Exploring Arctic housing and village planning based on Maslow's hierarchy of needs

ABSTRACT

This article examines northern communities undergoing environmental and cultural change that might affect communal identity, well-being and cultural viability. Many Arctic communities are vulnerable to climate change impacts. In some areas, the changes are fast, and some villages have even faced the need to relocate or change their village structure. Village planning has focused on practical issues such as energy efficiency, infrastructure, construction methods and material choices, and funding challenges. This article uses Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory to examine how local communities’ social and cultural needs have been taken into account in the implemented village relocation in the 1950s, an existing village, and a recent planning project. The aim is to highlight needs that do not necessarily rise to the centre of design and planning and to justify the need for place-based planning.

KEYWORDS:

• Arctic
• identity
• community
• housing
• Maslow's hierarchy of needs

1. Introduction

Motivation has been studied from the perspectives of work, learning, communities, planning and many more areas. All theories, regardless of perspective, have in common that the result is some activity. Abraham Maslow (1908–1970) defined the goals of human activity through the concept of necessity. Basic needs (food, care, security, and love) must be met to some extent in order to begin pursuing higher-level goals that lead to self-realization. Maslow presents this as a hierarchy of needs. At the most fundamental are (1) physiological needs and (2) security needs. These are followed by (3) social (needs for belonging and companionship) and (4) esteem needs (self-confidence, knowledge, independence, etc.). If all these previous needs are sufficiently satisfied, the needs of (5) self-actualization become relevant (Maslow 1943). The values are arranged according to their relative importance.

The basic assumption of Maslow's theory is that a person can meet the higher levels of the hierarchy only after fulfilling the lower ones, and this has been criticized. For example, people who lack shelter and adequate nutrition might still feel a sense of belonging or the feeling of being safe. They might meet the love and belonging needs without achieving the physiological or safety and security needs first. Maslow's hierarchy of needs has since also been criticized for simplifying human behaviour and for being too hierarchical. Many new classifications have since been developed that are less hierarchical (Allardt 1976, 37–55; Inglehart 1977, 22–23, 42).

The first four levels in Maslow's theory are deficiency needs, and the fifth level is a growth need. However, Maslow later added three more growth needs: the need to know and understand, aesthetic, and – at the top – transcendence. Aesthetic refers to what is visually pleasing for the individual, which is quite important from the viewpoint of housing and architecture. The transcendence level comes after self-actualization; it refers to what is beyond the self and to helping others reach and fulfil their self-actualization. Individuals who fulfil and reach self-actualization and transcendence are more capable of applying their expertise (Huitt 2007) (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Maslow's hierarchy of needs.

Maslow continued to refine his theory based on the hierarchy of needs (Maslow 1943; 1962; 1987). Finally, he concluded that the hierarchy's order is not as rigid as he had implied in his earlier description. He also pointed out that the order of needs might be based on individual or external circumstances. For example, for some individuals, the need for love is more important than the basic needs. He also noted that human behaviour is multi-motivated and determined by several basic needs simultaneously rather than by only one (Maslow 1987, 68–71). The refined theory supports the notions in the cases presented in this article.

The central controversial question in Maslow's theory has been: do all lower levels have to be gone through to enter a state of self-realization? Questions have also been raised about the supposed universality of the theory: are the needs of all people the same and in the same order of importance? These issues are also relevant when considering a basic needs strategy. Maslow's cultural affiliation in selecting needs and forming a hierarchy has sparked much debate (e.g. McLeod 2020).

Although there is some variation in the naming of the category levels, the symbol of the pyramid has become synonymous with Maslow. However, Maslow never actually represented his theory as a pyramid; on the contrary, he made it quite clear that we are always going back and forth in the hierarchy and can target multiple needs simultaneously (Bridgman, Cummings, and Ballard 2019).

Despite the criticism, Maslow's hierarchy of needs theory has been used in explaining users’ motivations in housing. The theory indicates that different levels of users’ needs imply different levels of housing expectations, and thus different house attributes (e.g. Zavei and Jusan 2012, 311–319). In this article, Maslow's theory is considered a phenomenon of hierarchy, as the primary objectives of architectural design must meet the physical and safety requirements. High-quality planning and designing, that respects and understands the community being designed for, also allow the fulfilment of more abstract needs. Today the consistent criterion across housing is the drive to provide safe, healthy, decent (quality) and affordable housing, focusing on mixed-income, environmentally sustainable communities. However, cultural sustainability is not emphasized in the same way as environmental sustainability.

Housing architecture can be regarded as both a product of culture and a medium that can influence change in society. A home is a private space, and living is almost always individual and personal. However, housing is to some extent also public – that is through economic, social, and technical issues. This is reflected in the change in Arctic Indigenous housing since World War II when government-subsidized housing plans and low-interest building loans changed the way of living. Provisioning social housing has been a continuous challenge in the North where problems include high costs for construction and maintenance of units. Living conditions in the Arctic among Inuit, Saami and Indigenous peoples of Chukotka were examined in the SLiCA-project (Poppel 2015), and, for example, Collings and Dawson have studied the development and evolution of Canadian housing policy in the North (Collings 2005, Dawson 1995, 74).

The goal of housing is to satisfy human needs. Three actors are involved in the planning process: the designer, the user, and the funder. Because designers don't have all the information about the people they are designing for, participatory methods are recommended. It is obvious that the basic needs of users should be met, and in practice, the basic requirements of the paying client should be achieved as well. The higher needs of the users are sometimes ignored or undervalued, or they are not understood because of the different cultural backgrounds of the planner and the user.

The article examines the topic from a historical and contemporary perspective. The challenges of Indigenous housing are still being addressed at the planning table, to which locals have not been invited. The means of participation may be illusory, leaving local knowledge unattainable. Climate change is affecting Arctic villages, so in addition to housing planning, the relocation of villages will have to be considered in many cases. This article focuses on the designer's aspirations, on how the architect has been able to understand and meet the needs of housing from Maslow's theoretical perspective when planning standardized housing for Indigenous communities. The theory is examined through three examples in Arctic housing: the resettlement of Skolt Saami after World War II in 1947, the design of the newest residential area in Shishmaref Alaska, and an experimental house planned for the Kwinhagak community in Alaska.

The article is based on archive materials, literature, interviews, and on-site village and housing analysis. The main archives were the collection of The National Archives of Finland (case Sevettijärvi), Alaska's Digital Archives and Elmer E. Rasmuson Library/University of Alaska Fairbanks (case Shishmaref). The material in the archives contained written documents related to the planning of the villages, as well as town plans, maps and photos. These documents were analysed in a typical way for architectural research, paying particular attention to the process of change and the planning goals. The fieldwork was done in Shishmaref during one week in the winter of 2018, when villagers were interviewed, and data was obtained through questionnaires and workshops. The interviews continued in autumn 2019 and the observation was on-site for one week. Ten villagers aged from 12 years to almost 80 were interviewed in a structured way, and several informal discussions with locals also took place. A participation method called ‘gåtur’ (‘a walking trip’) was also used. The guided walking tour consisted of small groups of locals. During these gåturs, informal discussions took place with one to four villagers at a time. The observations of the Quinhagak experimental house are based on material obtained during the visit to Cold Climate Institute, Fairbanks, 2018, and a discussion with two experts working there, who kindly provided photo material.

The article seeks to show, by way of these examples, that meeting the basic needs of the lowest levels of the Maslow pyramid is not a sufficient goal, but strengthening community and culture must be strongly included in the design goals as well.

This article examines three objects mainly through Maslow’s three original levels.

1. Physiological needs (primary survival). What is the quality of shelter provided?

2. Security needs. Do the home and village provide a feeling of safety for all members?

3. Social needs (belonging and companionship). Does the home enhance the connection with family and friends? Is the home in a welcoming community?

It would have been interesting to examine esteem needs (self-confidence, knowledge, independence, etc.; does the home express one's individuality) and self-actualization needs (is there a place to express your talents and creativity?) but based on the material this was not possible.

2. Reconstruction period standardized housing for Suenjel Skolt Saami in 1947

Finland's reconstruction phase began after the Winter War in 1939 and continued until the early 1950s, during which time many ministries, organizations and private enterprises released standardized house plans, which were guided and supervised by legislation, state-subsidized housing loans, regulation and standardization (Soikkeli 2020, 218–219).

Reconstruction-era planned houses brought partly a new way of living for the Saami. These buildings also brought a new kind of spatial experience, as space had been differentiated functionally; each room had a special function as a living room, kitchen, or bedroom (Saarikangas 2002, 261, 363–366). In the countryside, the kitchen and living room were most often combined. With standardized housing, similar and equally good housing was offered to everyone, both Finns and Saami people. However, the Suenjel Skolt Saami formed a group in which housing differed from all the other groups.

The Suenjel Skolt Saami have been living in the borderland area between Finland, Russia, and Norway, and the changes to borders have affected their life. In the early twentieth century, they still followed their ancestral annual migration pattern, but all gathered in the winter village for some months (Ingold 1976, 4). In 1920 when the peace treaty between Finland and the Soviet Union was signed, the old winter village was left on the Russian side and abandoned. The community requested that the Finnish government build a new winter village, which had essential significance for Skolt culture (Sverloff 2003, 113). The building programme was completed in 1930, when small dwellings (4 m × 8 m) for 20 families had been built (Nickul and Manker 1948, 20, 54). The houses were small, as the log dwellings had been in earlier times; there was no need to have lots of cubic meters to warm in winter, and life was mostly lived outside the dwellings (Figure 2).

Figure 2. Suenjel Winter Village 1931 (photo courtesy of K. Nickul, Finnish Heritage Agency).

According to peace treaties after the Second World War, the Skolt homelands in the Pechenga area were ceded to the Soviet Union, but the Skolts were once again given the opportunity to move to Finland. This time a separate compact winter village was not built for the Suenjel Skolts, but the aim was to create permanent houses and a year-round village. The new settlement in Sevettijärvi covered an almost 60-kilometer belt for 51 families. Each family had a lake or a part of it where they had a right to fish and hence to sustain the family. Altogether, 51 houses with 51 outbuildings and 21 saunas were built with government funding (Lehtola 2015, 130, 133). A school, health station, and chapel were also built, but they were just three individual buildings next to each other situated far from the dwellings, with no proper village structure to support the community. The Suenjel Skolt area was hard to reach by both land and water because there was no road leading to it. The purpose of the arrangement was to protect the authenticity of the colony of Suenjel and the purity of the culture, at least to some extent (Soikkeli 2019, 91; Tanhua 2014, 18).

Figure 3. Standardized houses for the Skolt Saami, planned in 1947. Types 1 and 2 are the larger types, consisting of two to three rooms. Types 3 and 4 had just one room (photo courtesy of National Archives of Finland, Oulu . He:8, Kolttakoti).

The new standardized houses of the 1940s were built according to Finnish-designed plans, but the type of planned houses for the Skolts differed from every other standardized housing type used in Finland during the reconstruction era. The prototype resettlement house was modelled after the Suenjel winter village house types of the 1920s. Although Skolt families had many members, the houses were exceptionally small compared with any other reconstruction house type. The families shared two rooms, one being a combined kitchen and living area. A large bread oven was in the kitchen and a wood-burning stove in the other room. The two-room dwelling's total area was just slightly over 30 m². Four houses had only one room of 20 m², and six two-room houses were smaller than the others, only 24–29 m² (Ingold 1976, 141, National Archives of Finland, Oulu) (Figure 3).

The buildings were constructed of timber on a concrete foundation and roofed with planks and roofing felt (Ingold 1976, 141). The most essential things a person needs to survive were fulfilled in Sevettijärvi. Based on Maslow's theory, they included the shelter, water, food, warmth, rest, and health. The quality of warmth was poor; it can be considered to have been a sufficient level in postwar circumstances but not an acceptable level later. In Suenjel village the houses had vertical six-pane windows, but in Sevettijärvi the smallest type had four-pane windows that resembled those from a very old tradition when window glass was expensive and rare. It might be concluded that Maslow's later added level of aesthetics was considered by the designer, and this view of beauty was given to the community in standardized housing. This emphasizes efforts to make the houses as ‘traditional’ as possible (Figure 4).

Figure 4. Skolt Saami house, 1952 (photo courtesy of Matti Poutvaara, Finnish Heritage Agency).

The community did not meet Maslow's highest levels easily. The basic reason was the misunderstanding of Skolt Saami culture. Their life in Suenjel had supported the culture more than in Sevettijärvi, and there were many reasons for that. In Suenjel the Skolts had their old summer and autumn places on their family lands and a new winter village where they had the opportunity for community and the culture flourished as before. In Sevettijärvi the situation was totaly different. The problem was caused by the new general plan that meant giving up the winter village. The construction of the new village in a linear layout completely undermined the community's social model. The houses being located so far away from each other weakened the Skolts’ social fabric and did not allow them to spend as much time together in winter as they had done before. This changed their culture, partly preventing them from sharing stories, dancing the traditional quadrille, and using their language. In housing projects, planning of the shelter – the home – is at the core, but as important is understanding the community and the structure of the culture as a whole.

The housing plan met physiological needs, although the quality of construction was lower than average, as well as basic security needs. The social needs were not met at the community level, just at family level. Also, there was a lack of community actualization, but self-actualization was met to some extent at least. Wide traditional yards, with many small buildings and structures, were partially simplified but did not totaly disappear. The placement of new houses in the yard reminded residents of the prewar period Saami dwelling entities. The sites were built according to the old tradition even when the dwelling was more of Finnish origin; storage rooms, huts, lavvus, outdoor baking ovens, and animal shelters were located around the dwellings, according to practical reasons and the terrain (Kärna and Ojanlatva 2015, 79–80). Although the annual cycle ended with permanent year-round housing, many families maintained the tradition of at least two sites – most often the summer place was situated just a kilometer or a few from the permanent housing. In this way, esteem needs were met after some years as the families’ living expressed individuality and also allowed self-actualization.

Safety and security needs are met when people experience order, predictability, and control in their lives. These needs can be fulfilled by the family or by the society. In Sevettijärvi, there was medical care in the village, but emotional security was not always achieved. The small size of the Skolt houses caused problems, but a bigger problem was that establishing new homesteads in the area was not allowed, and this caused the young Skolts to migrate. This prevented the security of stability in housing and aging in place because the younger generation had no possibility to build their own houses near their parents. The original families that moved to Sevettijärvi were confined to their own homestead and bound to it like farmers that they never were, and the younger generation was forced to move elsewhere. The Finnish administration didn't have any other solution because they did not understand the Skolt culture. The awareness that the area did not offer a future for young people hindered the sense of belonging, which according to Maslow is one of the deficiency needs.

The Finnish authorities had good intentions to protect Skolt culture and fulfil basic physiological needs by designing a suitable house type for the minority. However, they considered the culture as having a strong connection to a tangible heritage – the dwellings – and their livelihood, fishing. They did not see the winter village as a facilitator that maintained the culture, allowing it to fulfil a higher need, such as community actualization. Maslow's level of sense of belonging was problematic in Sevettijärvi also, because the community had lost their family lands in a peace treaty, and even when the decision to relocate to Finland was made by the community, the old Suenjel winter village was remembered with joy and yearning. Place identity is part of the human being, and in general, even the identities of the place are transferred from generation to generation. Instead of concrete location identities, children adopt at least the ways and practices that are associated with certain places in family life. In Sevettijärvi, meeting Maslow's sense of belonging level was a slow process.

Today, most of the Skolt Saami reconstruction-era 1950s houses are left without use and maintenance, or they are only in summer use. Only a few are inhabited all year round. The main reason for this is that the planning did not properly meet the needs of families or the community. Since the 1970s, new standardized houses have been built close to the old school, church and health station. So gradually, a dense village was built to meet the basic and cultural needs of the community.

3. Shishmaref and old airport road

Shishmaref is an Inupiat village of almost 600 people located on a barrier island in the Chukchi Sea, north of the Bering Strait. The Kigiqtaamiut people have inhabited the coastal areas around Sarichef Island for thousands of years. In 1901, a post office was established on the island. Soon after, a church and school were built, compulsory education was introduced, and a permanent village was established (Marino 2015, 5–9).

Today, there are around 150 houses in Shishmaref. The economy is primarily built around subsistence, and the village's only year-round connection to the outside world is air travel. Shishmaref is one of those 30 communities in Alaska that have been identified as potential candidates for relocation due to the consequences of climate change. Shishmaref is threatened by sea wall erosion, and the risk of intense flooding is increasing. During the last two decades Shishmaref became an important case study for researchers interested in environmental migration and how stress and uncertainty challenge culture and identity (e.g. Marino 2015; Mason et al. 2012).

So far, village planning in all US Arctic villages facing relocation has focused on practical issues such as energy efficiency, infrastructure, construction methods, material choices, and funding challenges. The village master plans have been unambiguous: the houses are grouped into rows on one or two straight main streets in almost military order (e.g. Cold Climate Housing Research Center 2017). What all the plans have in common is that they aim to secure basic needs: to ensure shelter, health, and safety of communities – that is, deficiency needs in Maslow's theory.

The loss of land through erosive action and as a result of a 1997 storm, Shishmaref was declared a disaster area and 13 residential homes were relocated to higher areas in a new residential site on the old village airport (Shishmaref Relocation Strategic Plan 2002, 2). The measures were focused on the two lowest levels of Maslow's hierarchy of needs, namely physiological and safety needs, and were implemented, though limited by a tight economy.

The old airport was located just east of the edge of village with a north–south runway, which forms the road now. The runway did not dictate road alignment in an exceptional way, but – as described above – direct street alignments are typical of Indigenous villages in Alaska. Today the oldest houses on the road are the ones that were moved there in the late 1990s; they are standardized houses from the 1970s. The newest buildings along the road were constructed in 2019 and represent contemporary standardized housing. The buildings’ conditions along Airport Road vary. Attention has been paid to energy efficiency in planning new housing types, and energy efficiency of old houses has been improved when relocating them. Basic physiological and safety needs are fulfilled, as are social needs (Figure 5).

Figure 5. Shishmaref Airport Road, summer 2019 (photo taken by the author).

All the residential buildings in the village have almost the same typology. The house has a cold porch to store food and other stuff. The small entrance hall opens into a living room with kitchen functions in the entrance corner. The living room gives access to the bedrooms. The house is compact and functional (Figure 6). The decor of local living rooms often reflects what is meaningful to the community: the walls are filled with photographs of relatives, and bone engravings and other crafts are also visible. Standardized houses have become individual, but at the same time, they are united by a culturally specific way of decorating and working from home. They are expressions of self-actualization and aesthetic needs. Standardized housing also offers possibilities to express talents and creativity (Soikkeli 2021, 46).

Figure 6. Example of a row of standardized houses in Shishmaref (photo taken by the author).

Some basic needs that are not met at the building level can be met at the village level. The houses do not have water toilets but waste is collected by the bucket from individual houses and hauled off to a lagoon nearby. The washeteria includes public showers, toilets, and washing machines. The water is filtered and then pumped into a tank with a central watering point. From time to time, there is a shortage of water, so it must be saved. Despite the challenges to meet basic needs, the esteem needs, such as esteem for oneself and respect from others, which are the fourth level in Maslow's hierarchy, are met. Among the cultural values of Alaska's Indigenous people, respecting and helping each others are important values (Inupiaq Cultural Values 2020). The values are also reflected in caring for the weaker members of the community. The need for respect is important for children and adolescents. Children participate in fishing, hunting, and gathering, and become full members of the community at a young age. Maslow's esteem needs are fulfilled, and the site in the village also supports the feeling of being part of the community, which encourages self-actualization. Even though people live in cramped conditions, it is possible to work with traditional handicrafts, such as beadwork. The village also has meeting facilities that allow working outside the home, focusing, for example, on carving, and meeting others at the same time.

In villagers’ interviews in the winter of 2018 and autumn of 2019, the newest area of the village – Airport Road – was mentioned as a particularly pleasant area. The most important requirement for a house was good thermal insulation. Even when the houses had a shabby appearance, they were generally warm (Soikkeli 2021, 54). Satisfying Maslow's basic needs was a key requirement for users. The appearance of the house was not considered particularly important, nor the façade material. The aesthetic needs mentioned by Maslow did not play a role in architecture, according to the questionnaires. The newest types of houses were preferred, as they were considered warm and considered to be in good condition.

According to respondents, the ensemble of buildings and surroundings was charming as were the views to the mainland over the lagoon. For the locals, the aesthetic need or the concept of the beauty was not related to the appearance of the houses but to the village and the landscape together. This viewpoint emphasized that housing is not self-sufficient but part of the village and community's everyday life. The location of the village allowed for the pursuit of natural livelihoods, which supported the community and tied it to its historical continuum. The location of the village in the old, traditional Inupiat area was also highlighted as very important. Respondents appreciated the nearness of nature and especially the sea, which is related to their livelihoods, in their living environment and village. The love and belongingness needs for interpersonal relationships motivate behaviour and include friendship and acceptance, but also being part of a group (Soikkeli 2021, 54, 56). Shishmaref is a small community with strong family and friendship ties. Meeting the needs of the individual and the community makes it possible to reach the highest levels of the hierarchy, according to Maslow's theory. Interviews with the villagers in Shishmaref revealed that the current types of houses offer a good solution for living. The residents also considered it important for family and friends to live nearby. However, the housing situation is not flexible when life situations change. There is a lack of building sites and housing, and the village structure does not allow young families to build near their parents. The houses are crowded, making it difficult or even impossible for two generations to live under the same roof. Also, the village plan is not flexible enough to allow new buildings and groups of buildings in which members of the same family would live, forming multi-generational entities (Soikkeli 2021, 58). In order to reach the higher levels of the Maslow hierarchy, the design of the area and village should always be included in the design of housing. The respondents appreciated Airport Road's clear road line for safety reasons. It is possible to leave and enter house yards safely and with simple driving lines when using snowmobiles and four-wheelers.

Basic diseases can be treated in the village, but, for example, the elderly who need constant care have to move to larger cities. There are major shortcomings in housing and in the village itself in achieving Maslow's level of security for those aging or falling ill.

4. Quinhagak experimental house

Contemporary residential housing in Arctic Indigenous villages is based on the use of standardized houses. The main purpose of the housing type design in Alaska has been to produce compact buildings for the permafrost area in a way that does not require special construction skills. The shape of the building is based on the principle of energy efficiency. Building materials must be light and durable. The houses’ architecture has limitations: they are compact, simple units. Therefore, the planning of the village, that is, the location of the buildings along the streets and the scale of the streets, becomes more important. The built environment is not a detached element, but users finish the environment and house interior with their own approval and their own views, which are not always the same as those of the designers. However, the Quinhagak experimental house focuses on physiological and safety needs, not on aesthetic needs.

The Cold Climate Housing Research Center (CCHRC) in Fairbanks is developing new technologies applicable in a harsh physical environment, but it's also interested in traditional wisdom, because local people might have innovative ways of building in the north. It partnered with a project whose goal was to design an affordable, energy-efficient, and healthy home type for the Native Village of Quinhagak. The Yukon–Kuskokwim Delta of Alaska is a very windy place, and even though the yearly snowfall is moderate, the snow can drift in houses, even preventing getting out through the door or windows. The village's housing stock is aging and has been compromised by extensive water infiltration, rot, and mould. The CCHRC design team gathered input from villagers about the problems with their current housing and explored possible solutions that the prototype could address. The primary goals of the design were to be energy efficient, warm, dry, mould-free, durable, affordable, and replicable by local labour resources (The Cold Climate Housing Research Center 2020). The deficiency needs were at the core of planning. The culture was not mentioned on the list of goals, but the design and floor plan were approved by the village in 2009. Based on the wind drift studies, the experimental house is octagonal, which lessens the surface area-to-volume ratio, reducing the amount of surface area exposed to the cold According to locals, the problems with snow drift had started after housing started being based on square boxes some 50 years ago (Shaw and Zacks 2020).

The octagonal shape is strongly related to energy efficiency, but it can also be associated with traditional round sod houses of the region. The house plan can be considered an outsider's interpretation of the material manifestation of culture. In general, there is always a danger that intangible values will be ignored in top-down decisions in planning processes in the way that outsiders protect and nurture a culture whose core they do not actually understand (Soikkeli 2019, 84–99). But still, here the aesthetic needs of a designer driven by a desire to understand culture and a community secured by experience and local knowledge were met (Figure 7).

Figure 7. Quinhagak prototype house (photo courtesy of the Cold Climate Housing Center).

The round shape of the building can also be questioned in relation to the satisfaction of basic needs. Today, the villagers in the area seemingly live in a very Western way. The last sod houses disappeared from residential use decades ago, and they have also disappeared from the village – the built environment doesn't carry their memory anymore. Recently, the characteristics and appearance of a sod house have been objectives in planning. So far, design practicality has outweighed the cultural aesthetic in most cases (e.g. Caldwell 2016). Standardized housing has brought a new kind of housing culture and also shaped the existing culture. It is a lengthy two-way process, and a change in housing is part of it: residents are shaping their homes, but housing is also shaping the way they live. The round form imitating sod houses does not necessarily communicate with the local culture, and the type of building does not have such a role in empowering the culture as music, dance, and drumming might have (Figure 8). The community offers possibilities to meet growth needs and belonging needs, and the house contributes more to deficiency needs, such as physiological, safety, social and esteem needs. The young generation, which does not necessarily perceive dance as necessary for its own identity, recognizes the shape of the peat house even less as its own. Also, in the Quinhagak prototype house, the use of the kitchen-living room area might be challenging, as all bedroom doors open in the middle of the space, which limits furnishability and usability and it partly functions as transit space. The space use is inefficient compared to the heated cubic meters in a cold climate.

Figure 8. Experimental house on the left (photo courtesy of the Cold Climate Housing Center).

The culture is deeper than in the external form of a house. Thus, the idea of a polygonal type of house might even be simplistic – albeit well-intentioned from an energy efficiency point of view – toward minority culture. Instead, the locals emphasized the values of sharing, cooperation, and respect for elders and others, and these could also be important themes in housing. The common space, the kitchen and living areas, are at the core of living. This crystallizes one characteristic feature of Inupiat culture: most family activities occur in integrated spaces, because daily activities provide an important context for social interaction among family members (Dawson 2003). What goals could be achieved through architecture, especially village planning? How could communality and other cultural values be reflected in the villages?

Maybe the most insightful thing about the CCHRC's polygonal-type house project was the contribution of local experts; the house owner is involved in the building process under professional guidance. This way, he learns not only to build but also to understand the function of the structures and, thus, is also better able to maintain the building (The Cold Climate Housing Research Center 2020). In this process the esteem needs and even self-actualization were met, and traditional knowledge was utilized in a modern way.

5. Interpretation of planning in light of Maslow’s theory

Three examples represent planning and designing projects for Indigenous peoples. The aim of management and architectural planning has sincerely been to produce a good environment for the Arctic conditions within the resources that have been available. Designers have had Western architectural training where the primary goal of construction is to provide protection and a safe living environment. The first example represents the planning of a new settlement, the second is an example of a village that has been inhabited for a long time and the third is a single building made in an existing village.

In chapters 2-4, users’ needs have been considered from a hierarchical perspective, assuming that satisfying basic needs enable higher needs to be satisfied. Examining an individual building based on Maslow's theory turned out to be insufficient, because the community is an essential value for Indigenous peoples, and some needs can be successfully satisfied, although the satisfaction of basic needs may remain weak at the level of an individual building. Or the other way around, even if basic needs are met at the level of a building, it may not be enough if village planning does not support the community. In light of the examples, it is also clear that even if the basic needs are not satisfied sufficiently in all respects, higher values in the community can still be satisfied in a commendable way. The perspective of a Western-educated architect can be utterly different from that of a member of an Indigenous community.

Based on cases, Maslow's theory is approached as a less linear phenomenon, and it is accepted that it also needs overlap and change. To show this, a graphic diagram has been created, which examines the fulfilment of needs simultaneously at the level of the individual home and the village. The presentation does not examine esteem and self-actualization levels but focuses on presenting the fulfilment of three other needs, that might enable and support the two others (Figures 9–11).

Figure 9. In Sevettijärvi, safety needs were fulfilled at the level of the home, and partly also at the level of the village. A health centre was located in its separate village centre, which created security. However, the fragmented village structure did not bring a feeling of belongingness at the community level in the same way as a traditional winter village structure. Basic physiological needs were also met at the home level, but the village structure did not allow these needs to be met in the best possible way in the community.

Figure 10. In Shishmaref, the physiological needs were met on a building level to some extent, and the village level expanded the fulfilment of needs, i.e. the needs were met as a whole. Also, it is assumable that the safety needs were met on both levels sufficiently. It was considered that social needs were not fully met at the home level, because the homes were cramped, and there were no building sites nearby for children moving out to start a family. The sense of belonging was strong in the tight-knit community, also because of the connection to ancestors’ land.

Figure 11. Quinhagak experimental house met the physiological requirements of modern Arctic living, i.e. the basic needs, such as water, warmth and a place to rest. Safety needs were also met in the building itself. For the village, the fulfilment of these needs is not evaluated here. The new building was built in an existing village and thus supported the need for belonging also at the village level. Cultural factors were considered in planning and construction, and the villagers were involved in these processes. The belongingness was therefore supported also on the village level.

According to Maslow's original theory, higher needs emerge when people feel they have sufficiently satisfied the previous need. In the housing examples presented in this article, the basic needs – physiological and safety needs – have been the main focus of planning. Physiological needs have been met through shelter, warmth, and places to sleep, prepare food and even work. As these needs are satisfied, the next level of safety and security needs becomes more pressing. Also, security and safety needs – of body, the family, health (both physical and mental), property, limits and stability – have been met in the housing examples in all cases, at least to some extent. Some changes in the family might affect the space requirements, but predicting and controlling the changes is challenging. For example, the family size and structure might change without any fixed patterns. A flexible spatial configuration might cover all the phases of living from birth to the end of life, but flexibility might also be included at the village level. Aging in place was not possible, at least in Sevettijärvi or in Shishmaref. In Sevettijärvi there was also a lack of stability in housing for young families, and in Shishmaref the village planning did not support multi-generational housing entities. Physical safety and security were enhanced, but there was a lack of emotional safety, especially in the first case of Skolt Saami housing. The goal of trying to meet higher-level needs of community, growth and personal development was forgotten. However, fulfilling basic needs was not always sufficient to advance to meeting needs in the higher categories. Sometimes the growth needs were met even when the physiological needs were not.

Architectural planning cannot focus solely on meeting the basic needs, but it is important to understand the diverse needs of users. The remote homes in Sevettijärvi were gradually abandoned because the planning response to needs was poor on many levels, despite efforts to design buildings that would correspond to the traditional way of housing. The architectural quality in Shishmaref may not be considered high, but this quality was not considered necessary by the villagers either. Cultural needs are largely met even when some basic needs are not met, and therefore residents prosper in their village. The Quinhagak experimental house can potentially meet the architectural quality from the villagers’ and designer's perspectives. However, how a community is formed and supports different needs along with the building determines the success of the house type.

Among the cultural values of Alaska's Indigenous people, sharing and helping each other are important (Inupiaq Cultural Values 2020). These values are also reflected in caring for weaker members of the community. The elderly are taken care of; they typically live with their children's families when they can no longer get along by themselves. Therefore, the house should also serve as a three-generation dwelling. The most important thing would be to solve the problem of cramped houses. For the designer, this creates a certain contradiction. Saving heating energy encourages compact building, that is, small and low spaces. On the other hand, the apartment should be flexible enough that space can be made for an elder to move in. The centralized floor shape (such as round or octagonal) and the transfer nature of the main space can hamper the versatility and possible expandability of the rooms. The concept of one's own space differs from the Western world view, and the requirement for one's own space is not absolute in requiring one's own room. One's own space can be a place, for example, in the living room where the resident can do beadwork. Shared spaces can be found in the common workspace of the village, where people gather, for example, to do engraving work. Personal space can also mean one's own bed. There are different perceptions of what constitutes personal space in different cultures (Baldassare and Feller 1975, 481–503), which is also something that an architect should keep in mind.

The need for storage space also requires reflection. Western culture holds a certain value of invisibility for all, which is also sometimes called for in Scandinavian design. There is a lot of stuff, but it is hidden in closets and storage rooms, making it possible to retrieve things as needed. What is needed less often is hidden deeper in the space, and some of the goods are never needed. In Inupiat villages as was also the case at Skolt Saami homes in Sevettijärvi, practically everything you own is needed and used, so there is no need to hide it; it must be easy to take out and use regularly. The crafts are waiting for the right moment to be made. The only ‘vanity’ in the visible living space is on the walls in the form of photographs representing family and relatives; carvings; and remembrances. This is strongly linked with respect for and remembrance of the community and the wider community; it is the maintenance of one's own roots and culture. Yards, on the other hand, are open storage spaces, which is practical. In villages where importing goods is expensive and inconvenient, it is important to reuse as much as possible. Thus, old plywood boards, pieces of wood, boxes, etc. occupy the vicinity of the buildings as seemingly confusing mounds. There is no need to build separate warehouses for them because that would also confine precious building materials ‘in vain’. All this might cause designers’ and users’ aesthetic needs to conflict.

6. Conclusion

Changes to Maslow's original five-stage model brought the theory to eventually include an eight-stage model, as explained in the introduction. The three new levels (cognitive needs, aesthetic needs and transcendence needs) were impossible or at least more difficult to recognize in the cases than esteem needs and self-actualization. Therefore, this article emphasized the physical features of the built environment, including physiological and safety needs.

Although the goal of design or planning can only fulfil some of the different needs defined by Maslow, the list of needs is a good guideline for designers regarding what kind of needs the users have. This thought might help to understand that architects and planners are also responsible for how the Indigenous communities are supported in planning. The diagrams presented in chapter 5 shows three core needs most relevant to architectural planning and design. It draws attention to both the village and the building levels and might help to comprehend the planning as an integral process.

The architect at best is an enabler, but cannot decide how the plans will ultimately serve e.g. communities. The primary value in affordable housing design is functionality. Homes should provide for a person's basic needs, they should give families a safe and warm place to live, in which they are sheltered from harsh weather. They should also be accessible to different opportunities such as schools, jobs, health, etc., which might vary in different places. The factors faced during planning are not only physical but psychological. Training, experience and a sense of empathy give architects the tools to meet requirements in design. They know housing functions, materials, and structures and often sufficient knowledge of costs. In planning, not everything is said, but the information–intangible knowledge–is filtered through architects’ experience. The challenge arises when planning for groups with different cultural backgrounds. For this reason, genuine participatory planning is necessary when planning for Indigenous communities.

Society and even individuals define what constitutes an acceptable way of ensuring safety. Cultural values and beliefs also underlie these definitions. The level of belongingness is met through affiliation with a family or a community. This process is also much impacted by cultural values. The esteem need is met through recognition and achievement, which can only be attained through meeting or exceeding expectations based on the values and beliefs determined by culture. In self-actualization and self-transcendence, the importance of culture becomes even more significant. The culture determines what is considered to be a potential worthy of attainment.

Housing promotes a sense of belonging. Personalization emphasizes the creation of a feeling of ownership of a place, marking its boundaries through personalization, and it occurs in identifying the boundaries of public and private territories. However, in many Indigenous communities, these boundaries are not as clear as in the Western world. It is essential to give occupants opportunities to select and control an environment, so that they can organize the space to fit them. Although lower-level needs are to be met in the early stages of standardized housing, the higher levels should be satisfied by providing chances for active and direct participation in the housing process. Residents should have the opportunity to suit their various needs and lifestyles for dwellings in housing projects. If this is not possible on the housing level, it should be allowed on the community level. In light of the examples, it would be necessary for architects and planners to understand that the connection between an individual home and a village is very solid, the individual is part of the community.

Maslow's theories about how humans move from lower levels of need to upper levels by regularly satisfying needs at one level and allowing the next level to become dominant is an interesting starting point for a housing survey. It is clear that the needs are simultaneous and overlapping, so it is not a question of climbing up the ladder of needs. Maslow's work centred around the humanistic approach, and criticism of the pyramid form is justified. The pyramid creates the impression of the value attachment of levels, at the culmination of which people are free to actualize themselves. The theory is straight and linear, as needs are more relational. More disturbing is the fundamental premise that on the top is the actualization of self, not community or generational legacy. This underlines Western world individualist values, not Indigenous values, as should be done when discussing the planning of and for Indigenous communities. Masolow's theory in itself does not serve as a design model or guideline, because, for example, human needs and the mutual relationship between needs vary at different times of life, i.e. also in the temporal dimension. However, Maslow's theory might help Western architects and planners to understand housing as a broader phenomenon than building design – it is also planning for the community. There is a need for a place-based, relational and integrated approach that can satisfy primary needs while enhancing the social, situated, cultural and community dimensions as an essential component of living.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).