Podcasts > Stuff You Should Know > Short Stuff: Hostile Architecture

Short Stuff: Hostile Architecture

By iHeartPodcasts

This episode of the Stuff You Should Know podcast explores hostile or defensive architecture — design elements in public spaces intended to discourage activities like loitering or sleeping, often targeting those experiencing homelessness. From spiked benches to unsittable surfaces, the hosts provide an overview of the history, ethics, and social implications of these exclusionary structures.

The blurb highlights how hostile architecture emerged from a desire to address perceived nuisances, but critics argue it disproportionately impacts vulnerable groups without addressing root causes of homelessness. Through case studies and analysis, the hosts facilitate a nuanced discussion around public access, inclusion, and compassionate approaches to complex societal challenges.

Listen to the original

Short Stuff: Hostile Architecture

This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Jun 19, 2024 episode of the Stuff You Should Know

Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.

Short Stuff: Hostile Architecture

1-Page Summary

Defining Hostile/Defensive Architecture

Hostile or defensive architecture describes features in public spaces that deter unwanted activities like loitering or sleeping, often targeting the homeless. As Josh Clark explains, examples include:

  • Benches with armrests or spikes to prevent lying down
  • Bright lighting in alcoves to discourage people staying
  • Blue lights in bathrooms to deter IV drug use by obscuring veins

Such designs are often subtle, disguising their exclusionary intent as safety or aesthetic elements.

History and Evolution

One early form of hostile architecture dates back to 19th-century Venice, where urine deflectors were installed to discourage public urination. The approach spread in the 1990s as a tool to manage perceived issues like homelessness in cities.

While framed as enhancing safety and cleanliness, critics argue hostile architecture disproportionately targets vulnerable groups without addressing root social issues.

Ethical and Social Implications

Opponents voice concerns that hostile architecture restricts access to public spaces and unfairly targets marginalized groups like the homeless, disabled, and elderly. They argue it's an ineffective, dehumanizing way to address complex issues like homelessness.

Hostile architecture projects a mentality that public spaces are only for those working or consuming, excluding those who don't fit that mold. Instead, critics advocate creating inclusive spaces and addressing societal challenges like homelessness with compassion.

Case Studies

  • In New York, "leaning bars" prevent people from sleeping or loitering in subway areas.
  • London's 2-ton Camden Bench has an uncomfortable, sloped design to deter long-term occupation.
  • In China's Shandong province, "pay-and-sit" benches require coin deposits to retract spikes and allow temporary sitting.

1-Page Summary

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • Blue lights in bathrooms are sometimes used to make it difficult for individuals to see their veins clearly, which can deter intravenous drug use. This strategy aims to discourage drug use by making it harder for individuals to inject substances. The blue light can distort the appearance of veins, making it challenging for drug users to find a suitable vein for injection. This method is part of a broader approach to prevent drug-related activities in public spaces.
  • Hostile architecture reinforces the idea that public spaces should cater primarily to individuals who are actively engaging in economic activities or consuming goods and services. This design approach prioritizes commercial interests and excludes those who do not conform to this expectation, such as individuals who are homeless or not actively participating in consumerism. It reflects a societal bias towards valuing productivity and consumption over the presence and needs of marginalized groups in public areas. This mentality can lead to the creation of urban environments that prioritize economic activities over inclusivity and social welfare.

Counterarguments

  • Hostile architecture can be seen as a necessary measure to maintain order and safety in public spaces.
  • Features like armrests on benches can provide comfort for those sitting and can help people with mobility issues to stand up more easily.
  • Bright lighting can enhance visibility and safety for all users of a public space, deterring crime and increasing the feeling of security at night.
  • Blue lights in bathrooms, while deterring drug use, can also create a calming atmosphere and reduce the visibility of unsightly stains.
  • Urine deflectors and similar measures can be viewed as a way to maintain hygiene and cleanliness in public areas.
  • The spread of hostile architecture in the 1990s could be interpreted as a response to the increased need for urban spaces to accommodate a growing population and diverse activities.
  • Some argue that the primary intent of these designs is not to target vulnerable groups but to prevent behaviors that are deemed inappropriate for the setting.
  • Proponents might argue that public spaces should be kept available for their intended uses, and that measures to prevent misuse are part of responsible urban management.
  • The idea that hostile architecture is dehumanizing could be countered by the argument that it is a tool to encourage appropriate use of shared spaces, which benefits the majority.
  • The notion that public spaces are only for workers or consumers can be challenged by the view that these spaces are for a variety of uses, and that maintaining them for those purposes requires certain regulations.
  • The design of features like the Camden Bench or leaning bars can be defended as innovative solutions to urban problems, balancing the needs of different users.
  • "Pay-and-sit" benches could be seen as a way to fund the maintenance of public seating or to ensure turnover so that more people have access to seating when needed.

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Short Stuff: Hostile Architecture

Defining and providing examples of hostile/defensive architecture

Hostile architecture, also known as defensive or exclusionary design, describes the implementation of features in public spaces to deter activities such as lying down, loitering, or other uses deemed undesirable, often targeting groups like the homeless.

Host climate by design

Hostile architecture utilizes a range of deterrent features, such as barriers, dividers, spikes, and slants on benches, sidewalks, and public fixtures to prevent extended use. Such designs are often overlooked by the general public and can be disguised as benign features for safety or erosion control.

Preventative measures against desired use

Josh Clark provides an example of "pay-and-sit" benches which require a coin deposit to lower spikes for sitting. Once the time expires, the spikes rise to discourage extended use. Additionally, benches may have armrests in the middle to prevent someone from lying across, and large rocks may be placed under overpasses to stop the homeless from setting up shelter.

Subtle but effective deterrents

The podcast highlights subtle design elements that are often invisible to most, such as armrests on benches, concrete slabs with metal to deter skaters, and bright lights in subway alcoves. These are typically perceived as aesthetic or safety features rather than preventative measures against the homeless or loitering.

Strategies to discourage unwanted behaviors

In terms of preventing specific behaviors, blue lights are installed in public bathrooms to deter IV drug use by making veins harder to find. The Camden Bench is a partic ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

Defining and providing examples of hostile/defensive architecture

Additional Materials

Counterarguments

  • Hostile architecture can be seen as a symptom of larger societal issues, such as inadequate social support and housing policies, rather than a solution to the presence of homeless individuals in public spaces.
  • The implementation of hostile architecture can be argued to be a form of discrimination against vulnerable populations, as it disproportionately affects the homeless and may violate their rights to use public space.
  • Some may argue that public spaces should be designed to be inclusive and accommodating to all, rather than exclusive and deterring to some, suggesting a need for more compassionate urban design.
  • There is a debate about whether hostile architecture actually solves the problems it aims to address or simply pushes them into less visible areas, potentially exacerbating the issues.
  • Critics may argue that the money spent on hostile architecture could be more effectively used for social services and support for the homeless population.
  • The use of hostile architecture can be seen as a failure to address the root causes of behaviors like loitering and public drug use, such as poverty, addiction, and mental health issues.
  • Some may argue that the presence of features like spikes and dividers can detract from the aesthetic and welcoming nature of public spaces for all users, not just the targeted groups.
  • There is a potential for hostile architecture to create unintended consequences, such as ...

Actionables

  • You can raise awareness by photographing examples of hostile architecture in your city and sharing them on social media with informative captions. By doing this, you help others recognize these designs in their daily lives and understand their impact on marginalized communities. For instance, if you notice a bench with dividers, take a picture and post it with a caption that explains how this design prevents people from lying down, sparking a conversation about the use of public space.
  • Start a community art project that transforms hostile architecture into engaging public art without altering its original function. Collaborate with local artists to add color or designs to surfaces like slanted benches or concrete slabs. This can draw attention to the presence of hostile architecture and create a dialogue about its role in public spaces while maintaining the structure's integrity.
  • Engage in a personal audit of the public spaces yo ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Short Stuff: Hostile Architecture

The history and evolution of hostile architecture over time

Hostile architecture is a controversial aspect of urban design that has evolved over time to address various issues such as public urination, homelessness, and loitering.

Early Examples of Hostile Design

One of the earliest forms of hostile architecture dates back to the 19th century in Venice, Italy. There, urine deflectors were implemented on public buildings. These sloped surfaces were designed to deflect urine back towards the individual who attempted to urinate on the building, acting as a deterrent against public urination.

The Spread in Modern Urban Planning

As the need to regulate public spaces grew, the use of hostile architecture became more widespread in urban planning, particularly in the 1990s. In this era, it was utilized as a tool to address the perceived problems associated with homelessness and loitering in public spaces.

