Talk:Issues in Interdisciplinarity 2020-21/Lights will Guide You Home: The Sociological and Environmental Impact of Light in Cities

Comments after Zoom meeting on 14th Dec
Should we remove the gender part altogether? Because it shows conflict of priorities even within sociology. But idk.

Also for the conclusion, I added a part about London's strategy, and as for the last sentence I think it should be the start of a paragraph where we talk about power, maybe in the decision making (overt) power of the people who actually implement the recommendations? Or also the latent power of education? Only 3% of people in a study by the city of london (found in the same strategy paper) considered that health was an important factor of urban lighting for example. https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/assets/Services-Environment/public-realm-city-lighting-strategy.pdf

Finally, if we were to find a solution to this urban lighting problem, it would resolve the power problem, and help us identify it more clearly. What do you think it is?

Comments after Zoom meeting on 13th Dec
First part: - Explaining what psychology is not necessary. - Still not sure what do you mean by “yields latent power over urban planning”. Most power is latent… I think we should be more specific here. What form does this latent power hold? - “and subsequently” — though “subsequently” is a nice words, saying “and” is enough - I would change “visceral” barrier to instinctive barrier. - “encourage a sociological perspective shift” - is it needed? Wouldn’t it be enough to just say “a catalyst to encourage a “collective efficacy” within a neighbourhood.” - “a sense of” is quite vague

The content of the psychology part is actually describing Sociology, except for the part on emotion. Therefore, we decided to link it together. This way we’re not boiling down psychology to feelings of safety, without discussing mental health and sleep deprivation.

I changed “Furthermore, this issue needs to be addressed by Psychology experts in an attempt to RECTIFY this sense of vulnerability and inability to recognise potential offenders and their facial expressions.” to “Furthermore, this issue needs to be addressed by psychology experts in an attempt to ABATE (could also be “mitigate”) this sense of vulnerability and inability to recognise potential offenders and their facial expressions. Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 21:26, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Urban lighting and economic growth - This section is not referenced enough and I would paraphrase “intrinsically linked” since “intrinsically” implies strong correlation and “linked” very weak one.

Conclusion — needs more development. I’ll try working on it. Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 21:26, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

General Discussion
I'm almost done with my contributions, I just have a few aspects to go over. For the moment, the general to-do list would be :

-put all the referencing in the right format
 * I agree. Could you have a look at the references I have done? I am using this format: . I am also, not sure how to use the same reference twice throughout the text. Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 12:00, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

-make sure all the parts work collectively to demonstrate the role of power and are coherent with their disciplines
 * We should set up a Zoom call and read out loud what we have written. Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 12:00, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

-improve the intro and conclusion

-reduce the word count

Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 16:01, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Morning, I have added a few resources and statements I have extracted from them to the wikichapter page. I hope that's alright, obviously it can be completely changed with and deleted! Just think it is good to get something down. I found a really great page for searching for articles and research papers actually from UCL so the link is here: https://discovery.ucl.ac.uk/. I found some great writing on lighting and the perceived safety of pedestrians. Have you found any really interesting articles or papers? oh and the title is a work in progress!!purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 12:38, 24th of November 2020 (UTC) (UTC)
 * This is also an interesting page on "Cities at night": https://citiesatnight.org/index.php/light-pollution/ Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 11:30, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

