Adaptation of social housing for income generation using a resilience rule: assessment and propositions

Adaptação da habitação social para renda por meio de régua de resiliência: avaliação e proposições

Abstract

A significant portion of the social housing provided by the Brazilian government program Minha Casa, Minha Vida (MCMV) has been adapted to accommodate income-generating activities. The program has delivered more than six million standardized housing units across Brazil. However, these homes do not include dedicated spaces for such activities. Consequently, residents—who often combine domestic responsibilities with income-generating endeavors—are left with inadequate and precarious living conditions that fail to meet their daily needs. Despite its relevance, the topic of income-generating activities in social housing remains underexplored in the literature. This research aims to present the findings from applying the Resilience Ruler tool to a case study of two MCMV housing projects in Uberlândia, Brazil. The study focuses on housing projects designed for families earning between zero and three times the minimum wage. The methodology involves evaluating indicators related to spatial flexibility and environmental comfort, using the Resilience Ruler as the primary instrument. The research follows the Design Science Research (DSR) methodology to develop a resilience rule, focusing on strategies to create more adequate and resilient housing for income generation.

Keywords
Income generation; Resilience scale; Spatial flexibility; Environmental comfort; Design science research

Resumo

Uma parcela significativa das habitações sociais do programa Minha Casa, Minha Vida (MCMV) tem sido adaptada para atividades de geração de renda. Embora o programa tenha entregado mais de 6 milhões de moradias padronizadas em todo o Brasil, estas não preveem espaços destinados a atividades de rendas. Isso resulta em habitações precárias e inadequadas para as necessidades diárias dos moradores, que frequentemente combinam atividades domésticas com atividades de geração de renda. Nesse contexto, percebe-se uma carência de estudos voltados às atividades de geração de renda em habitações sociais. Diante disso, este artigo tem como objetivo principal apresentar os resultados da aplicação da ferramenta Régua de Resiliência em um estudo de caso realizado em dois conjuntos habitacionais da faixa 1 do programa MCMV em Uberlândia. A abordagem inclui a avaliação de indicadores relacionados à flexibilidade espacial e ao conforto ambiental, utilizando a Régua de Resiliência como instrumento principal. A pesquisa fundamentou-se na metodologia Design Science Research (DSR) para desenvolver uma régua de resiliência com foco na criação de estratégias que promovam habitações geradoras de renda mais adequadas e resilientes.

Palvras-chave
Geração de renda; Régua de resiliência; Flexibilidade espacial; Conforto ambiental; Design science research

Introduction

The term “resilience” originates from the Latin word resilio, meaning “the ability to recover”. This study explores resilience through the perspectives of various authors, including Hassler and Kohler (2014), Pickett et al. (2014), Rodin (2015), Meerow and Newll (2015), Garcia and Vale (2017), Banks (2019). These researchers define resilience in the built environment as the capacity of a space to absorb shocks, adapt to change, and evolve over time in response to emerging demands. Furthermore, Garrefa et al. (2021), Villa et al. (2022) and Villa, Pena and Barbosa (2023) refine this concept by framing resilience as an interplay between conception, adaptation, and transformation, offering a more holistic and dynamic understanding of the subject.

This research adopts a comprehensive approach to examining resilience in the built environment, with a particular focus on the Brazilian government’s social housing program Minha Casa, Minha Vida (MCMV). Since its inception, the program has delivered over six million standardized housing units nationwide (Ministério das Cidades, 2024). However, these homes often struggle to adapt to changing demands within the built environment, necessitating modifications to extend their lifespan and improve the quality of life for their residents (Bonduki, 2014; Maricato, 2015; Rolnik, 2019; Cardoso; Lopes, 2022; Velasco, 2023). Many residents undertake renovations without professional guidance, largely due to insufficient public awareness and the ineffective implementation of Brazilian Law 11.888/2008 (Brazil, 2008), which mandates free technical assistance for low-income households. Despite its potential to enhance housing quality, the law continues to face significant implementation challenges in various regions of Brazil (Maricato, 2018; Observatório das Metrópoles, 2019; CAU/BR, 2024).

The purpose of this study is to present findings from the application of the Resilience Ruler tool, developed using the hypothetical-deductive method and the Design Science Research (DSR) approach. The DSR methodology emphasizes the creation of artifacts as solutions to complex systems.

This article evaluates spatial flexibility and environmental comfort indicators using the Resilience Ruler tool. The Resilience Ruler was created by the [MORA] Research Group as part of the larger research project CASA RESILIENTE - Design strategies for promoting resilience in social housing using post-occupancy assessment methods. Drawing inspiration from the Urban Community Resilience Assessment (UCRA) the tool evaluates resilience through attributes, indicators, and sub-indicators.

“Spatial flexibility” refers to the ability of physical spaces to accommodate changes in daily life—an essential characteristic for income-generating housing (Abreu; Heitor, 2007; Guerra, 2015; Logsdon et al., 2019; Parreira, 2020; Pelsmaker; Warwick, 2022; Castro; Faro; Silva, 2022; Šljivić, 2024). The study analyzed spatial flexibility using key indicators such as adaptability, expandability, and multifunctionality, as well as sub-indicators including conversion, polyvalence, adaptation, elasticity, expansion, overlapping activities, and adaptability. These criteria are critical in the context of income generation within residential environments.

Additionally, environmental comfort constitutes another essential feature of this research. This includes conditions that promote the well-being of users (Lamberts; Dutra; Pereira, 2014; Franco, 2015; Labaki; Kowaltowski, 2019; Bortoli, 2023). Indicators such as thermal comfort, lighting comfort, and environmental ergonomics were crucial to ensuring that the proposed strategies enhanced spatial quality and user well-being.

Flexibility and comfort: indicators of the resilience ruler for income generation

The concept of resilience in the built environment has garnered significant attention in academic discussions, particularly in the context of “resilient communities, resilient cities, ecosystems, and development” (Stockholm Resilience Centre, 2014). According to the Michaelis Dictionary, resilience is defined as “the ability to adapt or recover quickly.” However, in the context of Brazilian housing projects, resilience has yet to be effectively achieved. Developments under the Minha Casa, Minha Vida (MCMV) program have demonstrated limited capacity to respond to shocks and stresses, often resulting in negative adaptations (Araújo, 2020; Villa et al., 2022).

Resilience in the built environment is characterized by its ability to withstand, absorb, adapt, and transform in response to shocks and evolving demands over time (Hassler; Kohler, 2014; Pickett et al., 2014; Rodin, 2015; Garcia; Vale, 2017; Garcia; Vale; Vale, 2021; Araújo, 2020; Castaño-Rosa et al., 2022; Bortoli, 2023). One of the major shortcomings of MCMV housing projects lies in their standardized designs and reliance on low-cost materials, leading to inflexible layouts and reduced architectural quality. This compromises the functionality and spatial quality of the homes (Bonduki, 2014; Maricato, 2015; Villa; Oliveira, 2021; Cardoso; Lopes, 2022; Muianga et al., 2022). The lack of flexibility in these designs limits their ability to adequately respond to residents’ evolving needs, such as the increasing necessity for remote workspaces.

