Focus Group – Developing applications of nature with nature experts and hospitality businesses
For my second early intervention, I wish to produce an event to create change. I am in the process of organising a focus group which is taking the form of an online panel discussion, due to pandemic restrictions.
The focus group aims to bring hospitality businesses together with experts in biophilia in the aim of making change in how nature can be most effectively applied in hospitality businesses to re-connect people to the natural world.
The discussion will be relatively free forming, but a series of 3-5 prompts will be developed by myself to guide the conversation into the necessary areas.
At present the focus group is looking to take place on the 27th May, however this may change as people finalise their availability.
Confirmed Panellists:
Kristina Libby– Biophilic expert – worked on projects looking to incorporate biophilic design in workspaces to improve wellbeing and creativity
Leonardo Binetti – Biomimetics expert (mimicking natural materials, designs and systems with technology)
Simon Gardner – General manager of hospitality businesses for 25 years
Panellists Waiting to Hear Back From:
Abid Butt – Host of ‘Hospitality Talks’ group, which investigates problems facing the hospitality industry
Other individuals involved in hospitality and biophilia have been contacted, but are unable to partake at present.
In my next steps I will look to engage more individuals specifically from the hospitality industry to take part in the focus group. I have secure more biophilia experts than individuals from the hospitality industry and I wish there to be a near equal balance in representative of both halves in the focus group.
Further Future Intervention – Developing application of nature with customers
In the near future I also look to make an intervention targeted at the customers of hospitality businesses.
This intervention will involve creating a space for an ongoing process, by developing an online sharing group. The group will utilise an existing social media platform, such as Facebook, to engage as many people as possible by extorting their existing user base.
The group will provide customers of hospitality businesses that sell food and drink to share images of applications of nature or just nature itself to the group. The images will then be analysed and utilised to develop the most effective, manageable and feasible applications of nature for my project. The data supplied by customers of hospitality spaces will be analysed for frequencies of certain key elements such as light, sound, water and greenery to calculate which of these larger sectors is most important to customers. There will also be subsections that will be analysed that will go into greater depth regarding how these sectors are being approached, for instance the use of planting for the greenery section. The approaches that people like will also be closely examined to see how they could be adapted to be used in hospitality businesses that sell food and drinks.
Creating this intervention is not currently underway, as it is still in the ideas development phase. But creating this intervention will become a top priority, once the intervention of showcasing my video to hospitality businesses and organising the focus group are underway.
For my first early intervention, I wanted to target the issue I have been facing of explaining the complex subjects my project aims to tackle in a simple format. I then intend on utilising the simplified format of my ideas to engage my stakeholders of hospitality businesses.
To read further on my exploration of how I reached the formulation of this intervention, pleasure read my earlier post on developing interventions here: https://nicoleparkes.myblog.arts.ac.uk/2021/04/25/developing-an-early-intervention/
Intervention 1 – Engaging Hospitality Businesses
I have developed a video which aims to metaphorically express the importance and value that applying nature into hospitality spaces could have for hospitality business and their customers.
The video aims to break down my intrinsic aims for my project by utilising a metaphor that everyone is familiar with. This being unscented candles vs scented candles. The purpose of showcasing this video to my stakeholders is to help them engage with my work and feel they can actively contribute and get involved in what it is trying to achieve, rather than it being a project which utilises complex terms and ideas that are skewed at purely academics.
Iteration 1:
Below is the first iteration I made of my video. I have since adapted this video, as I felt the audio including technical terms such as biophilic was unapproachable for the individuals in the hospitality industry I am trying to engage. Also, I felt this initial audio didn’t explicitly showcase the point of re-connecting to nature, rather it more focused upon the wellbeing benefits of nature which isn’t the primary focus of my project.
Iteration 2:
Below you can see the updated version of my video, which I intend on showing to my stakeholders of hospitality businesses that serve food and drinks, to get them involved in the conversation around creating a re-connection to nature in their spaces.
After showing this video to my stakeholders, I plan to ask them how this made them think about the possible values of the integration of nature and re-connecting to nature in hospitality spaces. I will then ask if they now feel that the integration of nature is something they would be interested in testing out in their spaces and why? I will ask if they have any initial ideas of where they would benefit most from applications of nature to re-connect people with nature and how they think this may look?
Consequently, the point of this intervention is to start a meaningful conversation with my stakeholders, rather than overwhelming them with technical terms and ‘fluffy’ complex ideas.
Bibliography
Ideal Home (2019) “You won’t believe how much Brits are spending on candles each year! How much money are you burning? Ideal Home [Online] https://www.idealhome.co.uk/news/brits-annual-spending-candles-222764 Accessed 27/04/21
To gain a greater industry knowledge of the different applications of biophilic design, as well as the differing ways connections can be formed utilising nature, I reached out to biophilic deign experts.
Kristina Libby
She is an artist, innovator and technology executive. She has recently worked on projects looking to improve wellbeing and creativity in the workplace by applying biophilic design principles.
My conversation with Kristina, revealed the following:
She feels strongly that as a society we should be moving towards making indoor spaces as attractive as outdoor spaces.
She stated that people are 15-20% more likely to spend time in hospitality environments that have increased green spaces.
She feels that many hospitality spaces almost feel dead at present, some even toxic. We should be aiming to make these spaces welcoming and spaces that make us feel good and alive.
She advised that when looking at measuring topics such as wellbeing and social interactions, I should consider: How long people stay, whether group sizes expand over time and emotional self reports after visiting the spaces.
She felt that in relation to hospitality businesses, they have been too harshly hit by the pandemic to look at large scale improvements. But, as the economy improves she expects there to be greater willingness to draw people to spaces using nature.
This feeds into my smaller, manageable scale and approach
She feels buildings are spaces that improve wellbeing and connect people with nature are essential to creating a better planet.
Rajalakshami Iyer
She is a landscape architect and interior landscaper, who is passionate about connecting people to nature.
In my conversation with Rajalakshmi, she provided great insights into alternative ways to apply biophilic design, that target the feeling of making a connection. For example, she explained how she tends to utilise biophilic design principles to touch peoples hearts and trigger childhood or good memories. This makes the spaces feel honest and people can form a very personal connection with the nature.
Hospitality Businesses
To better understand how hospitality businesses are currently approaching bringing nature into their spaces, I began to ask people involved in the industry for their take on things.
Simon Gardner
He is a general manager with 25 years experience in the hospitality industry.
The discussion with Simon provided an interesting angle on how nature could be applied to discourage certain types of unwanted, troublesome behaviours due to the calming restorative benefits of nature. Additionally, Simon’s input helped me to establish that hospitality businesses are welcome to the type of change that I am trying to make.
