In August 2026, a family of three spent forty-eight hours at the Hotel Valencia on Santana Row, ten miles from home, with instructions to inhabit the district as a residence rather than a dinner stop. The question was whether being away can be manufactured in place. The recovery literature suggests the mechanism was never the mileage: what people experience predicts their return to work better than where they go, and detachment recurs as the most reliable predictor across two decades of studies. What the literature does not show is how those predictors behave in a real district across a real weekend, hour by hour, and where the built environment helps or fails. This essay reports that audit, and it argues for Garden Logic: frequent, iterative local detachment that outperforms the heroic annual itinerary.

Currency: The Legitimacy of Distance

The conventional paradigm of modern tourism operates on an implicit cultural and economic equation: the value of leisure is proportionate to geographic displacement. Distance guarantees novelty, justifies expenditure, and, crucially, establishes a socially legible boundary that protects the traveler from the obligations of everyday life. The pin on the map is a receipt and an excuse. It signals to peers that absence is costly and therefore legitimate.

When the psychological literature isolates the variables of recovery, geographic distance routinely fails to predict restorative value. In 2007, Sabine Sonnentag and Charlotte Fritz asked what helps people come back with better recovery from time off and assembled a four-dimension instrument for that purpose [1]. They identified psychological detachment, relaxation, mastery, and control as the core experiences. Detachment predicted better mood, lower strain, and improved health in the days that followed most consistently. Their method therefore measures experience as workers report it, and miles, pin drops, and itineraries drop out of the measurement.

The significance of that reframing becomes clear in time-scarce, highly connected labor markets. In 2015, Judy Wajcman described the acceleration of time, where digital technologies do not save time but rather densify it, creating perpetual urgency [27]. In 2013, Melissa Mazmanian and colleagues defined the Autonomy Paradox, where the more control professionals have over where they work, the less control they have over when they stop [28]. In 2001, Christina Maslach and colleagues characterized that depletion as burnout, marked by emotional exhaustion and reduced accomplishment [29]. In that context, distance works as a technology of legitimacy, proving unavailability rather than producing rest. A distant pin proves unavailability in a way a nearby calendar hold often does not.

Instead, Sonnentag and Fritz found that psychological detachment during a break was a stronger predictor of better mood, lower strain, and improved health in the days that followed a vacation than location or activity type. In 2009, Jessica de Bloom and colleagues synthesized vacation effects across studies and found a small initial lift in well-being that faded quickly after return [2]. In de Bloom's later empirical work, limited time on passive activities, pleasure derived from activities, and the absence of negative incidents together explained 38% of the variance in the vacation effect. Country, cost, and length explained little. Distance stood in for the mechanism.

In 2025, Grant and colleagues revisited the literature and meta-analyzed thirty-two studies and two hundred fifty-six effect sizes, and found larger and more durable well-being benefits than the 2009 estimate [3]. Grant et al. found psychological detachment and physical activity during vacation were the most beneficial for well-being; the role of location (home, away, or mixed) was unclear in their analysis. Detachment and activity predicted post-vacation well-being most consistently. For workers priced out of frequent far travel, that finding shows how to design recovery without adding mileage.

That distinction matters because travel carries its own debt. In 2015, Scott Cohen and Stefan Gossling identified the dark side of hypermobility, noting that frequent long distance travel for recovery can increase physiological stress and disrupt ontological security, the sense of order and continuity in one's life [30][31]. If mobility is no longer a reliable mechanism for rest, the question becomes how awayness is manufactured in place.

Distance therefore operates as a costly signal. Because the staycation lacks this legible geographic cost, it suffers from a legitimacy deficit. The absent worker is perceived as proximate, and therefore interruptible. Because proximity weakens the social boundary of unavailability, the staycation requires compensatory practices. Boundary maintenance must be actively delegated to socio-technical artifacts.

