Urban Form as a Driver for Inclusivity

in Public Open Spaces: A Case 17

from Glasgow

Preeti Pansare and Ashraf M. Salama

Abstract relationship between the user and the space, the

activities, and the sense of positive experience.
This paper argues for inclusivity as a critical
The paper draws conclusions on the possibility
factor for designing and examining public open of developing an index that examines human
spaces (POS). Understanding inclusivity in behavior in relation to urban form while
urban environments has been limited to phys-
embedding inclusivity as a key parameter for
ical accessibility for many decades. The United research and design.
Nations report (UN2030) emphasizes eradicat-
ing social exclusion and making societies more Keywords
cohesive through social integration and social
inclusion. This study considers inclusivity as a


Inclusivity Convivial space Safe open
value attached to public open space (POS). An


space Accessible Livability
inclusive public open space is one where the
needs of every single individual are recognized
and respected affording them a positive expe-
rience regardless of their background. 17.1 Introduction: The Case
Nonetheless, no comprehensive understanding for Inclusivity in the Urban
of how urban form affects inclusivity has been Realm
undertaken for POS beyond accessibility.
Using a selection of public open spaces in A city is a space that is always in a state of
Glasgow, Scotland, a walking tour assessment change due to the flux in activities and popula-
procedure is utilized as an observation tool to tion, in response to larger socio-economic forces.
quantify a set of indicators associated with Globalization has led to massive migration of
urban form and inclusivity. A further Likert people over the last few decades. Migration and
Scale is implemented to examine the reciprocal the growing diversity of urban populations have
brought about new experiences of space and
contact, resulting in cosmopolitanism, creoliza-
tion, and conviviality, but also riddled with new
P. Pansare
A. M. Salama (&) patterns of inequality, segregation, and prejudice
University of Northumbria, Architecture and Built (Ye 2019). Migration has eventually led to
Environment, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK
diverse cultures interacting and being together in
e-mail: [email protected]
new environments. These changes in places of
P. Pansare
residence and moving away to a new place
e-mail: [email protected]

© The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2023 219
M. Mostafa et al. (eds.), Design for Inclusivity, Sustainable Development Goals Series,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-36302-3_17
220 P. Pansare and A. M. Salama

trigger certain behaviors that lead to the devel- development, leading to further divide between
opment of newer constructs of self-belonging classes. Likewise, several studies are conducted
and identity. Thus, it becomes important to study on the image of the place and the city, but social
the inclusivity of public spaces for making the inclusion of the users for a more socially cohe-
city livable and hence improving the quality of sive place has been oversimplified. Urban iden-
life (Helliwell et al. 2020). The notion of inclu- tity is defined as the image of the environment in
sivity is underscored in Goal 11 of the UN Lynch’s theory, which considers identity as a
Sustainable Development Goals which states subjective component in completing the image of
“Make cities and human settlements inclusive, a place.
safe resilient and sustainable” (UN 2016). Public open spaces are often studied and
The UN places emphasis on social inclusion as measured for quality of space, aesthetic appear-
a key driver of inclusive development. Social ance of space and physical accessibility. There is
inclusion is defined as the process of improving sufficient body of knowledge that discusses the
the terms of participation in society for people, positive physical and mental health outcomes
who are disadvantaged based on age, sex, dis- associated with the access to parks and natural
ability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion, or eco- settings (Sugiyama et al. 2008). There are also
nomic or other status, through enhanced several indices used to assess the livability,
opportunities, access to resources, voice, and happiness, health and well-being, and quality of
respect for rights (UN 2016). Thus, social inclu- life in cities, but not much has been done with the
sion is both a process and a goal (UN 2016). idea of inclusivity in urban public spaces. This
Jacobs (1961) observes that “the ability of a city overview places emphasis on those writings and
to foster the diversity of users and uses in practices that delineate the multi-dimensional
everyday streets is a driver for its ability to sus- aspect of urban space diversity and the notion of
tain well-located parks that can give back grace inclusion. Typically, inclusion has always been
and delight to their neighborhoods instead of perceived through the lens of physical accessi-
vacuity” (Jacobs 1961). The importance of bility. Public open spaces are the spine that
diversity is also recognized by Stanley et al. connects different parts of the city. The need to
(2012), who stress that social heterogeneity and make them socially sustainable has become as
the fluid nature of diversity are important factors important as economic and environmental sus-
for understanding the social and cultural identities tainability. In diverse spaces, social inclusion
of neighborhoods (Stanley et al. 2012). Social becomes the overarching theme to make the
sustainability requires the presence of formal and urban public space more sustainable. Moreover,
informal processes; systems; structures; and inclusivity–lack of discrimination based on gen-
relationships to actively support the capacity of der, ethnicity, or other attributes—has always
current and future generations to create healthy been studied more in buildings or enclosed
and livable communities (WACOSS 2002). environments such as schools or office environ-
The city is widely studied in physical and ments but not at the scale of urban public open
visual terms, but not for social cohesiveness spaces. Therefore, it can be corroborated that no
achieved through social inclusion. Place identity comprehensive understanding of how urban form
(Lynch 1960; Whyte 1980) is widely studied, but affects inclusivity has been undertaken for public
expression of identity in public spaces has been space beyond accessibility.
overlooked. One of the notable exceptions was This paper establishes and tests the rationale
Harvey, who gave a detailed account of the that inclusivity needs to go beyond accessibility
hierarchies present in the world, highlighting the and that it is affected by the built form. The built
idea of exclusion leading to the need for cos- form and the user interactions with it and
mopolitanism (Harvey 2000). His observations amongst themselves are important factors for
are valid until today, since policies have failed to understanding social inclusion (Carr et al. 1992;
account for the unevenness in geographic Gehl et al. 2006). Thus, the paper interrogates the
17 Urban Form as a Driver for Inclusivity in Public Open Spaces: A Case from Glasgow 221

