Measuring and Improving Aesthetic Capital

It’s no secret that we make quick judgements about the places we visit. Those judgements, whether correct or not, can have significant implications on where we travel, shop, work, and live. Urban areas that quickly instill a welcoming, safe, and unique feeling will undoubtedly have a competitive edge in attracting talent at the metropolitan level or in revitalizing and sustaining neighbourhoods. In an attempt to utilize empirical and scientific processes to measure the “fuzzy” things related to aesthetic capital – how safe, affluent, or unique our urban areas look – the Macro Connections Group at MIT recently developed an online tool called Place Pulse.
Place Pulse uses readily available geotagged images of urban areas (presently only Vienna, Linz, Austria, Boston, and New York) and crowdsourced ratings to determine which areas are safer, more unique, or more upper-class in a photo vs. photo comparison. A few details have already emerged from these comparisons: the 10 safest images are all from Austrian cities, while the 10 “least safe” images were from US cities.
Place Pulse’s strength is its scalability and adaptability. Beyond adding additional cities, the model allows for the digital modification of photos to undertake certain controlled experiments. For example, graffiti could be removed from or added to a photo to determine whether the change has an influence on safety or uniqueness of a place. For cities that constantly lose the place vs. place comparison, Forbes’ list of America’s most transformed neighbourhoods offers examples of cities that are successfully addressing their aesthetic capital issues. |