That delegation is already familiar to knowledge workers. The calendar hold, the autoresponder, the device powered down after triage, the second location for sleep even when that location is ten miles from home, all act to produce a border where geography does not. A single forty-eight-hour nearby stay surfaces how those borders are made, where they fail, and what the failures reveal about the temporal assumptions built into self-described walkable districts.

Variance: What Predicts Recovery

The literature on recovery converges on a simple inversion: what people experience predicts return to work better than where they go. In 2007, the Recovery Experience Questionnaire formalized this with four scales that have since organized a decade of field work [1]. The scales made it possible to compare home evenings, weekends, vacations, and extended leave on the same psychological currency. Across those comparisons, detachment recurs as the most reliable predictor. The questionnaire left the vacation standing and reframed its value in experiential terms.

In 2009, the meta analytic record offered a tempering view of that value. De Bloom and colleagues found that vacationers reported better health, mood, and satisfaction during the break than before it, but the gain dissipated within weeks of return [2]. That team modeled moderators and found that work related factors such as holiday absence duration explained little. The strongest predictors were within the vacation itself. That finding reframes cost: if length and destination explain little, the price premium for distance is the cost of the signal.

In 2025, that argument gained additional support from a synthesis of thirty two studies. Grant and colleagues found that detachment and stable leisure activity predicted post-vacation well-being while the role of location (home, away, or mixed) was unclear in their analysis [3]. Home vacationers and distant travelers who detached reported similar slopes of recovery. The role of location was unclear in their analysis. That pattern recasts the search. The design problem becomes how to secure detachment, relaxation, mastery, and control without recruiting geography to do the work.

Recovery science therefore invites a substitution thought experiment: if detachment is the mechanism, what other socio-technical arrangements can produce it? In 1998, Marc Meijman and Gijs Mulder formalized the Effort-Recovery Model as memory of load and return to baseline [15]. In 2014, Daniel Newman and colleagues extended that into the DRAMMA model, adding meaning and affiliation to detachment, relaxation, autonomy, and mastery [10]. In 2018, Blank and colleagues randomly assigned 40 middle managers to four nights in a hotel with guided physical activity or four nights at home; strain fell more in the hotel group and effects were still detectable 30–45 days later — though the hotel group also exercised, so the setting effect cannot be separated from activity [4]. The hotel provided not a different continent but a different cue stack: it omitted domestic triggers and required no post-meal reset. The finding points to a curated set of cues that omits domestic labor and affords detachment more reliably than a voluntary intention to relax amid those cues.

Psychological detachment therefore requires boundary work. The worker must establish a legible edge between work and rest that others recognize and that the worker can maintain without continuous enforcement. The out of office autoresponder, the silencing of a corporate smartphone, and the deliberate use of a hotel room just ten miles from a primary residence function as boundary technologies. In this sense the staycation functions as an experiment in infrastructural delegation. It asks whether artifacts and temporal arrangements can do the boundary work that mileage normally does.

The weekend offers a test case for the same inversion. In 2005, Fritz and Sonnentag found that nonwork hassles, a lack of positive work reflection, and low social activity during the weekend predicted burnout and poorer well-being after the weekend in 87 emergency-service workers [9]. Longitudinal evidence on detachment and exhaustion is mixed (Kinnunen et al. 2023) [23]. The point is temporal, since a weekend contains the full recovery arc from detachment on Friday evening to reattachment on Monday morning. If detachment can be secured there, the weekly recovery system works without adding mileage.

Hearth: Border Work and the Managed Heart

In 2000, Susan Clark described border work as creating mental and physical partitions between the work self and the leisure self [12]. In 1983, Arlie Hochschild defined emotional labor as the requirement to manage affect and stay "on" even when out of the office [32]. In 1996, Christena Nippert-Eng described negotiating boundaries through artifacts [33]. A local hotel room serves as a Latourian delegate, performing boundary maintenance that the home, saturated with work triggers, can no longer provide [18]. By moving ten miles, the executive uses architecture to suppress the work role and activate the restorative one.

