Tag: (U1/2/3) Research Techniques/ Obtaining New Knowledge

Posted on

Defining the Measures to Utilise in My Project

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.

Measuring Wellbeing

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.

Posted on

Engaging with Stakeholders

The above diagram displays the 3 key stakeholder groups I have identified to approach and engage in my project.

Over the past week I have been channelling the focus of my project into stakeholder engagement. I have been trying to identify the most appropriate experts in my field to work with to gain greater depth and meaning in my work; as well as to provide insights which I may have overlooked and fresh perspectives.

So far I have attempted to contact over 20 organisations, businesses and individuals to engage with my project. These stakeholders are predominantly in the hospitality business group of stakeholders and the industry experts group, including biophilic, biomimetic and environmental design experts . An array of some of the business I have contacts can be seen below. However, I assume to it having been the Easter bank holiday break in the UK and most of the stakeholders I have reached out to being in the UK, I am yet to gain a reply from the majority of these stakeholders. So far I have only managed to gain contact with Dr Nigel Oseland, an environmental psychologist from UCL and BOH LAB which is an architecture firm focusing on biophilic design and green construction. Very excitingly I have been able to arrange a meeting with Dr Oseland, but unfortunately this is unable to take place until the 12th April; and I am in the process of arranging a meeting with BOH LAB.

I will continue to reach out to more stakeholders over the coming days and remain hopeful for responses of those I have already contacted in the meantime. Additionally, I am going to try and engage with more of the customer/ consumer portion of my stakeholder group, as I am yet to explore this fully.

Posted on

Who Are My Stakeholders?

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.

Posted on

Identifying The Arena In Which To Introduce My Change

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.

Panpacifc (2021)”Parkroyal Collection Marina Bay, Singapore” Panpacific [Online] https://www.panpacific.com/en/hotels-and-resorts/pr-collection-marina-bay.html Accessed 19/03/21

Analysis: Key things to consider from this line of thinking are:

  • How to achieve similar positives from this design at a lower cost
  • Or in spaces that cannot be redesigned from scratch, so how could the design aspects be added into existing spaces to create similar benefits?
  • How to measure the benefits of different aspects of the design to test their efficacy in improving wellbeing
Posted on

What Is The Change I Want To See?

From the advise of my tutor, David, I started addressing the task of Project 5 by first identifying the rough change I wish to see; and once that is identified I can move onto defining the arena for the change and the stakeholders involved.

When looking to outline precisely the change I wish to see I developed the mind map shown below.

From the process of this thinking I narrowed in on the type of change I am looking to see. This being behavioural changes in approaches to the incorporation of nature, specifically in hospitality spaces and with of focus of prompting social interactions to improve wellbeing.

Reflection: I initially set about thinking of this change as being prompted through the creation of a product. However, I am aware of the challenges associated with product design and the vast collaboration necessary, as I am not a materials expert nor an architect. Therefore, I am not ruling out the idea of product design completely, as if this becomes apparent as the most effective way to make change in my desired area I will of course take on that challenge. But, I am also keeping my thinking open to other ways of developing change such as possibly through a form of consultancy for hospitality spaces to intrinsically incorporate nature.

Posted on

Research To Identify The Change I Want To See…

Background Research Around Advancements in ‘Green’ Sustainability

It can be seen through this collection of news images I have selected there are vast advancements in incorporating ‘green’ sustainability across a multitude to sectors, which are all largely due to technological advancements.

Beautiful News (2021) “Eco and Climate Daily News” Information Is Beautiful [Online] https://informationisbeautiful.net/beautifulnews/ Accessed 15/03/21

Reflection: I look to build off these technological improvements that allow sustainability to be pushed even further and tie concepts from different sectors together to create a meaningful change in how nature is incorporated into the built environment.

Biophilic Design

The concept of biophilic design fully embodies the nature of the change I wish to make, by unifying people with the natural environment.

