Assessment of Outdoor Lighting: Methods for Capturing the Pedestrian Experience in the Field

energies

Article Assessment of Outdoor Lighting: Methods for Capturing the Pedestrian Experience in the Field

Johan Rahm * and Maria Johansson

Environmental Psychology, Department of Architecture and Built Environment, Faculty of Engineering, Lund University, 221 00 Lund, Sweden; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected]

Abstract: This study assessed whether methods for capturing the pedestrian experience of outdoor lighting, previously evaluated in a full-scale laboratory, were applicable in a real-world setting. It applied an approach capturing the human response to outdoor lighting in a systematic way, by assessing perception, evaluation and behaviour in the lit environment. The study involved 81 participants from two age groups (Young—n: 48, mean age: 26, 63% women; Elderly—n: 33, mean age: 69, 67% women) and was carried out on a pedestrian path in a park in the centre of Malmö, Sweden, in the evenings during wintertime. Two LED lighting applications, differing in light distribution, uniformity and horizontal illuminance, were presented, and the pedestrians’ perception (facial expression recognition and sign reading), evaluation (arousal, valence and perceived outdoor lighting quality) and behaviour (pedestrian flow) were assessed. The results from the perceptual tasks differed significantly between the lighting applications, in favour of the lighting application with greatest uniformity and horizontal illuminance. There was a significant difference in sign reading distance between the two age groups. The methods applied in this study are feasible to administer and could be used to assess lighting solutions in order to capture the needs of vulnerable groups.

Citation: Rahm, J.; Johansson, M. Keywords: street lighting; outdoor lighting; pedestrian; perception; evaluation; behaviour Assessment of Outdoor Lighting: Methods for Capturing the Pedestrian Experience in the Field. Energies 2021, 14, 4005. https://doi.org/10.3390/ 1. Introduction en14134005 Today, the majority of the world’s population lives in cities, and further urbanisation Academic Editor: Fabio Bisegna is expected globally [1]. This trend accentuates the need to develop sustainable cities, with safe and healthy living environments, and energy-efficient transportation systems [2]. Received: 31 May 2021 The pedestrian is central in sustainable urban design, since nearly all journeys undertaken Accepted: 30 June 2021 in the urban environment incorporate walking in one way or the other. Walking is therefore Published: 2 July 2021 an essential component in sustainable intermodal transportation systems [3–6], and benefits public health, by reducing the risk of chronic diseases such as cancer, diabetes and Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral heart disease [7]. with regard to jurisdictional claims in In the Nordic countries (and other countries at similar latitudes), daylight hours are published maps and institutional affil- very limited in winter and pedestrians depend on outdoor lighting to provide functional iations. levels of visual accessibility and perceived safety when getting to and from work. The social-ecological model of walking [8] suggests a hierarchical structure of pedestrian needs consisting of five levels (ranging from feasibility via accessibility, safety and comfort to pleasurability) that people consider when deciding to walk. The existence of Copyright: © 2021 by the authors. artificial outdoor lighting impacts the evaluation of accessibility and safety needs [9–11], Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. and is fundamental for people’s decisions as to whether to walk or not after dark. The im- This article is an open access article portance of outdoor lighting for pedestrians was highlighted in a recent focus-group study distributed under the terms and in Malmö, Sweden, where the participants were encouraged to speak freely about the per- conditions of the Creative Commons ceived design qualities of neighbourhoods in relation to walking. In most cases, despite the Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// discussions taking place during daytime, outdoor lighting was mentioned spontaneously, creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ in relation to perceived safety and intention to walk after dark [12]. This is in line with the 4.0/).

Energies 2021, 14, 4005. https://doi.org/10.3390/en14134005 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/energies Energies 2021, 14, 4005 2 of 15

previous research indicating that the presence of outdoor lighting improves the perceived neighbourhood quality [13] and increases the amount of walking after dark among all age groups: adolescents [14], adults [15–17] and elderly [18–20]. Unfortunately, the benefits of outdoor lighting are associated with adverse ecological consequences [21], as well as considerable energy use, generating financial and environmental costs [22]. One way of reducing energy use is to replace or retrofit existing outdoor lighting applications with light sources with greater energy efficiency [22–24]. In Sweden, many municipalities are actively promoting walking as a means of transportation and have developed pedestrian plans [25]. In these plans, improved outdoor lighting for pedestrians is stressed as a key factor. Municipalities on the verge of upgrading the lighting infrastructure are looking to LEDs to reduce energy use. However, LED lighting may have different photometric properties (e.g., spectral power distribution) than previous lighting technologies, such as high-pressure sodium and ceramic metal halides, and vary greatly depending on the quality and design [26]. Before committing to a costly, long-term investment, the needs of the users should be considered. Both technical aspects of lighting and the pedestrians’ experience should be taken into consideration, in order to find lighting solutions adapted to user needs while minimising energy use. Moreover, the needs of users from vulnerable groups, such as the elderly and the visually impaired, must be considered [9,27,28]. Most components of the visual system deteriorate with age, which affects visual performance negatively. Elderly therefore are more sensitive to glare and may have difficulties performing certain visual tasks important for pedestrians (such as detecting obstacles [29,30] and recognising facial expressions [30]) at low illuminance levels [31]. For people with low vision, it has been deemed difficult to provide general illuminance recommendations, due to large individual differences [31]. Therefore, in order to design lit environments more suitable for people of all ages, with varying levels of vision, it is important to identify which parameters are central for the pedestrian experience, and to develop tools that can be used to assess them. In many municipalities, for economic reasons, it is likely that only the luminaire will be exchanged, while the old lampposts are retained. This might bring about an unsatisfactory lighting solution and indicates the need to assess the pedestrian lighting experience in the field before initiating large-scale retrofits.

1.1. Previous Research The pedestrian response to outdoor lighting has previously been researched both in laboratory and field settings. A systematic review suggests that the research to date may be characterised by the overarching themes of perception, evaluation and behaviour in the lit environment [32]. Prominent areas of research within perception have been perceived brightness [33–39], facial recognition [36,40–46] and obstacle detection [29,47–51]. Within the evaluation theme, focus has been placed on perceived safety [36,52–58] and perceived lighting quality [10,24,59,60], whereas the behaviour domain has focused on pedestrian flow [52,61], walking speed [62–64] and visual fixation [65–69]. To identify and evaluate the methods that assess pedestrians’ experience of the lit environment, Rahm and Johansson [30] conducted a full-scale laboratory study, with three different lighting applications. The identified methods for perception (obstacle detection, facial expression recognition distance and sign reading distance) and evaluation (level of arousal [70,71] and Perceived Outdoor Lighting Quality scale (POLQ) [10]) differentiated between the different lighting applications. The lighting application with the greatest mean horizontal illuminance (EH) (32 lx, compared to 28 and 18 lx), the widest light distribution, and highest correlated colour temperature (CCT) (3810 K, compared to 2912 and 2890 K) achieved the best results on the perception tasks and was perceived as significantly different on the Perceived Comfort Quality (PCQ) and the Perceived Strength Quality (PSQ) dimensions of the POLQ scale, as well as on the composite arousal measure. No significant difference in the behaviour measure, walking speed, was found between the different lighting applications. However, other studies indicate that differences in illuminance level may Energies 2021, 14, 4005 3 of 15

result in changes in walking speed (0.05–0.11 m/s for differences in horizontal illuminance ranging from 14 to 290 lx [62–64]) and in pedestrian ﬂow when improving the lighting conditions [52,61].

