urban scrawl Issue 3

Reasons To Be Cheerful

www.urbed.coop

2 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

The world financial system, the economy, the coalition government, the budget (or lack of it), the public sector cutbacks, the architects and planners at the job centre, the developers in administration, the projects shelved, the masterplans left gathering dust, the sites left unfinished

and the World Cup... Its has been rough recently.

Is there anything more than years of penny pinching and wound licking to look forward to? Well yes we think there is This Urban Scrawl is dedicated to the threads of hope still out there in this fractured, turbulent and fragile world

of the built environment.

It may seem strange to talk about happiness at the moment, but many people are. Researchers, developers, social thinkers and politicians are all wondering why we didn’t get happier in the years of plenty. Indeed research shows that levels of happiness were lower in the boom years than they were in the years of austerity after the war. So maybe we should be planning for happiness rather than prosperity? If so, what does this mean in practice and how can the built environment be designed to promote

wellbeing.

In the spirit of enquiry Urban Scrawl set out to ask.

Editorial

2 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

3 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

Editoral Team:

Sarah Jarvis, Andy Kelham, John Sampson

Photographs:

Charlie Baker: Front Image, p.5,Back Image

David Rudlin: p.4 Pete Halsall: p.21

Illustrations:

John Sampson: p.10-15

Contents

Credits

3 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

URBED (urbanism environment design) Ltd

Fifth Floor, 10 Little Lever Street

Manchester, M1 1HR

t. 0161 200 5500

email: scrawl@urbed.coop web: www.urbed.coop

4-7

Rebuilding the market:

– rethinking housing

after the recession

Sarah Jarvis interviews practitioners and

commentators to discuss who are we

currently bulding new housing for and

how might this change in the future.

8-15

Exploring Happiness

Nick Dodd describes the work

he has been doing on a health

happiness and wellbeing standard

for the developer igloo.

16-19

Manifesto Upgrade: from

Comfort to Happy, Flourishing

Super Monkeys

Jamie Anderson trys to find out why we

can’t get happy in our moern cities?

20-21

Happiness Strategies at

One Brighton

Pete Halsall of , BioRegional

Quintain talks about their

‘One Brighton’ Scheme’

22-23

Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood

- Communities are good for you

David Rudlin asks should we be paying

more attention to the communities

we are helping to create?

1

Editorial

24-25

The Built Environment and Wellbeing

Elizabeth Burton on WISE (Wellbeing

in Sustainable Environments)

4 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

Rebuilding the market

– rethinking housing after the recession

Until about October 2007 it seemed

that property sold itself. It wasn’t just

property, of course. We were buying cars

and CDs, TVs and trainers, as well.

The recession changed all that, and now

companies across the board are looking

for new opportunities to rebuild their

markets. Designer Wayne Hemingway

points out that one strategy invaluable to

all successful manufacturers is to find out

as much as they can about their customers.

“That’s why everything including cereal

packets has surveys asking people

about themselves and their tastes.”

But that doesn’t apply, apparently, to

house building. “Of all the industries

we have worked in, housing is the

weakest in terms of understanding what

its customers want.” This is because,

he concludes, until now housebuilders

“never really had to take much notice.”

Hemingway contrasts thought given

to selling second hand homes: “Think

of all the television programmes that

are devoted to telling us what people

want, what colour to paint your house,

which kitchen to fit. At Red or Dead

we had researched our customers to

the nth degree – and we were doing

that for a bloody blouse. But ask

MORI how many house builders

have been to them to commission

research on what people want.”

So we did. Bobby Duffy, Managing

Director of Public Affairs at Ipsos

MORI has certainly not seen a change

in behaviour. “I think it must be one of

the most under-researched industries

relative to its value – they must spend

a minuscule fraction of a percent on

research, in contrast to most mature

markets.” But Duffy says that he cannot

really see the recession changing that,

as experience shows that it has not in

As the runaway housing market catches its breath in recession, Sarah Jarvis has interviewed practitioners and commentators from the across the sector if we are really making the most of an opportunity to redefine new housing and re-engineer a product that may be what people say they want, but which has

not always promoted happiness and well-being. Is it time to ask ourselves who are we building for and how might that change in a future uncertain?

the past. He finds a particular mindset

in the house building market not to

spend money with research agencies,

whether they are volume housebuilders

preferring to do their own in-house work

or niche market-makers relying on their

own understanding of the market.

Dan Bridgett, Head of Public Affairs

at Barratt Developments counters

that Barratt carries out “exhaustive

research”. Customer satisfaction is

extremely high and, Bridgett asserts,

that does not happen by accident.

But who has been buying new build?

Hemingway quotes research by Savills at

the turn of the Millennium, which showed

that only between 20 and 28% of house

buyers would consider buying a new house

from a house builder. “If only 20% wanted

to buy this product how does it still exist?

Imagine if the same were true for M&S or

the BBC – they would soon cease to exist

– so how did housebuilders survive?”

5 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

Yolande Barnes, Director of Residential

Research at property agents Savills

confirms that buyers of new build houses

are still not typical. “When housebuilders

do research, what they do is they ask

their customers. But they forget that

their customers are a weird lot in terms

of the whole market, certainly in the

past they’ve been a very rarefied group

indeed, because they’re the people

who buy new build. They keep asking

the lunatics about the asylum.”

One problem, she believes, has been the

narrowness of the product range on offer.

“Traditionally the mass house builder has

not catered to a broad range of occupiers,

they have gone on targeting the same

people. Ten years ago it was all ‘executive

family homes’; then they said they would

broaden their market base, but they just

added another type of homogenous buyer

– the buy-to-let investor. So they built

buy-to-let flats or executive homes and

nothing in-between.” Barnes thinks that

the only real areas of oversupply now are

in Docklands in London, and city centres

like Leeds and Manchester – all the places

where big regeneration projects have been

focused. “We have been so unimaginative

about doing these things. We think

that building buy-to-let flat factories

actually constitutes regeneration.”

