by victoria.bremer -

A different approach – designing for loneliness

While traditional approaches to tackling loneliness often focus on creating opportunities for social interactions, there’s another, more surprising strategy gaining attention: designing public spaces that actively embrace and even encourage solitude. A paradoxical approach recognizes that many people experiencing loneliness don’t necessarily want to be surrounded by others but instead need environments that allow them to feel comfortable being alone. Being comfortable with being alone and even feeling lonely is important. Sometimes the feeling is inevitable and a vital part to identifying and overcoming loneliness is connecting with ones own emotional needs as it is connecting with others. Places that make this possible in a positive, comfortable and nonjudgmental way can therefore also play an important role in wellbeing, reflection and dealing with an at first uncomfortable feeling [3].

Often, urban spaces prioritize group interactions, leaving little room for those who prefer solitude. This can unintentionally send the message that being alone in public is unusual or even undesirable. However, small design tweaks can challenge that stigma. Take seating arrangements, for example. Public furniture designed for individuals – like single chairs rather than long communal benches – can make it feel normal and even inviting to spend time alone in public. The MuseumsQuartier in Vienna does this with its modular seating options that work just as well for one person as they do for a group, creating a more inclusive and flexible experience.
It’s not just about where you sit, it’s also about the atmosphere. Public spaces can be designed to provide opportunities for quiet moments, which are essential for helping people process their feelings of loneliness. Parks are a natural fit for this kind of design. Whether someone wants a solitary walk or a peaceful corner to sit and reflect, these kinds of environments offer options for both privacy and connection. Nature itself can also play a big role. Green spaces, dense vegetation, and the presence of birds or other wildlife add a sense of life and calm to a city. These features don’t just make urban spaces – they provide a way for people to connect with something larger than themselves. Studies have shown that access to green spaces is linked to lower feelings of loneliness, likely because they help clear the mind and create moments of quiet, personal connection with nature.
This idea of “paradoxical intervention” in design doesn’t just apply to solitude. It’s about embracing contradictions to create better experiences. By designing spaces that support both solitude and social interaction, we can serve different emotional and social needs in the same environment. It’s a shift away from rigid design concepts and toward more flexible, human-centered thinking.
Interaction design, too, has a critical role in this conversation. Thoughtfully designed technology can help foster meaningful connections in ways that feel organic and comfortable. For example, the concept of “cozy tech” has emerged as a way to create products that offer a sense of companionship. Devices designed with warmth and simplicity in mind, for instance, can provide emotional support in subtle ways. These tools aren’t about replacing human relationships but complementing them, making it easier for people to feel connected in their own way.
Ultimately, combating loneliness in cities requires a holistic approach – including rethinking public spaces, embracing solitude as a valid experience, and designing products that help people feel less alone. By integrating interventions and innovative interaction design into urban life, environments can be created that feel welcoming, inclusive, and human. And in doing so, we can take meaningful steps toward not just reducing loneliness, but reshaping how we think about connection and belonging in the first place [1,2].

Modular seating vienna

Sources

  1. L. Heu and T. Brennecke, “Making Space For Loneliness In Our Cities,” Next City, Oct. 21, 2022. https://nextcity.org/urbanist-news/making-space-for-loneliness-in-our-cities-design-research
  2. L. C. Heu and T. Brennecke, “By yourself, yet not alone: Making space for loneliness,” Urban Studies, vol. 60, no. 16, pp. 3187–3197, May 2023, doi: 10.1177/00420980231169669.
  3. “Knowledge on Loneliness — The Loneliness Lab | Loneliness in urban spaces,” The Loneliness Lab, Dec. 29, 2020. https://www.lonelinesslab.org/knowledge-hub

by victoria.bremer -

Designing for connection – Part 1

In the last blogposts I have established, that public spaces offer a great opportunity for design to combat loneliness. Concepts like Third Places provide and ideal starting point for designers to tackle the loneliness issue ans shape social networks.
Based on my current research I would say that designing against loneliness means designing for connection. But what is important when designing public spaces with the purpose of community building in mind? How do we design spaces to nurture connection? In the following I will take a closer look at design principles, guidelines and important aspects for spaces, installations and interactions and maybe even seemingly counterintuitive design approaches addressing the problem.

