City Know-hows

Hostility in the city: How hostile architecture may impact the health of the homeless 

This bench with a middle armrest in Rittenhouse Square park, Philadelphia is one example of hostile architecture, where individuals can sit on it for a period of time but it is designed to prohibit anyone laying horizontally on it to sleep. Photograph: Brendan McCreath.

Death remains an ever-present threat to the unhoused community. Hostile architecture designs like benches with middle armrests or spikes along ledges likely contribute to the massive health disparities homeless individuals face. It’s time to design something new.

Share

Target audience

Urban planners, city planning officials who play a role in how public spaces are organized and constructed, public health officials whose research interests are in the homeless population or the built environment

The problem

Individuals facing homelessness are also subjected to vast health disparities compared to those living in stable housing. Some of these health disparities may be due to the built environment of our cities, specifically how public spaces are built or include design features to exclude the presence of the homeless population (commonly known as “hostile architecture”). To date there is little research or speculation about the health effects of these designs.

What we did and why

This article introduces hostile architecture to the readers utilizing a theoretical background and real-world examples, as well as explores various aspects of the health and wellbeing of those who face absolute homelessness. I then discuss how conceptually there is likely a relationship between hostile architecture and the health of the unhoused population. Utilizing the tools of urban bioethics, I outline several ethical frameworks to judge this relationship.

Our study’s contribution

This article sheds light on an aspect of public design that is an emerging subject in the public and academic spheres. New to the discussion of hostile architecture is how it may influence health outcomes of the unhoused population. I also introduce the subject to the field of urban bioethics, which would likely have much to say in regard to further research and consideration of using hostile architecture.

Impacts for city policy and practice

This article is only a conceptual discussion of hostile architecture and homeless health. Further research is warranted to fully understand the extent that these designs may be harming this population and how to adequately advocate for these individuals. Careful re-design of our public spaces may be warranted, however further funding for homeless resources and housing programs are likely to generate the greatest impact on improving homeless health disparities.

Further information

Full research article:

Related posts

A health equity-informed review of pedestrian urban designs and place attachment, sense of community

Building place attachment and sense of community through design can improve community well-being, yet reviews on this topic are lacking. This manuscript presents a systematic review of the links between pedestrian designs and place attachment and sense of community, and also highlights several health equity considerations to encourage new ideas about inclusive and healthy urban design practice and study.

Read More »

User experience of neighbourhood greenspace and perceived impact on health and wellbeing: the case of an urban extension to a ‘Healthy New Town’ in England

Providing access to greenspace is insufficient in ensuring that positive benefits are realised. Critical characteristics may distinguish between those spaces that encourage people to visit them and those that are uninviting. This article provides a case study of a residential urban extension in one of the UK’s ‘Healthy New Towns’.

Read More »