Ajit Nair
He is a manger of hospitality businesses.
Ajit also furthered that some hospitality businesses are open to biophilic design.
Reflection:
From engaging with stakeholders in the hospitality industry, I have had two very beneficial discussions with general managers of hospitality businesses. The first being with Simon and the second with Ajit. From these discussions I noted that introducing nature, specifically greenery into the hospitality spaces is an accepted idea in the field. But, that the introduction of differing parts of nature into hospitality spaces such as sound, water, pattern and in some cases (not Simon’s) light, are largely overlooked.
However, it must be noted that these two stakeholders reached out to a post I put in a large Facebook group for hospitality business owners which stated my intentions for biophilic design applications. Therefore, their accounts are representative of those who are interested in applying nature in spaces, as they engaged with my post. However, many others in the group did not engage with the post, possibly suggesting that they are less interested in brining nature into they spaces.
Hospitality Customers
In order to establish how customers may be attracted to hospitality businesses and how they develop their connections with nature, I reached out to my following on instagram. This following is of around 700 people from varying backgrounds, ages and areas.
From this stakeholder engagement I discovered that 93% of people who responded stated that they would be attracted to a hospitality business if it intrinsically incorporated nature. I reached out to the people in the 7% who responded NO but unfortunately I didn’t receive any replies as to why they responded that way.
I also learnt that feelings of relaxation, calm and peace are prominent effects of having string connections with nature, so they may be things I could attempt to measure to determine the quality of connection developed, alongside the academic scales of connection to nature.
Other highly beneficial feedback I gained stated that, people miss the natural world when they aren’t in it, so brining nature to people in hospitality businesses has a clear market.
Early Intervention
As an early intervention, I am looking to set up a focus group in the form of a virtual panel discussion, that aims to bring hospitality businesses and biophilia experts together to create change. I will explain the focus group more in a later blog post. So far, Kristina Libby, Rajalakshami Iyer, Leonardo Binetti (see previous stake holder engagement posts) have all agreed to take part in the discussion. Simon Gardner has potentially agreed to take part, depending upon work agreements.
Throughout the evolution of my enquiry the term hospitality has developed within my research question. However, I have been advised to focus in on a more precise area of the field or a unifying term that describes the range of spaces I wish to address.
Hospitality spaces are being utilised as the focus for my project, as they are currently overlooked in biophilic design schemes and research. There is a growing volume of work looking to apply biophilic design in workspaces, healthcare spaces, hotel accommodation and even homes. However, hospitality spaces are largely left out. Hospitality has also been hit very hard by pandemic restrictions in the UK and I have a vested interest in the hospitality industry having worked a number of jobs in the sector and enjoy discovering new hospitality spaces in my free time; which drives my passions for this project.
Scalability:
Additionally, focusing on hospitality spaces is a way to make the aims of my project achievable in the scale of my masters project. Therefore, if my work is successful it could be scaled up to other sectors of the hospitality industry. When looking to ‘dream big’ into the future, if successful my work may even be scaled up to vastly larger schemes such as the ‘BiodiverCity’ in the Penang Islands, Malaysia that is currently being developed by BIG; the architectural firm ran by Bjarke Ingles (who I examined in my box of uncertainties project) (GQ, 2021). The BiodiverCity is pioneering in creating a sustainable global destination, connected by autonomous transport, transforming the mudflats of Penang into a greater future for Malaysia (DeZeen, 2020). My work in hospitality spaces could be incorporated into the hospitality spaces in a city scheme similar to this, to help achieve incredible large scale connections to nature.
What Is Hospitality?
Due to the ambiguity surrounding the term hospitality, I aim to eventually remove the term in my research question altogether to one more specific to an area of hospitality. Changing the term hospitality aims to narrowing the focus of my research further and making it truly achievable in the time scale. Consequently, the work below explains my process of working towards narrowing my research field in relation to the term ‘hospitality’.
When exploring the topic of hospitality further, I discovered hospitality and the hospitality industry to host two distinct definitions:
Hospitality:
A contemporaneous human exchange, which is voluntarily entered into, and designed to enhance the mutual wellbeing of the parties concerned through the provision of accommodation, and/or food, and/or drink (Brotherton, 1999).
or
The friendly and generous reception and entertainment of guests, visitors or strangers (Oxford, 2021).
Essentially hospitality involves voluntarily entertaining people and hospitality spaces include any space that is utilised to entertain people.
Hospitality Industry:
The hospitality industry is comprised of commercial organisations that specialise in providing accommodation and/or, food, and/or drink, through a voluntary human exchange, which is contemporaneous in nature, and undertaken to enhance the mutual well being of the parties involved (Brotherton and Wood, 2000).
So, the hospital industry essential monetises the service of hospitality. Therefore, the hospitality industry more accurately represents the spaces I wish to target in my project. the hospitality industry includes businesses which can implement applications of nature, that allow a connection to nature to be fostered by numerous individuals who frequent those spaces.
I discovered that this slight difference between the entertaining and hospitality is a nuanced concept (Tefler, 2000), but may be useful in distinguishing between the precise outcome of the experience in the space that I am trying to achieve.
Brainstorming around why hospitality spaces are utilised:
largely informal spaces
social interactive spaces
business meetings
work drinks
meeting friends/family
personal time – enjoying entertainment/ food or drink
networking
social media work – gathering content for posts or ad work promoting spaces
necessity, in need of food or drink
Different Sectors Of The Hospitality Industry – Which To Focus Upon?
Working from the definitions of the hospitality industry, there is a clear split of 2 key sectors within the hospitality industry, those that look to provide accommodation and those that provide food and drink. Subsequently, I explored biophilic design application in these different settings.
Hotels/ Accommodation Spaces
Hotels are one of the most widely utilised hospitality spaces in Biophilic deigns schemes, specifically in relation to their accommodation spaces (The Resident, 2019). They are seen most frequently with pioneering designs and huge comprehensive schemes re-energisning the spaces. For instance, in Singapore the Park Royal collection hotel at Marina Bay (Panpacific, 2021). Therefore, hotels having large comprehensive schemes require a large budget from the hotel and scale of consultancy operation to conduct the work. Both of which are out of the scale for my MA project. Additionally, due to these spaces already having a biophilic focus, my work will arguably have a lesser effect in these arenas. However, a way in which my work could have a small impact in hotel spaces would be to target struggling hotels with minimal budgets to build connections to nature in these spaces that cannot employ the big schemes. However, it is arguable the profound nature that this change would have, due to the amount of attention hotels are receiving, it will only be a matter of time before the large scale adaptations trickle down into the smaller hotels.
