Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Integrating agent-based modeling, serious gaming, and co-design for planning transport infrastructure and public spaces

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

I hear and I forget. I see and I remember. I do and I understand – Chinese proverb

Abstract

Car-oriented transport infrastructure developments have had detrimental impacts on the public realm in terms of poor walkability and fractured leftover urban spaces. To build integrated transport infrastructure and public space systems with considering non-motorized travelers’ behavior, we present an integrated methodology incorporating an agent-based simulation model, serious games, and co-design which provides opportunities to involve citizens into the urban design process. In this paper, we show this process for a case study in London Hackney Wick. Qualitative data collected from collaborative experiments, cognitive and human needs mapping, interviews and conversations offer insights into people’s engagement with their environment and the public expectations. In parallel, an Agent-Based Model (ABM) informed by the gathered data is used to visualize local activities for the residents and to predict travel demand and spaces occupancy patterns of various designs. The prediction results indicate that a holistic design strategy is needed for planning attractive and pedestrian-friendly transport-public space systems. Lessons learned also lead to a proposal to improve the model with more realistic human behavior and activity schedules. The coupling of ABM–Game–Design is a valuable tool for engaging the audience and providing both qualitative and quantitative supports to decision-making.

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.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Adapted from Yang et al. (2019)

Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Adapted from Google map

Fig. 5

Participants were breaking the restrains of material. Copyright: Luka Radek

Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Copyright: Luka Radek

Fig. 9
Fig. 10
Fig. 11
Fig. 12
Fig. 13
Fig. 14
Fig. 15
Fig. 16
Fig. 17
Fig. 18

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. The Oxford Dictionary defines law as “The system of rules which a particular country or community recognizes as regulating the actions of its members and which it may enforce by the imposition of penalties.” It is demonstrated that the law not only refers to “statute law and the common law,” but also has a broader meaning of “something regarded as having binding force or effect.”

References

  • Al-Kodmany, K. 1999. Using visualization techniques for enhancing public participation in planning and design: Process, implementation, and evaluation. Landscape and Urban Planning 45: 37–45.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barnett, H., L. Cappelatti, J. Colwyn, D. Georgopoulou, J. Greenfield, A. Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, D. Strömbom, and L. Yang. 2017. Crowd Control. Interalia Magazine. https://www.interaliamag.org/articles/heather-barnett/. Accessed 18 Feb 2020.

  • Bertolini, L., F. Le Clercq, and L. Kapoen. 2005. Sustainable accessibility: A conceptual framework to integrate transport and land use plan-making. Two test-applications in the Netherlands and a reflection on the way forward. Transport Policy 12: 207–220.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonabeau, E. 2002. Agent-based modeling: Methods and techniques for simulating human systems. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of USA 99: 7280–7287.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, P. 1988. What city? A plea for place in the public realm. The Architectural Review 184: 31–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunschoten, R. 2018. From smart city to conscious city. In Handbuch Energiewende und Partizipation. Wiesbaden: Springer.

  • Bustos-Turu, G. 2018. Integrated modelling framework for the analysis of demand side management strategies in urban energy systems. PhD Thesis. Imperial College London.

  • Cervero, R. 2009. Transport infrastructure and global competitiveness: Balancing mobility and livability. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science 626: 210–225.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chisholm, J. 2017. What is co-design. Design for Europe. https://designforeurope.eu/what-co-design. Accessed Aug 2019.

  • De Nazelle, A. 2007. Risk assessment of a pedestrian-oriented environment. Doctoral Dissertation, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.

  • De Nazelle, A., M.J. Nieuwenhuijsen, J.M. Antó, M. Brauer, D. Briggs, C. Braun-Fahrlander, N. Cavill, A.R. Cooper, H. Desqueyroux, and S. Fruin. 2011. Improving health through policies that promote active travel: A review of evidence to support integrated health impact assessment. Environment International 37: 766–777.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dia, H. 2002. An agent-based approach to modelling driver route choice behaviour under the influence of real-time information. Transportation Research Part C: Emerging Technologies 10: 331–349.

    Google Scholar 

  • Digimap. Ordnance Survey data. https://digimap.edina.ac.uk/os. Accessed 6 April 2018.

  • Dill, J. 2004. Measuring network connectivity for bicycling and walking. In 83rd Annual meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 2004 Washington, DC, 11–15.

  • Duke, R.D. 1980. A paradigm for game design. Simulation and Games 11: 364–377.

    Google Scholar 

  • Edmonds, B. 2017. Five modelling purposes. In Simulating Social Complexity—A handbook, 2nd edn, eds., B. Edmonds and R. Meyer. Berlin: Springer.

