Archive

  1. David van der Leer

    Comments Off on David van der Leer

    David van der Leer is a forecaster, strategist, researcher, and writer. In 2018, David founded DVDL after having worked and consulted with institutions, government agencies, corporations, and individuals for 15 years. DVDL is an agency of innovators and strategists working at the intersection of cultural analysis and human behavior. DVDL develops models and concepts that bring the future of communities, public spaces, and cultural institutions into focus by creating a greater understanding of how to guide those towards people and the issues they hold dear.

    From 2013 to 2018, David was the Executive Director of Van Alen Institute. This design nonprofit develops cross-disciplinary research, provocative public programs, and inventive design competitions to make cities better. Before repositioning Van Alen Institute, David created and curated the Architecture and Urban Studies program for the Guggenheim Museum from 2008 to 2013. David developed and co-curated the highly publicized BMW Guggenheim Lab at the Guggenheim, which traveled from New York City to Berlin and Mumbai in its own building. He curated projects like stillspotting nyc and exhibitions like Frank Lloyd Wright: From Within Outward. In 2012, he co-curated the United States Pavilion at the Venice Architecture Biennale, and in 2011 he curated for the Shenzhen & Hong Kong Bi-City Biennale of Urbanism/Architecture. In 2010, The New York Times recognized David as one of ten promising curators of the next generation.

    -https://www.gsd.harvard.edu/person/david-van-der-leer/

  2. Crown Sky Garden

    Comments Off on Crown Sky Garden

    For Van Alen Report 20, we invited designers from around the world to share projects at the vanguard of using science-informed practices to design healthier cities. For each featured project, we asked the designers to identify the health impacts intended, and discuss how insights from neuroscience or psychology influenced the project’s design. We also consider how each project might advance both the conversation about evidence-based design, and the greater pursuit of designing healthier cities for all. These profiles have been adapted from the designers’ responses.

    Situated in the heart of downtown Chicago, the Crown Sky Garden is a sanctuary for patients, families, doctors and administrators within the 23-story Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago. A 5,000 sf area on the 11th floor was transformed into an inspiring healing garden.

    The commitment to this sky garden was built upon a growing body of scientific research which links access to natural light and contemplative spaces to reduced patient recovery time. The resulting design creates a vibrant sense of place and demonstrates innovative thinking for child-centered healthcare and healing environments. This regenerative project offers a new paradigm for healthcare design that integrates healing gardens as part of the healthcare regiment within these institutional environments.

    The Design

    Over the past decade research has shown that bodily experience of the natural world regulates the electrical circuitry of brain, blood flow and the mechanical tension of our muscles. Interactions with nature provide a rejuvenating tonic to our stressed bodies and minds bringing balance to our inner well-being. The main garden and tree house were designed to meet several programmatic goals: to give inpatient children an opportunity to engage Chicago’s storied historical and natural environment, to meet the stringent requirements of the infectious disease control board to create a safe environment for children with immune deficiencies, to create a range of interactive opportunities that mitigates stress, and to provide access to natural materials and light.

    The design allows for programmatic flexibility, creating opportunities for physical movement and exercise, as well as a variety of contemplative individual and vibrant collective social experiences.

    The Designer

    From Mikyoung Kim Design: “Mikyoung Kim’s diverse background in design and sculpture has shaped her body of work, blurring the boundaries between landscape architecture and environmental art. From children’s playgrounds to city parks and urban master plans, her work reflects a deep commitment to memorable place making that captures the public imagination. Her landscapes bring a richly layered civic experience to the public realm that engages the senses for a multi-generational audience.”

    The Outlook

    While an indoor space, the Crown Sky Garden project utilizes healthful strategies that can be applied to broader settings and public spaces. Healthcare facilities have been on the leading edge for quantifying the impacts of the built environment and demonstrating the profound physical impacts on patients and employees, and Mikyoung Kim’s design stands out as a forecast for the future of scientific rigor merged with artistry. Along with the restorative benefits of natural forms, she also emphasized multigenerational spaces to maintain and encourage social connections during patient recovery. Those connections have been well-documented as one of the strongest predictors of both quality of life and longevity, and should be prioritized when designing future cities with health in mind.

  3. Happier by Design

    Comments Off on Happier by Design

    For Van Alen Report 20, we invited designers from around the world to share projects at the vanguard of using science-informed practices to design healthier cities. For each featured project, we asked the designers to identify the health impacts intended, and discuss how insights from neuroscience or psychology influenced the project’s design. We also consider how each project might advance both the conversation about evidence-based design, and the greater pursuit of designing healthier cities for all. These profiles have been adapted from the designers’ responses.

    Situated in the heart of downtown Chicago, the Crown Sky Garden is a sanctuary for patients, families, doctors and administrators within the 23-story Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago. A 5,000 sf area on the 11th floor was transformed into an inspiring healing garden.

    The commitment to this sky garden was built upon a growing body of scientific research which links access to natural light and contemplative spaces to reduced patient recovery time. The resulting design creates a vibrant sense of place and demonstrates innovative thinking for child-centered healthcare and healing environments. This regenerative project offers a new paradigm for healthcare design that integrates healing gardens as part of the healthcare regiment within these institutional environments.

    The Design

    Over the past decade research has shown that bodily experience of the natural world regulates the electrical circuitry of brain, blood flow and the mechanical tension of our muscles. Interactions with nature provide a rejuvenating tonic to our stressed bodies and minds bringing balance to our inner well-being. The main garden and tree house were designed to meet several programmatic goals: to give inpatient children an opportunity to engage Chicago’s storied historical and natural environment, to meet the stringent requirements of the infectious disease control board to create a safe environment for children with immune deficiencies, to create a range of interactive opportunities that mitigates stress, and to provide access to natural materials and light.

    The design allows for programmatic flexibility, creating opportunities for physical movement and exercise, as well as a variety of contemplative individual and vibrant collective social experiences.

    The Designer

    From Mikyoung Kim Design: “Mikyoung Kim’s diverse background in design and sculpture has shaped her body of work, blurring the boundaries between landscape architecture and environmental art. From children’s playgrounds to city parks and urban master plans, her work reflects a deep commitment to memorable place making that captures the public imagination. Her landscapes bring a richly layered civic experience to the public realm that engages the senses for a multi-generational audience.”

    The Outlook

    While an indoor space, the Crown Sky Garden project utilizes healthful strategies that can be applied to broader settings and public spaces. Healthcare facilities have been on the leading edge for quantifying the impacts of the built environment and demonstrating the profound physical impacts on patients and employees, and Mikyoung Kim’s design stands out as a forecast for the future of scientific rigor merged with artistry. Along with the restorative benefits of natural forms, she also emphasized multigenerational spaces to maintain and encourage social connections during patient recovery. Those connections have been well-documented as one of the strongest predictors of both quality of life and longevity, and should be prioritized when designing future cities with health in mind.

  4. Living Bridges

    Comments Off on Living Bridges

    For Van Alen Report 20, we invited designers from around the world to share projects at the vanguard of using science-informed practices to design healthier cities. For each featured project, we asked the designers to identify the health impacts intended, and discuss how insights from neuroscience or psychology influenced the project’s design. We also consider how each project might advance both the conversation about evidence-based design, and the greater pursuit of designing healthier cities for all. These profiles have been adapted from the designers’ responses.

    Situated in the heart of downtown Chicago, the Crown Sky Garden is a sanctuary for patients, families, doctors and administrators within the 23-story Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago. A 5,000 sf area on the 11th floor was transformed into an inspiring healing garden.

    The commitment to this sky garden was built upon a growing body of scientific research which links access to natural light and contemplative spaces to reduced patient recovery time. The resulting design creates a vibrant sense of place and demonstrates innovative thinking for child-centered healthcare and healing environments. This regenerative project offers a new paradigm for healthcare design that integrates healing gardens as part of the healthcare regiment within these institutional environments.

    The Design

    Over the past decade research has shown that bodily experience of the natural world regulates the electrical circuitry of brain, blood flow and the mechanical tension of our muscles. Interactions with nature provide a rejuvenating tonic to our stressed bodies and minds bringing balance to our inner well-being. The main garden and tree house were designed to meet several programmatic goals: to give inpatient children an opportunity to engage Chicago’s storied historical and natural environment, to meet the stringent requirements of the infectious disease control board to create a safe environment for children with immune deficiencies, to create a range of interactive opportunities that mitigates stress, and to provide access to natural materials and light.

    The design allows for programmatic flexibility, creating opportunities for physical movement and exercise, as well as a variety of contemplative individual and vibrant collective social experiences.

    The Designer

    From Mikyoung Kim Design: “Mikyoung Kim’s diverse background in design and sculpture has shaped her body of work, blurring the boundaries between landscape architecture and environmental art. From children’s playgrounds to city parks and urban master plans, her work reflects a deep commitment to memorable place making that captures the public imagination. Her landscapes bring a richly layered civic experience to the public realm that engages the senses for a multi-generational audience.”

