). Connectivist pedagogy, with its emphasis
on the development and nurturing of networks as a major component of learning,
extended the interaction possibilities to include groups, sets and networks (Dron and
Anderson 2014. Besides dimensions researchers considered also levels of interaction
such as learner-self, learner-resource (human and nonhuman) and a meta level learner-
instruction interaction which guides the previous two types (Hirumi 2002; operation
interaction, information interaction, and concept interaction, from simple to complex
and concrete to abstract (Chen 2004; learner-content, learner-interface, learner-support,
learner-learner, and learner-context (Ally 2004); pedagogical levels of acquisition,
participation and contribution in relation to novice, experienced and expert competence
levels in the domain, technology and community dimensions (Bonanno 2011; 2014).
Building on this literature about dimensions and levels of interaction researchers
developed pedagogical models to facilitate the design, assessment and evaluation of
learning in technology-enhanced contexts. Chen (2004) developed the hierarchical
model for instructional interaction (HMII) in a distance-learning context, based on
Laurillard’s conversation framework. According to this model learners that shift from
concrete to abstract and from low to high levels manifest three levels of interactions.
The most concrete level, on which the other levels depend, is operation interaction, in
which the learner operates different media and is interacting with the media interface.
The second level is information interaction, which includes learner-teacher, learner-
learner, and learner-content interactions. In connectivist, networked environments
characterised by fluid, complex and emerging knowledge, learners have to orientate
themselves to filter, integrate, and extract information so as to make it coherent and
understandable. Siemens (2011) proposed two means of information interaction and
orientation in such complex online learning environments: wayfinding (orienting
oneself spatially through the use of symbols, landmarks and environmental cues) and
sensemaking (responding to uncertainty, complex topics or in changing settings).
The third level of HMII concept interaction is the most abstract and includes intra-
individual cognitive and affective interactions that form neural networks. It stimulates
the deepest cognitive engagement characterised by knowledge creation and growth
 A Pedagogical Model for CyberParks 301

(Downes 2006; 2007). It includes creation of new learning artefacts individually or

collaboratively and it is combined with learner-content interaction, but in collaborative
learning environments (Wang et al. 2014).
These three levels of interaction can occur simultaneously and recursively, and are
hierarchical with the operation interaction serving as the foundation of information
interaction, while information interaction is the foundation of concept interaction. For
(Chen 2004) the higher the level, the more critical it is to the achievement of learning
objectives so that only concept interaction leads to meaningful learning. Merging
Downes (2006; 2007) concept of innovation interaction with Bloom’s revised taxon-
omy (Anderson et al. 2000) that proceeds from remembering to understanding,
applying, analysing, evaluating, and creating as cognitive processes, Wang et al. (2014)
superimpose four interaction levels onto the HMII. These are operation, wayfinding,
sensemaking and innovation interaction. In operation interaction learners merely
practice and remember how to operate various media to build their own learning
spaces. In wayfinding interaction, learners have to master the ways to navigate in a
complex information environment and connect with different human and nonhuman
resources, thus reaching higher levels of understanding, applying and evaluating
information and connection formed in this process. Sensemaking is a pattern recog-
nition process, mainly involving applying, analysing and evaluating information.
Innovation interaction focuses on the expression of ideas, models or theory by artefact
creation and innovation to enhance and build new social, technological and informa-
tional connections. This engages learners at the deepest, creation level of Bloom’s
taxonomy.
Another process-oriented pedagogical model proposed by Bonanno (2011; 2014)
integrates interactions along three dimensions (domain, technology and community)
within three pedagogical levels of interaction (acquisition, participation and contribu-
tion). Table 1 show how this can be represented.

Table 1. Process-oriented pedagogical model proposed by Bonanno (2011; 2014)

Levels Dimensions
Domain Technology Community
Acquisition
Participation
Contribution

The acquisition level is similar to Wang’s et al. (2014) operation interaction dealing
with basic interactional skills in the domain (information categorisation), surface
structure of digital tools and interpersonal interactional skills. The participation level is
linked to the information interaction level comprising wayfinding and sensemaking
within the domain and the learning community. The contribution level is identical to
concept interaction and innovation interaction as it deals with learners’ creations within
the three domains.
302 P. Bonanno et al.

Developed to consider interactions in on-line learning environments these two

models do not capture all the dimensions of interactions evident in Cyberparks.
Interactions of the different agents (persons, technology or data) with the physical
environment are not considered. This shortcoming is addressed by including a fourth
dimension – the physical environment. Another dimension (data) is being added
considering Cyberparks as smart learning environments characterised by the utilisation
and generation of data. To achieve more comprehensive coverage of the possible
interactions in a CyberPark, the two models are merged into one, which is depicted in
Table 2.

Table 2. A pedagogical model for CyberParks

Levels Dimensions
Physical Domain Technology Data/knowledge Community
environment networks
Operation Determining Defining a Promoting digital Identify data Nurturing
interaction interactional domain-related and info sources relevant interpersonal
potential of PLE competencies; to PLE interactional
different areas developing skills within
of the effective HCI groups and
CyberPark strategies networks
Wayfinding Connecting Connecting key Using digital tools Connecting to Connecting
specialized domain info and that mediate relevant data with key
nodes or knowledge nodes learner sources people and
information to the different connection with identifying
sources related aspects of the info, knowledge, key features
to CyberPark CyberPark resources and of mature
relevant people identity
Sensemaking Negotiation Negotiation and Linking Developing an Identity
and argumentation of technological organizational development;
argumentation domain related affordances to network of data dialogic space
to understand knowledge; learning modes sources, types analysis and
the different developing an and capturing expansion
aspects of interdisciplinary devices
CyberPark knowledge
structure
Innovation Re-design of Renovation of Customize tools Generating data Renovate and
interaction Cyberparks to domain to interact in new through creation extend users’
address citizen knowledge ways with the of digital social
evolving needs relevant to hybrid artefacts networks and
Cyberparks environment digital
footprint

