Institute for Interdisciplinary Studies
Interdisciplinary Project
A student-oriented implementation of the temporary
public space at Science Park Amsterdam
Recommendations from applying Placemaking principles
Erik van Gorsel
10655379
Jeffrey Chong
11304669
Sander Ausems
11292431
Jordy van Bennekom
11161957
Supervised by:
Emma van der Zanden and Joris Buis
2019
Table of content Abstract 2 Introduction 3 Theoretical framework 6 Placemaking 6 Design Thinking 6 SWOT analysis 7 Empathize Phase 8 Context analysis 8 Stakeholder analysis 9 Preliminary interviews 9 Define Phase 11 Ideate Phase 12
The Study village 12
Food stand festival 14
Discussion 18
Conclusion 19
Recommendations 19
References 20
Appendix A - Interviews 2 2
Appendix A1 : Interview Yannick Vinkesteijn 2 2
Appendix A2 : Interview: Jasper Adegeest 23
Appendix A3 : Interview overall manager Startup Village - Patricia Leek 2 4
Appendix B - Survey questions 29
Appendix C - Survey results 3 2
Abstract
Science Park Amsterdam has facilitated residence, universities and science related
businesses for more than 73 years. This area located in the east of Amsterdam is constantly in development to become a relevant hub for science and sustainability. There are currently four open building plots located Science Park next to the faculty building from the University of Amsterdam. Buildings for the faculty of sustainability and artificial intelligence will be build on two of these building plots. There are however no actual plans for the implementation of the two remaining plots. The purpose of this research is to find the best possible temporary interpretation for these two building plots through the use of Design Thinking. This is a methodology within Placemaking that is used to solve ‘Wicked Problems’. Design Thinking consists of five phases that help to find solutions for a certain problem that the target audience have. After examining the problem through the first two phases of this research, the decision was made to select the students of Science Park as the target audience. The research question for this reason is: “ What is the best temporary implementation for the two
open building plots on Science Park 904, that will satisfy the students of the University of Amsterdam?”. After evaluating the specific needs of students, a majority addressed to
experience two main problems on the campus. Firstly, the lack of sufficient study places and secondly the relative high prices for food. This research has formed two main solutions to solve these problems. The Study Village is the sustainable solution for creating extra study spaces on the campus. This is done by using reused shipping containers. The realization of cheaper food on the campus could be accomplished by cultivating food on a local scale. The first stages of this process is not cost efficient. However new concepts show high potential.
Introduction
The Science Park campus of the University of Amsterdam is a diverse place where science, business and education meet and work together. The central organisation - The Science & Business Organisation (SBO) - is a collaboration between three separate entities: The city of Amsterdam, University of Amsterdam (UvA) and the Netherlands Organisation of Research Institute (NWO). Their main goal is to create connections between entrepreneurship, education and scientific research (Science & Business organisation, n.d.) . With the rise of climate change issues, natural resource depletion and ecological degradation processes, the SBO has decided to partake in mitigating these problems. The organisation wants to do this by investing in two new buildings that are planned to be finished in 2021. One of the buildings will be mainly based around the upcoming and quickly evolving technology of Artificial intelligence (AI). The other building will be entirely focused on sustainability. According to the SBO, the aim of this project is to facilitate students, scientists and entrepreneurs that are all related to AI and sustainability. This environment encourages the three groups to collaborate and come up with innovative solutions and insights. (University of Amsterdam, 2018) .
The two new buildings will be located in front of Science Park 904 building. However, the grass fields in front of building 904 contain 4 seperate building plots. The director of the SBO has decided that the two remaining plots will be given a destination as temporary public spaces (See figure 1). It is recommended, however not necessary, that the spatial interventions of these public spaces are interpreted in a way that it makes the users of Science Park aware of the latest findings in the fields of AI and sustainability. This research has generated possible solutions for the interpretations the two public spaces. In addition, this research has developed advice and recommendations for the director of SBO, and hopefully acts as inspiration for new innovative solutions.
Finding solutions to certain problems requires certain methodological fundamentals, theories and frameworks. First and foremost, this research makes use of interdisciplinary research and problem solving. The team of this research therefore consists of students from various disciplines: earth sciences, business and spatial planning. By drawing on insights from students of different disciplinary backgrounds, information can be transformed into new knowledge by integrative thinking. Complex problems often consists of multiple disciplinary factors (natural, technical, social, etc.), making an interdisciplinary approach an effective method for finding coherent solutions (Parker & Grand Valley State University , 2015) .
By looking at the problem from an interdisciplinary perspective, the team has used the mental model of ‘Design thinking’ as a method within the framework of ‘Placemaking’. Design thinking is a creative process in which continual feedback is gathered to redesign solutions (Razzouk, 2012). This method of thinking is required to effectively adopt the Placemaking principles. Placemaking is about involving the users of a certain place into the decision making process for designing public spaces - The so-called ‘bottom up’ approach (O’Rourke & Baldwin, 2016) .
This study will therefore address the following research question: “ What is the best temporary implementation for the two open building plots on Science Park 904 that will satisfy the students of the University of Amsterdam?” To answer this question, this research
has combined user participation with theoretical scientific research in the placemaking process to enhance the reliability of the results. The search for a solution was mainly based on the Point Of View (POV) of the students of Science Park, as they make up the largest portion of the future users.
This study will start with a theoretical framework to explain the frameworks and methods that are used in more detail. Then, the design thinking process is extensively described in the Methods section, to account for the decisions that were made and actions that were taken. After that, the end results will be shared and discussed by means of an SWOT analysis. SWOT is a model that analyzes internally the strengths and weaknesses and externally analyzes the opportunities and threats of a certain topic (Volberda & Morgan, 2011). Finally, recommendations are articulated for the director of the SOB.
Theoretical framework
The theoretical framework will elaborate the concepts of Placemaking and Design Thinking in more detail and how they worked together to effectively find solutions for the stated research question. Also, a model called “SWOT Analysis” is described which has been used to analyze the solutions. In addition, other related overlapping concepts are shortly mentioned that serve as an extra theoretical foundation.
