Process + Product: The condition of low-cost housing in Bangkok, Thailand

The low-income housing situation in Bangkok, Thailand, is similar to that faced in many developing cities throughout the world. The housing opportunities afforded to residents classed as low-income dwellers, are minimal, unsuitable and inconsiderate of their complex social, cultural and spiritual requirements, often leading to the formation of slums, and squatter settlements. The close proximity of living experienced in informal settlements results in a community-focused style of living, where neighbours rely on each other to survive. This is translated not only into the social fabric of the informal settlement, but also into the architectural style of these vernacular communities. The process of helping construct your neighbour's home, builds social and cultural ties; these traits are often lost when outside parties attempt to ‘improve’ the low-income living situation. The idea of housing design as a process not just a product, also referred to as ‘cooked’ architecture, is widely promoted through the writings, research and design methodologies focused towards low-income housing endeavors (Rapoport, 1988; Sinha, 2012; Yap, 1990). Despite this, effective involvement of residents in developing and building their own homes is something rarely practiced or achieved within architecture, yet the benefits of including residents, who are the focus of a complex social and architectural situation, in the design process seems clear. There is little question that communities that work through this process become stronger, both socially and economically, however, the quality of housing and architectural output is still at a very low level, despite obvious improvements from the previous low-cost conditions. To address this, an architectural outcome has been developed utilizing a critical design approach. The implementation of ethnographic and participatory design research, as well as multiple design iterations, based on current and traditional modes, has resulted in an architecture that is culturally responsive, impacts the existing context lightly, and primarily provides a positive social scenario to encourage community betterment through collective construction and living.