1.2. Aim and Hypotheses The aim of this study was to assess whether the methods for capturing the pedestrian experience of outdoor lighting, previously evaluated in a full-scale laboratory, are applicable in a real-world setting. A second aim was to investigate whether the group of elderly (60–75 yrs.) experienced the lit environment differently than the group of younger participants (20–35 yrs.), and whether the lighting applications were sufficient for both age groups. The motive for this research is to develop an approach that captures the human response to outdoor lighting in a systematic way, by assessing pedestrians’ perception, evaluation and behaviour in the lit environment. Such an approach could be used by municipalities to differentiate between lighting applications before initiating large-scale retrofits. The observer-based environmental assessment using a mobile method, along with the assessment of the three dimensions of human response to outdoor lighting, served to contribute to the understanding of the impact of outdoor lighting on the walkability of a neighbourhood. Previous research, along with the results from the laboratory study, gave rise to the following expectations: The methods are expected to, in a field setting, discriminate between two lighting applications, deemed equivalent by the local municipality, on the dimensions of perception, evaluation and behaviour. Further, due to the decline in night vision associated with increased age [72], the lighting applications are expected to be less supportive to the needs of the group of elderly with regard to the perceptual tasks.

2. Method 2.1. Participants The sample consisted of 81 participants (mean age: 43, 64% women) belonging to a younger population (n: 48, mean age: 26, 63% women) and an older population (n: 33, mean age: 69, 67% women) (see Table1). The participants usually walked outside after dark at least a few times a week (Total: 74%, Young: 79%, Elderly: 67%) and most declared that they could see well or very well with the help of the visual aid they normally used (Total: 93%, Young: 98%, Elderly: 83%). No medical problems relating to eyesight were reported. The participants were recruited through organisations for the elderly, information meetings on the university campus, and through personal networks. All participants had good command of both spoken and written Swedish. This study was carried out in accordance with the rules and regulations laid down by the Ethics Committee of the Swedish Research Council [73]. Information about the aim of the study was given and written informed consent was obtained from all participants. The participants were informed of their right to withdraw at any time without giving an explanation. Personal information was anonymised to retain the privacy of the participants, who received approximately 41 EUR after participation as remuneration.

Table 1. Number of participants, mean age and gender distribution.

Number of Participants (Mean Age (Years); % Women) Total Young Elderly Lighting application I 42 (45; 62%) 22 (27; 59%) 20 (71; 65%) Lighting application II 39 (40, 67%) 26 (27; 65%) 13 (69, 69%)

2.2. Setting The study was carried out in Pildammsparken, an urban park in the centre of Malmö, Sweden, in wintertime (November and December, 3–11 degrees centigrade, no snow cover on the ground), between 5 and 8 pm in the evenings (The sun set at approximately 4 pm). Energies 2021, 14, 4005 4 of 16

2.2. Setting Energies 2021, 14, 4005 4 of 15 The study was carried out in Pildammsparken, an urban park in the centre of Malmö, Sweden, in wintertime (November and December, 3–11 degrees centigrade, no snow cover on the ground), between 5 and 8 pm in the evenings (The sun set at approximately 4The pm). participants The participants walked walked a 90-m a long 90-metre and 3.4-m long wideand 3.4-m pedestrian wide pedestrian gravel path gravel (Figure path1). (FigureThe study 1). wasThe locatedstudy was in alocated dark and in a secluded dark and part secluded of the park,part of which the park, was beingwhich considered was being consideredfor new lighting for new applications lighting applications by the local by municipality. the local municipality. The part of The the part park of where the park the wherestudy wasthe study located was is located frequently is frequently used by pedestriansused by pedestrians passing passing through through the park, the people park, peoplewalking walking for recreation, for recreation, and by and joggers by joggers for exercise. for exercise. The park The is park surrounded is surrounded by residential by res- identialareas, and areas, there and are there no commercial are no commercial areas in theareas vicinity. in the vicinity.

Figure 1. Pedestrian path during the day (A) andand atat night,night, forfor lightinglighting applicationapplication II ((BB)) andand IIII ((CC)) (ISO(ISO 100,100, f/4,f/4, exposure time 1.3 s).

2.3. Lighting Lighting Applications Applications OnOn the the right-hand right-hand side side of of the the path, path, lamppost lamppostss were were placed placed at intervals at intervals of 21.5 of metres, 21.5 m, with luminaires at aa heightheight ofof 44 m.metres. Two LEDTwo lightingLED lighting applications applications were usedwere in used the study:in the study:lighting lighting application application I (CCT: I (CCT: 3060, Colour3060, Colour Rendering Rendering Index, Index, CRI: 74,CRI: Scotopic/Photopic 74, Scotopic/Pho- topicratio, ratio, S/P: 1.25)S/P: 1.25) and and II (CCT: II (CCT: 3028, 3028, CRI: CRI: 80, S/P:80, S/P: 1.28) 1.28) (for (for photometric photometric data, data, see see Table Table2). 2).The The lighting lighting applications applications were were selected selected by theby the municipality municipality of Malmö of Malmö on theon basisthe basis of eco- of economicnomic feasibility, feasibility, fulﬁlment fulfilment of technical of technical speciﬁcations specifications according according to the to the national national standards stand- ardsand relevanceand relevance for use for on use pedestrian on pedestrian paths inpaths the city.in the To city. attain To greater attain ecologicalgreater ecological validity, validity,the most the common most common CCT (3000 CCT K) (3000 for outdoorK) for outdoor use in Malmöuse in Malmö was used. was used. The horizontal The hori- illuminance on the path varied between 3 and 58 lx (lighting application I, EH: 10–58 lx, EH: zontal illuminance on the path varied between 3 and 58 lx (lighting application I, : 10– 26 lx; lighting application II, EH: 3–29 lx, EH: 15 lx) with the corresponding uniformities 58 lx, H: 26 lx; lighting application II, : 3–29 lx, H: 15 lx) with the corresponding uni- UI = 0.38 and UII = 0.20 (Figure2). formities = 0.38 and = 0.20 (Figure 2).

Table 2. Photometric data. Table 2. Photometric data.

MeasurementMeasurement Lighting Lighting Application Application I Lighting Lighting Application Application II II PowerPower (W) (W) 40 40 58 LuminousLuminous efficacy efficacy (lm/W) (lm/W) 85 85 60 E (lx) 26 15 H Uniformity (lx) 26 0.38 0.20 15 UniformityS/P ratio 0.38 1.25 0.20 1.28 S/PCCT ratio (K) 1.25 3060 1.283028 CCTCRI (K) 3060 74 3028 80 Face luminance (cd/m2) 0.26 0.19 CRI 74 80 Sign luminance (cd/m2) 0.18 0.12 2 Face verticalluminance illuminance (cd/m ) (lx) 0.26 1.02 0.19 0.75 Sign verticalluminance illuminance (cd/m2) (lx) 0.18 0.64 0.12 0.43 TheFace reflection vertical factors illuminance for the facial (lx) expression (0.8) and 1.02 sign reading (0.9) stimuli were estimated 0.75 by using a HagnerSign reflectionvertical reference, illuminance and a Hagner(lx) S4 universal photometer. 0.64 The vertical illumination 0.43 levels for the face and the sign were then calculated based on the luminance values from Table2. The reflection factors for the facial expression (0.8) and sign reading (0.9) stimuli were estimated by usingLighting a Hagner application reflection reference, I had the and greatest a Hagn luminouser S4 universal efficacy, photometer. since it The provided vertical greaterillumi- nationilluminance levels for levels the face at lower and the power. sign were The then horizontal calculated illuminance based on the measurements luminance values were from con- Tableducted 2. with a Hagner S4 universal photometer, using a grid with a distance of 2.15 m between data points along the length of the path, and at a distance of 1.14 m between data points across the path. CRI, CCT and spectral power distribution were measured with an Avantes AvaSpec 2048 spectroradiometer combined with an Avantes FC-UV400-2-ME detector. Luminance was measured with a Hagner S4 universal photometer, and vertical illuminance was calculated based on the measured luminance and the reflectance factors. Energies 2021, 14, 4005 5 of 15 Energies 2021, 14, 4005 5 of 16

Figure 2. HorizontalHorizontal illuminance illuminance distribution distribution on on the the path path (lx) (lx) for forlighting lighting applications applications I and I andII. The II. Thelampposts lampposts were were located located on the on right-hand the right-hand side, side, at the at start the start and andend endof the of thedepicted depicted segment segment of the of thepath. path. The The measurements measurements were were conducted conducted from from midp midpointoint to to the the second second lamppost lamppost and and extrapolated for illustrative purposes.