DESIGNING PLACES
Designing places to combat loneliness and foster connection requires thoughtful consideration of how we interact with our environment. Accessibility is the foundation, ensuring that spaces are inclusive, safe, and easy to navigate for everyone, such as parks, libraries, or pocket spaces (a micro space serving a function different to the room or area it’s located in) seamlessly integrated into neighborhoods. Creating spaces that feel welcoming also starts with comfort – designing environments that invite people to stay. Incorporating nature boosts mental health and also fosters sociability. Adding elements of activation, like strategically placed seating, amenities, and refreshments, brings energy and encourages interaction.
It’s also important to offer choice and flexibility. People have different needs – sometimes we crave stimulation, and other times we just want a quiet spot to rest. Spaces that adapt to these preferences are more likely to feel inclusive. Designing at a human scale (the proportion of space in relation to human dimension, eg. not making spaces too large or small) adds to this sense of comfort that naturally invite connection. A strong sense of place is equally essential. Spaces that reflect local culture and shared values signal belonging and create identity. Purposeful programming (placemaking), or giving a space a specific focus – like catering to a particular group with shared needs or interests – can lower barriers to connection. For example, a park designed with community gardening in mind brings people together over a shared activity, making it easier to strike up conversations and build connections [1,2,4]. The project “the loneliness lab” uses a metaphor to define the essential elements of place making. The physical environment is considered the „hardware“ (buildings, parks), the programming of these spaces is the „software“ (activities, events, services) and the policies and standards that bring people together and prevent loneliness are the „code“ [3].
Thoughtful integration of technology can also enhance these spaces, make them more accessible and extend the sense of community beyond the physical world. But technology should always support the space, not take over, and it needs to be used carefully so it doesn’t get in the way of the real human connections these spaces are meant to create. [2]

In practice this means understanding the unique needs of a community. Conducting a needs assessment helps identify gaps in existing spaces and uncovers the types of activities people value most. Collaboration is equally vital – partnering with local businesses, organizations, and community groups builds a support network that strengthens the foundation of these spaces. Securing funding through grants, sponsorships, and partnerships ensures their creation and long-term sustainability [2].
Third places are more than just physical spaces, they play a crucial role in reducing social isolation by encouraging meaningful connections and interactions. They also act as places for civic engagement, giving people opportunities to participate in and contribute to their communities. Beyond this, third places support well-being by providing spaces where people can relax, connect with others, and share experiences. They promote a sense of belonging, strengthen social bonds, and cultivate vibrant, inclusive communities [2].

SUCCESSFUL EXAMPLES

“Gathering place” in Tulsa is a concept of a park that offers a diverse amount of activities from learning and education to events and culinary experiences: „Gathering Place aims to serve as a cornerstone for our vibrant community while improving social, economic, and environmental sustainability in Tulsa.“
https://www.gatheringplace.org/


“The High Line” in New York used to be an old elevated abandoned railroad track and was transformed into a park and community space in the middle of the city. Ideas for dEsigns were created through contests by anyone who wanted to participate and much of it is therefore created by public participation. Most of it is supported by funding and it offers many activities from food, art, performance and nature: „The High Line is both a nonprofit organization and a public park on the West Side of Manhattan. Through our work with communities on and off the High Line, we’re devoted to reimagining the role public spaces have in creating connected, healthy neighborhoods and cities.“

https://www.thehighline.org/

The implications for interaction design projects could be developing design guidelines, such as workshops or a framework, to guide the creation of third spaces for urban planners, architects, community leaders or involved citizens. Another approach could be to create a platform that fosters the development of communities dedicated to designing third places tailored to their needs, thereby encouraging active citizen participation in urban planning.

Sources

  1. HKS Architects, “Healing Loneliness: Six Ways to design for Social Connection and Community | HKS Architects,” HKS Architects, Jun. 24, 2024. https://www.hksinc.com/our-news/articles/healing-loneliness-six-ways-to-design-for-social-connection-and-community/
  2. M. Abdelhamid, “Third place theory: creating community spaces,” Urban Design lab, Oct. 20, 2024. https://urbandesignlab.in/third-place-theory-creating-community-spaces/
  3. “Knowledge on Loneliness — The Loneliness Lab | Loneliness in urban spaces,” The Loneliness Lab, Dec. 29, 2020. https://www.lonelinesslab.org/knowledge-hub
  4. “Eleven Principles for Creating Great Community Places.” https://www.pps.org/article/11steps

by victoria.bremer -

What are Fourth Spaces?

