Wellness for All: Novel Design Scenarios and Concepts of Products-Systems for an Inclusive User Experience in Indoor Physical Activity

Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 776)


Today’s aging phenomena is bringing about important changes in the make-up of our population with consequential need for assistance and cures, thus substantially increasing the costs sustained by society. The policies of the European Community aim to maintain general health and to promote life styles capable of sustaining a level of self sufficiency and at the same time an “intelligent” process of aging, where one remains active and healthy for as long as possibile. The education to physical activity and to sports is a very important objective, which require the development of a conscious attitude of citizens towards their own health. With emphasis on the ergonomics of design and on methods of innovation, Human Centered Design designates likely scenarios in the near future and proposes possibile solutions which concentrate on needs and expectations, allowing one to maintain an active life, through wellness and prevention. This paper presents the results of the “Smart Running” workshop, promoted by the Laboratory of Ergonomics and Design (LED) of the University of Florence in collaboration with Technogym, a leading-edge company that develops fitness equipment for any physical activity. The projects represent innovative solutions for indoor running, particularly intent on involving an increasing number of participants.


Social inclusion Human centered design Wellness Treadmill Smart running 


  1. 1.
    World Health Organization: Activate Aging: A Policy Framework. WHO, Geneva (2002)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    World Health Organization: Health and Development Through Physical Activity and Sport. WHO, Geneva (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Corbin, C.B., Lindsey, R., Welk, G.J., Corbin, W.R.: Concepts of Fitness and Wellness: A Comprehensive Lifestyle Approach, 4th edn. McGraw-Hill, Boston, MA (2002)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Findeli, A.: Rethinking design education for 21st century: theoretical, methodological, and ethical discussion. Des. Issue 17(1), 5–17 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    World Health Organization: Global Action Plan for the Prevention and Control of Noncommunicable Diseases 2013–2020. WHO, Geneva (2013)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Hallal, P.C., Andersen, L.B., Bull, F., Guthold, R., Haskell, W., Ekelund, U.: Global physical activity levels: surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects. Lancet 380, 247–257 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sport and Physical Activity Report: Special Eurobarometer 412. European Commission, Directorate-General for Education and Culture, Brussels (2014)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lee, I.M., Shiroma, E.J., Lobelo, F., Puska, P., Blair, S.N., Katzmarzyk, P.T.: Effect of physical inactivity on major non-communicable diseases worldwide: an analysis of burden of disease and life expectancy. Lancet 380, 219–229 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    World Health Organization Europe: Steps to Health: A European Framework to Promote Physical Activity for Health. WHO Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen (2007)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Rinaldi, A., Tosi F.: Design and smart technologies for physical activity as key factors in promoting quality of life and social inclusion. In: Design for Inclusion, International Conference on Design for Inclusion, 17–21 July 2017, LA, USA, pp. 264–275. Springer (2017)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    BS 7000-6:2005. Design management systems. Managing inclusive design guide (2005)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Fisk, A.D., Rogers, W.A., Charness, N., Czaja, S.J., Sharit, J.: Designing for Older Adults, Principles and Creative Human Factors Approaches, 2nd edn. Taylor and Francis, Boca Raton, FL (2009)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cooper, L., Baber, C.: Focus Groups in Handbook of Human Factors and Ergonomics Methods. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL (2005)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Clarkson, P.J., Coleman, R., Hosking, I., Waller, S.: Inclusive Design Toolkit, Engineering Design Centre. University of Cambridge, Cambridge (2007)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Pruitt, J., Grudin, J.: Personas: practice and theory. In: Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on Designing for User Experiences, pp. 1–15. ACM (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hollnagel, E.: Task analysis, why, what and how. Handb. Hum. Fact. Ergon. 4, 385–396 (2012)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    BS EN ISO 9241-210: 2010, Ergonomics of human-system interaction, part 210: Human-centred design for interactive systems (2010)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Laboratory of Ergonomics and Design, Department of ArchitectureUniversity of FlorenceCalenzanoItaly
  2. 2.Scientific Research Dept.Technogym S.P.ACesenaItaly

Personalised recommendations