I really like the title! I think the previous one was good too: maybe we could look at 3 disciplines? I liked the idea of psychology as well. I've just found some links which I'll put here but haven't really looked into them yet: http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12610450/index.pdf (a thesis about ppls experience of urban lighting) https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2158244016629708 ( a research paper about emotions and urban lighting) https://www.academia.edu/17306672/People_s_Perception_of_Urban_Lighting_in_Public_Space (another research paper abt ppl's perception) https://www.buildingsandcities.org/zh/insights/reviews/urban-lighting-for-people-evidence-based-lighting-design-review.html (review of a book about urban lighting) https://theestablishment.co/the-shocking-connection-between-street-harassment-and-street-lighting-5db8497ef653/index.html (an article abt harrassment and its links to lighting) https://womeninlighting.com/images/uploads/misc/Govil_Aditi_Paper.pdf (a paper about women's experience of cities) https://www.actionaid.org.uk/campaign/campaigning-works/ending-street-harassment-the-safe-cities-for-women-campaign#:~:text=ActionAid's%20Safe%20Cities%20for%20Women%20Campaign&text=We%20campaign%20in%2020%20countries,culture%20of%20violence%20against%20women. (Safe Cities for Women Campaign) https://theconversation.com/more-lighting-alone-does-not-create-safer-cities-look-at-what-research-with-young-women-tells-us-113359 (link between safety and lights)Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 13:55, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Hi! That’s great – starting is the most important. Light in the Cities is an excellent example of a problem that has been approached from different disciplinary perspectives. Therefore, I agree that we could talk about it from 3 different angles: 1. Environmental Health and functioning of ecosystems, eg. disruption of wildlife breeding and migration patterns; decreased melatonin secretion and increased risk of some cancers (https://shibbolethsp.jstor.org/start?entityID=https%3A%2F%2Fshib-idp.ucl.ac.uk%2Fshibboleth&dest=https://www.jstor.org/stable/26327931&site=jstor) ecological and evolutionary implications for animal and plant populations (https://www.jstor.org/stable/26268230 Birds grounded by lighting along roads is an increasing anthropogenic threat, light-induced mortality (https://shibbolethsp.jstor.org/start?entityID=https%3A%2F%2Fshib-idp.ucl.ac.uk%2Fshibboleth&dest=https://www.jstor.org/stable/26607663&site=jstor) 2. Psychology and human well-being 3. Inter-related socio-economic consequences. Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 16:06, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

After delving into this issue, I cannot believe how important light is for the environment and for humanity. Another discipline, which isn't entirely a named discipline which is taught but could be argued to be becoming one is light therapy. This could be another aspect of artificial lighting that we research as more and more people are using light therapy to cure Seasonal Affected Disorder, neonatal jaundice, skin disorders like psoriasis and vitiligo. So as to structuring our argument:

- I think the title should be a question e.g "Is Artificial Light Usage Negatively Affecting Us? The Power of Artificial Light over Society and Our Environment". Environment kind of encompasses both the ecological and the social environments we are planning to discuss?
 * I am afraid these titles are too broad to tackle in our Wikibook chapter. We need to specify the question more. For example, let's focus on artificial light only at night in cities. Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 13:22, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

- the first section of our essay backing up the question for example: Yes this is true as seen in these research projects, scientific articles etc relating to BIOLOGICAL - CIRCADIAN RHYTHM, ECOLOGICAL EFFECTS, ecological and evolutionary implications for animal and plant populations (From Julia's suggestions!).

- the second section should be the counter argument SOCIOLOGICAL IMPACTS discussing potential safety improvements, blue lighting in public toilets reducing heroin use and in train station's reducing suicide rates, lower rates of road accidents. HOWEVER, I have found that quite a lot of the articles I have read do not note particularly large differences in safety or crime rates after adding lighting. Also, we could discuss lighting in the workplace and how that affects productivity levels and worker happiness.https://www.ilo.org/wcmsp5/groups/public/@americas/@ro-lima/@sro-port_of_spain/documents/presentation/wcms_250198.pdf

- ALSO, could talk about up and coming subdiscipline of light therapy, phototherapy and its positive and proven effects of improving Seasonal Affected Disorder, neonatal jaundice, skin disorders like psoriasis and vitiligo.

- then we conclude and summarise our agreed mutual middle ground for the disciplines in relation to artificial lighting usage.

What do you two think? This is just a suggestion. purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 19:04, 25th of November 2020 (UTC)


 * Whether artificial light has an impact on crime rates is actually a hot topic in criminology/urban planning, there doesn't seem to be a consensus. This thesis has a whole section on it (http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12610450/index.pdf) but I don't know if I agree with it. It would be interesting to study the literature on this, perhaps not all of it but the most recent findings? I think it's more relevant to the sociological issue rather than the psychological.

Darkness: Cons: crime, security, xenophobia (fear of the unknown), women in the city; Pros: sleep/health (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2627884/), animals, no light pollution, less energy waste Light: Cons: light pollution, roadkill, change in animal's behaviour (https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-019-48118-z), Pros: feeling of security, less crime, economics, emotions? (https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2158244016629708)

A middle ground exists: motion sensors, different types of light... (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285056237_Urban_city_lights_Light_pollution_as_one_of_the_effects_of_incorrectly_designed_external_illumination_How_can_a_successful_lighting_masterplan_diminish_its_impact)

Related to Power: Government officials make choice? Lobbying? Coercion with light?

