Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Digital intervention in the city: a conceptual framework for digital placemaking

  • Original Article
  • Published:
URBAN DESIGN International Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

From the early 2000s onwards, the emergence of digital technology and social media has motived to a questioning of the value of public space, as the relevance of physical places is eroded in the digital age. In recent years, the development of concepts such as media architecture, digital placemaking and the playable city has reignited interest in physical places and opened a discussion about the future, harmonious symbiosis amid the public space and virtual space. Plenty of digital placemaking interventions in public spaces proves how digital interventions can have significant potential for future urban design. Currently, literature on placemaking and human–computer interaction (HCI) showcases the need for a new interdisciplinary approach to evaluate how digital and mobile technologies can be used to enhance the sense of place in a locale. This paper proposes a theoretical framework to investigate digital placemaking, supporting the review of basic attributes of public spaces and the potential of mobile technologies in augmenting places. Further, it reveals how digital placemaking provides an opportunity to generate tension and meaning.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Aarseth E., S.M. Smedstad, and L. Sunnanå. 2003. A multidimensional typology of games. In Paper presented at the DiGRA Conference.

  • Al-Kodmany, K. 1999. Residential visual privacy: traditional and modern architecture and urban design. Journal of Urban Design 4 (3): 283–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Allanwood, G., and P. Beare. 2014. Basics interactive design: User experience design: creating designs users really love. London: A&C Black.

    Google Scholar 

  • Andujar, M., A. Nijholt, and J.E. Gilbert. 2017. Mobile augmented games in playable cities: humorous interaction with pokémon go. In International Conference on Distributed, Ambient, and Pervasive Interactions (pp. 575–586). Springer, Cham

  • Anthopoulos, L., and P. Fitsilis. 2010. From digital to ubiquitous cities: defining a common architecture for urban development. In Paper presented at the 2010 Sixth International Conference on Intelligent Environments.

  • Arefi, M., and M. Triantafillou. 2005. Reflections on the pedagogy of place in planning and urban design. Journal of Planning Education and Research 25 (1): 25–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arendt, H. 1958. The human condition. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Auge, M. 1995. Non-places: introduction to an Anthropology of Supermodernity. London: Verso.

    Google Scholar 

  • Aurigi, A., and S. Graham. 2004. The ‘crisis’ in the urban public realm Cyberspace divide, 71–94. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bardill, A., M. Karamanoglu, and K. Herd. 2005. Pleasure-based design approaches to the built environment. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the Institution of Civil Engineers-Municipal Engineer.

  • Barbosa, J., and R. Roda. 2015. Ephemeral public spaces in the reinvention of affection: three urban experiences from Brazil. In Proceedings of The Future of Places III, Public space in the new urban agenda. Stockholm, S: Sustasis Foundation. Retrieved from http://www.sustasis.net/FOPIII-Academic-Papers.html.

  • Basaraba, N. 2021. The emergence of creative and digital place-making: A scoping review across disciplines. New Media & Society, 14614448211044942.

  • Bishop, P., and L. Williams. 2012. The temporary city. New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Booth, N.K. 1989. Basic elements of landscape architectural design. Long Grove, IL: Waveland Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bodnar, J. 2015. Reclaiming public space. London: Sage Publications.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Brighenti, A.M. 2012. New media and urban motilities: a territoriologic point of view. Urban Studies 49 (2): 399–414.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calvium. 2022. https://calvium.com/projects/the-lost-palace/.

  • Carmona, M. 2021. Public places urban spaces: the dimensions of urban design. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carmona, M., and L. Sieh. 2004. Measuring Quality in planning: managing the performance process. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, S. 1992. Public space. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, G., and J. Fredericks. 2017. Finding the human factor in digital placemaking: a research journey through the digital nexus. Media architecture compendium: digital placemaking, 206–208.

  • Calhoun, C.J. 1992. Habermas and the public sphere. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Calvium. 2018. https://calvium.com/a-definition-of-digital-placemaking-for-urban-regeneration/

  • Carmona, M. 2010. Contemporary public space, part two: classification. Journal of Urban Design 15 (2): 157–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cesário V., S. Matos, M. Radeta, and V. Nisi. 2017. Designing interactive technologies for interpretive exhibitions: enabling teen participation through user-driven innovation. In Paper presented at the IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction.