    The Outlook

    While an indoor space, the Crown Sky Garden project utilizes healthful strategies that can be applied to broader settings and public spaces. Healthcare facilities have been on the leading edge for quantifying the impacts of the built environment and demonstrating the profound physical impacts on patients and employees, and Mikyoung Kim’s design stands out as a forecast for the future of scientific rigor merged with artistry. Along with the restorative benefits of natural forms, she also emphasized multigenerational spaces to maintain and encourage social connections during patient recovery. Those connections have been well-documented as one of the strongest predictors of both quality of life and longevity, and should be prioritized when designing future cities with health in mind.

  5. Via Verde: The Green Way

    Comments Off on Via Verde: The Green Way

    Intro

    For Van Alen Report 20, we invited designers from around the world to share projects at the vanguard of using science-informed practices to design healthier cities. For each featured project, we asked the designers to identify the health impacts intended, and discuss how insights from neuroscience or psychology influenced the project’s design. We also consider how each project might advance both the conversation about evidence-based design, and the greater pursuit of designing healthier cities for all. These profiles have been adapted from the designers’ responses.

    Situated in the heart of downtown Chicago, the Crown Sky Garden is a sanctuary for patients, families, doctors and administrators within the 23-story Ann & Robert H. Lurie Children’s Hospital of Chicago. A 5,000 sf area on the 11th floor was transformed into an inspiring healing garden.

    The commitment to this sky garden was built upon a growing body of scientific research which links access to natural light and contemplative spaces to reduced patient recovery time. The resulting design creates a vibrant sense of place and demonstrates innovative thinking for child-centered healthcare and healing environments. This regenerative project offers a new paradigm for healthcare design that integrates healing gardens as part of the healthcare regiment within these institutional environments.

    The Design

    Over the past decade research has shown that bodily experience of the natural world regulates the electrical circuitry of brain, blood flow and the mechanical tension of our muscles. Interactions with nature provide a rejuvenating tonic to our stressed bodies and minds bringing balance to our inner well-being. The main garden and tree house were designed to meet several programmatic goals: to give inpatient children an opportunity to engage Chicago’s storied historical and natural environment, to meet the stringent requirements of the infectious disease control board to create a safe environment for children with immune deficiencies, to create a range of interactive opportunities that mitigates stress, and to provide access to natural materials and light.

    The design allows for programmatic flexibility, creating opportunities for physical movement and exercise, as well as a variety of contemplative individual and vibrant collective social experiences.

    The Designer

    From Mikyoung Kim Design: “Mikyoung Kim’s diverse background in design and sculpture has shaped her body of work, blurring the boundaries between landscape architecture and environmental art. From children’s playgrounds to city parks and urban master plans, her work reflects a deep commitment to memorable place making that captures the public imagination. Her landscapes bring a richly layered civic experience to the public realm that engages the senses for a multi-generational audience.”

    The Outlook

    While an indoor space, the Crown Sky Garden project utilizes healthful strategies that can be applied to broader settings and public spaces. Healthcare facilities have been on the leading edge for quantifying the impacts of the built environment and demonstrating the profound physical impacts on patients and employees, and Mikyoung Kim’s design stands out as a forecast for the future of scientific rigor merged with artistry. Along with the restorative benefits of natural forms, she also emphasized multigenerational spaces to maintain and encourage social connections during patient recovery. Those connections have been well-documented as one of the strongest predictors of both quality of life and longevity, and should be prioritized when designing future cities with health in mind.

  6. Healthy Brains, Healthy Cities

    Comments Off on Healthy Brains, Healthy Cities

    Intro

    For Van Alen Report 20, we invited designers from around the world to share projects at the vanguard of using science-informed practices to design healthier cities. For each featured project, we asked the designers to identify the health impacts intended, and discuss how insights from neuroscience or psychology influenced the project’s design. We also consider how each project might advance both the conversation about evidence-based design, and the greater pursuit of designing healthier cities for all. These profiles have been adapted from the designers’ responses.

    What is a “healthy brain”?

    Sandra Chapman (SC): A healthy brain is one that allows us to thrive, not just to survive in our daily lives. It’s what allows us to make life decisions, solve problems, interact adeptly with others and really enjoy emotional balance. At the Center for Brain Health, we developed “pillars” of brain health that we measure. One is cognition, and when I say cognition, that’s not simply IQ: It’s really the ability to innovate, to synthesize. It’s what you’re trying to do right now [in this interview]: very quickly taking divergent ideas and boiling them down to the essence, looking for a takeaway point by strategically focusing on the most relevant information. It’s more than memory, more than speed of processing. It really is the ability to think and solve the problems that we’re faced with every day.

    Another pillar is psychological well-being. If you’ve got some type of mental health disorder or you’re severely depressed, say frozen in bed, you have diminished brain health. Another area is the complexity of what you do—in other words, what is the level of productivity of what you’re doing. And another key area is socially adeptness. Being socially adept is probably one of the most important things to our cognition. It’s the most complex and most important.

    Richard Davidson (RD): From my perspective, the scientific evidence clearly shows that brain health is promoted when one’s emotional well-being is enhanced or is vibrant. Emotional well-being and brain health go together. For the brain to be in a kind of harmonious balance seems to require the mind to also be in a harmonious balance. I would say that the first and most important ingredient for brain health is really having a calm and clear mind.

    Frederick Marks (FM): I look to the National Institutes of Health’s definition of brain health, which centers on the brain’s ability to remember, learn, play, concentrate, and maintain a clear, active mind.

    I don’t like the term “brain health.” What I use is “typical functional” or sometimes “satisfactory functioning.” Because what is a healthy brain? Everybody has a psychiatric disorder—everybody! In general, though, you can say it’s usually an evaluation of two things. One is just straight-up cognitive ability, which is the ability to mobilize your IQ without external interference. The second is emotional regulation or affective stability. So when you’re looking to define what “brain health” is, the two piers are cognition and emotion.

    John Medina (JM): I don’t like the term “brain health.” What I use is “typical functional” or sometimes “satisfactory functioning.” Because what is a healthy brain? Everybody has a psychiatric disorder—everybody! In general, though, you can say it’s usually an evaluation of two things. One is just straight-up cognitive ability, which is the ability to mobilize your IQ without external interference. The second is emotional regulation or affective stability. So when you’re looking to define what “brain health” is, the two piers are cognition and emotion.

    What methods and technologies are used to assess the relationship between built environments and the brain?

    FM: What’s key is that we’re learning more. The more sophisticated these tools become, the better the reports. In the case of an electroencephalogram (EEG), you’re recording the process by which you have visual order or auditory stimuli. The EEG can be mobile, depending upon the size of it. Just in the last couple of years, one has been able to use that without the confinement of a long string of electrode wires. You can have remote devices and pick up activity on a computer. In the case of the non-mobile tools, you get an excellent resolution. That’s the benefit of something being stationary. In the case of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), you are detecting changes in blood flow. The MRI and functional MRI (fMRI) are much more stationary, and that’s true of the electromyogram (EMG) as well.

    We can actually use these instruments both within a controlled room area as well as on the street. We can also use it with virtual reality (VR), which expands what you can test in real time. The combination of EEG and VR can take the form of being in a Cave Automatic Virtual Environment (CAVE). Even though you may consider that a static, stationary condition, [researchers] have so many opportunities within the CAVE to design the environment that subjects will experience. That is far more valuable data than you might be able to get conducting an experiment in real time on the street. And the feedback researchers get back allows them to keep making environmental changes. They can introduce many different environmental variables within a short period of time.

    Eye tracking is becoming more and more mobile, so I do see that helping in many different instances in the future. It’s not just where one is looking, but it’s what then might be happening in terms of brain function as one is looking at it. Are we detecting within certain parts of the brain an activation that applies to a reduction in stress, or just the opposite?

    We should not neglect building sensors, wearables and the development of algorithms for measurement. Each will be extremely important components of where the whole building industry goes in the future.

    RD: If we were doing experimental research, we would use modern tools with brain imaging to directly evaluate brain health. But in the absence of that kind of expensive assessment procedure, we can use certain proxies. We can look at behavioral measures of important constituents of well-being as a proxy for more direct measures of brain health. Those behavioral measures of well-being have been found in many laboratory studies to be associated with specific signatures, if you will, of direct measures of brain activity that would reflect brain health.

