Difference between revisions of "Environmental psychology"

From Securipedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(21 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
[[Category:Social]]
  
[[Category:Social]]
  +
[[File:ae.png|25px|right|This is a page providing background in a specific field of expertise]]
  +
'''Environmental psychology'''<ref> E.g. Nasar J. L.: Environmental Psychology and Urban Design, in: Banerjee T., Loukaitou-Sideris A. (eds.): Companion to Urban Design. London/New York: Routledge, 2011, 162-174.</ref> focuses on the interplay between society/social individuals and their (structural) surroundings. The term "environment" encompasses natural environment and built environment, but also social settings as well as learning and informational environments.
  +
Environmental psychology is both value and problem oriented and addresses the complexity of societal problems on the basis of human-environment interactions and the perception of environment.
   
  +
==Security-related aspects==
⚫
=Environmental psychology=
  
  +
* Urban environment impacts social behaviour in a positive or negative way.
−
'''Environmental psychology'''<ref> E.g. J. L. Nasar: Environmental psychology and urban design. In: T. Banerjee/A. Loukaitou-Sideris (eds.): Companion to Urban Design. London/New York: Routledge, 2011, pp. 162-174.</ref> has as its main tenet that the meaning intentionally embodied in built environment is not always decoded by citizens as intended. Environmental cognition cannot be designed. A related approach from [[urban planning]] is to avoid stressful and potentially threatening feelings of being lost in large buildings, and resulting perceived threat by providing “legibility”<ref>K. Lynch: The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1960.</ref> so that “one can comprehend and navigate environments”<ref>J. L. Nasar: Environmental psychology and urban design. In: T. Banerjee/A. Loukaitou-Sideris (eds.): Companion to Urban Design. London/New York: Routledge, 2011, pp. 162-174, p. 165. </ref>. An example would be [[Securitization|securitization]] as an emerging process: We cannot just decide about [[security]] by way of planning, such as [["designing out" approach|“designing out”]] crime or “designing in” protection and [[Resilience|resilience]].
 
  +
* [[Security]] or [[Resilience|resilience]] is determined by (urban) environment and the interactions with society/humans.
   
  +
But:
   
  +
* [[Security]] or [[Resilience|resilience]] cannot just be designed by way of planning.
−
==Meanings of built environments==
  
  +
* Environmental/security/risk cognition cannot be designed.
−
Therefore, it is important that urban designs “incorporate public meanings” and citizens’ images of places, including – one can add – those of “secure” or “safe” places<ref>J. L. Nasar: Environmental psychology and urban design. In: T. Banerjee/A. Loukaitou-Sideris (eds.): Companion to Urban Design. London/New York: Routledge, 2011, pp. 162-174, p. 166.</ref>. As a result, also the identification of “weak points” in urban environments from a security culture point of view has to be seen as socially negotiated and/or constructed sense-making that takes place in cultural contexts<ref>J. Falkheimer/H. Mats: Multicultural Crisis Communication: Towards a Social Constructionist Perspective. In: Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 14, no. 4., 2006.</ref>. Debates in urban design though have often disregarded this aspect, rather centring on “which good design determines good behavior”<ref>C. Whitzman: Secure cities. In: T. Banerjee/A. Loukaitou-Sideris (eds.): Companion to Urban Design. London/New York: Routledge, 2011, pp. 663-673, p. 670.</ref>. Another relevant aspect is the [[Infrastructure#Perception_of_criticality|perception of criticality of built infrastructure]].
  
  +
* The meaning intentionally embodied in built environment is not always decoded by citizens as intended.
  +
* The identification of “weak points”/insecurities in urban environments takes place in cultural context. <ref>Falkheimer J., Mats H.: Multicultural Crisis Communication: Towards a Social Constructionist Perspective, in: Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 14, no. 4., 2006.</ref> It is socially negotiated and/or constructed.
   
  +
==Approaches how to address it==
  +
* Consider interactions between (urban) environment and social behaviour/reactions.
  +
* Consider local/regional [[security culture]] in planning projects.
  +
* Consider local/regional perception of (in)security/risks in planning projects.
  +
* Involve citizens in the planning process (see [[citizen participation]]).
  +
* Urban design should avoid stressful and potentially threatening feelings of being lost in large buildings.<ref>Lynch K.: The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1960.</ref>
  +
* Urban design should “incorporate public meanings” and citizens’ images of places, including those of “secure” or “safe” places.<ref> Nasar J. L.: Environmental psychology and urban design, in: Banerjee T., Loukaitou-Sideris A. (eds.): Companion to Urban Design. London/New York: Routledge, 2011, 162-174, 166.</ref>
  +
* Desire for security should not inform urban planning to contribute to threatening citizens’ rights of expression and dissent.<ref>Cf. Whitzman C.: Secure cities, in: Banerjee T., Loukaitou-Sideris A. (eds.): Companion to Urban Design. London/New York: Routledge, 2011, 670-671.</ref>
   
