From Ukraine to Gaza
The primary purpose of hostile design is to make it difficult or impossible for homeless individuals to sleep, sit, or linger comfortably in public areas. You can often find anti-homeless architecture in places like parks, bus shelters, and underpasses, where homeless people may seek refuge.
These features include spikes on ledges, sloped benches, armrests in the middle of benches, and uncomfortable materials such as metal or concrete. They have been implemented in cities around the globe and across multiple areas, from landscaping to street planning.
Anti-homeless architecture reinforces social inequality by denying basic rights to those already living on the margins of society. In actuality, measures like this are shortsighted and ineffective, because they merely displace homelessness to other areas rather than addressing its underlying causes.
Such measures reinforce the marginalization and exclusion of homeless people from public spaces, which further exacerbates the existing stigma about their presence. These designs also support the misconception that homelessness is a personal choice, even though it is actually a systemic failure.
But while some spaces have an obvious display of anti-homeless sentiment, there are other spaces that are more subtle with their designs. Some hostile architecture has been built into windowsills and even railings.
Hostile architecture has seen a major rise in New York City, in particular, where about 100,000 people are homeless, more than 5% of whom live on the street. Anti-homeless designs have made it more difficult for them. Indeed, certain railway stations in the city have even removed benches entirely so as to deter homeless people from using them.
The fact is that the inclusion and compassion that you might wish to find in your community is entirely undermined through hostile architecture, since it establishes physical boundaries against those in need.
Another destructive side effect of hostile architecture is that it doesn’t only affect homeless people. By applying such designs to benches and other areas of public space, it discourages people from using them entirely. Even the active removal of benches has the consequence of affecting the disabled and the elderly who would normally seek rest on them.
Critics have pointed out that the existence of hostile architecture risks supporting a general lack of empathy and compassion towards vulnerable populations, so that aesthetics and commercial interests are considered more important than human welfare.
By criminalizing homelessness through design, it pushes marginalized individuals into even more precarious and dangerous situations. These individuals may find themselves drawn to crime, in the hopes that they might financially support themselves.
Instead of addressing the root causes of homelessness, anti-homeless architecture prioritizes superficial solutions that neglect the underlying social issues. People are made to believe that it is okay to dehumanize homeless people by treating them as unwelcome nuisances, when this should not be the case.
Some root causes of homelessness include lack of affordable housing, mental health issues, and economic inequality. So long as these remain unaddressed, homelessness will continue to grow rapidly.
Hostile design begs the question as to who is worthy of basic human rights and dignity. Although the common belief is that all people should be afforded this, anti-homeless architecture negatively perpetuates the idea that homeless people are the exception.
Social connection in communities can be rapidly destroyed due to anti-homeless architecture, since it actively reinforces divisions between different socioeconomic groups.
Anti-homeless architecture reflects broader societal attitudes towards poverty and inequality, highlighting the need for systemic change. Indeed, it serves as a visible reminder of the structural barriers that prevent marginalized individuals from fully participating in society.
Hostile architecture is one of many ways in which homeless people are trapped in an endless cycle of poverty and discrimination, since they are denied opportunities for rest, shelter, and community support.
Thankfully, there are some impactful ways that cities can move forward to create inclusive environments for everyone. Governments and city officials should reassess and revise policies that promote or allow the implementation of anti-homeless architecture.
Another way to address hostile design is to involve homeless individuals, advocacy groups, and community stakeholders in discussions and decision-making processes regarding urban design and homelessness policies.
Communities should encourage the development of inclusive urban design solutions that prioritize accessibility, safety, and comfort for all residents, regardless of housing status.
One of the most important ways to address this issue is to allocate resources towards expanding and improving support services for homeless individuals. This includes affordable housing, mental health care, and job training programs.
You might even find yourself noticing a degradation of public trust in government and institutions, simply because hostile architecture is one of many indicators that such administrations lack empathy towards vulnerable populations.
During the design process for public spaces, there should be crucial collaborations between architects, urban planners, social workers, and homeless advocates to design the spaces in a way that meets the needs of diverse populations.
If you want to address the issue of homelessness, one way to enact positive change is to provide temporary shelters, safe havens, and transitional housing options for homeless individuals while permanent housing solutions are developed.
There should also be the fostering of partnerships between government agencies, non-profit organizations, and private businesses to address homelessness through coordinated efforts and resources. Only together can such social injustices be overcome!
Adopt approaches to addressing the root causes of homelessness, such as poverty, inequality, lack of affordable housing, and systemic discrimination. By seeing hostile architecture as a symptom of a larger disease, it becomes far more beneficial for everyone to look at the bigger picture.
Ultimately, anti-homeless architecture is a manifestation of societal neglect and indifference towards those most in need, reflecting a failure in compassion and solidarity. But it is never too late to deconstruct the designs that have been put in place, and to reach out with a helping hand.
Sources: (The New York Times) (The Neighborhood Design Center) (Big Issue) (The Bowery Mission)
See also: Global poverty: an unstable truth
Anti-homeless architecture, also known as hostile architecture, refers to numerous urban design features that are intentionally implemented to deter homeless individuals from resting or seeking shelter in public spaces.
In the heart of our cities lies a battleground where designers wage war against the most vulnerable people in our society: the homeless. For many years, the urban landscape has evolved to divide entire communities and public spaces so that homeless people cannot use them, and these design choices reflect the shadows behind our principles.
Intrigued? Click through this gallery to see how anti-homeless architecture actually neglects everyone.
The controversy surrounding anti-homeless structures in cities
Why are public spaces not built for everyone?
LIFESTYLE Human rights
In the heart of our cities lies a battleground where designers wage war against the most vulnerable people in our society: the homeless. For many years, the urban landscape has evolved to divide entire communities and public spaces so that homeless people cannot use them, and these design choices reflect the shadows behind our principles.
Intrigued? Click through this gallery to see how anti-homeless architecture actually neglects everyone.