This final model captures most of the interactional possibilities that can take place
in Cyberparks and can be used to design and evaluate smart learning activities. At the
basic level operational interactions are possible in all five dimensions to build inter-
action spaces or PLE that merge knowledge and skill competence in different aspects of
Cyberparks. Changing the physical environment into a PLE implies getting to know the
interactional potential of each section of the place and linking these to ad hoc learning
 A Pedagogical Model for CyberParks 303

strategies. A smart learning journey, indicating relevant buildings, areas and any
associated points of interests facilitates operational interactions in the physical envi-
ronment. A PLE can be created in a particular domain (history, architecture, engi-
neering, science or humanities) relevant to any aspect of the CyberPark, by identifying
resources, support structures involving peer learners, experienced persons or experts,
together with learning strategies that can be adopted.
Operational interaction involves connecting learners with different technologies
through learner-interface interaction to support their further learning, by connecting
with different knowledge and opportunities and by bridging learning across multiple
learning and living contexts. Typical actions showing operational interactions with
technology include play, download, search, read, view, listen and buy. Also, learners
attempt to integrate other social and network-based media into their PLEs and connect
with different groups of people and information nodes, to develop a collective dis-
tributed technological network. In data rich environments operational interactions
enable smartphone users to connect with different data sources after rationalising rel-
evant mobile app interfaces to obtain (and possibly contribute) data related to their
learning endeavours. Along the community dimension interpersonal interactional skills
have to be nurtured both with contiguous and on-line groups or networks. This
develops operational competence with tools used for communication and social
networking.
Wayfinding interaction involves finding and connecting the right information and
people. Information about different sections of the physical environment are identified
and made available for access. People and special interest groups related to the different
areas are also identified, organising their means of contact. Learner-content interaction
and learner-group interaction are also carried out within any field of knowledge related
to the CyberPark, or any part of it, thus elaborating the relevant knowledge web, the
learning community and the social networks. This linking and organisational approach
is applied to any available or generated data. Typical wayfinding interactions include
communicate (chat, rate, comment, message) and share (send, upload, publish).
Sensemaking interaction is a collaborative process that includes information shar-
ing and discussion (Wang et al. 2014). Learners bring together concepts from different
domains in a novel way to achieve a coherent comprehension of information and make
decisions quickly. Thus, a detailed spatial plan and a global knowledge network serve
to integrate the different sections of cyberparks. Knowledge organisation is also carried
out in any field consulted, which in turn is linked to the other fields thus creating a final
interdisciplinary knowledge structure. With regards to technology, sense making
involves linking different digital tools used in various locations in cyberparks, such as
QR code systems, augmented reality, geo-tagging and gaming, into a coherent func-
tional system for promoting various modes of learning (Klichowski 2017). Similar
patterns are established with regards to data, by creating a bird’s eye view of data
sources, data types and data capturing devices. Along the community dimension
sensemaking interaction manifest itself in the development and sharing of learners’
knowledge networks, network identities and social presence. Typical sensemaking
interactions involve different modes of facilitation such as recommend, channel, tag,
subscribe, filter and mentor. The outcomes of sensemaking interaction are
organisational-networked patterns connecting tightly together nodes in geophysical,
304 P. Bonanno et al.

technological, data, social and conceptual (neural) networks which will eventually form
the basis for personal contributions in innovation interaction.
Innovation interaction is the deepest form of learner interaction and cognitive
engagement. Experienced learners show their knowledge and competence status
through contribution, engaging in evaluative and creative activities (Bonanno 2011;
2014). They create (digital) artefacts or elaborate existing ones and share this inno-
vation with others bringing more networking opportunities on the open network where
they are both accessible and persistent (Wang et al. 2014). Cyberparks’ users can
propose new designs or re-designs of the existing space or parts of it, add or modify
new knowledge about (aspects of) the cyberpark, or create/modify open educational
resources relevant to some particular aspect or theme. New digital technologies or
applications can be customised to interact in innovative or more elaborate ways with
the physical, virtual and social environments. Cyberparks visitors use available data
and generate new data as (multimedia) artefacts to communicate and share their ad hoc
experience. New tools or elaboration of existing ones can be used to innovate and
extend users’ social networks and digital footprint. Thus, key innovation-interaction
actions include customises, design, produce, contribute, program, model and evaluate.
This pedagogical model provides the necessary framework to design and assess
formal or informal learning in cyberparks. It captures patterns of interactions charac-
terising different learning instances or extension of one’s knowledge and social net-
works. Each square of the grid represents a specific category of interactions that may be
used to design focussed learning activities.

5 Conclusions

Anderson (2009) uses the tango metaphor: pedagogies and technologies are intertwined
in a dance, where the moves of one determine the moves of the other. Cyberparks can
serve as emergent hybrid environments where people, spaces, technology and purpose
create the movement and rhythm of the dance. Nevertheless, a new approach needs to
be adopted, to develop pedagogies for these emerging environments (Gros et al. 2016).
The proposed pedagogical model can serve as a theoretical lens and a practical
guide for understanding learner experience in cyberparks. More than serving as a static
instrument to fit and analyse learners’ experience this model should serve as a signpost
in the process of developing adaptive expertise. Gros et al. (2016; 15) claim that when
“all the components of emerging pedagogies including technology, pedagogy, content
and society are evolving, educators need to develop adaptive expertise to understand
how these components interplay with and influence their own practices”. This model is
a proposal to address the continual challenge in developing new pedagogies based on
innovative uses of technologies to fulfil the evolving needs and expectations of learners
in contexts like Cyberparks.
 A Pedagogical Model for CyberParks 305

