Hostile design: how can urban design impact social inequality?
source link: https://uxdesign.cc/hostile-design-how-can-urban-design-impact-social-inequality-d948d428292e
Go to the source link to view the article. You can view the picture content, updated content and better typesetting reading experience. If the link is broken, please click the button below to view the snapshot at that time.
Hostile design: how can urban design impact social inequality?
A design practice that obscures real social issues from the public.
Source: https://www.psychologytoday.com/ca/blog/modern-minds/202012/is-your-town-filled-hostile-architecture
Imagine this. It’s a crisp autumn afternoon and you’re walking through your city’s downtown area. You see a beautifully designed bench in the park and decide to take a moment to rest and enjoy the view.
As you sit, however, you quickly realize the bench isn’t as comfortable as it looks. The armrests in the middle of the bench cut into your sides and the seat’s slanted design makes it difficult to find a comfortable position. It’s clear that this bench wasn’t designed for relaxation, and that’s no accident.
Unbeknownst to many of us, this kind of design is a part of our everyday lives. These seemingly innocent fixtures in our cities are examples of “hostile architecture” or “defensive design” which are deliberate design strategies employed to guide, control, or even restrict how we interact with urban spaces.
From benches designed to discourage sleeping or loitering to spikes preventing birds from perching, or studs deterring skateboarders from grinding on ledges, the physical environment around us is full of subtle cues influencing our behavior.
But what is hostile architecture, and why does it matter?
Is it a necessary means of maintaining order and cleanliness in our public spaces, or is it an exclusionary practice that targets the most vulnerable among us?
What is Hostile Design?
Hostile architecture, sometimes referred to as defensive design or unpleasant design, refers to elements of the built environment intentionally designed to control, direct, or inhibit human behavior.
The intention is often to deter activities that are deemed undesirable, such as sleeping in public, skateboarding, littering, or even lingering.
Source: https://gothamist.com/news/a-field-guide-to-the-weapons-of-hostile-architecture-in-nyc
One of the most apparent examples of hostile architecture is the “anti-homeless” bench. Take a look at many public benches and you’ll see armrests positioned in the middle. While these might first appear as a mere convenience for leaning, their primary function is to prevent people from lying down, thus discouraging homeless individuals from using the benches as makeshift beds.
Another common form of hostile design is the use of “anti-skateboarding” devices. Metal studs or brackets, sometimes called “skate stoppers”, are attached to urban surfaces like ledges, curbs, or steps. While often unnoticed by the general public, their purpose is to disrupt skateboarders and prevent them from grinding on these surfaces and potentially causing damage.
Yet another form of hostile architecture is even more subtle. Certain establishments use high-frequency sound devices, sometimes known as “anti-loitering devices”, that emits a high-pitched sound mainly audible to younger people.
These devices aim to deter groups of teenagers from congregating near businesses or in public spaces.
These examples of hostile architecture have become increasingly commonplace in our cities. They silently shape our interactions with urban spaces, often passing unnoticed. However, their effects on our behaviors and on the most vulnerable segments of the population are profound and warrant deeper exploration.
History and Origins of Hostile Design
Hostile architecture did not appear out of nowhere. It emerged in response to perceived problems and challenges in urban spaces. Although the term itself has only been coined in recent years, the practice has historical roots in the design of cities.
In the ancient times and middle ages, cities were often designed with defensive purposes in mind. Walls, gates, and fortifications were all forms of architecture aimed at controlling behavior and maintaining security. While the threats they were designed to counter were much more life-threatening, these structures represented an early form of defensive design.
Ancient Times
- City Walls: Ancient cities often had walls around them to provide defense against invading forces. An example is the walls of Babylon in present-day Iraq, which were constructed from the 18th to the 6th century BC and were considered one of the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World.
- Castles: The most iconic form of defensive architecture. They were built with a variety of features designed to repel attackers, such as thick stone walls, drawbridges, moats, and arrow slits. One example is the Windsor Castle in England, originally built in the 11th century.
Source: https://www.britannica.com/topic/Windsor-Castle
Middle Ages
- Fortified Churches: During the Middle Ages, many churches were designed with defensive features to protect against potential attacks. This is particularly true in areas with a history of conflict. For example, the fortified churches in Transylvania, Romania, were built with high walls and towers for observation and defense.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Villages_with_fortified_churches_in_Transylvania
With the more recent context, the rise of hostile architecture can be traced back to the mid-20th century, as urban spaces became denser and more contested. Urban planners and designers sought ways to control these spaces and deter behaviors considered anti-social or disruptive. This gave rise to a more conscious and deliberate implementation of design elements aimed at controlling, guiding, or deterring certain behaviors.
While the name and terminology have evolved over time and vary across different contexts, reflecting the wide array of design strategies and their various targets.
Regardless of the name, the main objective is typically about controlling or influencing behavior in public spaces.
