Proceedings: Indoor Air 2002

QUALITY OF LIFE: MEDITATIONS ON PEOPLE AND

ARCHITECTURE

N Boschi1∗ and LM Pagliughi2

1
Dept. of Building Construction, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University,
Alexandria, VA, USA
2
Architect, Italy

ABSTRACT
This paper correlates the definition of architectural spaces to the concept of quality of life.
The concept of quality of life covers domains such as the psychological, physiological,
interpersonal, spiritual, and financial. Quality of life is dynamic; people and the environment
change over time. The 1949 definition of health provided by the World Health Organization
(WHO) is a useful blueprint for defining health measures to inform architectural design. Two
questions are discussed: Are cultural associations relevant in defining building environmental
performances? Can the Vitruvian connection of architecture-climate-comfort and the
Palladian theory of architecture still inform modern architecture? The historical domains of
durability, convenience and beauty continue to be a valid model because they are meant to be
a reflection of the quality of life of individuals at a given time. This paper promotes
architectural education that bases its philosophical approach on the historical concept of
commoditas/utilitas (convinience) as way to enhance quality of life.

INDEX TERMS
Quality of life, Architectural education, Indoor air education, Commoditas

INTRODUCTION
Architecture is generally recognized as being a valuable approach to improve our living
spaces. Levin and Adlercreutz’s (2000) analysis of Alvar Aalto’s architecture is a good
example of how architecture can provide for healthy spaces and enhance the quality of life of
the people living there.

It is known that the quality of indoor air (IA) has a bearing on health and impacts the quality
of our life (WHO, 2000). IA and quality of life can be improved in a number of ways.
Extensive efforts are devoted in defining indicators on how to measure IA quality, finding
better ways of controlling sources, quantifying economic impact of negative exposure (Fisk,
2000), promoting environmentally sound design and construction practices (Levin, 2000), and
promoting better education for all players (Boschi, 1999). However, a host of practical
difficulties limits the widespread adoption of this wealth of knowledge among architects.

This paper advocates the importance of promoting the concept of healthy living as an
indicator of quality of life among architects, by adopting a more familiar language to them
and by using an accepted historical theoretical framework. The aim of this paper is to discuss
the definition of architectural spaces in relation to the concepts of utilitas and commoditas as
provided by Vitruvius and Palladio and how these concepts can still inform contemporary
architectural choices. Addressing the issue of architectural professionalism versus

∗
Contact author email: nboschi@vt.edu

953
 Proceedings: Indoor Air 2002

architecture as discipline is beyond the scope of this paper. Rather, the focus is on promoting
architectural education that endorses people’s quality of life as the framework for design.

The trust of the paper is on showing, primarily to architects, how current knowledge of IA
concepts is a fundamental and historical component of design that dates back to the real first
codification of the architectural principles written by Vitruvius in the I century BC and
reiterated by Palladio XV centuries later. This paper reviews a few milestones that came to
define the health and cultural context nexus. Through text analysis the Vitruvian and
Palladian theories of utilitas and commoditas are reviewed, compared and analyzed in relation
to the WHO’s definition of health. Two questions are addressed: Are cultural associations
relevant in defining building environmental performance? Can the Vitruvian connection of
architecture-climate-comfort and Palladian theory still inform contemporary architecture?

THE HEALTH AND CULTURAL CONTEXT NEXUS

Since the time of Hippocrates (460-377 BC) it has been known that polluted air is detrimental
to health and that certain spaces are less healthy than others. In the last 50 years the context
of health has been broaden and started to be inclusive of aspects that characterize the way
people live. Here a review of a few milestones that define how this nexus has evolved. In
1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights established the link between health and
cultural context by stating: “Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the
health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and
medical care and necessary social services…” (United Nations, 1948).

In 1949, the WHO’ definition of health provided the blueprint for defining health measures:
“Health is a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being and not merely the
absence of disease or infirmity” (WHO, 1949). Two critical aspects are outlined here: firstly,
health has more than one dimension; secondly, it is important to measure the full range of
health states.