Where families have a choice, flats largely

remain unpopular and Barnes is aware that

much modern development has also been

particularly child unfriendly, from the signs

saying no ball games to the creation of vast

tracts of grass that nobody’s allowed to

actually sit on. “We’ve generally speaking

built single buildings west of the City of

London because that’s all the land that’s

been available, so unless there’s already

a park and all the amenities there, we

haven’t been building neighbourhoods

suitable for children.” She mentions an

expensive high-rise riverside apartment

scheme in London where the glassed-

in ‘winter gardens’ are crammed with

toys. “By contrast in Hammarby Sjöstad,

Sweden, although it wasn’t anticipated that

families would go there, the good internal

space standards and outside space have

attracted families; the general design and

good neighbourhood that was created,

with cars underground, etc, was very

usable, very practical. I can’t think of many

schemes in London that replicate that.”

She notes, however, that there is a cultural

difference between the Scandinavians and

the British. “A lot of people forget that

your average, middle class Scandinavian

family will have a wooden hut in the woods

or the beach, and that is important.”

She emphasises, also, that Hammarby is

still a relatively new place, and believes

that we should not forget the success of

established neighbourhoods in Britain

such as Northcote Road in Wandsworth,

South London. “You can learn much

more from studying that neighbourhood

about how to make a good place than you

can even from Hammarby, because it’s

evolved – it provides what people want.”

Sprawling Housing development in Hul

6 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

David Birkbeck, Chief Executive of not-

for-profit company Design for Homes

(where Barnes is also a director), is more

concerned with the other end of the

purchaser’s lifecycle and thinks that one of

the main challenges for housing in future

will be unlocking the huge proportion

of the country’s property value currently

“tied up in the hands of pensioners”.

Having so many of the country’s three-

or four-bed homes occupied by single

pensioners has created an imbalance in

the housing stock and while Birkbeck

acknowledges that the reluctance of

people to move home later in life can

be for social reasons as well as through

a lack of choice, he believes that there

is now a pressing need for new products

in the marketplace which can help

make the decision to downsize easier.

Like Barnes, Birkbeck is also looking to

Europe for examples that we can learn

from and has recently visited several. He

believes that crucially older age should

not mean isolation. “Switzerland is a good

model here, and there are also schemes in

Denmark and Sweden, such as Neptuna in

Malmö’s Western Harbour District which

is a Lifetime Neighbourhood. There needs

to be a greater range of people living

together – pensioners near kindergartens

works very well, it keeps people active.”

Birkbeck advocates that we get used

to thinking of our ‘property lives’ as

having two halves – up to the age of 50

and then from 50 onwards. This way

we will make provision for the needs of

our old age earlier and as part of the

wider community. While there are some

schemes being developed in Britain they

often tend to be gated developments with

campus-like facilities for people who can

retire early. The Pad 55 development in

Pickering, East Yorkshire, showed the

importance of removing the covenant

restricting the age of those living there,

so that it becomes easier to sell the

properties later on in the second hand

market. In general, though, the product

Hammarby Sjöstad, Stockholm

7 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

in the UK is still far too inflexible. “We

need to think like train companies offering

‘off-peak tickets’ – our housing stock is not

flexible like that. There needs to be more

money for researching those products.”

One practice that is exploring a more

flexible product is Croydon-based

Geraghty Taylor Architects, who are in

pre-application discussions to develop

their ‘Living Home’ scheme on a local

back land site. A 3-storey house on a

relatively small footprint can be turned

from a single family dwelling into three

flats or a flat and maisonette. The scheme

has been driven by an awareness of fuel

poverty issues and the generally poor

performance of older housing stock, but

also addresses the cultural and social

factors that can inhibit older people

from moving house later in life.e.

Brian Alborough at Geraghty Taylor

thinks that the post-recession landscape

will definitely be changing for house

builders as both local authorities and

customers become more discerning. From

his experience with other authorities,

he believes that “Croydon is ahead of

the game”. From April 2010 the south

London borough – where former CABE

and Housing Corporation Chief Executive

Jon Rouse is now in charge – will be

requiring a Sustainable Homes Code

Level 4 on all new housing. Croydon is

also still building new council housing

of its own, with a development of larger

family homes planned at Code Level 5.

And while the commercial house-building

market may still be crippled, Birkbeck

says that it won’t be in five years’ time.

This will be an opportunity for other

European companies to bring different

house building models to the UK market,

products that perhaps better suit our

needs, desires and aspirations, products

that intuitively engage with the promotion

of a healthier, happier lifestyle. Companies

registering interest with the HCA’s Public

Land Initiative have included Bouygues

and Skanska, with its ‘Modernahus’

model, which uses substantial off-site

manufacture. Birkbeck believes that one

advantage they may have is that “they are

more aware of what they’re building”.

As well as new products, Barnes believes

that housing needs a fundamental

change in the underlying model of

development. “The problem in the past

was that it was all about what yields most

in the short term, not the long term.

The individual house builder was often

working directly against the interests

of the long term landowners, but when

the long-term landowners were a whole

range of disparate people who will buy

in a frenzy, it doesn’t actually matter.”

To replace the mono-cultural

developments that have proven

so unsuccessful – both in terms of

placemaking and with the market – she

believes that a better mix will be achieved

by encouraging longer-term investment.

“Recession has forced change because

the market has fallen away, but so far

what it’s resulted in is nothing happening,

rather than something else happening.

What hasn’t changed is that we haven’t

yet got the mechanisms for long-term

developers to come on board.”

Citing the model of successful commercial

property owners, like the Howard de

Walden estate that owns London’s

‘Marylebone Village’, she would like to

see new tax incentives to encourage a

longer-term interest. “When investors

have a long-term ownership in the area

they are going to want to get a better mix

– and not just flog it as quickly as possible

to the nearest high bidder.” She believes

that such investment could attract the

sort of investing institutions who would

otherwise buy very long-dated bonds. But

at the moment she believes that “no one

in the property industry really speaks the

language of the investment and finance

industry. We have got to learn to turn

these design propositions that we know

are good for communities and good for

places, into financial propositions.”

Finally, Hemingway believes that just

as the building industry must change, so

too has the buyer. “When house builders

could sell all they built they didn’t have

to care about their customers. Nowadays

people are more discerning. They are

not rushing to buy houses anymore as

the mortgages are not there and the idea

that prices are only going upwards so you

can’t fail to make money has gone.”

With hindsight, the recession might

have been the spur developers and

policymakers needed to rethink

housing, to create a better climate

of building for the betterment of the

individual purchaser and collective

community. As Hemingway remarks,

“the difficulty to get a mortgage might

eventually prove to be a good thing.”

