Can investing in public art really improve wellbeing?

Arria

‘Arria’ By Andy Scott. Image: Heather Cameron

“...a new beginning of people and place…a voice calling out I belong…” (‘Watershed’ by Jim Carruth)

By Heather Cameron

Public art can be seen everywhere these days, from parks to town centres, from hospital settings to overlooking motorways.

Along with thousands of motorists, on my daily commute I pass one arguably iconic piece by award winning public artist Andy Scott – Arria, dubbed ‘Angel of the Nauld’ as Cumbernauld’s answer to Gateshead’s Angel of the North.

It is certainly an eye-catching piece, projecting different images at night when it is lit up by multi-coloured lights. Commissioned as part of a drive to regenerate the area, which had previously won the Scottish Carbuncle award, it was hoped it would “create a sense of place and provide a positive statement about the town”. But can public art really lead to such outcomes?

Value of public art

There has been growing recognition in recent years of the contribution that public art can play in improving public spaces and potentially quality of life for residents.

According to Public Art Online, the main assertions made about the value public art brings include that it:

  • Enhances the physical environment;
  • Creates a sense of place and distinctiveness;
  • Contributes to community cohesion;
  • Contributes to social health and wellbeing;
  • Contributes to economic value through inward investment and tourism;
  • Fosters civic pride and confidence;
  • Raises quality of life;
  • Reduces crime.

A recent survey reveals that “artists, consultants, local authorities and organisations within the health and education sectors largely agreed that public art: played an important role in local, regional and national identity; improved the design of the environment; and performed an important social role”.

Nevertheless, with continuing cuts to public spending and increasing scrutiny as to how local authorities spend public funds, it is not unusual to hear people questioning the money spent on art.

Although not always well received initially, such as in the case of Anthony Gormley’s Angel of the North, such installations can grow to achieve an iconic status which in turn can have a positive impact on the local community, particularly in terms of identity and belonging, thus arguably improving wellbeing.

A recently published thesis from Durham University which uses the Angel of the North as a case study, found that 72% of local residents say the sculpture makes them feel good whenever they see it, and it makes 64% proud of Gateshead. Half of the respondents agreed that it made them feel part of a community.

While most respondents said they felt good when they saw the angel, this varied from 61% in a high deprivation area to 80% in a low deprivation area, suggesting that public art alone is not enough.

Indeed, a literature review by the Arts Council suggests that public art is most effective as part of a wider programme of regeneration. And our previous blog on street art highlighted its use in the regeneration of urban areas.

By using public art to enhance or improve public spaces, the perceptions of such places can undoubtedly be improved. It has been suggested that the use of poetry and text-based art can make public spaces feel safer and deter vandalism, as well as reconnecting a community with its history.

Art and the perception of place

Even temporary installations can have a positive impact, by encouraging interaction with the local area. The sculptures of Clyde, the official mascot of the 2014 Commonwealth Games, that were dotted throughout Glasgow during the Games formed the Clyde trail and involved designs by local children. An app was also created so people could follow the trail, hunting down the sculptures.

Similarly, the Shaun in the City trail in London has recently been extended due to popular demand. Hundreds of thousands of people have visited the sculptures since they arrived in March, with many a ‘selfie’ having been taken.

These sculptures are likely to have an indirect impact on children’s health too, with the London trail raising funds for Wallace & Gromit’s Children’s Charity to support sick children in hospitals throughout the UK. 70 sculptures will then feature in Bristol to raise funds for The Grand Appeal, the Bristol Children’s Hospital Charity.

Health benefits

In relation to health more specifically, extensive evidence demonstrating the positive impact art can have has been highlighted. In 2007, A prospectus for arts and health was published by the Arts Council. It includes a summary of research carried out in two hospitals, Middlesbrough General Hospital and the James Cook University Hospital, which compared hospital accommodation before and after the move into a newly developed building (the JCUH). One of the main questions related to the impact of new commissioned art work on users. Among the key findings were that artworks were largely valued for providing colour, distraction and a sense of calm in the public areas, and for some patients they made the hospital seem “less like a hospital”.