Analysis: A study conducted by researchers from Terrapin Bright Green in New York highlighted the importance of biophilic design and connecting to nature in relation to wellbeing, especially in the built environment. The research also demonstrates how nature can be utilised for human restoration; as well as noting the 14 key patterns of biophilic design which explore the different possibilities for the use of nature in spaces. This research is extremely useful in highlighting the benefits of applying biophilic design in spaces, as well as how this application can be conducted successfully. Consequently, this study will be highly beneficial when looking at how to best utilise natural structures to apply the concept of biophilic design in spaces where food is consumed in order to maximise the possible improvements to wellbeing.

“Biophilic design can reduce stress, enhance creativity and clarity of thought, improve our well-being and expedite healing; as the world population continues to urbanise, these qualities are ever more important.”

Browning, W.D., Ryan, C.O., Clancy, J.O. (2014). “14 Patterns of Biophilic Design.” New York: Terrapin Bright Green, LLC.

The World’s Most Sustainable Restaurants

Azurmendi – World’s Most Sustainable Restaurant 2018

  • Full integrated multifaceted sustainable restaurant experience
  • 3 Michelin star
  • In costal northern Spain, near bay of Biscay 
  • Bioclimatic structure- designed by Naia Eguino
  • Works with the environment – “uses local wood, stone and recycled materials, renewable energy photovoltaic solar panels on glass roofs, storage batteries, geothermic energy, rainwater harvesting, electric charges for cars, and LEED certification for the complex’s design and construction.”
  • Interior garden – edible flowers and germplasm seed bank
  • Utilises quotes on walls to transport diners to consider different aspects whilst enjoying the food
  • Provides customers with a book listing the local products used at the restaurant
  • Business cards featuring seeds so they can be planted
  • Open to ideas to improve from anywhere – staff can anonymously add feedback to a board

Azurmendi (2021) “Sustainable Restaurant” Azurmendi [Online] https://azurmendi.restaurant/en/sustainable-restaurant/ Accessed 16/03/21

Forbes (2018) “The Awesome Integrated Experience of Michelin 3-star, World’s Most Sustainable Restaurant: Azurmendi” Forbes [Online] https://www.forbes.com/sites/michellegreenwald/2018/11/29/the-awesome-integrated-experience-of-michelin-3-star-worlds-most-sustainable-restaurant-azurmendi/?sh=4b2feb7c73c1 Accessed 16/03/21

Schloss Schauenstein- World’s Most Sustainable Restaurant 2019

  • 3 Michelin star
  • Located in Switzerland
  • Most recent winner of the award, due to the pandemic
  • Sources as much food as possible from its vast grounds
  • 100% renewable power 
  • All reusable packaging and any remaining packing is collected by a firm and transformed into renewable energy
  • Looks after community with its foundation to aid young hospitality professionals
  • Highly isolated location made it difficult to reach these sustainability feats, but they have proved it to be possible 

Schauenstein (2021) “Schauenstein Schloss Restaurant Hotel” Schauenstein [Online] https://schauenstein.ch Accessed 16/03/21

The World’s 50 Best Restaurants (2019) “Sustainable Restaurant Award 2019”The World’s 50 Best Restaurants [Online] (https://www.theworlds50best.com/awards/sustainable-restaurant-award Accessed 16/03/21

Analysis/ Reflection: From examining the most sustainable restaurants in the world in depth, I noticed that even in the most sustainable spaces in relation to spaces where food is consumed, there is still room to incorporate nature more intrinsically into the spaces. The restaurants predominately focus upon promoting food sustainability and renewable energies to foster as close to a carbon natural ethos as possible. Therefore, there is a gap to incorporate nature into the spaces through increased Biophilic design. In particular, Azurmendi aims to utilise the astonishing view at their site to bring the outside in, but nature could be greater introduced inside the space or through natural structures.