8 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

The Pursuit of happinessSpecialist property investor igloo

Regeneration commissioned URBED to

develop a new set of policies designed to

shape how their developments improve

people´s ‘Health, Happiness and

Wellbeing´. Here we set out our thinking

behind the policies.

Whilst the notion of a property developer

seeking to improve people’s health,

happiness and wellbeing might seem a little

esoteric, in reality it is something that has

preoccupied architects, urban designers,

local authorities and even property

developers for centuries.

In seeking to bring greater ‘health, happiness

and wellbeing’ to urban neighbourhoods

igloo is following a rich tradition of not just

investing in buildings, streets and spaces but

in thinking about how they may influence

people´s quality of life now and for many

years to come.

The city as a place of contradictionsCities have always been places of

contradictions and are often portrayed

as unhealthy places characterised by

pollution, crime and the worst of human

nature. Places where people live closely

together but often know nothing about

one anothers lives and where the values of

community have been eroded.

Trends in society, social engineering and

the poor quality of the urban environment

and buildings in many of the UK’s cities

have conspired to re-inforce the unhealthy

image of our cities. Examples include:

• Badly designed buildings without

sufficient natural daylight and

ventilation, containing potentially

harmful materials and finishings,

• Air pollution from vehicles and

increasing congestion which directly

affects health, reduces life expectancy

and increases stress,

• More sentient and decadent lifestyles

which have reduced how much physical

exercise we do and increased levels of

obesity,

• A degraded public realm and a lack

of quality green space that limits the

potential for exercise, relaxation and

social contact,

• Social exclusion and deprivation

that has proved consistently difficult

to tackle, leaving whole sections of

society without hopes or aspirations

for the future,

• Status anxiety, stress and time pressure

resulting from modern working

conditions and consumer society

which have contributed to a dramatic

increase in mental health problems.

But cities are a place of contradictions.

The ‘wit and mess’ of urban life has always

attracted people, creating new possibilities

for free expression and for meeting people

from different places and walks of life with

Exploring Happiness URBED have been working with specialist property investor and developer

igloo regeneration to develop and monitor socially-responsible principles for property investment, now known as their Footprint Policy. The initial principles

covered regeneration, sustainability and design. To these have been added a fourth category covering well-being and happiness. URBED’s Nick Dodd

describes these new principles and the standards that have been set.

9 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

new perspectives. ‘Town air makes the

man free’ wrote George Simmel observing

German cities in the 18th Century.

Cities have always stimulated new ideas

and thinking, challenging human ingenuity

to respond to the needs of urban society.

Great cities are creative and dynamic places,

where people and place come together to

create something really special.

Can regeneration improve wellbeing?There are large areas of urban Britain where

hope for the future is hard to find. In the

post-war era the decline of manufacturing

has created whole areas where high

employment is the norm. Slum clearance

and social engineering in the 1960’s and

1970’s created immense upheaval and

served to accelerate the erosion of the

social fabric of these communities.

The modern drive to ‘regenerate’ carries

the risk of further polarising society. With

the gap widening between the haves – those

with the wealth to sustain an increase

in values and buy into ‘urban living’ and

healthy lifestyles - and the have nots – the

socially excluded living in poor quality

housing, without access to employment and

basic amenities, exposed to crime, social

breakdown, insecurity and a degraded local

environment.

To try and change things a careful approach

to ´regeneration´ is needed focussing first

on people´s wellbeing. The psychologist

Abraham Maslow provides useful insight

into what this might mean in practice. He

observed that people have intrinsic needs

that have to be met in order to ensure they

can see a future in which they may be happy.

The implication is that before we can even

talk about happiness a focus is needed on

what is needed to improve people´s basic

living conditions and their health and

wellbeing – housing, employment, crime,

environment.

The pursuit of happinessHappiness is equally as precious as health

and wellbeing but is less easy to reliably

orchestrate. In modern consumer society

people often define or calibrate their

happiness against their peers, or what

clever marketing establishes as lifestyle

aspirations. This has the created the

modern Catch 22 of status anxiety in which

we demand greater choice but as a result

can never be happy. Increasing mental

health problems are a symptom of this,

together with the increased pace of modern

life in which time is a commodity.

The need to live more sustainably has added

to the concerns of modern life. But this

need not be a barrier to greater happiness,

and in fact it may offer a way forward as

people have begun to question modern

lifestyles and aspirations. Research by the

New Economics Foundation, amongst

others, has highlighted that fact that

“people are just as likely to lead satisfied

lives whether their levels of consumption

are very low or high”.

Contemporary sociologists such as Gehl,

Puttnam and Oldenburg have highlighted

the importance of a ´life lived with others´

- our intrinsic need for social contact. Their

writing suggests that the pursuit of happiness

might lie the creation of opportunities for

people to define happiness on their own

terms – by creating the space and time

to nurture social bonds and networks, in

whatever form they might take, and to have

a family. Modern patterns of commuting

have also upset people´s work/life balance.

For this to happen spaces are needed

for where social contact can be made

– in streets, public spaces, markets, third

places (such as cafes and pubs) or even,

as suggested by recent projects such as

the new suburb of Vikki in Helsinki, be

augmented by the internet. Schools have

been shown to be particularly important

in fostering social contact across different

forms of tenure and ethnicity. Urban living

also offers a solution to restoring people´s

work/life balance by promoting greater

proximity between home and work.

But happiness is not just about social

contact. Returning to Maslov´s theme

of ´self actualisation´ is about having

hopes and aspirations for the future and

the opportunity for people to realise

their potential. This could include the

potential to establish new businesses in

order to realise their ideas and to support

themselves and their family. But it can

also relate to people´s community and

neighbourhood. In each case it is about

creatng the opportunity to participate in

shaping, influencing and investing in their

future.

For more information on igloo and

to download the footprint sustainable

inverstment policy visit:

www.igloo.uk.net

10 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

Creating opportunities for community

Foot

fall

Targ

et =

8,0

00 p

er d

ay

10m

per hr

25%

STANDARD 1: VIBRANCY

and In

tesity

Standard 1: Vibrancy & intensityThe public realm should provide enough visual

interest and active facades at ground level to

retain people for longer, and to encourage them

to stop and spend time in the neighbourhood.

This should be measured based on:

• Footfall, with a target of 8,000 per day for

active frontages, adjusted for the temporal

distribution caused by different mixes of uses.

• Façade visual interest, with a target for areas

of active uses of at least 6-8 unit doors per

100 metre, of which at least 1 should promote

sitting, extending into the public realm

• People’s speed of movement, and the length

and type of interaction with the ground floor

uses - with a target of a 25% stopping to

look, and 20 people per hour / 10m of facade

stopping to socialise or go in/out of a building

Developing igloo´s approachBringing together this thinking has resulted

in four new policies which in turn deal

with ‘health, happiness and wellbeing’ and

which will be applied to all their property

investments. Their approach is based on

three basic premises:

• Celebrating the city: .

That the focus should be on celebrating

and emphasising the positive

contribution that cities have made to

civilisation, the ways in which they can

improve people’s quality of life, and

how their more detrimental effects can

be minimised or even designed out.

• Context is everything: ..

That the starting point for an

igloo regeneration project should

be an appreciation of the wider

neighbourhood, and the impact

each intervention will have on

neighbourhood wellbeing, with an initial

focus on basic needs and defficiencies.

• Happiness but not at any cost: .

That igloo should seek to create

opportunities for people to live

fulfilling and happy lives, based on an

understanding of the human condition

and basic needs, and bounded by a

strong social contract and the need to

live within environmental constraints.

The new policies set out measures and

standards that at first glance seem common

sense but in modern developments are

overlooked. They also focus attention

on the wider neighbourhood, and in the

spirit of urbanism, the chance to harness

the potential of cities to change lives and

realise people’s potential. It is in this way

that the long-term value of investment

in regeneration can be unlocked, to the

benefit of investors, communities and the

environment.

The standards are set out below:

11 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

Legal respon

sibi

lities

STANDARD 3:

SO

CIAL CONTRACT

A Social Contract......................................................................................................................

Upk

eep of the scheme

Responsibilities of resi

dent

s

Public

realm

Communal areas

Com

munal Facilites

STANDARD 2: B

RO

ADBAND ACCESS

Standard 2: Broadband accessAll homes and workplaces in igloo schemes

will have access to high capacity fibre optic

broadband networks, in order to give them

a competitive edge, facilitate modern

patterns of living and working, and in order

to future-proof data transfer capabilities.

Communal facilities and portals will be made

available to all residents in order to facilitate

networking and information sharing.

Standard 3: Social contractAll residents of igloo schemes will be required to

sign-up to a ‘social contract’ that is similar in its

role to a tenancy agreement. The ‘contract’ should

clearly setout legal responsibilities – such as to

avoid anti-social behaviour – with the capacity

for other aspects to be formalised as social norms

defined by each community over time. It should

be based on best practice from mixed – tenure

schemes and social landlords, and will setout

the rights and responsibilities of residents to

one another and to the upkeep of the scheme

and its public realm and communal areas.

12 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

STANDARD 2: NATURAL EDG

E

80 tr

ees =

1km Blu

e Spa

ce

Green Space

Vib

rant

urb

an scene

Supporting Healthy Lives

STANDARD 1: Dual Access

STA

NDARD 5: PR

IVACY

Airborne

Impact

Part E +5dB

Part E -5dB

xx

xx =1

12m

Standard 1: Dual aspectThe majority of residential units should have two

perpendicular aspects, particularly where streets

are narrow or north facing. The two aspects should

be no more than 12 metres apart (for conventional

ceiling heights and a 1:1 street enclosure ratio),

with the internal layout facilitating the free

passage of air between the two aspects – with

the exception of internal stairwells or communal

atriums that are designed to passively ventilate.

Standard 2: Natural edgeAt least one aspect for each home or workspace

should provide a view with visual interest,

either in the form of a vibrant street scene or

green/blue space in a courtyard or across a

larger external space. Street trees should be

planted at a density of 80 trees per km of street.

13 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

STANDARD 3: MATERIALS TO BE A

VO

IDE

D

Use of cncrete should be carefully considered

Volitile Organic

Formaldehyde

Compounds

Lead

Compounds

Chlorinated

Compounds

Toxic wood

Preservatives

STA

NDARD 5: LIFE

TIM

E HOMES

Standard 5: Lifetime homesAll igloo homes will seek to comply with the broad principles of Lifetime

Homes. igloo will seek to ensure that it’s ‘Lifetime Homes’ respond

to the need to attract and retain people in cities, to include people

wanting to start a family but to stay in the city, but also older people

wanting to ‘downshift’. Through its management arrangements igloo

will seek to respond to residents changing needs, which could include

assistance to identify and/or move to homes that are smaller or larger.

Standard 3: Materials to be avoidedSpecific materials will be blacklisted and will be excluded from use by contractors. The initial list

will include:

• Chlorinated compounds – Fluorinated carbons such as

HCFC’s, polyurethane, polystyrole and PVC

• Formaldehyde – Contained in products such as particle board and insulation

• Lead compounds – Contained in paints or primers

• Toxic wood preservatives – PCP’s, lindane and dichlorofluoronide

• Volatile Organic Compounds – Common paint ingredients and solvent

bases including acrylic resin, ethylene glycol, petroleum and toluene.

The use of concrete should be carefully considered and designed

in order to take into account potential for radon gas.

400m

STAN

DARD 4: LEIS

URE ROUTES + SPACES

>2km

Standard 4: Leisure routes & spacesAll residents and workers should have access to

at least one safe walking and cycling route that

enables them to make a leisure walk or cycle

of at least 2km from their front door and in a

continuous green setting (see Standard 2). A

green or open space of at least 1 hectare should

be accessible to all within a 400 metre walking

distance, and in family areas this should include

a Local Equipped Area of Play (LEAP).

14 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

STANDARD 1: SECUR

ITY

Living in the city

Standard 1: SecurityEntrances and transitions from public to

communal/private space, as well as the quality

of external doors, windows and fixtures will

conform with the latest guidelines published

under the Police’s Secured by Design standards.

Concierges will be provided where it is viable.

igloo will seek to respond to best practice and

guidance promoted by Secured by Design,

in so far as it does not conflict with igloo’s

emphasis on informal surveillance created

by well used streets and public realm, and

community stewardship of the public realm.

STANDARD 2: M

icroclimate

2.8m

280

260

<14m

1.5% 2%

0.58%

Standard 2: Microclimate• Sky view: Schemes should achieve an average ground

floor Sky View Factor of 0.58, with no one street or

ground level window achieving less than 0.18. Ceiling

heights should be at least 2.8 metres, preferably

higher at ground level, and glazing ratios should

be higher on areas of façade with a lower Sky View

Factor, albeit balanced against potential heat loss.

• Daylighting: Plan depths for residential and commercial

units should aim to be less than 14 metres for ceiling

heights of 2.8 metres. Individual residential units

should achieve daylighting levels of 2% in kitchens

and 1.5% in living rooms, dining rooms and studies.

• Overheating: The internal microclimate of homes

and workspaces should moderate temperature

within a tolerance of 28 oC for 99% of the time with

bedrooms that are below 26 oC for 99% of the time.

15 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

STA

NDARD 5: PR

IVACY

Airborne

Impact

Part E +5dB

Part E -5dB8m

>15m

Tow

n Houses

10m2

per unit

Communal Private

Flats

+

5m2

7.5m2

10m

2

STA

ND

ARD

4: E

XTERNAL SPACE

STA

NDARD 3: INTE

RN

AL SPACES

66m2

51m2

77m

2

93m2

106m

2

Standard 5: PrivacyHomes will have an airborne sound insulation value at least

5dB higher than that required in the current approved Building

Regulations Document Part E. Impact sound insulation values

will be at least 5dB lower that the performance standards set

out in Part E. At least 10 % of igloos homes will be tested

to demonstrate that they achieve the required standard.

Intrusion should be minimised through consideration of glazing,

internal floor layouts and distances between blocks. This should

be based on the guidance referenced. Distances between blocks

facing onto streets can be relatively tight, potentially down to 8

metres, as long as properties have a second aspect with a longer

view, and a distance from other units of more than 15 metres.

Standard 4: External space (private and communal)Schemes will be designed so that homes have access to a

combination of public, communal and private external space. For

blocks and streets 10m2 of communal space should be designed-

in per unit, usually in the form of courtyards, although up to 50%

of this could comprise streets designated as home zones. Minimum

in-curtilage private external space standards are as follows:

Standard 3: Internal SpacesHomes will conform to the following

minimum internal floor areas

16 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

Manifesto Upgrade: from Comfort to Happy,

Flourishing Super Monkeys

You are a super monkey. Well, super primate - with hundreds

of millions of years of R&D behind you. Trouble is, with the

exception of the last few years (approximately 8,000), you and your

genes were designed for an altogether different environment. You

are, as Bjorn Grinde puts it, a Stone Age creature living in a Jet

Age Zoo. This brings about mismatches or living conditions that

are alien to the conditions that shaped us - the Environment of

Evolutionary Adaptedness (EEA).

For instance, EEA moulded us, amongst other things, as biophiliacs.

Pardon? No, that wasn’t an insult – it’s why most of us, sometimes

on a deeply sub-conscious level, love nature – from potted plants

to eco-tourism. This affinity with nature is powerful. A clever

Swede called Roger Ulrich has shown that hospital patients with

a green view, not only recover more quickly, need fewer drugs

and encounter fewer complications - than those with a view of a

brick wall. Grinde calls problematic mismatches - such as lack of

patient contact with nature “Discords”. The demise of family and

community are two further discords at the interface of culture and

our biology.

As a cultural form, we know, intuitively, that the built

environment has brought and continues to bring discords.

However empirically, it is far from clear to what extent the

built environment is responsible, directly or indirectly,

for this deterioration in happiness. Neither is it clear

which specific aspects are mismatches that, in

fact, enhance mental wellbeing. For instance, a

combination of urban green infrastructure,

appropriate massing and street definition

We were born hedonists. As babies we are unabashed pleasure

seekers, trying to grab smooth objects, chomping sweet edifices

and checking out pretty things. We are wired to pursue happiness

but, despite this positive start, the proportion of people in UK

saying that they are “very happy” has fallen from 52% in 1957 to

just 36% today. This is echoed in numerous developed countries

- each frittering colossal potential – since happy people tend to

flourish and are associated with physical health, positive relations,

engagement and

productivity. Why

so unhappy?

URBED’s Jamie Anderson has been working for the last 12 months on a PhD at the Martin Centre at Cambridge University. Based on his research this article looks at urban design through the lenses of Positive & Evolutionary Psychology

17 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

is not only beneficial in terms of microclimate and physiological

comfort but, the associated wildlife seems to bring a lot of people

joy and the positive enclosure - a sense of coherence and increased

social interaction. One of the first attempts to determine the

impact of urban traits was undertaken by Greenwich Council

and their Teaching Primary Care Trust (Guite et al, 2006). This

primary research established 13 factors as, statistically, significant

to promoting well-being in local people. Nine other factors were

found not to be significantly associated (see table).

An evolutionary psychologist may flag-up that we can be extremely

sensitive to negatives (the majority of the items on the left side of

the table). We may be like this for good reason; evolutionarily, our

monkey brains knew that if we were not careful about ‘sticks’ then

there may be no ‘carrots’ to collect (Hanson, 2009). Our aversion to

the taste of sour – which is detected at 1:2 million - compared with

1:200 for sweet - is one example. These days, a well-used marriage

formula may have more relevance: make five positive remarks to

offset a single negative remark! (Gottman, 2005). Scenarios more

innocuous than an annoying spouse can prompt stress responses.

The reaction is sometimes formidable - our bodies can be flooded

with endogenous opioids to dose pain, our blood vessels constrict

so that we are less likely to bleed, our heart pounds - ready to prime

muscles etc. Our ancient systems are primed for survival and the

negative emotions of anger and fear - towards perceived threats

(Etcoff, 2008). The ‘smoke detector’ is turned up too high and may

activate at a violin recital, or when walking in your local park.

However, a positive psychologist would assert that, although

responses to threats are essential (if we were governed only by

pleasure we would not survive) evolutionary theory neglects

positive emotions. These emotions may have played an equally

important part in encouraging us to behave in ways that ensure our

survival. They might say that not only do we need to make people

feel safer with ground floor street animation and more comfortable

with microclimate strategies but, look for ways to encourage

opportunities and enhance positives. For instance, positively

defined and appropriately enclosed streets, active ground floors

plus benches, play areas, public art, biodiversity etc. Good urban

design makes sense in positive psychology terms.

But we do not always get what we design. How do we know which

features are of most importance to well-being? Do some features

override others for different users? Do we know all of the most

effective design interventions that cultivate happy patterns of

behaviour, thinking, feeling, motivation and social connection?

There have been only modest amounts of valid research to date so

the answer to these questions is still no. The science of well-being

Significantly Associated

• Damp

• Noise

• Sense of crowding

• Feeling safe in the day time

• Feeling afraid to go out at night

• Event to get people together

• Places to stop and chat

• Access to community facilities

• Access to greenspaces

• Needles and syringes left lying around

• Access to entertainment facilities

• Liking the ‘look’ of the estate Transport and accessibility

Not Significantly Associated

• Height of building (to live in)

• House type – house, flat, maisonette

• Light, heat, draughts

• Age of property

• Density Recorded crime levels

• Sports and exercise facilities

• Shopping facilities

• Vandalism and maintenance

• Feeling that people can influence decisions

Factors found to be significantly associated with

mental well-being in Greenwich

Urban and rural population (billions) - UNEP

18 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

offers an opportunity to bolster as well as broaden the holistic remit

of the urban design paradigm. Particularly in developing countries,

where urban populations are increasing exponentially and it is

paramount that wellbeing is optimized.

As with any science - definitions are a good place to start. Happiness

and well-being are both umbrella terms and are sometimes used

interchangeably. There are two key types of well-being and both

apply at personal and interpersonal levels. The first – hedonics

- is more commonly known as subjective well-being (SWB). SWB

is very much about how people feel. It is about pleasure and

enjoyment – the presence of positive emotions, the absence of

negative and satisfaction (Huppert et al, 2009). SWB gives us at

lot to go at. The positive emotions alone – as recently suggested

by Paul Ekman - are thought to include sensory pleasures,

amusement, contentment, relief, excitement, wonder, ecstasy,

elevation, gratitude and compassion. There are even two emotions

that elude the English dictionary: Schadenfreude - happiness in

another’s misfortune; Naches - pride and joy in their children.

The second key type of happiness is known as psychological well-

being (PWB) and is based on Aristotle’s eudaimonia; the life well-

lived. PWB extends well-being beyond the way people feel and

is more about how people function. It is about their autonomy,

competence or environmental mastery, interest, engagement and

meaning or purpose in life. It is about well-being as an active process

‘well-doing’ and not the passive process of how good people feel

(Huppert et all, 2009). As an urban designer working at URBED,

the concept of eudaimonia brings a degree of reassurance. Amongst

other things, we strive for connectivity, freedom of movement and

truly public realm. We push for densities that are conducive to the

establishment of small businesses and public transport. We treat

regeneration as a truly participative and collaborative process with

capacity building and community-led design. Each of these, in

different ways and to varying degrees, encourages engagement and

active participation; ‘well-doing’.

So why super monkeys? We are 98% chimp but the 2% variance

makes a huge difference. Since separating from our primate

ancestors our brains have nearly tripled in size. The architecture of

our skull has been overhauled in a blink of evolutionary time. This

is largely to accommodate huge frontal lobes and the pre-frontal

cortex (Gilbert, 2008). These new structures are involved in the

‘executive functions’ such as thinking, planning, problem solving,

language and regions in the left pre-frontal cortex are at the seat

of positive emotions (Begely, 2004). In additon, our brains can

enlarge and gain in sophistication throughout our lives. They are

far more adaptable or “plastic” than we ever thought. They are

built for change and to learn. We can all therefore lift our ‘set-

point’ - our average happiness - for ourselves.

As individuals, the combination of evolved executive functions

and neuroplasticity is powerful. They allow us to learn and/ or

employ psychological processes such as mindfulness, altruism,

compassion, optimism training etc. We can free ourselves from

the automatic behaviors and emotions (i.e. fear and anger) of our

primate relatives and embrace our positive mental attributes to

synthesize happiness. Meditating Buddhist monks are a powerful

example. Using functional magnetic resonance imaging, scientists

have found that monks revamp their brain structure and function

by expanding or strengthening circuits. As a result, the more

experienced the meditator; the deeper and more enduring were

the levels of well-being observed (Davidson, 2005).

But this change is generated from within. We are also susceptible

to experience of the external physical environment. One of the

most famous examples is that of London Taxi drivers. Researchers

have found that the number of years spent taxiing correlated with

the size of posterior hippocampi - the area of the brain associated

with navigation and spatial memory (Maguire et al, 2000). Monks

and cabbies both demonstrate we can remould our brains all of the

time. Can the places we design, which are experienced repetitively,

help expand and strengthen peoples’ happiness circuitry? It

is important to note that both the monks and the taxi drivers

make these changes under behavioural control. In other words,

they are not achieved in ‘auto-pilot’ mode. It is not clear what

19 – ISSUE 03

Exploring HappinessExploring Happiness

the cumulative impact may be for our well-being if we are either

unconsciously interacting, or, the built environment stimuli is not

sufficient to cause a subjective reaction.

Recent research concluded that it may well be important to design

for sensory stimulation (Byoko et al 2008). This does not necessarily

mean we should start licking buildings or sniffing shared surfaces.

It certainly does mean that we can pay more attention to the senses

and grapple with questions such as: what does the notion of hedonic

adaptation (becoming habituated or used to good or bad) mean for

sunny, thoughtfully scented, tactile public space? How else can we

build or encourage eudaimonia - which people do not adapt to and

can be constantly varied?

It is understandable that research into happiness may prompt

some skepticism. Quite rightly, we have a fear of architectural

determinism and repeating carbuncles associated with modernist

optimism in the 1960’s- 70s. However, the modernists did not

employ any proper holistic (valid or reliable) ‘affective forecasting’

- knowing how we will feel in the future. Research and design

has already come along way in reducing discords, environmental

stressors, making people safer and more comfortable. We have a

much better understanding of microclimate, democratic streets

and spaces etc. This has been very important work in light of our

hyper sensitive ‘smoke detectors’ and the fact that pleasure is, in

part, about the absence of negative emotions. And as mentioned

earlier, we have already gone some way to promoting eudaimonia.

We were born hedonists and although many of us lead comfortable,

wealthier lives, we are not, on average, that happy. Our genes

are expressed through environment (Huppert, 2009) and the

built environment may have a role to play in activating as well as

regulating genes. It may well be a moderate impact compared with

psychological interventions we learn, like the monks, as individuals.