Resilience should be a fundamental consideration in the design of contemporary buildings, including social housing. Promoting flexibility and adaptability in architectural models not only reduces environmental impacts but also enhances residents’ quality of life and facilitates future maintenance (Bortoli; Villa, 2020). In this context, the Resilience Ruler tool was developed to measure resilience levels in the built environment. This quantitative method combines questionnaires, data collection, interviews, technical analyses, and collaborative processes to assess housing performance in terms of resilience (Villa et al., 2021; Villa; Pena; Barbosa, 2023).

The Resilience Ruler evaluates critical physical aspects of housing, including spatial flexibility and environmental comfort. Spatial flexibility enables homes to meet residents’ evolving needs over time. Abreu and Heitor (2007), Pelsmakers and Warwick (2022) define flexibility as the capacity of physical spaces to adapt to the dynamic changes inherent in life processes, a characteristic deemed essential in architecture. Parreira (2020) highlights the relationship between flexibility and spatial quality, noting that flexibility significantly impacts a project’s functionality and usability. As residents’ lives and needs evolve, their living spaces must also adapt. Factors influencing housing needs include changing lifestyles, family structures, new social roles, remote work, and technological advancements (Finkelstein, 2009; Brandão, 2010; Sassen, 2012; Maricato, 2015; Villa et al., 2021; Martins; Villa; Garrefa, 2023; Martins, 2023; Martins; Villa, 2024a, 2024b).

When architectural designs fail to address residents’ actual needs, modifications are often necessary, which can compromise the functionality and comfort of the homes (Marroquim; Barbirato, 2007; Schneider, 2007; Brandão, 2011; Santos; Porto; Silva, 2020; Bortoli; Villa, 2020). Evolutionary designs may facilitate future expansions but often lack effectiveness in accommodating internal adaptations. The choice and number of strategies implemented directly influence housing flexibility (Freire; Heitor, 2010; Logsdon et al., 2019). Therefore, it is essential to incorporate flexible and adaptive strategies to ensure that housing evolves in line with residents’ changing needs. Parreira (2020) further emphasizes that housing quality is tied to functionality, spatial flexibility, and user satisfaction. Despite its importance, Moreira and Henriques (2019) observe that flexibility is not yet a central concept in modern architectural practices. Instead, materials and structural decisions often restrict spatial flexibility in housing. This challenge can only be addressed by evolving architectural designs to include flexible and resilient solutions.

Bortoli and Villa (2020) stress the importance of environmental comfort in enhancing residents’ satisfaction and supporting housing adaptability over time. Environmental comfort is a multidimensional concept encompassing factors such as thermal comfort, visual appeal, noise levels, human-scale design, and air quality (Lamberts; Dutra; Pereira, 2014; Franco, 2015; Labaki; Kowaltowski, 2019; Muianga et al., 2022; Bortoli, 2023). Poor architectural design can hinder functionality, creating uncomfortable and inefficient environments. Such shortcomings can result in poor circulation, task delays, and reduced perceptions of spatial quality. Additionally, furniture selection significantly impacts home comfort and influences how residents interact with their spaces (Villa; Shiaku; Prado, 2011; Zhang; Han; Lin, 2023). Architectural decisions play a critical role in fostering a healthy and comfortable lifestyle by addressing psychological, physiological, and physical factors (Castro; Faro; Silva, 2022).

Adherence to technical standards is essential for ensuring environmental comfort. Brazilian technical standard NBR 15220 (ABNT, 2005) addresses thermal performance and establishes bioclimatic zoning guidelines, emphasizing adequate ventilation openings. Similarly, NBR 15575 (ABNT, 2021) outlines parameters for thermal and acoustic comfort. Compliance with these standards is vital for creating housing that provides optimal environmental comfort and contributes to the resilience of built environments while enhancing occupants’ well-being.

Beyond technical standards, integrating spatial flexibility and environmental comfort is crucial for promoting housing resilience. Spatial flexibility facilitates adaptation to evolving requirements, while environmental comfort ensures the environment’s functionality and desirability. Together, these attributes enable housing to meet current needs while remaining adaptable to future conditions.

In conclusion, the integration of spatial flexibility and environmental comfort is pivotal to developing adaptable, functional, and resilient housing solutions. Such solutions aim to create living environments that support resilience and enhance well-being over time.

Method

This research adopted the Design Science Research (DSR) methodology, a framework commonly employed in studies aimed at developing artifacts and prescriptions to address practical problems. Its primary objective is to create solutions that enhance human performance in both social and organizational contexts (Dresch; Lacerda; Antunes Júnior, 2015). The study was divided into two phases (Table 1).

Table 1
Research structure

Phase	Methodology	Methods	Objective	Results
(i) Phase 1	Literature Review	A systematic literature review was conducted on two main topics: income generation in housing and resilience in the built environment. Additionally, prior research conducted by the [Mora] Group was analyzed due to its relevance to the research subject.	To explore and define the concept of “resilience in the built environment” in the context of income-generating activities in social housing.	This phase resulted in the production of articles presented at prominent conferences such as Entac 20221 and Cincci Colóquio 20232.
(ii) Phase 2	Empirical research	A case study was carried out using direct observation, Post-Occupancy Evaluation (POE), and a comparative analysis of two affordable housing complexes from the Minha Casa Minha Vida (MCMV) program: Residential SB, consisting of semi-detached houses, and Residential PQ, comprising single-family houses, both located in Uberlândia, Brazil. Two instruments were utilized: the Income Generation Questionnaire developed by the author, and the Impact Questionnaire created by the [Mora] Group. These tools were supplemented by walkthrough analyses and the application of the resilience ruler.	To develop instruments for assessing perceived housing impacts, apply these tools in a case study, and categorize and classify income-generating housing units. These elements were analyzed based on their capacity to facilitate income generation and enhance resilience in social housing. As an outcome, a resilience ruler was developed to measure and classify housing performance in terms of adaptability to change and resistance to adversity.	This phase culminated in articles published in journals such as Revista Projetar 20243 and the Entac 20244 event.

• Source: Martins (2023).

This article presents the principal findings of the second phase, derived from the application of the resilience ruler to the research case study.

Structure of the resilience ruler

The development of the resilience ruler followed a rigorous and systematic methodology to evaluate the resilience levels of various housing units. Two fundamental aspects were assessed: spatial flexibility and environmental comfort, both of which are considered critical to housing adaptability. The data collection process combined primary and secondary sources, including in-depth interviews with residents and detailed technical analyses of the buildings. These analyses aimed to evaluate the capacity of the housing units to adapt to change and withstand external stressors. By focusing on spatial flexibility and environmental comfort, the resilience ruler emerged as an effective tool for measuring residential resilience and promoting the design of more adaptable and functional built environments. The tool’s structure is based on an evaluation matrix, as detailed in Table 2.

