建筑的使命1）——建筑在挪威弱势居民住房上的潜在作用

埃利·斯托亚/Eli Støa

尚晋 译/Translated by SHANG Jin

建筑的使命1）
——建筑在挪威弱势居民住房上的潜在作用

埃利·斯托亚/Eli Støa

尚晋 译/Translated by SHANG Jin

从建筑品质上看，弱势居民的优质住房指的是什么？本文根据对挪威无家者和寻求避难者住房品质的研究对这一问题展开了讨论。文中强调了非量化品质的重要性，并探讨了保障私密与控制、尊严、建宅过程和积极参与等问题。本文主要论点是，美观、象征及其他非量化的住房品质不仅对于居民的福祉是不可或缺的，而且对于实现边缘化群体的社会融合与赋权等目标也是至关重要的。

住房品质，弱势居民，福祉，社会融合，赋权

“人人都应享有安全美好的生活。这对于接受教育、成立家庭、实现就业和保障健康都非常重要。家宅也是社交生活的平台，并让我们融入本地社区。”[1]

挪威从二战后的前10年开始形成了一种深厚的传统，让公众积极参与住房建设。其总体思想是：住房应是全体市民共享的福利。如今，挪威的住房业为欧洲市场驱动型之首。由于1980年代住房政策开始转向自由化，政府机构不再具有中心地位，也失去了指导住房建设所需的手段。这进一步表明目前挪威的社会住房政策针对的是特定群体，即被列为住房市场中弱势的人群。根据挪威政府的统计，这一群体不到人口的3%[1]，其中包括移民、低收入家庭、残障人士和无家者。除了提供公租房，目前对弱势群体的公共社会支持包括面向个人的低息贷款和补助方案（住房津贴和资助）[2]。

《国家住房与支持服务战略》[1]提出：优质住房对于弱势群体尤为重要，因为它是实现健康、教育与社会融合领域目标的一大支撑。本文将讨论“优质住房”对建筑品质的意义。其基础是针对无家者[3,4]和寻求避难者[5,6]的住房品质研究。虽然《战略》提到了住房的物理属性，但这仅限于实用功能方面，而没有强调美观及其他非量化的建筑品质。我们认为在对居民的福祉和日常生活的影响上，这些品质的潜在作用被低估了。

1 住房品质的建筑因素

关于住房品质，我们开展的研究有两个方面。一是认为品质是在人与物质环境之间的相互作用中不断形成和改造的动态现象。按照这种观点，被列为品质的因素会因居民的生活阶段和偏好而异。它会随时间变化，并取决于评估者的角色——是住户、邻居、业主、开发商还是建筑师[7]。从理论上看，可以说这是一种社会建构主义的住房品质视角。它需要理解不同的住户情况、前提条件和价值观，以及体现人与物质因素相互作用的复杂性，即杜塞所谓的建筑“与世界混为一体”的因素[8]29。这进一步表明品质不是一成不变的，它必须根据住户的情况和时间的变化来考查。

同时，我们认为品质是对象本身内在的特征，因此是有可能区分建筑优劣的。没有这种角度，在建筑设计和居住环境上投入精力就毫无意义。住房品质的建筑因素在本质上是规范性的，其目标通常是为设计师提供实用的指导，给未来的居民支持，并“教育”购房者，使他们知道询问和寻找的目标。在这个意义上，建筑干预的目标就是为社会增加价值。

但是，像这样的实质论方法存在明显的缺陷，因为它会忽视各种可知品质的关系。建筑史上有许多例子表明，尽管建筑师的用意是好的，却因结果更糟而备受责难。杜塞以现代主义建筑为例，认为“建筑增加价值之路绝不平坦”[8]29。所以，建筑师的一项重要任务就是坚持参与公共讨论，探讨我们时代的住房品质的现状和可能，并有义务参与讨论，为所谓的弱势群体研究合适的生活条件。

如今需要将住房品质研究中的社会建构主义同实质论角度结合在一起。一方面，住房品质标准如果不能充分植根于社会文化的土壤中，其意义就极其有限。另一方面，过度相对主义的方法存在着危险。我们认为在既定的文化社会背景中，不从根本上考虑住房条件改善与恶化的区别就无法讨论住房的品质。

综合的方法需要跨学科的研究。在上述两个项目中，本文作者同其他领域的研究人员（环境心理学、人类学和地理学）研究了建筑和其他物质特征与（1）无家者和（2）寻求避难者的住房状况的社会因素之间的相互作用。住房状况包括住房与住区的建筑特征以及本地化与城乡文脉。该项工作建立了一种框架，区分出涵盖了物质和社会因素的4种品质维度[9,10]。这包括（1）功能维度：住房状况如何影响日常生活和作息，比如睡眠、烹饪和饮食，以及培养实践和思维能力的其他工作和创意活动；（2）心理-社会维度：住房状况如何影响安全、独居和与亲友家人共处的可能性；（3）美观维度：建筑和环境的美观如何带来愉悦、感官刺激和幸福；（4）象征维度：住房状况如何表现社会经济地位、社会认同和价值观。

虽然这些维度很多都有可量化的因素（尤其是前两项），但本文的重点是突出非量化品质的重要性。在下文中，我们将详细考查心理-社会、美观和象征维度，并列出将它们转化为建筑方案或干预措施的例子。

2 建筑作为社会包容与融合的潜在手段

尽管政治文件中强调了为所有人提供优质住房的重要性[1]，但建筑意义上的优良品质并没有全面的讨论。此外，最近10年挪威为无家者2）建造了许多住房，并积极将建筑方案作为提高住户尊严与社会认同的手段。其中有些项目是我们研究弱势群体住房品质的对象[3,4]。

"Everyone should live safely and well. This is important in order to get education, start a family, be employed and take care of our health. Our home is also a framework for a social life and provides affiliation with our local communities."[1]

Norway has a strong tradition of public engagement in housing development. Originating in the first decades after the Second World War, Norwegian public housing was based on the idea that it is a welfare good that should be available for all citizens. With the liberal turn in housing policy beginning in the 1980s, the housing sector in Norway is currently among the most marketdriven in Europe. As a result, the public authorities have lost their central role as well as the necessary measures needed to guide housing development. This development further implies that social housing policy in Norway is currently directed towards selected groups defined as disadvantaged in the housing market. According to the Norwegian government, these groups constitute less than three percent of the population[1], and include immigrants, low income families, people with disabilities or mental health problems and homeless people. In addition to the provision of public rental housing, current public social support for disadvantaged groups consists of low interest loans and subsidy schemes (housing allowances and grants) given on individual basis[2].

In the "National strategy for housing and support services"[1]it is stated that good housing is particularly important for disadvantaged groups, since it is believed that higher quality housing supports the health, education and integration goals for these individuals. This article discusses what "good housing" may imply in terms of architectural qualities, and is based on research carried out on housing standards for homeless people[3,4]as well as asylum seekers[5,6]. Although the physical properties of "good" housing are mentioned in the national strategy, these criteria tend to be limited to practical and functional aspects while aesthetic and other non-measurable architectural qualities are not emphasised. This article argues that the potential role of such qualities is underestimated when it comes to the effect they may have on residents' wellbeing and everyday life.

1 Architectural aspects of housing quality

The perspective on housing quality in the research we have carried out has been twofold. First, we regarded quality as a dynamic phenomenon which is continuously shaped and reshaped in the interplay between people and their material surroundings. What is regarded as quality will, according to this perspective, vary according to each resident's phase in life and their preferences. Their perspectives change over time and are also shaped by the role the person has, whether he or she is a resident, neighbour, owner, developer or architect[7]. Theoretically, this method represents a social constructivist approach to housing quality, which requires insight into residents' situations, prerequisites and values, as well as the complexity that characterises the interplay between human and material actors, what Doucet refers to as architecture's "messy engagement with the world"[8]29. This further implies that quality is not always guaranteed, instead it must be assessed according to the residents' unique situation and how temporary each situation may be.

Second, we regard quality as an embedded property of an object, which implies that it is possible to distinguish between good and bad architecture. Without this perspective, it would be meaningless to put effort into the design of buildings and residential environments. Architectural perspectives on housing quality are in their nature normative, often aiming to provide practical guidelines for designers but also aim to support future residents and to "educate" home buyers, making them aware of what to ask and look for. In this sense, the aim of architectural intervention is to add value to society.

An essentialist approach like this still has obvious shortcomings, as it tends to neglect relational aspects of perceived qualities. There are several examples from architectural history where, in spite of all good intentions, architects have been blamed for making things worse. Doucet uses modernist architecture as an example, concluding that "architecture's adding of value is anything but straightforward"[8]29. Thus, an important task for architects is to continuously take part in the public discourse on housing quality. Embedded in this is also a responsibility to take part in the discussion of appropriate living conditions for so-called disadvantaged groups.

There is a need to combine both the social constructivist and the essentialist perspectives to more effectively understand housing quality. On one hand, housing quality norms may have limited significance if they are not sufficiently anchored in a social and cultural context. On the other hand, there is danger in taking a too relativist approach. We would argue that it is not possible to discuss housing quality without the acknowledging that there is a difference between good and poor housing conditions within a given cultural and social context.

A combined approach requires interdisciplinary research. In the two projects mentioned above, the author of this article has, together with researchers from other fields (environmental psychology, anthropology and geography) studied how architectural and other material characteristics interplay with social aspects of the housing situation for (1) homeless people and (2) asylum seekers. The housing situation includes both architectural features of buildings and residential neighbourhoods, as well as locality and urban / rural context. Our research has led to a framework that identifies four quality dimensions covering a combination of material and social elements[9,10]. These dimensions are (1) Functional: How the housing situation affects everyday life and routines, such as sleep, cooking and eating as well as how it affects the development of practical and intellectual skills, such as work and creative activities ; (2) Psycho-social: How the housing situation affects the likelihood to be safe, alone and to be together with friends and family; (3) Aesthetic: How the aesthetics of the building and its surroundings provides pleasure, sensory stimuli and overall well-being; (4) Symbolic: How the housing situation communicates socioeconomic status, social identity and values.

1 这些无家者的联排住宅设计特别考虑了公共与私密空间的过渡区。该项目共包括挪威东南莫斯市4个不同位置的24处住宅。建筑设计：CODE Arkitektur, 2006/These row houses for homeless people are designed with special consideration of the transition zones between public and private spaces. The project consists of all together 24 dwellings located on four different sites in the city of Moss in southeastern Norway. Architects: CODE Arkitektur (2006).（摄影/Photo: Henning Kaland/CODE）

2 入口和户外区由高幕墙保护，让人仅能瞥见私密区的一角，为住户带来了安全感和控制感。建筑设计：C O D E Arkitektur, 2006/The entrance and the outdoor area are protected with high screen walls, giving only a glimpse of the private area, and providing the residents a feeling of security and control. Architects: CODE Arkitektur (2006). （摄影/ Photo: Karine Denizou）

3 二层的私密露台由木质女儿墙包围，让住户能俯瞰邻里，同时又不被人看到。建筑设计：CODE Arkitektur, 2006/The private terrace on the first floor is sheltered with wooden parapets, giving the residents an overview of the neighborhood and at the same time the possibility to not be observed. Architects: CODE Arkitektur (2006). （摄影/Photo: Karine Denizou）

对于寻求避难者的住房3），情况就截然不同了。寻求避难者是由于战争或迫害来到挪威寻求避难的，他们向政府申请居留权，并在审查中。这个过程需要半年到数年[9]。在申请获得批准前，收容中心会为寻求避难者提供临时住房。这些中心不由挪威住房部门负责，而是国家移民政策的一部分。其结果是，虽然寻求避难者无疑是弱势和脆弱的，但这种中心的品质几乎无人重视。所用的往往是非居住功能的老旧房屋（旅馆、医疗机构等），并且这些建筑的标准通常都很低。许多中心人满为患，并且存在潮湿、透风、表面老化、室内气候差和缺少残障住户的无障碍设施等问题[9]。我们的研究发现，住房状况对住户的幸福以及与当地社区的交流都有负面影响。

因此，在挪威目前的政治体制下，移民政策的主要目标是降低入境寻求避难者的人数，而不提供优质住房。所以找不到有代表性的收容中心。不过仍有些小规模干预的例子，通常是志愿者和/或学生发起的对收容中心的建筑和户外区域进行的改善，以此支持有意义的活动，为住户提高自尊和社会认同。

我们将简要概括与弱势群体住房品质密切相关的一些问题：保障私密与控制、象征尊严、支持建宅和推动居民积极参与。

2.1 保障私密与控制

处在不安和脆弱生活状态中的人对受保护的私密生活有着特殊需求。有精神疾病或毒瘾问题的住户在很多情况下都希望保护自己不受环境带来的身体、社会和心理危害。他们希望能限制过去的亲友、邻居或陌生人来访。

这对于住所的设计有明显影响，尤其是私密与公共空间的过渡区：入口区、户外空间、窗洞口等。私密且受保护的露台能带来必要的安全感、控制感与独立感，并能为个性化提供空间，从而形成私密空间的标志（图1-3）。

窗洞口在为无家者设计住宅上是重要的问题。很多住户都不希望自己被外面看到，也不想有强烈的日照。这可以通过细心的设计和窗户的大小以及遮挡、百叶和窗帘来实现。有些建筑师刻意选择小洞口，而其他人用大窗户，认为这将给住户带来更大的自由，可以用窗帘和其他类型的遮挡调节开敞的程度（图4-5）。

2. 2 象征尊严

“建筑与场所必然建构并象征在社会中建立起来的个性与差异。”[11]18

建筑品质可以促进脆弱居民生活状况的改善，提高未来的希望和尊严。在研究中[4]我们发现，之前的无家者将各种建筑细节解读为代表普通人生活方式、自尊以及回归正常生活的象征。毒瘾者习惯住在凄惨的房屋中，使他们与毒品和反社会行为有关的特征根深蒂固。住进以高品质设计赢得公众关注的家中会带来自豪感，甚至让住户从过去的毒瘾者转向新的社会身份。在为特隆赫姆市有犯罪前科和毒瘾的人设计的住宅“交叉口”中（图6、7），建筑成了一些住户自我改造的动力：“……因为这是生活品质的问题，对么。这很容易想明白：假如这个地方曾经是破败不堪的垃圾堆，那你生活品质就会一塌糊涂，这很简单。所以这里要给你一点提升。”4）

2.3 支持建宅

住房品质的一部分心理-社会因素与拨款建宅的建筑框架有关。关于家的意义的研究可以概括如下：家与安全和控制密切相关，它是躲避外部世界的港湾。家反映出住户的思想、价值观和状态。它一方面是可以改变并实现个性化的地方（图8）；另一方面则是人们生活中与传承相关的永恒要素。家与亲友等社会关系相连，也是日常活动的舞台。最后，家与特定场所和实体建筑的归属和主人翁感有关[12]。

2.4 参与和认同

作为寻求避难者来到一个新的国家需要舍弃许多与个人身份有关的东西：家、亲友和工作。申请过程本身以及避难体制将在很多情况下刺激身份的丧失感。为影响日常环境创造各种机遇可以抵消这种感受，甚至成为重新把握人生的途径。奥斯陆的制造者中心5）是由建筑师和建筑学生组成的团体，他们曾在奥斯陆多所收容中心与住户动手合作。项目中还有许多志愿者。他们的活动包括头脑风暴（图9）、工作坊（图10）和建筑项目（图11）。制造者中心向寻求避难者表示信任并给予他们责任：“我们相信赋权的感觉是认同的一个关键因素。能够帮助他人的感受有助于提高自尊，从而给精神带来积极的影响。”[13]

3 结论性思考

“倘若有一群人离不开优质的环境，那恰恰就是这些人。”6）

以上引文讨论的是2015年秋来到挪威的大量难民的安置问题。这看上去针对的是为快速提供大量新住房而逐渐接受更宽松、简化的建筑规范的做法。

4 “交叉口”项目是为在特隆赫姆市有犯罪前科和毒瘾的人设计的。建筑师设计了玻璃墙，在他看来这象征了走出监狱的自由和走入社会、坦然生活的可能。建筑设计：Bård Helland, 2005/In a project called "Veiskillet", designed for former criminals and drug addicts in Trondheim, the architect designed glass walls, which according to him symbolised freedom from jail and the possibility to be visible and live openly. Architect: Bård Helland (2005). （摄影/Photo: Bård Helland）

Although there are measurable elements in several of these quality dimensions (in particular the first two), this article intends to highlight the importance of non-measurable quality aspects. In the following, we will look closer into some aspects of the psycho-social, aesthetic and symbolic dimensions and provide some examples of how they may be translated into architectural solutions or interventions.

2 Architecture as a potential tool for social inclusion and integration

Even if the importance of good quality housing for all is emphasised in political documents[1], the definition of what exactly is good quality in terms of architecture is not discussed thoroughly. However, during the last few decades there has been built several examples of housing for homeless people2）in Norway where architectural solutions have been used actively as tools to strengthen the residents' dignity and social identity. Some of these projects were studied as part of our research on housing qualities for disadvantaged groups[3,4].

5 为了保障私密，织竹屏保护着“交叉口”中的卧室窗。建筑设计：Bård Helland, 2005/In order to secure privacy, woven bamboo screens protect the bedroom windows in "Veiskillet". Architect: Bård Helland (2005).（摄影/Photo: Bård Helland）

When it comes to housing for asylum seekers3）, the situation is different. Asylum seekers are people who arrive in a country in order to seek asylum due to war or persecution, and who are typically in the midst of having their application for residency under consideration by the authorities. This process may take from a few months to several years[9]. Before their application is approved, asylum seekers are offered temporary housing at what are known as reception centres. These centres are not the responsibility of Norwegian housing authorities but are instead a part of the country's immigration policy. The result is that, although asylum seekers are undoubtedly are both disadvantaged and vulnerable, very little emphasis is given to the qualities of accommodation. Typically, reception centres are repurposed establishments (hotels, heath institutions etc.), often older buildings, and the standard of these buildings are often low. Many centres are overcrowded and they have defects such as moisture, drought, worn-down surfaces, poor indoor climate and a lack of accessibility for disabled residents[9]. Our research shows that the housing situation at reception centres have negative effects on both residents' well-being as well as on their interaction with the local community.

With the current political regime in Norway, the immigration policy's main goal is to lower the number of asylum seekers arriving in the country, thus investment in good housing is not a priority. Although no exemplary reception centres are found in Norway, there are examples of smaller-scale interventions.These projects are often led by volunteers or students, where buildings and outdoor spaces in receptions centres are improved in order to support meaningful activities and to strengthen self-esteem and social identity among residents.

We will next briefly outline some issues that are particularly relevant when discussing housing quality for disadvantaged groups. These include securing privacy and control, symbolising dignity, supporting home-making processes and involving residents through active participation.

6 在获奖项目“交叉口”中，建筑师对住户状况的关怀通过细心的设计体现出来。他的目的是积极利用建筑帮助住户重新开始，摆脱有害的生活模式[4]。建筑设计：Bård Helland, 2005/In the award-winning project "Veiskillet" (Crossroad), the architect's care for the residents' situation came to expression through a considerate design. He aimed to use the architecture actively in order to help the residents in starting over and breaking away from destructive life patterns[4]. Architect: Bård Helland (2005). （摄影/Photo: Bård Helland）

2.1 Securing privacy and control

People who are in an insecure and vulnerable life situation have a special need for privacy. Residents with mental illness or drug addiction will in many cases want to protect themselves physically, socially and mentally within their new surroundings. They may want to be able to control the access of friends, neighbours as well as strangers.

This has clear implications for the design of dwellings and in particular of the transitional zones between private and public space, such as entrance areas, outdoor spaces and window openings. Private and sheltered terraces may provide feelings of safety, control and independence, and can also provide areas for personalisation and thus function as markers for private space (Fig. 1-3).

Window openings are important issues when designing dwellings for the homeless. Residents may want to protect themselves against visual access from the outside as well as strong daylight. This can be done through considerate design sensitivity to the size of windows as well as screens, blinds and curtains. Some architects choose deliberately small openings, while others provide large windows, arguing that this will give the residents a greater freedom to choose how much they will expose themselves through the use of curtains and other kinds of screens (Fig. 4-5).

7 “交叉口”项目是以低预算实现的，而额外的资金用在精选出来的元素和材料上，比如覆有抛光黄铜板的入口大门。建筑设计：Bård Helland, 2005/The project "Veiskillet" was built with a small budget, but extra money was spent on selected elements and materials, such as the entrance door, which was covered in a polished brass sheet. Architect: Bård Helland (2005). （摄影/Photo: Karine Denizou）

8 在莫斯市外的无家者联排住宅中，有一面墙涂上了明黄、橙色或红色。建筑师希望以此促进或激励住户作出反应，让这面墙成为公寓中展示自我和个性化的大画布。建筑设计：CODE Arkitektur, 2006/In the row houses for homeless people outside Moss, one of the walls is painted in a clear yellow, orange or red colour. By this, the architects wanted to start a process where the resident is expected or inspired to react. The wall then becomes a canvas for self-presentation and personalisation of the flat. Architects: CODE Arkitektur (2006).（摄影/Photo: Karine Denizou）

虽然看起来建筑品质与边缘化的人群及其艰难的生活状况毫无关系，但我们的出发点恰恰是建筑应当改变这种处境。美观、象征及其他非量化的住房品质不仅对于居民的福祉是不可或缺的，而且对于实现边缘化群体的社会融合与赋权等目标也是至关重要的。

不过，更为重要的是：建筑无法凭借自身实现其使命。从本文中提到的大多数例子上可以清楚地看到，实体环境的利用和认识与复杂的社会和心理过程密不可分。这就意味着不仅需要全面了解住户具体情况和需求且技术娴熟的建筑师，并且实现改变需要意识到建筑是动态而不只是静态的对象，而且必须广泛调动各方人员才能创造成功的结果。

注释/Notes

1）题目呼应托马斯·基恩的文章《建筑的使命》[14]。作者呼吁将建筑理解为“人类活动的对象及行为主体的工具”（第36页），它“既被塑造又在塑造”（第41页）。/The title refers to Thomas Gieryn's article "What buildings do"[14]where he speaks up for an understanding of a building both "as the object of human agency and as an agent of its own actors" (p36) or "as simultaneously shaped and shaping" (p41).

2）无家者的定义是“不占有或租赁住房的人，只有偶然或临时性的住房，或者暂住在近亲、朋友或熟人家中，或者被改造所或机构收留，并将在两个月内释放，且没有住房。次夜没有安排住处的人也被视为无家者。”[1]11/A homeless person is defined as "...a person who does not own or rent a home, and is left with coincidental or temporary housing arrangements, who temporarily stay with close relatives, friends or acquaintances, or is under the care of the correctional services or an institution, due for release within two months and without a home. People without arranged accommodation for the next night are also considered homeless."[1]11

3）住在挪威收容中心的寻求避难者人数波动很大。现在（2017年4月）约1万人，而2016年1月是3万（www.udi.no）。/There are great fluctuations in the number of asylum seekers living in Norwegian reception centres. For the time being (April 2017) the number is about 10.000. In January 2016 it was 30.000 (www.udi.no).

4）对一位“交叉口”住户的采访[4]28/Interview with one of the residents in "Veiskillet"[4]28

5）参见/Refer to http://www.makershuboslo.com/

6）引自挪威建筑师协会（NAL）总顾问Tor Inge Hjemdal，见http://www.arkitektnytt.no/kreverkvalitet-for-flyktningeboliger [2017-05-08访问]/ Quotation from Tor Inge Hjemdal, Chief Advisor in the Norwegian Association for Architects (NAL). See: http://www.arkitektnytt.no/krever-kvalitet-forflyktningeboliger [accessed 2017-05-08]

/References

[1] Norwegian Ministries. Housing for welfare. National strategy for housing and support services (2014-2020). H-2312 E, Oslo: Norwegian Ministries, 2014.

[2] Sørvold J. 'Den boligpolitiske vendingen' Attachment to Norwegian Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development (2011) Rom for Alle, NOU 2011:15, Oslo: Norwegian Ministry of Local Government and Regional Development, 2011.

[3] Støa E., Denizou K., Hauge Å. L. Endelig hjemme - Utforming av Boliger for Vanskeligstilte. Drammen: Husbanken / SINTEF / NTNU, 2007.

[4] Hauge Å.L. & Støa E. "Here you get a little extra push": The meaning of architectural quality in housing for the formerly homeless - a case study of Veiskillet in Trondheim, Norway. Nordic Architectural Research, 2009, 21 (1): 18-31.

[5] Hauge Å. L., Støa E., Denizou K. "Framing Outsidedness - Aspects of Housing Quality in Decentrailized Reception Centres for Asylum Seekers in Norway" Housing, Theory and Society, 2017, 34 (1): 1-20. [6] Støa E., Hauge Å. L., Denizou K., Thorshaug R. Ø. & Grønseth A. S. Bokvalitet i asylmottak Trondheim: NTNU, 2016.

[7] Cold B. Boligen vi liker. In Svendsen, S E & M Hvattum (eds): Hva er god boligsak? Oslo: Ad Notam Gyldendal / Den Norske Stats Husbank, 1996.

[8] Doucet I. Problematising the Question. Conditions, No.4/2010: 26-29.

[9] Hauge Å. L., Denizou K. and Støa E. Bokvalitet på norske asylmottak, SINTEF Fag 29. Oslo: SINTEF akademisk forlag, 2015.

[10] Grønseth A. S., Støa E., Thorshaug R. Ø. & Hauge Å. L. Housing Qualities and Effects on Identity and Well-Being: Theoretical Perspectives for Interdisciplinary Research on Asylum Seeker Receptions Centres. HiL-Forskningsrapport nr. 169/2016. Lillehammer: Skriftserie Høgskolen i Lillehammer (HiL) , 2016.

[11] Dovey K. Framing Places. Mediating power in built form. London: Routledge, [1999] 2008

[12] Deprès C. The meaning of home: Literature Review and Directions for Further Research and Theoretical Development. Journal of Architectural and Planning Research 8, 1991: 96-115.

[13] Makers' Hub. What do we believe in? 2017 [2017-05-08]. http://www.makershuboslo.com/about/

[14] Gieryn T. What buildings do. Theory and Society, 2002, 31: 35-74.

2.2 Symbolising dignity

"Buildings and places inevitably construct and symbolize socially constructed identities and differences"[11]18

Architectural qualities may support the processes of improving the life situation and strengthening the dignity and hope for vulnerable residents. In our research[4]we found that former homeless people interpreted architectural details as symbols of how normal people live, providing a perspective to their self-worth and the possibility to get their lives back on track. Drug addicts are used to miserable housing, confirming the part of their identity devoted to drugs and anti-social behaviour. Living in homes with high quality design may give a sense of pride and may even help residents overcome their addictions. In "Veiskillet", a development housing former criminals and drug addicts in Trondheim (Fig. 6,7), the architecture became a motivator for change for some of the residents: "... because it's a quality of life issue, isn't it, it's easy to think: If this place had been a rundown dump, your quality of life would have just gone to hell, quite simply. So here you get a little extra push."4）

2.3 Supporting home-making processes

9 “制造者中心”在2016年邀请住户参加托尔绍夫收容中心的头脑风暴，对如何改善中心的建筑品质展开了讨论/ Makers' Hub invited residents in 2016 to take part in brainstorming sessions at Torshov Reception Centre where they discussed how they could improve the quality of the buildings at the centre. （摄影/Photo: Else Abrahamsen/ Makers' Hub）

Part of the psycho-social dimension of housing quality relates to providing the architectural framework for appropriation and the creation of a home. Research on the meaning of the home can be summarized as follows: A home is connected with security and control; it is a refuge from the world outside. A home reflects its residents' ideas, values and status. It is a place which on the one hand side can be changed and personalised (Fig. 8) and on the other hand, is something permanent in the residents' lives that is associated with continuity. A home is connected to relationships with family and friends, and as an arena for daily activities. Finally, the home is associated with attachment and sense of ownership to specific places and physical structures[12].

2.4 Participation and identity

To arrive as an asylum seeker in a new country involves leaving behind much of what is connected to one's identity: home, family, friends and work.The application process itself as well as the asylum system will in many cases strengthen feelings of a loss of identity. Providing opportunities to influence one's everyday surroundings may counteract this feeling and even work as a way to regain control over one's own life. Makers' Hub in Oslo5）is a group consisting of architects and architecture students who have been working on projects together with residents at different reception centres in Oslo. They also involve a number of volunteers in their projects. Among their activities are brainstorming sessions (Fig. 9), workshops (Fig. 10) and building projects (Fig. 11). Makers' Hub places trust in asylum seekers and gives them responsibility: "We believe that the feeling of empowerment is a key factor within identity. To feel useful for others helps to increase self-esteem and can thus create a positive impact on the psyche"[13]

10 某次头脑风暴的结果是对公共起居室进行装饰/ One of the results of the brainstorming sessions was to decorate the shared living room.（摄影/Photo: Else Abrahamsen/Makers' Hub）

3 Concluding reflections

"If there is a group who are dependent on good quality in their environment, it is exactly these people"6）

The quotation above was related to the discussion of how to accommodate the high number of refugees arriving in Norway in the fall of 2015. It came to express a reaction towards what seemed to be a growing acceptance for more liberal and simplified building regulations which could provide new housing quickly and in high numbers.

While it may seem that architectural qualities are irrelevant when people are marginalised and in a difficult life situation, our point of departure is that it is exactly in these situations architecture can make a difference. Aesthetic, symbolic and other non-measurable housing qualities are not only essential for residential well-being, but they can also be crucial for reaching goals such as social inclusion and empowerment for marginalised groups.

However, what is even more important: Architecture do not do anything on its own. It becomes clear from most of the examples mentioned in this article that the use and perceptions of our physical environment are intertwined with complex social and mental processes. This means that more is needed than just highly skilled architects with a thorough knowledge of the residents' specific situation and needs. Making a change requires an awareness of architecture as dynamic, not only as static objects, and that a broad range of actors must be involved in order to reach successful results.

What Buildings Do1）: The Potential Role of Architecture in Housing for Disadvantaged Residents in Norway

In terms of architectural qualities, what are the characteristics of good housing for disadvantaged residents?This article, which is based on research carried out on housing quality for homeless people and asylum seekers in Norway, intends to discuss this question. The research highlights the importance of non-measurable quality aspects, and also looks into issues such as securing privacy and control, dignity, home-making processes and involvement through active participation. The main argument is that aesthetic, symbolic and other non-measurable housing qualities are not only essential for residential well-being, but these characteristics can also be crucial to reach goals such as social inclusion and empowerment for marginalised groups.

housing quality, disadvantaged residents, wellbeing, social inclusion, empowerment

11 2016年夏，住户与志愿者密切合作设计了一座凉亭，并建在托尔绍夫收容中心原有的棚屋顶上。这座凉亭是用于中心户外社交活动的/A pavilion was designed in close cooperation with residents and other volunteers and constructed on top of an existing shed at Torshov Reception centre during summer 2016. The pavilion is used for social outdoor events at the centre. （摄影/Photo: Else Abrahamsen/Makers' Hub）

挪威科技大学建筑与设计学院／Faculty of Architecture and Design, NTNU

2017-05-09