Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Dr Shaneen Fantin, James Cook University (paper): Reminding me of home. Culturally responsive design of landscape and external environments in Indigenous secure and health facilities
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×
Saving this for later? Get the SlideShare app to save on your phone or tablet. Read anywhere, anytime – even offline.
Text the download link to your phone
Standard text messaging rates apply

Dr Shaneen Fantin, James Cook University (paper): Reminding me of home. Culturally responsive design of landscape and external environments in Indigenous secure and health facilities

339
views

Published on

Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University delivered this presentation at the 5th Prison …

Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University delivered this presentation at the 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance conference. This conference follows the production of existing, developing and future correctional facilities across Australia.

For more information, go to http://www.informa.com.au/prisonplanning2013

Published in: Technology

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
339
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
10
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance – 9-10th Dec, 2013. Melbourne Session Title: The Plan Phase: what do we need and where? Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland. 3.50 – 4:30pm Reminding me of home. Culturally responsive design of landscape and external environments in Indigenous secure and health facilities. Abstract In many states of Australia, Aboriginal prisoners make a large portion of the prison population. In Queensland it is about 30% (ABS 2013), but in prisons in remote areas such as far north Queensland the percentage is much higher. How can the landscape and outdoor environments in such facilities be designed to recognise and support Aboriginal cultural and social practices? Culturally and socially responsive site planning and design can create opportunities for rehabilitation of prisoners through re-connecting with country, enabling Aboriginal social practices and maintaining ethno-botanical knowledge. A number of case studies will be provided. 1.0 Introduction Australia is a vast country with a relatively small Indigenous population, less than 3% (ABS 2013). However the representation of Aboriginal people in prisons in Australia is approximately 30% (ABS 2013). The Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths in Custody (RCIADIC) stated that “[t]here are important cultural differences between Aboriginal and nonAboriginal detainees for which accommodation can, and should be made in the context of custodial procedures and cell design” (Johnston 1991 Vol 3 p.235). This paper is written from the perspective of architecture and people-environment studies, and how culturally responsive design of built environments and landscape can create supportive and potentially rehabilitative environments for users. It draws on literature from People Environment Studies, Environmental Psychology and Intercultural Design Practice (Rapoport 1982, Martin and Casault 2005, Bechtel and Churchman 2012). In some parts of the paper I use the term Aboriginal and in other parts Indigenous. This is intentional as one case study is from remote Western Australia where the use of the word Indigenous is not appropriate. Whereas the other case study is from far north Queensland where Indigenous is accepted as a term and regularly interchanged with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander. I am an architect with a PhD in Architecture and Aboriginal Environments and have been working with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people on health, housing and secure projects since 1995. I am predominantly a practitioner, but with a keen interest in research and analysis. Today’s paper presents two case studies. One of a prison and one of a health facility which incorporate design principles that aim to provide supportive environments for Aboriginal inmates and patients. The key questions that are at the forefront of this work are,  Why should we consider cultural imperatives in the design of custodial and health facilities? 1
  • 2. 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance – 9-10th Dec, 2013. Melbourne Session Title: The Plan Phase: what do we need and where? Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland.   How can we respond to social and cultural imperatives of Aboriginal people in the design of built environments? And, Is there any evidence to suggest that culturally responsive design contributes to rehabilitation and wellbeing? 