Social Implications and Efficacy of Hostile Design in Modern Contexts
Hostile design, while primarily functional in its intention, carries significant social implications and has been subjected to questions about its overall efficacy in modern contexts. A growing body of academic research reveals these multifaceted impacts. Meanwhile, many would argue the ethicality of such a design.
In the public spaces we share, city planners and property owners often use hostile design to deter unwanted activities. As James Wilt’s CBC piece, “How ‘defensive design’ leads to rigid benches, metal spikes, and ‘visual violence’ in modern cities” explains, it’s a strategy intended to prevent behaviors like homelessness and public disorder. Yet, effectiveness isn’t synonymous with problem-solving. Wilt points out that
“the strategy of ‘target hardening’ doesn’t decrease crime, but simply displaces it.”
The hostile design pushes social issues into different areas without addressing the root causes. In addition, not many people in the city know about the intentions of the designs and just assume that it is part of modern contemporary art when stumbled upon.
Alex Andreou, in his article “Anti-homeless spikes: ‘Sleeping rough opened my eyes to the city’s barbed cruelty” in The Guardian, highlights the wide-reaching social implications of this strategy. He states,
“It reveals how corporate hygiene has overridden human considerations…”
Hostile design breeds a sense of exclusion and unwelcome, which can deepen social inequalities and further marginalize vulnerable populations. Andreou also mentions the chilling example of “anti-homeless spikes,” underscoring the aggressive tactics employed.
Meanwhile, Selena Savic, in her essay for the “Unpleasant Design” book, dissects the ethical dilemmas at the heart of hostile design. The surface argument appears to be for the maintenance of clean and safe public spaces.
However, beneath the surface, Savic suggests, we are
“deliberately increasing the discomfort of some people who are deemed unfit for particular spaces.”
This points to a form of subtle discrimination and dehumanization that is often overlooked.
All three sources highlight the key tension in urban design: balancing the needs and rights of all citizens in shared spaces. The decisions we make in designing our cities are a reflection of our societal values and aspirations. As Wilt said, “It’s an example of the ways we design the world, either to care for people — or to keep them out.”
The conversation surrounding hostile design underscores a need for a more compassionate and comprehensive approach to dealing with complex urban problems.
Further, the idea of hostile architecture has always been a topic of debate as it’s seemingly an ill-intent design effort deeply rooted in societal stigma. The deliberate intent to create anti-homeless environments in the public eye can be seen as unsettling for many people that actually understand the purpose behind each hostile design artifact in public.
The problem is, not everybody knows.
Examples of Hostile Architecture That You Probably Never Noticed
There are many things that are considered hostile architecture, however, not everybody understands the intentions behind it and would often just associate it as a poorly designed fixture. The following images are taken from ReThinkingTheFuture.
The Leaning Bar
This bench is placed in New York City at Bay Ridge’s 53rd station. It is quite obvious that the function of the leaning bar is to compensate for a regular bench that has a flat surface and backrest. This is particularly exclusionary in the way that it doesn’t allow actual “sitting” and thus repels people from sleeping on it.
Blue Lit Washroom
This washroom is a public washroom in Victoria, Canada. The idea behind the blue light is to obscure one’s veins and used to prevent drug users from injecting drugs into their veins.
Sectioned Benches
This sectioned bench is placed somewhere in the UK and several variants of it can be found worldwide. The idea behind this design is to prevent homeless people from sleeping on it.
While there are several different variations of benches, you may find a lot of modern contemporary designs that have the same intent, such as the last picture which is placed in Japan. The idea is to make it near impossible for someone to sleep on it while obscuring its intent in the public space.
Sidewalk Boulders
These sidewalk boulders are placed in San Francisco, USA. Large boulders were placed on the open pavement as a way to take up space and prevent homeless people from sleeping on it.
Final Thoughts
As designers, it is important to understand that our designs can make a real impact and affect people’s lives.
Recognizing the social and ethical implications of hostile architecture is a crucial step in fostering more inclusive and empathetic cities. These implications tell us about who we are as a society and how we treat our most vulnerable members.
Understanding hostile design helps us to question and challenge these underlying societal structures. In Andreou’s words, it reveals how
“corporate hygiene has overridden human considerations.”
Similarly, as Savic points out, we might be
“deliberately increasing the discomfort of some people who are deemed unfit for particular spaces.”
The ethical questions surrounding hostile design challenge us to consider the fairness and inclusivity of our public spaces. It encourages critical thinking about the kind of society we want to cultivate and the role urban design can play in shaping these social environments.
By raising awareness and understanding of these implications, we can strive for a more compassionate approach to urban problems, aiming not to exclude or discomfort, but to accommodate and care for everybody.
Recommend
About Joyk
Aggregate valuable and interesting links.
Joyk means Joy of geeK