Defining methods for architectural and planning organization of temporary settlements for internally displaced persons in Ukraine

Abstract

This article analyzes the main issues of architectural and planning organization of temporary settlements for internally displaced persons. It identifies the current demands for increased flexibility and resilience in planning and explores a new type of temporary housing with a progressive (permanent) core. Special attention is given to incremental design and participation as methods of uniting the efforts of designers, communities, and governments into a single strategy for providing sustainable housing for affected populations. A review of the research revealed two main problems in the strategic planning of housing assistance: the issue of stability in the concept of "temporary housing" and the challenge of flexible planning solutions. In response to this, the introduction of new transitional types - "transitional shelters" designed using materials and structures that can be upgraded or reused in more permanent housing units, and "progressive shelters" - stationary, rapidly deployable shelters on designated land (with appropriate zoning) intended for future conversion into permanent housing units. In a methodological sense, both types feature a permanent, stable core and temporary residential volumes or structures that gradually evolve into a permanent living environment—a concept known as incremental architecture. It changes the morphological understanding of temporary housing, allowing it to be engaged at all stages of housing assistance alongside participatory methods and "advocacy planning" that regulate the involvement of communities and affected populations in planning activities together with specialists and local authorities. The experience of rebuilding the affected city of Constitution in Chile has shown that these methods can enhance the flexible nature of architecture (its planning possibilities and solutions for reuse and reconfiguration) and potentially create new values of permanence. Additionally, a review of the existing Ukrainian experience has revealed a lack of tools for uniting the efforts of designers, communities, and the government into a single strategy for temporary housing policy, thus preventing temporary shelter and housing facilities from meeting all the necessary (social, cultural, and infrastructural) needs of residents. This implies that a polyvalent strategy may be recommended for affected rural communities, simultaneously satisfying the needs of permanent residents and providing affected communities with temporary homes with the potential for permanent residency, as it is impossible to accurately assess the terms of temporary housing use and population repatriation until the end of hostilities.