    At the Center for Healthy Minds, we are actually creating a toolbox of measures that will be available on a smartphone, which measure the core constituents of well-being using objective measures, including neuroscientifically grounded behavioral tasks that could be administered on the smartphone. That suite of measures is not yet available, but it will be in the next couple of years. Something like that, I think, is potentially very valuable in this domain because it can easily be scaled; it simply requires a person to have a smartphone, which everyone has these days, and it could be easily deployed at scale. I think that can be done and will be available in the near future. We’re going to be geo-tracking as well, and using a variety of different classes of measure to provide as rigorous and as valid a measure as possible for each of the core empirically investigated constituents of well-being.

    JM: If you’re interested in neurological responses, you can use behavioral, cellular, or molecular instruments. The behavioral instruments would be things like psychometric tests, processing speed, mean reaction times. If you wanted to go a little deeper you would go to cellular instruments like non-invasive deep imaging—fMRI, positron emission tomography scans (PET scans)—or we could stay on the surface and look at surface electricity. This would be instruments like event-related potential (ERP) and EEG.

    And then there are the molecular instruments. That’s measuring cortisol levels—if you want to observe someone’s stress hormones. And there are a number of other things you can get at. It isn’t just stress hormone levels. We know that green plants, for example, secrete phytoncides. And that actually has a strong impact on one part of the human immune response, “natural killer cells.” [see image/caption for definition] Phytoncides can increase the population of natural killer cells by 40 percent.

    How might city dwellers re-imagine their behavior and experience within difference environments to improve brain health and quality of life?

    RD: I think city dwellers, who may have a little less access to nature, can take advantage of what we do know about brain health and well-being. One of the most effective ways of promoting well-being is through social connection and the emotions that facilitate social connection, like appreciation and gratitude, and actions which help to also facilitate social connection, actions like acts of generosity. Those are all strategies that change the brain: we know that from hard-nosed scientific research and move the brain in the direction of a healthier baseline.

    Social connection is anti-inflammatory. There’s good evidence to suggest that one of the most powerful strategies in reducing the molecular signals that are responsible for inflammation is social connection. Practices which can facilitate social connection are ones that we know reduce proinflammatory cytokines and actually have been found to alter gene expression for genes involved in the inflammatory cascade.

    FM: Now, certainly New York City is doing some very positive things with its active design guidelines. But I think we’re going well beyond that, particularly when we talk about brain health. Health has many more dimensions than what we’ve said it is in the past, and the impact of poor health on society has become far too expensive to ignore it. We also appreciate that people are living longer, so they’re vulnerable to things in health that we never had to think about in the past.

    JM: We know that the color green focuses people. You put kids with ADHD in a room of 523 nanometers of wavelength: plant green, chlorophyll-like green. You know what it does? It focuses them. If you do a pre and post, they show focusing behavior. You need to give doctors in an emergency room a break every 100 minutes because if you don’t, the error rate climbs. It actually goes up two times. But if you give them a break every 100 minutes and they go into a room that’s green with 523 nanometers of wavelength, and there’s a plant there so they can sniff up the volatile biochemicals and change the parasympathetic system, their error rate goes back down to baseline.

    SC: In cities, what I would look for are spaces that are interactional. Social cognition is important, and people love vibrant, multi-generational spaces where you see older people coming out, not just teenagers. We’re also trying to help empower people to think about what they’re doing in a given moment and which environment they should do that in to maximize performance. Rather than think, “I need this space to do more work in,” maybe be more nimble and think, where is the best place given what you’re trying to tackle.

    One barrier to better brain health is people not realizing how much agency they have to influence their brain health. Our heart, we know that it’s under our influence. We know it’s our fault if we’re not eating properly and our cholesterol is not good. But our brain, we just think it’s a black box, even though cognitive neuroscience has shown that it changes from moment to moment. But that potential for improvement hasn’t been translated for people. Habits such as physical exercise, nutrition, sleep, and stress management contribute to the brain’s performance: the brain is not static.

  7. Building for the Most Vulnerable

    Comments Off on Building for the Most Vulnerable

    Intro

    For people with Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) or autism, the built environments they occupy often compound the everyday challenges their conditions present. This environmental inequity impacts a staggering number of Americans, and it is an issue that Stuart Shell, architect and building scientist at BranchPattern, believes architects and planners should work hard to address. In this piece, Stuart suggests ways designers can make themselves better advocates while advancing a notion central to building a more equitable world: design that works for the most vulnerable among us is design that works well for all of us.

    Building for the Most Vulnerable

    Too often our cultures, along with the cities we build, assume we all have the same backgrounds and abilities. Today our buildings are overwhelmingly built on a foundation of ableism, with urban form deferring primarily to able-bodied persons. This ideology is so widespread as to make invisible the barriers in the built environment experienced by the one in five individuals living with cognitive impairments.

    The most common reason for cognitive impairments is a mental disorder: Alarmingly, over 20% of Americans have one. And outside of a psychological diagnosis, there are many reasons why people might suffer from persistent cognitive impairments—neurological disorders such as Alzheimer’s or dementia affect one in five people over 71 years old, or 1.3% of all Americans. Diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, Down syndrome, cerebral palsy, and conditions like migraines can also diminish cognitive abilities.

    Cognitive impairment often involves deficits in executive function: the skill required to control and coordinate all of the brain’s cognitive abilities and behaviors, like a CEO overseeing all departments in a business to make sure they progress efficiently and effectively. There are many theories about the nature and operation of executive functioning, but what might be the implications for design and planning? Take the example of ADHD. Decreased activity in the hippocampus—specifically, low dopamine levels—appears to be why individuals with ADHD exhibit impulsive behavior. Providing engaging sensory environments that promote dopamine production in the brain may be a helpful support in stimulating prefrontal brain activity.

    It’s imperative for architects to make streets and buildings more adaptable to everyone’s use. When our designs fall short of these standards, we risk making arbitrary barriers for individuals with cognitive impairments. But despite the physical environment having direct and indirect impacts on cognition, cognitive impairment is rarely considered as a design criterion, and practitioners in planning and design typically lack the lexicon to discuss inclusive design. (See the glossary below for a crash course.) From my perspective as an architect, questions about access for individuals with impairments typically go unasked, short-circuiting a design process that could remove barriers. We should ask which type of impairments people will bring with them to our buildings, streets, and parks. We have a mandate to expose and reduce these barriers so that the environment can help fulfill rather than hinder our potential. This means not only making the built environment more accessible but also increasing access to nature, providing the diversity of surroundings that humans need to thrive physically and mentally. Re-imagining our built environment in collaboration with individuals with cognitive impairments will be a step toward a more inclusive society, resulting in cities that improve the mental well-being of the entire population.

    Design for cognitive impairments is also a matter of equity. The legislative wins of the civil rights movement in the 1960s helped set the stage for those with physical impairments to advocate for their rights to access the built environment. Design improvements that address these impairments can now be thought of as universal design. Popularized in the 1980s, universal design posits that buildings, products, and processes work better the more people can use them. Undergirding universal design is an agenda that seeks to restore agency to excluded groups and to confront the ableist bias in society. This makes proponents of universal design also activists for social change.

    The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) legislation of 1990 is a great starting point, but despite increased awareness of cognitive impairments, designers still lack a framework for creating solutions and incorporating the tenets of universal design into practice. Removing obstacles in the built environment, for instance, such as those prescribed by the ADA, is not sufficient for creating designs that address cognitive impairments. A more salutogenic approach to mental health in the built environments—focused on promoting health and well-being rather than preventing disease or harm—provides opportunities for rich, physiological interactions, like chances to modify our surroundings to suit our mental and physical needs. Enabling people to access the built environment in this way helps exercise executive functioning skills: The choice of which path to take or which room to use provides a sense of control. This concept of manageability gives people the opportunity to create healthy outcomes while maintaining a strong sense of self. Adaptability is a hallmark of good design because it helps people accomplish their goals in a way that works for them.

    Providing all persons with options and the freedom to choose among them isn’t just a good idea—it’s also inherently pleasurable. Alliesthesia, the desire to achieve a neutral internal state, explains why water tastes better when we’re thirsty, and quiet is more desirable when we’re stressed. Providing arenas for people to exercise their executive functioning skills can create more opportunities for pleasure in the built environment.

    Encouraging agency and mental exercise within our surroundings is one way the built environment can support mental health. Attending to the ways a given suite of cognitive impairments compromise agency can help designers identify avenues for intervention. For instance, individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have symptoms that vary widely, although problems with social interactions are typical. Many individuals with ASD also have trouble with sensory integration—meaning they may be overwhelmed by lights, noise, and touch. Deficits in executive function are common. Given these characteristics, some simple accommodations could improve the learning experience for a student with ASD in a mainstream classroom, for example. Having an alcove in the room available for sensory escape would help ease overstimulation. Allowing options for self-regulation can help individuals with ASD practice executive functioning skills. Increased ventilation, insulation from outdoor noises, and controllable lighting are also particularly beneficial. The resulting classroom, tailored for those with ASD, also clearly stands to help everyone focus.