References
Ally, M.: Foundations of educational theory for online learning. In: Anderson, T. (ed.) The
Theory and Practice of Online Learning, pp. 15–44. Athabasca University Press, Edmonton
(2004)
Anderson, L.W., et al.: A Taxonomy for Learning, Teaching, and Assessing: A Revision of
Bloom’s Taxonomy of Educational Objectives. Pearson, New York (2000)
Anderson, T.: The dance of technology and pedagogy in selfpaced distance education. Paper
presented at the 17th ICDE World Congress, Maastricht (2009)
Anderson, T.: Theories for learning with emerging technologies. In: Veletsianos, G. (ed.)
Emerging Technologies in Distance Education, pp. 23–39. Athabasca University Press,
Edmonton (2010). https://doi.org/10.15215/aupress/9781771991490.01
Anderson, T., Garrison, D.R.: Learning in a networked world: new roles and responsibilities. In:
Gibson, C. (ed.) Distance Learners in Higher Education, pp. 97–112. Atwood Publishing,
Madison (1998)
Beetham, H.: Designing for active learning in technology-rich contexts. In: Beetham, H., Sharpe,
R. (eds.) Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: Designing for 21st Century Learning,
pp. 49–63. Routledge, New York and London (2013)
Beetham, H., Sharpe, R.: Rethinking Pedagogy for a Digital Age: Designing and Delivering e-
Learning. Routledge, London and New York (2007)
Blaschke, L.M.: Heutagogy and lifelong learning: a review of heutagogical practice and self-
determined learning. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 13, 56–71 (2012)
Bonanno, P.: A process-oriented pedagogy for ubiquitous learning. In: Kidd, T., Chen, I. (eds.)
Ubiquitous Learning: A Survey of Applications, Research, and Trends, pp. 17–35.
Information Age Publishing, Charlotte (2011)
Bonanno, P.: Designing learning in social on-line learning environments: a process-oriented
approach. In: Mallia, G. (ed.) The Social Classroom: Integrating Social Network Use in
Education, pp. 40–61. IGI Global Publishing, Hershey (2014). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-
4666-4904-0.ch003
Buchem, I., Perez-Sanagustin, M.: Personal learning environments in smart cities: current
approaches and future scenarios. e-Learning Papers 35, 1–14 (2013)
Canning, N.: Playing with heutagogy: exploring strategies to empower mature learners in higher
education. J. Further High. Educ. 34, 59–71 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1080/
03098770903477102
Canning, N., Callan, S.: Heutagogy: spirals of reflection to empower learners in higher education.
Reflective Pract. 11, 71–82 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1080/14623940903500069
Chen, L.: A hierarchical model for student and teacher interaction in distance learning. Distance
Educ. China 5, 24–28 (2004)
Conole, G.: Designing for Learning in an Open World. Springer, New York (2014)
Cook, J., Lander, R., Flaxton, T.: The zone of possibility in citizen led hybrid cities. Position
paper for Workshop on Smart Learning Ecosystems in Smart Regions and Cities. Co-located
at EC-TEL, Toledo, Spain (2015)
Downes, S.: Learning networks and connective knowledge. Collective Intell. E-learn. 20, 1–26
(2006). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-60566-729-4.ch001
Downes, S.: Learning networks in practice. In: David Ley, E. (ed.) Emerging Technologies for
Learning, pp. 19–27. Becta, London (2007)
Dron, J.: Control and Constraint in e-Learning: Choosing When to Choose. Information Science
Publishing, Hershey (2007)
Dron, J., Anderson, T.: Teaching Crowds. Edmonton, Athabasca (2014)
306 P. Bonanno et al.

Goodyear, P., Banks, S., Hodgson, V., McConnell, D.: Advances in Research on Networked
Learning. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2004)
Gros, B.: The design of smart educational environments. Smart Learn. Environ. 3, 1–11 (2016).
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40561-016-0039-x
Gros, B., Kinshuk, Maina, M.: The Future of Ubiquitous Learning. Lecture Notes in Educational
Technology. Springer, New York, Dordrecht, London, Heidelberg (2016)
Hase, S., Kenyon, C.: Heutagogy: a child of complexity theory. Complicity Int. Educ. 4, 111–
118 (2007)
Hillman, D.C.A., Willis, D.J., Gunawardena, C.N.: Learner-interface interaction in distance
education: an extension of contemporary models and strategies for practitioners. Am.
J. Distance Educ. 8, 30–42 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1080/08923649409526853
Hirumi, A.: A framework for analyzing, designing, and sequencing planned elearning
interactions. Q. Rev. Distance Educ. 3, 141–160 (2002)
Hwang, G.J.: Definition, framework and research issues of smart learning environments – a
context-aware ubiquitous learning perspective. Smart Learn. Environ. 1, 1–14 (2014). https://
doi.org/10.1186/s40561-014-0004-5
Isaksson, E., Naeve, A., Lefrère, P., Wild, F.: Towards a reference architecture for smart and
personal learning environments. Innovations in Smart Learning. LNET, pp. 79–88. Springer,
Singapore (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-2419-1_13
Klichowski, M.: Learning in CyberParks. A Theoretical and Empirical Study. Adam Mickiewicz
University Press, Poznan (2017)
Klichowski, M., Kroliczak, G.: Numbers and functional lateralization: a visual half-field and
dichotic listening study in proficient bilinguals. Neuropsychologia 100, 93–109 (2017).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2017.04.019
Klichowski, M., Bonanno, P., Jaskulska, S., Smaniotto Costa, C., de Lange, M., Klauser, F.R.:
CyberParks as a new context for Smart Education: theoretical background, assumptions, and
pre-service teachers’ rating. Am. J. Educ. Res. 3, 1–10 (2015). https://doi.org/10.12691/
education-3-12A-1
Klichowski, M., Patricio, C.: Does the human brain really like ICT tools and being outdoors? a
brief overview of the cognitive neuroscience perspective of the cyberparks concept. In:
Kenna, T., Zammit, A. (eds.) ICiTy – Enhancing places through technology, pp. 223–239.
Lusófona University Press, Lisbon (2017)
Klichowski, M., Smaniotto Costa, C.: How do pre-service teachers rate ICT opportunity for
education? a study in perspective of the SCOT theory. Kultura i Edukacja 4, 152–168 (2015).
https://doi.org/10.15804/kie.2015.04.09
Latour, B.: Reassembling the Social: An Introduction to Actor-Network-Theory. Oxford
University Press, Oxford (2005)
Mayes, T., de Freitas, S.: Review of e-Learning Theories, Frameworks and Models. Joint
Information Systems Committee, London (2004)
Moore, M.: Three types of interaction. Am. J. Distance Educ. 3, 1–7 (1989). https://doi.org/10.
1080/08923648909526659
Papert, S.: The Children’s Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the Computer. Basic
Books, New York (1993)
Pothier, K., Benguigui, N., Kulpa, R., Chavoix, C.: Multiple object tracking while walking:
similarities and differences between young, young-old, and old-old adults. J. Gerontol.
Psychol. Sci. Soc. Sci. 70, 840–849 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1093/geronb/gbu047
Sharples, M., et al.: Innovating Pedagogy 2012. The Open University, Milton Keynes (2012)
Siemens, G.: Connectivism: a learning theory for the digital age. Int. J. Instr. Technol. Distance
Learn. 2, 3–10 (2005)
 A Pedagogical Model for CyberParks 307