1.1 The relationship between culture and design Culture is conceptualised by many scholars as existing in both cognitive and physical dimensions; it encapsulates everything one thinks and feels, and how one behaves or represents thoughts and feelings in a social and spatial environment. Culture is learning: every individual learns from his or her environment how to speak, behave and think. All of the influences and experiences in a person’s life contribute to their self and the cultural framework from which they view and interact with the world. Amos Rapoport (1982, 1986), who has undertaken extensive studies on the relationship between built form and culture, states, “Culture is ultimately translated into form through what people do as a result of what is in their heads and within the constraints of their situation” (Rapoport 1986:162). What this suggests is that environmental influences that affect people’s thought and behaviour patterns can be seen in their spatial and built environments. Robinson (1989:253) states that built forms are manifestations of culture; they are “mirrors of cultural values” and allow people to compare cultural aspirations with achievements. The relationship of built form and culture can be expressed in a number of ways: as a symbolic representation of beliefs and practices, in response to spatial activities which are framed by cultural institutions, or by a combination of both symbolic and spatial structuring (Rapoport 1986). I have applied the expression Cultural Imperatives to those activities and symbols that are framed by cultural institutions. For the past fifteen years I have been slowly, through participatory observation and intercultural practice, observing and recording Cultural Imperatives for the design of built environments with Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people. Each project, people and location is different and its own imperatives are derived from the development of a design brief. However, the connection with the Australian landscape, or Country, and Aboriginal religion and identity is consistent on every project I have worked on. It is important to recognize that built form (and dominant cultural frameworks) also influence culture; it is a two-way reflective relationship. For example a person’s experience of different physical environments and cultures can subconsciously and consciously affect how they interpret their own environment. If an environment inhibits a preferred cultural practice it might be seen as a vehicle for culture change or adaptation. People’s creation of and control over their own living environment has consequences for their well-being and identity (van Staden 1984, Reser 1991 and Prussin 1995). If individuals feel that they have control over their environment and how it is structured (physically, socially 2
  • 3. 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance – 9-10th Dec, 2013. Melbourne Session Title: The Plan Phase: what do we need and where? Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland. and cognitively), and if the environment supports individuals’ belief systems then it contributes to the maintenance of individual health and well-being. 1.2 Why should we consider cultural imperatives in the design of custodial and health environments? Stress has been described as a ‘response stimulus’ which results from pressures and forces on people and things (Oxford Dictionary 1973, Memmott 1988:34, 1991, Reser 1991). Reser (1991: 249) states that people experience stress through:  The pressures and demands of transition;  The experience and impact of discrimination and prejudice;  Marginal social and economic status;  The condition of the physical environment in which people live, and;  Poor health. People also experience stress through conflict and lack of ‘personal control’ over situations and environments. Being ‘stressed’ can create anxiety, irritability, and may lead to conflict and health related problems. Ongoing stress can contribute to mental illnesses such as depression, neurosis, substance abuse, and, potentially, suicide. (Reser 1991, see chapter 7 on sorcery). Labelle Prussin (1995:205) supports Reser when she says, It is a well-established fact that control over one’s environment, whether perceived or real, is an essential component of environmental satisfaction. Control over one’s self-created architecturally defined space, particularly when it is so imbued with meaning and emotion, is essential for self-identity and mental health. Studies in cross-cultural psychology by D’Andrade (in Kitayama & Markus 1994:98) support the notion that preventing individuals from achieving culturally prescribed goals and following cultural directives can produce anxiety. If the medium inhibiting the achievement of these goals is a physical environment, then the environment will create stress for the occupants and users, and in turn they may deflect their anxiety onto their physical environment. Physical environments, such as buildings, are not entirely responsible for creating anxiety and stress in individuals, but can contribute to other feelings of a loss of control. In the creation of environments that recognise and support positive existing social and cultural practices and create some comfort we are trying to reduce stress and enable mental and physical rehabilitation. 1.3 How can we respond to social and cultural imperatives of Aboriginal people in the design of built environments? In some societies, such as Australian Aboriginal society, the translation of beliefs into spatial and built forms may not be easily recognizable from a non-Indigenous perspective. They are often subtle and available to keen observers and participants in Aboriginal culture and society. Traditional Aboriginal Australian lifestyles did not require ‘monumental’ 3