    Down syndrome is the most common form of genetic cognitive disability. It is characterized in part by atypical development of the prefrontal cortex, often producing deficits in executive function. While driving a car is out of reach for many individuals with Down syndrome, taking the bus is often a viable option. Navigating a transit system, however, can be a multi-step process that taxes our executive functioning, attention, and memory skills. Viewing this as an accessibility problem, there are several ways that attending to the nuances of this population could translate into better transit design. Bus stops with clear signage, a place to sit, and dynamic arrival times would reassure riders that they are at the right place while reducing attention demands. A digital interface at the bus stop where riders can enter their destination would confirm their travel plans and arrival time. The same interface could accept payment for the trip, easing a barrier to boarding the bus and finding a seat. A transit system designed in consideration of riders with cognitive impairment has features that all users would enjoy, allowing them to focus on alternate tasks and enjoy the ride.

    Urban design is a powerful avenue for mental health interventions, but being able to escape the city is equally important. The complexity of our brains can lead to an array of sensitivities when it comes to pollution in the air and water. Exposure to higher concentrations of dust, endocrine disruptors, and carcinogens may explain some differences in mental health for city-dwellers. Some research has shown that the incidence of autism spectrum disorder appears to be higher in cities. Anthropogenic soundscapes and lighting also disrupt sleep, increasing the risk of depression and other mood disorders.10 Just the stress from the pace of life in developed areas is associated with more pronounced symptoms for some individuals with cognitive impairment. This evidence supports the hypothesis that ecology is linked with mental health.

    Spending time in nature positively affects everyone’s mood, and is particularly impactful for those with mental disorders. Children who live nearby nature are also more psychologically resilient to stressors in life. A patch of wilderness can provide seminal developmental experiences for children, while also giving everyone room to breathe—literally and figuratively. Adding green space to our cities is a common-sense strategy for combating light and noise pollution, helping us entrain healthy sleep cycles. The evidence is telling us that better design for cognitive impairment means engineering with ecological principles that reduce pollution and increase our exposure to living things.

    For those with cognitive impairments, design for brain health is a civil rights issue. Neurotypical designers—those without neurologically atypically patterns of thought and behavior—have a mandate to combat the ideology of ableism and take part in the lived experience of their neighbors with cognitive impairments. This in part requires an earnest effort to include individuals with impairments—by including disability advocates as stakeholders in urban development. Recognizing exceptional projects that also meet the needs of those with disabilities will raise awareness of the damage caused by ableist development. Ultimately we could see rating systems such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) incorporate metrics for inclusive design, improving the standards of design in our communities overall.

    The brain activities that underpin success—executive function, memory, and attention—reside within all of us. Designing for these activities from multiple perspectives expands our knowledge of how our brains work, helping build empathy and, hopefully, a more cohesive community. Designing spaces for those with cognitive impairments supports neurotypicals too, building a future city that’s designed with all of us in mind.

    Glossary

    ABLEISM
    A common belief that individuals with impairments are abnormal and inferior to “able-bodied” people. Common ideas associated with this ideology are that individuals with impairments have less opportunity in life and suffer from limitations on their development as a whole person. Our buildings and streets bear testament to the hegemony of this ideology.

    COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT
    This umbrella term indicates deficit in brain function observed through behavior. This article focuses on problem-solving skills (executive functioning), attention, and working memory. Intellectual disability and learning disability are common types of cognitive impairment.

    DISABILITY
    Individuals experience a disability when they are unable to perform their intended task. Tasks with social significance such as going to work and self-care add definition to the disability a person experiences. Sometimes tasks with little relevance to everyday life such as standardized tests are used to label a person with a disability. Having an impairment does not mean a person has a disability. Accommodations can eliminate barriers to participation. Eyeglasses can give an individual with poor vision the ability to drive, just as a wheelchair can enable someone with cerebral palsy to go shopping. Social norms and the design of the environment create barriers that act on a person’s impairment, thereby creating the disability.

    DSM 5
    Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), published by the American Psychiatric Association. This book is the basis for classifying mental disorders. It describes differences (and similarities) in cognitive functioning for disorders.

    IMPAIRMENT
    Difficulty hearing, a migraine, and a broken arm are examples of impairments. They may be temporary, situational, or persistent. All of us will experience impairment at some time—for example, having our eyes dilated for a new pair of eyeglasses or having vision that needs correction in the first place.

    NEURODIVERSITY
    The concept that many “disorders” such as autism, attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and schizophrenia are best explained as natural variation in neurology. This is supported by the evidence that individuals on the autism spectrum may be high-functioning, such as Temple Grandin and Albert Einstein. Neurodiversity is also a social movement.

    SALUTOGENIC
    This term was introduced by Aaron Antonovsky in 1979 to describe how health is created through interactions with the social and physical environment. It is distinct from the dominant model in medicine, which presumes that health is the absence of pathogens. Comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness are the key components of a sense of coherence that ultimately determines health.

    SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY INSURANCE (SSDI)
    In the United States, many of us think of disability in the context of federal assistance. In fact, only one in five individuals with a disability receive SSDI. Of those who do, psychiatric disability is the largest group receiving benefits.

    References

    1. B. L. Plassman, K. M. Langa, G. G. Fisher, S. G. Heeringa, D. R. Weir, M. B. Ofstedal & R. B. Wallace, “Prevalence of cognitive impairment without dementia in the United States,” Annals of Internal Medicine 148, no. 6 (Mar. 18, 2008): 427-434.
    2. “Executive Functions,” UCSF Aging and Memory Center, accessed April 18, 2019, https://memory.ucsf.edu/executive-functions.
    3. For a detailed review, see S. Goldstein, J. A. Naglieri, D. Princiotta & T. M. Otero, “Introduction: A History of Executive Functioning as a Theoretical and Clinical Construct,” in The Handbook of Executive Functioning (Springer, New York, 2014), 3-12.
    4. For an overview of mental health and design, see G. W Evans. “The Built Environment and Mental Health,” Journal of Urban Health 80, no. 4, (2003): 536-555.
    5. J. A. Golembiewski, “Start Making Sense: Applying a Salutogenic Model to Architectural Design for Psychiatric Care,” Facilities 28, no. 3/4 (2010): 100-117.
    6. For a detailed discussion of alliesthesia, see M. Cabanac, “Physiological Role of Pleasure,” Science 173, no. 4002 (1971): 1103-1107.
    7. For a detailed discussion of classroom design for ASD, see M. Mostafa, “An Architecture for Autism: Concepts of Design Intervention for the Autistic User,” International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR 2, no. 1 (2008): 189-211.
    8. For example, see J. A. Ailshire & E. M. Crimmins, “Fine Particulate Matter Air Pollution and Cognitive Function Among Older U.S. Adults,” American Journal of Epidemiology 180, no. 4 (2014): 359-366 and L. G. Costa, T. B. Cole, J. Coburn, Y. C. Chang, K. Dao & P. J. Roqué, “Neurotoxicity of Traffic-Related Air Pollution,” Neurotoxicology 59 (2017): 133-139.
    9. A correlation between ASD and degree of urbanicity is shown in M. B. Lauritsen, A. Astrup, C. B. Pedersen, C. Obel, D. E. Schendel, L. Schieve & E. T. Parner, “Urbanicity and Autism Spectrum Disorders,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 44, No. 2 (2014): 394-404. A correlation to air pollution is shown in T. A. Becerra, M. Wilhelm, J. Olsen, M. Cockburn & B. Ritz, “Ambient Air Pollution and Autism in Los Angeles County, California, Environmental Health Perspectives 121, No. 3 (2012): 380-386.
    10. For a discussion of urban lighting and mental health, see R. Chepesiuk, “Missing the Dark: Health Effects of Light Pollution,” Environmental Health Perspectives 117, No. 1 (2009): A20.
    11. E. Gullone, “The Biophilia Hypothesis and Life in the 21st Century: Increasing Mental Health or Increasing Pathology?” Journal of Happiness Studies 1, No. 3 (2000): 293-322.
    12. For example, see J. Barton & J. Pretty, “What is the Best Dose of Nature and Green Exercise for Improving Mental Health? A Multi-Study Analysis,” Environmental Science & Technology 44, No. 10 (2010): 3947-3955 and P. Grahn, A. M. Pálsdóttir, J. Ottosson & I. H. Jonsdottir, “Longer Nature-Based Rehabilitation May Contribute to a Faster Return to Work in Patients with Reactions to Severe Stress and/ or Depression,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 14, No. 11 (2017): 1310.
    13. See N. M. Wells & G. W. Evans, “Nearby Nature: A Buffer of Life Stress Among Rural Children,” Environment and Behavior 35, No. 3 (2003): 311-330.
    14. See G. N. Bratman, J. P. Hamilton & G. C. Daily, “The Impacts of Nature Experience on Human Cognitive Function and Mental Health,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1249, No. 1 (2012): 118-136.
    15. For a foundational article on the role of culture in creating disability, see R. McDermott & H. Varenne, “Culture as Disability.” Anthropology & Education Quarterly 26, No. 3, (1995): 324-348.
    16. M. B. Mittelmark, “Introduction to the Handbook of Salutogenesis,” in The Handbook of Salutogenesis (Springer, Cham, 2017), 3-5.