relationship between urban form and inclusivity important part of the experience of exclusion is a
in urban public open spaces utilizing a case from weakened or non-existent sense of identity and
Glasgow. It goes beyond just exploring the space pride. A key step in integrating excluded popu-
for health and well-being of the users but lations into the social mainstream, therefore, is to
explores the idea of an inclusive public space as a assist them to find their voice, to validate their
space, where the needs of every single individual histories and traditions, to establish a collective
are recognized and respected affording them a identity, to give expression to their experiences
positive experience regardless of their back- and aspirations, and to build self-confidence
ground, age, or gender. (Griffiths et al. 1999).
As noted by Whyte, public open space pro-
vides a stimulus which supports interactions
17.2 Materials and Methods between complete strangers (Whyte, 1980). Jan
Gehl has also observed that the urban form sur-
17.2.1 A Theoretical Framework rounding any public space influences the
for Examining Inclusivity behavior of its inhabitants (Gehl et al. 2006). The
in the Urban Realm diversity amongst people occupying the space,
shapes the variety of ways in which it is expe-
The idea of inclusivity has evolved from a focus rienced, understood, and perceived. Amin (2008)
on physical accessibility to collaborative design argues that the quality of the space would
and universal design between the 1950s and the determine the way in which an urban street or a
1970s. The late 20th century witnessed a para- square is used (Amin 2008). This study hypoth-
digm shift to a more service orientated design, esizes that the diversity in urban form leads to
which resulted in a focus on human centered diversity in the use of space and an increase in
design aimed at making products and spaces the perceived inclusivity for visitors to the space.
more human centered. Despite these advances, To examine the relationship between urban
ghettos continued to persist in inner cities and form and inclusivity, the whole site needs to be
continue to exist today, along with the develop- analyzed according to a multi-layered approach.
ment of a permanent suburban middle class (Hall The analysis would include both quantitative and
2014). The planning and design of public spaces qualitative methods and aims at interpreting the
typically follow three tenets: (a) everyone has relationship of perception of safety, temporality,
rights of access; (b) encounters between indi- the urban form, and inclusivity. Thus, an
vidual users are unplanned and unexceptional; important quality of public space is visual and
and (c) their behavior towards each other is physical permeability, that is the ability to move
subject to rules none other than those of common through an environment and see the routes
norms of social civility (Chua and Edwards available to them (Carmona et al. 2011). The
1992). work of Krier suggests that the richness of the
The idea of inclusivity in public spaces as urban domain is enhanced by adjacent facades
considered in this study goes beyond the pre- that are architecturally subdivided (Krier 1992).
ceding basic tenets. For inclusion to work at the This is further emphasized by other scholars who
level of the user, the user needs to acquire a sense argue for understanding the relationship between
of belonging towards the public open space. urban landscape and social life for a better
A strong sense of belonging would be a driver understanding of the usability of urban space
for a sense of community amongst the users. (Lynch 1960; Jacobs 1961; Whyte 1980; Gehl
Based on an extensive review of theories in this 1987; Rapoport 1990).
field, the concepts associated with inclusivity are The production of space, following Henri
identity, place identity, appropriation, accessi- Lefebvre’s theory, can be utilized as the basis of
bility, flexibility of activities, and recognition of a framework for analyzing the factors that impact
user diversity. As Ron Griffiths notes, an inclusivity. According to Lefebvre, the
222 P. Pansare and A. M. Salama

production of space takes place in a triad con- 17.2.2 The Case of Glasgow City
sisting of conceived, perceived and lived space Center
(Salama & Wiedmann 2013). In this study, the
lived space and the perceived space are broken The sites for the study were selected from
into components of physical and functional Glasgow due to its rich and diverse local history,
domains. The lived space is produced by the shaped by shipbuilding, railways, landscaped
individual identification of individuals with space gardens, allotments, archaeology, architecture,
and expressed by their use and behavior, leading and diverse population. Between the 1880s and
to further identification of various attributes of 1950s, Glasgow was one of the most densely
inclusivity including perception of and behavior populated cities in the world, where immigrants
within the space. The examination of the body of flocked to the city from across the world. During
knowledge across multiple disciplines enabled the 19th century, the city was known as the
the development of a framework consisting of ‘Second city of the British empire’ (McKean
the four domains—physical, functional, behav- et al. 1989). This period was characterized by
ioral, and perceptual—to examine the relation- magnificent Victorian buildings and urban
ship between attributes of urban form and the spaces, which continue to shape the character of
different components of inclusivity (Fig. 17.1). modern Glasgow (Salama et al. 2017). Con-
Each of the four domains have nine components versely, during the 1930s, the prosperity of the
that would be measured on a Likert scale, which city declined dramatically as a result of the por-
can be outlined as follows: trayal of the city as an unsafe city spanning
Physical attributes: This set of attributes would decades, with rumors of razor gangs’ itinerant
capture the boundary conditions and the physical through the streets (Stewart 1997). Today Glas-
configuration of the urban public open space gow continues to be the largest city in Scotland.
(UPOS). The different factors considered in this In recent years it has initiated to its new role as a
domain are the morphology of form, formal qual-
ity, social spaces, accessibility, spatial configura- postindustrial European city and has become a
tion, permeability, legibility, temporality, and vibrant hub for trade, education, culture, and arts
diversity of landscape elements. (Fig. 17.2). Despite urban sprawl, social segre-
Functional attributes: This set includes factors gation, and car dependency (Frey 1999) the city
relevant to the variety of uses in the UPOS. The
nine factors considered as functional attributes are displays a great deal of spatial and formal con-
affordance for social interaction, walkability, social sistency, which makes it a thought-provoking
space mobility, accessibility, robustness and place for urban exploration (Salama et al. 2017).
adaptability, proximity and continuity, the richness The sites chosen for the study were in proximity
of visual experience, affordance for activities, and
ecological quality. to each other, and in the Glasgow city center.
Behavioral attributes: This set of attributes con- This ensured that the urban form across the
siders factors related to the sense of interaction and sites is comparable, and yet distinct enough for
idea of expression. The factors considered as each site to maintain its identity. First site was
behavioral attributes are diversity, diversity of
activities, diversity for expression, identity, inter- George square, which was originally designed as
personal relationships, fairness and administration, a residential private central civic space and
place attachment, sense of community, and human opened to the public in 1876. The second site for
scale. the study was the royal exchange square, which
Perceptual attributes: These attributes would
describe the user’s perspective on the space. The served as a meeting place for merchants and
factors considered as perceptual attributes include other businessmen to gather and deal in com-
safety and security, cultural diversity, cultural modity trade. This was also the site for the city's
marker, cultural memory, proxemics, attractive- first telephone exchange. The site has undergone
ness, comfort, distinction and recognition, and
density of users within the POS. many changes and was finally converted to house
the Gallery of Modern Art (GOMA). Enjoying
17 Urban Form as a Driver for Inclusivity in Public Open Spaces: A Case from Glasgow 223

Fig. 17.1 Domains and attributes for assessing inclusivity

Fig. 17.2 Evolution of Glasgow city center

224 P. Pansare and A. M. Salama

Fig. 17.3 Selected sites for assessment in Glasgow city center

unique history and development across the past caused by differences in urban form as opposed
century, the remaining sites were St. Enoch to differences in socio-economic indicators
square and Buchanan gallery square with the across the user base.
spine connecting the two (Fig. 17.3).

17.3.2 Mechanism for Assessing

17.3 Research Tools the Site

17.3.1 Site Selection A key element of the study is to instigate a

mechanism that involves the creation and use of
The six sites chosen to exhibit certain similarities a toolkit to examine the domains that would help
in the built form but are diverse in terms of the in defining and analyzing inclusivity in urban
land use despite their physical proximity while public open spaces (UPOS). The toolkit would
all share a similar yet diverse base of population be used to assess the urban public space in four
(users). As a result, the observed differences in layers of investigation, namely walking tour
inclusivity across the sites are more likely to be assessment, behavioral mapping, photomapping
17 Urban Form as a Driver for Inclusivity in Public Open Spaces: A Case from Glasgow 225

tool, and urban observation. The toolkit draws 2015). Lynch and Alexander employ this
upon Kevin Lynch’s interviewing and mapping approach in their seminal works to capture an
method to understand the user’s perception of individual’s perception of urban forms in the
space through their usage patterns (Lynch and environment (Lynch 1960; Alexander et al.
Hack 1971; Sanoff 1991). This method would be 1977).
utilized in the assessment of the physical, func- The photo mapping tool would be used to
tional, perceptual, and behavioral domains assess the perception of the space and its expe-
through observational tools (Table 17.1). The riential quality as reported by its users. This
data collated through behavioral mapping would would help to negotiate around the researcher
be used for the development of space profiles bias during the pure observation and mapping
(Lynch 1960; Whyte 1988). phase. In investigating other societies, several
The walking tour assessment would look at studies established that photography is helpful
patterns generated because of the physical and for overcoming habitual seeing and limited
functional activities around the boundaries and memory and perspective.
within the UPOS (Urban public open space). The Whyte looked at the relationship between
walking tour assessment procedure would also people’s behavior within a space and the design
observe the connection between the temporal features of the space (Whyte 1988). This method
changes and the urban form (Salama and Azzali is further extended to use the urban intervention

Table 17.1 Tools—operational and assessment dimensions of the six sites

Tools Operational dimensions Assessment dimensions
Behavioral Conducted before the walking tour • Observing users and the range of activities
mapping assessment; designed to capture vibrancy of • Development of space profiles
stationary, mobile, and temporal activities
taking place; used to tabulate the different
profiles of users and their behavior within the
sites
Walking tour Conducted by the researcher during the • Recognition of patterns
weekday, weekend and on days of fair and • Observation of the relationship between
inclement weather; outcomes were recorded at temporality and urban form
four times during the day and the activities of
the users within the urban public space and the
surrounding urban form
Photomapping Considered eliciting user preferences at • Users’ perception of space
selected sites through the user’s lens, to • Users’ experience in space
augment the data collected by researchers Responding to the following questions:
visiting the same sites. This visual perception ! What do people do in the POS, at the
tool will be based on a detailed framework boundaries and on the streets? How many
designed to help the observer observe the site connections are available for movement
carefully and diligently. The observer would through the space? How much time do people
be given a detailed framework to take spend in the POS? How is the boundary
photographs on their phone interacting with the POS?
Observing All the 6 sites situated in the city center area • Analyzing street furniture and landscape
urban are inundated by vehicular and pedestrian elements including placement and users’
interventions traffic. Observation mechanism is designed to engagement
gather information related to the urban street
furniture and landscape elements that facilitate
the movement which would be ascertained,
and their placement analyzed to examine their
impact in making the UPOS more accessible
safe, comfortable, and scenic
226 P. Pansare and A. M. Salama

observation tool that would be used to gather The final output of this step is a structured data
information related to the urban street furniture set populated with data corresponding to urban
and landscape elements. form indicators for all sites. This process
involved two key steps: (a) creation of a score
card for each site by aggregating the scores for
17.3.3 Data Analysis individual attributes, and (b) Computation of
Pearson’s correlation coefficient to examine the
The objective of examining the relationship relationship between urban form attributes and
between urban form and inclusivity is achieved components of inclusivity.
by conducting a factor wise investigation that
considers the relationship between elements of
urban form and components of inclusivity which 17.3.4 Preliminary Key Findings
stem from the walking tour assessment con-
ducted by the researchers. In essence, the oper- Key spatial features resulting from observing
ationalized objectives of the study are (a) to urban interventions include three elements that
examine the relationship between attributes of can be identified as follows (Fig. 17.4):
urban form and components of inclusivity by Barricades: Across the six sites, there are
pooling data across the six sites and (b) to sufficient well-designed light masts and bollards
compare the elements of urban form and per- for the purpose of security. The metal bollards
ceived inclusivity across the sites. The steps are placed in front of the entrance and exit of the
involved in the overall data analysis process can subway station and at the interchange between
be outlined as follows: the pedestrian and vehicular road along Bucha-
1. Extraction of urban form attributes from nan Street. There are certain bollards which
walking tour assessment. could be moved to ground level allowing access
2. Labelling of photographs from users pho- to pedestrian areas for loading/unloading and
tomapping responses to denote attributes of emergency vehicles. The other bollards are made
urban form. of marble and used as seating space, as they are
3. Tabulation of data from behavior mapping similar to big white concrete seats provided.
exercise. There are square and rectangular planters which
4. Collation of labeled data across walking tour serve the dual purpose of barricading and pro-
assessment and photomapping responses. viding aesthetic value to the space.
5. Computation of aggregated data. Facilities: There are wooden as well as
marble/stone-like seats provided in most of the
It is noted, however, that the analysis pre- sites. However, most of the seating is appropriate
sented here is focused on Walking tour, observ- for individuals or small groups. There is no
ing urban Interventions and does not reflect the provision for larger groups to come together and
comprehensive data sets gathered through the spend time in the UPOS. Most of the seats appear
other two tools utilized for assessment. to be in excellent physical condition. The seats
The walking tour assessment conducted by inside George square seem to be movable, thus
the researcher captured the attributes of urban allowing some benches to be shifted under tree
form across the selected sites. The resulting canopies for groups to sit together. There are
observations are recorded in fact sheets, with one maps vertically designed to allow more than 3
fact sheet representing each walking tour session. people to observe the ‘you are here map’ without
The next step involved converting the raw data interrupting each other’s personal space. The
using a 5-step Likert scale, which was followed map size appears to be of adequate size and is
by the creation of variables corresponding to legible and easy to read. The other facilities
urban form indicators by studying the distribu- present on the site are cycle stands and garbage
tion of the Likert scale data across the six sites. bins.
17 Urban Form as a Driver for Inclusivity in Public Open Spaces: A Case from Glasgow 227