  +
==Related subjects==
−
==Comprehensive view of security aspects in urban planning==
  
  +
*[[Ecological perspective]]
−
Additional aspects have to be considered so to arrive at a [[Comprehensive approach|comprehensive]] view to inform security-conscious [[urban planning]] decisions. For example, conflicts between different social groups about public space are a democratic phenomenon that should not be subject to [["designing out" approach|"designing-out"]]. Security aspects of urban design should not be overly mainstreamed because planning to increase security of excluded groups may also contribute to making cities safer. And desire for security should not inform urban planning to contribute to threatening citizens’ rights of expression and dissent, owing to the old principle that city air should make people free, rather than constrain them<ref>Cf. C. Whitzman: Secure cities. In: T. Banerjee/A. Loukaitou-Sideris (eds.): Companion to Urban Design. London/New York: Routledge, 2011, pp. 670-671.</ref>.
  
  ⚫
*[[Environmental design]]
−  
  +
*[[New urbanism]]
  +
*[[Designing out]]/[[designing in]]
  +
*[[Culture aspects]]
  +
*[[Security culture]]
  +
*[[Securitisation]]
  +
*[[Perception of (in)security|Perception of (in)security/risks]]
  +
*[[Ethics aspects]]
  +
*[[Resilience]]
  +
*[[Vulnerability]]
   
 
{{references}}
  
{{references}}
−  
−  
−
= MAP =
  
−
<websiteFrame>
  
−
website=http://securipedia.eu/cool/index.php?wiki=securipedia.eu&concept=Environmental_psychology
  
−
height=1023
  
−
width=100%
  
−
border=0
  
−
scroll=auto
  
−
align=middle
  
−
</websiteFrame>
  
−  
−
<headertabs/>
  

Latest revision as of 12:31, 12 November 2013

This is a page providing background in a specific field of expertise

Environmental psychology[1] focuses on the interplay between society/social individuals and their (structural) surroundings. The term "environment" encompasses natural environment and built environment, but also social settings as well as learning and informational environments. Environmental psychology is both value and problem oriented and addresses the complexity of societal problems on the basis of human-environment interactions and the perception of environment.

Security-related aspects

  • Urban environment impacts social behaviour in a positive or negative way.
  • Security or resilience is determined by (urban) environment and the interactions with society/humans.

But:

  • Security or resilience cannot just be designed by way of planning.
  • Environmental/security/risk cognition cannot be designed.
  • The meaning intentionally embodied in built environment is not always decoded by citizens as intended.
  • The identification of “weak points”/insecurities in urban environments takes place in cultural context. [2] It is socially negotiated and/or constructed.

Approaches how to address it

  • Consider interactions between (urban) environment and social behaviour/reactions.
  • Consider local/regional security culture in planning projects.
  • Consider local/regional perception of (in)security/risks in planning projects.
  • Involve citizens in the planning process (see citizen participation).
  • Urban design should avoid stressful and potentially threatening feelings of being lost in large buildings.[3]
  • Urban design should “incorporate public meanings” and citizens’ images of places, including those of “secure” or “safe” places.[4]
  • Desire for security should not inform urban planning to contribute to threatening citizens’ rights of expression and dissent.[5]

Related subjects

Footnotes and references

  1. ↑ E.g. Nasar J. L.: Environmental Psychology and Urban Design, in: Banerjee T., Loukaitou-Sideris A. (eds.): Companion to Urban Design. London/New York: Routledge, 2011, 162-174.
  2. ↑ Falkheimer J., Mats H.: Multicultural Crisis Communication: Towards a Social Constructionist Perspective, in: Journal of Contingencies and Crisis Management 14, no. 4., 2006.
  3. ↑ Lynch K.: The Image of the City. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1960.
  4. ↑ Nasar J. L.: Environmental psychology and urban design, in: Banerjee T., Loukaitou-Sideris A. (eds.): Companion to Urban Design. London/New York: Routledge, 2011, 162-174, 166.
  5. ↑ Cf. Whitzman C.: Secure cities, in: Banerjee T., Loukaitou-Sideris A. (eds.): Companion to Urban Design. London/New York: Routledge, 2011, 670-671.
Retrieved from "https://securipedia.eu/index.php?title=Environmental_psychology&oldid=13278"