Every household organizes a set of cues that invite domestic labor. The laundry pile on the chair, the dishes stacked to the height of a forearm, the inbox badge on the phone, the half finished school project on the kitchen counter all request attention. These cues constitute a hearth in the extended sense. They locate care at the center and orient bodies around it. Workers who attempt to rest at home must contend with the centripetal pull of that hearth. Intention competes with visible tasks.

In 2018, Blank's comparison made this concrete. The difference was omission. The cue stack did maintenance that willpower alone must do at home.

In STS terms, the local hotel room matters less as a bed than as a curated cue stack that omits the triggers of domestic labor. The blackout curtain replaces the laundry pile. The lobby replaces the kitchen. These artifacts enforce micro-role transitions. In 2000, Blake Ashforth described how workers shift between roles as they cross spatial boundaries that act as aids for transition [13]. A hotel key used ten minutes from home works as a border technology that cues a micro-role transition. The threshold holds because artifacts hold it.

Domestic habitation is continuous, while leisure districts are programmed for episodic consumption. The hearth resists export because it is organized for continuity. The localized vacationer therefore faces a choice between leaving the hearth intact and managing cues while attempting detachment, or reestablishing a temporary hearth elsewhere with linens, breakfast, sound, and temperature handled by staff. The staycation succeeds when the second friction is less than the first and when artifacts effectively substitute for geographic friction.

Being Away: Attention and the Micro-Catchment

Being away has been understood as a shift in mental content, with geography as the usual but not the necessary vehicle. Attention Restoration Theory describes four conditions that support involuntary attention and quiet directed attention: fascination, being away, extent, and compatibility [6]. Being away need not be another mountain range. It can be a tile pattern in a lobby that does not match the tile at home, or the sound of a pool filter where at home the sound is the dishwasher. Extending attention across a different sensory field allows directed attention to rest.

In 2008, Marc Berman found that a walk in a natural setting improved working memory more than a walk on a trafficked urban street [7]. In 2019, Mathew White estimated at least one hundred twenty minutes per week in natural environments associated with higher well-being [8]. The pattern points to a dose that could be accumulated in brief daily contacts rather than single extended trip. In 2021, Martin Jimenez reviewed nature contact and found diverse forms, including window views and indoor plants and short walks, associated with lower stress [5].

In 2003, Terry Hartig demonstrated restorative components such as extent and compatibility [34]. In 2010, Patrik Grahn and Ulrika Stigsdotter identified refuge and prospect dimensions in urban gardens [35][41]. Houlden and colleagues (2019) found that, for Londoners, the amount of greenspace within 300 metres of home was the strongest radius-level predictor of life satisfaction, happiness and sense of worth [26]. The micro-refuge therefore can be more restoratively efficient than a distant national park if the logistics tax of reaching the park is too high.

Weekends that contained absorbing activities predicted better recovery independent of location. The DRAMMA framework enumerates detachment, recovery, autonomy, mastery, meaning, affiliation, with detachment gating others [10]. Compatibility matters where families are concerned. A fascination that requires driving, queuing, or complex supervision trades fascination for logistical labor. Tile patterns that hold the gaze without instruction, water tables that reward scooping, and shaded benches at the pool edge where a parent can see without hovering preserve autonomy for adult and child.

In 1984, Roger Ulrich reported that post-surgical patients with a view of trees had shorter stays and needed less potent pain relief than matched patients facing a brick wall [19]; in 1991 he showed faster stress recovery after viewing nature rather than urban videotapes [14]. The hospital was not a forest; the window framed a different depth and illumination. Ulrich's principle is portable. Altering depth, canopy, acoustic refuge, and visual complexity within one hundred meters can move the body into a different attentional state.