Surely, at a time when there has been much economic decline, anything that lifts the mood of people, whether it be a huge metal sculpture at the side of a motorway, or a humorously designed sheep, can only be a good thing.


The Idox Information Service can give you access to further information on public art and regeneration. To find out more on how to become a member, contact us.

Further reading:

Street art…regeneration tool or environmental nuisance?

Evaluation of a community arts installation event in support of public health, IN Perspectives in Public Health, Vol 135 No 1 Jan 2015, pp43-48

Raising our quality of life: the importance of investment in arts and culture Centre for Labour and Social Studies (2014)

Cultural value and social capital: investigating social capital, health and wellbeing impacts in three coastal towns undergoing culture-led regeneration Sidney De Haan Research Centre for Arts and Health (2014)

The art of seeing things invisible (the role of the arts in urban areas), IN Urban Design, No 128 Autumn 2013, pp28-30

Promoting well-being through creativity: how arts and public health can learn from each other, IN Perspectives in Public Health, Vol 133 No 1 Jan 2013, pp52-59

Is 20 plenty? The evidence for lower speed limits

20mph

Image from Flickr user Edinburgh Greens via Creative Commons License

By Donna Gardiner

This week (18-25 May) it’s Walk to School Week – where parents and children are encouraged to leave the car at home and experience the benefits of walking to and from school.

The campaign is particularly important given recent evidence which suggests that the number of children who walk to school is falling. The most recent Department for Transport National Travel Survey found that only 42% of children walked to school regularly in 2013, compared to 47% in 1995/97. Indeed, Britain has one of the lowest levels of children walking or cycling to school in Europe.

A recent YouGov survey of 1,000 parents of five- to 11-year olds in Great Britain found that speeding traffic was the main reason that parents no longer let their children walk to school. In particular, 39% felt that school-run traffic was dangerous. Almost two-thirds reported that they would like to see car-free zones outside both primary and secondary schools, as well as 20 mph speed limits in surrounding areas.

20 mph limits and zones

The introduction of 20 mph speed limits and zones has received widespread interest of late, with a number of large schemes, such as the one planned in Edinburgh, capturing the headlines. The Edinburgh scheme is particularly notable for its scale. It covers over 80% of the city’s roads – effectively making 20 mph the default speed for all of its urban areas. Implementation is due to start in late 2015.

At the other end of the UK, the London Borough of Hackney has this week begun the rollout of its own 20 mph scheme, through which more than 99% of the borough’s roads will become subject to 20 mph limits by October 2015.

The Edinburgh and Hackney schemes join a host of others across the UK, including those in inner London, Liverpool, York, Bath, Bristol, Manchester, Newcastle, Brighton, Oxford and Glasgow.

Support for further implementation

Numerous campaign and road safety groups have called for the greater implementation of 20 mph zones and limits across the UK, including the Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents (RoSPA), Sustrans, the Campaign for Better Transport, CTC – the national cycling charity, 20’s Plenty for Us, The Slower Speeds Initiative and the European Transport Safety Council (ETSC).

The UK Government have also shown support for the wider implementation of 20 mph zones and limits. In 2013, they published revised guidance to make it easier for local authorities to implement 20 mph limits and zones in their areas, and earlier this year, new guidance which further supports 20 mph limits was published by Transport Scotland.

There is also clear evidence of the public’s desire for lower speed limits. A recent YouGov survey found that the majority of respondents supported the introduction of 20 mph speed limits in residential streets (65% support or strongly support) and busy shopping areas and busy streets (72%). Improved road safety and children’s safety were the key reasons for this, along with other reasons – such as making our streets more pleasant to live in, encouraging more walking and cycling, reducing noise and improving the quality of life.

The YouGov survey echoes the findings of the British Social Attitudes Survey 2013, which found 68% of people to be in favour of 20 mile per hour speed limits in residential streets.

Talking of the Hackney scheme, Cllr Feryal Demirci, Cabinet Member for Neighbourhoods and Sustainability, Hackney Council neatly summarises the anticipated benefits of 20 mph zones:

“We strongly believe this 20 mph rollout will be better for everyone. It will mean a safer, calmer and more liveable neighbourhoods for all residents, leading to more walking, cycling and playing outside, which in turn will have a positive impact on health and the community.”

