SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Akdeniz University Journal of the Faculty of Architecture / 2026 / Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1

COMPARISON OF SOCIAL AND CO-HOUSING RESILIENCE TO AIRBORNE DISEASES THROUGH CIRCULATION DENSITY ANALYSIS

Sosyal Konut ve Ortak-Yaşam Konutlarının, Sirkülasyon Yoğunluğu Aracılığıyla, Hava Yoluyla Bulaşan Hastalıklara Karşı Dirençliliklerinin Karşılaştırılması

Vedat Elbir(The University of Messina)0009-0006-7186-0018
Pages
40–69
Publication Date
2026-07-31
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results provide a theoretical framework for assessing spatial risk levels in co-housing designs under pandemic conditions such as COVID-19.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This study investigates the spatial safety of co-housing typologies in mitigating airborne disease transmission among non-kin occupants.
📊
Key Findings & Data:A concentric circulation model was developed based on Hillier’s (2007) theory of spatial behavior and simulated using AnyLogic software.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results provide a theoretical framework for assessing spatial risk levels in co-housing designs under pandemic conditions such as COVID-19.
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:2007 Verileri
⚙️Variables:ortak konut · Wells-Riley Modeli · eş merkezli sirkülasyon

Abstract

This study investigates the spatial safety of co-housing typologies in mitigating airborne disease transmission among non-kin occupants. Utilizing the Wells-Riley Transmission Model (WRTM), it evaluates infection risk in densely occupied shared environments. A concentric circulation model was developed based on Hillier’s (2007) theory of spatial behavior and simulated using AnyLogic software. Input parameters were derived from empirical data and spatial configurations of existing social housing layouts. The model analyzes circulation typologies and occupant density (persons/m²) to estimate airborne transmission probabilities. Results provide a theoretical framework for assessing spatial risk levels in co-housing designs under pandemic conditions such as COVID-19.

Özet

Bu çalışma, sosyal konut yapılarının bir türü olan ortak konut yapılarının hava yoluyla bulaşan hastalıklara karşı dirençliliğini sirkülasyon yoğunluğuna dayandırarak sosyal konutlar ile yapılan karşılaştırmalar üzerinden araştırmaktadır. Wells-Riley Bulaşma Modeli (WRTM) kullanılarak, yoğun nüfuslu paylaşımlı yaşam alanlarında enfeksiyon riski değerlendirilmiştir. Çalışmada, Hillier’in (2007) mekânsal davranış teorisine dayalı konsantrik dolaşım modeli geliştirilmiş ve AnyLogic yazılımı kullanılarak simülasyonu yapılmıştır. Girdi parametreleri, ampirik verilerden ve mevcut sosyal konut yerleşimlerinin mekânsal konfigürasyonlarından elde edilmiştir. Model; dolaşım tipolojileri ve kişi yoğunluğu (kişi/m²) gibi değişkenleri analiz ederek, hava yoluyla bulaşma olasılıklarını tahmin etmektedir. Elde edilen sonuçlar, COVID-19 gibi pandemi koşullarında ortak konut tasarımlarındaki mekânsal risk seviyelerinin değerlendirilmesine yönelik teorik bir çerçeve sunmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

Elbir, V. (2026). COMPARISON OF SOCIAL AND CO-HOUSING RESILIENCE TO AIRBORNE DISEASES THROUGH CIRCULATION DENSITY ANALYSIS. Akdeniz University Journal of the Faculty of Architecture, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 1, 40–69. https://ajindex.com/articles/1607634

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (33)

  1. Aalbers, M.B., 2015. The Great Moderation, the Great Excess and the Global Housing Crisis. International Journal of Housing Policy 15 (1): 43-60.
  2. Baas, A., 2021. Preliminary Research Literature Studies on Loneliness and Community Living. Chalmers University of Technology, Gothenburg.
  3. Chan, K.H., Peiris, J.S.M., Lam, S.Y., Poon, L.L., Yuen, K.Y., Seto, W., 2011. The Effects of Temperature and Relative Humidity on the Viability of the SARS Coronavirus. Advances in Virology 2011: 1-7. https://doi.org/10.1155/2011/734690
  4. Darling, E.M., 2017. Space for Community Cohousing as an Alternative Density Model for Housing Seattle. University of Washington, Seattle.
  5. Department for Communities and Local Government., 2013. Housing Standards Review Illustrative Technical Standards Developed by the Working Groups. London.
  6. Ehsanifar, M., 2021. Airborne Aerosol Particles and COVID-19 Transmission. Environmental Research. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2021.111752
  7. Elbir, V., 2023. Reconsideration of Social Housing in the Context of Spatial Development and Current User Needs on the European Scale. Kırklareli University, Architecture Department, Kırklareli.
  8. El-Tanbouly, R., Hassan, Z., El-Messeiry, S., 2021. The Role of Indoor Plants in Air Purification and Human Health in the Context of COVID-19 Pandemic: A Proposal for a Novel Line of Inquiry. Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences 8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2021.709395
  9. Gawronski, S.W., Vangronsveld, J., Sæbo, A., Gawronska, H., Lomniscki, S., 2017. Plants in Air Phytoremediation. In Advances in Botanical Research, Vol. 83, Elsevier, pp. 319-346. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.abr.2016.12.008
  10. Gensler., 2012. Circulation: Defining and Planning. U.S. General Services Administration Public Buildings Service, Washington.
  11. Giorgi, E., López, L.M., Krstikj, R.G.-M., Cobreros, C., Montoya, M.A., 2021. Co-Housing Response to Social Isolation of COVID-19 Outbreak, with a Focus on Gender Implications. Sustainability 13 (7203): 1-15. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13137203
  12. Glasgow City Council., 2024. Large-Scale Co-Living Planning Guidance.
  13. Hagbert, P., Larsen, H.G., Thörn, H., Wasshede, C., 2020. Contemporary Co-Housing in Europe: Towards Sustainable Cities? Routledge, London.
  14. Haleem, A., Javaid, M., Vaishya, R., 2020. Effects of COVID-19 Pandemic in Daily Life. Current Medicine Research and Practice 10 (2): 78-79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cmrp.2020.03.011
  15. Hillier, B., 2007. A Configurational Theory. In Space is the Machine. Space Syntax, pp. 20-27.
  16. Keleş, R., 1996. Sosyal Konut Politikası Kavramı Üzerinde Bir Deneme ve Türkiye’de Sosyal Konut Politikası. S.B.F. Dergisi 21 (2): 167-234. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/37244
  17. Khajehzadeh, I., Vale, B., 2015. How do People Use Large Houses? In Crawford, R., Stephan, A. (Eds.), 49th International Conference of the Architectural Science Association 2015, Wellington, pp. 153-162.
  18. Levinson, K.S., 2003. Encyclopedia of Community: From the Village to the Virtual World. Sage Publications, Vol.1.
  19. Mikszewski, A., Buonanno, G., Stabile, L., Pacitto, A., Morawska, L., 2020. Airborne Infection Risk Calculator User Manual. https://research.qut.edu.au/ilaqh/tools/airborne-infection-risk-calculator/
  20. Natapov, A., Kuliga, S., Dalton, R., 2019. Linking Building-Circulation Typology and Wayfinding: Design, Spatial Analysis, and Anticipated Wayfinding Difficulty of Circulation Types. Architectural Science Review. https://doi.org/10.1080/00038628.2019.1675041
  21. Natapov, A., Kuliga, S., Dalton, R.C., Hölscher, C., 2015. Building Circulation Typology and Space Syntax Predictive Measures. Proceedings of the International Space Syntax Symposium, London.
  22. Rezaei, M., Azarmi, M., 2020. DeepSOCIAL: Social Distancing Monitoring and Infection Risk Assessment in COVID-19 Pandemic. Applied Sciences 10 (21): 1-29. https://doi.org/10.3390/app10217514
  23. Scherer, R.J., Luu, N.T., Katranuschkov, P., Spieckermann, S., Habenicht, I., Protopsaltis, B., Pappou, T., 2018. Towards a Multimodel Approach for Simulation of Crowd Behaviour Under Fire and Toxic Gas Expansion in Buildings. Proceedings of the 2018 Winter Simulation Conference, München, pp. 3965-3976.
  24. Schmid, S., Eberle, D., Hugentobler, M., 2019. A History of Collective Living: Models of Shared Living. Birkhäuser, Zurich.
  25. Scotthanson, C., Scotthanson, K., 2004. The Cohousing Handbook. New Society Publishers, Gabriola Island.
  26. Starke, K.R., Reissig, D., Haack, G.P., Schmauder, S., Nienhaus, A., Seidler, A., 2021. The Isolated Effect of Age on the Risk of COVID-19 Severe Outcomes: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis. BMJ Global Health 6. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjgh-2021-006434
  27. UK Cohousing Network., 2025. About Cohousing. https://cohousing.org.uk/about- cohousing-2/ (Accessed January 30, 2025).
  28. Vestbro, D.U., 2010. Living Together–Cohousing Ideas and Realities Around the World. Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm.
  29. Worldometer., 2025. Coronavirus Statistics. https://www.worldometers.info/coronavirus/ (Accessed January 19, 2025).
  30. Xenakis, M.N., 2023. Generalizing the Wells–Riley Infection Probability: A Superstatistical Scheme for Indoor Infection Risk Estimation. Entropy 25 (896): 2-21. https://doi.org/10.3390/e25060896
  31. European Commission Eurostat., 2025. Housing Statistics. https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/cache/digpub/housing/bloc-1b.html (Accessed January 30, 2025).
  32. National Library of Medicine., 2025. Statistical Resources. https://www.nlm.nih.gov/oet/ed/stats/02-900.html (Accessed January 30, 2025).
  33. Happy Cities., 2022. Learning from Community Housing Movements: Transforming Corridors into Social Spaces. https://happycities.com/blog/learning-from- community-housing-movements-corridors-social-spaces (Accessed January 27, 2025).