Akademik Veri Yönetim Sistemi
7. Kent Araştırmaları Kongresi, Ankara, Türkiye, 16 - 18 Mayıs 2022, ss.484-495
Purpose of the Study
The world has been predominantly urban, and the urban population is
expected to double by 2050. While this situation poses massive sustainability
challenges regarding housing, essential services, infrastructure, and more,
growing inequalities, economic exclusion, and socio-spatial segregation have
persisted. This fueled the recent global studies that adopt more inclusive and
participatory approaches. Moreover, the Covid-19 pandemic illustrates that
these issues have not been recognized thoroughly. There is an urgent need to
develop a global agenda on inclusion and participation in creating urban
environments. Covid-19 and inequalities mutually reinforce each other: While
the pandemic created new socio-economic and environmental inequalities, its
effects have become more severe due to the deep-rooted inequalities that
especially the disadvantaged and marginalized groups have been experiencing.
Housing conditions and the immediate environments are important determinants
for exacerbating these inequalities. Those deprived of the fundamental
requirements of adequate housing -safe and sufficient living space and
accessible basic services- are more vulnerable and exposed to the pandemic.
However, this period is also a unique opportunity to rethink our conception of housing
at macro and micro levels to develop more inclusive and participatory
approaches. Accordingly, it is crucial to critically evaluate our current
understanding of inclusivity in the context of housing first.
Inclusivity refers to providing
equal opportunities for diverse individuals to participate in everyday life to
the greatest extent possible without discrimination and exclusion, based on the
conceptual grounds of equity, diversity, human rights, and accessibility. The
concept of equity recognizes using redistributive mechanisms for a fairer
environment. Considering that societies consist of people from diverse
backgrounds and cultures, they should be treated according to their diversities
to have equal opportunities and equal access to resources. Based on this
conceptual understanding, inclusive housing can be reevaluated in several
dimensions. Firstly, adequate housing is considered a fundamental human right,
so it should be understood as a universal and essential concept for society to
live in freedom, equality, and dignity. Besides its economic value, a
right-based understanding of inclusive housing is an important goal for
sustainable development. Moreover, diversities of people from different
backgrounds and cultures and those who have varying abilities during their
lives like disabled people, children, and elderly should be taken into
consideration for equal provision of housing services and spaces. Accordingly,
the housing environment should be flexible enough for transformation according
to changing needs of users. Also, social-developmental dimensions of housing
should be at the center with an actively participatory approach. Diverse
societal groups should be able to represent their varying needs properly and
participate in the decision-making processes for housing to create equal
opportunities for all aspects of society. Finally, housing, and related assets,
services, and environments should be accessible to all. This includes access to
environments, systems, and networks of information.
This conceptual understanding of
inclusive housing necessitates a dialectic and dynamic approach responding to
socio-spatial issues of urban environments in a participatory manner.
Especially today, the socio-political production of living environments is ignored,
and housing is considered merely as a financial production, resulting in a
design approach dominated by deterministic orders, fixed and abstract
formulations. Participatory design can be rediscussed in this respect to revive
the notion of space as a practical, participatory, and social product in the
housing context to develop a more inclusive and sustainable approach. Thus, the
paper aims to investigate the potentiality of “Participatory Design” as a
methodological design approach to achieve more coherent and consistent
inclusivity and diversity in strategies and implications of housing design.
Participatory design is evaluated through the represented importance of
engaging and participating in design processes like planning, designing,
testing, building, formulating, and regulating. In other words, participatory
design is considered as a dynamic alternative methodology to redefine housing
architecture by involving a significant heterogenic structure of citizens,
experts, partners, designers, contractors, workers, employees, and other
interested parties to produce more inclusive results and articulations.
Method
of the Study
The study firstly proposes an overall reassessment of the poor
perception and missing links between the participatory design methodological
approach and architectural housing projects despite their common dependency on
different socio-political agents and environments. In that sense, the study
points out the challenges and shortcomings faced in participatory design
strategies and practices, particularly in housing projects. These are the
failure of design to reveal, address and adopt the changing needs of the
diverse users in the participatory initiatives; the limitation of the binary
relationship between participants like designer and users in particular phases
of design; and the continuous ambiguity of inclusivity in participation.
Looking on the bright side, previous limitations, however, may indicate a new
definition of participatory design that reflects a certain level of flexibility
and experience-oriented interpretation defined by improvisation and
impermanence instead of predetermined and standardized practices.
Eventually, the study will
provide an extensive understanding of participatory design as an inclusive design
approach to explore the socio-political and cultural dimensions of housing
projects and relate them to the architectural practice to prioritize
inhabitants' ambitions, needs, and patterns of use, accordingly. How different
practices relate to the conceptual ground of inclusive housing will be
discussed.
Research
Findings and Conclusion
After presenting a more comprehensive understanding of the concept of
participatory design with extended dimensions connected to housing projects,
the study explores new strategies and practices. Derived from a variety of
participatory design initiatives and applications worldwidely, these practices
are studied to achieve a more inclusive and practical outline of the method
that goes in parallel with its new overarching meaning. Accordingly, the study
targets more inclusive, flexible, and two-way communication-based strategies of
participatory design. These strategies seem to be reflected in housing projects
in different phases, such as pre-design, design, construction, and occupancy.
The study points out participatory design strategies in the pre-design phase in
forms of participatory panels, inclusive forums, subjective surveys, and
communal initiatives like (Community Design Centers) (CDC) initiatives, that
offers a collaboration between civil society and architectural design services
for less fortuned groups and communities, and (Creative Capacity Building)
(CCB) participatory training programs which promote problem definition,
subjective solutions, and adaptive common alternative practices of
participatory design. It illustrates participatory design strategies in the
design phase in forms of dynamic architectural design concepts and project
models (such as ‘Open Building Concept’ developed by John Habraken, ‘User-defined housing idea’ by Eilfried
Huth and Günther Domenig, and ‘Timber
frame self-built house design project’ designed by Walter Segal.)
In addition, the study spots the light on participatory design practices
in the construction phase in the forms of workshops and collective work like
(Learning through doing/making) practice by Lucien Kroll and (Community Self Build Agency) (CSBA) that encourages
self-build housing for the unemployed, people on low incomes, and the young. At
last, the study shows participatory design strategies in the occupancy phase in
forms of flexible use patterns and designed incomplete constructions for future
participants’ appropriations. Self-management and co-occupancy in Co-housing
communities that promote collaboration and negotiation between both housing
private stakes and the whole community, and diverse users of the common spaces
in housing projects are discussed.
In conclusion, by exploring
participatory design strategies and practices in different stages of housing
projects, related sustainability issues are discussed regarding the concept of
inclusivity. The study relates the participatory design approach to more
inclusive evaluation and extended values of sustainability in housing. From one
perspective, the participatory design approach provides strong social
sustainability in housing projects by including excluded groups like children,
youth, immigrants, elderlies, and other different minorities. From another
perspective, the participatory design approach advocates economic
sustainability by providing economic alternatives and architectural
interventions through minimizing spending and limiting unnecessary costs led by
an inappropriate read of the design’s context and users. Ultimately, the
participatory design approach strengthens environmental sustainability by
providing common alternatives with beneficial exploitation that consume less of
our natural resources and lead to more accessible healthy environments.