In 1988, this concept of health was used to define quality of building performances as
follows: "…not just free from building related illness and discomfort but indeed promotes
well-being and health. Besides being non-hazardous, the salient features of the healthy
building include thermal comfort, pleasant air quality, illumination and acoustical
characteristics, support of social needs and productivity, and distinguished aesthetic qualities.
These features should be maintainable over the building's life time. The occupant should feel
confidence in the building and its operation, be able to comprehend the systems and design,
and be given a fair chance to control systems" (Berglund et al., 1988). This concept was
further expanded to include the larger environments, “A healthy building is one that adversely
affect neither the health of its occupants nor the larger environment” (Levin, 1995), and to
recognize that human health needs should be a priority, however, human comfort should be
refrained when at price of other life systems (WHO, 2000).

The last milestone defined relates to the concept of “quality of life” as an indicator that covers
psychological, physiological, interpersonal, spiritual, financial, political, temporal, and
philosophical domains (National Institute of Health, 1990). Indeed an interactive and
multidimensional expression of the occupant-environment relationship. The quality of life
concept, which has in recent times received a lot of attention in the medicine and health care
fields, is becoming an indicator in the architectural field as well. This concept of quality of
life is dynamic as the relationship between people and acceptable environmental performance

954
 Proceedings: Indoor Air 2002

changes over time to satisfy cultural changes, general sense of personal well-being and
satisfaction, as well as new scientific knowledge.

The concept of quality of life has gained more attention as the pressures of popular culture
and economic priority lead to cultural homogenization. In many areas, the result has been
social displacement – a lack of continuity with traditions and perspectives that gave life
meaning, and for many includes a feeling of dislocation. This has promoted architectural
models that have difficulties to relate to the traditional construction knowledge. These
models have promoted an “ideal way of living”, which is too often not compatible with most
environmental contexts and people “real way of living”. Often they are introduced in a
professional context not yet ready to provide the appropriate level of technical service that
these architectural models require. Further, it promotes technological possibilities as a
solution to overcome any possible limitation.

ARCHITECTURE AND PEOPLE

The Vitruvian and Palladian theories of utilitas and commoditas are here reviewed, compared
and analyzed in relation to the WHO’s definition of health. This part starts with a brief
summary of the cultural context in which Palladio operated.

Architecture as the tri-dimensional expression of the quality of life finds its roots in the work
of Palladio and his “ideal” master Vitruvius “…is the only ancient writer of this art, and set
myself to search into the reliques of all the ancient edifices, that, in spite of time and the
cruelty of the barbarians, yet remain; and find them much more worthy of observation, than I
first I had imagined.” (Palladio, 1570). Vitruvius’ treatise on architecture is the first one in
history. Barbaro’s translation of Vitruvius is the most thorough during the XVI century and
its illustration were mainly based on drawings made by Palladio. It is about this time that
Palladio himself decided to write his own treatise on architecture to summarize the practical
knowledge of his time and contribute to enhance the practice of architecture. His choice of
writing style reflected this intent “..and shall make use of those terms which at this time are
most commonly in use among artificers”. In the introduction to his treatise Palladio explains
his interest in antiquity. He also indicated his interest in ancient roman constructions as being
capable to inform current architecture “the ancient Romans, as in many other things, so in
building well, vastly excelled all those who have been since their time”.

Palladio’s interest in drawing upon history together with the recognition of the knowledge of
the work of his contemporaneous enabled the development of his architectural principles. He
defined new architectural forms relying on consolidated technical knowledge. For example,
his design of the Teatro Olimpico in Vicenza referenced the forms of Greek and Roman
theaters, as described by Vitruvius, without changing the complexity of the relationship form-
performance, in this case acoustic, he was capable of developing a space that met the needs of
the people of his time.

Habitant oriented culture

Among the northern Italian humanists of the XVI century Palladio is the main exponent. His
early work was fostered by Trissino and Cornaro and later on by Barbaro (Kruft, 1994).
Trissino viewed architecture as “ an art concerning the habitation of men, that provides a
basis for utility and pleasure” (Puppi, 1973). Trissino’s pragmatic thinking on commoditas
influenced his protégée. Cornaro, even more so than Trissino, focused on the importance of
convenience-commodita’ as decisive criterion in architecture “I shall always lavish more
praise on a building that is straightforwardly beautiful but perfectly convenient, than on one

955
 Proceedings: Indoor Air 2002

that is exquisitely beautiful, but convenient” (Fiocco, 1965). Cornaro, wrote specifically to
city dwellers about the construction of new houses and also methods of improving old houses.
For the first time in architectural history the issues of sanitation was presented.