Related to History: Environmental science is a relatively new discipline (or rather, its importance has been recognized only recently)Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 14:38, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Related to Evidence:

Related to Truth: Problem: what is more important? Your own experience feels more true: questionnaire for BAScers etc
 * It links to truth from humanities perspective and constructivism. Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 14:07, 29 November 2020 (UTC)

Street lighting such as streetlamps are not the only source of urban lights and light pollution, should we talk about private lights/advertisement lights/stores that are lit during the night? Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 14:38, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

There is also a potential cultural/historical perspective in terms of the night sky's cultural and historical significance (and stargazing), and the cultural/historical significance of city lights (like New York's Time Square or Paris being referred to as the "City of Lights"). Another cultural perspective is that of the illumination of important and historical buildings, which sometimes is even of artistic importance. Finally, there is the cultural association of light with progress/knowledge/technology/the future in our society. Are you guys interested in this? Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 14:38, 1 December 2020 (UTC)

Some studies show there is a significant difference in feelings of safety related to urban lights between men and women, but others don't. I don't know if I should focus on the psychological influences of light on people's emotions in general or focus on a gendered perspective.

Also, @purplerain24 (I don't know how to mention ppl) you might be interested in some economic analysises of the Urban Lighting topic in the book I borrowed from the library, I'll pass it to you!Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 15:22, 1 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I'm also interested! It might be relevant to my discussion about increased energy consumption.Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 11:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

I have started doing more specific research on the environmental impacts of light and although I have expected this, I am shocked by how much it is overlooked and not inluded in policy making. I plan on tackling 3 main negative effects: (1) Human health and sleep (2) Wildlife (3) Increased energy consumption. As for the "issue" between the disciplinary perspectives, I would argue it links to "Evidence" (as sociologists and policy-makers don't place enough value on scientific research?). Let me know what you think so we can move this chapter under the right heading on a main page. Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 11:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * I think that, while evidence is definitely linked to it, it's not the main tension. I would argue that it's either power or truth, because the psychological/sociological side builds upon people's perception, like feelings of safety, which everyone experiences and holds as true (darkness representing unsafety and the unknown). That vision therefore has more power and is considered more in policy making than the environmental side, which while it has a mirror view of reality, which is widely accepted nowadays, it is not very well-known.Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 13:05, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * They're all linked in some way or another. I had a look at my notes from the lecture on truth and I believe we could argue how disciplines have their own ideas of understanding the type of knowledge they produce and what they VALUE. Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 14:54, 2 December 2020 (UTC)

After meeting the other day and discussing whether it is related to power or evidence, I agree with Aveniform's conclusion on Power. Have you watched this week's upcoming power lecture? It reminded me a lot of the types of boundary-crossing we are addressing in our wikichapter! purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 18:38 5th of December (UTC)

Hi, after watching this week's upcoming lecture of the utility of Power within economic and ecologic disciplines it has made me more aware that our issue might be mainly associated with power. I think this struggle between sociological, psychological and ecological disciplines is who holds the most power, who holds it through ownership of resources and the ability to mastermind and control how those resources are used such as light. Therefore, the distinctive disregard for ecological impacts (as the rate of light pollution is ever increasing) is undermined due to a power imbalance between the disciplines. The economical, social and psychological aspects of this issue - I think we could argue that the psychological impact of light within cities for safety is actually to increase economic growth, culture and tourism due to more people coming out at all times of day, more consumption and circulation occur. This is why ecological affects are overlooked and there is this tension that remains unresolved. What do you think? purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 18:39 5th of December 2020 (UTC)
 * yess I completely agree, I think the economic part is super important because people in power tend to prioritize it (I feel like we should talk about lighting in stores overnight for instance) citing resource dependency. Also people feeling safer is good for politicians, even though we don't know how much of an actual impact it has on crime (latent dimension). A way to solve it might be for environmental scientists to use a more powerful language.  Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 14:20, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Agreed - I would argue that power plays out through light pollution policies and discuss the priorities of decision-makers and their non-decision making power. Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 07:29, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Do you guys know how to change the title without erasing the chapter? Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 16:12, 7 December 2020 (UTC)