Row: The 2026 Santana Row Audit

The method is rhythmanalysis: Henri Lefebvre's study of space and time [24], read through Kevin Lynch's imageability as legibility for wayfinding [22] and Ray Oldenburg's third places beyond home and work [36]. The STS layer treats artifacts as political [11], the district as a socio-technical landscape of consumption [37] with reverse salients where lagging components constrain the system's performance [16], and convenience as a socially organized temporal script [38]. Yi-Fu Tuan's topophilia names the affective bond between person and place [39], while Susan Leigh Star and Geoffrey Bowker show how classification makes mundane infrastructure invisible when coded as luxury [40], and Star notes that infrastructure becomes visible upon breakdown [25].

The Row is useful because it is explicit about temporal program. Santana Row is a mixed-use hospitality district in San Jose that markets high walkability, ground-level dining, canopy shade, and sheltered benches. The district website lists dining by category [17]. On a morning check, the verified list included Blue Bottle Coffee, Cocola, Johnny Doughnuts, Palmetto Superfoods, Starbucks, and Vbar and Cielo within Hotel Valencia [18]. Density runs high at night, and in the morning the same corridor empties, which follows a temporal script.

In August 2026, a family of three lodged at Hotel Valencia for a forty-eight-hour field stay. No stroller was used, and notes were kept at ninety-minute intervals, with evenings logged after bedtime. The request was to inhabit the district as a residence rather than a dinner stop. The group sought continuous domestic habitation in infrastructure built for episodic evening consumption.

Morning one exposed asymmetry. The Row's food desert at eight am required scouting. Blue Bottle Coffee offered a queue and a limited morning case. Notes from the morning read: still waiting on coffee, no good food options, people sitting around us all fighting. The entry captures two costs that hide inside trip reports. The first is the exposure of a small child to public conflict in a space without refuge. The second is the reintroduction of planning labor when the traveler expected relief. The observation that people were airing laundry in public marks the thinness of the district's membrane around domestic life. Conflict was visible and unbuffered.

The same morning exposed equipment fragility as a tax on continuity. A cheap inflatable ordered for pool use failed when unpacked. The failure eliminated the child's pool cue and forced a vehicle trip to replace it and restore the hot-tub portion of the day. A car was recruited to patch the broken micro-infrastructure. That recruitment re-engaged logistical labor, schedule management, and costs that distant travel bundles and hides inside itinerary services. A walkable district that cannot provision morning breakfast and requires a car to provision a child's float is walkable only on evening accounting.

Afternoon one offered a contrasting sequence that met the needs of low-intensity habitation. Lunch was taken at Maggiano's Little Italy. The room was quiet at eleven forty-five, the host seated the group immediately, and food arrived without negotiation. The meal functioned as a domestic hearth offloaded to a dining room. It restored capacity because it required no mitigation of conflict, no car, and no alternate venue search. For continuous habitation, the relevant variable is the availability of low-friction seating when the family needs food.

Interval two demonstrated cue-stack omission and boundary technologies in practice. The child went to the pool with both adults, and afterward one adult took the hot tub alone while the other stayed with the child in the room. The tub's water temperature and tile pattern provided a sensory field differing from the kitchen at home. Sound narrowed to the pump and breathing. The pattern of the tile held involuntary attention. That difference matches what Kaplan describes as being away without mileage [6]. Detachment in this configuration is rotational rather than shared. One adult holds the perimeter while the other uses the depth of the tub enclosure as a micro-border. The tub enclosure and pool band operate as aids for micro-role transition [13]. They index a different role even though the address changed by only two hundred meters.

Evening one documented compensatory boundary work under proximity. The corporate phone tether keeps legitimacy in question. Notes record that device clearing required less than ten minutes of focused triage at the start of the period. Messages were acknowledged, actions queued, and then the device was powered down at the end of the table in an off-stage location. The sequence was repeated before dinner. Ten-minute clearing followed by deliberate non-availability fails at home, where housework cues reassert availability every ninety seconds. The lodging hardware provides a place to store the offload.

Two features explain why nearby absences sometimes fail to register as legitimate. Availability protocols in many organizations default to Available unless marked otherwise. The staycation uses proximity to justify availability. When a peer perceives the worker ten miles away, failure to respond reads as volition rather than constraint. Distant travel supplies a costly signal that nearby lodging does not. That asymmetry is a cultural one. The family used an autoresponder stating dates and boundary rather than location. The choice shifts interpretation from miles to contract. That is boundary work.