TheLighting accuracy application of the Hagner I had the S4 universalgreatest luminous photometer efficacy, is stated since to beit provided better than greater±3% forilluminance all common levels light at lower sources. power. To get The more horizontal precise illuminance measurements, measurements a spectral mismatchwere con- correctionducted with factor a Hagner could S4 be universal applied, photometer, to compensate using for a the grid spectral with a mismatchdistance of between 2.15 metres the measuredbetween data light points sources along and the incandescent length of the light, path, for and which at a the distance photometer of 1.14 is metres calibrated between [74]. However,data points since across the the light path. sources CRI, CCT evaluated and spectral in this studypower havedistribution similar Spectralwere measured Power Distribution,with an Avantes SPD AvaSpec (Figure3 2048), the spectroradiometer inaccuracy of the combined measurements with mayan Avantes be assumed FC-UV400- to be similar.2-ME detector. Since the Luminance purpose ofwas Figure measured2 is to illustratewith a Hagner the relative S4 universal difference photometer, between theand lightingvertical illuminance applications, was the calculated illuminance based levels on have the measured not been mismatch luminance corrected. and the reflectance However, Energies 2021, 14, 4005 when designing road lighting applications, spectral mismatch correction factors ought6 of to 16 factors. be consideredThe accuracy in order of the to Hagner obtain correct S4 universal simulations photometer [75]. is stated to be better than ±3% for all common light sources. To get more precise measurements, a spectral mismatch cor- rection1 factor could be applied, to compensate for the spectral mismatch between the measured light sources and incandescent light, for which the photometer is calibrated [74].0.9 However, since the light sources evaluated in this study haveI similarII Spectral Power Distribution,0.8 SPD (Figure 3), the inaccuracy of the measurements may be assumed to be similar.0.7 Since the purpose of Figure 2 is to illustrate the relative difference between the lighting applications, the illuminance levels have not been mismatch corrected. However, 0.6 when designing road lighting applications, spectral mismatch correction factors ought to be0.5 considered in order to obtain correct simulations [75]. 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600 620 640 660 680 700 720 740 760 780 Wavelength (nm)

FigureFigure 3.3.Normalised Normalised SPDSPD forfor lightinglighting applicationsapplications I I and and II. II. Relative Relative power power is is depicted depicted on on the the y-axis y-axis andand wavelengthwavelength on on the the x-axis. x-axis.

2.4. Measurements 2.4.1. Perception To evaluate whether differences between the lighting applications affected the visual accessibility of the environment, two tasks were administered: facial expression recognition and sign reading (Figure 4). Facial recognition is deemed an important visual task for pedestrians after dark, since judging the intent of oncoming pedestrians from a safe distance is thought to influence the perception of safety [66,67,76,77]. In the facial expression recognition task, the participants were instructed to walk along the path towards a photograph of a woman’s face (175 × 200 mm; positioned at a height of 1.65 m; printed on non-glossy paper), placed on the right-hand side of the path 17.5 m from the first lamppost. The participants were instructed to stop when they could discern the facial expression of the woman (the expression was anger (p. 127), from the Emotions Revealed photo set [78]). They were then asked to give a verbal statement of the perceived emotion.

Figure 4. The setup of the facial expression recognition and sign reading tasks. The photograph used for the facial expression recognition task is excluded due to copyright.

Energies 2021, 14, 4005 6 of 16

0.9 I II 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.4 0.3 0.2 0.1 0 380 400 420 440 460 480 500 520 540 560 580 600 620 640 660 680 700 720 740 760 780 Wavelength (nm)

Energies 2021, 14, 4005 6 of 15 Figure 3. Normalised SPD for lighting applications I and II. Relative power is depicted on the y-axis and wavelength on the x-axis.

2.4.2.4. Measurements 2.4.1.2.4.1. Perception ToTo evaluateevaluate whetherwhether differencesdifferences betweenbetween thethe lightinglighting applicationsapplications affectedaffected thethe visualvisual accessibilityaccessibility of thethe environment,environment, twotwo taskstasks werewere administered:administered: facial expression recogni- tiontion and sign reading reading (Figure (Figure 4).4). Facial Facial recogn recognitionition is is deemed deemed an an important important visual visual task task for forpedestrians pedestrians after after dark, dark, since since judging judging the theintent intent of oncoming of oncoming pedestri pedestriansans from from a safe a safedis- distancetance is thought is thought to influence to inﬂuence thethe perception perception of safety of safety [66,67,76,77]. [66,67,76,77 In]. the In thefacial facial expression expres- sionrecognition recognition task, task,the participants the participants werewere instructed instructed to walk to walkalong along the path the pathtowards towards a pho- a photographtograph of a of woman’s a woman’s face face (175 (175 × ×200200 mm; mm; positioned positioned at at a aheight height of of 1.65 1.65 m; printed onon non-glossynon-glossy paper),paper), placed placed on on the the right-hand right-hand side side of of the the path path 17.5 17.5 m fromm from the the ﬁrst first lamppost. lamp- Thepost. participants The participants were instructedwere instructed to stop to when stop when they could they discerncould discern the facial the expressionfacial expres- of thesion woman of the woman (the expression (the expression was anger was (p. anger 127), (p. from 127), the from Emotions the Emotions Revealed Revealed photo set photo [78]). Theyset [78]). were They then were asked then to giveasked a verbalto give statement a verbal statement of the perceived of the perceived emotion. emotion.

FigureFigure 4. The setup of the facial expression recognition andand signsign readingreading tasks.tasks. TheThe photographphotograph usedused forfor thethe facialfacial expressionexpression recognitionrecognition tasktask isis excludedexcluded duedue toto copyright.copyright.

The second task, street sign reading, is considered an important task for orientating oneself in the environment [79]. For the sign reading task, the participants were asked to continue along the path towards a street sign placed 2 m to the left of the path and 5 m from the next lamppost in the walking direction, positioned at a height of 2.10 m. The street sign was placed to the left of the path in order to simulate conditions in a real- world setting. The street sign was of similar type and with equivalent number of syllables (Rosenlundsgatan; Tratex font; Size: 212) as in the laboratory study [30]. The task of the participants was to stop when the text on the street sign was legible. The distance was then measured, and the participants were asked to read out the street name aloud in order to validate the legibility.

2.4.2. Evaluation To assess whether the differences between the lighting applications had an impact on how the participants experienced the lit environment, the participants assessed their emotional state (arousal and valence) at the instance when they had walked halfway down the path, in a two-dimensional grid (consisting of 5 × 5 cells with the labels Active placed above, Passive below, Negative to the left and Positive to the right) [70,71]. Moreover, after the participants had walked down the path, they responded to the POLQ scale [10]. The scale consists of ten items factored into two dimensions: Perceived Strength Quality (PSQ, Cronbach’s alpha, α = 0.841) (subdued-brilliant; strong-weak; dark-light; unfocused- focused; clear-drab) and Perceived Comfort Quality (PCQ, α = 0.791) (warm-cool; natural- unnatural, glaring- shaded; mild-sharp; hard-soft) rated on a 7-point scale; items in italics Energies 2021, 14, 4005 7 of 15

were reversed before indices were calculated. The participants also rated how well they could see under the present lighting application, using a 7-point scale (1 = very poorly, to 7 = very well) and they rated their perceived visual accessibility by the following statements: I would have been able to (a) detect objects on the ground; (b) read a street sign and (c) recognise the people’s faces. Responses were given on 5-point scales (1= totally disagree, to 5 = totally agree). The mean score of the perceived visual accessibility scale was calculated and its internal consistency was evaluated using Cronbach’s alpha (αI = 0.854; αII = 0.788).