  • 4. 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance – 9-10th Dec, 2013. Melbourne Session Title: The Plan Phase: what do we need and where? Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland. representations of culture in a built form. Aboriginal cultural representations are inherent in the Australian landscape and in Aboriginal religion and world view. The two case studies I will describe have a range of similarities and differences. The first is a large custodial environment, while the second is a small supported accommodation facility. However, I can imagine the master plan of the smaller centre as a microcosm of a bigger custodial or health facility. Even perhaps as part of the mental health unit within a prison environment. There are a number of design principles that are consistent across the case studies presented. These design principles attempt to illustrate the cultural imperatives that may assist in reducing stress and aiding rehabilitation for Aboriginal prisoners and patients.      Maintaining connections to country and landscape: o Understanding Aboriginal history of the place, and o Through disassembling design elements and o Managing views to the horizon and of surrounding significant cultural landscapes Design of landscape and flora to support comfort through memory: o Acknowledging Aboriginal history of the site in the place making and landscape design o Maintaining significant trees, places, flora on the site. o Create a landscape selection that provides opportunity for prisoners/patients to engage (visually or physically) with the landscape and flora to aid rehabilitation Avoid institutional architecture: o Creating domestic scale and non-institutional language to the architecture o Choosing materials, textures and colours that reflect the surrounding landscape and are meaningful to the users of the facility o Create opportunities for informal social interaction Acknowledging socio-cultural groups (gender/kin/clan/skin/family groups): o Understand social-spatial behaviours and needs of Aboriginal prisoners/patients o Through careful consideration during the Master planning phase, design in flexibility that allows for program management of the facility to group and locate people with consideration for the social/cultural links and background. o Create central program areas that are inviting and welcoming to encourage social, educational and rehabilitation activities. Incorporating Indigenous identity: o By working with relevant Indigenous groups to identify how identity can be encapsulated into the design. o By working with relevant Indigenous groups to present Indigenous identity in building form, planning and orientation, material and finishing choices 4
  • 5. 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance – 9-10th Dec, 2013. Melbourne Session Title: The Plan Phase: what do we need and where? Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland. 2.0 Case Studies 2.1 West Kimberley Regional Prison by TAG and Iredale Pederson Hook Architects Figure 1: Boab trees maintained in landscape design on the site The West Kimberly Regional Prison in Western Australia has recently been awarded the National Award for Public Architecture and the David Oppenheim Award for Sustainable Architecture by the Australian Institute of Architects. The jury states that it “This project has re-imagined the role of a prison as a place of refuge and rehabilitation. Although it was designed for the specific requirements of Indigenous Australians, it suggests better ways of dealing with incarceration for all culture…The design of the buildings provide security without claustrophobia (AA Nov/Dec 2013: P51). The new prison is located on a 25ha site outside of Derby in north WA, and can hold up to 150 prisoners. It was conceived to keep Kimberley Aboriginal people close to their country and to respond to their cultural and environmental needs (Grant 2013: 76). The project’s success has been anchored to two factors, the implementation of a community consultation and feedback model and the collaboration of two design firms with diverse experience in prisons and working with Aboriginal people, which has produced a world-class facility. Elizabeth Grant (2013:78) has undertaken a review of the design of the facility and she states “The design is founded on the knowledge that prison accommodation needs to be flexible, culturally appropriate, promote human interaction and enable Indigenous prisoners to remain connected to their kin, land and community.” 5