Continuous habitation failed once more in the evening due to breakfast planning rather than breakfast itself. The dinner venue search required reviewing three menus beyond one. The child required spacing from a patio where speakers required the adults to raise their voices. The search completed but added a second episode of logistical labor to a day intended to minimize it. The district succeeded for a single meal and a single tub enclosure. It failed to sustain a continuous membrane across afternoon and evening for a home-based three-year-old. That failure points to the limit of episodic programming. Infrastructure built for the double date does not repurpose automatically for a parent working a forty-eight-hour proximity break.

The Row test yields specific deltas. Low-intensity lunch works when venues hold quiet at non-canonical times. Sensory difference for cue switching exists where tile, canopy, and water depth differ from home. Breakfast inventory is too thin at the morning and evening overlap, and replacement goods for the child's program require a car that undermines the walkability claim. The result reads as a pattern. Episodic points of compliance coexist with structural gaps imposing logistical labor on the family least able to absorb it. Artifact politics operates as temporal programming [11]. The built environment assumes free adult evenings as a consumer, not a working parent managing a nap while seeking hot-tub calm.

Map legibility shaped movement. In 1960, Lynch described wayfinding as built from paths, edges, districts, nodes, and landmarks [22]. The Row markets itself as legible at strolling scale. In a stroller-free walk, legibility suffered from temporal mismatch rather than any lack of signs. A map accurate at eight pm is misleading at eight am. In 1961, Jane Jacobs framed the condition as a requirement for diversity of use at different times [20]. The district had eyes on the street in the evening, and few at breakfast. Scarcity increased search time and re-engaged planning labor.

Garden: From Bouquet to Garden Logic

In 2012, Elizabeth Shove and colleagues framed vacationing as a social practice of materials, competence, and meaning [42]. Moving from Bouquet Logic, the rare heroic display, to Garden Logic, the frequent iterative tending, re-engineers meaning around detachment. The evidence for the garden side has accumulated across registers: in 2012, Leslie Perlow found that predictable time off, even one night per week, increased productivity and satisfaction [43]; longitudinal evidence on detachment and exhaustion is mixed (Kinnunen et al. 2023) [23]; and in 2010, Fritz and Sonnentag showed weekend recovery spilling over for three days [9]. Against this, in 1997, Arlie Hochschild described the time bind in which work colonizes family time [44], while the mobilities literature treats movement as practiced and storied [45] and movement and stillness as co-producers of access [46].

The concept of the garden is instructive because it names an arrangement that is continuous, maintained, and partly non-deterministic. The newsletter Signal and Soil contrasts garden thinking with bouquet thinking. A bouquet is cut, arranged, and presented: complete at delivery and beautiful for a day. A garden is pruned, watered, and fed, then left to produce its own configuration over years. Nearby leisure resembles garden thinking. It cannot be delivered as single moment. It must be tended.

Manufacturing awayness in place requires active alignment of three layers. The first layer is the artifact. Artifacts must omit domestic triggers, provide cues differing in pattern, sound, and temperature, and offer enclosures where a child can be held by tub and tile rather than the kitchen counter. In Winner's (1980) account, Robert Moses's low Long Island parkway overpasses, built from the 1920s onward, excluded buses — and the people who rode them — from the parkways [11]. Clark also described the work of borders as material [12]. The gate, wristband, lanyard, key, and pool door all function as borders. They make micro-role transitions more durable. The Row offers such markers only in isolated pockets.

