Seen, Felt, and Lived: Design Principles for Socially Sustainable Public Spaces

Maurice Harteveld; Paolo De Martino; Sheida Ghelichkhany; Faye Ellen; Mes Ulkü

doi:10.32891/jps.v11i1.1904

Cover image: The Soupes de Belleville, a solidarity project during the pandemic, Belleville, April 2021. Photo by Adèle Madeux

PDF

Published: Jun 29, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.32891/jps.v11i1.1904

Keywords:

social cohesion social encounter social learning public space design design principles immersive experience

Maurice Harteveld

TU Delft

Paolo De Martino

TU Delft

Sheida Ghelichkhany

TU Delft

Faye Ellen

Arttenders, Social Design Studio

Mes Ulkü

Arttenders, Social Design Studio

Abstract

Public spaces are increasingly expected to address complex societal challenges, from climate adaptation to social fragmentation. Yet, while the technical performance of public space has received considerable attention, its social sustainability remains less clearly defined and operationalized. This article, developed within the STEPS project funded by the Dutch Research Council, explores how social sustainability can be translated into design-oriented principles for public space. The contribution focuses on three interrelated dimensions of social life in urban environments: social cohesion, social encounter, and social learning. Social cohesion concerns the ties that connect people to places and to one another through trust, participation, and shared values (Aelbrecht & Stevens, 2018; Asadollahi Asl Zarkhah et al., 2025; Harteveld, 2017, 2020; Lai et al., 2024; Schiefer & van der Noll, 2017). Social encounter addresses the capacity of public spaces to foster meaningful interactions across difference, moving beyond co-presence towards genuine exchange (Askarizad & He, 2022; Ferreira et al., 2021; Horgan & Liinamaa, 2023). Social learning refers to collective processes of reflection, knowledge creation, and problem-solving that enable communities to develop civic literacy and transformative capacities (Bandura, 1977, 1986). Rather than treating these dimensions as isolated categories, the article approaches them as relational qualities that emerge through the immersive experiences in public space. In this perspective, public spaces are more than their physical form or functional assets. They are social infrastructures where belonging, encounter, and collective learning continuously take shape and give live to interactions of bodies in space. Building on a co-creative and interdisciplinary research process, the article proposes a conceptual and design-oriented framework that translates debates on social sustainability into operational principles for analysis and design. In doing so, it challenges approaches centred primarily on technical performance and advocates for a more holistic understanding of public space, towards subjective, symbolic, and culturally embedded dimensions.

How to Cite

Harteveld, M., De Martino, P., Ghelichkhany, S., Ellen, F. and Ulkü, M. (2026) “Seen, Felt, and Lived: Design Principles for Socially Sustainable Public Spaces”, The Journal of Public Space, 11(1), pp. 225–238. doi: 10.32891/jps.v11i1.1904.

Issue

Vol. 11 No. 1 (2026): Rethinking Public Space Evaluation

Section

Articles

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

The Authors retain copyright for articles published in The Journal of Public Space, with first publication rights granted to the journal.
Articles in this journal are published under the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial Licence (CC-BY-NC) - https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/.
You are free to:
• Share - copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format
• Adapt - remix, transform, and build upon the material
Under the following terms:
• Attribution - You must give appropriate credit, provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made. You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.
• NonCommercial — You may not use the material for commercial purposes.

Author Biographies

Maurice Harteveld, TU Delft

Maurice Harteveld’s work maintains a sustained focus on public space. His concept of “interior public space” (developed since 2004) has bridged multiple design disciplines and expanded the scope of urban design. Building on this, his notion of “domesticated public space” (since 2014) has fostered dialogue with cultural anthropology, urban sociology, and environmental psychology, leading to the development of innovative transdisciplinary methods. This trajectory also deepened his engagement with port cities and maritime cultures.
A key area of Harteveld’s research is the port city as a setting where hyperdiversity emerges through global and territorial flows of people. He has advanced spatially grounded research methods that capture how different social groups perceive and value public space. Through mnemonic techniques such as mental mapping and micro-biographic writing, he investigates collective cognitive values and their influence on urban environments.
By integrating these insights into design practice, Harteveld contributes to more nuanced and inclusive approaches to public space design. His work enables a richer understanding of social diversity, strengthens evidence-based spatial analysis, and supports the development of more responsive and varied urban design strategies.

