The term ‘habitable’ generally refers to how suitable an environment is for human occupation and use. However, there is no specific list of criteria that an environment must satisfy to be considered habitable. Recent theories of the environment – behavior relationship have provided numerous potential criteria for assessing the habitability of built environments but there is no overarching theory or framework that explains their relationship. In this paper I propose a framework for selecting and organizing environmental performance criteria according to levels of human need, organizational hierarchy, and scale of environmental system. Design professionals may benefit from this effort to structure research results in a pragmatic way and researchers may choose to focus their efforts where there are clear gaps in our knowledge of human environmental needs. Furthermore the approach may help establish legal minimum standards of habitability that are more aligned with the needs and preferences of human inhabitants.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AlexanderC, 1982The Timeless Way of Building (Oxford University Press, New York)
2.
AlexanderCPoynerB, 1970, “The atoms of environmental structure”, in Emerging Methods in Environmental Design and Planning Ed. MooreG T, (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp 308–321
3.
AppletonJ, 1975The Experience of Landscape (John Wiley, New York)
BarkerR G, 1978Habitats, Environments and Human Behavior (Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA)
6.
BarkerR G, 1979, “Settings of a professional lifetime”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology372137–2157
7.
BaumAKomanS, 1976, “Differential response to anticipated crowding”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology3426–536
8.
BellL, 1983, “Design of microgravity space environments to enhance crew health, morale, and productivity”, in Proceedings of 20th Space CongressCanaveral Council of Technical Societies, Cocoa Beach, pp IIIc-1–IIIc-14
9.
BenediktM L, 1977, “On theories of space and the growth of architectural knowledge”, report MB77001, School of Architecture, University of Texas, Austin, TX
10.
BenediktM L, 1978, “An introduction to Isovists”, technical paper, School of Architecture, University of Texas, Austin, TX
11.
BenediktM L, 1979, “To take hold of space”, Environment and planning bulletin; copy available from the author
12.
BenediktMBurnhamC, 1985, “Perceiving architectural space: From optic arrays to Isovists”, in Persistance and Change Eds WarrenW HShawR E, (Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ) pp 103–114
13.
BinkleyJ LParkerJ A, 1978, “Specifying for user needs in office environments”, in Facility Programming Ed. PreiserW F E, (Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, Stroudsburg, PA) pp 233–252
14.
CraikK HZubeE H, 1976Perceiving Environmental Quality (Plenum Press, New York)
15.
DavenportE WCongornS PPierceB F, 1963, “The minimum volumetric requirements of man in space”American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics Journal163–250
16.
DesorJ A, 1972, “Towards a psychological theory of crowding”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology2179–83
17.
EliovsonS, 1971Gardening the Japanese Way (George G Harrap, London)
18.
FisherJ DBellP ABaumA, 1984Environmental Psychology (Holt, Rinehart and Winston, New York)
19.
FraserT M, 1968, “The intangibles of habitability during long duration space missions” NASA contractor report NASA CR1084, Lovelace Foundation for Medical Education and Research, Albuquerque, NM 87108
20.
FriedmanAZimringCZubeE, 1978Environmental Design Evaluation (Plenum Press, New York)
21.
Gable v Silver (258 So.2d11 [Fla.App.1972])
22.
GobleF G, 1970The Third Force: The Psychology of Abraham Maslow (Grossman, New York)
23.
HallE T, 1966The Hidden Dimension (Doubleday, New York)
24.
HeerwagenJ HOriansG H, 1993, “Humans, habitats, and aesthetics”, in The Biophilia Hypothesis Eds KellertS RWilsonE O, (Island Press, Washington, DC) pp 138–172
25.
HeffronM H, (Ed.), 1978Habitability Programming for US Naval Ships (McGraw-Hill, New York)
26.
HeimsathC, 1977Behavioral Architecture (McGraw-Hill, New York)
27.
HillierBHansonJPeponisJ, 1984, “What do we mean by building function?”, in Designing for Building Utilisation Eds PowellJ ACooperILeraS, (Spon, London) pp 61–72
28.
HowellS C, 1978Private Space: Habitability of Apartments for the Elderly (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
29.
Humber v Mortons (426 5.W.2d544 [Tex.1968])
30.
ImamogluV, 1986, “Assessing the spaciousness of interiors”ODTU Mimarlik Fakultesi Dergisi7 (2) 127–137
31.
IvanovichMWiseJ AHeerwagenJ HLantripD B, 1996, “Development of a protocol for identifying and assessing potential benefits of green buildings”, final report for 1995 Green Buildings Subtask number 2, DOE contract DE-AC06–76RLO 1830, Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, 3350 Q Street, ISBN1, Richland, WA99352
32.
JamesW, 1962Psychology: The Briefer Course (Collier, New York)
33.
KaplanSKaplanR, 1982aCognition and Environment (Praeger, New York)
34.
KaplanSKaplanR, 1982bHumanscape: Environments for People (Ulrich Books, Ann Arbor, MI)
Keyes v Guy Bailey Homes (439 So.2d670 [Miss.1983])
37.
Kreigler v Eichler Homes Inc. (269 Cal. App. 2d224, 74 Cal. Rptr. 749 [1969])
38.
LangJ, 1991, “Design theory from an environment and behavior perspective”, in Advances in Environment, Behavior, and Design Eds ZubeE HMooreG T, (Plenum Press, New York) pp 53–111
39.
LantripD B, 1986, “ISOKIN: A quantitative model of the kinesthetic aspects of spatial habitability”, in Proceedings of the Human Factors Society 30th Annual MeetingHuman Factors Society, PO Box 1369, Santa Monica, CA90406–91369, pp 33–37
40.
LantripD B, 1988, “The design and analysis of space for haptic and kinesthetic habitability”, Masters thesis College of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Washington, DC
41.
LantripD B, 1990, “The built environment as a constraint to human freedom: An activity-based stochastic model”, in Proceedings of the 21st Annual Conference of the Environmental Design Research Association Eds SelbyR IAnthonyK HChoiJOlrandB, EDRA Inc., PO Box 7146, Edmond, OK 73083–7146, pp 489–493
42.
LantripD B, 1993aEnvironmental Constraint of Human Movement: A Case Study of the Effects on Office Worker Environmental Satisfaction and Self Rated Productivity PhD thesis, Urban, Technological, and Environmental Planning Program, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI
43.
LantripD B, 1993b, “Predicting satisfaction with the office environment by measuring constraints to worker activities”, in 37 th Annual Meeting of the Human Factors and Ergonomics SocietyHFES, PO Box 1369, Santa Monica, CA 90406–91369, pp 489–493
44.
LantripD B, 1994, “Beyond CAD to computer-aided analysis of environmental performance: A case study of the office environment”, in Proceedings of the 12th Annual ACSA Technology Conference Eds ClipsonCKimJ J, Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, pp 141–146
45.
LynchK, 1960The Image of the Environment (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
46.
McMillan v Brune-Harpenau-Turbeck Builders (455 N.E. 2d 1276 [1983])
47.
MarkusT A, (Ed.), 1972Building Performance (John Wiley, New York)
48.
MaslowA, 1954Motivation and Personality (Harper, New York)
49.
MaslowA, 1962Toward a Psychology of Being (Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York)
50.
Miller v McCardells (19.R.I. 304 [1895])
51.
MoleskiW H, 1978, “Environmental programming for human needs”, in Facility Programming Ed. PreiserW F E, (Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, Stroudsburg, PA) pp 107–126
52.
OriansG H, 1980, “Habitat selection: General theory and applications to human behavior”, in The Evolution of Human Social Behavior Ed. LockardJ S, (Elsevier, New York) pp 49–66
53.
OriansG HHeerwagenJ H, 1992, “Evolved responses to landscapes”, in The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture Eds BarkowJToobyJCosmidesL, (Oxford University Press, Oxford) pp 555–579
54.
PowellJ ACooperILeraS, (Eds), 1984Designing for Building Utilisation (Spon, New York)
55.
PreiserW F E, (Ed.), 1978Facility Programming: Methods and Applications (Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, Stroudsburg, PA)
56.
PreiserW F EVischerJ CWhiteE T, (Eds), 1991Design Intervention: Toward a More Humane Architecture (Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York)
57.
RushR D, 1986The Building Systems Integration Handbook (John Wiley, New York)
58.
SchiffenbauerA I, 1979, “Designing for high-density living”, in Residential Crowding and Design Eds AielloJ RBaumA, (Plenum Press, New York) pp 229–240
59.
SchiffenbauerA IBrownJ EPerryP LShulackL KZanzolaA M, 1977, “The relationship between density and crowding: Some architectural modifiers”Environment and Behavior9 (1) 3–14
60.
SouleM E, 1993, “Biophilia: Unanswered questions”, in The Biophilia Hypothesis Eds KellertS RWilsonE O, (Island Press, Washington, DC) pp 441–455
61.
StansallPPeponisJ, 1987, “Spatial culture”Designer's Journal June issue
62.
SteeleF I, 1973Physical Settings and Organization Development (Addison Wesley, Reading, MA)
63.
StokolsD, 1972, “On the distinction between density and crowding”Psychological Review79275–277
64.
SweetJ, 1958Legal Aspects of Architecture, Engineering, and the Construction Process (West, St Paul, MN)
65.
UlrichR S, 1984, “View through a window may influence recovery from surgery”Science224420–421
66.
UlrichR SSimonsR FLositoB DFioritoEMilesM AZelsonM, 1991, “Stress recovery during exposure to natural and urban environments”Journal of Environmental Psychology11201–230
67.
WilsonE O, 1984Biophilia (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA)
68.
WiseJ A, 1988, “The quantitative modelling of human spatial habitability”, NASA contractor report number NASA CR177501, College of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Washington, Seattle, WA
69.
WorchelSTeddlieC, 1976, “The experience of crowding: A two-factor theory”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology3430–40
70.
WortzE CNowlisD PWattersH H, 1978, “Parameters of habitable environments”, in Facility Programming Ed. PreiserW F E, (Dowden, Hutchinson and Ross, Stroudsburg, PA) pp 274–289
71.
ZeiselJ, 1981Inquiry by Design (Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA)