The second layer is temporal rhythm. Hospitality districts that list six breakfast options on their websites should ensure those options are open, seated, and serviced at eight am when a family needs to eat [18]. Walkability at eight pm that becomes a food desert at eight am fails as walkability for continuous habitation. It is a script for evening consumption, imposing friction costs on families and workers who need low-intensity seating between logistical tasks. Jacobs argued that eyes on the street sustain safety and commercial viability through diversity of use at different times [20]. Lynch argued that the legibility of edges and landmarks enables navigation [22]. Both point to a design choice. Programming for afternoon and evening alone reduces viability for the use that remote work now requires within thirty miles of home.

The third layer is social signaling. Absence must be made socially durable without consuming aviation fuel to prove it. Costly signal theory describes why distance works. It burns money, time, and carbon to document seriousness. Nearby absence must replace that burn with other signals that peers respect. Signals include autoresponder language stating dates and boundary rather than distance, device clearing limited to less than ten minutes followed by a powered-down device stored out of sight, and calendar holds that decline meetings with a brief boundary note rather than silent absence. Those protocols delegate boundary maintenance to language and timing rather than mileage.

From the point of view of employers and city-makers, the stakes are not small. When every absence must be far to be recognized, workers buy distance and fuel as a tax for being permitted to detach. That tax falls unevenly on those who cannot travel, who care for small children, and whose incomes are eaten by fees embedded in complex packages. In 2018, the Blank hotel condition reduced strain without recruiting air travel [4]. In 2025, the Grant synthesis found detachment predicted well-being while the role of location was unclear in their analysis [3]. Those results can be read narrowly as psychology or broadly as urban policy. If detachment predicts, cities should build detachment-friendly infrastructure near where workers already live.

The staycation challenges the assumption that leisure derives its value from geographic displacement, and demonstrates instead that valuable leisure is a co-production between the individual and the built environment, requiring active alignment of artifacts, temporal rhythms, and social signaling. As the technologies of remote work and continuous connectivity erode the boundaries of the home, the ability to manufacture awayness in place will increasingly depend on local infrastructures capable of sustaining the illusion of distance. The design task, therefore, is to repair the morning. Provision continuous seated breakfast, safe enclosed water for a three-year-old, quiet low-intensity lunchrooms at eleven forty-five, shaded benches that do not front fryer exhaust, and gates where the wristband signals role change rather than purchase. Those mundane repairs make the tile pattern register as fascination. They allow the tile's sound to hold attention long enough for the corporate phone to remain powered down.

Designing for proximity expands the palette of what counts as legitimate absence. It asks the city to acknowledge that curating cue stacks, sustaining morning provisioning, and enabling rotational care are productive forms of labor infrastructure. Hotel-tub calm while one adult readies a child for nap is productive. Lunchroom seating without negotiation is productive. A lobby replacing the kitchen for ninety minutes is productive. Each small substitution accumulates into a close-at-hand elsewhere, artifactual, temporal, and contractual, sufficient when it holds.

Future research should test the boundary conditions of proximity-based recovery. Field experiments that randomly assign families to morning-rich versus evening-rich provisioning within the same district would clarify whether the temporal script is causal. Within-design measures of detachment from the Recovery Experience Questionnaire, affect from weekend models, and stage models from Kaplan would provide a shared metric across studies.

For practitioners, the implication is concrete. Proximity breaks already happen. Workers book rooms within ten miles because they cannot secure far travel or because they value autonomy over novelty. The work is to make those breaks legitimate and low-friction. Morning provisioning should be listed accurately as verified open hours with seating type, not as six logos. Pool enclosures should list water temperature, tile shading, and sound. Autoresponder templates stating dates and boundary rather than city should be offered at booking. Small changes shift interpretation from distance to contract. They enable detachment without burning fuel. That shift reframes proximity as durable detachment-friendly infrastructure.

Strategic Recommendations: Designing for Detachment

  1. Cue Stack Omission: Choose an environment like a nearby boutique hotel that omits at least three domestic triggers such as cleaning, cooking, and mail [4].
  2. Temporal Equity Audit: Verify breakfast infrastructure via official directory such as santanarow.com/dine. Structural scarcity, not taste, shapes the morning's cost [17].
  3. Soft Fascination Catchment: Prioritize proximity to water or green space within three hundred metres for refuge and prospect [26].
  4. Mastery Without Load: Engage in low-stakes mastery such as a fitness routine or a non-work book for achievement without systemic arousal [10].
  5. Frequency Over Signal: A hypothesis to test: a twenty-four-hour local break every thirty days may maintain baseline recovery better than a ten-day distant vacation every twelve months.