Paolo De Martino, TU Delft

Delft University of Technology researcher, architect, and educator Paolo De Martino works at the intersection of port-city relations, maritime spatial planning, adaptive urbanism, and climate transition. He graduated in Architecture from the Department of Architecture of the University of Naples Federico II, where he developed an early interest in urban regeneration and the reuse of existing architectural heritage through professional practice in Naples. In 2014 he moved to the Netherlands to pursue a joint PhD between Delft University of Technology and the University of Naples Federico II. His doctoral research, Land in Limbo, explored the spatial and institutional dynamics shaping port-city territories, focusing on Naples as a critical case study to investigate how areas of land-sea interaction can become catalysts for territorial transformation and regeneration. Since 2017 he has been teaching at the Department of Architecture at Delft University of Technology, contributing to international design studios and research-by-design pedagogies including Architecture and Urbanism Beyond Oil, Adaptive Strategies, and Designing Public Spaces for Maritime Mindsets, coordinated by Carola Hein. Since 2021 he has also contributed to the development and teaching of the MOOCs (Re)Imagining Port Cities: Understanding Space, Society and Culture and Water Works: Activating Heritage for Sustainable Development. He is a member of the PortCityFutures research group and its coordination team. Since 2022 he has been a Postdoctoral Researcher at IUAV University of Venice under the supervision of Francesco Musco, where his research focuses on Maritime Spatial Planning, coastal transitions, and adaptive futures for port and coastal territories.

Sheida Ghelichkhany, TU Delft

Sheida Ghelichkhany is currently joining the Urban Design section at TU Delft as a guest researcher. Within STEPS, she contributes to spatial and analytical work, supporting the development of the Rotterdam case study and the design catalogue. Through visual analysis and literature review, her work helps connect conceptual frameworks with their spatial interpretation in real urban contexts.
Her academic background in Architecture for Sustainability, and her affiliation with Politecnico di Torino, align with the STEPS research initiative, which explores how urban design can actively contribute to social sustainability. The project focuses on the role of public space, with Rotterdam serving as an important reference for understanding real public spaces and built urban contexts.

Faye Ellen, Arttenders, Social Design Studio

Faye Ellen is the founder and owner of a social design studio, Arttenders, which over the past decade has focused on placemaking at the intersection of spatial development, social innovation, and culture. As both a leader and practitioner, she has shaped projects in urban regeneration, housing development, cultural districts, and public spaces, creating places that integrate social, cultural, and economic ambitions.
Ellen’s approach emphasizes uncovering the deeper questions behind complex challenges and translating them into actionable concepts and strategies. Drawing on sociology, anthropology, and systems thinking, she develops frameworks that foster social cohesion, local identity, and long-term resilience.
In addition to her project work, Ellen is the author of publications on placemaking and human-centered development, including recent reflections on the human scale in societal systems. Through her combined practice and writing, she advocates for development processes that prioritize human experience, stewardship, and belonging.

Mes Ulkü, Arttenders, Social Design Studio

Mesut (Mes) Ulku holds an MSc in Architecture, cum laude. He works as a Social Architect at Arttenders in Rotterdam, the Netherlands. He is also a designer, writer, and illustrator of children’s books.
He has worked at several design, architecture, and planning firms in the Netherlands and mainland China.

References

Abdullah Ali, F. (2018). From Zoning Based Area to a Hybrid Space; The Transformation Strategies. Journal of Contemporary Urban Affairs. doi:10.25034/ijcua.2018.4679

Abella, J., Fruttero, A., Tas, E., & Taj, U. (2020). Urban Design, Public Spaces, and Social Cohesion : Evidence from a Virtual Reality Experiment.