Fig. 17.4 Types of urban interventions at identified sites, Glasgow

Temporary Elements: There are temporary for getting together. George square and St. Enoch
barricades that allow for temporal activities to square score the highest on temporality, which is
take place on all sites. Temporary tents and sig- an affordance for expression. None of the sites
nage for social and cultural activities are also receive a high score on the provision of social
visible on all sites. spaces. Barring Buchanan galleries, none of the
The score card: synthesizes the observations sites receive a high score of legibility. George
from the walking tour assessment across the six square, being a historic site scores the highest on
sites and has a score ranging from 1 to 5. Score the diversity of landscape elements.
of 4 and above is good, 3–4 is moderate and Functional attributes: George square and the
below 3 is poor. An outline of the findings three Buchanan sites receive a high score of
underlying the four domains is included below: functional attributes, while St. Enoch square and
Physical attributes: St. Enoch square, and the Royal Exchange square receive a moderate score
three Buchanan sites score moderate on the (Table 17.3). All the sites receive a high score on
physical aspects of the urban form attributes accessibility, proximity and continuity and
(Table 17.2). George square received the highest robustness and adaptability. Except for Royal
rating, while Royal exchange square scored the Exchange square, all the sites also receive a high
lowest. George square is better accessible in score on social space mobility. Royal Exchange
comparison to St. Enoch square and scores the square scores poorly on multiple attributes such
highest on the Formal quality and Morphology of as affordance for social interaction, walkability,
form. St. Enoch is connected by a subway but social space mobility, affordance for activities
there seems to be a lack of maintenance of the and ecological quality. Other than St. Enoch
surface areas thus making them less accessible. square all sites receive a high score on the rich-
None of the places offer protection from incle- ness of visual experience. George square receives
ment weather, other than going indoors. Royal a high score on all the functional attributes
exchange square has a big portico in the front, except ecological quality, where the site receives
which acts as a weather protection area and space a moderate score.
228 P. Pansare and A. M. Salama

Table 17.2 Score card for the physical component of the urban form attributes

Royal
Domain Urban Form Attributes George Enoch Buchanan Buchanan Buchanan Exchange
Square Square street 1 street 2 Galleries Square
Physical Morphology of form 4.2 4.2 3.7 3.7 3.7 4.2
Physical Formal Quality 4.6 3.4 3.4 3.2 1.8 3
Physical Social spaces 3.6 3.6 2.7 3.0 2.8 3.0
Physical Accessibility 4.4 2.5 4.3 4.1 4.1 2.8
Physical Spatial Configuration 4.0 4.6 3.9 3.9 3.9 4.3
Physical Permeability 4.3 3.0 4.3 4.3 4.3 3.0
Physical Legibility 3.0 3.3 3.8 3.0 4.0 2.0
Physical Temporality 5.0 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Diversity of landscape
Physical
elements 4.0 3.0 2.8 2.8 2.0 1.5
Physical 4.1 3.6 3.5 3.4 3.3 3.0

Table 17.3 Score card for the functional component of the urban form attributes

Royal
Domain Urban Form Attributes George Enoch Buchanan Buchanan Buchanan Exchange
Square Square street 1 street 2 Galleries Square
Affordance for Social
Functional Interaction 4.7 3.0 3.7 3.7 3.0 3.0
Functional Walkabilty 4.6 3.6 5.0 5.0 5.0 2.4
Functional Social space mobility 5.0 5.0 4.0 4.0 4.8 2.0
Functional Accessibilty 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Robustness and
Functional adapatability 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0
Functional Proximity and continuity 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Richness of visual
Functional experience 5.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.5
Functional Affordance for activities 5.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 1.0
Functional Ecological Quality 3.8 3.7 4.3 4.3 3.8 3.0
Functional 4.7 3.9 4.4 4.4 4.4 3.3

Behavioral attributes: All the sites except the density of users. George square sees less self-
Royal exchange square, receive a high score on expression but sees far more social and cultural
diversity and diversity of activities (Table 17.4). activities and provides affordance to create and
However, George square and St. Enoch Square foster interpersonal relationships. The walking
score poorly on the diversity of expression. The tour assessment tool is unable to assess fairness
three Buchanan sites score the highest on this and administration and sense of community,
attribute followed by royal exchange square. hence these scores are not considered when
Royal exchange square affords a space for indi- computing the aggregate score for behavioral
vidual expression probably due to the lower domain.
17 Urban Form as a Driver for Inclusivity in Public Open Spaces: A Case from Glasgow 229