To determine the resilience of a system, it is essential to establish a theoretical framework that incorporates measurable factors, enabling the identification of the most relevant variables. This requires a clear understanding of the foundational concepts of attributes, indicators, and recommendations, which are indispensable for analyzing the factors contributing to system resilience. The resilience ruler comprises three principal components: attributes, indicators, and sub-indicators (see Figure 1).

Each attribute is associated with specific indicators and sub-indicators. For instance, the spatial flexibility attribute was analyzed through three primary indicators: adaptability, expandability, and multifunctionality. Similarly, the environmental comfort attribute was assessed using lighting comfort, thermal comfort, and spatial ergonomics (Table 3).

Table 2
Structure of the resilience ruler assessment matrix

Attributes	Objectives or qualities necessary to achieve resilience in the built environment.
Indicator	The elements, characteristics, and practices essential to fostering resilience in housing.
Sub-indicator	These are elements to describe and define each attribute with more detail.
Evaluation item	Defined based on the physical characteristics of the built environment or user behavior. This allows for identifying key factors within the environment and usage patterns that influence resilience and functionality. Both architectural aspects and daily use are considered for a comprehensive assessment.
Breakdown of evaluation item	A detailed verification process guided by the question: “What needs to be checked to confirm the existence of the sub-indicator?” This ensures precise analysis, identifies critical elements affecting housing resilience, and provides clear, objective assessments of the parameters.
Metric	A scale ranging from 1 to 5: 1 = Not Resilient, 2 = Slightly Resilient, 3 = Moderately Resilient, 4 = Resilient, and 5 = Very Resilient.
Parametrization	Developed based on national and international references, scientific research, standards, manuals, and the researcher’s expertise.
Collection tool	Instruments such as impact questionnaires, income questionnaires, walkthroughs, technical standards, and guides.

• Source: adapted from Villa, Pena and Barbosa (2023).

Figure 1
Attributes, indicators and sub-indicator of the resilience ruler

Table 3
Summary of resilience ruler indicators and sub-indicators

Adaptation for income generation	This concept refers to the interplay between flexibility and environmental comfort attributes, identifying aspects of the domestic environment that facilitate income-generating activities. It emphasizes prioritizing specific indicators and sub-indicators of flexibility and environmental comfort, which are essential for supporting work activities within the domestic context.
Indicators	Definition	Sub-indicators
Adaptability	Adaptability refers to achieving versatility by functionally de-characterizing building elements, enabling variability in their use to align with the user’s preferences (Brandão, 2003). It reflects the building’s capacity to meet users’ specific needs and aspirations through strategies like replacement, modification, readjustment, or adaptation of physical spaces for activities, including work, without increasing the total area (Parreira, 2020).	Conversion; Polyvalence; Personalization
Expandability	Expandability denotes the ability of a housing structure to accommodate additional rooms or spaces for more effective use in later development phases or by integrating adjacent components (Brandão, 2011). This supports the inclusion of income-generating activities in existing infrastructure.	Elasticity, Expansion.
Multifunctionality	Multifunctionality addresses reducing usable living space by offering solutions for compact dwellings, where objects are minimized, and habitable space is maximized. It involves adapting spaces for diverse uses, with or without altering their configuration (Lemos, 2006; Abreu; Heitor, 2007), enabling income-generating activities in constrained environments.	Overlapping activities; Adjustability
Lighting comfort	Lighting comfort, closely tied to visual comfort, emphasizes providing adequate indoor lighting to ensure optimal visual performance (Kralikova; Wessely, 2016). The physical environment, lighting quality, and their combined influence on activity performance (Giovana; Bortolan; Ferreira, 2019) significantly affect visual comfort.	Geometry considering natural lighting; Geometry considering artificial lighting.
Thermal comfort	Thermal comfort, as defined by Regulation NBR 15575 (Residential Buildings – Performance, 2021), addresses thermal and acoustic comfort parameters. Strategies like specifying materials and building systems, particularly for the building envelope, contribute to achieving favorable thermal performance (Ferreira et al., 2017), which is essential for work activities.	Materials of the building envelope; geometry considering natural ventilation
Spatial ergonomics	Environmental Ergonomics (Ergonomics of the Built Environment, or EBE) is a branch of ergonomics studying the interaction between humans and work activities (Villarouco et al., 2021). It focuses on factors such as adaptability, spatial aspects of activities, space usability, anthropometry, environmental psychology, and cognitive ergonomics.	Environmental Adaptation Strategy

• Source: Martins (2023).

The attribute of spatial flexibility is defined by three main indicators: adaptability, expandability, and multifunctionality. The environmental comfort attribute is evaluated according to three indicators: lighting comfort, thermal comfort, and spatial ergonomics. As illustrated in Figure 2, the resilience ruler has been filled with the adaptability indicator, which falls under the spatial flexibility attribute, and the luminous comfort indicator, which pertains to the environmental comfort attribute. Each indicator is accompanied by the corresponding evaluation item.

The scoring system employed a standardized scale of 1 to 5, where: 1 = “Not resilient,” 2 = “Slightly resilient,” 3 = “Moderately resilient,” 4 = “Resilient,” and 5 = “Very resilient.” (Figure 2).

Figure 2
Resilience ruler and its assessment items

Development and application of the resilience ruler tool

The construction of the resilience ruler follows a methodical process comprising ten sequential steps. First, the attribute to be assessed is identified; in this study, the selected attributes are spatial flexibility and environmental comfort. Next, the corresponding indicator is defined. In the third step, the sub-indicator to be analyzed is chosen. To streamline the ruler’s construction, it is recommended to define the indicator in advance, guided by the question: “What needs to be checked?” The answer to this question subsequently informs the evaluation item.

Figure 3
Resilience ruler score

In the fifth step, the evaluation item identified is elaborated upon, and in the sixth step, it is aligned with relevant standards, laws, or parameters established in the literature. The seventh step involves examining the assessment items in detail and assigning ratings that range from “not resilient” to “very resilient”. It is advisable to begin with the extremes, ensuring that the “moderately resilient” level reflects a neutral condition. In the eighth step, the final column is completed, specifying the data collection tool employed to address each item. This process is repeated for all sub-indicators. Finally, a sample is selected to test and calibrate the ruler, ensuring its effectiveness and applicability. The entire process is depicted in Figure 4.

Figure 4
Resilience ruler assemble guide

The resilience ruler is applied by systematically evaluating each housing unit within the selected sample. For each evaluation item, the number of houses exhibiting the identified characteristic is recorded. This process involves documenting how many houses meet the specified parameter aspects in the assessment table. For instance, within each sub-indicator item, the analysis determines how many houses have a “designated space for income-generating activities,” how many houses where “it is possible to work from home, but privacy is compromised,” how many have “a room for income generating activity overlapping with the garage/yard,” and/or how many have “a designated space for income-generating activities.” Points are subsequently assigned to each house based on its respective classification (number of houses x points). The average score for the rated item is then calculated by dividing the total points by the total number of houses (total points ÷ total number of houses). To compute the average for the sub-indicator, the scores for all items within the sub-indicator are summed and divided by the number of items. Importantly, the final averages for each sub-indicator must be calculated independently. Finally, using Figure 5, the classification corresponding to the resulting average is determined.

Figure 5
Example of application of the resilience ruler

Research case study

The evaluation employed a mixed-methods approach and focused on a double case study (Figure 6) conducted in two social housing complexes (SHCs) in Uberlândia, MG: Residential SB, comprising semi-detached houses, and Residential PQ, consisting of detached units. Both developments are part of the program MCMV – Income 1, which targets homeowners with family incomes ranging from 0 to 3 times the minimum wage. The Resilience Ruler was applied to 40 units, 20 in each residential complex. The questionnaires were sent to the Research Ethics Committee for authorization/approval with CAAE: 56151522.30000.5152, so that they could be applied to residents (respondents) of the two housing complexes. This research combined quantitative and qualitative techniques to identify similarities and differences between the two complexes. Key aspects, such as housing typology and location, were examined. Questionnaires were administered to a random sample with a 95% confidence level and an 8% margin of error, in accordance with the ethics committee’s approval. The study served as a pilot test to calibrate the resilience measure and support a comparative analysis of housing functionality.

Figure 6
Housing typology of the residential PQ and SB in the research case study

The comparative analysis focused on two low-income housing developments: Residential Sucesso Brasil (SB) and Residential Pequis (PQ), both located in Uberlândia, MG. The residential units include a living room, a kitchen, two bedrooms, and a bathroom, situated on plots of approximately 200 square meters. The building systems of the two complexes differ significantly. Residential Sucesso Brasil (SB) employs structural masonry constructed from ceramic blocks, whereas Residential Pequis (PQ) utilizes cast-in-place concrete. While both systems offer cost and speed advantages, they also present limitations in flexibility and resilience, impacting thermal and acoustic comfort. Additionally, the remote location of these complexes has created significant challenges related to accessibility and social integration.

Results and discussions

The assessment was conducted using a mixed-methods approach, incorporating both quantitative and qualitative data collection and analysis. It considered the current social housing (SIH) context, including the impact of resident-led interventions and renovations on the adaptability of these properties for income-generating purposes. The results are discussed in terms of spatial flexibility indicators, which include adaptability, expandability, and multifunctionality, as well as environmental comfort indicators, which cover lighting comfort, thermal comfort, and spatial ergonomics.

The analysis demonstrated that both Residential SB and Residential PQ exhibited low resilience, despite the variations in architectural design and construction characteristics between the two developments. Both were classified as “slightly resilient” in the primary indicators of adaptability, extensibility, and multifunctionality, as illustrated in Figure 6.

Figure 7
Comparative analysis of spatial flexibility attributes using the resilience ruler

As detailed in Figure 12, the first spatial flexibility attribute analyzed was the adaptability indicator, which includes sub-indicators such as conversion, polyvalence, personalization, and elasticity. Residential SB recorded a mean score of 2.12 for adaptability, classifying it as “slightly resilient.” The elasticity sub-indicator was particularly concerning, with a score of just 1.40. This finding highlights significant constraints in adapting spatial utilization. As noted by Parreira (2020), elasticity refers to the capacity to expand a space’s area. However, renovations often carried out by residents without technical assistance may compromise resilience, particularly due to the constraints imposed by external structural walls.

While Residential SB performed moderately well in the personalization sub-indicator (3.55), its poor scores in elasticity (1.40) and conversion (1.00) diminished its overall adaptability. Conversely, Residential PQ achieved a higher adaptability average of 2.67, also classified as “slightly resilient.” PQ demonstrated greater adaptability, reflected in higher scores for polyvalence (2.91) and personalization (3.93). These results suggest that PQ offers better flexibility in accommodating residents’ diverse needs compared to SB.

The conversion sub-indicator, which evaluates a building system’s capacity to unify or transform spaces, scored the lowest in both case studies, with both developments achieving a resilience level of zero. This result is consistent with a scale value of 1 (“not resilient”) for spatial flexibility, as illustrated in Figure 12. This poor performance can be attributed to the rigidity of the building systems, which rely on internal structural walls that incorporate electrical and plumbing installations, thereby complicating room reconfiguration.

The analysis of expandability further highlighted the resilience challenges faced by these residential units. Residential SB recorded an average score of 1.87, classifying it as “not resilient” under the established criteria. This low score reflects the limitations of the structural masonry system with ceramic blocks, which impedes internal space modifications and restricts adaptability to residents’ changing needs. In contrast, Residential PQ achieved a higher mean score of 2.27, classifying it as “slightly resilient.” While PQ also faces significant constraints, its traditional masonry structure offers marginally greater opportunities for expansion compared to SB.

Both developments struggle with expandability, particularly concerning the customization of units for income-generating activities, which are often concentrated at the front of the residences (Figure 8). These limitations negatively impact the resilience of the housing units, although PQ demonstrates a slight advantage over SB. The findings highlight the urgent need for more flexible construction solutions that enable expansion, particularly in low-income housing programs.

Figure 8
Extensions made to residential units in SB and PQ

The personalization sub-indicator, which evaluates the adaptation of spaces to residents’ cultural characteristics, was classified as moderately resilient in both locations. This assessment considered factors such as the use of colors and paintings on both interior walls and façades (Figure 9), the adaptation of spaces for income-generating activities, and modifications to sidewalks. In some cases, the façades displayed no evidence of commercial activity, suggesting a lack of integration between the space and its intended function. The ability to customize spaces has been associated with higher levels of resident satisfaction, reflecting individual preferences and personality traits (Parreira, 2020).

Figure 9
Customized façades with commercial advertisements in PQ and SB

Application of optimization

The application of the walkthrough technique with the resilience ruler facilitated the identification and categorization of renovations undertaken in the social housing (SH) units across the two residentials under study. A significant proportion of these residences have undergone internal modifications to support income-generating activities or the construction of commercial premises. In several units, garages were repurposed for commercial use, accommodating services such as mechanics, grocery stores, and bars. Additionally, the front setback areas adjacent to bedrooms or living rooms were often converted into new commercial or service spaces. However, this practice frequently blocked windows, thereby compromising ventilation and natural lighting in the affected bedrooms and living rooms, as shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10
Front setback with windows facing another room in PQ and SB

The final indicator analyzed in the Flexibility Resilience Ruler was multifunctionality, which encompasses overlapping activities and the adaptability of furniture. According to Parreira (2020), multifunctionality is critical for optimizing routine activities and ensuring the effective functionality of social housing. The activity overlaps sub-indicator, which measures the ability of spaces to simultaneously accommodate income-generating activities and other uses, was rated as moderately resilient (3) in both residential developments.

Conversely, the “furniture adjustability” sub-indicator received a classification of “not resilient” in both residentials, with scores of 1.66 in SB and 1.81 in PQ. This outcome reflects the widespread reliance on fixed furnishings and the lack of mobile, stackable, modular, or wheeled furniture options. Figure 11 highlights a selection of furnished spaces utilized for income-generating purposes. While some movable elements, such as chairs and tables, were observed alongside service-specific furniture, these represented a small fraction of the overall need for more adaptable and flexible furnishings.

Figure 11
Furnished spaces used for income generation in PQ and SB

The initial evaluation of the environmental comfort indicator focused specifically on lighting comfort, with an emphasis on the geometry of spaces to optimize natural light. Thirteen items were assessed in this category, including solar orientation, a key factor considered by the resilience ruler in relation to income-generating activities. A building’s orientation relative to the sun significantly influences thermal and lighting comfort, directly affecting indoor temperature and illumination. In Brazil’s predominantly tropical climate, the amount of sunlight exposure on building surfaces plays a critical role in shaping interior environmental conditions (Canelada; Montanheiro, 2022).

The findings regarding environmental comfort indicators—including the performance of housing units in terms of lighting, thermal comfort, and spatial ergonomics—are summarized in Figure 12.

Figure 12
Comparison of the environmental comfort attribute of the resilience ruler

The evaluation of the light comfort indicator revealed that both Residential SB and Residential PQ were classified as “slightly resilient,” indicating limited effectiveness in utilizing natural light within their respective residences. Residential SB recorded a mean score of 2.25, with a notably low rating of 1.75 for the geometry sub-indicator related to natural lighting, reflecting suboptimal use of available sunlight. The artificial lighting score was marginally higher, at 2.75, yet still insufficient to significantly enhance the units’ long-term resilience.

Similarly, Residential PQ also achieved a classification of “slightly resilient,” with an average score of 2.27. The natural lighting score was 1.88, slightly higher than SB, while artificial lighting received a slightly lower score of 2.67. Both developments face considerable challenges in optimizing natural light, which negatively impacts energy efficiency and residents’ visual comfort. These findings emphasize the need for targeted improvements to enhance the environmental performance of these housing units.

In addition, Brazilian Law No. 525/2011 (Uberlândia, 2011) allows high occupancy rates of up to 80% in public housing, which exacerbates the problem. In Residential SB and PQ (Figure 13), high occupancy levels, coupled with unregulated extensions constructed by residents without technical assistance, have resulted in obstructed windows, reducing both ventilation and natural lighting. These factors not only compromise environmental comfort but also undermine the overall resilience of the homes. Incorporating natural materials and strategic planning could significantly improve the quality and durability of these spaces.

Massaneiro, dos Santos, and Villela Filho (2022) highlight the importance of utilizing natural materials, resource-based techniques, and construction systems to address thermal comfort challenges. In both PQ and SB residences, the absorption capacity of interior and exterior walls and roofs was evaluated and classified as “slightly resilient.” However, the geometry results, particularly concerning ventilation, were less favorable, with SB averaging “not resilient” (1.86) and PQ averaging “slightly resilient” (2.05). These results underscore the critical need for meticulous planning and technical assistance to ensure that any modifications improve, rather than compromise, thermal and environmental comfort.

The environmental adaptation strategy sub-indicator scored an average of 2.84 for SB, indicating a “slightly resilient” status, and 3.11 for PQ, reflecting a “moderately resilient” status. These findings reveal limitations in the strategies employed to adapt the environment to residents’ needs, with insufficient flexibility to optimize spatial usability. The sub-indicator evaluating architectural accessibility for income-generating spaces indicated “slightly resilient” (2.65) for PQ, but “not resilient” (1) for SB. Many establishments in these areas lack access ramps, and even those with ramps frequently fail to comply with NBR 9050, the Brazilian accessibility standard. This lack of compliance hinders access and mobility. As Sassaki (2009) asserts, accessibility must be ensured both at entrances and within common areas and circulation spaces, extending to residential interiors.

Figure 13
Extensions in residential PQ and SB with over 80% lot occupancy

An investigation into the architectural mobility of workspaces within the housing units revealed significant deficiencies in accessibility features (Figure 14). Many spaces lack essential elements such as adequate ramps, doors with a minimum width of 90 cm, and sufficiently wide corridors to accommodate individuals with disabilities. In Residential PQ, architectural mobility was classified as “slightly resilient,” whereas SB was rated “not resilient” (Figure 15).

Figure 14
Commercial spaces lacking architectural accessibility in PQ and SB

Figure 15
Comparison of Resilience Indicators between SB and PQ Housing Complexes

Figure 15 provides a comparative analysis of the resilience indicators between the SB and PQ developments based on six metrics: adaptability, expandability, multifunctionality (spatial flexibility attributes), and lighting comfort, thermal comfort, and spatial ergonomics (environmental comfort attributes). Both housing developments exhibit low resilience levels in adaptability, expandability, and multifunctionality.

Specifically, SB demonstrates slightly higher adaptability resilience (Level 2, “slightly resilient”) compared to PQ, which was rated Level 1 (“not resilient”). Both developments show similarly low resilience levels in expandability, with PQ receiving the lowest rating (Level 1, “not resilient”) and SB rated marginally higher but still within the “not resilient” category. Multifunctionality resilience was comparable between the two developments, both rated as “slightly resilient” (Level 2). For lighting comfort, both sets performed similarly, maintaining Level 2 (“slightly resilient”). In thermal comfort, SB and PQ demonstrated moderate resilience, each receiving a score of 3 on the resilience scale. Lastly, for spatial ergonomics, SB was classified as “slightly resilient” (Level 2), while PQ achieved “moderately resilient” status (Level 3).

The analysis highlights recurring issues in PQ and SB residences, primarily stemming from conflicts between spatial planning and income-generating activities. These challenges are critical to developing resilience in social housing. Table 4 summarizes the main recurring problems identified in these residences.

Table 4
Main problems identified in the PQ and SB residences

MAIN PROBLEMS	DETAILS OF THE PROBLEM	ASSOCIATED SUB-INDICATORS
Lack of spaces for income-earning activities in the HU	Overlapping income activity in the living room	Polyvalence, conversion, customization.
	Overlapping income activity in the kitchen
Lack of multifunctional furniture for services/businesses	Overlapping income activity in the living room and kitchen Furniture that is easy to store and change layout	Polyvalence, conversion, personalization, environmental adaptation strategy
Windows facing a closed room	Building an income-generating room without technical assistance	Elasticity, expansion
Expand or build a room for income-generating activities	Suitable construction techniques and materials to expand the room for income generation	Elasticity, conversion, expansion, polyvalence, personalization, Geometry considering artificial and natural lighting, building envelope materials
Build a new room for income-generating activities	Suitable construction techniques and materials to build a new room for income generation	Elasticity, conversion, expansion, polyvalence, personalization, Geometry considering artificial and natural lighting, building envelope materials
Sockets and switches installed along only a single wall and central lighting	Suitable construction techniques and materials to build a new room Sockets and switches only on one wall in the income-generating space Use of central lighting Lack of focused lighting for income-generating activities	Conversion, polyvalence, Geometry considering artificial and natural lighting

• Source:Martins (2023).

Key challenges include overlapping income-generating activities within living and kitchen spaces, hindering spatial optimization; inadequate furniture for storage and flexible layouts; unregulated construction of new spaces without technical assistance, leading to poorly ventilated and inadequately lit environments; and the use of inappropriate construction materials and techniques that restrict the expansion of income-generating spaces.

The lack of flexibility, technical support, and dynamic architectural solutions, as well as persistent infrastructure problems, limit residents’ ability to fully utilize their homes. Sub-indicators such as polyvalence, elasticity, and customization underscore the need for architectural solutions that adapt to residents’ evolving needs over time. The Resilience Ruler results reveal significant deficiencies in spatial flexibility and environmental comfort within SB and PQ residences.

Other studies, such as those conducted by Parreira (2020) and Oliveira (2023) using the Resilience Ruler tool, have similarly identified low resilience in social housing. Their analyses of two housing developments revealed that the flexibility attribute was consistently classified as “not resilient,” while thermal comfort was rated as “not very resilient.” These findings highlight the difficulty of adapting and expanding the housing units to meet the evolving needs of residents. This issue stems from the absence of suitable spaces and the structural limitations that impede necessary modifications to accommodate diverse uses and changing family configurations. Furthermore, the lack of flexibility and thermal comfort is a significant factor contributing to the inability of dwellings to adapt over time, directly undermining their resilience.

These results corroborate observations from studies by Parreira (2020), Oliveira (2023), and Martins (2023), which also identified challenges related to the materiality of the built environment and the difficulties associated with maintenance. These factors collectively restrict the efficiency and functionality of social housing. The limited flexibility of these residences emerges as one of the primary obstacles to enhancing housing resilience. Without adaptable architectural solutions and adequate support for structural modifications, the capacity of these houses to meet residents’ needs remains severely constrained.

Conclusions

In conclusion, both Residential SB and PQ exhibit significant deficiencies in resilience, particularly concerning spatial adaptability and environmental comfort. The lack of adequate planning and technical support, combined with unregulated modifications, has resulted in environments poorly equipped to adapt to or mitigate challenges. The relatively low scores for adaptability, versatility, and thermal comfort underscore the urgent need for comprehensive interventions. Additionally, the absence of proper maintenance and oversight has adversely affected ventilation and lighting, further diminishing overall functionality. This study highlights the critical importance of ensuring accessibility in commercial establishments, emphasizing its role in promoting inclusivity for individuals with disabilities.

The findings of this research reinforce the necessity of adopting architectural planning strategies that prioritize spatial adaptability, enabling housing units to accommodate not only residential functions but also commercial and service-oriented activities. To enhance the current methodology, it is recommended to incorporate additional indicators, such as elasticity, versatility, and personalization, which could significantly improve its applicability and outcomes.

Designing social housing with an emphasis on spatial flexibility and environmental comfort is imperative. This approach involves creating multifunctional and expandable spaces, integrating sustainable materials, and employing sub-indicators like elasticity and personalization to ensure that housing units can continuously adapt to the evolving needs of their occupants.

The findings of the Resilience Ruler application will be further refined to produce practical guidance documents for both residents and professionals. When combined with the ongoing provision of technical assistance, this initiative has the potential to markedly improve the resilience of Brazilian social housing and enhance the quality of life for its inhabitants. By integrating diverse solutions, this strategy aims to strengthen the synergy between income-generating activities and residential spaces, thereby contributing significantly to the resilience and sustainability of social housing in Brazil.

Acknowledgments

We would like to express our gratitude to the National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) for the Research Productivity Grant (No. 311624/2021-9), the Coordination for the Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (CAPES), the Minas Gerais State Research Support Foundation (FAPEMIG), and PROPP/PPGAU/UFU for their support.

• 1
  Article published in the Proceedings of the Entac 2022 Event entitled: Access on: https://eventos.antac.org.br/index.php/entac/article/view/1980.
• 2
  Article published in the Proceedings of the VII CINCCI International Colloquium 2023, entitled Access on: https://www.even3.com.br/anais/viii-cincci-coloquio-internacional-sobre-comercio-e-cidade-272407/
• 3
  Article published in the academic journal Revista Projetar. Access on: https://periodicos.ufrn.br/revprojetar/article/view/33632.
• 4
  Article published in the Proceedings of the Entac 2024. Access on: https://eventos.antac.org.br/index.php/entac/article/view/6227.

References

• ABREU, R.; HEITOR, T. Estratégias de flexibilidade na arquitetura doméstica holandesa: da conversão à multifuncionalidade. 2007. Available: http://infohabitar.blogspot.com/2007/01/estratgias-de-flexibilidade-na.html Access: 20 nov. 2023.
  » http://infohabitar.blogspot.com/2007/01/estratgias-de-flexibilidade-na.html
• ARAÚJO, G. M. Bem-estar e resiliência em habitação social: uma relação necessária, estratégias para sua obtenção orientadas aos usuários. Uberlândia, 2020. Dissertation (Master’s in Architecture and Urbanism) – Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, Uberlândia, 2020.
• ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE NORMAS TÉCNICAS. NBR 15220­3: desempenho térmico de edificações: parte 3: zoneamento bioclimático brasileiro e estratégias de condicionamento térmico passivo para habitações de interesse social. Rio de Janeiro, 2005.
• ASSOCIAÇÃO BRASILEIRA DE NORMAS TÉCNICAS. NBR 15575 ­1: edifícios habitacionais: desempenho: parte 1: requisitos gerais. Rio de Janeiro, 2021.
• BANKS, B. Should resilience begin with the home? 2019. Available: https://www.ey.com/en_gl/government-public-sector/should-resilience-begin-with-the-home Access: 01 nov. 2023.
  » https://www.ey.com/en_gl/government-public-sector/should-resilience-begin-with-the-home
• BONDUKI, N. Minha Casa... E a Cidade? Avaliação do Programa Minha Casa Minha Vida e proposições para uma política habitacional urbana. São Paulo: Labhab-FAUUSP, 2014.
• BORTOLI, K. C. R. de; VILLA, S. B. Environmental adequacy as a facilitator attribute to built environment resilience in social housing. Ambiente Construído, Porto Alegre, v. 20, n. 1, p. 391-422, jan./mar. 2020.
• BORTOLI, K. C. R. Resiliência e conforto térmico em habitações de interesse social horizontais em Uberlândia (MG): avaliação para orientação de reformas. Uberlândia, 2023. 351 f. Tese (Doutorado em Geografia) – Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, Uberlândia, 2023.
• BORTOLI, K. C.; VILLA, S. B. Conforto ambiental como atributo para a resiliência em habitações de interesse social brasileiras. Revista Projetar - Projeto e Percepção do Ambiente, v. 5, n. 3, set. 2020.
• BRANDÃO, A. C. Habitação e modificações espaciais: uma análise das transformações dos espaços residenciais. Rio de Janeiro: LTC, 2011.
• BRANDÃO, A. C. Transtemporalidade. Revista Interpretar Arquitetura, Belo Horizonte, v. 15, 2010.
• BRANDÃO, D. Q. Habitação social evolutiva: aspectos construtivos, diretrizes para projetos e proposição de arranjos espaciais flexíveis. Cuiabá: CEFETMT, 2003.
• BRASIL. Lei nº 11.888, de 24 de dezembro de 2008. Dispõe sobre a garantia do direito de moradia para pessoas com deficiência ou com mobilidade reduzida. Diário Oficial da União, Brasília, 24 dec. 2008. Available: http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil _03/leis/2008/l11888.htm Access: 27 dez. 2024.
  » http://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil _03/leis/2008/l11888.htm
• CANELADA, A.; MONTANHEIRO. F. P. As influências da orientação solar na temperatura de laboratórios de projeto. Revista Vértice, v. 1, n. 1, abr. 2022.
• CARDOSO, F. S.; LOPES, J. M. D. A. Assessoria e assistência técnica para Habitação de Interesse Social: do discurso à construção da prática profissional. Revista Brasileira de Estudos Urbanos e Regionais, v, 24, 2022.
• CASTAÑO-ROSA, R. et al Resilience in the built environment: key characteristics for solutions to multiple crises. Sustainable Cities and Society, v. 87, 2022.
• CASTRO, R. T. S.; FARO, A. C. P. F.; SILVA, N. L. Avaliação de estratégias bioclimáticas aplicadas em habitação de interesse social pós pandemia. Projeto e Percepção do Ambiente – Revista Projetar, v. 7, n. 2, maio 2022.
• CONSELHOR DE ARQUITETURA E URBANISMO DO BRASIL. A lei de ATHIS e a assistência técnica pública e gratuita. Available: http://www.caubr.gov.br/athis-2/ Access: 20 set. 2024.
  » http://www.caubr.gov.br/athis-2/
• DRESCH, A.; LACERDA, D. P.; ANTUNES JÚNIOR, J. V. Design science research: método de pesquisa para avanço da ciência e tecnologia. Porto Alegre. Brookman, 2015.
• FERREIRA, H. N. M. et al. Open student modeling for academic performance visualization in ubiquitous learning environments. In: IEEE INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON SYSTEMS, MAN AND CYBERNETICS, Banff, 2017. Proceedings [...] Banff, 2017.
• FINKELSTEIN, C. W. Flexibilidade na Arquitetura Residencial: um estudo sobre o conceito e sua aplicação. Porto Alegre, 2009. 173 f. Dissertation - Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul. Faculty of Architecture, Research and Postgraduate Program in Architecture, Porto Alegre, 2009.
• FRANCO, J. Conforto ambiental em edificações: princípios e diretrizes. Rio de Janeiro: Elsevier, 2015.
• FREIRE, J. C.; HEITOR, T. A flexibilidade espacial no projeto habitacional: estratégias de adaptação ao longo do tempo. São Paulo: FAPESP, 2010.
• GARCIA, E. J.; VALE, B.; VALE, R. Collapsing gracefully: making a built environment that is fit for the future. Heildelberg: Springer, 2021.
• GARCIA, J. E.; VALE, B. Unravelling sustainability and resilience in the built environment. Routledge, Londres, 2017. Available: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315629087 Access: 20 nov. 2023.
  » https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315629087
• GARREFA, F. et al. Resilience in social housing developments through post-occupancy evaluation and co-production. Ambiente Construído, Porto Alegre, v. 21, n. 2, p. 151–175, abr./jun. 2021.
• GIOVANA M. Z.; BORTOLAN, M. G. G.; FERREIRA, R. T. Conforto e desconforto: revisão de conceitos e elaboração de um modelo de conforto visual. HDF, v. 8, n. 15, p. 67-84, mar. 2019.
• GUERRA, F. Flexibilidade espacial como ferramenta de adaptação da habitação às novas demandas sociais. In: AMORE, C. S.; SHIMBO, L. Z.; RUFINO, M. B. C. (org.). Minha Casa... e a Cidade? Avaliação do programa Minha Casa Minha vida em seis estados brasileiros. Rio de Janeiro: Letra Capital, 2015.
• HASSLER, U.; KOHLER, N. Resilience in the built environment. Building Research & Information, v. 42, n. 2, p. 119-129, 2014.
• KRALIKOVA, R.; WESSELY, E. Lighting quality, productivity and human health. In: DAAAM INTERNATIONAL SYMPOSIUM, 27., Mostar, 2016. Proceedings […] Mostar, 2016.
• LABAKI, L. C.; KOWALTOWSKI, D. C. C. K. Conforto Ambiental na arquitetura: um curso introdutório com ênfase em estratégias bioclimáticas e sustentabilidade. 2. ed. São Paulo: Oficina de Textos, 2019.
• LAMBERTS, R.; DUTRA, L.; PEREIRA, F. O. R. Eficiência energética na arquitetura Rio de Janeiro: Eletrobras, 2014.
• LEMOS, S. M. C. Artefactos economizadores de espaço. Aveiro, 2006. 126f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Design) - Departamento de Comunicação e Arte, Universidade de Aveiro, Aveiro, 2006.
• LOGSDON, L. et al. Flexibilidade na habitação social: a prática e a teoria em busca da qualidade espacial. In: SIMPÓSIO BRASILEIRO DE QUALIDADE DO PROJETO NO AMBIENTE CONSTRUÍDO, 6., Uberlândia, 2019. Anais [...] Uberlândia: PPGAU/FAUeD/UFU, 2019.
• MARICATO, E. A questão da habitação social no Brasil. Revista Pólis, v. 42, 2018.