2.4.3. Behaviour To evaluate the potential impact of lighting conditions on pedestrian ﬂow (number of pedestrians/min), an observation was conducted between 7 and 8 pm on four different occasions (Sunday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Thursday) for each lighting application. The pedestrian path was observed from a secluded spot some distance away and the number of pedestrians was recorded.

2.5. Design and Procedure The study employed a between-subjects design, where the first group conducted the tasks under lighting application I and the second group under lighting application II (Tables1 and2). The luminaires were mounted on opposite sides of the lamppost, and the top of the lampposts were rotated to give each group the right lighting condition. The participants arrived in groups of five at the meeting point, located a short distance from the starting point of the path. Before starting the study, they were informed, according to the process of informed consent, about the aim, procedure and their rights to abort their participation without stating a reason before they signed a consent form. The participants were then instructed on how to use the POLQ scale and the affect grid. For the POLQ scale, the participants were asked to assess the perceived lighting quality of a pedestrian path depicted in a photo [80] (17 × 21 cm) with the objective of establishing a common starting point, as well as giving an opportunity to ask questions about how to use the scale. The participants were then asked to complete questionnaires surveying background data and individual characteristics. The meeting point had the same type of lighting applications as the path, and the participants spent approximately 15 min under these conditions. The next step was to, one by one, walk to the starting point and then walk along the footpath. The procedure was based on the structured walk methodology developed by Johansson et al. [71]. The participants were instructed to stop when they reached markings on the ground indicating they had reached the location to fill in the affect grid. When they had completed the affect grid, the participants continued to the end of the path where they completed the POLQ scale, rated how well they could see, and responded to the visual accessibility items. When one participant had finished the walk, the next started. When all participants had completed their walks, they returned to the meeting point while the sign reading and facial expression recognition tasks were prepared. Then the participants individually returned to the starting point and performed the facial expression recognition task, followed by the sign reading task. When all participants had completed the tasks, there was a debriefing and the participants were thanked for their participation. The results were analysed by IBM SPSS 22, using two-way independent ANOVA for analysing differences on measures of perceptual tasks and evaluation measures between the groups experiencing different lighting applications and between the age groups, whereas a Mann–Whitney U-test was used for analysing differences in pedestrian flow between the two lighting applications. To avoid potential problems with violations of assumptions underlying the use of ANOVA, parallel analyses were conducted using a robust two-way independent ANOVA on the trimmed means (10%) using the t2way function of the WRS2 package in R. The results from the robust trimmed means two-way ANOVA supported the findings from the original two-way ANOVA. Energies 2021, 14, 4005 8 of 15

3. Results 3.1. Perception Descriptive data for the assessments of perception, evaluation and behaviour in the lit environment are reported in Table3, and the results from the statistical analyses are presented in Table4. The results for the visual tasks used to assess perception of the lit environment differed significantly between the lighting applications. For facial expression recognition, lighting application I enabled the participants to feel confident of recognising the facial expression at an average distance of approximately 1.5 m greater than for lighting 2 application II (F(1, 77) = 5.256, p = 0.025, ηp = 0.064) (Table3). Similarly, for sign reading, the first lighting application enabled the participants to read the street sign at a greater distance (15.79 m) compared to lighting application II (12.24 m) (F(1, 77) = 18.325, p < 0.001, 2 ηp = 0.192). For sign reading, there were also significant age differences (F(1, 77) = 36.953, 2 p < 0.001, ηp = 0.324). The young group was able to read the street sign at a distance of about 16 m, whereas the older group averaged at about 11 m. Further, there were significant interaction effects between age and lighting application for the sign reading 2 task (F(1, 77) = 7.201, p = 0.009, ηp = 0.086), where the younger group managed to read the street sign at a relatively greater distance for lighting application I compared to application II (Table4).

Table 3. Mean values for all measures sorted by lighting application and age group.

Mean (SD) Response Lighting Application I Lighting Application II Young Elderly Both Groups Young Elderly Both Groups Perception Facial expression distance (m) 5.96 (3.78) 3.74 (3.02) 4.90 (3.58) 3.46 (2.00) 3.24 (2.13) 3.39 (2.02) Sign reading distance (m) 19.57 (4.39) 11.64 (4.25) 15.79 (5.86) 13.27 (3.75) 10.20 (2.83) 12.24 (3.73) Evaluation Arousal 3.77 (0.87) 4.04 (0.69) 3.90 (0.79) 3.69 (0.74) 4.18 (0.66) 3.86 (0.74) Valence 3.89 (0.77) 4.05 (0.56) 3.96 (0.68) 3.83 (0.73) 4.00 (0.71) 3.88 (0.72) PSQ 4.51 (1.27) 4.30 (0.98) 4.41 (1.14) 4.54 (1.11) 4.66 (1.37) 4.58 (1.19) PCQ 4.15 (1.04) 4.55 (0.79) 4.34 (0.94) 3.95 (1.13) 4.09 (1.53) 3.99 (1.26) Perceived visual 3.98 (0.91) 3.22 (1.01) 3.62 (1.02) 3.41 (0.97) 3.54 (0.79) 3.45 (0.90) accessibility Perceived seeing condition 5.23 (1.57) 4.64 (1.31) 4.95 (1.46) 4.65 (1.79) 5.38 (1.56) 4.90 (1.73)

Table 4. The results from the two-way ANOVA and the Mann–Whitney U-test. Signiﬁcant differences marked in bold.

Between Lighting Response Between Age Groups Interaction Applications Perception F(1, 77) = 5.256, p = 0.025, Facial expression distance 2 F(1, 77) = 3.465, p = 0.066 F(1, 77) = 2.309, p = 0.133 ηp = 0.064 F(1, 77) = 18.325, p < 0.001, F(1, 77) = 36.953, F(1, 77) = 7.201, p = 0.009, Sign reading distance 2 2 2 ηp= 0.192 p < 0.001,ηp= 0.324 ηp= 0.086 Evaluation F(1, 77) = 4.853, p = 0.031, Arousal F(1, 77) = 0.028, p = 0.868 2 F(1, 77) = 0.400, p = 0.529 ηp= 0.059 Valence F(1, 77) = 0.116, p = 0.734 F(1, 77) = 1.041, p = 0.311 F(1, 77) = 0.001, p = 0.981 PSQ F(1, 77) = 0.505, p = 0.479 F(1, 77) = 0.025, p = 0.875 F(1, 77) = 0.362, p = 0.549 PCQ F(1, 77) = 1.652, p = 0.203 F(1, 77) = 1.160, p = 0.285 F(1, 77) = 0.254, p = 0.616 Perceived visual F(1, 77) = 4.343, p = 0.040, F(1, 77) = 0.348, p = 0.557 F(1, 77) = 2.212, p = 0.141 2 accessibility ηp= 0.053 Perceived seeing condition F(1, 77) = 0.054, p = 0.817 F(1, 77) = 0.040, p = 0.842 F(1, 77) = 3.271, p = 0.074 Behaviour U = 1, z = −2.021, Pedestrian ﬂow —— p = 0.057, r = −0.71 Energies 2021, 14, 4005 9 of 15

3.2. Evaluation The two lighting applications were evaluated similarly for emotional state, seeing conditions, the POLQ scale and perceived visual accessibility (Tables3 and4). The results from the composite arousal measure showed that the younger group were signiﬁcantly less 2 aroused than the elderly (F(1, 77) = 4.853, p = 0.031, ηp = 0.059) and for perceived visual 2 accessibility, there were signiﬁcant interaction effects (F(1, 77) = 4.343, p = 0.040, ηp = 0.053). The young group rated lighting application I as providing the best visual accessibility, whereas the elderly preferred lighting application II (Table4).

3.3. Behaviour For the behaviour measure, observations of pedestrian flow, there was no significant difference between the lighting applications (U = 1, p = 0.057, r = −0.71) (Table4). However, the effect size of −0.71 indicates a large effect, and the non-significant result may be a type II error, due to the limited number of observations (N = 8). As seen in Figure5, Energies 2021, 14, 4005 the pedestrian flow on the path was quite low for both lighting applications (I: Mdn =10 0.65; of 16

II: Mdn = 0.27 pedestrians/min).

