
Night owls on slick Moscow streets.
Photo courtesy of Mosdave.
The true charm of pedestrianism does not lie in the walking, or in the scenery, but in the talking. The walking is good to time the movement of the tongue by, and to keep the blood and the brain stirred up and active; the scenery and the woodsy smells are good to bear in upon a man an unconscious and unobtrusive charm and solace to eye and soul and sense; but the supreme pleasure comes from the talk. ~Mark Twain
“Can you, uh, scoot over, G? You’re pushing me off the sidewalk,” my friend said, staring at me with an unamused look on her face. I was walking on a paved path in one of the numerous city parks in Minnesota along one of the thousand lakes the State has to offer. Oops, I thought as I tried to veer my body to the right of the pathway. So much for walking in a straight line. Since we each had different paces, not only could we not keep up with one another, but we also couldn’t share the sidewalk space properly. Or, correction, I couldn’t.
My walking behavior is not that unique, as we as human beings do not innately walk in straight lines. This then has an effect on the interpersonal distances we keep in step with as we walk together, in pairs or in groups. Have you ever wondered about why in pairs, people sometimes walk in sync with each footstep in perfect harmony? Or in groups of three or more, either one trails or one leads while steps are shuffled and more abrupt? Either someone is taking up more space than they need or rather, they are really using only the space given them. Maybe you haven’t wondered this at all. So what would be the importance of wondering about these behavioral patterns, especially in a city setting?
One reason to consider these behaviors is to become aware of the physical arrangements provided for personal space in a city setting. Boundaries delineated for personal space in shared environments are constructed for smooth-running channels for passage. This is designed to combat clogged arteries of traffic. In other words, the design of a good city should be structured around you and the way you walk, move and travel. The design must keep in mind the interpersonal distance you have with another pedestrian as well.

Two friends walking in unison in Nevada City.
Sidewalks and streets are not always conducive to the way we move, though. Think of a tight rope and how hard it is to balance, or walking along a plank over a deep canopy. Our movement is like water; it is not militant, it is dynamic. Add a few hundred more people to the equation, and it isn’t hard to understand that walking in groups or in large crowds can restrict our movement, our walking speed and our invasive behaviors. The structure of streets then must adapt to our human behavior, rather than confining our movement to superficial extremities.
In cities, people walk in groups more often. Whether you are with strangers or friends, if you live or work or socialize in the CBD, you walk in large groups in the city. You might step on someone’s foot or the back of their heel, you might walk slower or faster, and you might need to do the running man to catch the bus. Because of our personal connection to the city center, studying crowd dynamics and their ebb and flow is critical in designing the layout of the urban environment, according to Switzerland-based researcher Mehdi Moussaïd. How wide the sidewalks should be, the relative size of streets to those sidewalks, how to minimize congestion for efficient and time sensitive alternatives, evacuation designs in buildings, etc, are all strong points to be considered.
It seems obvious though, that the significance of walking has been downgraded due to its relationship with time. In a culture where time is inextricably linked with money, walking for sure has its setbacks. With new ways to travel, we figured cutting time in half was the point. But what has been overlooked is the human connection associated with walking and its purposefulness.
Instead of relying on walking as a means to an end, technological innovations have upgraded more people’s accessibility to goods and services, personal learning, our occupations and even friendships. But the focus on walking is critical, the group dynamics especially interesting.
Mehdi Moussaïd, identifies the usefulness of studying social organization in his experimental study of behavioral mechanisms in human crowds. He sees the pivotal point of research in studying human crowd dynamics as trying to, “…understand how pedestrians move and interact with each other in order to predict the phenomena emerging at the scale of a crowd.”

Walking together and out of key on a New York evening.
In the report, data collected at an individual level is studied to predict behavior at a group level (the crowd dynamic). The driving forces (an individual’s personal walking behavior that includes speed) and repulsion forces (how pedestrians react to obstacles and other pedestrians) help to paint a conceptual picture of how spatial interactions are carried out.
From the generic construction of the experiment, it was revealed, “how pedestrians modify their behaviour during interactions”; avoidance of an ‘obstacle’ or a standing (aka immobile) person does not slow down the speed of a pedestrian; the pedestrian rather changes his direction, at the same speed. It was also found that walking speed is decreased when approaching another pedestrian head-on, averting movement to either the left or right of one another:
“we suggest that the left/right bias can be interpreted as a behavioural convention that emerges because the coordination during evading manoeuvres is enhanced when both pedestrians favour the same side (Bolay 1998; Helbing 1991). It is therefore advantageous for an individual to develop the same preference as the majority of people.”
Yet what the experiment did not specifically look at (and what would have been interesting to investigate) are groups of two or more pedestrians who are acquaintances, and the effect they would have on a crowd. Not only would a group level experiment of people who know each other change the dynamics of interpersonal distances, speeds and intrusion of space, it will also help to understand the benefits of walking with people we know in crowded areas.
For instance, this personal group dynamic could likely give much insight on personal safety. In the urban setting, walking in groups may be one of the keys to discouraging criminal behaviors. Especially when the urban environment is blanketed under a night sky, the group dynamic is essential. Could walking in small groups with friends curb crimes [i.e. robbery, assaults, abductions] vs. walking in large unfamiliar crowds ‘alone’? Does it matter if the group is gender specific? From my own experience, it seems that we feel entitled to more space when we are walking with others we know. So the standing individual singled out in the experiment may be the one to move when he encounters a group moving in his direction rather than when an individual enters his ‘bubble’; his space. It also seems from experience that not only does our entitlement to space increase, but our speed decreases. (UPDATE: Darn! After looking over Moussaïd’s webpage, I found a research project that did study the behavior of social groups, aka, groups of people who do know one another, and their effect on crowd dynamics. I was looking all over for this! And I completely overlooked the article. Well, I have to see if my hypotheses were correct! (future post though.) This guy, Moussaïd, is two steps ahead of ya girl.)

Japanese Schoolmates; Tokyo Dome City.
Photo courtesy of Alfie Goodrich.
How about the group dynamic in terms of the marketplace? After all, when we do walk, we walk with a purpose: to purchase a good or use a service, to get to work or school and to meet up with people to go to another destination. When I walk 2 miles, I might get thirsty faster. So I stop by that new little deli with a friend and spend money on a decaffeinated iced tea (my preference) or for the more sophisticated masses, an iced latte. At the heart of it, walking in the city is interconnected with economics. Because chances are, if my friend stops for a drink, I will too.
Because these studies were conducted in Europe (mainly London), we must recognize that walking patterns and behavior have much to do with culture and geographic perspectives. The experiment did manage to briefly touch on this issue, stating how some behaviors may be a result of cultural bias. Questions like, is interpersonal distance interpreted the same the world over? Do men walk farther apart from each other in the U.S. but closer to each other in West Africa? Or is it the other way around?, are meaningful concerns when considering the design of a city’s pathways. It is best to understand not only the cultural intricacies of the area and how people in a particular region relate to one another but also to nature and the built environment as well.
Studying walking in the city has much to do with the human nature of exploration and appreciation as we travel on foot towards the destination. Bottom line, it is all about the human connection: connection to being aware of our immediate surroundings, connection to nature, connection to comprehending direction, connection to resources and connection to other travelers. These elements are what walking really revolves around.
But why is this important you still ask? Because the focus is on enhancing our quality of living. Of course the element of time can deter people from choosing to walk more; the journey sometimes seems endless. Yet what makes the thought of walking a long (or even short) distance less daunting is that more times, it is done with another person. Instead of looking at walking as a task, it could be considered a beautiful benefit when sharing that space with someone we know.
“Walking together out of key on a New York evening”, photo courtesy of The Stella.
More information on Mehdi Moussaïd: http://mehdimoussaid.com/
Like this:
Be the first to like this post.