  • 6. 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance – 9-10th Dec, 2013. Melbourne Session Title: The Plan Phase: what do we need and where? Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland. How is this achieved in the design of the facility?          Cluster design of smaller buildings, no single large building modules, arranged around central football oval. Non-rigid or institutional pathway and landscape design. Varied orientation of buildings creates visual interest and more residential scale to the facility. Open nature of the design in the master plan allows for view corridors to landscape, country and the horizon. Maintenance of existing landscape and significant flora including iconic boab trees Incorporation into the Master Plan of meeting areas, a spiritual centre, separate women’s and men’s health facilities Women’s area is clearly physically separated from other areas and given its own facilities and character – gender separation is an important cultural consideration for many Aboriginal people Clustered self-care accommodation units in groups of between four and six units, each housing 6 to 8 prisoners each. This allows prisoners to be clustered in cultural groups, if program and management supports this model Minimum security accommodation units include secure sleep outs that allow people to sleep under the stars on secure verandah spaces. Selection of materials and finishes and colours reflect the natural environment, bringing comfort to the prisoners Figure 2: Considered, non-institutional architecture, meandering pathways and native landscape. 6
  • 7. 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance – 9-10th Dec, 2013. Melbourne Session Title: The Plan Phase: what do we need and where? Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland. 2.2 Wabu Gadun Bulmba Gurriny Mukanji Centre (Gurriny) by ICTC, People Oriented Design and Indij Design Figure 3: Part Site Plan: Gurriny centre. Cluster of accommodation units and landscape design The Gurriny Centre aims to create a rehabilitative environment for people with acquired brain injury through individual program services in a residential setting where the landscape and building designs are integral to each other. The centre is proposed on Yidinji land south of Cairns, Queensland. I concur with Martin and Casault (2004:16) when they state ‘Of utmost importance are the skills of listening, observing, and drawing, and of questioning what seems taken for granted by oneself and the “client”, for it is with these that one can make visible and materialize the essential’. What does to ‘materialize the essential’ mean? In architectural design it means to draw out and refine the essence of something; to find the key purpose and spirit of something. This was precisely what we attempted to do in the Gurriny project with a range of stakeholders; with the client on the model of health care, with the Yidinji traditional owners in 7
  • 8. 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance – 9-10th Dec, 2013. Melbourne Session Title: The Plan Phase: what do we need and where? Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland. the design workshops, and with the Design Managers on their vision for Indigenous management of the project. Our role as the design team was then to balance and unify these essential components and make a Yidinji place for people with acquired brain injury to rest and heal. The design methodology was not explicitly discussed when the project started. What was discussed over a series of meetings was how the project was to be managed, by whom, with which other stakeholders and how, and what communication protocols should be followed. This manifested in a number of activities and practices, which initially challenged some of the parties on the project, but eventually became incorporated into the project process. Such as,  Acknowledgement of traditional owners at every meeting  Clear communication protocols that gave the Indigenous design manager control and veto over design decisions  Allowance in project timeframes for meetings with traditional owner and ecology groups and for cultural family business such as ‘sorry business’.  Being respectful during meetings and allowing everyone space and time to talk without being interrupted or spoken over The process that resulted was more flexible and discursive than others I have worked on, but it was still a non-Indigenous framework in which the Indigenous design team danced, weaved and negotiated to be able to apply a more iterative process in parallel. The Indigenous Design Manager describes the design process that we developed as being nonIndigenous architectural traditions injected or affected by Indigenous beliefs and practices. Martin and Casault (2005:5) refer to this in their work in Canada with the Innu, ‘The Innu are continually fashioning a way of being in the world that builds on the past while simultaneously resisting and embracing white Western values’. This reflects our own process in which we often had meetings to discuss how to work within and around the structure of the project and still achieve a design and process that responded to Indigenous priorities and ways of living. The responded to Indigenous cultural imperatives. 2.2.1 Approach to Model of Care, Planning and Building Code Constraints: How is all this made evident in the design? Gurriny has been designed with careful consideration for the philosophy and model of care planned by the client. The facility is to provide transitional care for people with acquired brain injury in an environment that is supportive but that also encourages independence and rehabilitation specific to the needs of each person. The centre is not specifically for people of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander descent, however it is expected that the majority of clients will be Indigenous because of the cohort of people in north Queensland with acquired brain injury. The buildings are carefully arranged on the site within a native rehabilitative garden (or ‘Abriculture’1 landscape). The gardens include vegetable gardens, bush foods, native plants 1 ‘Abriculture’ is the name of a company and way of working developed by Seith Fourmile and Jenny Lynch to develop local Indigenous food forests and gardens. 8