Biophilic Design in Restaurants

From my research into the benefits of biophilic design when applied to the spaces of restaurants, I uncovered that primary biophilic design helps customers to feel at ease and relax in the space and to make connections with others; thus helping to improve wellbeing. I discovered the following features that encourage the beneficial attributes of biophilic design to be aroused:

  • Application of plants, tall trees and pampas grass
    • Plants utilised to create partition walls – this can aid social distancing in Covid-19 times
  • Natural materials and textures
    • Help to engage the senses and create features in spaces
  • Organic Shapes
    • Flowing shapes replicating organic forms 
  • Outdoor View
    • Highlight a view wherever possible or attempt to create a view
  • Water
    • Focal point – or can replicate the feeling of water through light and material, if utilising physical water isn’t appropriate 
  • Mystery and Refuge 
    • Creating cosy nooks or an alternative mysterious mood to a space utilising nature eg: blackened room with green planting utilised to bring intrigue
  • Risk
    • Add playful elements that help guest to remember the space

D for Design (2020) “How to Bring Biophilic Design into Restaurants” D for Design [Online] https://dfordesign.style/blog/how-to-bring-biophilic-design-into-restaurants Accessed 17/03/21

Reflection: It will be very useful to keep these features in mind when looking at the different natural structures that could be utilised to evoke social interaction in spaces where food is consumed. Especially, when deciding upon the characteristics natural structures need to successfully apply biophilic design.

How Biophilic Design Drives Social Interaction

Several studies have highlighted that biophilic design can actually help to promote social interactions in spaces which in turn improve personal wellbeing through the benefits of the interactions. Such benefits include the release of oxytocin in to the brain when social interaction occur, which creates strong anti stress physiological effects. Socialising is also linked to longer life expectancy, reduced depression and anxiety; all benefits massively impacting wellbeing.

Terrami (2021) “Socialising, Collaboration, and Physical Activity – What do they have to do with biophilic Design? ” Terrami [Online] https://www.terramai.com/blog/biophilic-design-supports-human-needs/ Accessed 18/03/21

Uvnäs-Moberg, K. (1998). “Oxytocin may mediate the benefits of positive social interaction and emotions.” Psychoneuroendocrinology, 23(8), pp.819-835.

The New York Times (2017) “Social Interaction is Critical for Mental and Physical Health” The New York Times [Online] https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/12/well/live/having-friends-is-good-for-you.html Accessed 18/03/21

Humans crave nature just as socialising is a natural and essential aspect of society

One study showcased how social interactions in an old persons assisted living home were increased when the plastic products were substituted for wooden products.

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.

Reflection: Therefore, highlighting how natural products can help to evoke social interactions; a principle I aim to apply and build upon in my work.

Another study conducted by Terrapin Bright Green, highlights how biophilic spaces can allow social interactions to occur more spontaneously.

Salingaros, N. A. (2015) “Biophilia & Healing Environments: Healthy Principles For Designing the Built Environment.” New York: Terrapin Bright Green LLC.

Reflection: Trying to formulate spontaneous social interactions is something I am interested in exploring further with my work. I believe spontaneous, naturally formed social interactions are the most beneficial types of interaction to wellbeing, as they are not forced or awkward. Such interactions are therefore most important to try to create, in my opinion. So, the focus becomes about prompting these interactions through nature in a way that people aren’t aware they are being encouraged into this way of acting the space.

Nature In Structures/ Natural Structures

Ellison, M.S. (2013) Engineered Biomimicry: Chapter 10. Biomimetic Textiles. Elsevier Inc. Chapters.

Analysis and Reflection: The principle of biomimetics involves mimicking aspects of nature to develop new materials and solutions, as outlined in the definition above. When looking to incorporate the natural world through natural structures into spaces where food is consumed to evoke social interactions, biomimetics will be paramount. I will look to incorporate biomimetics in developing natural sustainable structures themselves; but also keeping an open mind as to how this principle could be utilised to tackle other issues that may arise in my examination of developing social interactions to improve wellbeing in spaces where food is consumed.

Posted on

My Plan Moving Forward into Project 5

Looking at the next steps of investigating my research question of:

“How can nature or natural structures evoke social interactions in spaces where food is consumed?”

I have created a plan of action as to what needs to be addressed over the coming weeks in order to address the brief of Project 5.

