Advancing methods for citizens and design professionals to improve decision-making about socially desirable built environments and public spaces

QC 20250812

Abstract

Research indicates that despite the emphasis on people in sustainability, social sustainability in the planning process remains underdeveloped and often overlooked. This dissertation is based on the hypothesis that user participation positively influences the planning process and serves as an effective way to foster greater engagement among affected citizens. Increased citizen involvement provides planners with deeper insights into which issues are important for the city and its residents, particularly in neighborhoods impacted by ongoing planning processes. Ultimately, this leads to a planning process that emphasizes social sustainability as a key quality.

Although there are many different ways and incentives for public involvement in Sweden, researchers indicate that local implementation of these measures is lacking. This dissertation presents five research methods that help planners evaluate the quality of built projects and public spaces in Nordic cities while also gathering citizens' opinions on specific planning issues and locations. The methods and findings focus on addressing critical challenges necessary for enhancing social sustainability.

These methods support planners in understanding what citizens value in these projects and demonstrates how social values in public spaces can be measured and assessed. Papers I and II explore how existing methods have limitations in involving people in urban planning, often excluding community members and overlooking the perspectives of diverse age, ethnicity, and gender groups. The absence of reliable methods can lead to disengagement and conflicts between the community’s desired environment and what planners ultimately deliver. An effective dialogue between users and planners is essential for urban development processes aimed at enhancing social sustainability.

There is a need for simpler approaches and methods that help residents actively shape their surroundings. Papers I and II used a photo-elicitation method, where participants use photos during interviews to share thoughts and gain deeper insights. In Paper I, 457 participants assessed urban design features, while a separate study in Paper II involved 400 participants exploring color scheme preferences across different demographic groups. The findings from Papers I and II contribute to the development of an innovative method that helps urban planners and architects gain valuable insights into citizens' opinions and sociodemographic evaluations of built projects.

Papers III and IV focus on developing a method to quantify social values in urban public spaces. This method, called the “social space ratio,” assesses social sustainability, which is often at risk of being overlooked in today’s planning processes. Existing methods struggle to measure the extent of activities in public spaces that foster social interaction and are often not adapted to local contexts. Paper III uses the PRISMA method to evaluate seven social activities on Karlstad’s pedestrian streets, leading to the creation of eight assessment tools and the development of the social space ratio. This tool will help municipal planners analyze the use of public spaces and identify areas for improvement.

Paper IV adapts two methods—Jan Gehl’s twelve quality criteria as the “easy-to-use” method and the "building blocks" from Design for Social Sustainability as the evidence-based method—to Swedish contexts. It expands the assessment criteria to include social and cultural aspects while aligning them with Maslow’s hierarchy of needs, critical theories, and global priorities. The result is a user-friendly assessment tool in the form of a radar chart that visually highlights strengths and weaknesses, providing planners with clear and actionable knowledge to improve urban spaces in a social context.

Paper V addresses the issue of subjectivity in assessment methods for social sustainability in urban spaces. Its aim is to determine whether multiple assessors can reach a consensus, identify the most effective method, and measure alignment with the author’s initial assessment. Engineering students from Karlstad University tested three methods—the author’s method, Jan Gehl’s twelve quality criteria, and a structured survey—against the author’s original assessment. Seven student groups completed the first round of assessments, followed by twelve individual students for the second and third rounds. The author's method demonstrated the highest reliability in subjective assessments, achieving a 75% consensus rate, with significant differences observed in only two of the eight evaluated categories. This was followed by Jan Gehl’s method and the structured survey, which achieved 67.0% and 50.0% consensus, respectively. The study suggests that subjective methods for assessing social sustainability can yield similar results, with the author’s method proving to be more objectively applicable than the other two tested methods -Jan Gehl’s twelve quality criteria, and a structured survey

The dissertation findings offer methods and insights to help urban planners and decision-makers understand what citizens value in projects and demonstrate how social values in public spaces can be measured and assessed objectively to enhance social sustainability in urban development. They also support the development of the Social Area Factor, similar to the Green Area Factor. 

urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-368229