ARCHITECTURAL SPACE AS A NETWORK PHYSICAL AND VIRTUAL COMMUNITIES Dr Kerstin Sailer Bartlett School of Graduate Studies, University College London Lorentz Workshop Innovation at the Verge Computational Models of Physical / Virtual Space Interaction, Leiden / NL, 17-21 Dec 2012
Architectural Space as a Network Flow of space represented as a spatial network patterns of co-presence of occupants construct affects SOCIAL BEHAVIOURS
Architectural Space as a Network Co-presence of occupants: Virtual Community
Architectural Space as a Network Co-present individuals may not know each other, or even acknowledge each other, but it will be argued that this does not mean to say that copresence is not a social fact and a social resource. Co-present people are not a community, but they are part of the raw material for community, which may in due course become activated, and can be activated if it becomes necessary. However, even without conversion into interaction, patterns of co-presence are a psychological resource, precisely because co-presence is the primitive form of our awareness of others. Patterns of co-presence and co-awareness are the distinctive product of spatial design, and constitute, it will be argued, the prime constituents of what will be called the virtual community. Bill Hillier (1996): Space is the Machine Architectural Space as a Network Dr Kerstin Sailer, December 2012
Architectural Space as a Network The Method of Space Syntax Bill Hillier (1996): Space is the Machine
Architectural Space as a Network The Method of Space Syntax Bill Hillier (1996): Space is the Machine
Architectural Space as a Network The Method of Space Syntax Total depth: 16 2 3 1 1 0 2 1 1 3 10 2 5 6 4 4 3 3 2 2 10 0 1 Total depth: 30
Architectural Space as a Network The Method of Space Syntax
Architectural Space as a Network The Method of Space Syntax
Architectural Space as a Network The Method of Space Syntax Floor plan Visual graph analysis Axial topology Metric topology Space usage, e.g. movement flow Integrated Segregated
Space Syntax Research: Comparative Analysis of Cities 1000m Part of Tokyo 500m Part of London Bill Hillier et al
10000m Architectural Space as a Network Bill Hillier et al LONDON and its region within the M25, with its strong centre and strong radials, but weak lateral connections between the radials Dr Kerstin Sailer, December 2012
BEIJING with its relative weak centre and weak radials, but strong lateral structure between radials 10000m Bill Hillier et al
Architectural Space as a Network 10000m Bill Hillier et al TOKYO with its fairly strong centre, strong radials and strong laterals, generating the strong sub-city structure characteristic of Tokyo Dr Kerstin Sailer, December 2012
Space Syntax Research: City Centres and Retail Activity Laura Vaughan, Sam Griffiths, Muki Haklay, Kate Jones
Space Syntax Research: Public Spaces Old Market Square, Nottingham Anna Rose / Space Syntax Ltd. Architectural Space as a Network Dr Kerstin Sailer, December 2012
Space Syntax Research: Public Spaces Old Market Square, Nottingham Anna Rose / Space Syntax Ltd.
Space Syntax Research: Museums Spatial configuration and movement flows at Tate Britain SOCIAL BEHAVIOURS Bill Hillier / Space Syntax Ltd.
Space Syntax Research: Libraries Movement flows in the British Library Movement flows on Upper Ground Floor Data collection by UCL MSc AAS students in 2009 and 2010 Readers Non-Readers
Space Syntax Research: Workplace Environments Movement flows in offices: result of configuration and attractor placement SOCIAL BEHAVIOURS Kerstin Sailer
From Spatial to Transpatial Solidarities: from Virtual to Real Communities SOCIAL BEHAVIOURS
Spatial and Transpatial Solidarities Concept of spatiality and transpatial solidarity as two distinct ways of creating relationships between individuals: In their elementary forms, in effect, buildings ( ) can define a relation to others by conceptual analogy, rather than spatial relation. The inhabitant of a house in a village, say, is related to his neighbours spatially, in that he occupies a location in relation to them, but also he relates to them conceptually, in that his interior system of spatialised categories is similar or different from those of his neighbours. He relates, it might be said, transpatially as well as spatially. (Hillier and Hanson 1984: 18ff) Key features of spatial and transpatial ordering of categories: Affinity between individuals spatially as well as transpatially driven Societies may use one way of ordering more than another Ordering of space not of equal conspicuousness to every culture
Spatial and Transpatial Solidarities SOCIAL SOLIDARITIES FORM Mechanic Organic ORGANISATIONAL OPERATIONS SPATIAL IMPLICATIONS Integration through similarity Homogeneity Long models, i.e. strongly programmed Hierarchies Vertical communication Transpatial Segregated and sparse space Interior relations, inside Well defined categorical differences between spaces High levels of control of events and encounter Interdependence through differentiation Heterogeneity Short models, i.e. weakly programmed Network Structure Lateral communication Spatial Integrated and dense space Exterior relations, outside Weakly defined categorical differences between spaces Low levels of control of events and encounter Sources: Durkheim 1893, Burns and Stalker 1961, Hillier and Hanson 1984, Hillier and Penn 1991; summarised in Sailer 2010