  8. Learning in Urban Environments

    Comments Off on Learning in Urban Environments

    Intro

    For Van Alen Report 20, we invited designers from around the world to share projects at the vanguard of using science-informed practices to design healthier cities. For each featured project, we asked the designers to identify the health impacts intended, and discuss how insights from neuroscience or psychology influenced the project’s design. We also consider how each project might advance both the conversation about evidence-based design, and the greater pursuit of designing healthier cities for all. These profiles have been adapted from the designers’ responses.

    Building for the Most Vulnerable

    Too often our cultures, along with the cities we build, assume we all have the same backgrounds and abilities. Today our buildings are overwhelmingly built on a foundation of ableism, with urban form deferring primarily to able-bodied persons. This ideology is so widespread as to make invisible the barriers in the built environment experienced by the one in five individuals living with cognitive impairments.

    The most common reason for cognitive impairments is a mental disorder: Alarmingly, over 20% of Americans have one. And outside of a psychological diagnosis, there are many reasons why people might suffer from persistent cognitive impairments—neurological disorders such as Alzheimer’s or dementia affect one in five people over 71 years old, or 1.3% of all Americans. Diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, Down syndrome, cerebral palsy, and conditions like migraines can also diminish cognitive abilities.

    Cognitive impairment often involves deficits in executive function: the skill required to control and coordinate all of the brain’s cognitive abilities and behaviors, like a CEO overseeing all departments in a business to make sure they progress efficiently and effectively. There are many theories about the nature and operation of executive functioning, but what might be the implications for design and planning? Take the example of ADHD. Decreased activity in the hippocampus—specifically, low dopamine levels—appears to be why individuals with ADHD exhibit impulsive behavior. Providing engaging sensory environments that promote dopamine production in the brain may be a helpful support in stimulating prefrontal brain activity.

    It’s imperative for architects to make streets and buildings more adaptable to everyone’s use. When our designs fall short of these standards, we risk making arbitrary barriers for individuals with cognitive impairments. But despite the physical environment having direct and indirect impacts on cognition, cognitive impairment is rarely considered as a design criterion, and practitioners in planning and design typically lack the lexicon to discuss inclusive design. (See the glossary below for a crash course.) From my perspective as an architect, questions about access for individuals with impairments typically go unasked, short-circuiting a design process that could remove barriers. We should ask which type of impairments people will bring with them to our buildings, streets, and parks. We have a mandate to expose and reduce these barriers so that the environment can help fulfill rather than hinder our potential. This means not only making the built environment more accessible but also increasing access to nature, providing the diversity of surroundings that humans need to thrive physically and mentally. Re-imagining our built environment in collaboration with individuals with cognitive impairments will be a step toward a more inclusive society, resulting in cities that improve the mental well-being of the entire population.

    Design for cognitive impairments is also a matter of equity. The legislative wins of the civil rights movement in the 1960s helped set the stage for those with physical impairments to advocate for their rights to access the built environment. Design improvements that address these impairments can now be thought of as universal design. Popularized in the 1980s, universal design posits that buildings, products, and processes work better the more people can use them. Undergirding universal design is an agenda that seeks to restore agency to excluded groups and to confront the ableist bias in society. This makes proponents of universal design also activists for social change.

    The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) legislation of 1990 is a great starting point, but despite increased awareness of cognitive impairments, designers still lack a framework for creating solutions and incorporating the tenets of universal design into practice. Removing obstacles in the built environment, for instance, such as those prescribed by the ADA, is not sufficient for creating designs that address cognitive impairments. A more salutogenic approach to mental health in the built environments—focused on promoting health and well-being rather than preventing disease or harm—provides opportunities for rich, physiological interactions, like chances to modify our surroundings to suit our mental and physical needs. Enabling people to access the built environment in this way helps exercise executive functioning skills: The choice of which path to take or which room to use provides a sense of control. This concept of manageability gives people the opportunity to create healthy outcomes while maintaining a strong sense of self. Adaptability is a hallmark of good design because it helps people accomplish their goals in a way that works for them.

    Providing all persons with options and the freedom to choose among them isn’t just a good idea—it’s also inherently pleasurable. Alliesthesia, the desire to achieve a neutral internal state, explains why water tastes better when we’re thirsty, and quiet is more desirable when we’re stressed. Providing arenas for people to exercise their executive functioning skills can create more opportunities for pleasure in the built environment.

    Encouraging agency and mental exercise within our surroundings is one way the built environment can support mental health. Attending to the ways a given suite of cognitive impairments compromise agency can help designers identify avenues for intervention. For instance, individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have symptoms that vary widely, although problems with social interactions are typical. Many individuals with ASD also have trouble with sensory integration—meaning they may be overwhelmed by lights, noise, and touch. Deficits in executive function are common. Given these characteristics, some simple accommodations could improve the learning experience for a student with ASD in a mainstream classroom, for example. Having an alcove in the room available for sensory escape would help ease overstimulation. Allowing options for self-regulation can help individuals with ASD practice executive functioning skills. Increased ventilation, insulation from outdoor noises, and controllable lighting are also particularly beneficial. The resulting classroom, tailored for those with ASD, also clearly stands to help everyone focus.

    Down syndrome is the most common form of genetic cognitive disability. It is characterized in part by atypical development of the prefrontal cortex, often producing deficits in executive function. While driving a car is out of reach for many individuals with Down syndrome, taking the bus is often a viable option. Navigating a transit system, however, can be a multi-step process that taxes our executive functioning, attention, and memory skills. Viewing this as an accessibility problem, there are several ways that attending to the nuances of this population could translate into better transit design. Bus stops with clear signage, a place to sit, and dynamic arrival times would reassure riders that they are at the right place while reducing attention demands. A digital interface at the bus stop where riders can enter their destination would confirm their travel plans and arrival time. The same interface could accept payment for the trip, easing a barrier to boarding the bus and finding a seat. A transit system designed in consideration of riders with cognitive impairment has features that all users would enjoy, allowing them to focus on alternate tasks and enjoy the ride.

    Urban design is a powerful avenue for mental health interventions, but being able to escape the city is equally important. The complexity of our brains can lead to an array of sensitivities when it comes to pollution in the air and water. Exposure to higher concentrations of dust, endocrine disruptors, and carcinogens may explain some differences in mental health for city-dwellers. Some research has shown that the incidence of autism spectrum disorder appears to be higher in cities. Anthropogenic soundscapes and lighting also disrupt sleep, increasing the risk of depression and other mood disorders.10 Just the stress from the pace of life in developed areas is associated with more pronounced symptoms for some individuals with cognitive impairment. This evidence supports the hypothesis that ecology is linked with mental health.

    Spending time in nature positively affects everyone’s mood, and is particularly impactful for those with mental disorders. Children who live nearby nature are also more psychologically resilient to stressors in life. A patch of wilderness can provide seminal developmental experiences for children, while also giving everyone room to breathe—literally and figuratively. Adding green space to our cities is a common-sense strategy for combating light and noise pollution, helping us entrain healthy sleep cycles. The evidence is telling us that better design for cognitive impairment means engineering with ecological principles that reduce pollution and increase our exposure to living things.

    For those with cognitive impairments, design for brain health is a civil rights issue. Neurotypical designers—those without neurologically atypically patterns of thought and behavior—have a mandate to combat the ideology of ableism and take part in the lived experience of their neighbors with cognitive impairments. This in part requires an earnest effort to include individuals with impairments—by including disability advocates as stakeholders in urban development. Recognizing exceptional projects that also meet the needs of those with disabilities will raise awareness of the damage caused by ableist development. Ultimately we could see rating systems such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) incorporate metrics for inclusive design, improving the standards of design in our communities overall.

    The brain activities that underpin success—executive function, memory, and attention—reside within all of us. Designing for these activities from multiple perspectives expands our knowledge of how our brains work, helping build empathy and, hopefully, a more cohesive community. Designing spaces for those with cognitive impairments supports neurotypicals too, building a future city that’s designed with all of us in mind.

    Glossary

    ABLEISM
    A common belief that individuals with impairments are abnormal and inferior to “able-bodied” people. Common ideas associated with this ideology are that individuals with impairments have less opportunity in life and suffer from limitations on their development as a whole person. Our buildings and streets bear testament to the hegemony of this ideology.

    COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT
    This umbrella term indicates deficit in brain function observed through behavior. This article focuses on problem-solving skills (executive functioning), attention, and working memory. Intellectual disability and learning disability are common types of cognitive impairment.

    DISABILITY
    Individuals experience a disability when they are unable to perform their intended task. Tasks with social significance such as going to work and self-care add definition to the disability a person experiences. Sometimes tasks with little relevance to everyday life such as standardized tests are used to label a person with a disability. Having an impairment does not mean a person has a disability. Accommodations can eliminate barriers to participation. Eyeglasses can give an individual with poor vision the ability to drive, just as a wheelchair can enable someone with cerebral palsy to go shopping. Social norms and the design of the environment create barriers that act on a person’s impairment, thereby creating the disability.

    DSM 5
    Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), published by the American Psychiatric Association. This book is the basis for classifying mental disorders. It describes differences (and similarities) in cognitive functioning for disorders.

    IMPAIRMENT
    Difficulty hearing, a migraine, and a broken arm are examples of impairments. They may be temporary, situational, or persistent. All of us will experience impairment at some time—for example, having our eyes dilated for a new pair of eyeglasses or having vision that needs correction in the first place.

    NEURODIVERSITY
    The concept that many “disorders” such as autism, attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and schizophrenia are best explained as natural variation in neurology. This is supported by the evidence that individuals on the autism spectrum may be high-functioning, such as Temple Grandin and Albert Einstein. Neurodiversity is also a social movement.

    SALUTOGENIC
    This term was introduced by Aaron Antonovsky in 1979 to describe how health is created through interactions with the social and physical environment. It is distinct from the dominant model in medicine, which presumes that health is the absence of pathogens. Comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness are the key components of a sense of coherence that ultimately determines health.

    SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY INSURANCE (SSDI)
    In the United States, many of us think of disability in the context of federal assistance. In fact, only one in five individuals with a disability receive SSDI. Of those who do, psychiatric disability is the largest group receiving benefits.

    References

    1. B. L. Plassman, K. M. Langa, G. G. Fisher, S. G. Heeringa, D. R. Weir, M. B. Ofstedal & R. B. Wallace, “Prevalence of cognitive impairment without dementia in the United States,” Annals of Internal Medicine 148, no. 6 (Mar. 18, 2008): 427-434.
    2. “Executive Functions,” UCSF Aging and Memory Center, accessed April 18, 2019, https://memory.ucsf.edu/executive-functions.
    3. For a detailed review, see S. Goldstein, J. A. Naglieri, D. Princiotta & T. M. Otero, “Introduction: A History of Executive Functioning as a Theoretical and Clinical Construct,” in The Handbook of Executive Functioning (Springer, New York, 2014), 3-12.
    4. For an overview of mental health and design, see G. W Evans. “The Built Environment and Mental Health,” Journal of Urban Health 80, no. 4, (2003): 536-555.
    5. J. A. Golembiewski, “Start Making Sense: Applying a Salutogenic Model to Architectural Design for Psychiatric Care,” Facilities 28, no. 3/4 (2010): 100-117.
    6. For a detailed discussion of alliesthesia, see M. Cabanac, “Physiological Role of Pleasure,” Science 173, no. 4002 (1971): 1103-1107.
    7. For a detailed discussion of classroom design for ASD, see M. Mostafa, “An Architecture for Autism: Concepts of Design Intervention for the Autistic User,” International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR 2, no. 1 (2008): 189-211.
    8. For example, see J. A. Ailshire & E. M. Crimmins, “Fine Particulate Matter Air Pollution and Cognitive Function Among Older U.S. Adults,” American Journal of Epidemiology 180, no. 4 (2014): 359-366 and L. G. Costa, T. B. Cole, J. Coburn, Y. C. Chang, K. Dao & P. J. Roqué, “Neurotoxicity of Traffic-Related Air Pollution,” Neurotoxicology 59 (2017): 133-139.
    9. A correlation between ASD and degree of urbanicity is shown in M. B. Lauritsen, A. Astrup, C. B. Pedersen, C. Obel, D. E. Schendel, L. Schieve & E. T. Parner, “Urbanicity and Autism Spectrum Disorders,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 44, No. 2 (2014): 394-404. A correlation to air pollution is shown in T. A. Becerra, M. Wilhelm, J. Olsen, M. Cockburn & B. Ritz, “Ambient Air Pollution and Autism in Los Angeles County, California, Environmental Health Perspectives 121, No. 3 (2012): 380-386.
    10. For a discussion of urban lighting and mental health, see R. Chepesiuk, “Missing the Dark: Health Effects of Light Pollution,” Environmental Health Perspectives 117, No. 1 (2009): A20.
    11. E. Gullone, “The Biophilia Hypothesis and Life in the 21st Century: Increasing Mental Health or Increasing Pathology?” Journal of Happiness Studies 1, No. 3 (2000): 293-322.
    12. For example, see J. Barton & J. Pretty, “What is the Best Dose of Nature and Green Exercise for Improving Mental Health? A Multi-Study Analysis,” Environmental Science & Technology 44, No. 10 (2010): 3947-3955 and P. Grahn, A. M. Pálsdóttir, J. Ottosson & I. H. Jonsdottir, “Longer Nature-Based Rehabilitation May Contribute to a Faster Return to Work in Patients with Reactions to Severe Stress and/ or Depression,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 14, No. 11 (2017): 1310.
    13. See N. M. Wells & G. W. Evans, “Nearby Nature: A Buffer of Life Stress Among Rural Children,” Environment and Behavior 35, No. 3 (2003): 311-330.
    14. See G. N. Bratman, J. P. Hamilton & G. C. Daily, “The Impacts of Nature Experience on Human Cognitive Function and Mental Health,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1249, No. 1 (2012): 118-136.
    15. For a foundational article on the role of culture in creating disability, see R. McDermott & H. Varenne, “Culture as Disability.” Anthropology & Education Quarterly 26, No. 3, (1995): 324-348.
    16. M. B. Mittelmark, “Introduction to the Handbook of Salutogenesis,” in The Handbook of Salutogenesis (Springer, Cham, 2017), 3-5.

  9. Parks, Cities, and Mental Health

    Comments Off on Parks, Cities, and Mental Health

    Intro

    At the Centre for Urban Design and Mental Health, Director Layla McCay works closely with designers, planners, and scientists who are actively interested in creating cities that support good mental health. The well-documented benefits of nature for city dwellers underlines the importance of new research showing what kinds of green spaces best promote well-being.

    Andrew Brown spoke with McCay by phone about how parks and nature influence mental health in cities, how that influence is currently studied, and how greener, healthier cities can be designed from that knowledge. This conversation has been edited and abridged for clarity.

    Building for the Most Vulnerable

    Too often our cultures, along with the cities we build, assume we all have the same backgrounds and abilities. Today our buildings are overwhelmingly built on a foundation of ableism, with urban form deferring primarily to able-bodied persons. This ideology is so widespread as to make invisible the barriers in the built environment experienced by the one in five individuals living with cognitive impairments.

    The most common reason for cognitive impairments is a mental disorder: Alarmingly, over 20% of Americans have one. And outside of a psychological diagnosis, there are many reasons why people might suffer from persistent cognitive impairments—neurological disorders such as Alzheimer’s or dementia affect one in five people over 71 years old, or 1.3% of all Americans. Diseases such as rheumatoid arthritis, Down syndrome, cerebral palsy, and conditions like migraines can also diminish cognitive abilities.

    Cognitive impairment often involves deficits in executive function: the skill required to control and coordinate all of the brain’s cognitive abilities and behaviors, like a CEO overseeing all departments in a business to make sure they progress efficiently and effectively. There are many theories about the nature and operation of executive functioning, but what might be the implications for design and planning? Take the example of ADHD. Decreased activity in the hippocampus—specifically, low dopamine levels—appears to be why individuals with ADHD exhibit impulsive behavior. Providing engaging sensory environments that promote dopamine production in the brain may be a helpful support in stimulating prefrontal brain activity.

    It’s imperative for architects to make streets and buildings more adaptable to everyone’s use. When our designs fall short of these standards, we risk making arbitrary barriers for individuals with cognitive impairments. But despite the physical environment having direct and indirect impacts on cognition, cognitive impairment is rarely considered as a design criterion, and practitioners in planning and design typically lack the lexicon to discuss inclusive design. (See the glossary below for a crash course.) From my perspective as an architect, questions about access for individuals with impairments typically go unasked, short-circuiting a design process that could remove barriers. We should ask which type of impairments people will bring with them to our buildings, streets, and parks. We have a mandate to expose and reduce these barriers so that the environment can help fulfill rather than hinder our potential. This means not only making the built environment more accessible but also increasing access to nature, providing the diversity of surroundings that humans need to thrive physically and mentally. Re-imagining our built environment in collaboration with individuals with cognitive impairments will be a step toward a more inclusive society, resulting in cities that improve the mental well-being of the entire population.