Hostile Architecture as a Doub ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

The history and evolution of hostile architecture over time

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • Hostile architecture is a design approach in urban planning that aims to influence behavior by using physical elements to restrict certain activities in public spaces, often targeting specific groups like the homeless or skateboarders. It includes features like anti-homeless spikes, sloped surfaces, armrests on benches, and small trash bin openings to deter unwanted behaviors. This design strategy has historical roots in social engineering efforts, such as 19th-century urine deflectors and urban planning practices aimed at segregation.
  • A urine deflector is a device designed to redirect the flow of urine, commonly used in various settings like toilets and public spaces to prevent splashing or deter unwanted behavior like public urination. In urban design, urine deflectors were historically installed on buildings to discourage people from urinating in public areas, reflecting early forms of hostile architecture aimed at controlling behavior in cities. These angled surfaces redirect urine back towards the individual, serving as a deterrent against using the building as a urinal. This practice is considered one of the earliest examples of hostile architecture, illustrating how design elements can influence behavior in public spaces.
  • Hostile architecture is often used to deter behaviors like loitering and sleeping in public spaces, which are seen as undesirable by city planners. Homelessness is a complex social issue that involves individuals lacking stable housing, often leading them to seek shelter in public areas. Hostile architecture is somet ...

Counterarguments

  • Hostile architecture can be seen as a necessary measure to protect property and maintain public order in urban environments.
  • Some argue that the presence of hostile features can encourage individuals to use designated facilities and services.
  • It's suggested that hostile architecture can be part of a broader strategy that includes providing support and services for vulnerable populations.
  • The design and implementation of hostile architecture can be done with aesthetic considerations in mind, blending with the environment and serving multiple functions.
  • There is a perspective that not all measures categorized as hostile architecture are intended to be hostile but are rather unintended consequences of designs aimed at other purposes, such as preventing skateboarding damage.
  • Some proponents argue that hostile architecture can help in reducing crime and increasing safety by designing out crime through environmental desi ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Short Stuff: Hostile Architecture

The ethics and social implications of hostile architecture

Hostile architecture, also known as anti-homeless architecture, refers to the design of public spaces in a way that discourages their use for purposes other than those intended, often targeting marginalized groups in society. This controversial form of urban design raises significant ethical concerns and sparks debates about the kind of society we are shaping through our built environment.

Hostile architecture raises ethical concerns about restricting access to public spaces and unfairly targeting marginalized groups like the homeless, disabled, and elderly

Critics are voicing their concerns regarding the ethical implications of hostile architecture. They argue that such designs, which can include spikes on flat surfaces, armrests on benches to prevent lying down, and sloped or ridged surfaces, serve to exclude already vulnerable populations from public spaces. Homeless individuals, who may seek refuge in these areas, are the most visibly targeted group. However, hostile architecture does not only affect the homeless. It can also pose accessibility issues for the elderly and disabled persons, limiting their freedom and mobility within public spaces.

Critics argue hostile to architecture is an ineffective and dehumanizing approach to addressing complex social issues like homelessness, rather than providing meaningful solutions

Opponents of hostile architecture argue that it is a superficial response to the deeper issue of homelessness and fails to provide any meaningful solutions. By making public spaces uncomfortable and unwelcoming, hostile architecture simply pushes the problem out of sight, often further marginalizing those it affects. Moreover, such design choices can dehumanize individuals who are in need of support, reinforcing a perception that they are a problem to be managed rather than members of the community deserving of dignity and assistance.

Hostile architecture can be seen as projecting a mentality that public spaces are only for those who are working or consuming, excluding those who do not fit that mold

Critics also suggest that hostile architecture reflects and perpetuates a societal mentality that values public spaces on ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

The ethics and social implications of hostile architecture

Additional Materials

Clarifications

  • Hostile architecture is a design approach in urban spaces that aims to control behavior by using physical elements to discourage certain activities, often targeting marginalized groups like the homeless. It includes features like spikes on flat surfaces, benches with armrests, and sloped window sills to prevent specific behaviors. Hostile architecture is criticized for its exclusionary nature and its impact on vulnerable populations, raising ethical concerns about the use of public spaces. This design strategy has historical roots in using urban planning to control social behavior, dating back to practices like segregation in the United States and social control measures in other countries.
  • Hostile architecture, also known as anti-homeless architecture, involves designing public spaces to discourage certain behaviors, often targeting marginalized groups like the homeless. This can include features like spikes on flat surfaces, armrests on benches to prevent lying down, and other elements that make resting or seeking shelter difficult. Hostile architecture is criticized for its exclusionary nature and for failing to address the root causes of social issues like homelessness. It reflects a societal mindset that prioritizes certain activities and individuals in public spaces, while marginalizing those who do not fit these norms.
  • Spikes on flat surfaces are physical deterrents often installed in public spaces to prevent individuals, like homeless people, from sitting or lying down. These spikes are designed to make the surface uncomfortable or impractical for extended use, aiming to discourage loitering or sleeping in specific areas. The presence of spikes on flat surfaces is a common example of hostile architecture, intended to modify behavior by making certain spaces less inviting for certain groups of people.
  • Armrests on benches are physical barriers added to seating surfaces to prevent individuals from lying down or sleeping on them. This design feature is often implemented in public spaces as a form of hostile architecture to deter certain behaviors, particularly by marginalized groups like the homeless. The presence of armrests restricts the usable space on benches, making it uncomfortable or impossible for individuals to stretch out and rest, thereby discouraging prolonged stays or sleeping in these areas. This practice is controversial as it raises ethical concerns about exclusion and the treatment of vulnerable populations in urban environments.
  • Sloped or ridged surfaces in hostile architecture are designed to make areas uncomfortable for sitting or lying down. These surfaces are intentionally created to deter certain behaviors, such as loitering or sleeping in public spaces. The incline or uneven texture of these surfaces makes them unsuitable for extended periods of rest, discouraging individuals from using these spaces for purposes other than intended. Such design features are often criticized for targeting vulnerable populations like the homeless and can contribute to the exclusion of marginalized groups from public areas.
  • Marginalized groups are segments of society that experience discrimination, exclusion, or limited access to resources and opportunities due to various factors like race, gender, socioeconomic st ...

Counterarguments

  • Hostile architecture can be seen as a necessary measure to maintain the intended use of public spaces, ensuring they are accessible and comfortable for the general public.
  • Some argue that the presence of individuals sleeping or loitering in public spaces can create safety concerns or deter the public from using these areas, thus justifying the use of hostile architecture.
  • It is suggested that hostile architecture can help to prevent damage and wear to public property, which can be costly to repair and maintain.
  • There is an argument that the implementation of hostile architecture can be part of a broader strategy that includes support services for the homeless and marginalized, rather than being the sole approach to the issue.
  • Some believe that the design of public spaces should prioritize the needs of the majority while still ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free
Short Stuff: Hostile Architecture

Specific case studies of hostile architecture in different cities

Urban spaces are often designed to serve various functions, and sometimes this includes discouraging certain behaviors through architectural design. Here are examples from different cities around the world where the built environment is altered to deter unwanted activities such as sleeping or loitering.

In New York City, "leaning bars" have been installed in subway areas to prevent people from sleeping or loitering

In New York City, a form of hostile architecture can be seen with the implementation of "leaning bars." These bars are supports that people can lean against, but they are not designed for sitting or sleeping. Typically, these leaning bars are installed against subway walls or on sidewalks to give pedestrians a place to rest briefly while still preventing long-term occupation that might be associated with sleeping or loitering in subway areas.

The Camden Bench in London is a 2-ton concrete slab designed with an uncomfortable, sloped surface to deter long-term occupation

In London, the Camden Bench is a striking example of hostile architecture. This 2-ton concrete slab has been crafted with an intentional design to make it uncomfortable for extended use. It features an uneven, sloped surface, and none of its parts are flat, which discourages people from sitting too long or sleeping on it. The Camden Bench is a direct physical response to the need to control how public spaces are utilized and to prevent them from becoming makeshift beds or spots for extended loitering.

In Shandong, China, "pay-and-sit" benches require a coin deposit to low ...

Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary

Registered users get access to the Full Podcast Summary and Additional Materials. It’s easy and free!
Start your free trial today

Specific case studies of hostile architecture in different cities

Additional Materials

Counterarguments

  • The use of "leaning bars" may disproportionately affect the homeless and vulnerable populations who have nowhere else to go.
  • Hostile architecture like the Camden Bench can be seen as a failure to address the root causes of homelessness and public loitering.
  • "Pay-and-sit" benches may discriminate against those who cannot afford to pay, effectively privatizing public seating.
  • Such measures can be viewed as treating symptoms rather than solving the broader social issues that lead to the behaviors they aim to deter.
  • Hostile architecture can contribute to a less welcoming and inclusive urban environment.
  • These designs may not effectively deter the targeted behaviors and could lead to individuals finding other, potentially ...

Actionables

  • You can design a personal space management plan for your home to discourage clutter and maintain organization. Start by identifying areas where clutter accumulates and create designated zones with specific purposes, such as a reading nook with a single comfortable chair that discourages piling up items. Use furniture with built-in storage to limit surface space for items to accumulate, similar to how the Camden Bench's design discourages long-term occupation.
  • Explore the use of timed devices to promote productivity and discourage prolonged breaks during work or study sessions. Invest in a kitchen timer or use a smartphone app to allocate specific time slots for tasks, after which an alarm will sound to signal it's time to move on to the next activity. This mimics the concept of the "pay-and-sit" benches by creating a physical reminder to avoid overstaying in one task.
  • Create a perso ...

Get access to the context and additional materials

So you can understand the full picture and form your own opinion.
Get access for free

Create Summaries for anything on the web

Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser

Shortform Extension CTA