Pubs/ Bars – Restaurants – Pop-ups/ Events
Pubs/bars, restaurants and events spaces have very minimal focus at present in applying biophilic design. When biophilic design is applied in such areas it predominately includes simply adding a few plants into the space, making little impact. At present there are very few companies looking to employ biophilic deign specifically into events, but one company at the forefront of this venture into biophilic events is ‘Planted’. Planted Cities aims to run zero waste, biophilic events and is the first of its kind (Planted, 2021). Protype events for which was held last September and the first real event to hopefully take place in September 2021 at Kings Cross, which I have already signed up to attend. I have also reached out to contact Planted in the hopes of working with them in some capacity to achieve the goals of my project. Therefore, there is huge scope for addressing the spaces of pubs/bars, restaurants and pop-ups/ events with applications of nature. So, what do all of these spaces have in common? They serve food and drinks.
Reflection:
My project will not be focusing upon hotels, so I needed to find a term that encompasses spaces that involve the hospitality industry, entertaining, excludes hotel accommodation and serves food and drinks. The term needs to unify the spaces that I do wish to focus upon, being pubs/bars, restaurants, pop-ups and events. Consequently, my field for enquiry in my question became “commercial entertaining spaces which serve food and drink”. The term aimed to target the business element of the hostility industry, focusing upon the aim of pleasure from entertaining and removing ambiguity as to what constitutes hospitality; whilst specifying that the spaces sell food and drink.
However, I will continue my stakeholder engagement further to attempt to narrow in even further within the subsection of commercial entertaining spaces, which can be scaled to up include other fields of hospitality if successful.
Stakeholder Feedback/ Realisation:
When talking with stakeholders, both in hospitality businesses and biophilic experts, I began utilising the term ‘commercial entertaining spaces that serve food and drink’. However, when utilising this term multiple stakeholders needed greater clarification of which spaces I was in fact referring to. From these conversations I realised that the term ‘commercial entertaining spaces that serve and food and drink’ wasn’t actually effective in engaging with my stakeholders. Although the term does accurately represent the area I am aiming to target according to academic studies, it isn’t easily understandable from a public perspective, you have to be an expect in defining hospitality and what determines hospitality vs entertainment to understand the area I am targeting. Consequently, it was ineffective and required changing.
Decision – Working Phrase For The Area Of Hospitality
Therefore, I stepped back and looked again into a term that could be easily understood and accurately represented the field I am aiming to target. I also looked back at prior engagement with my stakeholders and when utilising the term hospitality I didn’t have any issues of understating the areas I aimed to target. Therefore I looked back further at utilising hospitality, but instead of hospitality spaces keeping the clear commercial element by stating hospitality businesses and the defining into serving food and drink. Subsequently, my working term is now ‘hospitality businesses that serve food and drink’.
Bibliography
Brotherton, B. (1999)”Towards a definitive view of the nature of hospitality and hospitality management.” International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management 11(4): 165- 173.
Brotherton B., Wood R.C. (2000). “Hospitality and hospitality management.” In: In Search of Hospitality: Theoretical Perspectives and Debates (eds. C Lashley, A Morrison), pp. 134- 156. Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford.
GQ (2021) “‘BiodiverCity’ is an alluring glimpse at how designers will take on climate change” GQ [Online] https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/lifestyle/article/bjarke-ingels-biodivercity Accessed 02/05/21
Telfer, E. (2000). “The philosophy of hospitableness.” In: In Search of Hospitality: Theoretical Perspectives and Debates (eds C Lashley & A Morrison), pp 38-55. Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford.
The Resident (2019) “Experience urban forest bathing in London’s first biophilic hotel suites” The Resident [Online] https://www.theresident.co.uk/lifestyle-london/londons-first-biophilic-hotel-suites-filled-with-houseplants/ Accessed 01/05/21
Once I had decided that the direction of my project was moving towards developing connections between people and nature, I began by brainstorming my ideas around connections to nature, which you can see below.
From this initial thinking, I developed 3 key areas that need to be addressed:
Why do we need to connect, or more precisely re-connect, with nature?
How will this re-connection be achieved?
How will this re-connection be measured?
1- Why do we need to re-connect with nature?
Humans have an innate connection to nature. However, due to technological advancements, extended working hours and processes such as urbanisation we have become distant from the natural world (Bragg et al., 2013). On average people spend 90% of their time indoors (Opinium, 2018), and given the current restrictions with the pandemic this figure has undoubtedly been heightened even further! Subsequently, being indoors already immediately removes us from the natural world in its traditional sense. However, there are many different methodologies which will be tested and adapted throughout the course of this project to bring the natural world to the indoors; effectively bringing the natural world to the people.
Connecting to nature is the amount that an individual includes nature in their personal identity (Schultz, 2002). Connection includes understanding the complexities of nature, good and bad and accepting it as a whole (Nisbet et al., 2009). Connectedness to nature is also an indicator for subjective reports of wellbeing, for example connection to nature has been taken to include feelings of peacefulness, developing a sense of place and a respect for nature (Hine et al., 2009).
Having a strong connection with nature is important because…
Nature Deficit Disorder is the human implications of a disconnect from nature. The disorder involves costs of diminished attention rates, increased mental and physical illness and reduced use of the senses (Louv, 2005). Originally this disorder was focused upon children, however in more recent academic study it has also been observed in adults. Reconnecting adults with the natural world is not only important for their personal health and lives, it is also important to pass on experiences of the natural environment to their children, otherwise connection to nature will eventually be lost due to a term referred to as ‘extinction of experience’ whereby children spend less and less time in nature as adults are disconnected from it (Pyle, 2003).
The implications for connecting people with nature, in the setting of hospitality spaces that serve food and drink is demonstrated again through the diagram below.
2- How will this re-connection to nature be achieved?
Reconnecting with nature will be achieved through implementing biophilic, biomimetic and natural design features into hospitality spaces.
Therefore, the connections will be developed through exposure. Exposing people to natural design in informal spaces that they typically visit for leisure allows people the freedom to explore the applications of nature and soak in their benefits, consequently developing their personal relationship and connection with nature.
Through applications of biophilic design, many spaces that we spend a great deal of time in are being adapted to bring in the benefits of nature, such as in the workplace, healthcare spaces and hotel accommodation. Consequently, providing an opportunity to learn from these applications of nature and build off them to apply nature into hospitality spaces but instead aimed to evoke re-connection to nature.