But we can ‘point’ or at least ‘nudge’ peoples’ happiness - both

directly via the senses - for passive recipients and in-directly i.e.

facilitating social interaction or meaningful job creation for active

participators. Collectively, as practitioners and researchers, our

large ‘plastic’ forebrains equip us with the imagination to work,

more deliberately and creatively, towards an upgraded manifesto:

taking us from comfort to a happy and flourishing species.

20 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

Happiness Strategies at One Brighton

As a developer we are corporately

committed to creating One Planet

Communities. The joy of working with

these principles is the process of discovery

as the implementation of such ideas

requires considerable research, debate,

soul searching, thinking and no small

amount of trying to work out how to frame

and then apply them. We have taken the

Corbusian approach, and omitted both the

car and the megalomania to create features

and characteristics that will engender

health, happiness and a genuine sense of

community? Architectural philosophers

might say the idea is that of a latter day

humanistic modernism – I say fine to that,

but let’s be a little braver and call it health

and happiness by design.

So – what have we done? Firstly, we

consulted and asked everyone a basic but

powerful question. If you were going to

live in this building, what would make you

healthier and happier? Somebody suggested

that we use the roof space for allotments

The recently completed ‘One Brighton’ scheme by Bioregional Quintain is an experiment in happiness. Built as part of URBED’s New England Quarter

masterplan, the scheme has been conceived, designed, constructed, marketed and managed in accordance with the 10, One Planet Living principles. One of these principles is to promote health and happiness something perhaps a little radical for us Calvinist Brits? However Pete

Halsall of , BioRegional argues that we should assuage our feelings of guilt and silliness that we seem to feel in pursuing such a goal.

Exploring Happiness

and food growing areas, as that would be a

great place to socialise, meet new people,

and grow food and maybe flowers. So we’ve

done that. Another said that an apartment

building needs gardens, and not necessarily

of the public realm variety, but perhaps

in small , intimate places where one can

ponder and enjoy the view. So we have

incorporated ‘sky gardens’, lounge–size

outside spaces interspersed elevationally

between residential units. Rooms without

windows, filled with light, space and plants.

Our architect suggested that we could create

a sense of community with corridors that

mirrored non orthogonal street patterns.

So we’ve done that too.

We also thought about health in buildings.

Amazingly, the wider UK green building

community seems to have virtually no real

concept of it. Yes, we must save energy.

Yes, we must reduce air infiltration losses

as it’s silly after all to insulate a building

and then let the heat seep away from the

unseen cracks. But what about indoor air

20 – ISSUE 03

quality? What about the huge damage to

respiratory health by mould growth in warm

but wet buildings? We have created a vapour

permeable wall system so that water vapour

can escape to the outside and leave the wall

surface mould free. We have implemented

a Scandinavian heat recovery ventilation

strategy – not seeking to ventilate by drilling

holes in the frames of high performance and

very energy efficient windows – but rather by

mechanically bringing in fresh air, preheating

with waste exhaust air from kitchens and

bathrooms and then finally re-heating it

from renewable energy sources if required to

achieve a comfortable room temperature.

Above all, we have taken a simple principle

– health and happiness – and applied it

to all stages of the development. We even

applied it to our site workers eco-café, where

builders were fed local and sustainable food

produce. So let’s not forget, and this could

be the retrospectively created motto for One

Brighton - it takes healthy and happy workers

to create healthy and happy communities.

21 – ISSUE 03

Exploring HappinessExploring Happiness

21 – ISSUE 03

22 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood

Communities are good for you

Recognising the value of community is one thing,

understanding how communities work is quite another.

Yet without this understanding attempts to create

communities can go hopelessly wrong. This is where the

paternalism of public authorities has devalued the concept

of community and where academic and professional debate

has been dominated by some very muddled thinking.

Why does no one agonise about the need to build middle-

class communities? Is it that middle-class communities are so

strong that they do not need professional help or that middle-

class areas do not need strong communities to ensure their

success? The debate about community in the 20th century

was almost entirely focused on social housing. The reason was

that communities came to be seen as ‘good for you’ rather

than just good. There is just a short step from this to the

philosophy that ‘our idea of community is good for you’.

Inevitably many of the professionals and academics who have

debated the value of community over this period have done

so while living in the suburbs. In the suburbs what people

tend to mean by community is the rich network of voluntary

As we sculpt the urban neighbourhoods of our cities should we be paying more attention to the communities we are helping to create? Definitely!

Should we seek to transplant a suburban life experience into modern urban living? Definitely not argues David Rudlin in this extract from Sustainable

Urban Neighbourhood published by the Architectural Press.

23 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

groups such as churches and amateur dramatic societies which

thrive in such areas. People may only be on nodding terms

with their neighbours but they play an active part in networks

of people who share similar interests and values often over

quite a wide geographical area. At the same time behaviour

is controlled by a milieu of social pressures which ensures

that lawns are trimmed and disturbance is minimised.

This is not however the sort of community which has exercised

academics and professionals concerned with the inner city and

social housing development. Their idea of community has not

been the social networks and interest groups that characterise

suburban areas but rather a vague notion of conversations

over the garden fence, corner shops and being able to leave

your front door open while children play on the street. This

lies at the heart of the confusion over what we mean by

community. We have been seeking to promote a vague and

idealised notion of urban community yet we have judged such

communities by suburban standards so that we have failed

to recognise and value them even where they do exist.

This is perhaps best illustrated by a personal example from

Manchester. I remember walking around the terraced streets

of the Great Western Street area of Moss Side with a group of

fellow council officers in the mid 1980s. It was a warm day that

could have come from the memoirs of those elderly residents

who moan that things were so much better in the old days.

Front doors were left open, children were playing in the street,

people were chatting on doorsteps, a couple of men were fixing

a car propped up on bricks and one particularly blasé dog was

snoozing in the middle of the street. The perfect picture of an

urban community, one might think. However this was not what

my fellow council officers were seeing. What they noticed was

the loud music coming from the open doors and the group of

youths on the corner who might have been drug dealers. The

children playing amongst the parked cars were in mortal danger

(not to mention the dog) and were symptomatic of the area’s

lack of play facilities. The car mechanics were an unauthorised

use on the public highway. They noticed the overturned bin,

the broken glass, the graffiti and could no doubt have found a

syringe or two if they had looked hard enough in the back alleys.

In short, what they saw was not a tightknit urban community

but a stressed inner city district in need of their help.

This is the way that many professionals view urban communities

– through suburban eyes. Most of my fellow council officers

commuted in from the leafy suburbs of south Manchester and had

a very different idea of community from the people of Moss Side.

This is not to say that either idea of community is right or wrong

or to suggest that Moss Side’s community was perfect. It does

however illustrate some of the confusion that muddles the debate

about community. The community in many of the older parts of

Moss Side has many of the characteristics that professionals and

academics have been promoting for years yet when confronted

with such a community, warts and all, in a deprived inner city area

they either do not recognise it or do not like what they see. Instead

they start judging urban areas by suburban standards. This is when

attempts to build or engineer communities can go badly wrong.

Exploring Happiness

23 – ISSUE 03

Sustainable Urban Neighbourhood: Building the 21st Century

Home – Architectural Press Oxford 2009

This updates the 1999 edition Building the 21st Century Home

that played a small part in the rediscovery of urbanism in the UK.

The new edition has been re=written drawing on the history of the

last ten years as well as URBED’s experience working a range of

strategies and masterplans across the UK.

24 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

I was told

on more

than one

occasion in

design studio

reviews to

stop thinking

about people

and to see

the building

as sculpture

Pause a moment and think about your

favourite urban place. It may be indoors or

outdoors. It may be somewhere you go for

holidays or somewhere you visit regularly.

Imagine being in this place now. How does it

make you feel? If only we could capture what

it is about this place that makes it so good,

in order to recreate it in new development!

This is what we are trying to do in the WISE

(Wellbeing in Sustainable Environments)

research unit, now based at the University of

Warwick. I set up the unit in 2004, in order

to investigate how the built environment

affects our wellbeing, health and quality of

life, seeking to find aspects of design that are

positive and to offer evidence-based guidance.

WISE grew out of my own disillusionment

with common architectural thinking and

education. When I began my architectural

training at University at the age of 18 I thought

– idealistically, you may say – that it was all

about making a better world for people. I soon

discovered that architecture was considered

to be an art form. I was told on more than

one occasion in design studio reviews to stop

thinking about people and to see the building

as sculpture. Contrary to Bentham’s Utilitiarian

ideas of ‘the greatest happiness of the greatest

number’, designing ‘to please the masses’ was

almost the polar opposite of what was admired

The Built Environment and Wellbeing

The wellbeing agenda is not peripheral or a ‘nice bonus’ for the world of architecture, planning and urban design, it is a necessity.

Elizabeth Burton founder director of WISE (Wellbeing in Sustainable Environments) at Warwick University tells us in her view why.

and promoted. I staggered through my degree

and went on to complete my professional

training, later taking up a research career

as it seemed to provide a better route for

developing an alternative design philosophy.

Recent heated debate at a Cumberland Lodge

conference on ‘Hope in the Built Environment’

(November 2009), involving some well-known

UK architects, convinced me that architecture as

modern art is still the norm for the profession.

It is interesting that even architects presenting

‘design for wellbeing’ speak in highly abstract

terms, stating design benefits with no evidence

base or user opinion. To be fair, I can see why

architecture has adopted this stance. The

Modernists got such bad press. Yet, many

of them, Le Corbusier included, very much

embraced their social agenda. On the whole,

they aimed to make life better for people, to

free housewives from the drudgery of their

existence, and to lift people up into the sunshine

and fresh air. The problem was, well meaning

as they were, they got it wrong. They got it

wrong because their proposals were based on

their own original ideas about what would work

– none of these were tested or based on previous

evidence of success. So what has happened

since then is that architects have retreated

from their social role, denying that they are

engaging in any way with social engineering

25 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

or architectural determinism – after all, how

arrogant it is to assume they know what is best

for people! It is much safer to claim the artist’s

role. What was more, towards the end of the

20th century the architectural profession as a

whole was coming under threat because of new

contractual arrangements such as ‘design and

build’ and the rise of the ‘project manager’.

Everyone and anyone can have a view on design

– compare this with the protected position of the

medical consultant whose opinion is the final

word. It is not surprising that architects further

mystified their role by using a language that was

increasingly specialised and obscure, delivering

the message that not everyone could do the job!

We are at the beginning of a new decade

and never has the need to design our

environments for wellbeing been stronger.

There are several reasons for this:

1. Wellbeing is an integral part of

sustainability, and in order to address

climate change effectively we need to

design low energy environments that

people want to live in and encourage

them to live more sustainably.

2. There is growing evidence of the

link between health and built

environments, particularly in relation

to obesity problems and the need

for ‘walkable’ neighbourhoods.

3. The social model of disability and related

legislation has led to increased interest

in inclusive design or ‘design for all’.

4. We know now that continued economic

growth is not necessarily going to make

us happier so there is a new focus

in policies worldwide on wellbeing

and how it can be promoted.

As for the activities of WISE, we are in the

process of setting up a new Masters course

on health and the built environment, which

aims to train a new generation of designers

and practitioners in evidence-based design

and design for wellbeing. Initiatives in this

area, mostly in the US, have been limited

to the design of healthcare facilities. There

seems to be a lot of interest already in this

more generalised, multidisciplinary course.

Moving forward, there will be many challenges.

We need to find ways of turning research

findings into guidance that doesn’t unnecessarily

inhibit creativity. We don’t want to foster a

‘one size fits all’ design solution that reduces

environments to a lowest common denominator.

It is essential for our research to address

the more intangible elements of design (e.g.

‘ugliness’) and to control for the many other

influences on wellbeing. Design for wellbeing

needs to allow for the many differences between

people and to avoid conflicts with other worthy

requirements such as energy reduction and

historic conservation. But at the beginning of the

2010s, I issue a clarion call to all those interested

in the built environment, to actively pursue the

wellbeing of all people in society – ideals still

matter and we can build a better world . . . .

For more information about WISE,

contact Elizabeth Burton (e.burton@warwick.

ac.uk) or visit the website:

http://www2.warwick.ac.uk/fac/cross_fac/

healthatwarwick/research/devgroups/environments/

We know

now that

continued

economic

growth is not

necessarily

going to

make us

happier so

there is a

new focus

in policies

worldwide on

wellbeing and

how it can be

promoted.

26 – ISSUE 03

Exploring Happiness

urban scrawlIssue 3

www.urbed.coop