Spatial and Transpatial Solidarities Spatial Solidarities WHERE WE ARE Location, Neighbourhoods, Proximity, Physical Closeness Transpatial Solidarities WHO WE ARE Gender, Age, Profession, Affiliations, Memberships, Interests The Guildhall, City of London
Interplay between Spatial & Transpatial Example 1 Organisational Cultures in the British Museum High levels of local integration yet global segregation distinct org. cultures, segregated spaces allow transpatial identities to flourish
Interplay between Spatial & Transpatial Example 2 Lack of local identities in a Media Company Brands need to own their space and feel separate to other brands. If you walk around the office you would never know where you are unless you already know people. This doesn't enable people to make new friends or contacts. High levels of global integration and uniform workstation layout lack of identities, disregard of transpatial solidarities
Interplay between Spatial & Transpatial Example 3 Time-space routines and social cohesion in Research Institute High levels of global integration emergence of social cohesion and contacts fostered in transpatially organised clusters
Spatial and Transpatial Solidarities Two mechanisms for bonding and social relationships between people: 1. Sharing same local world and coming together in physical space (spatial solidarity); 2. Shared interests or goals, which may overcome / transverse boundaries of physical space (transpatial solidarity); SPATIAL TRANS- SPATIAL Example: The Guild Virtual Community Real Community
Impact of Technologies Physical and Virtual Spaces
Impact of Technologies Emergence of Online Communities Source: http://xkcd.com/802/
Impact of Technologies Networked Individualism Networked Individualism (Rainie and Wellman 2012): People function as connected individuals; partial membership in multiple networks instead of permanent membership in settled groups; Made possible by: Social Network Revolution: opportunities to reach beyond tightly knit groups Internet Revolution: communication and information-gathering power Mobile Revolution: accessibility, anywhere and anytime PAST SOCIETY: fixed groups CURRENT / FUTURE SOCIETY: networked individualism KINSHIP WORK CHURCH Village / Town Various spatial scales
Impact of Technologies: Physical and Digital Space How do people find information? Example: Rosetta Stone at British Museum OPTION 1: Travel to London, visit British Museum (physical space) OPTION 2: Go to website of the British Museum (digital space)
Impact of Technologies: Physical and Digital Space Finding information on Rosetta Stone at British Museum: Option 1 (physical space) Structured search: looking at map or asking information desk (2-3 steps) Exploratory: finding interesting / relevant exhibits on your own (2-10 steps, possibly more)
Impact of Technologies: Physical and Digital Space Finding information on Rosetta Stone at British Museum: Option 2 (digital space) Structured search: typing name of exhibit into search box (2 steps) [Exploratory: clicking through the online collections (3-10 steps, possibly more)]
Impact of Technologies: Physical and Digital Space Finding information on Rosetta Stone at British Museum different spatial experiences in physical & digital space, but also different social realities PHYSICAL SPACE DIGITAL SPACE
Impact of Technologies: Physical and Digital Space What is the difference between physical space and digital space in enabling the get together of people and allowing communities to flourish? PHYSICAL SPACE Complex spatial configuration Deep or shallow Relative position or location matters Distribution of users through spatial configuration / attractors Unplanned encounter Co-presence DIGITAL SPACE Simple or no spatial configuration at all Shallow / flat Access matters Distribution of users through access / self-selection process Structured encounter Lone activity
Conclusions Physical space in buildings and cities structures co-presence and interaction patterns of people; Co-presence of people in space gives rise to virtual community : raw material of society, awareness and psychological dimension; Communities emerge from the combination of spatial and transpatial worlds; Technologies change the way in which people interact, yet physical space remains an important dimension; Digital space allows online communities to flourish distinctly different from affordances of physical space and implications for social relationships; Similarly to Space Syntax which offers a language for discursive and structured analysis of physical space, an approach to systematically investigate the structure and affordances of digital spaces is needed
Thank you! Email: k.sailer@ucl.ac.uk Twitter: @kerstinsailer Dr Kerstin Sailer Lecturer in Complex Buildings Bartlett School of Graduate Studies University College London 14 Upper Woburn Place London WC1H 0NN United Kingdom