Placemaking
Placemaking is about involving the local community for designing a public place for a specific purpose. This purpose is to create a place of meaning and inclusivity, where people can meet, socialize, and do what they expect from that place. Essential is to take into account local conditions, by observing and listening to the users work and live there and understand their specific needs (O’Rourke & Baldwin, 2016) .
The placemaking principles are relatively a new way of looking at urban planning, which is a reaction to its counterpart; modernist urban planning. Jane Jacobs has been the most influential in proposing these new principles opposing modernist planning since 1961. Jacob mentions four different principles before something can be considered as placemaking and be neglected as modern planning. The first new principle is to see urban areas as ecosystems. Like a living thing that change over time as they react on the local circumstances. The second principle to create a place of local economies with a variety of business forms. The third new principle is mixed-use development. The focus here is on diverse vibrant communities. The presence of people of different age groups and backgrounds. Finally, the fourth new principle is to create more density in order to generate more concentrated populations of people and combat homogeneity (Harris, 2008).
Design Thinking
To effectively adopt the method of Placemaking a specific way of thinking is required. There are namely a lot of ways to think about a problem, and it should be aligned with the problem you want to solve. Engineering thinking for example, solves problems for which there are already clear repeatable solutions. Like building a bridge. Optimization thinking is mainly used in business and marketing, and analytic thinking is used in scientific research
(Big Think, 2016). Within this research, the Design Thinking method is applied, which has the following definition: “Design thinking is an analytic and creative process that engages a person in opportunities to experiment, create and prototype models, gather feedback, and redesign” (Razzouk, 2012).”
Design Thinking is a methodology that is used in solving so-called ‘wicked problems’. This is a term developed in the 70s by urban planners at the University of Berkley (Rittel & Webber, 1974). Wicked problems are characterized by having no clear criteria for success, with constantly changing conditions. People are central to the methodology by always defining problems from human needs.
Within design thinking there are five phases: Empathise, Define, Ideate, Prototype and Test (See figure 2). In the empathize phase as much as possible information is gathered to gain insights from the various stakeholders and to create clarity about the social and physical context. In the define phase decisions are made for which challenges and target groups a solution is designed. In the ideate phase possible solutions are proposed for the
challenges that are defined. Then, in the prototype phase actionable solutions are designed. Finally, in the testphase, data is gathered about the effectiveness of the intervention to possible redesign the solution.
Figure 2. The 5 phases of the Design Thinking process (Design Thinking Asia 2018, 2018) .
However, due to time and resource constraints not all phases of the Design Thinking process are executed. This research limits itself to the first three phases, generating ideas that can be further explored by the director and all other members of the SOB.
The Placemaking principles are integrated within the Design thinking process, focussing on involving the local community and local users to create ideas that focus on the needs of the users.
SWOT analysis
SWOT stands for: Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats. It is a model widely used in the business world to analyze certain strategies. The model analyzes the internal strengths and weaknesses and the external opportunities and threats in the environment of a strategy (Volberda & Morgan, 2011). This research has used this model to analyze the solutions that have emerged from the ideate phase of the Design Thinking process. This in order to create an organized overview of the steps that have to be taken for further phases.
Empathize Phase
The empathize phase is the first stage of the Design Thinking-cycle. A collection of three methods was used to gain the necessary information for this part of the research. It contains a context analysis, stakeholder analysis and preliminary interviews.
Context analysis
The context analysis provides information on the location and background in which the two plots will be located. Science Park has been in development since 1946 when the first scientific institutes arrived, followed by technology and science related businesses in the early nineties.
The current and historic development of Science Park show clear signs of implementations of the placemaking principles defined in the theoretical framework. The municipality of Amsterdam and the project developers of Science Park are aware of the importance of having meeting places and public spaces (Amsterdam Science Park, 2019). The various restaurants (e.g. De Oerknal & Restaurant de Polder), sport facilities (USC) and green spaces (Anna’s Tuin) are some examples. These informal social places are meant to meet the wishes of the different groups of people on Science Park and create connectedness between them.
Besides creating these type of spaces, Science Park also tries to accommodate students on the campus. Between 2007 and 2012, 1870 new apartments were built that are primarily used by international students. The Amsterdam college of Major and Alderman decided to place 250 extra housing units next to the StartUp Village by 2021. Half of these units are destined for asylum seekers and the other half for students. Science Park has constantly been in development since the beginning of 1946. Currently, new plans are in development for building a Innovation Center Artificial Intelligence (2021) and a Conference center in 2022 (Amsterdam Science Park, 2019).
Due to Science Parks relatively car-free character, most locations are easily accessible by foot or bicycle which makes the area feel dense. However, there appears to be a division of the area due to the Science Park car street. This generates a distance between the research institutes on the west part of Science Park and the educational buildings of the campus on the east side. This has created more social heterogeneity between the two parts of Science Park.
Stakeholder analysis
The aim of the stakeholder analysis was to get an overview on the different stakeholders that are present in the area to determine the target audience. There are six prominent stakeholders located in Amsterdam Science Park. These stakeholders consist of: employees and scientists from the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research, entrepreneurs and their employees, scientists and employees at the University of Amsterdam (Faculty of Science), students at the University of Amsterdam (Faculty of Science), students at Amsterdam University College and the Science Park residents.
The stakeholders are indicated in Table 1. According to Amsterdam Science Park (2019), a majority of 55% of the stakeholders on the campus consist of students (Table 1).
Table 1. Distribution of each stakeholder located at Science Park in the academic year of 2018 - 2019 (Amsterdam Science Park, 2019).