  • 9. 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance – 9-10th Dec, 2013. Melbourne Session Title: The Plan Phase: what do we need and where? Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland. for manufacturing, a freshwater therapy pool and a native seasonal plant-clock. The freshwater, hydrotherapy pool is adjacent to the central facility and is fully accessible by wheelchairs. The maintenance and use of the gardens are intended to be part of the rehabilitation of the people receiving care: rather than physiotherapy with tools in a nonindigenous sense, the intention is to create a landscape that can be used as the tools for physiotherapy. For example, instead of putting peas in a jar to improve fine motor function, the clients should be able to sort lily pillys or, pick herbs from the garden or, strip Yakal (pandanus) leaves to weave a basket (and be reminded of home and country at the same time). The central facility has been designed at a domestic scale to be non-institutional and welcoming. A number of spaces within the central facility are multi-purpose and open to large verandahs, which maximises connections with the gardens and promotes natural ventilation. All the Bulmba are within 30m of the central facility and the high dependency Bulmba are within 10m. This enables easy and immediate access between the buildings and maintains visual surveillance of each Bulmba from the staff unit. Each living unit is connected to the central facility with an emergency call system and sealed pathways. All of the buildings on the site have been designed and arranged to passive climatic design principles for the tropics. They capture the local breezes, shield from the storms and have extensive shading and overhangs to protect from the sun. The central facility will capture rainwater to irrigate the vegetable gardens. The sewerage system for the facility is contained on site providing irrigation to some of the lawn areas. The design of Gurriny Centre has been classified as a 9a Health Care Building under the Building Code of Australia. It exceeds the Australian Standard 1428 - Design for Access and Mobility, and 90% of the complex meets the platinum level of the Liveable Housing Design Guidelines. The building has also been designed to achieve a six star commercial energy assessment rating under the Building Code of Australia. 2.2.2 Approach to Design for Indigenous Clients and Respect for Yidinji Land: The proposed design is anchored in the land and country in which it is based. The proposed site was on Yidinji land, and it aims to recognise the Yidinji and its Indigenous clients through a number of landscape and design features. Early in the process, design workshops were held with the Yidinji to discuss how Indigenous culture could be expressed in the design without causing offence or confusion to non-Yidinji Indigenous clients and users of the facility. There is a design engagement methodology that I (Fantin 2003b) developed in the late 1990s that was used as a framework to start conversations around culture and design. The method starts with a presentation on design and architecture in International Indigenous environments and then moves to discussions on identity represented in stories, art and history, the site and the country around the site. It also includes discussions about social and cultural norms and behaviours. The process aims to find consensus on what and how the Yidinji wanted their cultural identity recognised in the design. This process occurred over a series of meetings in which design ideas were developed and discussed with the Indigenous Design Manager prior to discussing them with the traditional owner group. 9
  • 10. 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance – 9-10th Dec, 2013. Melbourne Session Title: The Plan Phase: what do we need and where? Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland. A summary of Indigenous and Yidinji features of the design:  Incorporation of references to the rainforest cross-boomerang, the Wangul, as the anchoring design element for the orientation of the buildings and landscape. The cross-boomerang was the symbol chosen by the Yidinji elders as appropriate for the project and place. It was seen as specific to the rainforest of north Queensland, but not a totemic ancestor featured in local histories that would cause any angst or confusion with another group.  