The scientific evidence for the exposure to nature having a positive correlation with improvements to personal health both physical and mental, is continuing to increase (Defra, 2011). Subsequently, re-connecting people with the natural world via exposure to natural elements is firstly of benefit to the individual and their health; secondly it may allow for increased attention to be paid the future survival of the natural world.
3- How will this re-connection with nature be measured?
A baseline level of connection to nature will need to be established to conduct this work. Baseline studies of general populations and granges already exist in academic work and so they may be utilised in my project.
To measure the changes in connection to nature there are limited measures, as it is an emerging concept (Schultz et al., 2004).
Key measures of connectedness to nature :
Connection to Nature Scale
Single-factor measure
Developed by Mayer and Frantz, 2004
Based on the principle of the ‘Land Ethic’ by Leopold (1966)
Defines connection to nature as “an individual’s affective, experiential connection to nature” (Mayer and Frantz, 2004, pp.504)
Considered primarily a trait measure but there is an adapted version for measuring state (which previous University of Essex research has shown to be responsive).
Nature Relatedness Scale
3-factor measure – self, perspective and experience
Developed by Nisbet, Zelenski and Murphy, 2009.
Nature relatedness describes individual levels of connectedness with the natural world and comprises the cognitive, affective, and physical connection we have with nature (Nisbet et al., 2011).
“Self” = “an internalized identification with nature, reflecting feelings and thoughts about one’s personal connection to nature” (Nisbet et al., 2009).
“Perspective” = “an external, nature-related worldview, a sense of agency concerning individual human actions and their impact on all living things” (Nisbet et al., 2009)
“Experience” = “a physical familiarity with the natural world and the level of comfort with and desire to be out in nature” (Nisbet et al., 2009)
Considered a trait measure.
Inclusion of Nature with Self
Single-item question
Developed by Schultz, 2002
Designed to measure the extent that individuals include nature as part of their identity. Schultz considers ‘inclusion’ to involve caring about nature (affective), connectedness (defined here as cognitive) and commitment (behavioural).
The question asks participants to rate their connectedness to nature by choosing one of seven pairs of circles that differ in their degree of overlap.
The question can be used as either a state or a trait measure (there are two different wordings) (Schultz, 2002).
Environmental Identity Scale
Developed by Clayton, 2003
Designed to assess the extent to which individuals identify with the natural environment and environmental causes.
24-item scale which looks at spending time in nature, enjoyment of nature, learning about nature, responsibility for nature and ‘oneness’ with nature.
Emotional Affinity to Nature
Developed by Kals, Schumacher, & Montada, 1999
4-factor measure
Emotional affinity toward nature is described as being the love or affection towards nature (107) and the hypothesis is that this emotional affinity should increase nature-protective behaviours.
The 16-item scale consists of four subscales: Love of nature, Feelings of Freedom, Feelings of Safety, and Feelings of Oneness with Nature.
Considered a state measure.
At present, for my project I am looking to employ the measures of connectedness to nature of: Nature relatedness scale, Inclusion of nature with self, and emotional affinity to nature. These scales may be employed by following a group of regular customers to a specific hospitality business over a period of time, if the relationship is built up with customers and business owners to allow this. Otherwise, the measures may be employed on an individual visit by visit basis. The nature relatedness scale may be useful in gaining a sense of how peoples opinions to the wider natural world differ depending on their interactions with nature. Emotional affinity to nature may be utilised to gauge personal feelings towards nature, perhaps pertaining to changes in emotional state and wellbeing. Inclusion of nature with self may allow individuals to define succinctly, due to the one question nature of the measure, the connectedness to nature. However, I will continue to explore if any other measures of connection to nature may be more suitable for my project, as my work evolves.
Re-connecting With Nature
In the endeavour to re-connect with nature I have developed a working title for a consultancy or organisation that I aim to form to establish this goal. ‘Nature. In’ aims to bring nature back into spaces in which it is currently excluded. This inclusion of nature will begin in hospitality spaces that serve food and drink and will be scaled up to other hospitality settings if it proves to be successful.
The aim to reconnect people with nature in hospitality spaces, which are typically visited for leisure provides people with the freedom to explore feeling connected to nature, along with feeling its benefits, such as becoming re-energised. Consequently, people will return to nature to feel the benefits once again, thus growing their relationship. People may even give back to the natural world that they have formed a relationship with, by caring for it and subsequently helping to tackle the climate crisis.
Creating this re-connection is not a step away from the change I previously proposed at the end of Project 5 (see below). Instead forming a re-connection to nature, as proposed, is the single-strand accumulation of all the different aspects that were involved in my previously proposed change; thus, it embodies the same change I wish to see.
Change I want to see…(Project 5)
Bibliography
Bragg, R., Wood, C., Barton, J. and Pretty, J. (2013) “Measuring connection to nature in children aged 8-12: A robust methodology for the RSPB.” University of Essex.
Clayton, S. (2003) “Environmental identity: A conceptual and an operational definition.” Identity and the natural environment: The psychological significance of nature, pp.45-65.
Defra (2011) “The natural choice: securing the value of nature, Natural Environment White Paper.” The Stationery Office, London.
Hine R, Pretty J and Barton J. (2009) “Research Project: Social, Psychological and Cultural Benefits of Large Natural Habitat & Wilderness Experience: A review of current literature. Report for the Wilderness Foundation.” Available at: http://www.essex.ac.uk/ces/occasionalpapers/Kerry/Literature%20Review%20for%20WF.pdf
Kals, E., D. Schumacher, and L. Montada (1999) “Emotional affinity toward nature as a motivational basis to protect nature.” Environment & Behavior 31, no. 2: 178–202.
Louv, R. (2005) Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder North Carolina, Algonquin Books.
Leopold A. (1966) “A Sand County Almanac: With Other Essays On Conservation from Round River.” Oxford University Press.
Mayer FS and McPherson Frantz C. (2004) “The connectedness to nature scale: A measure of individuals’ feeling in community with nature.” Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24, 503-515.
Nisbet E, Zelenski J and Murphy S. (2009) “The Nature Relatedness Scale: Linking Individuals’ Connection With Nature to Environmental Concern and Behavior.” Environment and Behavior vol. 41 no. 5 715-740
Nisbet E, Zelenski J and Murphy S. (2011) “Happiness is in our Nature: Exploring Nature Relatedness as a Contributor to Subjective Well-Being.” Journal of Happiness Studies, Vol 12, 2, pp. 303-322.