Table 17.4 Score card for the behavioral component of the urban form attributes

Royal
Components of
Domain George Enoch Buchanan Buchanan Buchanan Exchange
inclusivity
Square Square street 1 street 2 Galleries Square
Behavioural Diversity 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.3
Behavioural Diversity of Activities 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.8
Diversity for
Behavioural expression 3.0 3.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 4.0
Behavioural Identity 5.0 3.5 5.0 5.0 4.0 5.0
Interpersonal
Behavioural Relationships 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 3.0
Fairness &
Behavioural Administration

Behavioural Place Attachment 5.0 4.0 2.0 3.0 2.5 4.0

Behavioural Sense of Community
Behavioural Human scale 5.0 3.7 4.3 4.3 4.3 4.0
Behavioural 4.36 3.60 4.05 4.05 3.98 3.58

Perceptual attributes: All the sites receive a score. None of the sites barring George square
high score of distinction and recognition. All receive a high score on cultural memory of
sites except St. Enoch square receive a high score comfort. However, George square and St. Enoch
on user density, and all the sites except Royal square score poorly on cultural markers due to
Exchange square receive a high score on prox- the absence of public art and the lack of affor-
emics (Table 17.5). A different picture can be dances for the users to add their own cultural
seen on attractiveness, where George square and markers. None of the sites receive a high score
Buchanan Street receive a high score, St. Enoch for safety and security. While George square
and Royal Exchange square receive a moderate receives a moderate score, all the other sites
score while Buchanan Galleries receives a low receive a low score. Only George square receives

Table 17.5 Score card for the perceptual component of the urban form attributes

Royal
Components of
Domain George Enoch Buchanan Buchanan Buchanan Exchange
inclusivity
Square Square street 1 street 2 Galleries Square
Perceptual Safety and Security 3.7 2.5 2.3 2.3 2.7 2.7
Perceptual Cultural Diversity 5.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 3.0 2.0
Perceptual Cultural Marker 2.3 3.3 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0
Perceptual Cultural memory 5.0 3.0 3.0 3.0 2.5 1.0
Perceptual Proxemics 4.0 4.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 3.5
Perceptual Attractivness 4.8 3.0 4.3 4.3 2.6 3.4
Perceptual Comfort 4.0 2.3 3.0 3.0 3.5 2.0
Distinction and
Perceptual Recognition 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0
Perceptual Density of user 4.0 3.8 4.2 4.2 4.2 4.0
Perceptual 4.2 3.3 3.9 3.9 3.6 3.1
230 P. Pansare and A. M. Salama

Table 17.6 Aggregate score card for urban form attributes and components of inclusivity

Royal
Aggregate Domain George Enoch Buchanan Buchanan Buchanan Exchange
Scores Square Square street 1 street 2 Galleries Square
Urban form attributes 4.7 3.9 4.4 4.4 4.4 3.3
Components of
inclusivity 4.6 3.5 4.1 4.1 3.9 3.5

a high aggregate score on the Perceptual domain, made more robust by carrying out a multi-
Royal Exchange square receives a low score layered analysis as described in the methodology,
while all the other sites receive a moderate score. yet across a larger number of sites.
Aggregate score card across the six sites in Correlation between urban form attributes
Glasgow city center: A high score on urban form and components of inclusivity: The above table
attributes seems to be a necessary condition for (Table 17.7) summarizes the observed correla-
achieving a high score on inclusivity tions between attributes of urban form and
(Table 17.6). However, as witnessed at Bucha- components of inclusivity as computed using
nan galleries, a high score on urban form attri- Pearson’s correlation coefficient. While these
butes is not sufficient to achieve a high score on results would be made more robust through a
inclusivity. A moderate score on urban form study of a larger number of sites, some interest-
attributes might be the factor driving the mod- ing patterns are already emerging. ‘Identity’ only
erate score on inclusivity in St. Enoch square and has a positive correlation with the ‘richness of
Royal exchange square. None of the sites that visual experience’. ‘Robustness & adaptability’
have a low score on urban form attributes or is the only urban form attribute that is positively
inclusivity, hence the study cannot claim a con- correlated with ‘cultural marker’ and ‘diversity
clusive finding on the drivers for low inclusivity. for expression’. Both these elements of urban
The results presented in this paper are based on form have a negative correlation with many
data collected through a single method which is a urban form attributes. From these observations,
walking tour assessment and considers only six one could hypothesize that an increase in the
sites. Therefore, the preceding findings can be physical and functional elements provided for in

Table 17.7 Correlation between urban form attributes and components of inclusivity
Morphology of form

Affordance for

Affordance for
Robustness and
Spatial
Configuration

Social space

activites
Social spaces
Formal Quality

Temporality

Walkabilty

adapatability
mobility
Diversity of

Richness of visual
Social Interaction

experience
Permeability
Accessibility

Legibility

Ecological Quality
landscape elements

Attribute
Diversity -0.4 0.1 0.2 0.5 -0.4 0.6 0.8 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.9 0.9 0.4 -0.3 0.9 0.8
Diversity of Activities -0.4 0.1 0.2 0.5 -0.4 0.6 0.8 0.3 0.7 0.4 0.9 0.9 0.4 -0.3 0.9 0.8
Diversity for expression -0.9 -0.6 -0.9 0.5 -0.7 0.5 0.4 -0.9 -0.5 -0.3 0.5 -0.2 0.9 0.0 0.1 0.5
Identity -0.1 0.4 -0.3 0.5 -0.5 0.4 -0.4 -0.4 0.1 0.6 0.1 -0.5 0.1 0.8 0.1 0.2
Interpersonal Relationships 0.4 0.7 0.6 0.4 -0.1 0.3 -0.1 0.6 0.8 0.9 0.2 0.4 -0.4 0.7 0.5 0.0
Place Attachment 0.9 0.6 0.9 -0.3 0.5 -0.4 -0.6 0.8 0.4 0.4 -0.5 0.0 -0.9 0.3 -0.1 -0.5
Human scale -0.1 0.4 0.1 0.9 -0.7 0.8 0.1 0.1 0.6 0.9 0.5 0.3 0.1 0.8 0.7 0.4
Safety and Security 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.3 0.0 0.2 -0.2 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.0 0.3 -0.5 0.7 0.4 -0.2
Cultural Diversity -0.2 0.7 0.3 0.7 -0.5 0.7 0.3 0.4 0.9 0.9 0.7 0.6 0.2 0.4 0.9 0.7
Cultural Marker -0.6 -0.8 -0.9 -0.1 -0.2 -0.1 0.1 -0.9 -0.8 -0.7 -0.6 -0.5 0.6 -0.4 -0.5 0.1
Cultural memory 0.1 0.7 0.6 0.5 -0.2 0.6 0.4 0.7 1.0 0.8 0.6 0.8 -0.1 0.2 0.9 0.5
Proxemics -1.0 -0.4 -0.6 0.7 -0.8 0.8 0.8 -0.5 0.0 0.0 0.9 0.4 1.0 -0.2 0.6 0.9
Attractivness 0.0 0.8 0.2 0.6 -0.4 0.5 -0.2 0.2 0.7 0.9 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.6 0.5 0.5
Comfort -0.3 0.2 0.1 0.9 -0.7 0.9 0.5 0.2 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.6 0.3 0.5 0.9 0.5
Density of user -0.9 -0.4 -0.8 0.8 -0.9 0.8 0.4 -0.8 -0.2 0.1 0.7 -0.1 0.9 0.3 0.4 0.6
17 Urban Form as a Driver for Inclusivity in Public Open Spaces: A Case from Glasgow 231

the UPOS would leave the space less open for or be by themselves. This is in line with
adding cultural markers and individual Alexander’s observation that activity at the edges
expression. is a key driver of activity in the UPOS
(Alexander et al. 1977).
Right of access is not the only criterion for
17.4 Discussion and Conclusion inclusion, the affordance for unplanned and
unexceptional encounters is also extremely
Glasgow city center, known as the merchant city, important. Buchanan street and George square
has evolved since 1780s. Over this period all the afford the space for unexpected encounters as
six sites considered for the study have also well as an affordance for expression. Royal
evolved in use, as well as in urban form. George exchange square because of its central urban
square has transformed from being a residential form provides spaces for individuals as well as
central garden space to a flourishing public groups for congregation and expression without
square lined by public buildings along the hindering the flow along its boundaries.
boundary. St Enoch Square has transformed from The urban form being rigid with cultural
being a sacred ground to a car park and finally to markers leads to a good place identity. But this
a node, that now functions more like a transi- may lead to lower affordance for adding new
tional space. The Royal exchange square has not markers in the contemporary world. Conse-
undergone a drastic change in urban form, but its quently, the space would become less inclusive
use has changed. The land use along the for changing modes of expression or addition or
boundaries has evolved into more social spaces. cultural markers.
In Buchanan Street and St Enoch square, the Urban form should provide comfort, safety,
evolution of spatial activities has resulted in new and affordance for expression as seen in George
architectural interventions. In comparison with square and Buchanan galleries. This in turn
all the other sites, Buchanan Gallery square is would make the space more inclusive and
comparatively new and constructed over an ear- socially sustainable. An inclusive space should
lier railway station. The observations from the provide A. optimum space for interpersonal
Walking Tour Assessment clearly demonstrate communication. B. Maximum individual free-
that diversity in the economic and land use pat- dom. C. optimum aesthetic stimulus. D. Maxi-
terns, in a space drives the diversity of its mum choices offered by the urban form for users
inhabitants. Thus, urban form drives density, to be either single or be present in crowds for any
which in turn, might be a pre-condition for activities. E. Maximum flexibility of space.
diversity. F. Maximum efficiency of space for diverse
The nodes, that is George square, St Enoch crowds. (Lynch et al. 1995).
square and Buchanan gallery square all have The visual environment should be meaningful
active boundaries with visibly different spatial to the observer. (Lynch et al. 1995) But the
use. The space comes alive, depending upon the environment should also provide space for user
affordance the boundaries render for interaction. interaction. This paper has demonstrated a cor-
The more rigid and non-legible the boundary, the relation between the urban form and the abstract
less the UPOS becomes a destination. This is idea of inclusivity. However, this is only the first
seen in St Enoch square, Royal exchange square step in this line of research. The analysis could
and Buchanan gallery square. The boundaries in be made more robust by conducting a systematic
George square and along the Buchanan Street act assessment coupled with users’ perception of
as a point of engagement for the users. These spaces to obtain a more holistic view. Future
active boundaries give the UPOS a place identity work could also consider more tools to under-
and foster the creation of memories leading to stand perception through the use of tools such as
place attachment. The boundaries of the UPOS attitudinal survey. The objective of a multi-
provide social spaces for people to come together layered investigation would be to get a holistic
232 P. Pansare and A. M. Salama