    Design for cognitive impairments is also a matter of equity. The legislative wins of the civil rights movement in the 1960s helped set the stage for those with physical impairments to advocate for their rights to access the built environment. Design improvements that address these impairments can now be thought of as universal design. Popularized in the 1980s, universal design posits that buildings, products, and processes work better the more people can use them. Undergirding universal design is an agenda that seeks to restore agency to excluded groups and to confront the ableist bias in society. This makes proponents of universal design also activists for social change.

    The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) legislation of 1990 is a great starting point, but despite increased awareness of cognitive impairments, designers still lack a framework for creating solutions and incorporating the tenets of universal design into practice. Removing obstacles in the built environment, for instance, such as those prescribed by the ADA, is not sufficient for creating designs that address cognitive impairments. A more salutogenic approach to mental health in the built environments—focused on promoting health and well-being rather than preventing disease or harm—provides opportunities for rich, physiological interactions, like chances to modify our surroundings to suit our mental and physical needs. Enabling people to access the built environment in this way helps exercise executive functioning skills: The choice of which path to take or which room to use provides a sense of control. This concept of manageability gives people the opportunity to create healthy outcomes while maintaining a strong sense of self. Adaptability is a hallmark of good design because it helps people accomplish their goals in a way that works for them.

    Providing all persons with options and the freedom to choose among them isn’t just a good idea—it’s also inherently pleasurable. Alliesthesia, the desire to achieve a neutral internal state, explains why water tastes better when we’re thirsty, and quiet is more desirable when we’re stressed. Providing arenas for people to exercise their executive functioning skills can create more opportunities for pleasure in the built environment.

    Encouraging agency and mental exercise within our surroundings is one way the built environment can support mental health. Attending to the ways a given suite of cognitive impairments compromise agency can help designers identify avenues for intervention. For instance, individuals with autism spectrum disorder (ASD) have symptoms that vary widely, although problems with social interactions are typical. Many individuals with ASD also have trouble with sensory integration—meaning they may be overwhelmed by lights, noise, and touch. Deficits in executive function are common. Given these characteristics, some simple accommodations could improve the learning experience for a student with ASD in a mainstream classroom, for example. Having an alcove in the room available for sensory escape would help ease overstimulation. Allowing options for self-regulation can help individuals with ASD practice executive functioning skills. Increased ventilation, insulation from outdoor noises, and controllable lighting are also particularly beneficial. The resulting classroom, tailored for those with ASD, also clearly stands to help everyone focus.

    Down syndrome is the most common form of genetic cognitive disability. It is characterized in part by atypical development of the prefrontal cortex, often producing deficits in executive function. While driving a car is out of reach for many individuals with Down syndrome, taking the bus is often a viable option. Navigating a transit system, however, can be a multi-step process that taxes our executive functioning, attention, and memory skills. Viewing this as an accessibility problem, there are several ways that attending to the nuances of this population could translate into better transit design. Bus stops with clear signage, a place to sit, and dynamic arrival times would reassure riders that they are at the right place while reducing attention demands. A digital interface at the bus stop where riders can enter their destination would confirm their travel plans and arrival time. The same interface could accept payment for the trip, easing a barrier to boarding the bus and finding a seat. A transit system designed in consideration of riders with cognitive impairment has features that all users would enjoy, allowing them to focus on alternate tasks and enjoy the ride.

    Urban design is a powerful avenue for mental health interventions, but being able to escape the city is equally important. The complexity of our brains can lead to an array of sensitivities when it comes to pollution in the air and water. Exposure to higher concentrations of dust, endocrine disruptors, and carcinogens may explain some differences in mental health for city-dwellers. Some research has shown that the incidence of autism spectrum disorder appears to be higher in cities. Anthropogenic soundscapes and lighting also disrupt sleep, increasing the risk of depression and other mood disorders.10 Just the stress from the pace of life in developed areas is associated with more pronounced symptoms for some individuals with cognitive impairment. This evidence supports the hypothesis that ecology is linked with mental health.

    Spending time in nature positively affects everyone’s mood, and is particularly impactful for those with mental disorders. Children who live nearby nature are also more psychologically resilient to stressors in life. A patch of wilderness can provide seminal developmental experiences for children, while also giving everyone room to breathe—literally and figuratively. Adding green space to our cities is a common-sense strategy for combating light and noise pollution, helping us entrain healthy sleep cycles. The evidence is telling us that better design for cognitive impairment means engineering with ecological principles that reduce pollution and increase our exposure to living things.

    For those with cognitive impairments, design for brain health is a civil rights issue. Neurotypical designers—those without neurologically atypically patterns of thought and behavior—have a mandate to combat the ideology of ableism and take part in the lived experience of their neighbors with cognitive impairments. This in part requires an earnest effort to include individuals with impairments—by including disability advocates as stakeholders in urban development. Recognizing exceptional projects that also meet the needs of those with disabilities will raise awareness of the damage caused by ableist development. Ultimately we could see rating systems such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) incorporate metrics for inclusive design, improving the standards of design in our communities overall.

    The brain activities that underpin success—executive function, memory, and attention—reside within all of us. Designing for these activities from multiple perspectives expands our knowledge of how our brains work, helping build empathy and, hopefully, a more cohesive community. Designing spaces for those with cognitive impairments supports neurotypicals too, building a future city that’s designed with all of us in mind.

    Glossary

    ABLEISM
    A common belief that individuals with impairments are abnormal and inferior to “able-bodied” people. Common ideas associated with this ideology are that individuals with impairments have less opportunity in life and suffer from limitations on their development as a whole person. Our buildings and streets bear testament to the hegemony of this ideology.

    COGNITIVE IMPAIRMENT
    This umbrella term indicates deficit in brain function observed through behavior. This article focuses on problem-solving skills (executive functioning), attention, and working memory. Intellectual disability and learning disability are common types of cognitive impairment.

    DISABILITY
    Individuals experience a disability when they are unable to perform their intended task. Tasks with social significance such as going to work and self-care add definition to the disability a person experiences. Sometimes tasks with little relevance to everyday life such as standardized tests are used to label a person with a disability. Having an impairment does not mean a person has a disability. Accommodations can eliminate barriers to participation. Eyeglasses can give an individual with poor vision the ability to drive, just as a wheelchair can enable someone with cerebral palsy to go shopping. Social norms and the design of the environment create barriers that act on a person’s impairment, thereby creating the disability.

    DSM 5
    Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), published by the American Psychiatric Association. This book is the basis for classifying mental disorders. It describes differences (and similarities) in cognitive functioning for disorders.

    IMPAIRMENT
    Difficulty hearing, a migraine, and a broken arm are examples of impairments. They may be temporary, situational, or persistent. All of us will experience impairment at some time—for example, having our eyes dilated for a new pair of eyeglasses or having vision that needs correction in the first place.

    NEURODIVERSITY
    The concept that many “disorders” such as autism, attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and schizophrenia are best explained as natural variation in neurology. This is supported by the evidence that individuals on the autism spectrum may be high-functioning, such as Temple Grandin and Albert Einstein. Neurodiversity is also a social movement.

    SALUTOGENIC
    This term was introduced by Aaron Antonovsky in 1979 to describe how health is created through interactions with the social and physical environment. It is distinct from the dominant model in medicine, which presumes that health is the absence of pathogens. Comprehensibility, manageability, and meaningfulness are the key components of a sense of coherence that ultimately determines health.

    SOCIAL SECURITY DISABILITY INSURANCE (SSDI)
    In the United States, many of us think of disability in the context of federal assistance. In fact, only one in five individuals with a disability receive SSDI. Of those who do, psychiatric disability is the largest group receiving benefits.