Opinium (2018) “Brits spend 90% of their time indoors” Opinium [Online] https://www.opinium.com/brits-spend-90-of-their-time-indoors/ Accessed 30/04/21
Pyle RM. (2003) “Nature Matrix: reconnecting people and nature.” Oryx 37(2): 206–214
Schultz, P. W. (2002) “Inclusion with nature: The psychology of human-nature relations.” In P. Schmuck & W. P. Schultz (Eds.), Psychology of sustainable development pp. 62-78. Norwell, MA: Kluwer.
Schultz, P.W., C. Shriver, J.J. Tabanico, and A.M. Khazian (2004) “Implicit connections with nature.” Journal of Environmental Psychology 24, no. 1: 31–42.
Measures has been an uncertainty facing my project over the coming weeks, which I have aimed to be as transparent about as possible in my previous blog posts. Consequently, the journey to determining a measure that I feel accurately represents the aim I wish to achieve with my project into the WWHI brief has been a long one, which I will break down throughout this post.
Following On From Project 5
Whilst working on my project up to and including Project 5, I have been looking at measuring the success or failure of applications of nature through measures around wellbeing, social interactions; and subsequently customers attracted to the space which increases profits of the venues.
When presenting my projects in my tutorial group, it was advised by my tutor that wellbeing would be an adequate measure, if I could demonstrate the methodology I would employ to measure it. It was advised that I should perhaps step away from attempting to measure social interactions, as this is a less tangible measure. Consequently, I invested a great deal of time into investigating different forms of wellbeing and how they are measured in academic settings, which you can see summarised below.
MeasuringWellbeing
In the UK measuring wellbeing as an indicator for societies’ progress is debated nationally with the Office for Nation Statistics driving the discussion (Seaford, 2011). Consequently, demonstrating that wellbeing is being seriously considered as a measure of experience in society.
Hedonic Wellbeing:
This includes recording emotive feelings or moods, such as happiness and sadness, that are associated with differing states of wellbeing (Steptoe et al., 2015).
To record this form of wellbeing, individuals are often asked to rate their experience utilising adjectives such as anger, stress, relaxed. The adjectives are utilised don’t simply showcase opposites, the positive and negative adjectives are required to determine a point in which that individuals lies between the two associated dimensions of the positive and negative emotions (Kahneman et al., 2004).
Eudemonic Wellbeing:
This revolves around reporting a sense of purpose and meaning in life to determine states of wellbeing (Steptoe et al., 2015).
To record this diverse measure of wellbeing and resultantly there are multiple methods to measure it . One of the most used measures involves structured self report scales to measure self acceptance, which looks to encourage the acceptance of personal strengths and weaknesses (Ryff et al., 2004). Unlike Hedonic wellbeing, this measure requires reflective self report, which can cause complications in what standards the individual is comparing their current status to.
Life Evaluation:
This measure involves a people’s wholistic assessment of the quality or goodness of their life (Steptoe et al., 2015).
Applying this measure includes utilising processes such as the 11 step Cantril Ladder, where individuals place themselves on the scale from 1 being the worst life possible, to 11 being the best life possible (Cantril, 1965).
Analysis of Measuring Wellbeing:
The measures of eudemonic wellbeing and life evaluation are harder to apply in the setting of my project, as they involve wholistic assessments of a person’s life. Therefore, external factors to my applications of nature may be impacting the outcome of this measure of wellbeing. Such wholistic measures are also conducted over a long time scale, which isn’t suitable for the parameters of my MA project and would be work conducted in the future out of the MA setting. Additionally, all of these self reporting measures of psychological states can be unreliable sources of data, due to both unconscious and conscious biases that lie in individuals.
Alternative Methods of Measuring Wellbeing:
Brainwave Technology
Brainwave technology to measure wellbeing was something suggested to me in the feedback from my dragons den presentation.
Upon further research I have discovered that brainwave activation occurs naturally during active and resting states, but external forces can create activity waves (Desai et al., 2015). This activity is recorded via electroencephalograms to measure differences in waves (alpha, beta, the and gamma) (Desai et al., 2015).
Therefore, there is the possibility of measuring brainwaves before and after an interaction with natural elements incorporated into spaces.
The technology needed to measure such brainwaves would be difficult to access and bring to the setting of a hospitality space.
However, brainwave technology could be useful if hospitality spaces were to remain closed due to pandemic restrictions, as it could be a way to quantify people’s emotions towards biophilic design elements if they were shown a digital rendering of the designs, rather than physically experiencing the design applied in the space.
Reflection:
After conducting this research into measuring wellbeing and then talking with Dr Nigel Oseland (Environmental Psychologist and Professor at UCL), I began to consider that wellbeing may not be the most advantageous measure for my project. I noted that the most suitable measure of wellbeing to apply in my project would be hedonic wellbeing, however due to the subjective psychological reporting nature of this measure I was unsure of its academic validity and rigour. In my meeting with Dr Oseland, he suggested that utilising social interaction may be more specific and beneficial measure of the success of my biophilic design. This was due to the issues I had raised, but also resultant from wellbeing being vastly studied in the field and most beneficially examined over a long period of time. From my research into measure of wellbeing I concurred that there is an overwhelming quantity of research in the field of biophilic design, linking biophilia to improved wellbeing (Browning et al., 2014).
Due to these issues raised around utilising wellbeing as a measure, I looked to move away from wellbeing in its general sense and move towards measuring social interactions. Social interactions are spontaneously evoked through the application of biophilic design (Salingaros, 2015) and they improve personal wellbeing through creating a release of oxytocin, which creates physiological anti-stress responses; thus, reducing stress and anxiety.
Measuring Social Interactions
I considered the following methods to measure social interactions in spaces which may occur resultant from applying nature into hospitality spaces.
Group Sizes
I considered measuring how groups increase over the durations of their visit – this was suggested to me in my stakeholder engagement with Katarina Libby, a Biophilic Design expert.
Length of Stay
Looking at how long customers stay and how many people they interact with whilst they’re in the space, through observational study
Customer Satisfaction
However, other elements can impact satisfaction and it is hard to gain base sample for before and after interaction with the biophilic elements, as it is so subjective.
Quantity of Social Interactions
Either the quantity of interactions between one group/party and other in the space, or possibly measuring the quantity of individual social interactions that occur in the space before and after biophilic elements are introduced into the space.
Quality of Social Interaction
Quality of the interaction linked to wellbeing
Reflection
After exploring many avenues of how to measure social interactions in spaces and their bearing on applications of nature, I still felt this wasn’t the exact direct I was trying to articulate within my project. Measuring social interactions is very hard to determine whether that exact application of nature is what is causing the social interactions and I erased that socially interacting with each other wasn’t what I was trying to achieve, I was trying to achieve people interacting with the application of nature. Subsequently, I explored getting people into the spaces to interact with the applications of nature in the first place. I therefore examined how people are attracted to spaces and nature, and whether the profits of the spaces could be increased by the application of nature.