view of all the factors affecting inclusivity, in Lynch K, Banerjee T, Southworth M (eds) (1995) City
addition to urban form factors. This line of sense and city writings and projects of Kevin Lynch.
MIT. Press, Cambridge, MA
examination can be concluded by creating a McKean C, Walker D, Walker F (1989) Central Glasgow:
holistic list of indicators to assess inclusivity in An illustrated architectural guide. RIAS-Royal Incor-
urban public open spaces. poration of Architects, Edinburgh in Scotland
Rapoport A (1990) The meaning of the built environment:
A nonverbal communication approach, 2nd edn.
University of Arizona Press, Tucson, AZ
References Salama AM, Azzali S (2015) Examining attributes of
urban open spaces in Doha. Proc ICE-Urban Des Plan
Alexander C, Ishikawa S, Silverstein M (1977) A pattern 168(2):75–87
language: Towns. Oxford University Press, Buildings, Salama AM, Wiedmann F (2013) The production of
Construction, New York, NY urban qualities in the emerging city of Doha: Urban
Amin A (2008) Collective culture and urban public space. space diversity as a case for investigating the ‘Lived
City 12(1):5–24 Space.’ Archnet-IJAR 7(2):160–172
Carmona M, Heath T, OC T, Tiesdell S (2011) Public Salama AM, Remali AM, MacLean L (2017) Character-
places urban spaces, Routledge, London isation and systematic assessment of urban open
Carr S, Francis M, Rivlin LG, Stone AM (1992) Public spaces in Glasgow city centre. SPATIUM 37(2):22–
space. Cambridge University Press, New York, NY 33
Chua BH, Edwards N (eds) (1992) Public space: Design. Sanoff H (1991) Visual research methods in design, van
NUS Press, Use and Management, Singapore Nostrand Reinhold, New York, NY
Frey H (1999) Designing the city: Towards a more Stanley B, Stark B, Johnston K, Smith M (2012) Urban
sustainable urban form. E & FN Spon, London open spaces in historical perspective: A transdisci-
Gehl J, Kaefer LJ, Reigstad SB (2006) Close Encounters plinary typology and analysis. Urban Geogr 33
with Buildings. Urban Design International 11:29–47 (8):1089–1117
Gehl J (1987) Life between buildings, van Nostrand Stewart P (1997) Central Glasgow. Tempus Publishing,
Reinhold, New York, NY Gloucestershire
Griffiths R, Bassett K, Smith I (1999) Cultural policy and Sugiyama T, Leslie E, Giles-Corti B, Owen N (2008)
the cultural economy in Bristol. Local Econ 14 Associations of neighbourhood greenness with phys-
(3):257–264 ical and mental health: Do walking, social coherence
Hall P (2014) Cities of tomorrow: An intellectual history and local social interaction explain the relationships? J
of urban planning and design since 1880, 4th edn. Epidemiol Community Health 62(5)
John Wiley & Sons Economic U N D O and S Affairs (2016) Report on the
Harvey D (2000) Spaces of hope. Edinburgh University world social situation 2016, United Nations
Press, Edinburgh Western Australian Council of Social Service Inc (2002)
Helliwell JF, Layard R, Sachs J, De Neve J-E (eds) (2020) Submission to the state sustainability strategy consul-
World happiness report 2020. Sustainable Develop- tation paper
ment Solutions Network, New York Whyte WH (1980) The social life of small urban spaces.
Jacobs J (1961) The death and life of great American Conservation Foundation, Washington, DC
cities. Random House, New York, NY Whyte WH (1988) City: Rediscovering the center.
Krier L (1992) Leon Krier: Architecture and urban design Anchor books, University of Michigan, An Arbor MI
1967–1992, Academy Editions, New York, NY Ye J (2019) Re-orienting geographies of urban diversity
Lynch K (1960) The image of the city. MIT Press, and coexistence: Analyzing inclusion and difference in
Cambridge, MA public space. Prog Hum Geogr 43(3):478–495
Lynch K, Hack G (1971) Site planning, 3rd edn. MIT
Press, Cambridge, MA