  • Edwards, V.M., and S. Smith. 2011. Lessons from the application of decision-support tools in participatory management of the New Forest National Park, UK. Environmental Policy and Governance 21: 417–432.

    Google Scholar 

  • Escobar-Castillejos, D., J. Noguez, L. Neri, A. Magana, and B. Benes. 2016. A review of simulators with haptic devices for medical training. Journal of Medical Systems 40: 104.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ewing, R., and R. Cervero. 2010. Travel and the built environment: A meta-analysis. Journal of the American Planning Association 76: 265–294.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilbert, N. 2007. Computational social science: Agent-based social simulation. In Agent-based modelling and simulation. Oxford: Bardwell.

  • Gilbert, N., and K. Troitzsch. 2005. Simulation for the social scientist. London: McGraw-Hill Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gosen, J., and J. Washbush. 2004. A review of scholarship on assessing experiential learning effectiveness. Simulation and Gaming 35: 270–293.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hahn, H.A. 2013. The conundrum of verification and validation of social science-based models. Procedia Computer Science 16: 878–887.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanzl, M. 2007. Information technology as a tool for public participation in urban planning: A review of experiments and potentials. Design Studies 28: 289–307.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackson, T., W. Jager, and S. Stagl. 2004. Beyond insatiability: Needs theory, consumption and sustainability. ESRC Sustainable Technologies Programme Working Paper Series 2.

  • Jahangirian, M., T. Eldabi, A. Naseer, L.K. Stergioulas, and T. Young. 2010. Simulation in manufacturing and business: A review. European Journal of Operational Research 203: 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kelly, H., K. Howell, E. Glinert, L. Holding, C. Swain, A. Burrowbridge, and M. Roper. 2007. How to build serious games. Communications of the ACM 50: 44–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, Y. 2008. Design participation tactics: the challenges and new roles for designers in the co-design process. Co-design 4: 31–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liao, C., Y. Lin, and P. Barooah. 2012. Agent-based and graphical modelling of building occupancy. Journal of Building Performance Simulation 5: 5–25.

    Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Macal, C.M. 2016. Everything you need to know about agent-based modelling and simulation. Journal of Simulation 10: 144–156.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mallmann, C. 1980. Society, needs and rights: A systemic approach. In Human Needs: A contribution to the current debate: 37–54. Cambridge: Oelgeschlager, Gunn and Hai.

  • Manzini, E. 2015. Design, when everybody designs: An introduction to design for social innovation. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maoh, H., and P. Kanaroglou. 2009. A tool for evaluating urban sustainability via integrated transportation and land use simulation models. Urban Environment 3: 28–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mayer, I.S. 2009. The gaming of policy and the politics of gaming: A review. Simulation and Gaming 40: 825–862.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meadows, D.L. 1999. Learning to be simple: My odyssey with games. Simulation and Gaming 30: 342–351.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moughtin, C. 2003. Urban design: Street and square. Oxford: Architectural Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nieuwenhuijsen, M.J., H. Khreis, E. Verlinghieri, N. Mueller, and D. Rojas-Rueda. 2017. Participatory quantitative health impact assessment of urban and transport planning in cities: A review and research needs. Environment International 103: 61–72.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parkmap. Park Living Map. https://parkmap.livingmap.com/?zoom=13&lon=-0.01651009360558059&lat=51.539351925165846&overlay=&interest=&interestTypes=&gid=ax537659ay184078#. Accessed 21 March 2019.

  • Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, A. 2014. Spatial justice: Body, lawscape, atmosphere. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ravazzoli, E., and G.P. Torricelli. 2017. Urban mobility and public space. A challenge for the sustainable liveable city of the future. The Journal of Public Space 2: 37–50.

    Google Scholar 

  • Raybourn, E.M. 2007. Applying simulation experience design methods to creating serious game-based adaptive training systems. Interacting with Computers 19: 206–214.

    Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, D.T., D.G. Brown, D.C. Parker, P. Schreinemachers, M.A. Janssen, M. Huigen, H. Wittmer, N. Gotts, P. Promburom, and E. Irwin. 2007. Comparison of empirical methods for building agent-based models in land use science. Journal of Land Use Science 2: 31–55.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ruiz-Apilánez, B., K. Karimi, I. García-Camacha, and R. Martín. 2017. Shared space streets: Design, user perception and performance. Urban Design International 22: 267–284.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sanoff, H. 1990. Participatory design: Theory and techniques. Raleigh: Henry Sanoff.