  • Coates, G.J., and D. Seamon. 1984. Toward a phenomenology of place and place-making: Interpreting landscape, lifeworld and aesthetics. Oz 6: 6–9. https://doi.org/10.4148/2378-5853.1074.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Colquhoun, A. 1989. Modernity and the classical tradition: architectural essays, 1980–1987. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Corkery, L. 2016. Reclaiming and making places of distinction through landscape architecture. In Place and placelessness revisited, ed. R. Freestone and E. Liu, 61–75. New York: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Crommelin, L. 2016. Examining place-making in practice: observation from the revitalization of downtown Detroit. In Place and placelessness revisited, ed. R. Freestone and E. Liu, 153–167. New York: Routledge.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Cullen, G. 1995. The concise townscape. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Backer, M., and A. Pavoni. 2018. Through thick and thin: young people’s affective geographies in Brussels’ public space. Emotion, Space and Society 27: 9–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dentsu. 2022. https://www.dentsu.co.jp/en/showcase/ibutterfly.html

  • Doh, Y.Y., and S.-M.L. Whang. 2014. From separation to integration: identity development of Korean adult players in online game world. Games and Culture 9 (1): 30–57.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donovan, M. 2017. Place making and sustainability. Epic: Advancing the value of ethnography in industry. Retrieved from https://www.epicpeople.org.

  • Dorward, L.J., J.C. Mittermeier, C. Sandbrook, and F. Spooner. 2017. Pokémon Go: benefits, costs, and lessons for the conservation movement. Conservation Letters 10 (1): 160–165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Digital-Placemaking. 2021. Retrieved from March 24, 2021, from http://digital-placemaking.org/.

  • Dupre, K. 2019. Trends and gaps in place-making in the context of urban development and tourism: 25 years of literature review. Journal of Place Management and Development. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPMD-07-2017-0072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ellin, N. 1999. Postmodern urbanism. New York: Princeton Architectural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Era, R.T. 2012. Improving pedestrian accessibility to public space through space syntax analysis. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 8th International Space Syntax Symposium. Santiago, Chile.

  • Feldman, B. 2018. Agency and governance: Pokémon-Go and contested fun in public space. Geoforum 96: 289–297.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flynn, J., and M. Yassin. 2012. Community-oriented BRT: urban design, amenities, and placemaking.

  • Fang, J., Chang, V., Gao, G., & Wang, H.-C. (2021). Social Interactions in Virtual Reality: What Cues Do People Use Most and How. Companion Publication of the 2021 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work and Social Computing, 49–52. https://doi.org/10.1145/3462204.3481772

  • Foth, Marcus. 2017a. Lessons from urban guerrilla placemaking for smart city commons In Proceedings of the 8th International Conference on Communities and Technologies (C&T ‘17), 32–35. New York, NY, USA: ACM.

  • Foth, M. 2017b. Some thoughts on digital placemaking. In H. M. Hausler, M. Tomitsch, L. Hespanhol, & G. Tscherteu (Eds.) Media architecture compendium: digital placemaking, 203–205.

  • Freeman G., J. Bardzell, S. Bardzell, S.-Y. Liu, X. Lu, and D. Cao. 2019. Smart and fermented cities: an approach to placemaking in urban informatics. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 2019 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.

  • Fuchs, C., and M. Obrist. 2010. HCI and society: Towards a typology of universal design principles. Intl. Journal of Human-Computer Interaction 26 (6): 638–656.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gehl, J., Gemzøe, L., Kirknaes, S., & Søndergaard, B. S. (2006). New city life.

  • Gehl, J. (2011). Life between buildings: using public space. London: Island press.

  • Golub, A. 2010. Being in the World (of Warcraft): Raiding, realism, and knowledge production in a massively multiplayer online game. Anthropological Quarterly 83 (1): 17–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Graham, S., and A. Aurigi. 1997. Virtual cities, social polarization, and the crisis in urban public space. Journal of Urban Technology 4 (1): 19–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Habermas, J., and P. Press. 1989. The public sphere: an inquiry into a category of Bourgeois society. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Halegoua, G., and E. Polson. 2021. Exploring ‘digital placemaking.’ Convergence 27 (3): 573–578.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hancock, M., S. Carpendale, and A. Cockburn. 2007. Shallow-depth 3d interaction: design and evaluation of one-, two-and three-touch techniques. In Paper presented at the Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems.

  • Hartmann, M. 2009. The changing urban landscapes of media consumption and production. European Journal of Communication 24 (4): 421–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys, L. 2010. Mobile social networks and urban public space. New Media & Society 12 (5): 763–778.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Humphreys, L. 2017. Involvement shield or social catalyst: thoughts on sociospatial practice of Pokémon GO. Mobile Media & Communication 5 (1): 15–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ishii, A., Tsuruta, M., Suzuki, I., Nakamae, S., Minagawa, T., Suzuki, J., & Ochiai, Y. (2017). ReverseCAVE experience: providing reverse perspectives for sharing VR experience SIGGRAPH Asia 2017 VR Showcase (pp. 1–2).

  • Jacobs J. 1961. The death and life of Great American Cities. Random House LLC.