Aelbrecht, P., & Stevens, Q. (2018). Public Space Design and Social Cohesion: An International Comparison.

Aelbrecht, P., & Stevens, Q. (2023). Geographies of Encounter, Public Space, and Social Cohesion: Reviewing Knowledge at the Intersection of Social Sciences and Built Environment Disciplines. Urban Planning, 8. doi:10.17645/up.v8i4.6540

Alami Fariman, M., Lee, C., Hakiminejad, A., & Mehan, A. (2025). City, Public Space, and Body: Introduction. In.

Alberti, F., & Radicchi, A. (2022). The Proximity City: a comparative analysis between Paris, Barcelona and Milan. TECHNE - Journal of Technology for Architecture and Environment (23). doi:10.36253/techne-12151

Amenta, L., & De Martino, P. (2018). Wastescapes in port cities. Naples and Rotterdam: a spatial and institutional comparison on the role of ports as promoters of circular economy. bdc. Bollettino del Dipartimento di Conservazione dei Beni Architettonici ed Ambientali, 18(2), 159-181. doi:https://doi.org/10.6092/2284-4732/6235

Amenta, L., & De Martino, P. (2026). Learning How to Live with Risk - The Role of Co-Design for Managing City–Port Thresholds in Castellammare di Stabia, Naples, Italy. Sustainability, 18(7), 3242.

Amenta, L., & Van Timmeren, A. (2018). Beyond Wastescapes: Towards Circular Landscapes. Addressing the Spatial Dimension of Circularity through the Regeneration of Wastescapes. Sustainability, 10(12), 4740.

Aparici, M., & Harteveld, M. (2025). Overcoming Disciplinary Stupidity: Collective Creation for Diversity and Inclusion in Public Space Design. Footprint, 19, 49-60. doi:10.59490/footprint.19.1.7490

Asadollahi Asl Zarkhah, S., Harteveld, M., van Dorst, M., & Adlakha, D. (2025). The socio-spatial roles of public space as an enabler for community resilience. Urban Design International. doi:10.1057/s41289-025-00288-1

Askarizad, R., & He, J. (2022). Perception of Spatial Legibility and Its Association with Human Mobility Patterns: An Empirical Assessment of the Historical Districts in Rasht, Iran. Int J Environ Res Public Health, 19(22). doi:10.3390/ijerph192215258

Askarizad, R., & He, J. (2022). Post-pandemic urban design: The equilibrium between social distancing and social interactions within the built environment. Cities, 124, 103618. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103618

Balug, K. (2019). The imagination paradox: Participation or performance of visioning the city. Geoforum, 102, 278-286. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.08.014

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, US: Prentice-Hall, Inc.

Beatley, T. (2014). Planning for Resilient Coastal Communities: Emerging Practice and Future Directions. In B. C. Glavovic & G. P. Smith (Eds.), Adapting to Climate Change: Lessons from Natural Hazards Planning (pp. 123-144). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands.

Belland, M., Kausan, B. Y., Kooy, M., & Zwarteveen, M. (2025). Seeing like a pond: Amphibious stories of coastal subsidence in Central Java. Geoforum, 161, 104248. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2025.104248

Braudel, F. (2017). Il Mediterraneo. Lo spazio, la storia, gli uomini, le tradizioni (E. D. Angeli, Trans.): Bompiani.

Brislin, P., & Pallasmaa, J. (2012). Newness, Tradition and Identity: Existential Content and Meaning in Architecture. Architectural Design, 82. doi:10.1002/ad.1486

Cankurt Semiz, S. N., & Özsoy, F. A. (2024). Transmission of Spatial Experience in the Context of Sustainability of Urban Memory. Sustainability, 16(22), 9910.

Carmona, M. (2019). Principles for public space design, planning to do better. URBAN DESIGN International, 24. doi:10.1057/s41289-018-0070-3

Carmona, M. (2023). Coding urban design: Constructing a wireframe for a place-focused urbanism. Progress in Planning, 176, 100775. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.progress.2023.100775

Carr, S., Francis, M., Rivlin, L., & Stone, A. (1991). Public Space.

Carr, S., Francis, M., Rivlin, L., & Stone, A. (2006). Needs in Public Space. In Tiesdell, S., & Carmona, M. (2007). Urban Design Reader (1st ed.). Routledge.

Castigliano, M., De Martino, P., Amenta, L., & Russo, M. (2020). Reinventing wastescapes in port cities. A resilient and regenerative approach to plan Naples at the time of logistics. BDC. Bollettino del Dipartimento di Conservazione dei Beni Architettonici ed Ambientali, 20(2), 261-276. doi:https://doi.org/10.6092/2284-4732/7555

Cattell, V., Dines, N., Gesler, W., & Curtis, S. (2008). Mingling, observing, and lingering: Everyday public spaces and their implications for well-being and social relations. Health & Place, 14(3), 544-561. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthplace.2007.10.007

Corboz, A. (1983). The Land as Palimpsest. Diogenes, 31(121), 12–34. doi: https://doi.org/10.1177/039219218303112102

Crawford, K. (2022). Atlas of AI: Power, Politics, and the Planetary Costs of Artificial Intelligence. Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, 74, 61-62. doi:10.56315/PSCF3-22Crawford

Crawford, M. (2015). From the feel-good city to the just city [Keynote address given on October 2, 2015, at Contesting the Streets II: Vending and Public Space in Global Cities]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lEGliu4P-Mk

De Martino, P. (2022). Towards Circular Port-City Territories. In L. Amenta, M. Russo, & A. van Timmeren (Eds.), Regenerative Territories: Dimensions of Circularity for Healthy Metabolisms (pp. 161-171). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

De Martino, P., Ferraioli, E., Maragno, D., & Musco, F. (2026). Living with Water: Toward an amphibious planning paradigm for multi-risk territories. Contesti. Città, territori, progetti, 156–179.

Dorst, K. (2011). The core of design thinking and its application. Design Studies, 32(6), 521–532. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2011.07.006

Ferreira, J., Ferreira, C., & Bos, E. (2021). Spaces of consumption, connection, and community: Exploring the role of the coffee shop in urban lives. Geoforum, 119, 21-29. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2020.12.024

Floridi, L. (2019). Translating Principles into Practices of Digital Ethics: Five Risks of Being Unethical. Philosophy & Technology, 32. doi:10.1007/s13347-019-00354-x

Forczek-Brataniec, U., & Jamioł, K. (2024). The Role of Public Space in Building the Resilience of Cities: Analysis of Representative Projects from IFLA Europe Exhibitions. Sustainability, 16(12), 5105.

Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. Pantheon Books.

Gaver, W., Beaver, J., & Benford, S. (2003). Ambiguity as a resource for design.

Gehl, J. (1986). “Soft edges” in residential streets. Scandinavian Housing and Planning Research, 3(2), 89-102. doi:10.1080/02815738608730092

Gehl, J. (2011). Life between buildings: Using Public Space. Washington, DC 20009: Island Press.

Gehl, J., & Svarre, B. (2013). How To Study Public Life.

Gouvea, L., & Mont'Alvão, C. (2013). Observing the Urban Space: A Protocol to Analyse Street Furniture in Public Squares. Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society Annual Meeting, 57, 555-559. doi:10.1177/1541931213571119

Guzman, L. A., Oviedo, D., & Cantillo-Garcia, V. A. (2024). Is proximity enough? A critical analysis of a 15-minute city considering individual perceptions. Cities, 148, 104882. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2024.104882

Hahn, K. (2024). Intimacy and the Transformation of the Public Sphere. Theory, Culture & Society, 41(7-8), 41-56. doi:10.1177/02632764241299390

Haim-Litevsky, D., Komemi, R., & Lipskaya-Velikovsky, L. (2023). Sense of Belonging, Meaningful Daily Life Participation, and Well-Being: Integrated Investigation. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 20, 4121. doi:10.3390/ijerph20054121

Harteveld, M. (2017). The Quest for Public Space: Changing Values in Urban Design, The City as Learning Lab and Living Lab. In.

Harteveld, M. (2020). Domestication Will Shape Future Public Spaces. A Report from Rotterdam. The Journal of Public Space, 53-66. doi:10.32891/jps.v5i3.1379

Hein, C. (2021). Port City Porosity: Boundaries, Flows, and Territories. Urban Planning, 6(3), 1–9. doi: https://www.cogitatiopress.com/urbanplanning/article/view/4663

Horgan, M., & Liinamaa, S. (2023). Entanglements of Improvisation, Conviviality, and Conflict in Everyday Encounters in Public Space. 2023, 8(4), 5. doi:10.17645/up.v8i4.7580

Isik, P., Reicher, C., & Sezer, C. (2023). Public Space and Play Theory: Reading Aachen through the Play Theory. Transactions of the Association of European Schools of Planning, 7, 23-35. doi:10.24306/TrAESOP.2023.01.003

Jacobs, J. (1961). The Death and Life of Great American Cities. New York: Random House.

Kitchin, R. (2017). Thinking critically about and researching algorithms. Information, Communication & Society, 20(1), 14-29. doi:10.1080/1369118X.2016.1154087

Krause, F. (2017). Towards an Amphibious Anthropology of Delta Life. Human Ecology, 45(3), 403-408. doi:10.1007/s10745-017-9902-9

Krause, F. (2022). Rhythms of wet and dry: Temporalising the land-water nexus. Geoforum, 131, 252-259. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.geoforum.2017.12.001

Krebs, C. J., Boutin, S., & Boonstra, R. (2025). Population and community ecology: past progress and future directions. Integrative Zoology, 20(1), 2-14. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1749-4877.12863

Lai, Y., Wang, P., & Wen, K. (2024). Exploring the Impact of Public Spaces on Social Cohesion in Resettlement Communities from the Perspective of Experiential Value: A Case Study of Fuzhou, China. Buildings, 14(10), 3141.

Lee, K. (2021). Urban Public Space as a Didactic Platform: Raising Awareness of Climate Change through Experiencing Arts. Sustainability, 13(5), 2915.

Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans.). Oxford: Basil Blackwell.

Low, S., & Iveson, K. (2016). Propositions for more just urban public spaces. City, 20, 10-31. doi:10.1080/13604813.2015.1128679

Low, S., & Smith, N. (2005). The Politics of Public Space.

Madanipour, A. (2004). Marginal public spaces in European cities. Journal of Urban Design, 9, 267-286. doi:10.1080/1357480042000283869

Madanipour, A. (2015). Urban Design and Public Space. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences (Second Edition) (pp. 789-794). Oxford: Elsevier.

Maragno, D. D. M., P.; Ferraioli, E., Dall’Omo, C.F.; Musco, F. (2025). Towards A New Geography of Risk: MIRACLE. Conegliano, Treviso: Anteferma Edizioni Srl.

Massey, D. B. (2005). For space.

Mehta, V. (2014). Evaluating public space. Journal of Urban Design, 19(1), 53–88. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574809.2013.854698

Mehta, V. (2022). Public space: Notes on why it matters, what we should know, and how to realize its potential. Routledge.

Mitchell, D. (2003). Cultural landscapes: just landscapes or landscapes of justice? Progress in Human Geography, 27(6), 787-796. doi:10.1191/0309132503ph464pr

Oldenburg, R. A. Y. (2023). The Great Good Place: Cafés, coffee shops, bookstores, bars, hair salons, and other hangouts at the heart of a community: Berkshire.

Patnaik, P. (2019). Public spaces and private intimacies. In Chakraborty, K. (Ed.). (2019). The Politics of Belonging in Contemporary India: Anxiety and Intimacy (1st ed.). Routledge India (pp. 167-179).

Rathod, D., & Wagner, C. (2021). The condition of public spaces: the role of sensory experience design.

Redaelli, E., Hansen, L. E., & Djupdræt, M. B. (2025). Museums as public spaces in the City: Insights from Aarhus, Denmark. Cities, 159, 105778. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2025.105778

Royfee, A. (2026). Public Space Intimacy. Open Access Te Herenga Waka-Victoria University of Wellington, Retrieved from https://openaccess.wgtn.ac.nz/articles/thesis/Public_Space_Intimacy/20388111

Russo, M. (2016). Harbourscape: Between Specialization and Public Space. In M. a. R. Carta, D. (Ed.), The Fluid City Paradigm. Waterfront Regeneration as an Urban Renewal Strategy. Switzerland: Springer International Publishing.

Rösner, L., Winter, S., & Krämer, N. C. (2016). Dangerous minds? Effects of uncivil online comments on aggressive cognitions, emotions, and behavior. Computers in Human Behavior, 58, 461-470. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.01.022

Sandercock, L. (2003). Out of the Closet: The Importance of Stories and Storytelling in Planning Practice. Planning Theory and Practice, 4, 11-28. doi:10.1080/1464935032000057209

Schiefer, D., & van der Noll, J. (2017). The Essentials of Social Cohesion: A Literature Review. Social Indicators Research, 132(2), 579-603. doi:10.1007/s11205-016-1314-5

Silverman, W. (1982). The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces William H. Whyte, Washington, DC: The Conservation Foundation, 1980. 125 pp. $9.50 (paper) and 16mm color film, 55 minutes, 2 reels, sound. $750.00 (purchase), $75.00 (rental). New York: The Municipal Arts Society, 1980. Urban Life, 10(4), 466-468. doi:10.1177/089124168201000411

Smith, R. J., & Hetherington, K. (2013). Urban rhythms: mobilities, space and interaction in the contemporary city. The Sociological Review, 61(S1), 4-16. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-954X.12050

Spence, C. (2020). Senses of place: architectural design for the multisensory mind. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 5(1), 46. doi:10.1186/s41235-020-00243-4

Stevens, Q., Daly, J., & Dovey, K. (2024). Designing for possibility in public space: affordance, assemblage, and ANT. Urban Design International, 29(2), 94-104. doi:10.1057/s41289-023-00235-y

Tasan-Kok, T., Kempen, R., Raco, M., & Bolt, G. (2013). Towards Hyper-Diversified European Cities: A Critical Literature Review.

Thrift, N. (2004). Intensities of feeling: towards a spatial politics of affect. Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography, 86(1), 57-78. doi:10.1111/j.0435-3684.2004.00154.x

Townsend, A. (2013). Smart Cities: Buggy and Brittle. Places Journal. doi:10.22269/131007

UN-Habitat. (2020). World Cities Report 2020: The Value of Sustainable Urbanization. Retrieved from https://unhabitat.org/world-cities-report-2020-the-value-of-sustainable-urbanization:

Valera, S., & Casakin, H. (2022). Integrating Observation and Network Analysis to Identify Patterns of Use in the Public Space: A Gender Perspective. Frontiers in Psychology, 13. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.898809

Viganò, P., & Secchi, B. (2009). Antwerp, Territory of a new modernity. Amsterdam: Sun Publishers.

Viganò, P. (2018). Porosity: Why This Figure Is Still Useful. In W. Sophie (Ed.), Porous City (pp. 50-56). Berlin, Boston: Birkhäuser.

Yacoub, W., & Alkinani, A. (2024). Urban Acupuncture as a Strategy to Enhance Social Interactions: Insights from the Historic Center of Baghdad, Iraq. International Society for the Study of Vernacular Settlements, 11. doi:10.61275/ISVSej-2024-11-02-10

Đurić, M., Righetti, F., Zoppolat, G., Saura, C., & Schneider, I. (2025). Loves Me, Loves Me Not: Perceived Romantic Partner’s Ambivalence Is Associated With Lower Personal and Relationship Well-Being. Emotion, 25, 1.

The Journal of Public Space