The orientation and layout of the facility responds to the cultural and scenic views of the site. The axis of the facility is the axis of the Wangul and aligns with views to Bunda Djarragan (the Pyramid) to the south, Bunda Mundii Ghunji White Rock to the north and Bunda Meringi (Mt Peter) to the west; all significant Yidinji places.  The Bulmba form was inspired by traditional Aboriginal rainforest architecture of the region. Each Bulmba has an outdoor barbeque area and healing herb garden. The Bulmba have curved internal corners to minimise places for bad spirits to harbour. The Bulmba are designed to be constructed of timber to feel natural and warm.  The facility and the buildings have been given names in Yidin, anchoring them to the place and the people whose land the facility sits on.  The roof of the central facility has a number of planes, and the main plane has a slight twist. This is a subtle reference to leaves and traditional Yidinji water carriers from the region.  The spatial organisation of the buildings and rooms within buildings provides privacy but also enables people to pay respect to various family members including ‘poison cousins’ (those in avoidance relationships. See Fantin 2003). Most spaces have multiple entries and exits so that people can move subtly away from one another if needed.  The landscape design is extensive and intricate and includes native bush food and medicinal plants, vegetable gardens, fruit trees, private gardens for each unit and a native seasonal plant-clock. Each plant has been identified using its Yidin and scientific botanical names.  The seasonal plant-clock is at the south of the facility and includes a selection of species that flower and/or fruit at different times of the year. The seasonal plant-clock allows clients to connect with other environmental triggers in the surrounding landscape. 4.0 Conclusion To commence this paper I raised three questions:   Why should we consider cultural imperatives in the design of custodial environments? How can we respond to social and cultural imperatives of Aboriginal people in the design of built environments, and 10
  • 11. 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance – 9-10th Dec, 2013. Melbourne Session Title: The Plan Phase: what do we need and where? Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland.  Is there any evidence to suggest that culturally responsive design contributes to rehabilitation? To the first question I would add, and whose Aboriginal cultural imperatives are these? Are they developed by non-Indigenous designers based on a romantic world view of Aboriginal Australia? Or are they anchored in Aboriginal social-cultural belief systems? During the introduction I described the relationship between culture and built form. I quoted Amos Rapoport “Culture is ultimately translated into form through what people do as a result of what is in their heads and within the constraints of their situation” (Rapoport 1986:162). One could argue that what I have presented today is a non-Indigenous interpretation of cultural imperatives important to Aboriginal people. This is an important position to consider. What is evident in the Gurriny case study are the cultural imperatives driven by an Aboriginal Design Manager and the Indigenous CEO of the client organization. This is the closest I have been as a practitioner to testing what I observe and record as a cultural imperative and what my Aboriginal client tells me is one. The list of Design Principles I have presented today have been tested rigorously through the Gurriny project. And in any new projects I work on we will test them again, because perceptions of culture change, as do people from different places. The second question How can we respond to social and cultural imperatives of Aboriginal people in the design of built environments? has been answered in a preliminary way by providing the case studies and discussing how each project responded to the needs of the Aboriginal users of each facility. A key consideration is the consultation and engagement methodology established to undertake the design work. Both demonstrated collaboration with Aboriginal people involved in and affected by the project. If a design is developed with an “expert” or “specialist” input, but without collaboration and ownership by Aboriginal people then we fail to test the cultural imperatives that we develop and apply to the project. We also fail to acknowledge and respect the people affected by the project and engage in a two-way learning process that empowers all parties. The third question has the least comprehensive empirical data in Australian environments, Is there any evidence to suggest that culturally responsive design contributes to rehabilitation? The theory of environmental psychology suggests that responding to an individual or group’s world view in the creation of physical environments will contribute that individual’s wellbeing. However, we can’t rely on architecture and design alone to facilitate wellbeing. Recent research by Roderick Lawrence (Bechtel 2012:394-410) on healthy environments describes the need for a holistic approach to achieving well-being that considers the following factors:        Economic circumstances Positive social/cultural environments Environmental health: access to clean water and air, infrastructure Access to health services Access to quality food and nutrition Education and information Appropriate housing and accommodation 11
  • 12. 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance – 9-10th Dec, 2013. Melbourne Session Title: The Plan Phase: what do we need and where? Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland.    Local urban/rural environment Contribution of local ecology and natural conditions Change in needs over time To understand how all these factors may affect the design of a prison or health facility, projects need to have extensive study and collaboration of different disciplines in the beginning of projects. I would argue that this collaboration should include representation of relevant Aboriginal user groups to each project. Aboriginal prisoners and patients are our most marginalised clients and those with the highest incarceration rates and health problems of all Australians. The two case studies provided demonstrate what can be achieved when designers, clients, funders and program managers work together with Indigenous needs in mind. 5.0 References Australian Bureau of Statistics. Prisoners in Australia 2012. http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/Products/A91DA889C3E80BA4CA257B3C000DC CC1?opendocument Bechtel, R and Churchman, A. (2002) Handbook of Environmental Psychology. John Wiley & Sons, New York. Bessarab, D and Ng’andu, B. (2010) Yarning About Yarning as a Legitimate Method in Indigenous Research in International Journal of Critical Indigenous Studies, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane. Vol 3. No. 1 Bryam, M and Guilherme, M. (2010). Intercultural Education and Intercultural Communication: Tracing the Relationship. In Becoming Intercultural: Inside and Outside the Classroom. Tsai, Y and Houghton, S (eds). Cambridge Scholars Publishing. UK. Chapter 1. (4-18). Fantin S., (2002) Recognising Aboriginal architecture from northeast Arnhem Land: The ‘ancestral aesthetic in Yolngu dwellings and ceremonial structures, in. Additions SAHANZ Conference Proceedings, Brisbane, Oct 4-7. Fantin, S. (2003a) Aboriginal Identities in Architecture in Architecture Australia Sept/Oct Fantin, S. (2003b) Housing Aboriginal Culture in Northeast Arnhem Land. PhD Thesis, Aboriginal Environments Research Centre, University of Queensland, Brisbane. Grant, E. (2013) West Kimberley Regional Prison in Architecture Australia July/August 2013, P76 – 82. Hall, E T. (1966) The Hidden Dimension, Doubleday & Company Inc. New York. 12
  • 13. 5th Prison Planning, Design, Construction and Maintenance – 9-10th Dec, 2013. Melbourne Session Title: The Plan Phase: what do we need and where? Dr Shaneen Fantin, Director, People Oriented Design and Adjunct Associate Professor: School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, James Cook University, Cairns, Queensland. Heffernan, E.B et al (2012) Prevalence of mental illness among Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people in Queensland prisons in MJA 197 (1) July. P 37 - 41 Johnston, E. (1991). Royal Commission into Aboriginal Deaths In Custody National Report, Volumes 1- 5. Canberra, Australian Government Printing Service. Kitayama, S and Markus, HR. (1994A). Introduction to Cultural Psychology and Emotion Research in Kitayama, S & Markus, HR.(eds) 1994. Emotion and Culture. Empirical Studies of Mutual Influence. American Psychological Association, Washington. Lawrence, RJ. (1989) Translating Anthropological Concepts into Architectural Practice. in Setha, M & Chambers, E (eds) Housing, Culture & Design. A Comparative Perspective. University of Pennsylvania Press, Philadelphia. Martin, T and Casault, A. (2005) Thinking the Other: Towards Cultural Diversity in Architecture. Journal of Architectural Education (1984-) Vol. 59, No. 1 (Sept). pp 316. Wiley on behalf of the Association of Collegiate Schools of Architecture, Inc. Memmott, P. (2007) Gunyah, Goondie & Wurley. The Aboriginal Architecture of Australia, St Lucia: University Qld Press,. Memmott, P. (1990B) Sociospatial Structures Of Australian Aboriginal Settlements in Pamir,H., Imamoglu, V., Teymur, N. (eds) Culture Space, Mefu Faculty of Architecture and Serki Vanli Foundation of Architecture, Ankara. May Vol 14 Pp280290. Prussin, L. (1995). African Nomadic Architecture. Space, Place and Gender. Smithsonian Institution Press and The National Museum of African Art. London. Rapoport, A. (1982) The Meaning of The Built Environment. A non-verbal communication approach. The University of Arizona Press, Tucson. Rapoport, A.(1986). “Culture and Built Form – A Reconsideration” in Saile, David. G. (eds) Architecture in Cultural Change. Essays in Built Form & Culture Research. University of Kansas, Lawrence. Reser, J. (1991) Aboriginal Mental Health: Conflicting Cultural Perspectives.” In Reid, J & Trompf, P. (eds) The Health of Aboriginal Australia. Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Limited, Sydney. Van Staden, F J. (1984) Developments in defining the experience of crowding In South African Journal of Psychology. No 14, Pp20-22. 13