  • Jacobs, J. 2000. The death and life of great American cities. London: Pimlico.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jarvis, R.K. 1980. Urban environments as visual art or as social settings?: A review. The Town Planning Review 51 (1): 50–66.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, A.J., T.D. Glover, and W.P. Stewart. 2014. Attracting locals downtown: everyday leisure as a place-making initiative. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration 32 (2): 28–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jones, B., & Sohdi, R. (2012). The illustrated history of projection mapping. Retrieved August, 28, 2013.

  • Jordan, P.W. 1998. Human factors for pleasure in product use. Applied Ergonomics 29 (1): 25–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kalandides, A. 2018. Citizen participation: towards a framework for policy assessment. Journal of Place Management and Development 1 (2): 152–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Knox, P., and S. Pinch. 2014. Urban social geography: an introduction. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Krier, R., and C. Rowe. 1979. Urban space. London: Academy Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lah, O. 2017. Pathways for urban development: the role of urban basic services in delivering on the New Urban Agenda. Archivio 3: 4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lew, A.A. 2017. Tourism planning and place making: place-making or placemaking? Tourism Geographies 19 (3): 448–466.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loukaitou-Sideris, A., and T. Banerjee. 1998. Urban design downtown: poetics and politics of form. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lynch, K. 1960. The image of the city, vol. 11. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lydon, M., and A. Garcia. 2015. Tactical urbanism. Washington, DC: Island Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madanipour, A. 1996. Design of urban space: an inquiry into a socio-spatial process. Chichester: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Madureira, A.M. 2015. Physical planning in place-making through design and image building. Journal of Housing and the Built Environment 30 (1): 157–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Main, K., and G.F. Sandoval. 2015. Placemaking in a translocal receiving community: the relevance of place to identity and agency. Urban Studies 52 (1): 71–86.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Massey, D. 2005. For space. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCullough, M. 2004. Digital ground: architecture, pervasive computing, and environmental knowing. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mehaffy, M.W., T. Haas, and P. Elmlund. 2019. Public space in the new urban agenda: research into implementation. Urban Planning 4 (2): 134–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mehta, V. 2014. Evaluating public space. Journal of Urban Design 19 (1): 53–88.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meyrowitz, J. 1986. No sense of place: the impact of electronic media on social behaviour. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, W.J. 1996. City of bits: space, place, and the infobahn. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morrison, J. 2018. https://calvium.com/a-definition-of-digital-placemaking-for-urban-regeneration/.

  • Morrison, J. 2022. https://calvium.com/resources/digital-placemaking/.

  • Moudon, A.V. 1992. A catholic approach to organizing what urban designers should know. Journal of Planning Literature 6 (4): 331–349.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Myrick, P. 2011. The power of place: a new dimension for sustainable development. Project for Public Spaces. Retrieved from https://www.pps.org.

  • Neal, S., K. Bennett, H. Jones, A. Cochrane, and G. Mohan. 2015. Multiculture and public parks: researching super-diversity and attachment in public green space. Population, Space and Place 21 (5): 463–475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nijholt, A. 2020. Making smart cities more playable. Singapore: Springer.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nijholt, A. 2016. Playable cities. Singapore: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Norberg-Schulz, C. 2019. Genius loci: towards a phenomenology of architecture (1979). Historic Cities: Issues in Urban Conservation 8: 31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pallot, M., and S. Richir. 2016. Laval Virtual Vision 2025: blurring the lines between digital and physical worlds. In Paper presented at the Proc. 11th Intl Conf. Disability, Virtual Reality & Associated Technologies.

  • Pang, C., C. Neustaedter, K. Moffatt, K. Hennessy, and R. Pan. 2020. The role of a location-based city exploration game in digital placemaking. Behaviour & Information Technology 39 (6): 624–647.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pavlovskaya, M. 2016. Digital place-making: insights from critical cartography and GIS, In The digital arts and humanities (pp. 153–167). Springer.

  • Peltonen, J. 2021. The world is your playground: a bibliometric and text mining analysis of location-based game research. In Paper presented at the Interactivity and Game Creation: 9th EAI International Conference, ArtsIT 2020, Aalborg, Denmark, December 10–11, 2020, Proceedings.

  • Plunkett, D. 2011. On place attachments in virtual worlds. World Leisure Journal 53 (3): 168–178.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Proshansky, H.M. 1978. The city and self-identity. Environment and Behavior 10 (2): 147–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ramlee, M., D. Omar, R. Mohd Yunus, and Z. Samadi. 2018. Attributes of successful public spaces through users perception. Asian Journal of Quality of Life 3 (11): 21–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Raskar, R., G. Welch, and H. Fuchs. 1998. Seamless projection overlaps using image warping and intensity blending. In Paper presented at the Fourth International Conference on Virtual Systems and Multimedia.

