Page - 197 - in Critical Issues in Science, Technology and Society Studies - Conference Proceedings of the 17th STS Conference Graz 2018

a trash receptacle, pausing to watch a street entertainer, exploring objects and their use, testing limits of engagement with objects and events [e.g. sitting on steps], and performing a host of other actions. The upshot for a designer is necessity to learn to anticipate this new layer of intricacy within the problem space, as it is possible that estimates of critical parameters might shift. Examples of those parameters are sidewalk width, pavement surface design (e.g. to minimize risk effects prompted by distraction), walking speed, and physical and managerial constraints to curiosity about objects in space. The pre-eminent logic of the type of scientific exploration described above is cause --> effect. In this paper, we explore the potential that, in a social context such as the street, pedestrians might influence one another in/about a particular behavior in public space. For the purpose of that exploration, we have taken up the diversionary act of eating while walking. We frame our exploration of cause --> effect around the context of inducement of non-eaters to eat, following influence by eaters. We ask the question: Given a few people eating in the street, and given social interaction, could the number of eaters increase? We will enquire into the prospect that, in a social context such as the street, repeated encounter with those who are already eating, in concord with other conditions which might affect the possibility of eating on the street (see below), might gradually stimulate some people who were originally non-eaters, in the instance, to consider eating while walking. The critical mediating construct is expressed as social facilitation (Stroebele & De Castro 2004). To the extent that social facilitation might increase number of eaters, the designer should aspire to recognize the possibility of organic changes in the parameters that shape and ultimately define the sidewalk. Food in the Street According to the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations in a 2001 report, an estimated 2.5 billion people world-wide consume street food (FAO 2001). As might be expected, some of these foods are eaten at point of purchase, but it is to be expected that some are also eaten on-the-go, while the eater is walking (or riding, driving). Our population frame is larger, as it includes those eating foods purchased on the street as well as those who have either purchased food in a setting such as a restaurant and taken it out into the street or have brought the food along from home. Eating while walking adds new layers to the dynamic dialogue of ambulation and space: slower pace of movement, translocation of waste (from point where eating is initiated to where it ends), sidewalk surface management (level changes, trip obstacles [since attention is divided], slip resistance), and so on. There are, however, also more deep- seated layers of the phenomenon: personal agency, social relationship, composite awareness- shaping (in the process of tasting while moving across landscape), and so on. Factors associated with consumption of food. People eat in the street or in a public space for a variety of reasons. Satisfying hunger is a direct reason (homeostatic regulation [Kringelbach 2004]). There are other motivations, however. One street eater speculated on the following: “tempting street vendor;” “happen to have a fruit or snack with me;” “just purchased from vending machine;” “I have someone with me and the food is [one] he/she likes;” “when I see delicious food;” “warm you up in...winter;” “celebrate a relationship;” “crush’s favorite;” “[your] stomach is already full, [but] for some reason, when a friend or relative asks for your company to eat...you accept their offer;” habit; curiosity; 197