Siemens, G.: Orientation: sensemaking and wayfinding in complex distributed online information
environments. University of Aberdeen, Doctoral dissertation (2011)
Takeuchi, N., Mori, T., Suzukamo, Y., Tanaka, N., Izumi, S.I.: Parallel processing of cognitive
and physical demands in left and right prefrontal cortices during smartphone use while
walking. BMC Neurosci. 17, 1–11 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12868-016-0244-0
Tan, S.C., Divaharan, S., Tan, L., Cheah, H.M.: Self-directed Learning with ICT: Theory,
Practice and Assessment. Ministry of Education, Singapore (2011)
Thomas, V., Ding, W., Mullagh, L., Dunn, N.: Where’s wally? in search of citizen perspectives
on the smart city. Sustainability 8, 1–13 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3390/su8030207
Wang, Z., Chen, L., Anderson, T.: A framework for interaction and cognitive engagement in
connectivist learning contexts. Int. Rev. Res. Open Distrib. Learn. 15, 121–141 (2014)
Yamada, M., Aoyama, T., Okamoto, K., Nagai, K., Tanaka, B., Takemura, T.: Using a
smartphone while walking: a measure of dual-tasking ability as a falls risk assessment tool.
Age Ageing 40, 516–519 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1093/ageing/afr039
Yuan, P., et al.: Increased brain activation for dual tasking with 70-days head-down bed rest.
Front. Syst. Neurosci. 10, 71 (2016). https://doi.org/10.3389/fnsys.2016.00071

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
4.6
The Application of Advanced IoT
in Cyberparks

Jamal Raiyn1(&) and Jugoslav Jokovic2

1
Computer Science Department, Al Qasemi Academic College,
Baqa Al Gharbiah, Israel
[email protected]
2
Faculty of Electronic Engineering, University of Nis, Nis, Serbia
[email protected]

Abstract. The diffusion of information and communication technologies

(ICT) into public spaces is giving birth to a new type of public space: the cyberpark.
ICT and the next generation of internet of things (IoT) impact the evolution of
modern cities, changing traditional urban planning processes. The IoT with e-
economy, e-government, e-medicine, e-learning, and e-society is believed to make
a city more efficient and effective. Both IoT and ICT can be used to incentive
people to use public open spaces and to spend more time outdoors. In order to
attract people, public open spaces have to be attractive, easily accessible and
inclusive. IoT can be used to manage the resources in mediated places, including
the street traffic in conjunction with events offered in a particular place at a par-
ticular time for different user groups. IoT tools are implemented in public spaces to
prevent crime and to increase the safety of users. Security services goes from smart
cameras that are being installed in many places, to determining users’ position and
signal tracking with the support of smart mobile phones, GPS/GNSS, QR codes,
web services, and Wi-fi. Furthermore, biometric of all types are considered an
enhancement of visual surveillance. Biometric are already being used for identi-
fication and verification including fingerprint, face iris, speech, eye, and DNA
analysis. Various IoT tools are used to design and to create virtual games based on
augmented reality for different target such as, human interaction, information
collection, and playing in abnormal condition. This chapter addresses IoT tools
used in public places to promote their safer use.

Keywords: IoT
Surveillance
Privacy
Information security

Augmented reality

1 Introduction

The diffusion of information and communication technologies (ICT) into public open
spaces is giving birth to a new type of public space: the cyberpark. ICT and the internet
of things (IoT) have a strong impact on the evolution of modern cities, changing the
traditional urban planning processes. The Internet of Things (IoT), also known as the
Internet of Objects, refers to the networked interconnection of everyday objects. Today,
the Internet of Things has become a leading path to the smart world of ubiquitous

© The Author(s) 2019

C. Smaniotto Costa et al. (Eds.): CyberParks, LNCS 11380, pp. 308–321, 2019.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-13417-4_24
 The Application of Advanced IoT in Cyberparks 309

computing and networking. The IoT is believed to make the e-economy, e-government,
e-medicine, e-learning, and e-society of a city more efficient and effective. The major
goal is to encourage people to better use the outdoor environment in a safe manner.
Advanced IoT aims to promote the movement of people from virtual life to real life in
society. In other words, information communication technologies and tools aim to free
humans from the prison called virtual life and its predominantly sedentary behaviours.
IoT can be used to incentivize people to use public open spaces and to spend more time
outdoors. However, in order to engage people, public open spaces have to be attractive,
easily accessible and inclusive. IoT can be used to manage the street traffic in cities in
conjunction with events offered in a particular place at a particular time for different
user groups, namely, the elderly, children and young people.
This chapter is focused on the improvement of human safety in cyberparks by
introducing an encryption scheme. Encryption, a method that protects the communi-
cations protocol from cyber attacker, uses an algorithm and key to transform data at the
source safety. In the secret-key encryption, the sender of the message uses an algorithm
and a key to encrypt the message, and the receiver of the message uses the same key to
decrypt the message. The receiver and the sender of the message must both agree on the
key without any third party knowing, a method called key management. In former
encryption schemes, the algorithm and the key were transmitted along with the data at
the same time; however, such schemes were considered extremely unsecure. In today’s
encryption schemes, all communications involve public keys. The public keys for the
two parties are published, but the private keys are kept secret. To retain and secure
privacy, the biometric data in encryption mechanism are included.

