What is Hostile Architecture:
Exploring the Hidden Discomfort and Complexity in Living Environments, and Everyday Acts of Resistance (2025)
Time
Spring 2025. Revised Summer 2026
Context
School project
A journalistic article, written for my Communication Science master's elective, reporting on a topic of choice. In this project, I chose to investigate on hostile architecture and urban inclusion, through an interview with Dutch architect and researcher Floor van Ditzhuyzen.
...
Peculiar black marble structures stand in the pedestrian area of Rotterdam’s Weena district, near the train station and business hub. Quietly positioned along a corporate building’s outer edge, under a built-in rain shelter, they blend into the daily flow of diverse travelers who come and go. At first glance, they seem purely decorative, but a closer look reveals their geometric forms subtly protruding a few centimeters taller, awkwardly raising just slightly above ground level.
Almost like unapologetically well-conspired bumps in the road!
Hostile architecture can be defined as pre-designed or post-installed architectural structures, aimed at preventing or limiting certain behaviour or expelling particular groups from accessing the space (van Ditzhuyzen, 2022; Molnar & de Fine Licht, 2025).
Hostile architecture has existed for a long time in history, but gained traction as a design discipline in the global West during the 1990s in response to growing urban middle-class populations in cities like Rotterdam, according to Netherlands-based architect and researcher, Floor van Ditzhuyzen, known as the Public Space Detective. Her work focuses on public space, urban hospitality, and hostile architecture.
Hostile architecture can take on many forms: from metal spikes mounted on window edges to deter loitering, small metal pieces on ledges to block skaters, armrests dividing benches to prevent sleeping, to stools with nonergonomic designs that discourage long-term sitting. Even certain public art or sculptures may quietly serve purposes of exclusion, if one takes into account their strategic placement and interaction with the broader context.
Measures against undesirable behaviour may seem sensible to the majority; however, while they drive away the unwanted, the negative impacts of hostile architecture do not end there. Threats also occur to individuals who are not the subject of expulsion. With their intentionally defective design, these structures obstruct and endanger disabled individuals, elderly, and children alike, who especially require space to move or rest.
According to Floor, some morally problematic designs are still present and operating in major cities widely considered safe and inclusive, primarily to safeguard commercial interests. One example is a device called “mosquito,” which makes a high-pitched, mosquito-like noise that is allegedly only audible to youths, provoking and driving young skaters away from skateboarding hotspots.
“They [public institutions, private owners] told me ‘Yeah, we still use them a lot’,” Floor said about her interactions with Rotterdam landowners. “I’m very sure mosquitos are illegal to use. But they kept using them.”
From a more holistic urban planning perspective, there are also hostile civil engineering practices that perpetuate the segregation of certain disadvantaged or minority groups in society (Schindler, 2015).
An illustrative example is the intentional construction of low-level bridges that prevent buses, a means of public transportation predominantly associated with lower- and middle-income demographics, from entering higher-income neighborhoods in New York City (Swain, 2013). This is a highly tactful and structural arrangement that strictly constrains travel and movement.
More voices are protesting hostile architecture, arguing how they do not solve the root cause of the problem besides passively moving it elsewhere (Wandalowski, 2021). Indeed, some people can and will sit, even on uncomfortable grounds, if they have nowhere left to go, rendering the hostile measure ineffective. Furthermore, defensive acts such as driving the homeless away from one city only cause them to dwell in other cities (van Loo, 2024), and such a cycle cannot continue forever.
“Public space are fluid; they are technically owned by no one and therefore by anyone.”
The 2020 pandemic was a turning point in the Netherlands, says Floor, prompting many to rethink inclusive public spaces. It was a profound period during which many people felt uncomfortable in, or excluded from, even the most conventional public spaces, particularly those who were accustomed to taking everyday comfort for granted.
Floor began her personal blog about public space around that time, which includes some personal investigation and reflections on the subject. Others did as well, such as the anonymous Instagram account Dutch Hostile Architecture (@dutch_hostile_architecture), who has been posting about hostile architecture since 2022 and has 18.2K followers as of March 2025.
Multiple social actors are involved in the push-and-pull of accountability in the event of public criticism or unforeseen consequences, which complicates matters. Should the municipality take full responsibility? Or should it be the private landowners, architects, social workers, or the individuals themselves? Balancing these interests can be challenging. Ideally, the municipality should be responsible for ensuring that (semi-)public space is accessible and safe for all, as well as enforcing legislation that specify which types of designs are (not) permitted. “Public space are fluid; they are technically owned by no one and therfore by anyone.” Floor commented.