Introduction
I feel like the introduction is a bit biased towards environmental science. I think we should focus more on the tension between disciplines and how power influences that tension. Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 10:25, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

In the introduction, "Our deteriorating ecological environment is a pressing issue and there are three dominant disciplines: environmental science, sociology and psychology" I think it should be "environmental health science", since it's important to discuss its imapcts on human health. Also, as for conclusion, this paper calls out for the connection of research among different disciplines: https://www.jstor.org/stable/envirevi.23.1.14 and we could use it. Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 10:12, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
 * great idea, I highly recommend you edit the intro and conclusion to reflect this! Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 11:37, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

Previous intro:

Nighttime lighting is a defining feature of economic development within countries to improve safety and perhaps also consumption and tourism. However, the environmental health science impact is rife and there lies a clear tension between the overuse of lighting, the question of necessity and its quantitative and quantitative uses. Our deteriorating environment is a pressing issue and there are three dominant disciplines: Environmental Health Science, Sociology and Psychology who are disputing the significance and necessity of artificial lighting for society. The definition of light pollution is “the inappropriate or excessive use of artificial light”. In a 2003 journal, Cozens stated that the UK government had recently allocated £300 million to the improvement of street lighting in relation to lighting and the psychological and physical protection of societal wellbeing. Therefore, the concept of power is exercised in terms of who holds the authority to implement action and the competition and abrasion of disciplinary arguments. Overt power can be observed through the consequent action of those disputes. Although there is currently no consensus on how to measure light pollution, this study in 2017 estimated that light pollution increased by 2% per annum from 2012 to 2016 .The effect of urban lighting on the rate of crime, feeling of safety and the behavioural and physiological impacts on wildlife and ecosystems have been contentious issues across the disciplines.

Psychology section - AS OF 13TH OF DECEMBER THIS HAS BEEN ADDED TO THE SOCIOLOGICAL PERSPECTIVE
What is interesting to notice is that the psychological perspective could easily argue for both sides of the tension between environmental health and sociology (effect on circadian rhythms vs safety in the city). We could try to bring it in as a 3rd discipline that could shed more light on both arguments. As for the title, in this article (https://www.jstor.org/stable/26268230) they mentioned the significance of the night and how we should learn how to “manage darkness” which I believe nicely links all 3 approaches. Also, I don’t see yet how we attribute the tension between the disciplines to the issue of power, but I guess it’s just a matter of doing more research.Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 16:06, 25 November 2020 (UTC)

Psychologically, warmer lights feel safer, colder lights feel more unsafe and less inviting. (just a note)
 * It's important to mention this since the majority of lights in cities are cold, which is quite contradictory to the fact that they are supposed to make us feel safe. On the other hand, from ecological perspective it doesn't seem to make much difference: https://www.jstor.org/stable/24432256?Search=yes&resultItemClick=true&searchText=Light%20pollution&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3DLight%2Bpollution%26sd%3D2010%26refreqid%3Dexcelsior%253Ac636becdc3d851d77c075b19a5e75476&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_SYC-5187_SYC-5188%2F5187&refreqid=fastly-default%3A718557709c35589b9522fc6bf9b5a92b Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 11:24, 2 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Interestingly, however, blue light does decrease melatonin production more effectively compared to light at longer wavelengths (more yellow/orange/red), so it has both psychological and physiological effects on humans. I've just finished my contribution to it on the main page. Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 12:06, 12 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey, this section in the Psychological part I think could be more valuable in the Sociological section:

"According to Matsui, over 85% of women 'always' fear being a victim of street crime.[13] This data conflicts with the concerns of ecology as lighting has strong negative effects on wildlife, migration and mating habits. Therefore, this rising tension exposes power polarities between societal and ecological debate. Hannah Arendt theorised that power can never be attributed to the act of a single individual, but of the group that implements, builds and stimulates the agency of the act within the community.[14] Therefore, power is created through the implementation of lighting’s influence, galvanisation and alteration of social dynamics at night." - the Arendt quotation I think is particularly resonant in terms of implementing policies and the power surrounding that authority.