Vitruvius and Palladio’s theories

Palladio, like Vitruvius, identified domains that guide his design as follows: commoditas (or
Utility), durability and beauty. Table 1, compares Vitruvius and Palladio’s architectural
theories with regard to the concept of utilitas/commoditas as they relate to the concept of
providing healthy living. The analysis indicates a very similar intent. The main point
underlined here is their interest in meeting client’s needs and social satisfaction that, in today
terms, we would call health, comfort, well-being and productivity within an ethically sound
environmental framework.

Table 1. Vitruvius (V) and Palladio’s (P) concepts of Utilitas, Durability and Beauty.
Utilitas/commoditas
and location …first comes the choice of a very healthy site if our design of private
houses are to be correct we must at the onset take note of the countries
and climates in which they are built (V)
..great care..not to build near those waters..with regard the
wholesomeness of the air…(P)
and ventilation, ….different rooms require different exposures … in libraries with
thermal comfort, southern exposures books are ruined by worm and dampness…
health summer dining rooms to the north … it makes the use of the rooms
both healthy and agreeable (V)
… an edifice may be esteemed commodius, when every part or
member stands in its due place and fit situation, neither above or
below its dignity and use; or when the loggia’s, halls, chambers
cellars and granaries are conveniently disposed, and in their proper
places…(P)
and social-well being …after settling the position of the rooms .. we must consider the
principles on which should be constructed those apartments …to suit
different classes of persons (V)
… the habitation for the master ought to be made with regard to his
family and condition... (P)
and economy ..proper management of materials and of site…thrifty balancing of
cost and common sense in the construction work..plan for different
kinds of dwellings suitable for ordinary people, great wealth…(V)
… that one may learn, by little and little, to lay aside the strange
abuses, the barbarous inventions, the superfluous expenses…(P)
Durability …when foundations are carried down to solid ground ….(V)
… foundations strong and solid…(P)
Beauty ... members are in due proportion. Proportion is a correspondence
among the measures of the members if the entire work and the whole
to a certain part selected as standard…(V)
… will result from the form and correspondence of the whole, with
respect to the several parts, of the parts with regard to each other, and
of these again to the whole; that the structure may appear an entire and
complete body, wherein each member agrees with the other, and all
the necessary to compose what you intend to form.. (P)

956
 Proceedings: Indoor Air 2002

The components of Utilitas or Commoditas

In a very unique way, Palladio established a logical hierarchical relationship between
domains. He associated commoditas with the problem of décor and beauty, being the last
subordinated to the first one: “The agreeable, pleasant, commodius, and healthy function
being found, attention is to be given to its elegant disposition”. Further, he suggested that
commoditas is achieved when each parts finds its adequate place in the overall composition:
“So one must call that house convenient (commoda) which is suitable to the quality of the
person who lives in it, and whose parts correspond to the whole and to each other”.
Palladio’s qualitative and quantitative definition of space is intended as expression of current
social well-being in terms of reflection of the owner’ social and/or political role: “The
habitation for the master ought to be made with regard to his family and condition”.

Palladio, while recognizing the professional’s need to second the ambitions of the client,
believed that the design work must aim at finding beauty which is achieved by reaching the
equilibrium among the three domains “… as much as possible, one ought … to have regard to
those who are inclined to build; and not so much to mind what they can afford to lay out as
the quality of the building that is proper for them…”. He further recognized that clients’
ambitions might lead to un-realistic model or focus on a few architectural elements without
really relating them to the overall structure. Palladio’s practical sense and experience come
through also when he wrote: “But an architect is very often obliged, to conform more to the
will of those who are at the expense, than to that which ought to be observed”.

The climatic factor and the orientation

The relation between the building and its surroundings was key both for Palladio and
Vitruvius. The selection of the site was identified as being of great importance: “and because
waters are very necessary to human life, and according to their various qualities they produce
is us different effects, some generating the spleen, other glandulous swelling in the neck, other
the stone, and many other diseases: …great care …not to build near those waters… with
regard the wholesomeness of the air .. the ancient edifices will give an indication thereof, if
they are not corroded or spoiled: if the trees are well nourished…”.

The orientation of the rooms was their way of controlling indoor exposures, thermal, lighting,
and visual comfort: “ the rooms for summer be ample, spacious and turned to the north and
those for the winter to the south and west… but those we would use in the spring and autumn,
must be turned to the east, and ought to look over greens and gardens”. Palladio continues
by offering another practical insight on the difficulties of relating to constraints: “… in cities,
either the neighbors walls, the streets or…prescribe certain limit that the architect cannot
surpass, it is proper he should conform himself to the circumstances...”

CONCLUSIONS
This is an initial effort to challenge architects and the indoor air community in fulfilling 3
main needs for achieving better quality of life through architecture:
- New view from the texts analysis: Palladio and Vitruvius identify architecture as model to
meet inhabitant’s quality of life. They establish a clear link between architecture,
occupant’s health, comfort , and social needs and beauty within a specific cultural context.
Commoditas is identified as the primary concept for designing spaces.
- Architectural education: Based on the review of historical and current literature there is
strong evidence that cultural contexts inform the concepts of health and quality of life.
New scientific knowledge must continue to inform architecture. However, architectural

957
 Proceedings: Indoor Air 2002

education should promote architecture that originates from these concepts rather than as a
compliance step to be added afterward.
- Effective communication: Architects are professionals which work is informed by a
number of disciplines. In Vitruvius’ words: “The architect should be equipped with
knowledge of many branches ... let him be educated, know much history…have knowledge
of the study of medicine on account of the questions of climates, air, the healthiness and
unhealthiness of sites, and the use of different waters. For without these considerations,
the healthiness of a dwelling cannot be assured … nor again like Hippocrates, though not
ignorant of medicine”. While this profile is still a valid one, it must be recognized that
most architects are not at ease with the way these fields of knowledge are currently
conveyed to them. This lead to avoidance. This is a call for establishing effective
communication among disciplines, which must occur both vertically and horizontally.

REFERENCES
Berglund B, Lindvall T, Samuelsson I, Sundell J. 1988 . prescription for healthy Buildings.
Proceeding of Healthy Buildings ’88. Berglund B and Lindvall T . Swedish Council for Building
Research. Stockholm. Vol. 4. Pp. 5-14
Boschi N (Ed.). 1999. “Education and Training in Indoor Air Sciences”, Kluwer Academic Publishers,
Dordrecht/Boston/London
Fisk WJ. 2000. Review of Health and Productivity Gains from Better IEQ”. In Proceedings of Healthy
Buildings 2000. Published by SIY Indoor Air Information Oy, Helsinki, Finland. Vol. 4. pp. 23-
34
Cornaro A (writings). in Fiocco G, 1965, Alvise Cornaro. Il suo tempo e le sue opere, Vicenza, p. 156
Kruft HW. 1994. A History of Architectural Theory from Vitruvius to the Present, Zwemmer,
Princeton Architectural Press
Levin H, Adlercreutz G. 2000. Alvar Aalto as a Healthy Building Architect. In Seppänen O,
Tuomainen M, Sateri S (Eds). 2000. Healthy Buildings 2000: Workshop Summaries Published by
SIY Indoor Air Information Oy, Helsinki, Finland. Pp. 115-116
Levin H. 2000. Design and Construction of Health and Sustainable Buildings. In Proceedings of
Healthy Buildings 2000. Published by SIY Indoor Air Information Oy, Helsinki, Finland. Vol. 4.
pp. 13-22
Levin H. 1995. Building Ecology: An Architect’s perspective on Healthy Buildings”. In Proceedings
of Healthy Buildings ’95. Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Healthy
Buildings. Milan. Italy. Vol. 1. pp. 5-24
National Institute of Health (NIH). 1990. Quality of Life Assessment. Practice, Problems, and
Promise. US Dept. of Health and Human Services. Proceedings of a Workshop
Palladio A, 1570, The Four Books of Architecture. Translated by Ware I. 1738. Dover Publications.
New York. 1964 Edition. All citations from Palladio refer to this publication.
Trissino G. (1478-1550), Palladio’s patron, in Puppi L., Scrittori vicentini d’architettura del secolo
xvi, Vicenza , 1973, p.82 “La architettura e’ un arteficio circa lo abitare de li homini, che prepara
in esso utilita’ e dilettazioni”
United Nations. 1948 (Resolution 217A-III). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. New York.
Article 25
Vitruvius. (I century BC). Ten Books of Architecture. Morgan MH (Translation), Dover, N.Y. 1961.
Chapter 1. All citations from Vitruvius refer to this publication.
World Health Organization (WHO). 1949. Constitution of the World Health Organization. In Basic
Documents. Geneva, Switzerland
World Health Organization (WHO). 2000. The Right to Healthy Indoor Air. Report on a WHO
meeting. Bilthoven, The Netherlands. P. 6

958