Attracting Customers and Increasing Profits
Attracting customers and increasing profits is the driving factor for hospitality spaces, to make money, and so this is what will get the businesses involved in my project. Getting the businesses involved in my project is crucial in allowing biophilic design to be widely applied and consequently creating lasting change.
I considered measures such as:
Measuring quantity of customers before and after the nature is added
Asking customers what attracted them to the space
ie: did they come due to the design features or was it something else such as the food offering?
Measuring if customers interacting with certain elements of nature more than others, to suggest that element hosts greater attraction?
Recording business profits before and after biophilic elements are added
This would be extremely hard to pinpoint what was causing the changes in profits and many businesses would be very reluctant to hand over the details of their books.
However, when engaging with my stakeholder in the hospitality industry, I discovered that actually many hospitality business are paying increased attention towards being more sustainable and creating a natural environment for their customers (see below images of conversations with stakeholders). This revelation allowed me to set away from the thinking that the only way I would get hostility businesses involved would be if I could prove that the application of nature would increase their profits. Therefore, I was able to step back and really pin point the exact measure and catalyst for the change I am trying to see.
Reflection, Realisation and Change – Getting to my true aim and measure…
After conducting all of this work and delving deep into different measures to utilise in my project, I still felt that my question and direction of my project was missing the mark of what I was aiming to achieve overall. The reason for this I now realise is that I had so many aims floating around in my head that I didn’t even know the true aim of the project myself. Therefore, I decided to take a step back and look at the bigger picture.
Consequently, I began to try and succinctly write the aim for my project, as I mentioned, I felt that I was trying to examine too many issues at once which was really holding me back. So, what is it that I want to achieve? I began by attempting to write down my aims, which initially led to around 300 words of blurring lines and unclear sentences. However, after a lot of personal introspection, I finally rooted down to the core of what I really want, this being to get people connecting with nature and appreciating its benefits in a way that I have; especially over the lockdowns where I spent lots of time in the garden at home. Additionally, growing people’s connection with nature in such a way will allow a relationship to form between the person and the natural world, which will hopefully raise their awareness and want to protect the natural world, in small ways in their lives, to tackle climate change.
In my stepping back and re-evaluation, I also looked back over my body of work in investigating measures. I realised that when assessing social interactions, what I was actually trying to achieve was to get people to interact with nature, rather that measuring interactions between people in the spaces. Also, in regard to wellbeing, I was trying to achieve an internal improvement to wellbeing through exposure and interactions with nature. Even when looking at attracting people to the spaces to increase profits, I was really trying to bring people to interact with the nature and form a… CONNECTION, that would ultimately result in them spending time and money in the spaces boosting profits for the venues.
So there is it the link between everything that I had been completely missing and the summary what I wish to measure and develop through the work in my project is a CONNECTION WITH NATURE. The diagram below aims to visually display this.
To the left you can see my representation of the endless loop and cycle of my ideas that I was looking to measure and explore. They all fed into each other in some way and from stakeholder feedback and secondary research I viewed them all to be of near equal importance, making no clear stand out direction for my project. Hence, the feeling of an endless loop whereby all measures were fair measures but none truly encapsulating the essence of the work I wish to conduct. However, looking to the diagram on the right hand side, it can be seen that when the various measures are put together there is a clear link between them all, which combines them. This link being that they are all rooted in people forming a stronger connection to nature. Developing upon individuals’ connection to nature will consequently impact factors of improving wellbeing (Browning et al., 2014), evoking social interactions (Salingaros, 2015), attracting customers an increasing profits (Browning et al., 2012) that have been seen to be resultant from exposure and interaction to nature in existing academic works, as outlined.
Additionally, forming a connection between people and nature steps my project away from the realms of the predictable in what is already being studied in the field, into a new arena. The new arena of a connection also provides opportunity to get individuals to take agency over their relationships with the natural world and care for it, aiding the climate crisis. This aims to tackle getting those people who would be typically uninterested in the climate crisis engaged in a refreshing way.
I will go on to unpack how I look to measure and test forming a connection with nature, as well as the importance of connecting with nature in my next blog post.
Bibliography
Browning, B., W.D., Ryan, C.O., Clancy, J.O. (2014). “14 Patterns of Biophilic Design.” New York: Terrapin Bright Green, LLC.
Browning, B., Garvin, C., Fox, B., Cook, R. (2012) “The Economics of Biophilia” New York: Terrapin Bright Green, LLC
Cantril, H. (1965) “The pattern of human concerns.” Rutgers University Press; New Brunswick, NJ.
Desai, R., Tailor, A. and Bhatt, T. (2015) “Effects of yoga on brain waves and structural activation: A review.” Complementary therapies in clinical practice, 21(2), pp.112-118.
Kahneman, D., Krueger, A.B., Schkade, D.A., Schwarz, N. and Stone, A.A. (2004) “A survey method for characterizing daily life experience: The day reconstruction method.” Science, 306(5702), pp.1776-1780.
Ryff, C.D., Singer, B.H. and Dienberg Love, G. (2004) “Positive health: connecting well–being with biology.” Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences, 359(1449), pp.1383-1394.
Salingaros, N. A. (2015) “Biophilia & Healing Environments: Healthy Principles For Designing the Built Environment.” New York: Terrapin Bright Green LLC.
Seaford, C. (2011) “Time to legislate for the good life.” Nature, 477(7366), pp.532-533.
Steptoe, A., Deaton, A. and Stone, A.A. (2015) “Subjective wellbeing, health, and ageing.” The Lancet, 385(9968), pp.640-648.
Research question at the start of the project: How can nature or natural structures evoke social interaction in spaces where food is consumed?
Upon starting this project, I plunged myself into in-depth research around the current uses of nature in spaces where food is consumed, as well as the current applications of nature generally in the built environment. From this initial research examined the term biophilic design, which looks to connect people with the natural world. I soon realised the concept of biophilia encapsulates the heart of what I am trying to achieve with my project; thus, the exploration of this field will form a key component of my project. Additionally, I discovered the term of biomimetics which involves utilising the natural world to inspire the development of new materials and systems. Again, biomimetics is a principle that embodies the change I want to see and so forms another key pillar of my project.
Other topics explored during this in-depth research include examining the most sustainable restaurants in the world including Azurmendi, Spain and Schloss Schauenstein, Switzerland. I studied what they are currently doing to incorporate nature and noted that the majority of their sustainability focus is on the food and energy consumption; with the integration of nature into the spaces being seemingly secondary. Therefore, displaying there is scope to add nature intrinsically even into the most sustainable hospitality spaces in the world.
My journey then moved into an examination of the strong link between interactions with nature and improved personal wellbeing. This link is proven by a multitude of academic papers, news articles and websites that I have unpacked in earlier blog posts; as well as being later confirmed in my stakeholder engagement with industry experts. Furthermore, I studied how biophilic design drives social interaction. Several studies highlighted that social interactions boost personal wellbeing due to their encouragement of the release of oxytocin which creates anti-stress effects. Socialising is also linked to longer life expectancy, reduced depression and anxiety, which all massively benefit wellbeing.
As a result of uncovering this research linking nature and wellbeing, I decided to conduct a personal intervention. Due to being home in Sheffield I had the fortunate position of having access to my garden and my mum is a keen gardener which I am eager to learn the different properties of plants from. Therefore, I ensured I went out to the garden for at least 2 hours a day, over the course of a week, with my mum. From this time, I saw for myself the positive effects spending increased time with nature can have on personal wellbeing. I experienced feeling relaxed whilst increasing with the garden and even afterwards and I thoroughly enjoyed learning the different qualities and studying the forms of a variety of plants which I could utilise in my biophilic designs. Upon reflection I missed a crucial opportunity during this time to document the research process, as I didn’t video my time spent in the garden. However, I will ensure not to make this mistake again.
To outline my arena for change, I unpacked the area outlined in my initial research question, of spaces in which food is consumed. From this I decided to narrow my focus to hospitality spaces. This decision was made due to my research showcasing that the majority of biophilic design schemes are currently focused upon workspaces to improve wellbeing and productivity; thus, leaving a gap in the market for the application of biophilia in the hospitality industry. I also have a strong interest and passion in hospitality, as I love visiting and discovering new hospitality spaces alongside cooking; therefore, it is an area I am passionate about exploring and maximising its potential. Finally, the hospitality industry has been hit incredibly hard by the coronavirus pandemic and so any schemes that could draw new customers to the spaces and boost their revenue, such as applications of nature that improve customers wellbeing, could be very beneficial. However, I am aware the cost of said schemes will have to be minimal for most businesses as they have limited funds after being closed for so long with the pandemic restrictions.
Research question evolution:How can nature or natural structures be utilised to improve wellbeing through evoking social interaction in hospitality spaces?
In relation to stakeholders, I initially identified 2 key stakeholder groups, the first being experts and the second being consumers. As my project has progressed, I have moved onto defining these categories even further to be hospitality businesses, hospitality customers and industry experts; with these stakeholders being encompassed by my possible output of a biophilic and biomimetic consultancy. Gaining stakeholder feedback is something I have struggled with on this project, and upon reflection I feel this is largely to do with the timings in which I reached out to the majority of my stakeholders. I placed my full focus upon stakeholder engagement during the 2 weeks of Easter holiday, which coincided with the Easter bank holiday, a time which many in the UK have off work. I feel this has limited the number of responses I have managed to collate for the presentation of project 5, as I over the past few days I have started to receive some more responses beginning initial conversations with stakeholders. Consequently, stakeholder engagement is something I really need to extensively work on over the coming weeks.
Finally, the change I want to see has been created from all of the research previously outlined. The statement below summaries the change I want to see and the following diagram helps to demonstrate how my chosen area, stakeholders and question interact to create the change I want to make.
Research question evolution: How can nature be intrinsically incorporated into hospitality spaces to evoke social interaction and improve personal wellbeing?
My Personal Reflection on Project 5
For the first time I really started to feel absorbed by the feeling of being lost that has been mentioned during the course so far, whilst working on Project 5. This was scary to me as it first began and if I am honest that feeling of being a bit lost is still with me even at the end of Project 5. Feeling lost remains scary, but I am taking it to mean that I am on track to uncovering something in the unknown which should lead to more profound change. There are lots of ideas and avenues for discovery that I have unearthed and found very interesting, but I feel lost in how to decipher which to pursue and so I feel I have fallen into the trap of looking at all of them slightly rather than a few in depth. This predicament is mostly clearly displayed in the vagueness of terms in my research question of ‘hospitality’ and ‘wellbeing’ which need to be clearly defined, forming the clear next steps for my project.
I have also struggled with contacting certain stakeholders. Upon reflection I feel I may be gaining limited responses due to possibly having over-faced people by throwing too much information at them at once, as I wanted them to see all the different aspects I am interested in studying. Consequently, I will try and provide clearer, condensed ideas when making contact with stakeholders to try and build a meaningful relationship with them at first. Consequently, I can later ask them about the multitude of angles I wish to investigate to ensure I am aiming for the most suitable and effective change.
I have also really been focusing on trying to bring my whole self to the project which is a new thing to me. Prior to undertaking this Masters, I have always had quite a clear distinction between my academic work and my personal interests. So, blending the two together has been a bit of a mental obstacle for me. However, I feel as though I am getting there, so that I will hopefully be able to create a project that I will be able to fully throw myself into and creating lasting change with.
Project 5 – Bibliography
Anme, T., Watanabe, T., Tokutake, K., Tomisaki, E., Mochizuki, H., Tanaka, E., Wu, B., Shinohara, R., Sugisawa, Y., Tada, C. and Matsui, T. (2012) “Behaviour Changes in Older Persons Caused by Using Wood Products in Assisted Living.” Public Health Research, 2(4), pp.106-109.
Salingaros, N. A. (2015) “Biophilia & Healing Environments: Healthy Principles For Designing the Built Environment.” New York: Terrapin Bright Green LLC.
After presenting my research for Project 5 – The Change I Want To See… in my tutorial, I have developed a series of next steps to take, as a result of analysing and reflecting on the feedback I received.
FEEDBACK:
Addressing The Hospitality Arena:
It was raised through discussion in feedback after my presentation that I need to ensure I am constantly checking myself for how I am approaching the arena of hospitality. I am aware that I have been almost subconsciously grouping the different hospitality sectors together as one unit and looking to tackle them all through one collective approach. However, I recognise this is not the most effective way to make meaningful change in the sector.
Therefore, moving forward I am going to ensure I treat the different parts of the hospitality sector accordingly and identify the necessary changes needed for each area. I will utilise engagement with my stakeholders to identify which hospitality sector is the most necessary and appropriate to create change in first, with a view that my model could be upscaled to other areas of hospitality in the future.
