The Relationship between the Spatial Configuration and the Fourth Sustainable Dimension Creativity in University Campuses: The Case Study of Zernike Campus, Groningen, The Netherlands

Abstract

To date, little is known about the spatial aspects of the creativity of university campuses and their public spaces. This study recognises that creativity is the fourth sustainability, because the spatial configuration of campuses and city-university accessibilities are ‘creative solutions’ conceived for human needs. At the same time, creative ideas depend on interactions between individuals and the built environment. Therefore, based on the theoretical framework of the scholars who have explored the spatial aspects of creativity, this study empirically investigates Zernike Campus, Groningen, and its public spaces using a mixed-methods approach that involves (1) a space syntax analysis of the campus’s spatial configuration, (2) volunteered geographic information (VGI) of the users’ perceptions, and (3) non-participatory observations of the interactions between people and the built environment in public spaces with high and low ‘potential for creativity’. The results show that creativity cannot be explained simply by analysing spatial configurations, but that it also depends on the combination of the land-use mix, physical features, positive experiences, and perceptions of a sense of place which enable trust and interactions, and which facilitate creative encounters. Therefore, the mixed-methods approach applied here can help urban planners and designers to address public spaces more effectively, integrating conditions that support creativity.

Socio-spatial aspects of creativity and their role in the planning and design of university campuses’ public spaces: A practitioners’ perspective

“…In line with that, multiple studies have explored the effect of the built environment on the uses, perceptions, and behavior of people in public spaces through an empirical or theoretical perspective (Kytta et al, 2012; Ewing and Clemente, 2013; Mehta, 2014; Hadavi et al, 2015; Ghavampour et al, 2017) and specifically in campuses’ public spaces (Kenney et al, 2005; Strange and Banning, 2015; Hajrasouliha, 2017; Soares et al, 2020a,b, 2021). These studies established ideas on how public spaces could be physically improved through strategic guidelines, such as campus design, urban design, or public spaces guidelines.…”

“…In this sense, effective evidence improves EBP (Keen, 1980; Hamilton et al, 2019), increases the ability of an individual or a group to make decisions, and strengthens the research-practice interface through research-led decision-making in practice (Tennøy et al, 2016). In this research, the “research-generated evidence” was generated by multiple sources of theory and data-driven knowledge (analog and digital) on socio-spatial aspects of creativity––operationalized and measured as the causal relationships between the physical environment and creativity (the evidence was extracted from Soares et al, 2020a,b, 2021).…”

“…To guide this study, we elaborated and discussed with practitioners four propositions (see Supplementary Appendices A and B). To give context, these propositions are the summary of the research-generated evidence on socio-spatial aspects of creativity extracted from past empirical research (conducted by the authors; Soares et al, 2020a,b, 2021). Such research-generated evidence was generated through data-driven knowledge and multiple disciplinary methodologies (e.g., space syntax analysis, self-reported perceptions in public spaces, statistical analysis, and on-street observations).…”

Effect of Space Configurational Attributes on Social Interactions in Urban Parks

“…The association between spatial configurational attributes and social interactions remains in question. In the context of the urban environment, some exploratory studies have revealed the significant impact of space configurational features on social interactions within urban spaces [29][30][31]. Soares et al investigated the potential associations between spatial configuration and the possibility of socialization on school campuses [30].…”

“…In the context of the urban environment, some exploratory studies have revealed the significant impact of space configurational features on social interactions within urban spaces [29][30][31]. Soares et al investigated the potential associations between spatial configuration and the possibility of socialization on school campuses [30]. Focusing on in-between spaces, Can and Health revealed that street connectivity is important for long-duration activities and social interactions [29].…”