Reimagining Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs: The Role of Aesthetics in Shelter and Settlement Response Policy Brief

Dr. Devora Neumark and Stephanie Acker

June 2024

In Zaatari Refugee Camp, artists volunteered to paint shelters around the camp. A mural in Zaatari Refugee Camp, Zaatari, Jordan.

Photo: Joel Artista, 2017

Summary

Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs has significantly influenced development and humanitarian frameworks, leading to the categorisation of needs as “basic” or “essential” while dismissing others as non-essential. This framework’s application in refugee shelter and settlement projects is misaligned with forced migration realities and critically overlooks aesthetics as a crucial component of wellbeing. Drawing on mixed-methods research including Dr. Neumark’s research-creation with individuals experiencing forced displacement, desk research examining shelter beautification across displacement contexts, and community-driven dialogues with residents in Palestinian refugee camps, this policy brief demonstrated that aesthetics in the built environment are imperative for human wellbeing. Neuroaesthetics research and forced migration studies reveal that refugee-driven aesthetics support mental health, enable cultural identity expression, strengthen community resilience, uphold human rights, and contribute to economic recovery. The brief provided practical steps for humanitarian actors, donors, policymakers, shelter coordinators, and community leaders to incorporate aesthetics into shelter and settlement assistance, addressing common challenges including resource constraints, cultural sensitivity, and political resistance.

Key Takeaways

Shelter and settlements assistance, recognised as the “foundation of humanitarian response,” currently operates under Maslow’s framework that categorizes shelter as a “basic need,” inadvertently reinforcing the notion that any basic shelter will suffice. This has resulted in most shelters being bare, anonymous, and standardized, failing to meet the full spectrum of human needs for recovery and resilience in displacement contexts.
Neuroscientific evidence confirms that aesthetics in the built environment are not supplementary to wellbeing but rather imperative for it, directly influencing occupants’ mood, cognitive functioning, behaviour, and mental health. Design with deliberate intention to incorporate beauty has positive effects on learning, social behaviour, and emotional wellness, making aesthetics a necessary component of shelter provision rather than an optional enhancement.
Across diverse displacement contexts globally, refugees demonstrate remarkable consistency in beautifying their living spaces despite severe resource constraints and restrictive policies, transforming spaces into places through gardens, painted murals, decorative textiles, and cultural symbols. This universal practice reveals aesthetics as a fundamental human drive that persists regardless of legal status, camp type, or geographic location.
Integrating aesthetics into shelter and settlements yields measurable returns across six key domains: individual wellbeing and mental health, cultural identity preservation and self-expression, community resilience and social cohesion, human rights fulfilment, economic recovery through local employment, and long-term self-reliance that reduces dependency on humanitarian assistance.
Practical integration of aesthetics into shelter and settlements response requires coordinated action across five strategic areas: establishing aesthetics as a core objective in shelter strategy and planning, identifying context-specific entry points for aesthetic interventions, advocating aesthetic impact to donors and incorporating it in funding mechanisms and tenders, building staff capacity through specialized training on aesthetics and trauma-informed design, and developing monitoring and evaluation systems that measure dignity, cultural expression, and spatial satisfaction alongside traditional shelter metrics.

Implications for Practitioners

Establishing aesthetics in shelter strategy and planning: Shelter and settlements coordinators should add aesthetics as an explicit objective in response strategies, ensuring its inclusion from initial planning stages. Designated task forces comprising artists, designers, cultural historians, and community representatives can lead aesthetic integration efforts. Different response types offer unique entry points: emergency responses can include aesthetics in supply chain planning through personalised supply kits; transitional shelter programs can incorporate aesthetic standards in design specifications; self-recovery initiatives can focus on supporting and amplifying residents’ existing beautification efforts.
Funding mechanisms and donor engagement: Donors and funders should incorporate aesthetic considerations into Terms of Reference and grant requirements, providing financial incentives or awards for projects that successfully integrate community-driven design. Aesthetics should be explicitly included in formal funding requests and used strategically to seek in-kind donations, leverage volunteers, and target new corporate partners whose missions align with art, creativity, and design values (such as public relations firms, art institutes and foundations, home goods suppliers, and interior design and architecture firms). Communication strategies should highlight the economic returns of aesthetic investment, including reduced long-term dependency on social services and increased self-reliance.
Policy reform and operational guidelines: The Global Shelter Cluster and implementing partners should create and advocate for policies that afford residents maximum autonomy to personalise, decorate, modify, and improve their personal and shared spaces. This includes removing restrictive policies that prohibit painting, gardening, repurposing materials, or modifying initial designs. Shelter standards, camp management protocols, and settlement design guidelines should mandate provisions for aesthetic expression and cultural representation rather than treating beautification as unauthorized modification.
Capacity building and professional training: Training programs for architects, urban planners, humanitarian workers, and social service providers should integrate modules on aesthetics in the built environment, neuroaesthetics research, trauma-informed design principles, and participatory design methodologies. Cross-disciplinary training initiatives bringing together professionals from different fields (architects, psychologists, cultural specialists) can foster holistic approaches to shelter design that recognise aesthetics as integral to recovery and wellbeing.
Monitoring, evaluation, and evidence generation: Monitoring, evaluation, assessment, and learning (MEAL) systems should develop and track indicators measuring aesthetic integration, dignity, cultural expression, mental wellbeing, and spatial satisfaction alongside traditional metrics of physical safety and structural adequacy. Research should be commissioned to assess the impact of aesthetic interventions on recovery trajectories, self-reliance outcomes, and long-term dependency rates. Successful case studies should be documented and disseminated through conferences, webinars, and knowledge-sharing platforms to build the evidence base and inspire replication.