2 IoT Technologies

This section introduces the IoT tools that can be used in cyberparks. Various IoT tools
are being already used to monitor public spaces (Hachiya and Bandai 2014), with some
of them summarised in Fig. 1.

2.1 Smart Video Cameras

Video cameras are being widely used to monitor traffic. Video surveillance systems
have also been used in indoor and outdoor environments with the aim of preventing
crime (Raiyn 2013). For years video surveillance systems have been used in streets and
in public spaces to control, for example, drug-related criminality. Video surveillance is
based on features of abnormal behaviour that are represented by energy: the velocity
and disorderly features of the moving targets. Energy is a term used to express the
relative positions of the moving targets. Current video surveillance systems have many
limitations; systems face difficulties in isolating a number of people located at different
positions at the same time, and in tracking those people automatically. The number of
possibly targeted people is also limited by the extent of user’s involvement in manually
switching the view from one video camera to another. Furthermore, preserving
310 J. Raiyn and J. Jokovic

personal privacy, the implementation of video surveillance is limited, and the private
monitoring of public spaces is restricted. Nonetheless, video surveillance data analysis
has proven particularly effective in solving crimes (Raiyn 2015a).

2.2 Mobile Networks

Location based services are offered by various IoT tools (Sekar and Liu 2014).
A mobile station is needed to provide users with services related to their location. In
some cases, like accidents, a person can call an emergency number but may be not able
to give any information about the location of the occurrence. In such cases, the task of
the IoT tools is to localize the injured person quickly and accurately (Smit et al. 2012).
The user location can be easily determined based on the mobile phone service. In the
last decade position determination through wireless network technologies has
increased. Mobile and wireless communications systems increasingly offer this service.
In a mediated open space (cyberpark), high quality location services can be used to
provide more safety and security. A mobile station uses signals, transmitted by
antennas to calculate its own position. In other words, the positioning receiver calcu-
lates the distance between the mobile station and the base station by signal measure-
ments. Mobile phones mostly use wi-fi networks for internet access, or they use cellular
systems to setup audio and video communication (Mok and Retscher 2007).
The cellular concept is a mobile network architecture composed ideally of
hexagonal cells. The cells represent geographic areas. Inside the coverage area, the
users, called mobile stations (MS) are able to communicate with the network while
moving inside the cells. Each cell has a base station (BS), which serves the mobile
stations. The coverage zones are however not hexagonal in real radio networks.
Interference leads to missed and blocked calls due to errors in digital signalling.
Between the transmitter (BS) and the receiver (MS), the channel is modelled by several
key parameters. These parameters vary significantly with the environment (urban, rural,
mountainous, etc.). The propagation of radio signals on both the uplink and the
downlink is affected by the physical channel in several ways. A signal propagating
through a wireless channel usually arrives its destination along a number of different
paths, referred to as multi-paths. These paths arise from the scattering, reflection,
refraction or diffraction of the radiating energy of objects in the environment. The
received signal is weaker than the original transmitted signal due to phenomena such as
mean propagation loss, slow fading and fast fading. The mean propagation loss comes
from square-law spreading, absorption by water and foliage and the effect of ground
reflections. Mean propagation loss is range dependent and changes very slowly even
for fast mobiles. Slow fading results from a blocking effect by buildings and natural
features and is also known as long-term fading, or shadowing. Fast fading results from
multi-path scattering in the vicinity of the mobile. It is also known as short-term fading
or Rayleigh fading, for reasons explained below. Multipath propagation results in the
spreading of the signal in different dimensions (Raiyn 2014).
 The Application of Advanced IoT in Cyberparks 311

2.3 Satellite Technologies

There are several self-positioning systems, such as the GPS, GNSS, GLONASS,
Galileo (Fernandez-Prades et al. 2011). The global positioning system (GPS) is a
worldwide satellite-based radio navigation system (Huang and Pi 2014). It consists of
three main segments: a space segment, a control segment and a user segment. There is a
basic method for position determination-based cell identification. The cell identification
method is based on an approximation of the position of a mobile handset by knowing in
which cell the mobile station is located. This method is the basic technique; however,
the accuracy of the method is rather low. Satellite navigation system such as the GPS
and GNSS are tools well suited for collecting localization data such as a vehicle’s speed
and the direction of motion at regular time intervals. Satellite navigation systems have
been used to manage real-time road traffic information in order to improve route choice
decisions. When satellite navigation system data are unavailable, especially in devel-
oping countries, or outdoor, travel speeds can be computed on basis of the cellular
network data. The GNSS has been used widely for outdoor services.

2.4 Interactive E-Services and Web Services

A cyberpark includes online services across different fields. Interactive e-services
enable data collection and processing. Web based collaboration and mobile device
applications actualize a user’s location. In addition, some information is used to
improve location-based e-services.
Developing web-based applications and services is assumed to make smart cities
more efficient for citizens, such as e-services for hospitals, education, banking, events,
transportation, tourism, security, to name a few. Similarly, Web services support social
interactivity and cyberpark events.

Fig. 1. IoT technologies that can be used in a mediated public space

3 Surveillance in Cyberpark

People tend to use public spaces that are inviting, attractive, accessible, and above all
safe. Crime in public places reflects a societal problem. It is a very complex issue with
several aspects, and it cannot be solved by urban planning alone. Crimes consist of
assaults, and threats and offenses against personal property. Various IoT tools and other
312 J. Raiyn and J. Jokovic

techniques may help to create a safer environment. The use of IoT tools in public place is
not new, cameras have been installed in many places around the world. However, their
application in public open spaces and other natural settings is more recent, and therefore
limited. IoT tools are increasingly being implemented in public spaces with the intention
to prevent crime and to increase the safety of outdoor activities. Security services
include position determination and signal tracking with the support of smart digital,
mobile phones, GPS/GNSS, QR cod, web services, and wi-fi as listed in Table 1.
User location can be determined by these services (Patil et al. 2014). When a user
requests information about a place from the location-based server, the server needs to
know the location of the user, and a location information is normally requested. Fur-
thermore, biometrics of all types are considered an enhancement of visual surveillance;
biometrics are already being used for identification and verification including finger-
print, face iris, speech, eye, and DNA analysis.

Table 1. IoT-based services

IoT Services\tasks Feature Reliability
Static Dynamic
Digital camera Monitor\surveillance Image detection √
Mobile phone Information Signal √
GPS\GNSS Positioning, tracking Altitude, longitude √
WiFi Internet connection IP √
QR code\web service Information providing IP/signal √
Interactive digital map Visitor guide √
Screen Media playing √
Multimedia place Calling, music, games √

To improve the safety in open spaces, an agent has been introduced (a cyberpark-
agent) into the wireless video surveillance system, and a cyberpark agent based, multi-
node, collaborative, wireless video monitoring scheme is proposed. The cyberpark
agent is designed for target tracking, it can move among network nodes a designated
path or on an independently selected path based on network conditions and cumulated
information. The target will pass through multiple monitoring regions of nodes.
Although aimed at the same target, each device obtains different target moving
information, e.g., the target trajectory. Different cyberpark agents created for each
target can be used to achieve continuous tracking. While the target switches between
different monitoring regions, the cyberpark agent moves between different nodes,
records target motion information, and accordingly reaches the goal of multi-node
collaborative tracking. Videos, sensors and cellular networks are not sufficient for
collecting data because of their limited coverage and expensive costs for installation
and maintenance. To overcome the limitations of the tools mentioned above, GNSS can
be introduced, as its application to monitor travel time has proven to be accurate. Its
data are being used, for example, to monitor indoor areas and traffic congestions. GNSS
products provide worldwide and real-time services using precise timing information,
and positioning technologies (Bhuvana and Jiang 2014).
 The Application of Advanced IoT in Cyberparks 313

3.1 Privacy in IoT Technology

Information about users that is collected and stored should be kept secure. There are
various algorithms for protecting information from possible cyber-attacks (Raiyn
2014). In general, cyber-attacks are actions that attempt to bypass the security mech-
anisms of computer systems. Cyber threats detection has been defined as “the problem
of identifying individuals who are using a computer system without authorization and
those who have legitimate access to the system but are abusing their privileges”
(Bhuvana and Jiang 2014). To this definition the identification of attempts to use a
computer system without authorization or to abuse existing privileges should be added
(Karthikeyan and Indra 2010).
The main scientific challenge is to develop a multi-agent that detects, and tracks
suspected cyber attackers (Maskat et al. 2011; Raiyn 2015b). Cyber security should be
considered a top priority issue in the digital era since digital technology advancements
seem to increase the incidence of criminal and terrorist acts. Moreover, we note that
specific communities, like the Israeli society for example, suffers from frequent cyber-
attacks. Since the inception of the internet the society and human life have become
divided between the real and the virtual worlds. Large number of people spend their
lives in the virtual world, many of them have misused internet. Criminal and cyber-
attacks are increasing exponentially. To save people’s life, we suggest setting ethical
rules for the virtual world based on those of the real world. Furthermore, new security
measures are required to protect privacy in the virtual world. Cyber-attacks attempt to
bypass the security mechanisms of computer systems. According to Jerry Durlak (Smit
et al. 2012), privacy is a human value consisting of elements he calls rights: the right to
be alone without disturbances, the right to have no public personal identity, the right
not to be monitored, the right to control one’s personal information including the
methods of dissemination of that information.

3.2 Information Security

In general, security can be considered a mean to prevent unauthorized access to
information. It includes the integrity, confidentiality, privacy, availability, authentica-
tion, and authorisation of information stored and disseminated in servers, including
information in files and databases and in transition between servers, and between
clients and servers. The security of information can be ensured in a different number of
ways. The most common are cryptography for information transmission and authen-
tication. Cryptography, the science of writing and reading coded messages, forms the
basis for all secure transmission. This is done through three functions: symmetric and
asymmetric encryption, and hash functions.

4 Cyberpark’s IoT Design Proposal

A mediated public space (cyberpark) can be designed in line with IoT services and
what follows is our proposal to develop a safer open space. The cyberpark users have at
hand several IoT tools to determine a user’s location, as illustrated in Fig. 2. Users
314 J. Raiyn and J. Jokovic

could also select and reserve social events a priori. The information received from the
IoT tools is stored and the data obtained are organized in databases according to the
type of IoT tool that is involved, and a cyberpark agent manages the data. Furthermore,
to keep user information secure, the cyberpark (CP) agent protects the information from
cyber-attacks. To manage the various IoT e-services resources in the cyberpark, a
cyberpark agent that considers quality of service (QoS) and quality of experience
(QoE) is put in place.

Fig. 2. The proposal for a cyberpark design

4.1 Cyberpark Agent

The cyberpark agent plays an important role in mediated places. It collects information
about the activities of the cyberparks, updates the local information constantly, and
takes the proper decision in terms of how to perform safely the selected activity.
A cyberpark aims to increase the number of the users by applying the cyberpark agent.
The cyberpark agent should have autonomy to work, in order to manage negotiation
and take decisions (Fig. 3). Figure 2 depicts the decision-making process.

Fig. 3. Cyberpark agent strategy

 The Application of Advanced IoT in Cyberparks 315

4.2 Cyberpark Agent Communication

In this phase, the cyberpark agent collects information about the activities by using
messaging exchange. The message exchange is secured based on biometric data. After
that, the cyberpark agent sends request message to acquire an activity (Fig. 4).

Fig. 4. Communication protocol

4.3 Information Collection

A new user who wishes to make use of cyberpark activities, is requested to register; a
cyberpark agent is created to serve the user. According to the received information, a
cyberpark agent offers activities suitable for the user’s requirements and preferences.
Furthermore, the cyberpark agent performs data analysis to improve the services based
on quality of experience (Fig. 5).

Fig. 5. The pathway of gathering information

316 J. Raiyn and J. Jokovic

5 Cyber Security with GNSS

This section addresses the currently available Global Navigation Satellite System
(GNSS). The main task of GNSS is to provide localization and time synchronization
services, for this it counts on three basic elements: the set of satellites, ground aug-
mentation systems, and user equipment. Four main satellite technologies have gone live
in recent years: Global Positioning System (GPS), GLONASS, Galileo, and
BeiDou/Compass (Fernandez-Prades et al. 2011; Mok and Retscher 2007; Quddus
et al. 2003). Among these technologies the GPS is the most commonly-used, especially
for vehicle navigation and localization (Bernstein and Kornhauser 1996). The GPS data
is transmitted via the Coarse/Acquisition (C/A) code, which is the unencrypted navi-
gation data. The encrypted (military) signal is called the Precision-code, also broad-
casted by every satellite. It has its own PRN codes, in the order of 1012 bits long.
When locked onto the signal, the receiver will get the Y code, which is the encrypted
signal with an unspecified W code. Only authorized users can decipher this informa-
tion. Newly GPS satellites can perform further features.
To get a better estimation of a location, there are several methods of augmenting
GNSS data. Three of these methods are: satellite-based augmentation systems (SBASs),
assisted-GPS and differential-GPS (Greenfeld 2002). SBASs are commonly used in
airplanes, especially for critical issues such as the landing phase. SBASs consist of few
satellites and many ground stations, a SBAS covers only a certain GNSS for a specific
area. For every GNSS, the accuracy is greatly dependent on and influenced by external
factors, as propagation errors and “space weather” conditions (Langley 2000). These
factors affect not only to GNSS applications, but all other wireless transmission appli-
cations. As the satellites are orbiting earth at a height of approximate 20.000 km, signals
can be affected in many ways. According to Langley (2000), ‘space weather’ is greatly
influenced by the sun, and this affects satellite signals too. GNSS requires however exact
timing in the order of nanoseconds to determine a position. Furthermore, when the
satellite signal reaches earth, it can be reflected on buildings and other objects, causing
an increase in travel time. These factors have impact on the measurements. In order to
overcome these issues and to increase the estimation of users’ position outdoors, we
combine augmented GNSS with biometric data, as Fig. 6 illustrates.

Fig. 6. Biometric data

 The Application of Advanced IoT in Cyberparks 317

6 Implementation

IoT tools can be a mean to invite and engage people in public spaces even seven days
per week. When using public spaces, people consider the weather conditions and the
time available. In this chapter, we introduce an application for interactive digital
mapping based on the GNSS. Figure 7 illustrates the management of various resources
in this application. Some resources, like e-services, are allocated in public spaces
according to the date and time.

Fig. 7. E-services management

To use IoT tools outdoors, in a cyberpark, the user should log on the system as
illustrated in Fig. 8. The system is protected by password authentication, also in data
communication, authentication is used to ensure to the digital message recipient the
identity of the sender and the integrity of the message. The authentication mechanism is
based on cryptography use, either with secret-key or public-key schemes and mostly done
via digital signatures based on biometric data, while the message exchange between users
is secured with protocol supported with biometrics data, as shown in Fig. 9.

Fig. 8. The secured logon system

318 J. Raiyn and J. Jokovic

Fig. 9. Secured message exchange

7 Interactive Digital Map

In order to offer an enhanced service for users of a mediated public space, an interactive
digital map can be installed as a station, or map can be displayed on a touch screen for
people who do not carry mobile devices, or for those who have difficulties in using
modern IoT devices. In this station users select a starting point and a destination for the
trip and the cyberpark agent calculates the longitude and the altitude of the path as
illustrates Table 2. Users have to provide some information in order to use IoT tools.
Users start the trip by selecting a path, the system delineates the path, and tracks the
users, as shown in Fig. 10. The tracking process can accomplish via various IoT tools.
In this application, GNSS has been used to draw the trip path (Fig. 11).

Table 2. Location of nodes

Positioning Longitude Latitude Velocity
[km/h]
A 32.875902 35.187868 35.53
B 32.876271 35.191891 45.53
C 32.876866 35.197041 40.37
D 32.874280 35.197020 40.41
E 32.869117 35.200281 31.42
F 32.879540 35.203779 39.00
G 32.869838 35.207169 Final destination
 The Application of Advanced IoT in Cyberparks 319

Fig. 10. Position tracking

Fig. 11. Interactive digital map showing a fictive trip path

8 Conclusion

In this chapter some significant IoT tools were described and analysed. This analysis
contributes to a broader understanding towards our primarily interest: developing a new
scheme for securing the privacy of users in a mediated public space. Most cyber-attack
detection schemes are fixed on use of authenticity strategies with session key
320 J. Raiyn and J. Jokovic

agreement. However, traditional cyber-attack detection schemes do not satisfy current

security requirements; and there are limitations in order to increase the threat defenses.
The main limitation of misuse detection-based IDSs is that these schemes can accu-
rately detect only known attack procedures; they are unable to notice unknown or novel
attacks. Moreover, predefined attack specifications have to be provided to the IDS to
enable misuse detection, which requires human security experts to manually analyse
attack’s related data and formulate attack specifications. However, attack specifications
can be generated automatically by applying various automated techniques. In future
work we will consider a novel cyber-attack detection scheme that is based on a cog-
nitive security system. This system should act autonomously, analysing user beha-
viours, managing vertical handoff to track suspected cyber-attacks, moving over
networks, considering anomaly detection, and handling cyber-attacks in real-time.

References
Bernstein, D., Kornhauser, A.: An introduction to map matching for personal navigation
assistants. Technical report, New Jersey TIDE Center (1996)
Bhuvana, S., Jiang, B.L.: Location based mobile apps development on Android platform. In:
IEEE 9th Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA), pp. 2148–2153
(2014)
Fernandez-Prades, C., Presti, L., Falletti, E.: Satellite radio localization from GPS to GNSS and
beyond: novel technologies and applications for civil mass market. Proc. IEEE 99(11), 1882–
1904 (2011)
Greenfeld, J.S.: Matching GPS observations to locations on a digital map. In: Proceedings of the
81st Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board (2002)
Hachiya, T., Bandai, M.: SmartLocService: place identification method using space dependent
information for indoor location-based services. In: 28th International Conference on
Advanced Information Networking and Applications Workshops, pp. 578–581 (2014)
Huang, P., Pi, Y.: An improved location service scheme in urban environments with the
combination of GPS and mobile stations. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 14, 1287–1301
(2014)
Karthikeyan, K.R., Indra, A.: Intrusion detection tools and techniques – a survey. Int. J. Comput.
Theory Eng. 2(6), 1793–8201 (2010)
Langley, R.B.: GPS, the Ionosphere, and the Solar Maximum. In: GPS World (2000). http://
gauss.gge.unb.ca/gpsworld/gpsworld.july00.pdf (cit. on p. 19)
Maskat, K., Afizi, M., Khairuddin, M.A., Isa, M.R.M.: Mobile agents in intrusion detection
system: review and analysis. Mod. Appl. Sci. 6(5), 218–231 (2011)
Mok, E., Retscher, G.: Location determination using WiFi fingerprinting versus WiFi
trilateration. J. Locat. Based Serv. 1, 145–159 (2007)
Quddus, M.A., Ochieng, W.Y., Zhao, L., Noland, R.B.: A general map matching algorithm for
transport telematics applications. GPS Solut. 7, 157–167 (2003)
Patil, D.S., Gavali, A.B., Gavali, S.B.: Review on indexing methods in location based services.
In: IEEE International Advance Computing Conference (IACC), pp. 930–936 (2014)
Raiyn, J.: Detection of objects in motion - a survey of video surveillance. Adv. Internet Things 3,
73–78 (2013)
Raiyn, J.: A survey of cyber attack detection strategies. Int. J. Secur. Appl. 8(1), 247–256 (2014).
https://doi.org/10.14257/ijsia.2014.8.1.23
 The Application of Advanced IoT in Cyberparks 321

Raiyn, J.: Introduction to big data management based on evolution agent in cyberparks. J. Multi.
Eng. Sci. Technol. 2(9), pp. 2432–2437 (2015a)
Raiyn, J.: Information security and safety in cyber parks. Global J. Adv. Eng. Technol. Sci. 2(8),
pp. 33–38 (2015b)
Sekar, B., Liu, J.B.: Location based mobile apps development on android platform. In: IEEE 9th
Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications (ICIEA), pp. 2148–2153 (2014)
Smit, L., Stander, A., Ophoff, J.: An analysis of base station location accuracy within mobile-
cellular networks. Int. J. Cyber Secur. Digit. Forensics (IJCSDF) 1(4), 272–279 (2012)

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing,
adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appro-
priate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons
license and indicate if changes were made.
The images or other third party material in this chapter are included in the chapter’s Creative
Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not
included in the chapter’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by
statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly
from the copyright holder.
 Author Index

Albacete, Xavier 120 Maciuliene, Monika 262

Artopoulos, Georgios 50, 167, 224 Maksymiuk, Gabriela 69, 87, 137
Arvanitidis, Paschalis 50, 76, 87, 109, 167 Malinverni, Eva Savina 25
Marcheggiani, Ernesto 251
Bahillo, Alfonso 278 Masala, Elena 120
Bihuňová, Mária 251 Mateus, Diogo 278
Bonanno, Philip 294 Menezes, Marluci 76, 109, 224
Breser, Christoph 14
Osaba, Eneko 278
Čakovská, Barbora 251

de Lange, Michiel 153, 157 Pallares-Barbera, Montserrat 50, 120

de Waal, Martijn 153 Patrício, Catarina 14
Djukic, Aleksandra 38, 120 Pierdicca, Roberto 278
Duarte, Tiago 278
Raiyn, Jamal 308
Galli, Andrea 251 Redaelli, Gaia 224
Ruchinskaya, Tatiana 181, 209
Hansen, Preben 25, 251
Skarzauskiene, Aelita 262
Ioannidis, Konstantinos 14, 181, 241 Smaniotto Costa, Carlos 3, 109, 224, 241
Ivanova-Radovanova, Petja 76, 196, 262 Šuklje Erjavec, Ina 3, 209
Suomalainen, Sari 167
Joklova, Viera 38
Synnes, Kåre 157, 224
Jokovic, Jugoslav 120, 308

Kenna, Therese 69, 76, 87, 137 Vlastos, Thanos 38

Khromova, Anna 25
Kimic, Kinga 181 Weinstein, Zvi 109
Klichowski, Michal 294
Yapicioglou, Balkiz 196
Lalenis, Konstantinos 50, 196
Leindecker, Gerald 157 Zammit, Antoine 137
Lister, Penelope 294 Zedlacher, Stefan 25