At this stage of the empathize phase it was clear that the target audience are the students of Science Park. In order to complete this phase, preliminary interviews were conducted. This gave insight into the point of views (POV) of the target audience, before starting the define phase. The preliminary interviews were taken with a master student Artificial Intelligence, a programming teacher assistant, who is also a Msc student Computer Science, and a member of the VIA. These specific users were selected because of the fact that they are all students that are frequently present on the Science Park campus. Therefore these users have knowledge about most of the facilities in the area and they will also remain users of Science Park for the coming years. Table 2 shows an overview of the results from the preliminary interviews (see appendix A for the entire interviews). The most important insight from the interviews was the need for extra study spaces and cheaper food on Science Park.
Table 2. Overview of the information gathered from the preliminary interviews.
Users Needs Insights
Master Student Artificial Intelligence
More quiet study spaces There are too many students, with too little quiet study spaces.
Computers with more GPU power to run the necessary algorithms
There is not enough powerful hardware available for all Master AI students to run the algorithms of their projects and programs.
A cheaper alternative for the canteen
There are not enough ‘student budget’ healthy food options
AI themed seminars AI students are interested in more informational seminars that cover subjects concerning AI.
Teaching assistant minor Programmeren
More study spaces dedicated for groups
There are few study spaces that are convenient to work in groups and that have enough available power points.
Cheaper alternatives for the canteen and food trucks
It is too expensive to eat at the canteen every day. More student involvement could help create cheaper alternatives. Public lounge area Science Park is still lacking a space where people really
want to lounge, meet up with each other or organize events. Think of a better interpretation of the Brainwave.
VIA More quiet individual study spaces
There is a lack of spaces where students can study quietly
More space for the VIA itself
The room where the VIA is residing is to small
Cheaper food Science park needs more and cheaper food alternatives to the Science park canteen
‘Other’ students ICT helpdesk Science park is lacking a place where students can go to resolve their computer or software related problems.
Define Phase
After completing the empathize phase, an adequate amount of information is gained to start the define phase of the research. In this stage an online survey has been distributed among five student associations located on Science Park. These include: Congo, Spectrum, 'Vereniging Informatiewetenschappen Amsterdam (VIA)’, ‘ Amsterdams Chemisch Dispuut ( NSA)’ and ‘ Natuurwetenschappelijke Studievereniging Amsterdam ( ACD)’. The members of these five student associations form a realistic image of the variety of students that are present on Science Park. This group of people is therefore approached to be questioned. The online survey provides sufficient data to evaluate the most important needs of the target audience on Science Park. With that information it is possible to define a problem statement that is based on a larger group of students. The layout of the digital survey was based on the results of the preliminary interviews and our own intuition. The two main problems that are derived from the preliminary interviews were; the lack of sufficient study spaces and the high food prices on the campus. Besides the questions about these subjects, the respondents got the freedom to address their personal needs and problems on Science Park (see Appendix B for the entire structure of the digital survey). The information that is obtained from the survey is used to determine the actionable problem statement.
The following results and conclusions are based on 32 respondents (see Appendix C). The digital survey shows that over half of the respondents are unsatisfied (score of 5 out of 10 or below) with the availability of sufficient study spaces on Science Park. The personal comments also confirmed this issue. Important to note is that 75% of the respondent are not necessarily interested in an outdoor study space. The food related question about Science Park show that most of the respondents are unsatisfied with the availability of food and its prices on campus. Based on this evaluation and the personal comments of the respondents, it came apparent that the two main problems from the preliminary interviews were also the most important issues that are shared among the other students on Science Park. Moreover, 70% of the personal comments were related to either study spaces or food alternatives on the campus. Thus, the POV of this research was from this stage on focused on the implementation of a thought out study environment and the possibilities on lower priced food options. This leads the research into the third phase in which we started to create solutions to satisfy the needs of the students.
Ideate Phase
The ideate phase is the third stage of this research. As explained, during the ideate phase possible solutions are proposed for the challenges that were defined during the empathize and define phase. This chapter elaborates on the two main ideas that are derived from the POV of the target audience, namely the study village and hydroponic farming. The aim is to solve the proposed challenges, satisfy the users needs and from there continue with the prototype phase.
The Study village
The lack of sufficient study spaces on Science Park is the first significant problem that is determined from the define phase. According to the survey, students would like to see more comfortable study spaces with enough power outlets. There is also a demand for more study spaces designed for groups, comparable with the rooms in the ‘B’ wing on the first floor of Science Park. It is important to realize that the implementation of the two plots is temporal. Therefore the study environment that will be created must be easily to dismantle. The option to have an outdoor study space is negatively criticised by the students. Due to the relative low outdoor temperatures in The Netherlands.
For this reason the decision was made to create a temporal indoor study space, called the ‘Study Village’. The concept of ‘Study Village’ is derived from the physical environment of StartUp Village which is located on the east side of Science Park (Figure 3). StartUp Village is a project from ACE Incubator who rent out container workspaces to startup businesses. Hereby creating an approachable community for beginning entrepreneurs. More than 55 startups and scaleups are currently situated in StartUp Village on Science Park.
Figure 3. An overview map of the StartUp Village on Science Park Amsterdam (Julius Taminiau Architects).
Creating an indoor study space with the use of used shipping containers, such as StartUp Village, is an appropriate solution for this research. Firstly, the containers that are used in these projects can be installed and dismantled on short notice. Therefore an indoor workspace can be created for temporal use. Secondly, the containers are suitable for modifications. Hereby making it possible to install power outlets, windows, ventilation systems and sound dampening walls.
An interview was conducted with StartUp Village location manager Patricia Leek. (Appendix A3). This interview confirmed that it is possible to customize the container units according to the mentioned modifications. These main changes on the containers are necessary to create a healthy and functional study environment. It is also possible to arrange the containers as represented in Figure 3. This arrangement has a rectangular shape and according to Patricia Leek creates a transparent and tranquil environment in the middle. A community space, such as a coffee bar, can be placed in the middle of the village. This satisfies part of the students needs and improves the ambience. Lastly Study Village will be made from second-hand sea containers. Hereby conveying the idea to be sustainable with materials. This will also fits well with the new sustainability faculty, which will be built on the adjacent building plot.
Exact financial figures about the shipping containers from Startup Village were not available because they have bought the shipping containers in large quantities, which reduced the price (Appendix A3). However a number of containers within Startup Village were rented from an third party for 20 euros a month. For this reason, the costs of the shipping containers themselves are reasonably low. Although the modifications to the containers (heating, air conditioning, electricity) often brought extra costs for Startup Village. These costs can be greatly reduced, because of their experience and knowledge on certain modifications which were found not to work in a sufficient manner. One example is the heat panels that were purchased for the winter in 2017. These systems were eventually not suitable for container units, because the significant increase in heat damaged the panels. Assistance can be requested from Startup Village with the construction of study village to prevent these situations.
A possible disadvantage for study village is the noise disturbance. Study village is a place for students to study in silence. However, the construction of the two new faculties can cause noise nuisance. Two years ago, a new data center was built next to Startup Village (Appendix 3), the noise from the construction side was notably distractive according to the people from Startup Village that worked during that period. This problem can partly be prevented by sound dampening material, that can be integrated on the walls of the containers.
Food stand festival
The second significant problem that is derived from the define phase, is the relatively high food price at the local campus canteen. In this part of the ideate phase several solutions have been explored to examine the best option for this problem.
Online literature research has provided the incentive to explore the possibility to grow crops locally on the Science Park campus to reduce food prices. One study done by Sauer (2012) showed that food sold locally at the farmers market had statistically significant lower prices compared to food sold at supermarkets. Other research suggests that growing food locally can be economically advantageous because of the reduction in costs for transportation (Specht et al., 2013).
Further online exploration revealed that on University campuses in North America, local sustainable food projects are growing at a rapid rate. Both students and staff have helped to initiated these projects due to concerns about the waste that is produced by conventional farming methods. Over 600 college and university institutions in North America have signed an agreement to invest more in sustainable and local food systems (Barlett, 2011).
The research by Barlett (2011) also looked specifically at how these food projects influence various aspects of the institutions. For example, it provided colleges and
universities with the possibility to create academic programs, courses and internships that are linked to sustainable food production. Whatsmore, it generated a community supported agriculture market because of this active engagement with food. This experiential learning and educational engagement with food has shown to induce emotional resonance with place and identity.
As these effects really resonate with the concepts of Placemaking and sustainability, possibilities for local food production on Science Park was explored further. Due to the temporary nature for the design of the public spaces a temporary solution was investigated. This led to the company called “Freight Farms”, which produces hydroponic indoor farms inside transportable containers (See figure 4). The company has already provided several university campuses with their system in order to produce local sustainable food
(Freightfarms, 2019).
In order to provide more insight into the sustainability characteristics of this method, extensive literature research was conducted to explore the sustainability dimension of hydroponic indoor farming.
Indoor hydroponic farms grow crops without the use of a soil base. The crops are able to grow by placing their roots in liquid solutions that provide the necessary nutrients. This agricultural method has the potential to make a significant positive environmental impact because of its resource efficiency, reuse and reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in the food production chain (Specht et al., 2013). From this research the following conclusions could be made:
- Hydroponic farming has a higher Water Use Efficiency (WUE) compared to conventional farming methods (Barbosa et al., 2015) .
- Hydroponic farming decreases the threat to natural habitats because of less cultivation area demand (Zeidler & Schubert, 2014).
- Hydroponic farming reduces CO² emissions because of reduction in transportations miles (Eigenbrod & Gruda, 2014).
- Hydroponic farming reduces runoff of pesticides and herbicides because it uses none (Sills, 2018).
- Hydroponic farming shows to need much more energy per kg of crop produced to conventional farming methods (Kalantari, Tahir, Joni, & Fatemi, 2018).
Although indoor hydroponic farming shows much potential when it comes to sustainable food production, it must be noted that the energy demand for this method is significantly higher compared to conventional farming methods. This extra energy consumption will either have to be compensated in a sustainable way with purchasing solar panels for examples, or have to be taken into account into the central energy consumption Science Park. Both options require a significant financial investment.
Apart from the significant need for energy, a Freight the purchase price of a Freight Farm container is about 92.000 euros, up to about 98.000 including shipping and start-up costs. As this is a significant financial investment, it is questionable that food prices can be kept low. This has led to an alternative approach for growing local sustainable food; using existing facilities.
The Science Park campus has a greenhouse complex since 2006 that includes breeding facilities that are used for educational purposes and conducting research. The complex has 43 compartments with a total surface area of 2500m². The greenhouse is equipped with an advanced climate control system that regulates lightning and watering. Only biological pesticide control is used and the construction of the whole complex is based on current environmental legislation. External screen, double-walled polycarbonate sheets in the air-conditioned compartments, and the recycling of water are some of the energy saving measures (Universiteit van Amsterdam, 2019) .
Therefore, this greenhouse seems as a realistic option to sustainably and locally produce food for consumption on Science Park. It requires significantly lower financial investment compared to the Freight Farms, and transportation costs are also minimized.
Figure 5. Birds eye view of the greenhouse on Science Park (Universiteit van Amsterdam, 2017). Growing food sustainably and locally is one only part of the equation. The key is to create active engagement with the local users of Science Park. The goal is to induce emotional resonance when selling the food in order to follow the Placemaking principles. Therefore, inspiration has been found with a organization called “Freshbag”.
Freshbag is found by UvA student Jaleesa Schaap (Earth Sciences). Freshbag sells bags full of local and biological vegetables and fruits to students and employees of Science Park. The crops are grown on a biological farm in De Marsen Landsmeer, just above the North of Amsterdam. Every wednesday afternoon, subscribers of Freshbag can pick up their bag, with no plastic packaging - for sustainability reasons (Folia, 2017) .
Arriving at the end of the ideate phase, the following solution is proposed that is inspired by a combination of the findings of this research. This solution can be further explored in the prototype phase:
● Grow food locally to enhance the consumers connection with the food that they eat. ● Make use of hydroponic farming techniques in the existing greenhouse complex to
grow crops sustainably and minimize financial investment to keep prices low and affordable.
● To induce social connection between different users of Science Park, organize a weekly (recurring) small scale “Food stand festival” where people can buy and experience organic and sustainably produced local food.
Figure 7. Impression of the Food stand festival located in front of the Science Park 904 building (Tripadvisor , n.d.) .
Discussion
This research has several points which could be improved. These include suggestions for further research or for researches which are conducted with similar methods. This will be done through a critical analysis.
First of all, the time span of this research wasn’t enough to thoroughly investigate all possible options and suggestions for the two temporary plots. To include more end users, more time is needed. Instead of half a year this time span could be extended to minimally a year. Because of this lack of time this research used a lower N together with some small interviews to narrow down the options for the plots giving a not fully substantiated outcome. However with the available time sufficient data has been gathered to give an insight on the possible answer of our research question.
Second of all, as already shortly mentioned above, there was a lack of respondents on the survey. Science Park consists of roughly 5000 students and our sample size was around 30. To get a better overview of the needs of the end users, more should be included. This could be done by spreading the survey via multiple platforms and not only the student associations. In combination with the extension of time this should make gathering more data from more respondents easier. However this shouldn’t hamper the speed of the process. Nevertheless the data from the respondents does give us a look into all the possibilities.
Third of all, in this paper there is no consideration for leaving the plots as they are. One plot consists of a volleyball field and as a result of our findings this would be taken away. In the first preliminary interviews and the surveys there wasn’t any notion of this problem. However, the preliminary interviews and the surveys only consisted of a few, too little, people because of the time within this research. This could be done by specifically giving an option within the preliminary interviews and surveys to keep the plots as they are. In further research this option should also be investigated.
Last of all, a preliminary research should be conducted to include more possible and feasible options for the two existing plots. One of the examples which is already mentioned is leaving the plots as they are. Including more options could be done through another ‘preliminary’ survey asking users for possible ideas and filtering them when it comes to feasibility of the ideas or it could be done through a large number of interviews as well.
Conclusion
As the results show there are certain possibilities but also weaknesses when it comes to the concept of a study village and the concept of hydroponic farming. In this paragraph the main outcomes of the results will be summarized.
With the concept of Study Village there are several possibilities. These possibilities have been shown by researching a comparable case. In this instance it’s Startup Village. Startup Village encourages community building and therefore can be seen as a community of people whom all share a common value, they have a startup business. Furthermore it’s a sustainable way of implementing study spaces because it can be done with used
seacontainers. This combination of community forming and sustainability could be suitable for the plots that are free for temporary completion if sufficient heating and ventilation is included. However seacontainers are very sensitive to noise pollution, which is an important issue when considering study spaces. There is noise pollution occuring when the two other plots will be construction sites. Therefore this should be taken into account and further investigated.
Hydroponic farming has much potential in providing local sustainable food. It perfectly aligns with a sustainable and smart way of farming. The system does not use soil and constantly adjusting temperature and air moisture contents with intelligent programmes for maximum resource efficiency. However, implementing this system requires a high financial investment. The current option for acquiring a temporary movable hydroponic system is in the form of a container, from a company like Freight Farms, but it is doubtful whether this system is able to deliver cheaper food for the students of Science Park.
Therefore, it is recommend to use existing facilities to implement hydroponic farming, which offers a cheaper alternative. Also, to create a connection between the students and local food, the concept of Freshbag can be imitated on a larger scale in the form of a recurring food stand festival.
Recommendations
When it comes to study village this paper recommends handling it as a possible option for the two open plots and design a plan which improves the existing plans further. It is recommended to start testing in the prototype phase with a single container on sight to investigate the effectiveness of the containers as study spaces. It is recommended to modify the container by implementing a ventilation system and sound dampening walls to create an effective study environment. Continual feedback should be gathered to examine the potential noise pollution on the building sights and how to counter them.
It is also recommend to explore the option of implementing hydroponic farming techniques in the existing greenhouse of Science Park to grow crops for local consumption. It is recommended for the prototype phase to start using one of the compartments as an experimental sight to gather information about the potential quantity of food that can be produced. Furthermore, the produced food can first be sold in collaboration with Freshbag to build publicity for the concept.
References
Amsterdam Science Park. (2019). Area Development. Geraadpleegd op 24 februari 2019, van https://www.amsterdamsciencepark.nl/about-amsterdam-science-park/area-development
Amsterdam Science Park. (2019). Fact & Figures. Geraadpleegd op 8 mei 2019, van
https://www.amsterdamsciencepark.nl/about-amsterdam-science-park/facts-figures/
Barbosa, G., Gadelha, F., Kublik, N., Proctor, A., Reichelm, L., Weissinger, E., . . . Halden, R. (2015). Comparison of Land, Water, and Energy Requirements of Lettuce Grown Using Hydroponic vs. Conventional Agricultural Methods. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 12(6), 6879–6891. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph120606879
Barlett, P. F. (2011). Campus Sustainable Food Projects: Critique and Engagement. American
Anthropologist , 113 (1), 101–115. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1548-1433.2010.01309.x
Bewust in de Buurt. (n.d.). Fresh Bag - Bewust in de Buurt . Photograph. Retrieved from
https://bewustindebuurt.nl/bedrijf/fresh-bag/
Big Think. (2016, 6 oktober). Want to Make Better Decisions? Know the Difference between
Engineering and Design Thinking [Video]. Geraadpleegd op 3 maart 2019, van https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7LRxKHdao8&t=168s
Design Thinking Asia 2018. (2018). Why Design Thinking . Photograph. Retrieved from https://www.processexcellencenetwork.com/events-designthinkingasia/why-design-thinking
Eigenbrod, C., & Gruda, N. (2014). Urban vegetable for food security in cities. A review. Agronomy for
Sustainable Development , 35 (2), 483–498. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13593-014-0273-y
Finn, D. (2014). DIY urbanism: implications for cities. Journal of Urbanism: International research on
placemaking and urban sustainability , 7 (4), 381-398.