    Google Scholar 

  • Skiena, S.S. 1998. The algorithm design manual. New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, R. 2010. The long history of gaming in military training. Simulation and Gaming 41: 6–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Steinfeld, E., and J. Maisel. 2012. Universal design: Creating inclusive environments. Hoboken: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sugiyama, T., J. Francis, N.J. Middleton, N. Owen, and B. Giles-Corti. 2010. Associations between recreational walking and attractiveness, size, and proximity of neighborhood open spaces. American Journal of Public Health 100: 1752–1757.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN-Habitat. 2016. Urbanization and development emerging futures. World cities report.

  • Unity. Unity Technologies—Game engine, tools, and multiplatform. https://unity3d.com/es/unity. Accessed 6 Aug 2019.

  • Vainio, T. 2016. Motivations, results and the role of technology in participatory design research during 2000’s—A review in the field of architecture and urban planning. Architecture and Urban Planning 11: 14–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Berkel, D.B., and P.H. Verburg. 2012. Combining exploratory scenarios and participatory backcasting: Using an agent-based model in participatory policy design for a multi-functional landscape. Landscape Ecology 27: 641–658.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dam, K.H., D. Koering, G. Bustos-Turu, and H. Jones. 2014. BOTH Agent-based simulation as an urban design tool—Iterative evaluation of a smart city masterplan.

  • Van Dam, K.H., G. Bustos-Turu, and N. Shah. 2017. A methodology for simulating synthetic populations for the analysis of socio-technical infrastructures. In Advances in social simulation 2015, ed. W. Jager, R. Verbrugge, A. Flache, G. De Roo, L. Hoogduin, and C. Hemelrijk, 528. Springer.

  • Van Os, M. 2012. Using gaming as a data collection tool to design rules for agents in agent-based models. MSc Thesis, Delft University of Technology.

  • Waldheim, C. (ed.) 2012. The landscape urbanism reader. Chronicle books.

  • Yang, L., K.H. Van Dam, L. Zhang, and A. Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos. 2018. Using qualitative data from resident engagement in a simulation model to inform urban transport and public space design in Hackney Wick. presented in Social simulation conference 2018.

  • Yang, L., K.H. Van Dam, B. Anvari, and A. De Nazelle. 2019. Simulating the impact of urban transport infrastructure design on local air quality in Beijing. In Social simulation for a digital society: Applications and innovations in computational social science, ed. D. Payne et al., Springer.

  • Yigitcanlar, T., and M. Kamruzzaman. 2014. Investigating the interplay between transport, land use and the environment: A review of the literature. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology 11: 2121–2132.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Q., E.H.K. Yung, and E.H.W. Chan. 2018. Towards sustainable neighborhoods: Challenges and opportunities for neighborhood planning in transitional urban China. Sustainability 10: 406.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The research is based on a Joint-PhD Program between the University of Chinese Academy of Sciences (UCAS) and Imperial College London (ICL) and partially supported by a Scholarship offered by the UCAS. The authors appreciate the support from Dr. Arnab Majumdar and Prof. Washington Ochieng from the Centre for Transport Studies, ICL, and the assistance of Ms. Heather Barnett and Mr. Julius Colwyn in organizing the Escaping Lawscape experiment of the Crowd Control project. Specifically, the authors thank Dr. Wander Jager for giving insightful comments to improve the paper. An earlier version of this paper was presented at the Social Simulation Conference 2018 in Stockholm. We thank for all the suggestions given by our reviewers and the conference participants. Van Dam is supported by the EIT Climate-KIC project Smart District Data Infrastructure.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center of Architecture Research and Design, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, 100190, China

    Liu Yang & Lufeng Zhang

  2. The Westminster Law & Theory Lab, University of Westminster, London, W1W 7UW, UK

    Andreas Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos

  3. Energy and Industry Group, Department of Technology Policy and Management, Delft University of Technology, Jaffalaan 5, 2628 BX, Delft, The Netherlands

    Emile J. L. Chappin

  4. Centre for Process Systems Engineering, Department of Chemical Engineering, Imperial College London, London, SW7 2AZ, UK

    Koen H. van Dam

  5. Centre for Transport Studies, Imperial College London, London, UK

    Liu Yang

Authors
  1. Liu Yang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Lufeng Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Andreas Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Emile J. L. Chappin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Koen H. van Dam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Liu Yang or Koen H. van Dam.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yang, L., Zhang, L., Philippopoulos-Mihalopoulos, A. et al. Integrating agent-based modeling, serious gaming, and co-design for planning transport infrastructure and public spaces. Urban Des Int 26, 67–81 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-020-00117-7

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-020-00117-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation