Understanding the socio-spatial aspects of creativity in public spaces of Dutch university campuses

Abstract

List of figures 1.1.4.2. Data collection and analysis 1.5. Structure of the thesis References 2.The Relationship between the Spatial Configuration and the Fourth Sustainable Dimension Creativity in University Campuses:The Case Study of Zernike Campus, Groningen, the Netherlands 2.1. Introduction 2.2. Literature Review 2.2.1. Spatial configuration: Space syntax for university campus planning and design 2.2.2. Mapping people's perceptions and observing interactions 2.2.3. Creativity as the fourth sustainability through the lens of space syntax and the sense of place 2.3. Materials and methods 2.3.1. Case study: Zernike Campus, Groningen, the Netherlands 2.3.2. Computational analysis with space syntax 2.3.3. Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI) 2.3.4. Combining the space syntax model with volunteered Geographic Information (VGI) data 2.3.5. Observation of interactions between people and the built environment 2.4. Results and discussion 2.4.1. Potential for creative encounters through spatial configuration 2.4.2. Superimposing people's perceptions on space syntax results 2.4.3. Observation analysis: Physical features, interactions and creativity 2.5. Conclusions references 3. Public spaces as knowledgescapes: Understanding the relationship between the built environment and creative encounters at Dutch university campuses and science parks 3.1. Introduction 3.2. Literature Review 3.2.1. Spatial affordances for creativity of university campuses 3.2.2. Public spaces: The interface between perceptions and built environment features 3.3. Materials and methods 3.3.1. Case studies 3.3.2. Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI) and spatial analysis 3.3.3. The interface between mapped perceptions and builtenvironment features 3.3.4. Differences and similarities between public spaces of inner-city campuses and science parks 3.4. Results and discussion 3.4.1. Perceptions of creative encounters throughout campus public spaces 3.4.2. The proximity between high-value cells and characteristics of the built environment 3.4.3. Differences and similarities of creative encounters and public spaces at inner-city campuses and science parks 3.5. Conclusions References 4. The impact of the built environment on creativity in public spaces of Dutch university campuses and science parks 4.1. Introduction 4.2. Methodology 4.2.1. Study areas 4.2.2. Data collection 4.2.3. Statistical analysis 4.3. Results 4.3.1. Frequency of creative encounters 4.3.2. Pooled model 4.3.3. Comparative models 4.4. Discussion and conclusion References 5. Socio-spatial aspects of creativity and their role in the planning and design of university campuses public spaces: a practitioners' perspective 5.1. Introduction 5.2. Theoretical Framework 5.2.1. University campuses' public spaces and creativity 5.2.2. Effectiveness of research evidence for the decision-making, planning and design of public spaces 5.3. Methodology 5.3.1. The institutional context of Dutch campuses' public spaces 5.3.2. Case selection 5.3.3. Data collection and participants 5.3.4. Data analysis...