Fischer, F. (2006). Participatory governance as deliberative empowerment: The cultural politics of discursive space. The American review of public administration, 36(1), 19-40.
Fischer, F. (2004). Professional expertise in a deliberative democracy. The good society , 13 (1), 21-27. Folia. (2017, September 16). Studenten verkopen lokaal gekweekte groenten op Science Park. Retrieved May 28, 2019, from
https://www.folia.nl/actueel/115357/studenten-verkopen-lokaal-gekweekte-groenten-op-science-park
Freightfarms. (2019). A CAMPUS FARM FOR EVERYONE. Geraadpleegd op 10 maart 2019, van https://www.freightfarms.com/education
Harris, W. (2008, 5 mei). How Urban Planning Works. Geraadpleegd op 24 februari 2019, van
https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/urban-planning4.htm
Kalantari, F., Tahir, O. M., Joni, R. A., & Fatemi, E. (2018). Opportunities and Challenges in Sustainability of Vertical Farming: A Review. Journal of Landscape Ecology , 11 (1), 35–60. https://doi.org/10.1515/jlecol-2017-0016
Kotler, Philip & Keller, Kevin Lane (2016), ‘Marketing Management’, Global Edition, 15/E; ISBN-13:9781292092621, Publisher: Pearson, UK (832 pages)
O’Rourke, V., & Baldwin, C. (2016b). Student engagement in placemaking at an Australian university campus. Australian Planner , 53 (2), 103–116. https://doi.org/10.1080/07293682.2015.1135810
Parker, K. A., & Grand Valley State University . (2015). INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH AND PROBLEM SOLVING A GUIDE FOR STUDENTS (Environmental Studies Programs). Retrieved from https://www.academia.edu/14982806/Interdisciplinary_Research_and_Problem_Solving_A_Guide_fo _Students
Razzouk, R., & Shute, V. (2012). What Is Design Thinking and Why Is It Important? Review of Educational Research. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654312457429
Rittel, H. W., & Webber, M. M. (1974). Wicked problems. Man-made Futures , 26 (1), 272-280.
Sauer, C. (2012). Is Local Food More Expensive? A Grand Rapids Case Study. Undergraduate
Research and Creative Practice , 1 (1), 2–17. Retrieved from
https://scholarworks.gvsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1160&context=honorsprojects
Science & Business organisation. (n.d.). Organisation | Amsterdam Science Park. Retrieved May 25, 2019, from https://www.amsterdamsciencepark.nl/about-amsterdam-science-park/organisation/ Specht, K., Siebert, R., Hartmann, I., Freisinger, U. B., Sawicka, M., Werner, A., . . . Dierich, A. (2013). Urban agriculture of the future: an overview of sustainability aspects of food production in and on buildings. Agriculture and Human Values , 31 (1), 33–51.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10460-013-9448-4
Sills, C. (2018). VERTICAL FARMING: A REVOLUTION TO SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE (Session C10 8203). Geraadpleegd van http://www.pitt.edu/~budny/papers/8203.pdf
Startup Village. (2019). [Amsterdam Science Park Startup Village]. Geraadpleegd op 22 februari 2019, van https://startupvillage.nl/amsterdamsciencepark
Tripadvisor . (n.d.). best street food market in bucharest for sure - Foto van Wahaka Street Food Park,
Boekarest - TripAdvisor . Photograph. Retrieved from
https://www.tripadvisor.nl/LocationPhotoDirectLink-g294458-d12963948-i284860842-Wahaka_Street_ Food_Park-Bucharest.html
Universiteit van Amsterdam. (2017). Home - Universiteit van Amsterdam . Photograph. Retrieved from
https://www.uva.nl/shared-content/faculteiten/nl/faculteit-der-natuurwetenschappen-wiskunde-en-infor matica/onderzoek-uitgelicht-sils/onderzoek-uitgelicht-bioloog-michel-haring.html
University of Amsterdam. (2018, March 12). UvA wants new building at Amsterdam Science Park for education, research and collaboration - UvA Students - University of Amsterdam. Retrieved May 25, 2019, from
https://student.uva.nl/en/content/news/2018/03/uva-wants-new-building-at-science-park-for-education research-and-collaboration.html
Volberda H.W., Morgan R.E., (2011), Strategic management Competitiveness & Globalization: Concepts & Cases - 1st Edition, Publisher: Cengage learning Emea (816 pages)
Zeidler, C., & Schubert, D. (2014). From Bioregenerative Life Support Systems for Space to Vertical Farming on Earth – The 100% Spin-off. Vertical Farming , 1 (1). Geraadpleegd van
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263747164_From_Bioregenerative_Life_Support_Systems_f or_Space_to_Vertical_Farming_on_Earth_-_The_100_Spin-off
Appendix A - Interviews
Appendix A1 : Interview Yannick Vinkesteijn
Onderwijsassistent minor programmeren (Leeftijd: 26)
- Zijn er volgens jou voldoende studieplekken? Hoe zou je dit anders zien?
Nee, zeker geen voldoende studieplekken. Het is op het Science Park vaak druk omdat iedereen gewoon naar binnen kan lopen en kan zitten, dus ook middelbare school leerlingen bijvoorbeeld. Maar ik denk dat er vooral plekken missen waar je met een groep kan
samenwerken. Dus meer een openbare studieplek waar je makkelijk met een groep kan werken met stopcontacten, zonder te reserveren zoals bij de hokjes.
- Denk je dat er animo is voor studieplekken die buiten zijn?
Jaa zeker. Ik denk dat een aantal buiten studieplekken zeker een goede toevoeging is voor het Science Park en het zou top zijn als er dan ook stopcontacten aanwezig zijn.
- Hoe regelmatig geef je geld uit aan voedsel en drinken in en om het Science Park gebouw? Wat vind je van de eetmogelijkheden ?
Niet vaak, bijna nooit eigenlijk. Het is gewoon te duur om elke dag lekker te lunchen of avond te eten op het Science Park. De foodtrucks die er af en toe aanwezig zijn, hebben vaak lekker eten maar het is wel erg duur. Ik denk dat ze meer studenten moeten
betrekken.
Dus bijbaantjes creëren voor studenten, zodat het eten wellicht ook goedkoper kan worden..
- Wat vind je van de educatieve lezingen/ meet ups/ events die worden georganiseerd in en om het Science Park gebouw?
De betabreak vind ik vaak erg interessant en ik denk dat het ook goed werkt als concept. Ik denk dat het zeker een goede is om zulk soort events op de kavels te organiseren, als de sprekers maar interessant zijn. Ook is het tijdstip belangrijk, want de studenten zijn na 16.00 uur vaak niet meer op de campus.
- Hoe denk je over een ICT helpdesk op het Science park?
Ik denk dat dit voor veel studenten erg nuttig is. Maar ik denk dat een chatbox ook al erg zal helpen voor dit soort computerproblemen. En hier zou ik ook zeggen dat slim is om
studenten te gebruiken om dit werk te verrichten.
- Wat zou je graag op deze kavels willen zien?
Een beter versie van de brainwave. De brainwave is niet erg gezellig en als er een borrel wordt gehouden stoort dat het hele balkon. Ik zou graag borrel/chill/ontmoetingsruimte willen zien. Dus vooral plekken waar studenten en medewerkers kunnen zitten om even uit te rusten of een beetje te studeren.
Appendix A2 : Interview: Jasper Adegeest
Master Student Artificial Intelligence
- Op welke locaties heb jij college gehad in jou 2 jarige AI master?
Voornamelijk Science Park en soms de VU
- In die 2 jaar, miste jij iets op het gebied van faciliteiten rondom de studie?
Studieplekken. Rustige plekken, waar je wel kunt overleggen.
- Welke faciliteiten kon jij extra waarderen?
De Bibliotheek. Robo lab - hok met voetbalteam. Bij het mammoetskelet is ook een goede studieplek.
- Wat is jou ervaring met ICT steun voor computerproblemen?
Nee nooit echt problemen gehad. Ik heb het altijd zelf kunnen oplossen. Wat wel een punt van verbetering is, is de aanbod aan goede supercomputers. Er zijn vaak niet genoeg computers met sterke grafische kaarten die de rekenkracht aankonden van de algoritmes die we moesten gebruiken. Het aanbod grafische kaarten mag wel verbeterd worden - Niet genoeg GPU kracht.
- Hoe klinkt een soortgelijke 'Room for discussion' met specifiek het thema AI en duurzaamheid?
Ja zou wel vet zijn. Er wordt al zoiets georganiseerd door assistent professor Stratis Gavvees. Een Deep Learning leraar die seminars over AI en soortgelijke
onderwerpen geeft.
- Hoe is jouw beleving betreft de huidige kantine en eetgelegenheid rondom science park?
Appendix A3 : Interview overall manager Startup Village - Patricia Leek
Resp:
Vast in een team zitten die echt dedicated hiervoor werken en dan hebben we nog bijvoorbeeld iemand die goed is in vastgoed dingetjes.. Dan lekt het dak, dan heeft een contact weer door. Nou dan hebben we nog een persoon, dan hebben we nog een connector noemen we haar. Zij is heel erg goed om op hoog niveau sponsorships af te sluiten. Dus dat een zak geld hier naar toe komt, zij is daar heel erg goed in dus dat hebben we ook nog op parttime basis. En Erik Boer is de directeur van en Startup Village en Ace Incubators dus die hoort ook in het team maar die is niet persé met allerlei kleine dingen bezig ofzo maar meer op hoog niveau en dan hebben we nog iemand die bezig is met inhoudelijke evenementen hier naar toe te krijgen om meer korpsen te koppelen aan studenten maar ook aan de startups en daar de info aan te geven dus daarom zijn we nu ook bezig met een andere website om er echt een dienst zeg maar van te maken. En mijn taak daarin is eigenlijk om ervoor te zorgen dat onze doelstelling gehaald worden, dus ook onze financiële doelstelling gehaald, dat het team goed functioneert en dat ik
eindverantwoordelijk ben dus dat ook bijvoorbeeld alle containers vol zijn en dat we qua evenementen de doelstellingen halen maar ook een beetje kijken naar de visie en dat soort dingen voor 2020. Dus we zijn heel erg aan t kijken dat we meer een community kunnen zijn in plaats van dat we zo een vastgoed poeltje zijn met kantoren en meetingen. Dus we willlen daar heel erg meer een meer een switch in maken, los van het feit dat we dat eigenlijk al zijn want dat gebeurt hier al een beetje automatisch. Maar als je ook op onze website komt is het redelijk saai, er is niet echt interactie, niet echt een gevoel van dit is echt super cool terwijl de mensen die er komen vinden het wel altijd erg leuk dus dat klopt eigenlijk niet echt met wat we uitstralen dus daar moet ook nog een vertaalslag in komen dus met dat soort dingen ben ik een beetje bezig.
Jeffrey:
Ja, maar je bent wel echt van Startup Village en niet persé van Ace Incubators
Resp:
Nee, ik ben echt van Startup Village. Ja
Jeffrey:
En.. Ja, wat wij natuurlijk een beetje het idee van dit concept willen weten. Weet jij misschien hoe het eigenlijk is opgezet? Zeg maar het idee van Startup Village om startups en scale ups ruimte te geven
Resp:
Ja, nou de basis is Ace Incubators dus dat is ook eigenlijk de basis geweest van Startup Village. Ace Incubators bestond al langer dus die heeft ergens nog in het Matrix gebouw hier verderop gezeten en in eerste instantie nog in de bibliotheek van een universiteitsgebouw maar dat stond toch leeg. Nou uiteindelijk moesten ze daar uit dus hadden ze zelf ook geen
plek meer op een gegeven moment en in het Matrix gebouw daar zaten ook al een paar startups vanuit het programma wat zij aanbieden die zaten, die waren daar toen ook
gevestigd. En toen was er een architect die, hele moeilijke naam, Julius Termanaoi of zoiets. Staat ook wel ergens hier op het terrein aangegeven. Die was in Engeland geweest en daar hebben ze dus ook zo een containerdorp en die is daar heel erg door geïnspireerd geweest en het startup op science park zocht nog een soort plek met een rauw randje waar dus hè mooie dingen konden ontstaan en toen is Julius ook eigenlijk met Science Park gaan praten en Erik Boer zocht dus eigenlijk ook een plek voor de startups en zo is het eigenlijk een beetje samengekomen. Dus de architect Julius heeft het bedacht en Erik heeft zeg maar samen met de aandeelhouders het dan gebouwd uiteindelijk. Dus het was eigenlijk meer een behoefte van oke hè, Incubator gaat goed we hebben eigenlijk wel plekjes nodig en ‘t is hier niet echt hier op Science Park niet hè terwijl je wel al die studenten hier heb zitten die mogelijk wel allemaal ideeën hebben dus hoe gaan we dat doen? En de Incubator was al eigenlijk vanuit de universiteit dus het was al een universitaire opleiding dus het was best wel een goede stap om daar ook een locatie, een vaste locatie aan te koppelen.
Jeffrey:
Dit was ook een logische plek om het te doen
Resp:
Ja, dit is ook UvA grond dus dit huren wij ook van de UvA daar hebben wij x aantal jaren voor gekregen volgens mij mogen we nu nog 7 jaar blijven uit mijn hoofd anders is het 5 jaar en of we dan verlengd worden of wat dan ook dat weten we nog niet maar dit krijgt sws uiteindelijk ook een andere bestemming.
Jeffrey: Ja
Resp:
Dus we zijn nu ook aan het kijken wat gaan we dan straks doen, waar gaan we dan heen?
Erik:
Want weten jullie al tot hoelang jullie gaan blijven? Staat dat al vast of..?
Resp:
Nou we weten wel dat toen we hier kwamen hadden we een vergunning voor 10 jaar. In oktober zitten we hier 3 jaar dus dan zou je zeggen nog 7 jaar. Alleen het terrein Spark Village wat hiernaast zit daar staan nu 240 één persoons woningen, die hebben geloof ik ook weer 10 jaar gekregen als het goed is en ik me niet vergis en anders 8 jaar maar door dat zij langer mogen, mogen wij waarschijnlijk zo lang als zij blijven ook weer blijven.
Erik:
Ja, precies.
Resp:
Jeffrey:
Nee dus jullie hebben ook niet echt persé een plan gemaakt wat jullie uiteindelijk met de containers gaan doen, met deze containers?
Resp:
Nee, dit is allemaal koop wat je hier ziet dus waarschijnlijk gaan we dan kijken, kan je dat nog verkopen? Dus dat zou het dan zijn. En dat stuk is het laatste gedeelte wat gebouwd is en die zijn ook allemaal groen, wit en geel en nieuw als het goed is zie je dat ook. En die zijn ook 30 centimeter hoger en dat hebben we gehuurd, dat is ook een ander business model. Dus dit allemaal gekocht en gewoon neergezet en alles wat hier kapot gaat is ons probleem en alles wat daar kapot gaat is zeg maar het probleem van de leverancier. Natuurlijk hangt het ervan af in wat voor zin maar dan moeten zijn dat repareren en als wij weg gaan halen zij dat gewoon op. Dus dat is een ander business model geworden.
Jeffrey
Waren deze containers gloednieuw of waren het echt gebruikte containers?
Resp:
Nee, dit waren echt al gebruikte zeecontainers. Dus dit is allemaal tweedehands gekocht.
> Waarom zouden jullie dat huren in plaats van kopen, wat is daar het voordeel van of andersom?
< Nou, het business model is dat hier moet je een flinke investering doen en dan moet je het eigenlijk terugverdienen, dus dat moet je het terugrekenen en daar, ik zeg maar wat, heb je een container van 10 euro per maand en verhuur je hem voor 20 euro per maand. Dat is een heel makkelijk business model want dan verdien je gewoon 10 euro per maand en hier wordt het bijvoorbeeld weer verkeerd geplaatst en dat is dan allemaal ons probleem. Dan schat je in dat je een investering van één ton nodig hebt en dat wordt dan weer 2 ton en dan moet je opeens weer gaan bedenken wat worden onze verhuurprijzen en dat is een beetje lastig. Hier hadden we nu dan al verhuurprijzen voor en dat kwam er dan een beetje bij en toen hebben we gekeken met de leverancier, komt dat een beetje uit, nou dat kon, toen hebben we nog een beetje onderhandeld. Dus nu kunnen we daar dus ook geld verdienen terwijl we dat huren dat is voor ons dus minder risicovol dan dit. Dan toen we dit op beginnen te zetten bedoel ik dan.
> Wat is nou eigenlijk, ja zo een container neerzetten en dat verhuren is natuurlijk best wel een goedkope manier van ruimte verwerken.
< Ja, het is natuurlijk wel makkelijk om het neer te zetten uiteindelijk komt er wel altijd veel bij kijken, je hebt namelijk nul luxe. Je hebt bijvoorbeeld geen water in je container. Iedereen moet ook naar buiten lopen om zijn water container te vullen of om naar het toilet te gaan. Dat maakt het ook altijd wel weer leuk want op die manier kom je ook wel weer je plekje af en toe verlaten. Alleen, het is allemaal, het zijn allemaal OSD platen wat je ziet. Het is gewoon geperst hout met lijm. Het is niet het meest gezonde wat ik weet. Hierdoor is de lucht ook niet heel erg goed. In de winter heb je altijd dus een probleem want je wil dat het