• MARICATO, E. O impasse da política urbana no Brasil. 4. ed. Petrópolis: Vozes, 2015.
• MARROQUIM, F. M. G; BARBIRATO, G. M. Flexibilidade espacial em projetos de habitações de interesse social. Artigo sobre dissertação de mestrado defendida na Faculdade de Arquitetura e Urbanismo da Universidade Federal de Alagoas, em julho de 2007.
• MARTINS, B. C. Adaptação e reforma da habitação social para renda: análises para intervenções mais resilientes. Uberlândia, 2023. 412 f. Dissertation (Master’s in Architecture and Urbanism) - Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, Uberlândia, 2024.
• MARTINS, B. C.; VILLA, S. B. Categorização e classificação dos tipos de comércio e serviços em Habitação Social por meio de análise morfológica e walkthrough. In: ENCONTRO NACIONAL DE TECNOLOGIA DO AMBIENTE CONSTRUÍDO, 20., Maceió, 2024b. Anais [...] Porto Alegre: ANTAC, 2024.
• MARTINS, B. C.; VILLA, S. B. Os impactos nas atividades de geração de renda em habitação social: um estudo de caso em Uberlândia.Revista Projetar - Projeto e Percepção do Ambiente, v. 9, n. 2, p. 159–174, 2024a.
• MARTINS, B. C.; VILLA, S. B.; GARREFA, F. Categorizando os tipos de comércios e serviços na habitação social por meio de análise morfológica: um estudo de caso em Uberlândia-MG. In: COLÓQUIO INTERNACIONAL SOBRE COMÉRCIO E CIDADE, 7., Londrina, 2023. Anais [...] Londrina, 2023.
• MASSANEIRO, V.; SANTOS, K. N. P. dos; VILELLA FILHO, E. M. Análise da insolação e ventilação no nível de conforto térmico em habitações de interesse social. Innovatio, ano 9, v. 1, 2022.
• MEEROW, S.; NEWELL, J. P. Resilience and complexity: a bibliometric review and prospects for industrial ecology. Journal of Industrial Ecology, v. 19, n. 2, p. 236–251, 2015.
• MINISTÉRIO DAS CIDADES. Conheça o programa Minha Casa, Minha Vida. Available: https://www.gov.br/cidades/pt-br/assuntos/noticias-1/conheca-o-programa-minha-casa-minha-vida#:~:text=Desde%20a%20sua%20cria%C3%A7%C3%A3o%2C%20o,digna%20 para%20quem%20mais%20precisa Access: 20 set. 2024.
  » https://www.gov.br/cidades/pt-br/assuntos/noticias-1/conheca-o-programa-minha-casa-minha-vida#:~:text=Desde%20a%20sua%20cria%C3%A7%C3%A3o%2C%20o,digna%20 para%20quem%20mais%20precisa
• MOREIRA, F. D.; HENRIQUES, J. E. de M. R. Adaptabilidade na arquitetura: um protótipo para comunidades carentes no Recife. Revista Projetar - Projeto e Percepção do Ambiente, v. 4, n. 1, p. 126–140, 2019.
• MUIANGA, E. A. D. et al. Transformações habitacionais e seus impactos no bem-estar dos residentes. Ambiente Construído, Porto Alegre, v. 22, n. 4, 2022.
• OBSERVATÓRIO DAS METRÓPOLES. ATHIS para a moradia digna: levantamento nacional de agentes. Available: https://habitacao.observatoriodasmetropoles.net.br/athispara-moradia-digna/ Access: 11 ago. 2019.
  » https://habitacao.observatoriodasmetropoles.net.br/athispara-moradia-digna/
• OLIVEIRA, L. V. Avaliação dos impactos da Covid-19 na habitação social e suas adaptações para um ambiente construído mais resiliente. Uberlândia, 2023. 395 f. Dissertation (Master’s in Architecture and Urbanism) – Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, Uberlândia, 2023.
• PARREIRA, F. V. M. Estratégias de flexibilidade orientadas ao usuário como facilitador da resiliência em habitação de interesse social. Uberlândia, 2020. 259 f. Dissertation (Master’s in Architecture and Urbanism) – Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, Uberlândia, 2020.
• PELSMAKERS, S.; WARWICK, E. Housing adaptability: new research, emerging practices and challenges. Buildings and Cities, v. 3, n. 1, p. 605–618, 2022.
• PICKETT, S. T. A. et al. Ecological resilience and resilient cities. Building Research & Information, v. 42, n. 2, p. 143-157, 2014.
• RODIN, J. The resilience dividend Great Britain: Profile Books, 2015.
• ROLNIK, R. Territórios em conflito: São Paulo, espaço, história e política. São Paulo: Três Estrelas, 2019.
• SANTOS, T. L. dos; PORTO, F. H. F. dos S.; SILVA, A. S. Análise da correlação entre conforto e desempenho térmico em habitações de interesse social por simulação computacional. Ambiente Construído, Porto Alegre, v. 20, n. 2, p. 211–229, 2020.
• SASSAKI, R. K. Inclusão: acessibilidade no lazer, trabalho e educação. Revista Nacional de Reabilitação (Reação), São Paulo, v. 12, p. 10-16, mar./abr. 2009.
• SASSEN, S. Cities in a world economy. 4. ed. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2012.
• SCHNEIDER, T.; TILL, J. Flexible housing. Oxford: Architectural Press, 2007.
• ŠLJIVIĆ, A. How to improve spatial adaptability in small inflexible apartments with minimum investment? A case study from Sarajevo. In: ARSLANAGIĆ-KALAJDŽIĆ, M., ADEMOVIĆ, N., TUFEK-MEMIŠEVIĆ, T. (ed.). Interdisciplinary advances in sustainable development II. Cham: [S.l.], 2024.
• STOCKHOLM RESILIENCE CENTRE. What is resilience? 2014. Available: http://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-news/2015-02-19-what-is-resilience.html Access: 10 set. 2024.
  » http://www.stockholmresilience.org/research/research-news/2015-02-19-what-is-resilience.html
• UBERLÂNDIA. Lei Complementar nº 525, de 14 de abril de 2011. Dispõe sobre o zoneamento do uso e ocupação do solo do Município de Uberlândia. Diário Oficial do Município de Uberlândia, Uberlândia, 14 abr. 2011.
• VELASCO, T. Habitação como direito social: a Lei de ATHIS, sua aplicabilidade e desafios. In: ENCONTRO NACIONAL DA ANPUR, 20., Belém, 2023. Anais [...] Belém: ANPUR, 2023.
• VILLA, S. B. et al. BER_HOME: resiliência no ambiente construído em habitação social: métodos de avaliação tecnologicamente avançados. Uberlândia: PPGAU, FAUED, Universidade Federal de Uberlândia, março de 2022. Relatório final.
• VILLA, S. B. et al. Reflexões sobre os impactos da pandemia de COVID-19 no espaço doméstico. Gestão & Tecnologia de Projetos, v. 1, 2021.
• VILLA, S. B.; OLIVEIRA, N. F. G. Métodos de avaliação da resiliência no ambiente construído em habitação de interesse social: uma abordagem teórica no contexto da cidade de Uberlândia-MG. In: CONGRESSO LUSO-BRASILEIRO PARA O PLANEJAMENTO, REGIONAL, INTEGRADO E SUSTENTÁVEL, 9., Águas de Lindóia, 2021. Anais [...] Águas de Lindóia, 2021.
• VILLA, S. B.; PENA, I. C.; BARBOSA, M. C. R. Resilience ruler in social housing: a case study in the city of uberlândia/brazil. In: RUBBO, A.; DU, J.; THOMSEN, M.R.; TAMKE, M. (org.). Design for Resilient Communities. UIA 2023 Cham: Springer, 2023.
• VILLA, S. V.; SHIAKU, A. C.; PRADO, A. K. M. S. A relevância do design para a obtenção da qualidade em His: Avaliação pós-ocupação funcional em Uberlândia. In: CONGRESSO NACIONAL DE DESIGN, 1., Bento Gonçalves, 2011. Anais [...] Bento Gonçalves, 2011.
• VILLAROUCO, V. et al. Residências estudantis universitárias: análise ergonômica de dormitórios. Revista Projetar - Projeto e Percepção do Ambiente, v. 6, n. 2, maio 2021.
• ZHANG, Y.; HAN, Q.; LIN, J. The impact of furniture design on the comfort and well-being of occupants in modern living spaces. Building and Environment, v. 214, p. 108875, 2023.

Edited by

• Editor:
  Enedir Ghisi

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  16 May 2025
• Date of issue
  Jan-Dec 2025

History

• Received
  15 Oct 2024
• Accepted
  01 Jan 2025