Area/ Context of My Project: 

  1. What is the area/ context of my research?
    • Research current natural sustainable structures/ buildings/ items out there surrounding the consumption of food
      • Utilise appealing designs or videos to make data digestible and audience friendly 
      • Record research visually as well as the written word to keep it engaging 
      • Make data comparative and proportional
  2. How will I research it?
    • Academic papers
      • Biophilic design 
      • Nature in building
      • Social interactions around food
      • Social interactions in differing spaces
      • Temporary structures with nature
    • Websites
      • Assess how restaurant and other spaces in which food is consumed utilise nature at present and how this impacts social interactions – (try and observe this in person once spaces are open after restrictions are lifted)
    • News Articles
  3. Outline what change is possible in the area 
    • Create a new natural sustainable product to evoke social interaction?
    • Changes in behaviour – how people utilise spaces around food
    • Changes in approach to sustainable structure – nature bound intrinsically into the built structure

Stakeholders:

  1. Who are the people and organisations involved in this field? 
    • How would they be affected by the changes I propose – for or against? 
    • What power do they hold in the situation/ context? 
  2. Reach out to experts– get their opinions on the issues that a natural structure could alleviate and also what materials and forms might work – Temporary, semi- permeant or permeant structure?
    • Industrial designers
    • Structural engineers
    • Sustainable/ natural designers
    • Materials experts
    • Product developers
    • Hospitality spaces – events companies?
  3. Reach out to consumers – gather opinions on what kind of structures they would utilise and how nature could be utilised to evoke social interactions
    • Could the structure be utilised for domestic use as well as commercial? – eg: in people’s gardens or homes? or is it social – found in parks etc?
    • What features of existing structures do they like/ dislike – how can they be addressed and improved?

The Change I Look to Make:  (move outside of my comfort zone)

  1. What is the change I wish to make and why is it necessary?
    • Changes in social behaviours and attitudes towards sustainability and nature by the utilisation of a product?
    • To what extent would a product be viable for a business model – would the structure work?
  2. Look to learning how to use CAD 
    • To be able to create 3D models of designs for structures
  3. Possible interventions:
    • Test models with stakeholders
      • Can be physical models, but prepare for judgement over the quality of the model impacting people’s opinions of the proposed design – high quality model will suggest a high-quality finished design, which you will have to be able to deliver, or a low quality/ unfinished model may reflect poorly on the design
      • Focus on demonstrating the idea – not so much the aesthetics, as to test the idea first and then visuals can be adapted later, by collaboration with stakeholders
    • Invitation to create with nature
      • Provide people with natural materials/ apparatus and ask them to form what social interaction means to them out of the apparatus – utilise the outcomes to realise change in how nature can be utilised to form structures, even as small models
      • How do people respond to nature? how does nature aid their wellbeing?
    • Simulate how changes in configurations of spaces in which food is consumed alter interactions in that space?

Remember– Keep bibliography of source materials used or that I plan on using as I go

Having outlined all of the work I need to address during Project 5, I have developed a week by week guide as to the tasks I aim to complete over the course of this project; which you can see below.

Week of Project 5 Tasks to Complete
Week 1 (W.C. 8/3/21)
Getting the ball rolling
Make blog – add project findings so far to blog

Formulate plan of action 

Find some useful sources to read/ people and organisations to contact

(ALL WEEK 1 TASKS ARE NOW COMPLETED)
Week 2 (W.C. 15/3/21)
Begin in-depth research 		Read and record data from academic papers, news articles and websites to utilise for in-depth study 

Outline what is already out there and what change is possible in the area

Identify all possible stakeholders 

Contact at least 15 expert stakeholders/ stakeholder groups and 10 consumers as stakeholders

Week 3 (W.C. 22/3/21)
Continue in-depth research		Follow up any leads that have come out of week 2 research and peruse them to gain greater depth of knowledge and understanding 

Build greater relationships with stakeholder and test ideas with them

Continue researching via academic sources, websites and news articles as well as contacting new stakeholders to further knowledge
Week 4 (W.C. 29/3/21)
Finalise outcome		Consolidate research and how to then take the findings further 

Possibly begin to outline what possible interventions could be developed next
Week 5 (W.C. 5/4/21)
Holiday week		Polish off any outstanding items ready to present on the 12th April but try to have some time off on this week

Posted on

Developing My Question and Interventions

Creating my box of uncertainties really got the ball rolling to then push my thoughts around sustainable building with nature to their limits and really explore a space that felt almost uncomfortable and scary to try and develop the most pressing and effective question possible.

At first I began quite fixed and limiting in my thinking looking at especially the coral from my box of uncertainty. I examined how possibly the material of dead coral resultant of the mass coral bleaching crises could be repurposed as a material for construction. I was also almost subconsciously limiting myself when thinking about building to mean a literal building. So, after acknowledging these thresholds I had placed upon myself I began trying to open up my thinking in including nature in its entirety and to look at structures rather than strictly building. Opening up my thinking in this way was always useful to apply more accurately to my skill sets, as I am not a materials expert nor an architect.

I then took the ideas developed through this initial thinking to my tutor David. David helped me to visualise the links between my different iterations of my questions, as he advised to go back and examine what is the key aim that is present in all of my questions, to help myself focus upon one of the aspect that is most important to me. This reflection upon my questions really helped me to focus my thinking, as previously I was trying to tackle so many things, but not accurately addressing any of them. Therefore, I established my key aim to be intrinsically linking nature with the built environment in structures, with a focus upon improving wellbeing through these structures. David also placed emphasis on defining why I wanted to study this question/ topic and why it was important to me. This approach led to to thinking about brining the entirety of myself to the project, not simply my academic ambitions, and so I began to list my passions involving health/ fitness and food/ cooking. Subsequently, I utilised my passion for food to define the area of study in which to intrinsically link nature into the built environment, whilst aiming to improve wellbeing. Thus, my question was born:

“How can nature or natural structures be utilised to evoke social interaction in restaurants?”

After defining my question, I went on to establish two mini interventions, each one aimed at a key part of the question. Part 1 being – the use of nature in natural, sustainable structures and Part 2 being – the evoking of social interactions in the spaces of restaurants. So, the combination of both of these elements aims to create natural, sustainable solutions which combat the climate crisis, but also improve wellbeing through promoting social interactions.

My first intervention involved assessing perceptions towards the needs for sustainable building and nature’s role in this. Participants were provided with a poster demonstrating the impacts of traditional construction methods on the ocean and asked to annotate their thoughts around the poster going off three provided prompts.

The second intervention aimed to action changes towards people’s habits of social interactions around food. Participants were asked to record their feelings towards social interactions around meals, specifically dinner, as this is the most prominent meal of the day for most people. Dinner in the home was utilised to imitate interactions in restaurants due to current covid-19 restrictions meaning restaurants are closed.

I have included my full journal for this project below which demonstrates all of my thinking and decision making in developing both my question and my interventions, as well as showcasing the outcomes of my interventions.

Below exhibits the inner workings of how I developed my intervention addressing perceptions towards the need for sustainable building and nature’s role in this. The poster utilised in the intervention was developed utilising a multitude of research from academic papers make sure that all figure utilised are accurate and precise.

Posted on

The Brick and The Coral – My Box of Uncertainties

For my box of uncertainties project, I began by examining in depth the topic of sustainable building, which is a topic I am very interested in investigating further from my undergraduate studies. Exploration of sustainable building led to big uncertainties being raised, such as what is the future of the traditional brick in construction? As well as questions around the possible role that nature can play in sustainable building developments. The examination of the possibilities nature holds led to my study into coral and the current coral bleaching crisis; investigating how the crisis could be overcome through sustainable building or even if coral could be utilised as a material or design feature in building.

Consequently, my chosen items to place into my box of uncertainties was a BRICK and a piece of CORAL.

Key Points From the Project:

Discovering the work of Neri Oxman really revolutionised my thinking on this project, to thinking of how structures can be grown with nature rather than developed and nature added later to the infrastructure. Prior to discovering how Neri and her team at the MIT Media lab are developing ways to utilise nature’s processes to build, I was really struggling to form ideas as to how the current model of ‘green’ building could be challenged/ changed. I knew that I wanted to make nature more intrinsic to the fabric of buildings, but I wasn’t sure of any possible ways that this could be achieved. But, Neri’s work really opened my eyes and got me excited to explore ways to achieve this harmonious blend of nature and building.

Below I have included my reflective journal for this project which documents all of the decisions I made and why I made them, to result in my outcome.