Continuous Habitation Audit: Provide seated low-friction morning infrastructure legible in the Lynch imageability sense [22]. Design acoustic refuges masking commercial hum with natural white noise, as William Whyte documented in 1980 [21]. Ensure last-mile logistics for mundane gear within walkable catchment [17]. Support diverse edge use as Jacobs argued in 1961 [20], and third-place function as Oldenburg argued in 1989 [36].

References

  1. [1] Sonnentag & Fritz (2007) REQ
  2. [2] de Bloom et al (2009) Vacation effects meta analysis fade out
  3. [3] Grant et al (2025) Recovery meta analysis activity over location
  4. [4] Blank, C., et al. (2018). Short Vacation Improves Stress-Level and Well-Being in German-Speaking Middle-Managers. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 15(1): 130
  5. [5] Jimenez et al (2021) Nature contact review
  6. [6] Kaplan (1995) ART
  7. [7] Berman et al (2008) Nature walk benefits
  8. [8] White et al (2019) 120 minute threshold
  9. [9] Fritz & Sonnentag (2005, 2010) Weekend recovery spillover
  10. [10] Newman et al (2014) DRAMMA
  11. [11] Winner (1980) Do Artifacts Have Politics
  12. [12] Clark et al (Border work)
  13. [13] Ashforth et al (2000) Micro role transitions and Clark Border Theory
  14. [14] Ulrich (1991) SRT
  15. [15] Meijman & Mulder (1998) Effort-Recovery
  16. [16] Lynch (1960) Image of City & Hughes (1983) Reverse Salients
  17. [17] Santana Row district data santanarow.com/dine verified Aug 14 2026
  18. [18] Field notes Hotel Valencia family three no stroller Aug 14-15 2026
  19. [19] Ulrich (1984) view through window
  20. [20] Jacobs (1961) Death and Life
  21. [21] Whyte (1980) Small Urban Spaces
  22. [22] Lynch (1960) Imageability
  23. [23] Kinnunen, U., et al. (2023). Longitudinal recovery profiles. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 20(7): 5382
  24. [24] Lefebvre (2004) Rhythmanalysis
  25. [25] Star (1999) Infrastructure ethnography
  26. [26] Houlden, V., et al. (2019). A spatial analysis of proximate greenspace and mental wellbeing in London. Applied Geography 109: 102036
  27. [27] Wajcman (2015) Pressed for Time acceleration
  28. [28] Mazmanian et al (2013) Autonomy Paradox
  29. [29] Maslach et al (2001) Burnout
  30. [30] Cohen & Gossling (2015) Hypermobility dark side
  31. [31] Giddens (1991) Ontological Security
  32. [32] Hochschild (1983) Managed Heart
  33. [33] Nippert-Eng (1996) Home and Work boundaries
  34. [34] Hartig et al (2003) Restorative components
  35. [35] Grahn & Stigsdotter (2010) Sensory dimensions
  36. [36] Oldenburg (1989) Third Places
  37. [37] Geels (2002) Technological transitions landscape
  38. [38] Shove (2003) Comfort, Cleanliness, Convenience
  39. [39] Tuan (1974) Topophilia
  40. [40] Star & Bowker (1999) Sorting Things Out
  41. [41] Stigsdotter et al (2010) Health promoting nature
  42. [42] Shove et al (2012) Social Practice dynamics
  43. [43] Perlow (2012) Sleeping with Smartphone PTO
  44. [44] Hochschild (1997) Time Bind
  45. [45] Cresswell (2006) On the Move
  46. [46] Sheller & Urry (2006) New Mobilities Paradigm