1.0 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.6 0.5 I 0.4 II 0.3 0.2 0.1 Pedestrian flow (# of pedestrians/min) of (# flow Pedestrian 0.0 Sunday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday

FigureFigure 5.5.Pedestrian Pedestrian flow flow on theon paththe path during during four, onefour, hour one long, hour observations long, observations for each lighting for each application. lighting application. 4. Discussion 4. DiscussionThis field study evaluated two retro-fit LED outdoor lighting applications that differed in lightThis distribution, field study uniformity evaluated and two horizontal retro-fit LED illuminance, outdoor butlighting that wereapplications similar inthat other dif- aspects.fered in light The studydistribution, had two uniformity aims: to assessand horizontal whether illuminance, the methods but capturing that were pedestrian similar in experienceother aspects. of outdoor The study lighting, had two previously aims: to assess evaluated whether in a full-scalethe methods laboratory, capturing were pedes- ap- plicabletrian experience in a real-world of outdoor setting, lighting, and to previously investigate evaluated whether thein a elderly full-scale experienced laboratory, the were lit environmentapplicable in differentlya real-world to setting, the young, and andto in ifvestigate so, whether whether the lightingthe elderly applications experienced were the sufficientlit environment for both differently age groups. to the young, and if so, whether the lighting applications were sufficientThe study for both shows age that groups. the perceptual tasks (facial expression recognition and sign reading) differentiatedThe study shows between that thethe two perceptual lighting tasks applications (facial expression that, while providingrecognition satisfying and sign horizontalreading) differentiated illuminance levelsbetween according the two tolighting international applications standards, that, while produced providing markedly satis- differentfying horizontal seeing conditions. illuminance While levels the according differences to international in lighting conditions standards, resulted produced in signifi- mark- cantedly differences different seeing for the conditions. perceptual tasks,While nothe significant differences differences in lighting were conditions found between resulted the in lightingsignificant applications differences for for the the evaluation perceptual and tasks, behaviour no significant measures. differences The lighting were application found be- withtween the the greatest lighting illuminance applications and for most the evalua uniformtion distribution and behaviour allowed measures. the participants The lighting to identifyapplication facial with expressions the greatest and illuminance read street an signsd most at greater uniform distances. distribution This allowed was expected, the par- sinceticipants these to conditions identify facial resulted expressions in greater and luminance read street on signs the photograph at greater distances. and the street This sign, was expected, since these conditions resulted in greater luminance on the photograph and the street sign, so they were brighter and easier to distinguish. Similar results would likely have been obtained had the visual tasks been performed at another part of the path, since lighting application I provided greater illuminance on all parts of the path (Figure 2). However, even though the perceptual tasks differed between the lighting applications, the participants were not aware of the differences in seeing conditions. The different designs of the luminaires may have resulted in different glare properties, but no significant differences were found for the POLQ scale, which contains an item assessing glare. The participants reported that they could see well and rated the perceived accessibility as satisfactory for both lighting applications, despite differences in horizontal illuminance and uniformity. However, there was a significant interaction effect for perceived visual accessibility where the young group experiencing lighting application I rated the perceived visual accessibility greater than the group experiencing lighting application II. The opposite was true for the two groups of elderly. There were also significant differences between the age groups. The younger participants could read street signs at greater distances than the older participants. This result was also in line with the expectations, since both acuity and night vision deteriorate with

Energies 2021, 14, 4005 10 of 15

so they were brighter and easier to distinguish. Similar results would likely have been obtained had the visual tasks been performed at another part of the path, since lighting application I provided greater illuminance on all parts of the path (Figure2). However, even though the perceptual tasks differed between the lighting applications, the participants were not aware of the differences in seeing conditions. The different designs of the luminaires may have resulted in different glare properties, but no significant differences were found for the POLQ scale, which contains an item assessing glare. The participants reported that they could see well and rated the perceived accessibility as satisfactory for both lighting applications, despite differences in horizontal illuminance and uniformity. However, there was a significant interaction effect for perceived visual accessibility where the young group experiencing lighting application I rated the perceived visual accessibility greater than the group experiencing lighting application II. The opposite was true for the two groups of elderly. There were also significant differences between the age groups. The younger participants could read street signs at greater distances than the older participants. This result was also in line with the expectations, since both acuity and night vision deteriorate with age [72]. The results from the group of elderly are therefore of special interest, since they have greater needs in terms of providing pedestrian-friendly outdoor lighting. Despite both lighting applications providing horizontal illuminance levels far above the minimum requirements for Swedish pedestrian paths [81], the older participants struggled with identifying facial expressions at the recommended minimum distance of four metres [46,68,76] for both lighting applications, whereas the young group managed to identify facial expressions at an average distance of six metres under lighting application I. However, the vertical illuminance levels at the signpost and at the photograph were below the lowest recommended level (2.5 lx) for pedestrian paths, according to the Swedish standards [81], which might explain the poor performance of the elderly. The relatively short distances, compared to the recommended minimum distance, may also be a sign of the task being more difficult than detecting the facial expression of a real person. Both the elderly and the young performed much better on the sign reading task despite lower luminance levels, which may reflect the difference in difficulty between the two perceptual tasks. The facial expression detection task relied upon correct perception of relatively minor changes in expressions, while the sign reading task relied upon correctly reading black letters on a white background, using a large font size and a font designed for legibility. The perceptual tasks corresponded to different needs according to Alfonzo’s needs hierarchy [8], where sign reading is related to accessibility and facial expression recognition to perceived safety. From that perspective, both lighting applications provided lighting conditions good enough to satisfy the accessibility need, but were not sufficient in support- ing facial expression recognition, which is deemed relevant for the perception of safety. Unfortunately, the experimental situation did not allow for an unbiased assessment of perceived safety, due to the presence of the researchers and the group of participants in the nearby surroundings. However, in a future study, it would be of interest to assess the perception of safety of pedestrians walking alone in differently lit environments. The PCQ dimension of the POLQ scale may be used for predicting perceived safety [10]. Using it as a proxy for perceived safety, the results do not indicate significant differences between the two lighting applications. There are several plausible explanations for why the evaluative methods did not capture the differences in illuminance levels and uniformity. First, the difference between the two lighting applications might not have been sufficiently pronounced to detect the differences with the selected methods. In other studies, paired comparisons have been employed, both in the laboratory [33,34] and in the field [37]. Paired comparison could possibly have been successful in differentiating between the lighting applications used in this study. However, such an approach was not suitable, due to our intention to capture the direct exposure of walking in the lit environment, in contrast to standing still and alternating the view between two different lighting applications. In future studies, a newly Energies 2021, 14, 4005 11 of 15