Evidence of the benefits

But does the evidence support these anticipated benefits?

One of the most commonly cited benefit of lower speed limits is improved road safety, resulting from a reduction in the number and severity of collisions. There is widespread evidence that this is the case – for example, research published in the BMJ in 2009 concluded that 20 mph zones were effective measures for reducing road injuries and deaths. Specifically, their introduction was associated with a 41.9% reduction in road casualties, with the effect being greatest in younger children and for the category of killed or seriously injured casualties.

Similar findings have been reported elsewhere, for example, in a review of evidence reported to the London Road Safety Unit, in research by the DfT and by the SWOV Institute for Road Safety Research.

There is also evidence that lower speed limits may help to tackle health inequalities. This is because children and young adults are more at risk of road traffic accidents within poorer localities than in richer urban neighbourhoods. Indeed, in January 2014, Danny Dorling, Halford Mackinder Professor of Geography at the University of Oxford, went as far as to claim that implementing 20 mph speed limits was the main way in which local authorities could effectively improve the health of the local population and reduce health inequalities.

Similarly, research published in the Journal of Public Health in 2014 reported that targeting 20 mph zones in deprived areas may be beneficial. It also concluded that “20 mph zones and limits were effective means of improving public health via reduced accidents and injuries”.

Improved public health is another often cited benefit of lower speed limits. Evidence from Bristol and Edinburgh demonstrates that 20 mph zones do indeed encourage increased levels of physical activity, including walking and cycling, and there is also evidence that they improve resident quality of life, through increased opportunities for social interaction and less noise and air pollution.

The reduced levels of pollution also mean that lower speed limits can be better for the environment.

Finally, there is also some evidence that 20 mph zones may result in increased local economic activity – with improved walking environments having many potential benefits for local business. Research conducted by Living Streets in London also found that pedestrians tended to spend more than those arriving by car.

Driver concerns and attitudes

Despite the evidence in their favour, 20 mph zones are not always welcomed with open arms. There remain a number of concerns about the implementation of 20 mph zones, including fears that they may lead to increased levels of congestion, increased carbon emissions, suffer from a lack of enforcement, increase journey times, and increase emergency response times.

Most of these concerns have been countered by research evidence; however, attitudinal barriers remain. In an analysis of a YouGov survey of public attitudes towards 20 mph zones, Professor Alan Tapp of UWE Bristol, reports that a sizable minority of people (31%) claim that ‘If a 20 mph speed limit is introduced, I may not stick to it’. He also points out that 49% felt that ‘It is just too difficult to stay at 20 mph’ and almost a third of people (30%) thought that 20 mph is an example of a nanny state.

The way forward

So despite the progress that has been made, there is clearly still some way to go before 20 mph limits and zones become a fully accepted part of UK towns and cities. Implementing more 20 mph limits is only the start – it seems that there is also a need for local authorities to tackle the negative perceptions of 20 mph zones held by many drivers in order to ensure that 20 mph limits are adhered to in practice.

Sharing evidence of the positive benefits of 20 mph zones and demonstrating that many of the main concerns associated with them are ill-founded is likely to play an important part in encouraging more positive attitudes, changing driver behaviour, and in turn, make streets safer and more enjoyable for children and adults alike.


 

The Idox Information Service can give you access to further information on improving road safety. To find out more on how to become a member, contact us.

Further reading:

Addressing health inequalities: five practical approaches for local authorities (Perspectives in Public Health, 2014)

Reducing unintentional injuries on the roads among children and young people under 25 years (Public Health England, 2014)

Road safety and public health (The Royal Society for the Prevention of Accidents, 2014)

Achieving safety, sustainability and health goals in transport (Parliamentary Advisory Committee for Transport Safety (PACTS), 2014)

Unlimited aspiration for a calmer city (speed limits) (Local Transport Today, 2011)

Sign of the times (20 mph speed limits in Portsmouth) (Parking Review, 2010)

Review of 20 mph zone and limit implementation in England (Department for Transport, 2009)