Search results

This paper aims to explore smart facilities services in the context of university campus by aiming to understand how the service development processes can be classified.

The qualitative study is based on literature review about smart facilities services and a case study about developing visualisation, data and smart service in one building in Finnish campus. The case study data were gathered by diverse methods and analysed by content analysis.

Three smart facilities service processes were identified: experience processes for users, data-based service processes and technology processes. All the processes require more than only technocratic approach.

Single case study without longitudinal data gathering is not strong in terms of generalisation.

The process classification can help different stakeholders to identify their role and tasks in smart facilities service development.

The research aims to understand how to develop smart services in addition to more investigated topic what the services include.

Smart cities are concepts much loved by politicians and technologists but are very difficult to bring about in practice. There are many isolated applications in cities such as operating streetlamps, but very few, if any, examples of integrated applications sharing data and managing the city as a holistic entity rather than a set of disparate and unconnected applications. This is despite hundreds of trials and indicates how difficult bringing about a smart city will be. The key challenge is the wide range of interested parties in a city including the elected city authority, subcontractors and suppliers to the authority, emergency services, transport providers, businesses, residents, workers, tourists, and other visitors. Some of these entities will be primarily driven by finance, such as businesses and transport providers. Some will be driven by political considerations. Some will be concerned with the quality of life as well as financial costs. In some cases, there will be conflicting interests – the city may want as much information as possible on people in the city, whereas individuals may want privacy and the minimum data stored concerning their movements and attributes. COVID-19 does not change any of these issues, but it does increase the importance of some applications such as smart health, logistics, people surveillance, data security, and crisis management, while reducing the importance of others such as traffic management. It may result in more willingness for monitoring and data sharing if this can be shown to result in better control of the virus.

In the nineteenth century, the comparative method was seen as essential, if not fundamental, to growth and production of knowledge in the human sciences. However, over time the categories that formed the basis of nineteenth century comparative research (civilized: savage for example) were discredited. And so, in time, was the comparative method itself.

Health scientists and urban planners have long been interested in the influence that the built environment has on the physical activities in which we engage, the environmental hazards we face, the kinds of amenities we enjoy, and the resulting impacts on our health. However, it is widely recognized that the extent of this influence, and the specific cause-and-effect relationships that exist, are still relatively unclear. Recent reviews highlight the need for more individual-level data on daily activities (especially physical activity) over long periods of time linked spatially to real-world characteristics of the built environment in diverse settings, along with a wide range of personal mediating variables. While capturing objective data on the built environment has benefited from wide-scale availability of detailed land use and transport network databases, the same cannot be said of human activity. A more diverse history of data collection methods exists for such activity and continues to evolve owing to a variety of quickly emerging wearable sensor technologies. At present, no “gold standard” method has emerged for assessing physical activity type and intensity under the real-world conditions of the built environment; in fact, most methods have barely been tested outside of the laboratory, and those that have tend to experience significant drops in accuracy and reliability. This paper provides a review of these diverse methods and emerging technologies, including biochemical, self-report, direct observation, passive motion detection, and integrated approaches. Based on this review and current needs, an integrated three-tiered methodology is proposed, including: (1) passive location tracking (e.g., using global positioning systems); (2) passive motion/biometric tracking (e.g., using accelerometers); and (3) limited self-reporting (e.g., using prompted recall diaries). Key development issues are highlighted, including the need for proper validation and automated activity-detection algorithms. The paper ends with a look at some of the key lessons learned and new opportunities that have emerged at the crossroads of urban studies and health sciences.

We do have a vision for a world in which people can walk to shops, school, friends' homes, or transit stations; in which they can mingle with their neighbors and admire trees, plants, and waterways; in which the air and water are clean; and in which there are parks and play areas for children, gathering spots for teens and the elderly, and convenient work and recreation places for the rest of us. (Frumkin, Frank, & Jackson, 2004, p. xvii)

Coaches have long been recognized as key contributors to youth sport (DCMS, 2000; Smoll & Smith, 1980). Coaches are singled out in ‘A Sporting Future for All’ (DCMS, 2000) as playing a central role in the development of sport at every level and improving the accessibility of coach education and the quality and quantity of coaches in all sports is deemed important. In the last decade in Britain, the demand for coaches has increased because organized sport experiences have become commonplace for children as young as six years of age (English Sports Council, 1997).

The mid-1990s marked a paradigm shift in the way physical activity is promoted, and walking is now considered the most suitable type of physical activity for widespread promotion. Accurate measurement underpins public health practice, hence the aims of this chapter are to: (1) provide a typology for the measurement of walking; (2) review methods to assess walking; (3) present challenges in defining walking measures; (4) identify issues in selecting instruments for the evaluation of walking and (5) discuss current efforts to overcome measurement challenges and methodological limitations. The taxonomy of walking indicates that secondary purpose walking is a more complex set of behaviours than primary purpose walks. It has many purposes and no specific domain or intensity, may lack regularity, and therefore poses greater measurement challenges. Objective measurement methods, such as accelerometers, pedometers, smartphones and other electronic devices, have shown good approximation for walking energy expenditure, but are indirect methods of walking assessment. Global Positioning System technology, the ‘Smartmat’ and radio-frequency identification tags are potential objective methods that can distinguish walkers, but also require complex analysis, are costly, and still need their measurement properties corroborated. Subjective direct methods, such as questionnaires, diaries and direct observation, provide the richest information on walking, especially short-term diaries, such as trip records and time use records, and are particularly useful for assessing secondary purpose walking. A unifying measure for health research, surveillance and health promotion would strongly advance the understanding of the impact of walking on health.