developed method, Random Environmental Walking [82], might be used for differentiating between the lighting applications. It uses a forced-choice technique to tap into pedestrians’ relative preferences regarding lighting applications. However, the method is developed for a simultaneous presentation of multiple lit environments, which was not a viable option for this study. Second, the illuminance levels of both lighting applications might have reached a plateau where an increase in illuminance did not contribute noticeably to the pleasantness of the lit environment. Third, in comparison to the laboratory study, where the evaluative methods were successful in differentiating between the lighting applications, this study had to resort to a between-subjects design for practical reasons. With a weaker research design, potential differences between the different lighting applications might have been missed. Lastly, the differences in the laboratory study might have been partly due to differences in CCT, a factor that was held constant in this field study. In the field, the most common CCT for outdoor use in Malmö was picked, to attain greater ecological validity. The observational method applied did not discover any significant differences regarding pedestrian flow. However, the limited number of observations may have concealed existing differences indicated by the large effect size. Nonetheless, there are many reasons why people choose a specific path, and it is possible that something other than perceived lighting quality determined where people walked. Habit or preference for the most direct route to the destination may have outweighed the impact of the differences in uniformity and illuminance. The lighting applications might also have been too similar to generate detectable differences in pedestrian flow. Therefore, it would have been valuable to employ an additional behavioural assessment method. A possible complement to direct observation could have been to film the path. The use of video recordings, possibly in combination with eye-tracking, could have cast light on where pedestrians placed themselves on the path, where they directed their gaze, and which strategies were employed with regard to glaring luminaires. In this study, the lighting applications were chosen in collaboration with lighting designers from Malmö Municipality, with the aim to discriminate between lighting applications that were to be integrated with the municipality’s normal lighting scheme. This meant that the lighting applications differed in light distribution, uniformity and horizontal illuminance, while being similar in other aspects. If the objective would be to evaluate the impact of a certain parameter in isolation, all but that parameter should be kept constant. Such an approach would for example be suitable for determining how much lighting applications need to differ for a difference to be detected, or for evaluating lighting applications at varying levels of illuminance. The presence of outdoor lighting is an important factor when people are considering if and where to walk after sunset. With recent technological advances in LED lighting, there is potential for achieving outdoor lighting much more tailored to the needs of the users. To ac- complish this, an understanding of how different user groups perceive the lit environment is needed. To date, the research on how to assess the human response to outdoor lighting is scarce, and methods and tools for field use must be developed. This study is an attempt to develop a systematic approach to the assessment of pedestrians’ experience of outdoor lighting, intended for use by municipalities prior to large-scale retrofits. It evaluates the generalisability of measures that have been shown to differentiate between lighting applications and age groups under controlled conditions, by applying them in a field setting. The results show that the perceptual tasks of sign reading and facial expression recognition can be used to differentiate between different lighting applications in the field, and to identify where lighting applications are inadequate with regard to groups with special needs. The methods applied in this study are feasible to administer and could be part of a municipality’s analysis prior to a retrofitting or before a decision on lighting schemes for a new development. The methods could be used to capture the needs of vulnerable groups, to create better lighting conditions and provide accessibility for all users. Outdoor lighting is associated with considerable energy use, and the methods should be applied along with Energies 2021, 14, 4005 12 of 15

considerations of energy-efficiency. In this study, the lighting application providing the best seeing conditions was also the most energy-efficient, affording the municipality a solid foundation for their decision. The perceptual tasks correspond to the pedestrian accessibility and perceived safety needs that, according to Alfonzo [8], contribute to the walkability of a neighbourhood. However, established measures of walkability, such as the Systematic Pedestrian and Cy- cling Environmental Scan [83] and the Neighborhood Environment Walkability Scale [84], treat outdoor lighting superficially, or leave it out entirely [85]. We suggest that, in order to capture the complex impact of outdoor lighting on walkability, all three dimensions (perception, evaluation and behaviour) of the pedestrian experience of the lit environment needs to be assessed. Further research is necessary to advance the understanding of how LED outdoor lighting impacts walkability in an urban context. It is especially important to investigate how lower illuminance levels might affect the perception, evaluation and behaviour of the elderly and the visually impaired, to identify lighting solutions that cater to user needs while minimising energy use.

5. Conclusions In this field study two retro-fit LED outdoor lighting applications that differed in light distribution, uniformity and horizontal illuminance were evaluated by pedestrians. The methods applied were feasible to administer in field and can be used by municipalities in parallel with lighting guidelines to obtain qualitative information about different lighting schemes to improve decision-making regarding new investments. In this study the lighting application with the highest illuminance and most uniform light distribution allowed the participants to succeed with important perceptual tasks at greater distances. For the sign reading task, the younger participants performed better, but for facial expression recognition there were no significant age differences, and both groups of elderly and one of the young groups struggled with identifying facial expressions at the recommended minimum distance of four metres. This shows that the perceptual tasks can be used to differentiate between different lighting applications in the field and highlights the importance of considering the needs of vulnerable groups. However, the evaluation and behaviour measures did not detect any statistically significant differences between the two lighting applications. Further research is necessary to advance the understanding of how LED outdoor lighting impacts walking in an urban context with special consideration to the elderly and the visually impaired, to identify lighting solutions that cater to user needs while minimising energy use.

Author Contributions: Both authors contributed equally in the preparation of this manuscript. Conceptualisation, J.R. and M.J.; data curation, J.R.; formal analysis, J.R. and M.J.; funding acquisition, M.J.; investigation, J.R. and M.J.; methodology, J.R. and M.J.; project administration, M.J.; supervision, M.J.; visualisation, J.R.; writing—original draft, J.R.; writing—review and editing, M.J. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript. Funding: This research was funded by the Swedish Energy Agency [Dnr: 2012-00-3180] (www. energimyndigheten.se, accessed on 1 July 2021)), and by the INTERREG project Lighting Metropolis, funded by the European Regional Development Fund [NYPS 20200430] (www.lightingmetropolis.com ((1 July 2021))). The APC was funded by Lund University. Institutional Review Board Statement: This study was carried out in accordance with the rules and regulations laid down by the Ethics Committee for the Swedish Research Council after consultation with the Regional Ethical Review Board. The Board concluded that approval according to the Swedish Ethical Review Act was not needed for this study. Informed Consent Statement: Information about the aim of the study was given and written informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki. The participants were informed of their right to withdraw at any time without providing an explanation. Data Availability Statement: Data is available upon request from the authors. Energies 2021, 14, 4005 13 of 15

Acknowledgments: The authors would like to thank the city of Malmö for providing and installing the lighting applications. Thanks also to Lina Haremst and Rifa Maliqi for assisting with the data collection and to all participants who, despite the dark and cold Swedish winter evenings, volunteered to spend time in the park assessing outdoor lighting. Conﬂicts of Interest: The authors declare no conﬂict of interest. The funders had no role in the design of the study; in the collection, analyses, or interpretation of data; in the writing of the manuscript, or in the decision to publish the results.