Including A Measure Of Social Interaction In My Question:
It was raised that I needed to include a measure for social interaction in my question. Naturally, due to improving wellbeing being the aim of evoking social interactions in hospitality spaces, it is only right that this is introduced into my question as a unit of measure. For instance, the quality of the social interaction may be judged upon how the individuals wellbeing improved?
Be Aware Of The Focus Of Hospitality Being To Sell Food And Drink:
In my feedback it was brought up that the aim of the hospitality industry is not in fact to improve wellbeing, but to sell food and drink. Therefore, I must keep this in mind when trying to get stakeholders in the hospitality industry to see the need for natural structures and products in their spaces; for instance if the natural structures aid the sales of food and drink.
From this discussion it also made me think, it could be argued that a focus of some hospitality spaces is in fact to host social interactions, as socialising is a key factor drawing people to visit the spaces. Subsequently, this ethos could be used to help promote the use of natural structures in spaces if they are proven to evoke such interactions?
Additionally, there is an argument that hospitality spaces that are aimed at healthy living/ lifestyle are also focused upon improving wellbeing, so they may also be good spaces to get behind the campaign of intrinsically linking nature into hospitality spaces.
NEXT STEPS:
Further engage with stakeholders:
Utilise this engagement to identify the exact arena and scope of the change I wish to see.
Narrow the focus of my arena:
Inside or Outside?
Which aspect of hospitality to target?
Consider the change I want to see
How this will adapt and change due to feedback and the needs of stakeholders
What type of change may be more effective? – product or consulting? (this may be more how change will be made and so can be explored further in Project 6)
Trigger greater research from the thoughts raised by stakeholders
Find digestible, visual ways to present my findings
In aiming to distinguish who the stakeholders involved in the change I am looking to make are, I split my stakeholders into 2 categories. The first being ‘Experts’ in the arena of hospitality or in developing natural structures and biophilic design. The second category being ‘Consumers’ this is looking at the people who will be interacting with the nature/ natural structures within the hospitality space.
Experts
When looking at the ‘Experts’ I determined an array of people who would fall under this category, as can be seen in the mind map above. From this I decided the best way to approach these individuals or organisations working in this field would be to first establish their opinions on biophilic design and biomimetics. My next move was then to establish power the stakeholder has in the arena; as well has how a product or consultancy aimed to intrinsically incorporate nature into hospitality settings to evoke social interactions would impact their standing in that arena.
Below you can see a few of the key stakeholder expert organisations I have contacted so far in relation to my project.
Consumers
Regarding the ‘Consumers’ I want to address an array of people who may interact within the hospitality space. This includes people who are avid users of hospitality spaces, as well as those who are not. Likewise, I wish to gather the opinions of environmental activists pushing for sustainable change in design and the incorporation of nature, as well as individuals who aren’t interested in sustainability. This approach is to attempt to gather as balanced a view of the arguments as possible and thus create a change that will be beneficial to as wide a scope of stakeholders as possible.
When engaging with consumers my approach is similar to that of experts in gathering their opinions towards nature in design, the power the individual/ group holds and how my proposed change would impact them. However, I also look to gain from consumers what they favour in spaces regarding social interactions in hospitality settings, how they would look to make changes to this and how they feel their wellbeing could be improved through a heightened relationship with nature in such spaces.
Reflection: Now I have identified who my stakeholders are and how to approach them, stakeholder engagement is going to be a key focus of mine for the next steps on this project.
When looking to identify the key arena in which to create the change I want to see, around behavioural change in approaches to intrinsically incorporating nature into the built environment; I needed to unpack spaces in which food is consumed. Currently my question states the arena of ‘spaces in which food is consumed’ but I feel this needed to be narrowed down and made more precise in order to be able to create lasting change in my arena. Consequently, I developed the mind map shown below to demonstrate my thinking around the most suitable arena to create my change in and to help in trying to define this arena.
Reflection/ Analysis:
The key struggles still facing my decision in narrowing down my arena for change are as follow:
Inside Vs Outside
I am still in the debate of whether my change should focus upon tackling inside or outside spaces in which food is consumed. Outside spaces are massively rising in popularity due to the restrictions imposed as a result of the pandemic. Outdoor spaces also have a more accessible link to nature due to the spaces being in the outside world; potentially making the task of intrinsically incorporating nature into these spaces easier or more seamless. But, as much as that may seem a pro for choosing outside spaces, the is an argument it is in fact a pro for choosing inside spaces, as inside spaces require more work to intrinsically incorporate nature into; thus, creating change inside may be more profound and lasting. Additionally, inside spaces in which food is consumed will most likely once again be the predominate spaces in which food is consumed after they reopen and so maybe they are the more impactful space to make change in?
Which Aspect of Hospitality?
In exploring my arena for change further, it became clear that a natural progression in the evolution of my question should be to change the vague wording of ‘spaces in which food is consumed’ to be ‘hospitality spaces’. Hospitality spaces encompasses all the areas I have been looking to address and helps to keep the scope of my research more precise and refined. However, the struggle I now face is what aspect of hospitality should I tackle to evoke change in? I have decided to work on identifying this distinction within the hospitality arena after further work with my stakeholders, so that I can identify which sector of hospitality perhaps requires change more or that I would create greater lasting and meaningful change within.
Background To Narrowing In On My Arena For Change:
My research identified that biophilic design and the incorporation of nature into spaces is being readily applied mostly (that I have discovered so far) to be in the sector of the workplace. There are multiple models and academic works looking at the application of biophilic design in the spaces of offices and workspaces to improve the wellbeing of those working in these spaces; consequently making them more productive and generating a greater profit for their employers. A selection of the key takeaways from such research can be seen in the infographics I have put together, below.
Subsequently, I decided to tackle the hospitality arena, as this seems to be a much less explored sector to intrinsically incorporating nature to improve wellbeing within. Additionally, the hospitality sector is a space I am much more interested in as I love cooking and have had a passion for discovering new foods, restaurants and spaces to visit in the hospitality sector for the majority of my life.
Biophilic Design In Hospitality
Some hospitality spaces are presenting groundbreaking models of biophilic design, one such space is the Parkroyal Collection, Marina Bay, Singapore. The hotel boasts a strong biophilic design developed by architect John Portman whilst making sensible design decisions. Some of these designs can bee seen in the images below collated form the hotel’s website and information about which can be seen in the summary taken from LinkedIn. Aspects and inspiration from this hotel can help to establish how nature can be intrinsically incorporated into other hospitality spaces.