    References

    1. B. L. Plassman, K. M. Langa, G. G. Fisher, S. G. Heeringa, D. R. Weir, M. B. Ofstedal & R. B. Wallace, “Prevalence of cognitive impairment without dementia in the United States,” Annals of Internal Medicine 148, no. 6 (Mar. 18, 2008): 427-434.
    2. “Executive Functions,” UCSF Aging and Memory Center, accessed April 18, 2019, https://memory.ucsf.edu/executive-functions.
    3. For a detailed review, see S. Goldstein, J. A. Naglieri, D. Princiotta & T. M. Otero, “Introduction: A History of Executive Functioning as a Theoretical and Clinical Construct,” in The Handbook of Executive Functioning (Springer, New York, 2014), 3-12.
    4. For an overview of mental health and design, see G. W Evans. “The Built Environment and Mental Health,” Journal of Urban Health 80, no. 4, (2003): 536-555.
    5. J. A. Golembiewski, “Start Making Sense: Applying a Salutogenic Model to Architectural Design for Psychiatric Care,” Facilities 28, no. 3/4 (2010): 100-117.
    6. For a detailed discussion of alliesthesia, see M. Cabanac, “Physiological Role of Pleasure,” Science 173, no. 4002 (1971): 1103-1107.
    7. For a detailed discussion of classroom design for ASD, see M. Mostafa, “An Architecture for Autism: Concepts of Design Intervention for the Autistic User,” International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR 2, no. 1 (2008): 189-211.
    8. For example, see J. A. Ailshire & E. M. Crimmins, “Fine Particulate Matter Air Pollution and Cognitive Function Among Older U.S. Adults,” American Journal of Epidemiology 180, no. 4 (2014): 359-366 and L. G. Costa, T. B. Cole, J. Coburn, Y. C. Chang, K. Dao & P. J. Roqué, “Neurotoxicity of Traffic-Related Air Pollution,” Neurotoxicology 59 (2017): 133-139.
    9. A correlation between ASD and degree of urbanicity is shown in M. B. Lauritsen, A. Astrup, C. B. Pedersen, C. Obel, D. E. Schendel, L. Schieve & E. T. Parner, “Urbanicity and Autism Spectrum Disorders,” Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 44, No. 2 (2014): 394-404. A correlation to air pollution is shown in T. A. Becerra, M. Wilhelm, J. Olsen, M. Cockburn & B. Ritz, “Ambient Air Pollution and Autism in Los Angeles County, California, Environmental Health Perspectives 121, No. 3 (2012): 380-386.
    10. For a discussion of urban lighting and mental health, see R. Chepesiuk, “Missing the Dark: Health Effects of Light Pollution,” Environmental Health Perspectives 117, No. 1 (2009): A20.
    11. E. Gullone, “The Biophilia Hypothesis and Life in the 21st Century: Increasing Mental Health or Increasing Pathology?” Journal of Happiness Studies 1, No. 3 (2000): 293-322.
    12. For example, see J. Barton & J. Pretty, “What is the Best Dose of Nature and Green Exercise for Improving Mental Health? A Multi-Study Analysis,” Environmental Science & Technology 44, No. 10 (2010): 3947-3955 and P. Grahn, A. M. Pálsdóttir, J. Ottosson & I. H. Jonsdottir, “Longer Nature-Based Rehabilitation May Contribute to a Faster Return to Work in Patients with Reactions to Severe Stress and/ or Depression,” International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 14, No. 11 (2017): 1310.
    13. See N. M. Wells & G. W. Evans, “Nearby Nature: A Buffer of Life Stress Among Rural Children,” Environment and Behavior 35, No. 3 (2003): 311-330.
    14. See G. N. Bratman, J. P. Hamilton & G. C. Daily, “The Impacts of Nature Experience on Human Cognitive Function and Mental Health,” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1249, No. 1 (2012): 118-136.
    15. For a foundational article on the role of culture in creating disability, see R. McDermott & H. Varenne, “Culture as Disability.” Anthropology & Education Quarterly 26, No. 3, (1995): 324-348.
    16. M. B. Mittelmark, “Introduction to the Handbook of Salutogenesis,” in The Handbook of Salutogenesis (Springer, Cham, 2017), 3-5.

  10. Good Design Over Grand Gestures

    Comments Off on Good Design Over Grand Gestures

    Editor’s Note

    The idea of rebuilding America’s infrastructure often inspires ambitious plans and political promises, but grand aims are so often hobbled by flawed execution. Projects like the “Big Dig” in Boston or the San Francisco Bay Bridge’s eastern span are infamous due to massive delays and cost overruns. For our final perspective, Aaron Betsky recommends that the United States rethink its approach to getting the infrastructure it needs. He presents a sweeping vision of how, through new technology and design, the nation may find ways to improve the performance of existing infrastructure and build greater value into the new. Betsky also imagines a future where design interventions may be small, flexible, and tactical in nature, but, when linked together through thoughtful and inspired planning, may yet achieve an impact that is greater than the sum of their parts.

    Andrew Brown, Director of Programs

    Across the country, roads, bridges, and tunnels are falling apart; airports are overcrowded and unable to handle the volume of traffic they attract; congestion is wasting millions of hours of productive time and millions of tons of non-renewable resources from the tailpipes of idling cars; uneven development is isolating the poor in places without adequate public transportation or services.

    It would be nice to imagine that we could solve all these problems with grand gestures. Unfortunately, that is not only impossible, but unwise. First, support for a $1 trillion infrastructure plan, even if it leverages tax credits to spur private investment, is uncertain given very divergent views within Congress about the need for any federal involvement at all. Second, given that Congress hasn’t raised the federal gas tax since 1993, the burden of supporting our infrastructure will shift even more to local and state governments. To improve their infrastructure, some urban areas may be able to attract financing. But because private investors will only select profitable projects, poorer suburbs and areas beyond dense urban cores may find themselves left out, leaving them more isolated and unequal in their distributions of resources. Furthermore, the benefits of privatizing public services have been ambiguous, proving so expensive that in some cases (Coeburn, Virginia’s water system) communities have reversed course, while in others (Indiana Toll Road) the companies and banks involved have crept away in defeat.

    So, what, then, is to be done? Here, designers and planners have the opportunity to propose smart solutions. Though many of us see infrastructure as massive, inflexible, and expensive, great designers can apply their imaginations to improving existing infrastructure. Innovative design can increase performance and add types of use, or conceive new projects altogether that provide flexibility, vary in size and cost, but still do much to improve mobility, reduce pollution, give shelter from extreme weather, or better connect people within and between communities.

    Perhaps first, innovators should turn their attention toward smart technologies that can help us get more from the infrastructure we already have. Airlines and airports are using technology to increase efficiency of their services, scheduling, and pricing in ways that, though sometimes painful for the consumer, are rather brilliant in optimizing the use of materials and personnel. The fact that you don’t have an extra seat next to you on the plane is, from that perspective, a good thing, as the airline company is not wasting fuel flying an empty chair. In the future, the airlines may rely on laser guidance and satellite tracking to sequence planes more efficiently, so they can both fly more directly and closer together.

    Additional funding for investigations into materials and methods could connect us in more flexible and sustainable ways. That means, for instance, looking at the ways in which we put roads together. In Europe, there are many experiments with new forms of expanded asphalt—road surfacing materials made by harvesting and processing existing asphalt. They are made out of recycled materials and let water drain through so that it can be collected and recycled, absorbing up to 90 percent of the tire noise, which, in turn, is 70 percent of all highway noise. They can eat pollution and, even, through either absorption and conversion of kinetic energy or embedded solar panels, produce energy. All of this would mean that we could get more use out of our existing roads, and they would be less wasteful and less of a nuisance to those who have to be their neighbors.

    Beyond new materials, designers may also conceive of new ways to eliminate the need for roads altogether. Though not appropriate in all cases, cable cars, in municipalities like Caracas, Medellin, and several other South American cities, are an attractive alternative. Reducing the size of not only cars, but also everything from buses to fire trucks—a challenge given that their uniformly monster size is determined by unions and regulations—could further mitigate the need for new road construction. In the case where roads are already planned, they may add value in more pragmatic ways, such as the plans for the extension of the I-15 highway from Las Vegas to the Mexican border, which is supposed to provide room for high-speed trains and green spaces as part of the initial construction.

    They may take action in small ways that are temporary in nature—in the manner of the “parklet” movement—or join the long slog by sitting on committees and boards responsible for infrastructural improvements. The BeltLine around Atlanta is a good example of how both these tactics may come together effectively. Designers came up with the idea of providing small, temporary parks and amenities along an abandoned transportation corridor that, when combined with new street car routes and connected transit, could stitch together Atlanta’s far-flung suburban communities. The project showed how designers may start with small, temporary elements and, through smart planning, provide larger and potentially more impactful projects, even if they are never built.

    Examples of such visions abound. Probably the most inspiring construction now underway are projects conceived through Rebuild By Design. The post-Hurricane Sandy design competition awarded $930 million to projects that strengthen the New York metropolitan area’s ability to withstand rising water levels. Altogether, the project features many different components, including the necklace Bjarke Ingels has designed for lower Manhattan, combinations of parks that will act as buffers and dykes, storage sites for excess water, and small-scale interventions at the street level to improve drainage. In other words, there is work to be done, but his is not a time for grand gestures. This is a time to be smart, be creative, and stay flexible.

    About the Author

    A prolific architecture critic and commentator, Aaron Betsky contributes frequently to design publications and has been vocal advocate of design as a tool to bring communities together. He has worked as a designer for Frank O. Gehry & Associates and Hodgetts + Fung, and served as the director of the Netherlands Architecture Institute, the Cincinnati Art Museum, and the 11th Venice International Architecture Biennale. He is currently director of Virginia Tech’s School of Architecture + Design.