I have been editing the Psychology section this evening and I am struggling to find evidence for society's qualms about night lighting. If you find any other resources or studies please post them below. I think a few more examples could help it flow better.purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 20:00 9th of December 2020 (UTC)


 * I think, in terms of the psychology section, you should mostly focus on the effect light has on individual behaviour, because the sociology section builds on that and talks more about the societal level. It would be interesting to talk more about emotions and their connection with light, and even with different types of light (because the question is also, how do we design urban lighting well so it improves quality of life and doesn't affect the environment too much)Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 11:37, 11 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I completely agree with this. I think I have been branching out too far and I need to be a lot more precise about Psychology itself. I will from now on rewrite my section relating it specifically to the individual and the emotions and effects of urban lighting. purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 23:24 11th of December 2020 (UTC)

So should my comments on the improvement of light for the environment, since there are many studies that say safety isn't that largely affected by very high amounts of urban lighting, relate to how Psychology AS A DISCIPLINE can the positive psychological benefits of decreased lighting improving circadian rhythms and emotions through that? therefore, both disciplines can find a middle ground in relation to their tension? purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 23:25 11th of December 2020 (UTC)

Also, I changed the location of one of the pictures and added it to the environmental section which deals with light pollution. I think the pictures in the psychology section should perhaps focus more on pictures of streets that look scary vs pictures that don't and what their differences are. (If these can be found) Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 16:05, 11 December 2020 (UTC)


 * I agree I will search for one today! purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 14:10 12th of December 2020 (UTC)

Good evening, I have read through the proposed comments on the psychology section and I am very much absorbing them into my writing. I am rewriting my section after reanalysing the rubric and guidance for the wikichapter as I don't think my section is as concise and accurate as it needs to be for Psychology specifically. My writing blurred the boundaries between Sociological and Psychological studies. In order to discuss the precise arguments surrounding urban light I am going to focus on the emotions and feelings of safety conjured by different types of lighting. I will use more journal articles discussing emotion and feeling rather than physiological symptoms.

purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 23:18 11th of December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I have rewritten my section, ssychology, and tried to link it more to the issue of power. I have taken evidence predominantly from sources which discuss very specific Psychological topics to ensure there is relatively no cross over between the Psychological and Sociological arguments. purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 14:11 12th of December 2020 (UTC)

In the introduction to psychology section I wouldn't begin it with: "Psychology focusses on the external setting's effect on a person's behaviour and emotions." as it doesn't really encapsulate what psychology does as there are many different schools of thought. Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 17:32, 13 December 2020 (UTC)

Scratching the psychological perspective and including it within the sociological perspective works a lot more cohesively and can be easily transferred. This will help with decreasing the word count to get to 1200. Currently we are on 1400. After our Zoom call, we managed to gauged a more success and flowing argument and delete unnecessary sentences. purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 19:57 13th of December 2020 (UTC)

Socio-economic section
As for the "safety" argument, are we discussing nighttime driving in the end? Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 07:58, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
 * Probably not, because as of now I've talked more about gender and economic growth.

I think the first section on the Feminist protest group needs to either be removed or transferred to later in the second paragraph. Urban lighting isn't mentioned and it uses quite a lot of words without relating it back to the title! Very interesting but not as focussed for such a short word limit. I hope this is ok. purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 19:26 13th of December 2020 (UTC)
 * I think the rest of the argument for gender inequality in the streets is very useful at heightening and strengthening the tensions between the environmental health discipline. This contributes to the diminished power of minorities, again showing power imbalances between society and policy makers.purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 20:02 13th of December 2020 (UTC)

I have changed "Urban lighting is at the core of many power struggles in society: feelings of safety, inequality, protection." to "Urban lighting is at the core of many power imbalances in society: feelings of safety, inequality, protection." but I am afraid this sentence should be rephrased or just deleted in full (since we're not really showing in-depth understanding of what we're saying). Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 10:11, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Environmental Health section
I have been reading through this section and there is a lack of discussion about power. I will have a look at it now and locate places I could add comments on power in but could you two also have a scan of it? Thank you. purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 13:15 13th of December 2020 (UTC)

This reference https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4112959/