After discussing the concept of third places (informal gathering spots like cafes, libraries, and parks) I would now like to shine light on a relatively new idea that has emerged in the recent years: fourth spaces. While third places serve as a “home away from home,” fourth spaces are (depending on the definition) a response to the increasing blurring of physical and digital boundaries in our lives. They go beyond the physicality of third places, incorporating hybrid, inclusive, and adaptive elements to address the evolving ways people connect and build community today. But what exactly are fourth spaces, and how can they shape a sense of belonging?

Definition
Like with loneliness and Third Places there isn’t one single definition for fourth spaces. Some interpretations focus on the physical world and informal interactions in places that are undefined, similar to third places, while others place more emphasis on the digital world [3] and how it interacts with physical spaces. Fourth spaces can be seen as in-between places, blending traditional environments with digital layers. Not all definitions consider the digital aspect in the same way, but all highlight the role of these spaces in fostering spontaneous, casual connections that contribute to shared public life. [1, 2]

Fouth Places as the “in-between” [3]

Fourth Spaces as the digital realm [5]

Fourth spaces can counteract the impersonal aspects of “non-places” by embracing in-betweenness and publicness in their design. These spaces often include open, diverse layouts that are intentionally flexible, allowing people to adapt them for various uses that encourage spontaneous interactions.

Novel typologies – new forms of spatial design

Fourth space frameworks blend elements from traditional public spaces with modern innovations, such as integrating green spaces into urban environments or combining digital and physical interactions. In the context of fourth spaces, typology focuses on creating new forms of environments that encourage interaction, creativity, and adaptability to meet modern societal needs. These strategies ensure inclusivity and dynamic social interactions, creating environments where diverse individuals can connect and feel a sense of shared experience. By doing so, fourth spaces move beyond sterile functionality, fostering creativity, community, and belonging. [3]

An example approach to actively creating a fourth space is a project called „The Commons“. It is described as: „A modern-day town square for communal meaning-making, personal discovery, and self-expression in the heart of San Francisco.“ This concept focuses mostly on creating a place that is versatile and open in its functionality and can become whatever it needs to be at any given time. So in reference to the earlier definition, this is less an approach of combining digital and real world places, and follows more the idea of in-between places and meaning-making. They themselves define Fourth spaces as follows: „A physical space that facilitates meaning-making through intentional programming and pluralistic discussion, where individuals explore questions of ultimate concern without seeking conclusive answers. It honors the authenticity and uniqueness of each person’s path while fostering deeper bonds through consistent encounters in a supportive holding environment.“ [4]

Designing Fourth spaces is not an easy task, since it is quite hard to grasp what exactly fourth places are and how they fit into our lives. In terms of digital Fourth spaces the concept is just now emerging and changing constantly. It is important to clearly define the Fourth space in order to utilize it for designing in the context of loneliness. Is a fourth space an in-between place with unlimited potential that needs to be programmed and directed? Or is it the digital world that has emerged in the past few years? And if so, do we integrate it into the real world and try to find ways to combine the two? Or is it maybe even those places where the two meet?

Sources

  1. P. S. Aelbrecht, “‘Fourth places’: the contemporary public settings for informal social interaction among strangers,” Journal of Urban Design, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 124–152, Jan. 2016, doi: 10.1080/13574809.2015.1106920.
  2. “The fourth place and re-imagining the city | Urbanarium.” https://urbanarium.org/journal/fourth-place-and-re-imagining-city
  3. D. Hardegger, “A First Holistic ‘4th Space’ Concept,” Mdpi, p. 72, Mar. 2022, doi: 10.3390/proceedings2022081072.
  4. “The Commons” https://www.thesfcommons.com/
  5. T. Masuku, “The fourth place,” Showit Blog, Jun. 15, 2024. https://ticamasuku.com/the-fourth-place/

