Ethnographic Urban Corridor Evaluation

Applied Research for Mobility Justice and Urban Design

I work with cities, organizations, and institutions navigating the human consequences of street design, mobility policy, and urban change across the Americas.

My work brings cultural studies approaches, urban ethnography, and historical research to questions of mobility justice and urban design—especially where technical solutions alone have failed to resolve conflict, risk, or inequity.

How I work

This work is designed for decision-makers and practitioners responsible for streets, corridors, and public space—particularly where mobility decisions carry social, political or equity consequences. In contrast to technical corridor studies, my approach draws on cultural studies to examine how power and assumptions embedded in design and policy determine whose movement is prioritized, whose risk is normalized, and whose safety is treated as expendable.

  • A deep, time-based analysis of a street or corridor as a lived, historical system. This work combines urban ethnography and archival research to understand how a corridor functions today by tracing how it has changed over time.

    What This Work Assesses

    Rather than focusing only on technical performance, this assessment asks:

    • How does this corridor feel to different users?

    • Who is expected to be here — and who is not?

    • What behaviors are encouraged, tolerated, or punished?

    • Whose time and safety are prioritized?

    • How have past planning decisions shaped present-day risk and access?

    Methods

    • Urban ethnography (on-the-ground observation, walking and cycling the corridor, documenting lived experience)

    • Longitudinal archival research (maps, plans, policy documents, historical change over time)

    • Cultural analysis of mobility, power, and design assumptions

    Deliverables

    Deliverables are tailored to project scope, but typically include:

    • A written corridor experience report (PDF)

    • Ethnographic field documentation (photos, annotated maps, curated notes)

    • A historical corridor brief

    • Interpretive findings relevant to mobility justice and design

    • Optional public-facing summary or presentation

  • A focused analysis that situates a street, corridor, or mobility policy within its historical, political, and cultural context. Drawing on archival research and cultural analysis, this briefing helps explain how past decisions continue to shape present-day conditions — and why certain interventions succeed, fail, or provoke resistance.

    This service is well-suited for projects that require context and clarity, but do not yet call for a full corridor assessment.

    Use Cases

    • Preparing for corridor redesigns

    • Responding to public controversy

    • Supporting advocacy or grant applications

    • Background for journalism or reports

    • Internal decision-making and framing

    Typical Deliverables

    • 5–10 page written briefing (PDF)

    • Timeline of key historical decisions

    • Interpretive analysis of assumptions and power

    • Clear takeaways for policy or communication

    • Optional consultation or presentation

How I read meaning, power, and risk in urban corridors

01

Grounded Observation and Ethnographic Fieldwork

On-the-ground engagement with the corridor or policy context, documenting how people actually move, wait, cross, and adapt in everyday conditions.

Who uses this corridor and under what conditions?

Whose movement is accommodated? Whose is tolerated?

Where does design intent diverge from lived experience?

02

Historical and Contextual Research

Archival research situates present-day conditions within longer histories of planning, policy, and investment.

Why does this corridor function this way?

Which past decisions shape present day risk?

What assumptions about users were built into the design?

03

Interpretation and Synthesis

Findings are synthesized into clear, usable analysis that complements technical studies and clarifies implications for mobility justice and design.


What is this corridor communicating about whose safety matters?

Where is risk being redistributed onto vulnerable users?

What does this mean for equity, policy, and next steps?

Applied Work: Interpreting a Corridor

A sample project that demonstrates how interpretive, ethnographic analysis informs mobility questions in practice


PROJECT:

Reading a Corridor: Informal Bike Count and Ethnographic Observation, Mérida (December 2025)

What I noticed

Although the corridor functions "efficiently" by conventional traffic metrics — high vehicle speeds and steady throughput — it is not meaningfully designed for any user who arrives without a car.

  • There is no bike lane or safe cycling accommodation, despite regular bicycle traffic.

  • Pedestrians have no protected crossing points and must judge gaps in fast-moving traffic.

  • The median is narrow and offers little refuge. Pedestrians are forced to run.

  • Bus stops incorporate hostile architecture: no seating, shade, or safe waiting space.

And yet people use the corridor — by necessity rather than invitation. Riders slow, divert, or ride defensively. Pedestrians cross where they can. Most strikingly, people were observed climbing over hostile barriers near a bus stop to reach the Walmart directly across the road, improvising a crossing where none exists.

What this reveals

This corridor encodes a hierarchy of value that has nothing to do with accident or neglect. It is designed around a specific user: the aspirational, car-owning middle-class shopper pulling into the Walmart parking lot. For that user, the corridor works perfectly — continuous lanes, generous turning radii, abundant free parking. The Walmart and its surrounding infrastructure make a bet on who the future of this city belongs to, and they build accordingly.

In this context, car ownership is not merely a transportation choice. It is a form of social citizenship — evidence of arrival, of becoming a proper person. The corridor infrastructure recognizes and rewards that citizenship. It is designed for people who have already made it, or who are in the process of making it. Everyone else — the cyclist, the pedestrian, the bus rider — is accommodated at the margins, if at all. Their presence is tolerated, not anticipated. Their safety is treated as their own problem, a consequence of their insistence on moving through space the wrong way.

Safety is not absent from this corridor. It is redistributed onto the people with the fewest alternatives.

The corridor's dysfunction is not only a product of car-centric design. It is also a product of nostalgia as governance. The roundabout at Paseo de Montejo and Avenida Colón is a case study in infrastructure designed to serve a memory rather than a function. Paseo de Montejo was built in 1905 by Mérida's henequen oligarchy as a statement of cosmopolitan aspiration — two straight lanes of traffic flowing in both directions, a Yucatecan Champs-Élysées. That image has calcified into civic identity. The roundabout exists not because a roundabout is the right solution for this intersection — it manifestly is not — but because it allows traffic engineers to preserve the visual fiction of the original boulevard while accommodating a volume of cars that the 1905 design never anticipated. The result is an intersection that does none of the things a roundabout should do, surrounded by workarounds and informal adaptations that reveal the gap between what the infrastructure performs and what it actually delivers.

Nostalgia, here, is not sentiment. It is a design constraint. And like all design constraints, it has consequences — borne, as usual, by the people moving through the space without a car.

Hi—I'm Lisa L. Munro, PhD.

I study how power, risk, and everyday life shape our streets.

I'm the person decision-makers turn to when a street or corridor technically "works," but feels dangerous, contested, or fundamentally misaligned with the people who use it. When traffic models say one thing and lived experience says another — when projects stall, provoke backlash, or quietly externalize risk, the problem is rarely a lack of data or technical studies.

My work focuses on that gap and helps decision-makers see what standard studies miss — before harm becomes normalized or conflict becomes unavoidable. By bringing ethnographic observation, historical context, and cultural analysis to mobility questions, I help clarify how power, assumptions, and design decisions shape real outcomes on the ground — and why those patterns matter for safety, equity, and public trust.

Let's talk about what's happening in your city. Fill out the form to get started.