However, because people’s circumstances and ways of interaction with the environment vary, what some consider to be “hostile” may feel perfectly appropriate to others. A post of an outdoor stair in Nijmegen by Dutch Hostile Architecture created some discussions. Some people thought it was too much, while others thought it was perfectly acceptable.
“[F]riction is also a necessary form of social contact.”
When asked about what we can do with the issue, Floor believes it is important to keep the notion that to live in cities inevitably comes with frictions of sharing spaces, or fighting over how spaces should be used. According to Dutch architect Frank van Klingeren, whose ideas Floor take inspiration from, friction is also a necessary form of social contact. Perhaps discussions and engagement with different individuals and interest groups is the best way to understand how spaces should be used together.
What can individuals like us do about hostile architecture, knowing the pros, cons, and complexity behind it? “Write about it,” Floor suggested, almost without hesitation. “Or make noise.”
Following criticism of unaccommodating and discriminatory armrests, the city council of Amsterdam intends to remove them from public benches in the near future, joining Utrecht and Leiden (NL Times, 2024).
A few years ago, Floor started placing stickers of disapproval on hostile public structures as a mild form of activism, the geometric strictures at Weena being one of them. Besides taking direct action, she also wrote about it on her blog. Her “work” sparked public debate on the subject. Recently, the Weena structures were finally removed, “after being there for over 20 years,” said Floor. Those who noticed rejoiced.
Photo credit: Stripping Architecture (@destriparchitects) on Instagram
It is unclear whether Floor’s stickers and writings, or any of the Instagram accounts condemning hostile public constructs directly contributed to the removal of the Weena structures. Nevertheless, the case proves how bottom-up initiatives, or simply the act of making honest noise, could foster tangible changes by increasing awareness of the hidden aggression and inequality within the urban environment we interact with daily.¶
March 2025. Revised July 2026.
...
Afterword
There was quite an incidental story behind how this article came to be. Back in 2023, I happened to stumble across an unusual sight in central Rotterdam and instinctively took a few photos.
I searched up the name on the stickers out of curiosity, thereby discovering Floor’s initiative. Intrigued and inspired, I moved on with life, keeping that small piece of information in the back of my mind.
At the time, I couldn't have anticipated that this random encounter would eventually lead to a realised idea of an interview with the Public Space Detective herself—and to a meaningful journalistic piece examining the everyday spaces we collectively inhabit through a critical and reflective lens.
July 2026
...
References
Amsterdam ditching center armrest on benches to be more accommodating to homeless. (2024, May 21). NL Times. https://nltimes.nl/2024/05/21/amsterdam-ditching-center-armrest-benches-accommodating-homeless#:~:text=A%20team%20of%20expert%20civil,the%20city's%20parks%20and%20squares
van Ditzhuyzen, F. (2022). The Weena Trilogy, Part I: Double Trouble at the Weena. Public Space Detective. https://publicspacedetective.com/cms/category/hostile-architecture/page/7/
Molnar, S., & de Fine Licht, K. (2025). Defensive for whom: The valuation of users and uses in public space design in Gothenburg, Sweden. Urban Studies, 0(0). https://doi.org/10.1177/00420980241305055
Schindler, S. (2015). Architectural exclusion: Discrimination and segregation through physical design of the built environment. The Yale Law Journal, 124(6), 1836-2201. https://www.yalelawjournal.org/article/architectural-exclusion
Swain, F. (2013, December 2). Secret city design tricks manipulate your behaviour. BBC News. https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20131202-dirty-tricks-of-city-design
Van Loo, J. (2024, September 21). Na overlast ziet Zwolle nu veel minder bedelaars: 'Zijn vertrokken naar andere steden zonder verbod.’ De Stentor. https://www.destentor.nl/zwolle/na-overlast-ziet-zwolle-nu-veel-minder-bedelaars-zijn-vertrokken-naar-andere-steden-zonder-verbod~a6096990/?referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F#:~:text='De%20Zwolse%20bedelaars%20zijn%20veel,dat%20het%20vrij%20onzichtbaar%20blijft
Wandalowski, Z. (2021, October 19). Hiding homelessness through hostile architecture only hurts the community. The Diamondback. https://dbknews.com/2021/10/19/hostile-architecture-homeless-city-planning-community/#:~:text=This%20punitive%20approach%20doesn't,undesirable%E2%80%9D%20by%20businesses%20and%20governments
< back to writings / research