"Nighttime lighting and wealth are so intrinsically linked that it is used to measure GDP and compare countries according to their wealth." Nighttime lighting didn't use to measure GDP, this article only proposes such solution. They mention "a variety of applications at the sub-national level focused on sub-Saharan Africa." Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 08:26, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi! I just changed the first sentence because sociology doesn't just pursue safety in cities :) Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 10:53, 14 December 2020 (UTC)

Conclusion
I changed the conclusion and proposed a shorter intro, trying to be more clear about the role of power in our work (I didn't delete the previous one though). What do you think? Also, I finished my part pretty much (haven't managed to speak about effects on crime prevention though). Our word count is now at about 1600 (with the new intro) so we need to reduce/cut some parts. As it stands, the socio-economic section is at around 550 words, psychology at around 500 and environmental science at around 350 I think. Aveniform (discuss • contribs) 15:42, 11 December 2020 (UTC)

I found an interesting article discussing how citizen science might help in monitoring light pollution, which we can indicate as one of the possible solutions to the problem. Here's the link: https://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctv550cf2.31 Whygrowup (discuss • contribs) 18:51, 11 December 2020 (UTC)


 * Instead of stating "urban lighting aspects" maybe we should label these as disciplinary viewpoints or standpoints to really drive the focus of disciplinary tension. purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 23:18 11th of December 2020 (UTC)

I have deleted 2 sentences from the conclusion as they required citation to back up the claims. We do not need to resolve these tensions within this essay so I think the maximum amount of words will be put to better use when this section is deleted. Thanks! purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 10:11 14th of December 2020 (UTC)

CONCLUSION - too focussed on the ecological side of the argument rather than balanced ending.

The perspectives of Sociology and Ecology have highlighted the conflicts within the existing power dynamic of urban lighting in cities. While activists argue light pollution is the most straightforward issue to minimise[37], it is a much more complex problem. From an ecological perspective, the conclusion is clear: governments should introduce laws limiting illumination from the cities[38]. However, the final decision often disproportionately reflects the fear of forgoing commercial gains rather than preserving human health and the ecosystem. London's urban lighting strategy which prioritises sustainability is more akin to a set of recommendations than an urban lighting policy.[39]

Some attribute this tension to the lack of well-developed connections between "research, policy and practice".

purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 12:49 14th of December 2020 (UTC)

REDONE Conclusion - PURPLERAIN24
The perspectives of Sociology and Ecology have highlighted the conflicts within the existing power dynamic of urban lighting in cities. While activists argue light pollution is the most straightforward issue to minimise, it is a much more complex problem. From an ecological perspective, the conclusion is clear: governments should introduce laws limiting illumination from the cities. However, the final decision often disproportionately reflects the fear of forgoing commercial gains rather than preserving human health and the ecosystem. London's urban lighting strategy which prioritises sustainability is more akin to a set of recommendations than an urban lighting policy.

Some attribute this tension to the lack of well-developed connections between "research, policy and practice". However, there is strong evidence to demonstrate lighting's positive emotional and reassuring impact on societal mental wellbeing. Perhaps, a "collective efficacy" can be achieved towards improving awareness of urban lighting's positive and negative effects. This could instigate more improved discussions between the disciplines to create the most suitable middle ground urban lighting designs.

Useful Links and Resources
- good article! http://cescos.fau.edu/observatory/lightpol-environ.html starting point?purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 13:12 29th of November 2020 (UTC)

- https://www.jstor.org/stable/24432256 Search=yes&resultItemClick=true&searchText=Light%20pollution&searchUri=%2Faction%2FdoBasicSearch%3FQuery%3DLight%2Bpollution%26sd%3D2010%26refreqid%3Dexcelsior%253Ac636becdc3d851d77c075b19a5e75476&ab_segments=0%2Fbasic_SYC-5187_SYC-5188%2F5187&refreqid=fastly-default%3A718557709c35589b9522fc6bf9b5a92b

-http://etd.lib.metu.edu.tr/upload/12610450/index.pdf (thesis about urban lighting)

- how to add a photo: thumb|Write your caption in this last section. purplerain24 (discuss • contribs) 12:22 10th of December 2020 (UTC)

- Especially for @purplerain24 : https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2158244016629708 On emotions and urban lighting!