ASEAN Journal of Community Engagement


This article discusses a participatory design project that aims at creating a collaborative design among architectural students, visitors, and zoo management in designing street furniture and selfie spots in city zoos. Participatory design is used in the design process to get the users’ and designers’ interpretation of the space, improve design outcomes, and increase the community awareness of their surroundings. As part of the Universitas Indonesia Community Engagement Program, the zoo design project fosters a collaborative design between the university and zoo community and supports the educational, conservational, and recreational goals of Ragunan Zoo in Jakarta. Designing street furniture and selfie spots can hopefully be parts of improving the quality of public space in the zoo. Students and lecturers who usually have limited opportunity to collaborate now have a chance to interact with visitors and the zoo management during the research and design stages while visitors actively collaborate in informing their needs and perception of the space. The zoo management also provides information on their goals and missions so that students can develop and convert the education, conservation, and recreation goals of the zoo into designs. In conclusion, the participatory design approach applied in the zoo design not only allows students to deal with real-life issues in design but also enhances space quality through community participation.


Andersen, L. L. (2007). Zoo education: from formal school programs to exhibit design and interpretation. International Zoo Yearbook, The Zoological Society of London, 38(1), 75-81. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-1090.2003.tb02066.x

Arnstein, S. R. (1969). A ladder of citizen participation. Journal of the American Planning Association, 35(4), 216–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944366908977225

Benneworth, P., Charles, D., & Madanipour, A. (2010). Building localized interactions between universities and cities through university spatial development. European Planning Studies, 18(10), 1611-1629. https://doi.org/10.1080/09654313.2010.504345

Booher, D. E. (2008). Civic engagement and the quality of urban places. Planning Theory & Practice, 9(3), 379-414.

Budge, K. (2018). Visitors in immersive museum spaces and Instagram: self, place-making, and play. The Journal of Public Space, 3(3), 121–138.


Cartiere, C., & Willis, S. (2008). Introduction. In C. Cartiere & S. Willis (Eds.), The Practice of Public Art (pp. 1-6). Routledge.

Clayton, S., Fraser, J., & Saunders, C. D. (2009). Zoo experiences: conversations, connections, and concern for animals. Zoo Biology, 28(5), 377-397. https://doi.org/10.1002/zoo.20186

Cleaver, F. (1999). Paradoxes of participation: questioning participatory approaches to development. Journal of International Development, 11(4), 597-612. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1099-1328(199906)11:4%3C597::AID-JID610%3E3.0.CO;2-Q

Coe, J. C, (1985). Design and Perception: Making the Zoo Experience Real. Zoo Biology, 4(2), 197-208. https://doi.org/10.1002/zoo.1430040211

Coe, J. C. (1997). Entertaining zoo visitors and zoo animals: an integrated approach. Proceedings of the American Zoo and Aquarium Association Annual Conference, 156-162. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255595175_Entertaining_Zoo_Visitors_and_Zoo_Animals_An_Integrated_Approach

Coley, R. (2019). Street smarts for smart streets. In P. Dibazar & J. Naeff (Eds.), Visualizing the Street: New Practices of Documenting, Navigating and Imagining the City. Amsterdam University Press, 161-184.

Cornell, E. H., Sorenson, A., & Mio, T. (2003). Human Sense of Direction and Wayfinding. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93(2), 399-425.


Correa de Jesus, S. (1994). Environmental Communication: Design Planning for Wayfinding. Design Issues, 10(3), 32-51. https://doi.org/10.2307/1511691

Department of Architecture, Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Indonesia. (2019). Furniture: Context, Response and Object Class Report. Department of Architecturem Faculty of Engineering, Universitas Indonesia.

Eaza. (2008). Education in zoos and aquaria. In: European Aquaria and Zoo Association Strategy.

Eyler, J. S. (2000). What do we most need to know about the impact of service-learning? Michigan Journal of Community Service Learning, Fall, 11-17.


Frampton, K. (1991). Reflection on the autonomy of architecture: a critique of contemporary production. In D. Ghirardo [Ed] Out of site: A social Criticism of Architecture. Seattle, WA: Bay Press: 17-26.

Guijt, I. (2014). Participatory Approaches, Methodological Briefs: Impact Evaluation No. 5. Florence: UNICEF Office of Research.

Hasanin, A. A. (2013). Cultural diversity and reforming social behavior: a participatory design approach to design pedagogy, International Journal of Architectural Research: ArchNet-IJAR, 7(2) 92–101.


Holgersen, S., & Haarstad, H. (2009). Class, Community and Communicative Planning: Urban Redevelopment at King's Cross, London. Antipode, 41(2), 348–370.


Hone, D. D. (2014, August 19). Why zoos are good. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/science/lost-worlds/2014/aug/19/why-zoos-are-good.

Howarth, J., Currie, M. A., Morrell, E., Sorensen, J., & Bengle, T. (2017). Challenges of building community-university partnerships in new poverty landscapes. Community Development, 48(1), 48–66. https://doi.org/10.1080/15575330.2016.1244696

Jabareen, Y. R. (2006). Sustainable Urban Forms: Their Typologies, Models, and Concepts. Journal of Planning Education and Research, 26(1) 38–52.


Kensing, F. & Greenbaum, J. (2012). Heritage: having a say. In J. Simonsen & R. T. Routledge [Eds] International Handbook of Participatory Design, London: Routledge, 21–36.

Ludlum, S. (2003). Historic Zoo Architecture: Creating New Meaning, MS Thesis, North Carolina State University–Raleigh.

Lynch, K. (1960). The image of the city. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Moomaw, S. M. (2016). Improving local results: fusing community design and community development. Community Development, 47(5), 670–682.


Pedersen, J. (2016). War and peace in codesign. Codesign, 23(3), 171-184.


Robertson, R. & Simonsen, J. (2012). Challenges and Opportunities in Contemporary Participatory Design. Design Issues, 28(3), 3-9. https://doi.org/10.1162/DESI_a_00157

Rodriguez, C. M. (2017). A method for experiential learning and significant learning in architectural education via live projects. Arts and Humanities in Higher Education, 17(3), 279–304. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1474022217711878

Roe, K., McConney, A., & Mansfield, C. F. (2014). The Role of Zoos in Modern Society—A Comparison of Zoos' Reported Priorities and What Visitors Believe They Should Be. Anthrozoös: A multidisciplinary journal of the interactions of people and animals, 27(4), 529-541. https://doi.org/10.2752/089279314X14072268687808

Salama, A. (2009). Transformative Pedagogy in Architecture & Urbanism. Solingen: Umbau-Verlag.

Sanoff, H. (2000). Community Participation Methods in Design and Planning. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

Sanoff, H. (2008). Multiple views of participatory design. International Journal of Architectural Research, 23(1), 131–43.


Sanders, E. B.-N. & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. Codesign, 4(1), 5-18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068

Uffelen, C. V. (2010). Street Furniture. Berlin: Braun Publishing.

Whyte Jr., W. (1980). The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces. Conservation Foundation.

Yücel, G. F. (2013). Street furniture and amenities: Designing the user-oriented urban landscape. In Advances in landscape architecture. IntechOpen.




To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.