This paper introduces the open-source Urban Belonging (UB) toolkit, designed to study place attachments through a combined digital, visual and participatory methodology that foregrounds lived experience. The core of the toolkit is the photovoice UB App, which prompts participants to document urban experiences as digital data by taking pictures of the city, annotating them, and reacting to others’ photos. The toolkit also includes an API interface and a set of scripts for converting data into visualizations and elicitation devices. The paper first describes how the app’s design specifications were co-created in a process that brought in voices from different research fields, planners from Gehl Architects, six marginalized communities, and citizen engagement professionals. Their inputs shaped decisions about what data collection the app makes possible, and how it mitigates issues of privacy and visual and spatial literacy to make the app as inclusive as possible. We document how design criteria were translated into app features, and we demonstrate how this opens new empirical opportunities for community engagement through examples of its use in the Urban Belonging project in Copenhagen. While the focus on photo capture animates participants to document experiences in a personal and situated way, metadata such as location and sentiment invites for quali-quantitative analysis of both macro trends and local contexts of people’s experiences. Further, the granularity of data makes both a demographic and post-demographic analysis possible, providing empirical ground for exploring what people have in common in what they photograph and where they walk. And, by inviting participants to react to others’ photos, the app offers a heterogeneous empirical ground, showing us how people see the city differently. We end the paper by discussing remaining challenges in the tool and provide a short guide for using it.
This book is the account of teaching practice linked to research projects, a practice that is able to create new, unexpected values in the complex patchwork of the city through experimental and strategic interventions with greenery. That the interventions involve greenery is obviously linked to the fact that the Van Hall Larenstein university of applied sciences specializes in nature and agriculture, but there is also a practical reason. Green spaces act as a cohesive force, as is shown again and again in the Netherlands and in the Lively Cities programme. Particularly in the urban context, green spaces have a distinctive and perhaps even emotional value that encourages people to pause there and makes them think about their appreciation of a place. Greenery triggers people to take part in social experiments. But that is just the beginning.
MULTIFILE
Background: Most studies on birth settings investigate the association between planned place of birth at the start of labor and birth outcomes and intervention rates. To optimize maternity care it also is important to pay attention to the entire process of pregnancy and childbirth. This study explores the association between the initial preferred place of birth and model of care, and the course of pregnancy and labor in low-risk nulliparous women in the Netherlands. Methods: As part of a Dutch prospective cohort study (2007–2011), we compared medical indications during pregnancy and birth outcomes of 576 women who initially preferred a home birth (n = 226), a midwife-led hospital birth (n = 168) or an obstetrician-led hospital birth (n = 182). Data were obtained by a questionnaire before 20 weeks of gestation and by medical records. Analyses were performed according to the initial preferred place of birth. Results: Low-risk nulliparous women who preferred a home birth with midwife-led care were less likely to be diagnosed with a medical indication during pregnancy compared to women who preferred a birth with obstetrician-led care (OR 0.41 95% CI 0.25-0.66). Preferring a birth with midwife-led care – both at home and in hospital - was associated with lower odds of induced labor (OR 0.51 95% CI 0.28-0.95 respectively OR 0.42 95% CI 0.21-0.85) and epidural analgesia (OR 0.32 95% CI 0.18-0.56 respectively OR 0.34 95% CI 0.19-0.62) compared to preferring a birth with obstetrician-led care. In addition, women who preferred a home birth were less likely to experience augmentation of labor (OR 0.54 95% CI 0.32-0.93) and narcotic analgesia (OR 0.41 95% CI 0.21-0.79) compared to women who preferred a birth with obstetrician-led care. We observed no significant association between preferred place of birth and mode of birth. Conclusions: Nulliparous women who initially preferred a home birth were less likely to be diagnosed with a medical indication during pregnancy. Women who initially preferred a birth with midwife-led care – both at home and in hospital – experienced lower rates of interventions during labor. Although some differences can be attributed to the model of care, we suggest that characteristics and attitudes of women themselves also play an important role.
MULTIFILE