References 1. United Nations. World Urbanization Prospects 2018: Highlights; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2019. 2. United Nations. The Future We Want; United Nations: New York, NY, USA, 2012. 3. Wilson, E.J.; Wilson, R.; Krizek, K.J. The implications of school choice on travel behavior and environmental emissions. Transporta- tion Research Part D 2007, 12, 506–518. [CrossRef] 4. Xia, T.; Nitschke, M.; Zhang, Y.; Shah, P.; Crabb, S.; Hansen, A. Traffic-related air pollution and health co-benefits of alternative transport in Adelaide, South Australia. Environ. Int. 2015, 74, 281–290. [CrossRef] 5. Rastogi, R. Promotion of non-motorized modes as a sustainable transportation option: Policy and planning issues. Curr. Sci. 2011, 100, 1340–1348. 6. Eryi˘git,S. Investigation of pedestrian accessibility to railway system stations in the context of sustainable urban development: The case of Konya. Megaron 2019, 14, 555–566. [CrossRef] 7. World Health Organization. Global Health Risks: Mortality and Burden of Disease Attributable to Selected Major Risks; World Health Organization: Geneva, Switzerland, 2009. 8. Alfonzo, M.A. To walk or not to walk? The hierarchy of walking needs. Environ. Behav. 2005, 37, 808–836. [CrossRef] 9. Johansson, M.; Rosén, M.; Küller, R. Individual factors influencing the assessment of the outdoor lighting of an urban footpath. Lighting Res. Technol. 2011, 43, 31–43. [CrossRef] 10. Johansson, M.; Pedersen, E.; Maleetipwan-Mattsson, P.; Kuhn, L.; Laike, T. Perceived outdoor lighting quality (POLQ): A lighting assessment tool. J. Environ. Psychol. 2014, 39, 14–21. [CrossRef] 11. Mattsson, P.; Johansson, M.; Almén, M.; Laike, T.; Marcheschi, E.; Ståhl, A. Improved Usability of Pedestrian Environments After Dark for People with Vision Impairment: An Intervention Study. Sustainability 2020, 12, 1096. [CrossRef] 12. Rahm, J.; Sternudd, C.; Johansson, M. In the evening, I don’t walk in the park: The interplay between street lighting and greenery in perceived safety. Urban Des. Int. 2020, 26, 42–52. [CrossRef] 13. Bonaiuto, M.; Fornara, F.; Bonnes, M. Perceived residential environment quality in middle—And low-extension Italian cities. Eur. Rev. Appl. Psychol. 2006, 56, 23–34. [CrossRef] 14. Jago, R.; Baranowski, T.; Zakeri, I.; Harris, M. Observed environmental features and the physical activity of adolescent males. Am. J. Prev. Med. 2005, 29, 98–104. [CrossRef] 15. Addy, C.L.; Wilson, D.K.; Kirtland, K.A.; Ainsworth, B.E.; Sharpe, P.; Kimsey, D. Associations of perceived social and physical environmental supports with physical activity and walking behavior. Am. J. Public Health 2004, 94, 440–443. [CrossRef] 16. Eyler, A.A.; Matson-Koffman, D.; Vest, J.R.; Evenson, K.R.; Sanderson, B.; Thompson, J.L.; Wilbur, J.; Wilcox, S.; Young, D.R. Environmental, policy, and cultural factors related to physical activity in a diverse sample of women: The women’s cardiovascular health network project—Introduction and methodology. Women Health 2002, 36, 1–15. [CrossRef] 17. Lee, C.; Moudon, A.V. Neighbourhood design and physical activity. Build Res. Inf. 2008, 36, 395–411. [CrossRef] 18. Corseuil, M.W.; Schneider, I.J.C.; Silva, D.A.S.; Costa, F.F.; Silva, K.S.; Borges, L.J.; d’Orsi, E. Perception of environmental obstacles to commuting physical activity in Brazilian elderly. Prev. Med. 2011, 53, 289–292. [CrossRef] 19. Corseuil, M.W.; Hallal, P.C.; Corseuil, H.X.; Schneider, I.J.C.; D’Orsi, E. Safety from crime and physical activity among older adults: A population-based study in Brazil. J. Env. Public Health 2012, 2012, 1–7. [CrossRef] 20. Rosenberg, D.E.; Huang, D.L.; Simonovich, S.D.; Belza, B. Outdoor built environment barriers and facilitators to activity among midlife and older adults with mobility disabilities. Gerontologist 2013, 53, 268–279. [CrossRef][PubMed] 21. Owens, A.C.S.; Lewis, S.M. The impact of artificial light at night on nocturnal insects: A review and synthesis. Ecol. Evol. 2018, 8, 11337–11358. [CrossRef][PubMed] 22. Beccali, M.; Bonomolo, M.; Leccese, F.; Lista, D.; Salvadori, G. On the impact of safety requirements, energy prices and investment costs in street lighting refurbishment design. Energy 2018, 165, 739–759. [CrossRef] 23. Boyce, P.R.; Fotios, S.; Richards, M. Road lighting and energy saving. Lighting Res. Technol. 2009, 41, 245–260. [CrossRef] 24. Kuhn, L.; Johansson, M.; Laike, T.; Govén, T. Residents’ perceptions following retrofitting of residential area outdoor lighting with LEDs. Lighting Res. Technol. 2013, 45, 568–584. [CrossRef] 25. Malmö. Fotgängarprogram. Malmö—Den Gångvänliga Staden; Malmö Stad: Malmö, Sweden, 2012. 26. Dam-Hansen, C.; Corell, D.D.; Thorseth, A.; Poulsen, P.B. Light Quality and Efficiency of Consumer Grade Solid State Lighting Products. In Proceedings of the Light-Emitting Diodes: Materials Devices and Applications for Solid State Lighting XVII, San Francisco, CA, USA, 2–7 February 2013; p. 864119. 27. Bierings, R.; Jansonius, N.M. Luminance and pedestrians’ perceived ability to see after dark: Mapping the Netherlands using a citizen science network of smartphone users. Lighting Res. Technol. 2019, 51, 231–242. [CrossRef] Energies 2021, 14, 4005 14 of 15

28. Kuyk, T.; Elliott, J.L.; Fuhr, P.S. Visual correlates of mobility in real world settings in older adults with low vision. Optom. Vis. Sci. Off. Publ. Am. Acad. Optom. 1998, 75, 538–547. [CrossRef][PubMed] 29. Uttley, J.; Fotios, S.; Cheal, C. Effect of illuminance and spectrum on peripheral obstacle detection by pedestrians. Lighting Res. Technol. 2017, 49, 211–227. [CrossRef] 30. Rahm, J.; Johansson, M. Assessing the pedestrian response to urban outdoor lighting: A full-scale laboratory study. PLoS ONE 2018, 13, e0204638. [CrossRef] 31. Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage (CIE). Lighting for Older People and People with Visual Impairment in Buildings; CIE: Vienna, Austria, 2017. 32. Rahm, J.; Johansson, M. Walking After Dark–A systematic Literature Review of Pedestrians’ Response to Outdoor Lighting; Department of Architecture and Built Environment: Lund, Sweden, 2016; pp. 1–58. 33. Fotios, S.; Cheal, C. Lighting for subsidiary streets: Investigation of lamps of different SPD. Part 2—Brightness. Lighting Res. Technol. 2007, 39, 233–249. [CrossRef] 34. Fotios, S.; Cheal, C. Predicting lamp spectrum effects at mesopic levels. Part 1: Spatial brightness. Lighting Res. Technol. 2011, 43, 143–157. [CrossRef] 35. Fotios, S. Maintaining brightness while saving energy in residential roads. Lighting Res. Technol. 2013, 45, 7–21. [CrossRef] 36. Knight, C. Field surveys of the effect of lamp spectrum on the perception of safety and comfort at night. Lighting Res. Technol. 2010, 42, 313–329. [CrossRef] 37. Rea, M.S.; Bullough, J.; Akashi, Y. Several views of metal halide and high-pressure sodium lighting for outdoor applications. Lighting Res. Technol. 2009, 41, 297–320. [CrossRef] 38. Rea, M.; Bullough, J.; Brons, J. Spectral considerations for outdoor lighting: Designing for perceived scene brightness. Lighting Res. Technol. 2015, 47, 909–919. [CrossRef] 39. Rea, M.S.; Bullough, J.D.; Brons, J.A. Parking lot lighting based upon predictions of scene brightness and personal safety. Lighting Res. Technol. 2015, 49, 293–304. [CrossRef] 40. Fotios, S.; Yang, B.; Cheal, C. Effects of outdoor lighting on judgements of emotion and gaze direction. Lighting Res. Technol. 2015, 47, 301–315. [CrossRef] 41. Dong, M.; Fotios, S.; Lin, Y. The influence of luminance, observation duration and procedure on the recognition of pedestrians’ faces. Lighting Res. Technol. 2015, 47, 693–704. [CrossRef] 42. Lin, Y.; Fotios, S. Investigating methods for measuring face recognition under lamps of different spectral power distribution. Lighting Res. Technol. 2015, 47, 221–235. [CrossRef] 43. Iwata, M.; Uchida, S. Experiment to evaluate visibility with street luminaires with different upward light output ratios and the use of calculated veiling luminance to determine contrast performance. J. Light Vis. Environ. 2011, 35, 42–54. [CrossRef] 44. Fotios, S.; Castleton, H.; Cheal, C.; Yang, B. Investigating the chromatic contribution to recognition of facial expression. Lighting Res. Technol. 2017, 49, 243–258. [CrossRef] 45. Yang, B.; Fotios, S. Lighting and recognition of emotion conveyed by facial expressions. Lighting Res. Technol. 2015, 47, 964–975. [CrossRef] 46. Fotios, S.; Johansson, M. Appraising the intention of other people: Ecological validity and procedures for investigating effects of lighting for pedestrians. Lighting Res. Technol. 2019, 51, 111. [CrossRef] 47. Fotios, S.; Cheal, C. Obstacle detection: A pilot study investigating the effects of lamp type, illuminance and age. Lighting Res. Technol. 2009, 41, 321–342. [CrossRef] 48. Fotios, S.; Cheal, C. Using obstacle detection to identify appropriate illuminances for lighting in residential roads. Lighting Res. Technol. 2013, 45, 362–376. [CrossRef] 49. Fotios, S.; Uttley, J.; Cheal, C. Maintaining foveal fixation during a peripheral detection task. Lighting Res. Technol. 2016, 48, 898–909. [CrossRef] 50. Fotios, S.; Uttley, J. Illuminance required to detect a pavement obstacle of critical size. Lighting Res. Technol. 2018, 50, 390–404. [CrossRef] 51. Fotios, S.; Mao, Y.; Uttley, J.; Cheal, C. Road lighting for pedestrians: Effects of luminaire position on the detection of raised and lowered trip hazards. Lighting Res. Technol. 2020, 52, 79. [CrossRef] 52. Painter, K. The influence of street lighting improvements on crime, fear and pedestrian street use, after dark. Landsc. Urban Plan 1996, 35, 193–201. [CrossRef] 53. Fisher, B.S.; Nasar, J.L. Fear of crime in relation to three exterior site features: Prospect, refuge, and escape. Environ. Behav. 1992, 24, 35–65. [CrossRef] 54. Blöbaum, A.; Hunecke, M. Perceived danger in urban public space. The impacts of physical features and personal factors. Environ. Behav. 2005, 37, 465–486. [CrossRef] 55. Boomsma, C.; Steg, L. Feeling safe in the dark: Examining the effect of entrapment, lighting levels, and gender on feelings of safety and lighting policy acceptability. Environ. Behav. 2014, 46, 193–212. [CrossRef] 56. Haans, A.; de Kort, Y.A.W. Light distribution in dynamic street lighting: Two experimental studies on its effects on perceived safety, prospect, concealment, and escape. J. Environ. Psychol. 2012, 32, 342–352. [CrossRef] 57. Nasar, J.L.; Bokharaei, S. Lighting modes and their effects on impressions of public squares. J. Environ. Psychol. 2017, 49, 96–105. [CrossRef] Energies 2021, 14, 4005 15 of 15

58. Fotios, S.; Monteiro, A.L.; Uttley, J. Evaluation of pedestrian reassurance gained by higher illuminances in residential streets using the day–dark approach. Lighting Res. Technol. 2018, 51, 557–575. [CrossRef] 59. Shikakura, T.; Kikuchi, S.; Tanaka, T.; Furuta, Y. Psychological evaluation of outdoor pedestrian lighting based on rendered images by computer graphics. J. Illum. Eng. Inst. Jpn. 1992, 74, 648–653. [CrossRef] 60. Davidovic, M.; Djokic, L.; Cabarkapa, A.; Kostic, M. Warm white versus neutral white LED street lighting: Pedestrians’ impressions. Lighting Res. Technol. 2019, 51, 1237. [CrossRef] 61. Fotios, S.; Uttley, J.; Fox, S. A whole-year approach showing that ambient light level influences walking and cycling. Lighting Res. Technol. 2019, 51, 55. [CrossRef] 62. Itoh, N. Visual guidance of walking: Effects of illumination level and edge emphasis. Gerontechnology 2006, 5, 246–252. [CrossRef] 63. Choi, J.; Kang, D.; Shin, Y.; Tack, G. Differences in gait pattern between the elderly and the young during level walking under low illumination. Acta Bioeng. Biomech. 2014, 16, 3–9. [CrossRef] 64. Pedersen, E.; Johansson, M. Dynamic pedestrian lighting: Effects on walking speed, legibility and environmental perception. Lighting Res. Technol. 2018, 50, 522–536. [CrossRef] 65. Davoudian, N.; Raynham, P. What do pedestrians look at at night? Lighting Res. Technol. 2012, 44, 438–448. [CrossRef] 66. Fotios, S.; Uttley, J.; Cheal, C.; Hara, N. Using eye-tracking to identify pedestrians’ critical visual tasks, Part 1. Dual task approach. Lighting Res. Technol. 2015, 47, 133–148. [CrossRef] 67. Fotios, S.; Uttley, J.; Yang, B. Using eye-tracking to identify pedestrians’ critical visual tasks. Part 2. Fixation on pedestrians. Lighting Res. Technol. 2015, 47, 149–160. [CrossRef] 68. Fotios, S.; Yang, B.; Uttley, J. Observing other pedestrians: Investigating the typical distance and duration of fixation. Lighting Res. Technol. 2015, 47, 548–564. [CrossRef] 69. Fotios, S.; Uttley, J.; Fox, S. Exploring the nature of visual fixations on other pedestrians. Lighting Res. Technol. 2018, 50, 511–521. [CrossRef] 70. Russell, J.A.; Weiss, A.; Mendelsohn, G.A. Affect grid: A single-item scale of pleasure and arousal. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 1989, 57, 493–502. [CrossRef] 71. Johansson, M.; Sternudd, C.; Kärrholm, M. Perceived urban design qualities and affective experiences of walking. J. Urban Des. 2016, 21, 256–275. [CrossRef] 72. Jackson, G.R.; Owsley, C.; McGwin, G., Jr. Aging and dark adaptation. Vision Res. 1999, 39, 3975–3982. [CrossRef] 73. Gustafsson, B.; Hermerén, G.; Petterson, B. Good Research Practice; Swedish Research Council: Stockholm, Sweden, 2011. 74. Rosas, E.; Estrada-Hernandez, A. Effect of photometric detector spectral response quality on white LED spectral mismatch correction factors. Appl. Opt. 2016, 55, 5267–5272. [CrossRef] 75. Czyzewski,˙ D.; Fryc, I. The influence of luminaire photometric intensity curve measurements quality on road lighting design parameters. Energies 2020, 13, 3301. [CrossRef] 76. Caminada, J.F.; Van Bommel, W.J.M. New lighting considerations for residential areas. Int. Lighting Rev. 1980, 3, 69–75. 77. Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage (CIE). Lighting of Roads for Motor and Pedestrian Traffic; Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage: Vienna, Austria, 2010; pp. 1–45. 78. Ekman, P. Emotions Revealed: Recognizing Faces and Feelings to Improve Communication and Emotional Life, 2nd ed.; Henry Holt: New York, NY, USA, 2007. 79. Fotios, S.; Cheal, C. Lighting for subsidiary streets: Investigation of lamps of different SPD. Part 1—Visual Performance. Lighting Res. Technol. 2007, 39, 215–232. [CrossRef] 80. Estormiz. White Wooden Bridges in Hupisaaret Park in the Winter Night. Available online: https://commons.wikimedia.org/ wiki/File:Hupisaaret_Bridges_20081125.JPG (accessed on 1 July 2021). 81. Swedish Transport Administration. Krav—VGU, Vägars och Gators Utformning; Swedish Transport Administration: Borlänge, Sweden, 2020. 82. Patching, G.R.; Rahm, J.; Jansson, M.; Johansson, M. A new method of random environmental walking for assessing behavioral preferences for different lighting applications. Front. Psychol. 2017, 8, 1–13. [CrossRef] 83. Pikora, T.J.; Giles-Corti, B.; Knuiman, M.W.; Bull, F.C.; Jamrozik, K.; Donovan, R.J. Neighborhood environmental factors correlated with walking near home: Using SPACES. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2006, 38, 708–714. [CrossRef][PubMed] 84. Saelens, B.E.; Sallis, J.F.; Black, J.B.; Chen, D. Neighborhood-Based Differences in Physical Activity: An Environment Scale Evaluation. Am. J. Public Health 2003, 93, 1552–1558. [CrossRef][PubMed] 85. Wahlgren, L.; Stigell, E.; Schantz, P. The active commuting route environment scale (ACRES): Development and evaluation. Int. J. Behav. Nutr. Phys. Act. 2010, 7, 58–73. [CrossRef][PubMed]