Bernal, D M; Laitinen, J; Shevchenko, H; Ivanova, O; Pelsmakers, S and Nisonen, E (2026) Spatial (in)justice shaping the home as a space of work. Buildings & Cities, 7(1), pp. 161-175. ISSN 2632-6655
Abstract
Drawing on an extensive literature review, this study examines how injustices manifest in space and the role of space in engendering injustices when associated with working at home. Findings illustrate, first, that by defining the home as a space of non-work positioned in the private sphere renders invisible work at home, the worker within, as well as the material and immaterial conditions under which they work. This invisibility conduces to injustices. Second, work at home and the home are starkly gendered and feminised, frequently devalued, and under-or unpaid. Third, that quality housing with material conditions to support homeworkers is not evenly distributed or accessible across different social groups. Unequal access to high-quality living environments and nature to support their work and wellbeing was exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Homes separate homeworkers from each other, hindering the formation of networks of solidarity to advance justice. Finally, the type of work at home is unevenly distributed geographically, fragmenting cities and creating hierarchical spatial relations that exacerbate injustices across urban spaces. PRACTICE RELEVANCE The study offers individuals working in the fields of architecture and planning—in research and practice—conceptual tools to see, understand, and make visible spatial injustices when work is realised at home. It mobilises these tools to discuss concrete ways in which injustices become spatialised, how space contributes to shaping these injustices and the reasons behind unjust spatial formations. Key reasons include the material and ideological separation between home and work; the ideological positioning of the home in the private sphere and defining the home as a feminised space; homes designed as isolated spaces that separate workers and conceal work, homeworkers, and the material and immaterial conditions under which they work; and spatial practices that create hierarchical divisions of space and unequal distribution of quality homeworking environments. Actions are recommended for architects and planners to address and advance spatial justice in the home.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | architecture; domestic work; home; housework; planning; spatial justice; working at home; working from home |
| Index terms: | architect, COVID-19, justice, planner, urban space, literature review, housing, well-being, pandemic, drawing |
| Subjects: | mental health and wellbeing, health risk and incident analysis, legal systems, technical documentation, data analysis and analytics, construction type, profession, urban design and public space |
| Topics: | Urban Studies, Legal Issues, Health and Safety, Construction Technology, Design Practice, Roles and Professions, Research Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here