by victoria.bremer -

The living room of society

When talking about loneliness and human connection so called „third places“ often come up. The term was first coined by Ray Oldenburg who defined first places (home), second places (work) and finally the idea of third places, which he defines as spaces for „informal, free social interaction“, for example libraries, cafés, restaurants, museums etc. He even goes so far as to say that as places of free speech (and allowing a certain level of equality), third spaces can be seen as the “precursors of democracy“. They are places in which we meet friends and strangers, foster connections and create new ones [1]. This is especially interesting when talking about loneliness, since even small and short social interactions can improve mental wellbeing and create a feeling of belonging and connection [2].

When designing Third Places it is important to remember that they are dynamic spaces that are constantly changing, evolving and adapting: „A public space cannot be finished any more than the city in which it resides can be“ [3]. This also means that a key element of a good public space is good management, to be able to keep up with the needs and constant changes of the communities and people. Big issues when creating spaces (besides real estate prizes and restrictive regulations [4]) has been that much of the planning and building has been done from the top down, by experts such as architects and urban planners. The main factor however are the people: „Normal citizens are the best experts that you can ask for when planning how a place should be designed or used“ [3]. Citizen participation could therefor be an interesting topic for the design process of third places, asking questions like How can people be motivated to engage and participate in community building? And How can we make Third Spaces accessible for all people? [5]

“Libraries shouldn’t shush, they should roar”
In her Talk Maarya Rehman makes an interesting case about libraries as good Third Places, even or especially in the digital age. She opens up an entirely new angle to think about libraries, describing her own experience when she was given the opportunity to reopen a library in Pakistan. Rehman states that a place like a library doesn’t have just one function and can be many different things to many different people, depending on their needs. Another important attribute – as mentioned previously – is that Third Places act as social levelers. This means that it doesn’t matter who a person is (where they come from, how much money they make, etc), in Third Places like libraries they are simply a citizen. Finally she makes the point, that the existence of these Places in the real world is as relevant as ever with a large amount of our lives shifting into the digital online world where our connections become intangible data and we are constantly overloaded with information. Libraries can take many forms and help people connect over one thing at a time. Be it a common interest or a shared problem that can be solved together. [6, 7]

Several places have taken up this idea and basic concept of a library and adapted it to their needs. One of the most famous examples is Finland with its Oodi library, that not only rents out books, but is an entire three story building detected to bringing people together for creative collaboration, co-working and connecting [7]. It has a restaurant and cafe for people to eat and chat, but also several different areas of creative work like sewing machines. It is a small ecosystem with everything that is needed for different types of communities and connection. It makes co-working possible but also offers workshops for people to learn and bond over new experiences. Studios with expensive equipment can be rented to work on projects and create together. It is also inclusive to all generations offering family solutions for people with children. All in all it is an incredibly diverse place, designed for many types of different interaction and existing for many different people and a very interesting starting point for thinking about the potentials of public spaces.

Oodie Public Library, Finland https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oodi

Sources

  1. R. Oldenburg, The great good place: Cafes, Coffee Shops, Bookstores, Bars, Hair Salons, and Other Hangouts at the Heart of a Community. Da Capo Press, 1999.
  2. J. Murray, “Are third places the cure for loneliness?,” Wondermind, May 16, 2024. https://www.wondermind.com/article/third-place/
  3. “To make a great third place, get out of the way.” https://www.pps.org/article/to-create-a-great-third-place-get-out-of-the-way
  4. C. Diaz and S. M. Butler, “‘Third places’ as community builders,” Brookings, Sep. 14, 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/third-places-as-community-builders/
  5. M. Lerner, “Redefining third spaces: Modern approaches to informal urban gathering places – Urban Land Magazine,” Urban Land, Aug. 16, 2024. https://urbanland.uli.org/redefining-third-spaces-modern-approaches-to-informal-urban-gathering-places
  6. M. Rehman, “Libraries – the good (third) place,” TED Talks. [Online]. Available: https://www.ted.com/talks/maarya_rehman_libraries_the_good_third_place?subtitle=en
  7. “Home – Oodi,” Oodi, Jan. 02, 2025. https://oodihelsinki.fi/en/