by Dr Yarden Woolf, Prof Issy Bray, and Prof Danni Sinnett
What can a single day of conversations tell us about the streets we live on, and the ones we want to create? At this year’s Festival of Nature, we spent the day listening. Listening to children imagining greener, brighter streets. Listening to adults reflecting on the spaces they move through every day. And listening to the ideas, tensions and aspirations that shape how people experience their local environments.
We began with questions that were intentionally straightforward: How do different types of spaces make you feel? What helps you take environmental action, and what gets in the way? And if you could redesign your street, what would it look like? People responded in different ways, placing votes on posters, sharing reflections in conversation, sitting down to draw and create, or experimenting with a thermal sensor to demonstrate the cooling power of plants and water. What emerged was a blend of numbers and narratives, each helping to make sense of the other.
What makes a space feel “good”?
The responses revealed clear patterns. Greenspaces, like parks, trees and flowers, were overwhelmingly associated with positive feelings, with 100 out of 108 responses marked as “good”. Blue spaces, such as rivers and canals, followed closely (90 out of 113).
But there were subtle differences. Blue spaces attracted slightly more mixed responses, which was reflected in conversations about contamination and maintenance: “I like rivers and blue spaces but some of them are contaminated”. This points to an important distinction, while blue spaces are highly valued, they may be perceived as more vulnerable than greenspaces, which can influence how they are experienced. Similarly, as people were marking green as “good” they often commented that this was representing their potential, but at the moment they would consider them as having a bad or neutral impact on their wellbeing due to poor maintenance.
Grey spaces, like roads and buildings, told a different story. With only 18 out of 112 responses marked as positive, people’s views were more ambivalent than negative. Rather than rejecting grey infrastructure, many seemed to accept it as necessary, but not something that actively contributes to positive experiences: “We need buildings and roads, I suppose”. At the same time, even greenspaces were not universally experienced as positive, particularly where issues of safety and accessibility came into play: “I don’t always feel safe in the greenspace next to my house”.
Taken together, these insights suggest that it is not just the presence of different types of spaces that matters, but their quality, maintenance, and inclusivity.
Thinking about action: enabled, not just constrained
When we asked people about their views on climate friendly actions, a different pattern emerged. Participants shared nearly twice as many responses about what helps (100) as what gets in the way (58). The most frequently cited enabler, good local spaces, is particularly striking. It reinforces a key message emerging from both the GP4Streets project and our earlier research in Bristol, that the quality of local environments plays a central role in shaping people’s ability to act sustainably and their neighbourhood satisfaction.
Other important enablers included easy options, community support, and clear information, highlighting that people are more likely to act when opportunities are visible, accessible, and socially supported.
This has practical implications. Community-based initiatives, such as ‘Friends of’ groups for local parks, can play a vital role here. Spaces like Gainsborough Square in Lockleaze (Bristol), with community growing and planting initiatives, show how local environments can become hubs for action, supporting not only environmental outcomes, but also education and social connection. Barriers such as lack of time, cost, and uncertainty were still present, but often framed alongside calls for change: “Clean up our water!” and “Engage community in decision making/not for profit making”. Rather than focusing only on constraints, participants were articulating what needs to change, specifically pointing towards collective, place-based solutions.
Designing streets: what children showed us
Children’s designs offered a complementary perspective. Their streets were consistently greener, more colourful, and full of trees, plants, and space for nature, echoing adult comments such as “We need more trees and plants on our streets” and “More space for wildlife to live safely and undisturbed.”
Some children also approached the activity differently, moving beyond the templates or reworking the task entirely. One, for example, designed an indoor space, highlighting the importance of plants inside the home. Together, these contributions add a valuable dimension to the findings, showing how children engage with and reinterpret ideas about streets and environments.
What we take from this
A single day of engagement does not provide definitive answers, but it offers insight into what people value, what they notice, and what they want to change.
Across the activities, common threads emerge. Natural elements are central to positive experiences of place. The quality of local spaces matters for how people engage with environmental action. And when invited into the conversation, people of all ages bring thoughtful, grounded, and often imaginative ideas about how streets could be different. For us, this reinforces the importance of listening as part of planning and research.
We are continuing to reflect on what we heard and saw and will share further insights from the GP4Streets project soon. In the meantime, thank you to everyone who stopped, shared, created, and imagined with us.
Feature image: UWE’s team, Yarden, Issy and Danni (left to right)