  • Relph, E. 1976. Place and placelessness, vol. 67. London: Pion.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, C.N. 1980. Genius loci: towards a phenomenology of architecture. London: Academy Editions.

    Google Scholar 

  • Science and Media Museum. 2020. https://www.scienceandmediamuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/short-history-internet.

  • Sennett, R. 2020. The public realm being urban, 35–58. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Shach-Pinsly, D. 2019. Measuring security in the built environment: Evaluating urban vulnerability in a human-scale urban form. Landscape and Urban Planning 191: 103412.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shach-Pinsly, D. 2010. Visual openness and visual exposure analysis models used as evaluation tools during the urban design development process. Journal of Urbanism 3 (2): 161–184.

    Google Scholar 

  • Singh, K. 2016. Understanding augmented reality (ar) game and its implications on security. Center for Air Power Studies, 10.

  • Sitte, C. 1986. City planning according to artistic principles. Mineola, NY: Dover Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sorkin, M. 1992. Variations on a theme park: the new American city and the end of public space. New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • Soukup, C. 2006. Computer-mediated communication as a virtual third place: building Oldenburg’s great good places on the world wide web. New Media & Society 8 (3): 421–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stevens, Q. 2007. The ludic city: exploring the potential of public spaces. London: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Strydom, W., and K. Puren. 2013. A participatory approach to public space design as informative for place-making. Challenges of Modern Technology 4: 33–40.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sun, E. 2015. The importance of play in digital placemaking. Paper presented at the Ninth International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media.

  • Tabb, P. 2009. Placemaking as a sustainable planning strategy: Serenbe Community. In Paper presented at the ARCC Conference Repository.

  • Tang, A.K. 2017. Key factors in the triumph of Pokémon GO. Business Horizons 60 (5): 725–728.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tan, L., and K.K. Chow. 2017. Piano staircase: exploring movement-based meaning making in interacting with ambient media. In Paper Presented at the IFIP Conference on Human-Computer Interaction.

  • Teamlab. 2022a. https://www.teamlab.art/zh-hans/w/genpei-waterscreen/.

  • Teamlab. 2022b. https://www.teamlab.art/e/mifuneyamarakuen2018/.

  • Teder, M.E. 2018. From Outsideness to Insideness-Placemaking in Public Space.

  • The National Grid. 2021. https://thenationalgrid.com.au/journal/whatisplacemaking. Accessed May 2021.

  • Tuan, Y.F. 1979. Space and place: humanistic perspective. In Philosophy in geography, ed. S. Gale and G. Olsson, 387–427. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Urry, J. 2002. Mobility and proximity. Sociology 36 (2): 255–274.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Nes, A., and M.J. López. 2007. Micro scale spatial relationships in urban studies: the relationship between private and public space and its impact on street life. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 6th Space Syntax Symposium (6SSS), Istanbul, Turkiye, June 12–15, 2007.

  • Vivid. (2022). https://www.vividsydney.com/.

  • Vukmirovic, M., & Gavrilović, S. (2020). Placemaking as an approach of sustainable urban facilities management. Facilities.

  • Whyte, W.H. 1980. The social life of small urban spaces. Washington, DC: The Conservation Foundation.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whyte, W.H. 1988. Rediscovering the center. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania.

    Google Scholar 

  • Willis, K.S., K. O’Hara, T. Giles, and M. Marianek. 2009. Sharing knowledge about places as community building Shared encounters, 291–308. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, B., & Chen, Q. (2017, July). Location spoofing in a location-based game: A case study of pokémon go. In International Cartographic Conference (pp. 21–32). Springer, Cham.

  • Zhang, J., P.Y. Tan, H. Zeng, and Y. Zhang. 2019. Walkability assessment in a rapidly urbanizing city and its relationship with residential estate value. Sustainability 11 (8): 2205.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, C., and Y. Min. 2009. What is authentic urban public space? A review of western public space theories and an evaluation of the ‘publicness’ of public space. Urban Planning International. 24 (3): 44–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zucker, P. 1959. Town and square: from the agora to the village green. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Faculty of Urban Planning, Zhejiang University of Science and Technology, Hangzhou, China

    Kuangfan Chen

  2. School of Architecture and Built Environment, Faculty of Engineering, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane City, Australia

    Mirko Guaralda

  3. School of Design, Faculty of Creative Industry, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane City, Australia

    Jeremy Kerr

  4. School of Computer Science, Faculty of Science, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane City, Australia

    Selen Turkay

Authors
  1. Kuangfan Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mirko Guaralda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jeremy Kerr
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Selen Turkay
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kuangfan Chen.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chen, K., Guaralda, M., Kerr, J. et al. Digital intervention in the city: a conceptual framework for digital placemaking. Urban Des Int 29, 26–38 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-022-00203-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-022-00203-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation