(close)

Vaasanpuistikko is not Designed for Marginalized Groups
Essay
Aalto University 2026

Vaasanpuistikko is located at the metro stop Sörnainen in Helsinki. The square is part of the district Kallio which is known for its night life. Many young and ethnically diverse residents are situated here. It is an infamous social hotspot at least since the 1980s for persons with substance use disorder. Several homeless shelters are located in Kallio. The centre of the district, Sörnainen, functions as a meeting ground for young residents to spend the night in bars and clubs and for certain groups of marginalized people that meet up at public squares or parks.

The essay reflects on the current urban design of the Vaasanpuistikko in terms of defensive design. Afterwards it discusses alternative designchoices when re-planning a public square and a meeting point for people with substance use disorder.

Prologue
I live two streets away from Vaasanpuistikko and I cross the square multiple times a day. I moved to the neighbourhood two and a half years ago and witnessed the everyday social interactions on the square. The space can be considered as infamous because of the heavy alcohol and drug consumption that is taking place almost every day. Many times, I saw syringes on the side of the pathway or in the metro entrance. In summer the social gatherings of people with a seemingly unhealthy relation to drugs and alcohol happen in front of the supermarket at the metro square or directly in front of the metro entrance. In winter the gatherings move underground inside the metro entrance. When I am doing groceries at a supermarket close to Vaasanpuistikko, I often witness inebriated people stealing beverages at the stores. Security often just let them walk out and it seems to be a usual interaction. Almost every day a police car is parked in the middle of the square for many hours, and the surveillance of police officers hinders aggressions between substance users to escalate. As a resident I never felt unsafe since aggressive behaviour was never towards me. When I am waiting in front of the metro station most times a drug consumer strikes up a conversation. We are having a small talk, and the person maybe asks for money or cigarettes. The only times a get annoyed is when persons with substance use disorder squat in the hallway of my building and leave trash behind them. When I am in my apartment I can still hear them yelling at each other and I lock my door twice because I am afraid of break-ins.

Current Design – Defensive Design

Vaasanpuistikko was re-designed, and the construction ended last year. I had a conversation with Näkymä Oy, the responsible landscape architecture firm for the renovation of Vaasanpuistikko at the beginning of February in 2026. As part of the new design the concrete pavement was removed and replaced with natural stone tiles. The top view reveals a circle of lighter tiles in the middle which represent the moon. The landscape architecture firm referred to Kallio as the night life district of Helsinki and translated the local reference as a pavement design. More greenery was added to the existing square and a large circle with grasses and ferns was added close to the supermarket entrance. Underneath the square is the metro tunnel and the layer of soil is very thin inbetween tunnel and square. In effect, no vegetation can be planted on top of the metro station. The landscape architecture company had considerable restrictions about the design set by the city planners and the police. The city insisted on defensive design choices for Vaasanpuistikko. The urban design of space has hostile elements that prevent certain residents of the neighbourhood to linger for too long. It was a deliberate choice to offer chairs instead of benches for people not to sleep in the public environment. The square has three cluster of chairs placed in different corners. The idea was a separation of the different groups of visitors. People enjoying a rest on the square do not want to mingle with people consuming drugs and alcohol was the assumption when the space got re-designed. Between the two metro buildings was a roofed area that got removed to reduce shelter and hidden spaces to consume drugs. The brick walls of the metro entrance got replaced with glass to enhance public and police surveillance. On the square are several art pieces made by a local Finnish artist. The art aims to resemble circus decoration and is placed on colourful poles a few meters above ground, which prevents vandalism. Näkymä Oy made the square as green as possible according to one of the architects, but part of the demanded concept was to keep an open view across the square. No high bushes or grasses should offer a hiding spot for people to consume drugs or alcohol or a place to sleep. Some choices of the new design of the Vaasanpuistikko are intentionally against the needs of certain groups of people. These choices are defined as “defensive” or even “hostile” design¹. Both are sub-categories of “behavioural design” Karl de Fine Licht described it in his paper Urban Design International from 2023 as an agent trying to modify behaviour with a specific outcome in mind. The modification of behaviour can be towards humans as well as non-humans. I should also be considered that the modification can influence more than just the target group². For the re-design of Vaasanpuistikko no tall bushes or grasses were planted to facilitate surveillance of potential drug consumption. The downside of this intervention is a cold and sealed surfaced public space for every visitor and a defensive place for non-humans. “Defensive design” as a part of “behavioural design” is a modification of behaviour that prevents or hinders humans or non-humans of certain actions. One example would be the installation of chairs instead of benches for marginalized people not to sleep on public squares because other people feel disturbed by it. “Hostile design” differs from “defensive design” as in the outcome of the modification creates a threat or harm. An example of this design is the removal of the roof between the two metro buildings on Vaasanpuistikko. Outer space is considered as hostile to humans as coldness and precipitation can have fatale consequences. The removal of the roof on the square in Helsinki prevents on one hand people to stay there and on the other hand it can add harm to the people who do stay outside without protection. Other aspects of defensive design are manifested at Vaasanpuistikko in forms hard-to-reach artpieces to prevent their demolition and the replacement to glass walls at the metro entrance to facilitate surveillance of the space.

Design for Marginalized Groups

The current design of the Vaasanpuistikko actively excludes people with substance use disorder and widens the
gap between these marginalized groups and the other residents of Kallio instead of accommodating for coexistence.
The persons with substance use disorder meet at the Vaasanpuistikko since many years and the design of
the square still tries to relocate the people instead of finding a solution to help people with addiction.
The groups of people with substance use disorder that meet regularly at the square sometimes don’t speak
Finnish and are part of different groups of ethnic minorities in Helsinki. The term “marginalized groups” when
used in this paper focuses on ethnic minorities and persons with substance use disorder.
Helsinki is a city of many nationalities. In 2023 around a fifth of the population have a foreign background,
from former countries of the Soviet Union, Asia, Africa and other countries of the European Union³. The term
“ethnic minorities” can have different meanings, depending on the context. Hutchinson and Smith defined
the term in 1996 as following, “a named human population with myths of common ancestry, shared historical
memories, one or more elements of common culture, a link with a homeland and a sense of solidarity among at
least some of its members.”⁴ “Minority” and “majority” are percentage values of a defined geographic area, in
this case Helsinki. The meaning of ethnic minorities in this essay is regarding the preferences and interpretations
of landscapes and cityscapes of persons that might not feel a great attachment to the urban design of Helsinki
because of a foreign background.
Preferences of different landscapes have been widely studied⁵ ⁶ ⁷ with no clear conclusion whether the respondents
prefer familiar landscapes or exotic landscapes regarding the scenic quality. What has been found out
though is the importance of spaces related to personal history. The social phenomena is called “place attachment”
and defines the bond between a person and an environment⁸. The favourite places of peoples are often
connected to childhood landscapes and natural landscapes across different nationalities⁹. When moving between
countries or continents a familiar landscape or urban design feature might ease a cultural shock and facilitate
the attachment to a new place. A study in the US in 1995 by Loukaitou-Sideris investigates the use of a public
park by different nationalities grouped in White, Hispanic, African-American and Asian. Hispanics use the parc
most commonly to meet in larger groups and eat together, African-Americans practice sporting activities often
in company, Whites exercise in the park on their own and Asians, mostly Chinese in this case, were the least
frequent users of the green space. Many elderly Chinese men would meet on a park bench to socialise or practise
Tai Chi in the urban space¹⁰.

The study shows a tendency of different approaches to public green spaces depending on the culture which is
important to consider when planning a public space. In the case of Vaasanpuistikko the different ethnic backgrounds
of the residents of Kallio did not influence the design choices. Multicultural backgrounds are part of
the lived reality in Kallio and a reflection of this in the public square could increase the well-being of the residents.
Different case studies, mostly in Great Britain outlined three approaches to ethnicity in urban design. Clare
Rishbeth published an article in 2001in the paper Landscape Research about the representations of foreign
ethnicities in the built environment. The three methods are “symbolic reference”, “experiential reference” and
“facility provision”¹¹. “Symbolic reference” describes a landscape element or a typical shape or colour of objects
taken from a country or culture and placed in a new context. A typical example of this is re-created “Chinatowns”
in western culture. Typical elements are often exaggerated or idealized and placed in a new location
without considering its integration. Nevertheless, cultural symbols or other goods such as traditional food in
other than the original country or region, can increase the connection between two cultures. “Experiential reference”
is a landscape or urban design where inspiration of another culture is expressed in a subtle and wholistic
way, such as scale, texture and density of the environment. One example can be the usage of foreign plants in a
public park or even the density of plants can trigger memories. Not all aesthetic experiences of foreign places
are seen as pleasant by native communities. What is considered beautiful design of outdoor or indoor design in
one place can be seen as dreadful in others. The last approach of different ethnicities in public space is “facility
provision”. This method does not use visual tools to connect to a foreign culture but instead it uses lifestyle
elements. For example, the UK promotes allotment facilities to immigrants since many of the new citizens of
British cities were used to grow their own food. This way ethnic minorities can practice a familiar activity and
be in contact with the new place where they live¹¹. All three methods have strengths and weaknesses but can be
applied in the right contexts. Especially in diverse district such as Kallio experiential reference or facility provision
could be applied as these approaches are subtle and might not stand out negative.
Clara H. Greed wrote in the book Social Town Planning in 1999 that „space and place is socially constructed
out of human interrelations and interactions. (…) The shaping of a place is therefore the outcome of power
struggles between various cultures, aspirations, needs and fears within the existing social order.“¹²
Humans influence the environment and the environment influences humans in the same manner. The built environment
has been proven to affect the physical and mental health of people. Urban design can influence health
by creating an access to environmental amenities, such as recreational opportunities, clean air, healthy food and
protect residents from natural hazards.¹³ The focus point in the coming paragraph is the relation between neighbourhood
and drug consumption.

Factors such as disinvestment in the built environment, easy access to drugs, low access to interventions and
built environment- associated environmental and social stressors might initiate and enhance the misuse of
drugs. A paper from the Morgan State University in Baltimore in 2023 summarised 14 relevant articles on the
influence of the built environment to drug misuse and abuse. As stated above urban blight and decay is a physical
indicator of increased drug use. Abandoned buildings in run-down neighbourhoods are often hotspots for
drug activities. Other physical factors leading to drug misuse are the closeness to public parks, as a place of
consumption and injection and liquor vending shops. Besides certain neighbourhoods attracting drug activities,
these places are also creating a feeling of stress for other residents who might consume drugs as an escape.
A stronger influence on the persons with substance use disorder are different mental impacts. A disinvestment of
the municipality in the community can entail low educational level and poverty of the residents and neighbourhood
effects such as high unemployment rates. These influences often lead to hopelessness and mental disorder.
A third category next to providing drugs and physical consumption places and a mental illness that people try
to escape from with drugs, are facilities and services after and during the drug consumption. The research of the
Morgan State University has shown that places with a bigger distance to opioid treatment centres and hospitals
have higher numbers of deaths caused by overdose. Additionally, a smaller distance to treatment services
increases the overdose prevention. Another reason for substance abuse problems are police arrests for low-level
violations. Problematic policing is connected to higher drug related mortality, as consumers rather avoid police
than reach out for help in critical situations¹³.
It has been proven that drug consumption rooms (DCR) are beneficial for persons with substance use disorder¹⁴,
as well as economically for the country. A DCR reduces the death rate by overdoses and saves healthcare costs.
Still, there are no DCRs installed in Finland because current legislations hinder any initiation even when the
number of drug related mortality is growing¹⁵.
DCRs have evidence-based support but are not a cure-all remedy. A paper by Tim Rhodes, Jo Kimber, Will
Small, John Fitzgerald, Thomas Kerr, Matthew Hickman and Greg Holloway from 2006 promoted facilitating
safer environments interventions at public and semi-public injecting sites. Other than consumption rooms, interventions
in existing spaces with the focus on peer-supervised injections. The essay also underlines the mostly
neglected importance of small-scale interventions affecting risk in drug use¹⁶.
A high infection risk is posed by shared and unhygienic injection equipment, especially when the consumption
has to happen in hurry. A study in Denver shows that shooting at “unsafe” locations such as parks, alleys and
abandoned buildings increases the likelihood of utilizing previously used equipment by two to three times¹⁷.
Uncleaned syringes often pass on HIV and HCV and cause vascular damage and bacterial infections. Less
attention is paid to hygiene routines when persons with substance use disorder feel the fear of being interrupted,
which is often the case at public spaces. The physical environment contributes to the risk of infections and
diseases when no running water is available, or the lighting conditions are poor. A simple approach to a saver
injecting environment is the availability of sterile water, vending machines for injecting equipment, a place for
safe disposal of them and sufficient lighting¹⁷. Small interventions of this kind may improve already the safety
of the person with substance use disorder. A slightly more controlled environment for drug injection might also
ease the mind of other residents who feel disturbed by public drug consumption.
Many injectors feel shameful about their addiction¹⁸. A homeless injector stated “They (the police) try to belittle
you and make you feel dirty; They (the police) will do anything to show the publicyou are a drug addict; People
look down their noses at you; People walk past you as if you’re worthless, a as if you’re dirty, a stinking tramp
off the street, but we’re human like everybody else.”¹⁹

As part of a smaller intervention peer-supervised injecting has been found to be successful in collective changes
among groups of drug users in terms of hygiene and safety²⁰. Together with local and city officials and organizations
in charge of keeping public toilets clean peer-based drug usage has become safer in many places, often
accompanied by a local outreach team²¹. In the paper “Public injecting and the need for safer environment interventions
in the reduction of drug-related harm” the authors describe how a sense of belonging can be created
on a small scale. “(…) peer interventions offer scope for fostering changes in location-specific social relations.
The importance of noting above that place, and our relations to it, are made of the meaning ascribed to it, is that
this opens up the possibility for peer and social interventions to create spaces in which a sense of belonging is
created and sustained.”¹⁶
An example of a social consciousness from a drug user was written on a public toilet in Melbourne in a busy
drug scene. The author addressed the “manifesto” to fellow drug users and other citizens that need to use the
bathroom. The person wrote on the wall of the toilet: “On behalf of all the sensible junkies that use this facility
to use our drugs. I would like to apologise for all of the lazy, inconsiderable and brainless arseholes who do not
dispose of their needles safely and just leave them and the of their rubbish on the floor. Please be careful of used
syringes without their orange coloured cap on … And as for all you slack fuckers who can’t lift your arm with
the oh so heavy fit (needle/syringe) in it to put it in the bin in here, you are all a mob of hopeless fuck-witted
pricks! Get your shit together AND USE THE FUCKING BIN!!”¹⁶

Acknowledgment instead of Ignorance
Punavuori, a district in the south of Helsinki used to be a place for marginalised groups and persons with
substance use disorder. A clinic station got installed for people to get substitutes for drugs, such as naloxone.
Unfortunately, the results were not as expected and people instead of consuming the substitutes rather sold them
to fellow drug users. In the end the marginalized groups of people were merely displaced and today Punavuori
is residents by the upper and middle class. Some public toilets in Punavuori still have designated bins for syringes.
The history of Punavuori is an example of an intervention that at first, acknowledged persons with substance
use disorder but later on, changed the environment to deliberately displace them. It is comparably easy to design
a defensive or even hostile public space instead of tackling a complex social problem for which a panacea
has not been found yet. To create a safer environment for persons with substance use disorder, other non-marginalized
residents and to hopefully decrease the number of drug-related mortality, different sectors of the city
need to work together. This entails politicians, city planners, urban designers, social workers and NGOs and the
residents themselves. The city planners and landscape architects of the Vaasanpuistikko did not want to support
drug and alcohol consumption and tried to displace the persons in question which did not make a difference to
the established drug consumption scene in Kallio. Facing an infamous “institution” as the Vaasanpuistikko, a
drug consumption hotspot since several decades with installing chairs instead of benches is a surreptitious if not
useless design choice. Small interventions, such as running water and appropriate bins for syringes could have
a bigger impact than defensive design at Vaasanpuistikko. To go deeper into facing the problem one should
understand how persons with substance use disorder got to the current living conditions. This entails comprehensive
research into reasons and prevention of drug addiction.
A possible reason for discomfort and drug misuse for foreign residents in Kallio could be a culture shock and a
disconnection to Finland. A second aspect of acknowledgement instead of ignorance is the integration of different
ethnicities in the urban design. Symbolic reference, experiential reference and facility provision can benefit
persons with substance use disorder and non-affected residents. The current defensive design of Vaasanpuistikko
creates an uninviting space for every resident. Aesthetic design choices inspired by foreign cultures can be
considered as pleasant by all visitors of the square.

References

1. Rosenberger, R. On hostile design: Theoretical and empirical prospects. Urban Studies, Original work published,
2020.
2. de Fine Licht, K. Behavioral designs defined: how to understand and why it is important to differentiate between “defensive,”
“hostile,” “disciplinary”, and other designs in the urban landscape. Urban Des Int, 2023.
3. An ethnically and culturally diverse Helsinki, accessed February 21, https://historia.hel.fi/en/ilmiot/helsinki-residents/
an-ethnically-and-culturally-diverse-helsinki.
4. Hutchinson J. & Smith A.D., Ethnicity, Oxford University Press, 1996.
5. Zube E.H. & Pitt D.G. Cross-cultural perceptions of scenic and heritage landscapes, Landscape Planning, 1981.
6. Canter D. & Thorne R. Attitudes to housing: a cross-cultural comparison, Environment and Behavior, 1972.
7. Kaplan R. & Herbert E. Familiarity and preference: a cross-cultural analysis, in Nasar J. (Ed.) Environmental Aesthetics:
theory, research and applications, Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1988.
8. Altman I. & Low S. Place Attachment, New York, Plenum Press, 1992.
9. Brierley Newell P. A cross-cultural examination of favorite places, Environment and Behavior, 1997.
10. Loukaitou-Sideris A. Urban form and social context: cultural differentiation in the uses of urban parks, Journal of
Planning Education and Research, 1995.
11. Rishbeth, Clare. Ethnic Minority Groups and the Design of Public Open Space: an inclusive landscape?, Landscape
Research, Vol. 26, 2001.
12. Greed, Clara H. Social Town Planning, Routledge 1999.
13. Oladele, Adewumi F., Onyango, Edward, Esdaille, Kyle. The influence of the built environment on drug misuse and
abuse, Journal of Construction Project Management and Innovation, Morgan State University, Baltimore, Maryland,
USA, 2023.
14. Vincent, Tran, Reid, Sharon E., Roxburgh, Amanda & A Day, Carolyn. Assessing Drug Consumption Rooms and
Longer Term (5 Year) Impacts on Community and Clients, Risk Management and Healthcare Policy, 2021.
15. Sunell, Kerkko Kalle Tapani. Drug Consumption Rooms in Helsinki? A Rapid Review of Economic Evidence, University
of Helsinki, 2025
16. Rhodes, Tim, Kimber, Jo, Small, Will, Fitzgerald, John, Kerr, Thomas, Hickman, Matthew & Holloway, Greg. Public
injecting and the need for “safer environment interventions” in the reduction of drug-related harm, Addiction 101, no.
10, 2006.
17. Koester, S., Glanz, J., Baron, A. Drug sharing among heroin networks: implications for HIV and hepatitis B and C
prevention, AIDS Behav, 2005.
18. Fitzgerald, J., Dovey, P., Dietze, G. Health outcomes and quasi-supervisedsettings for street injecting drug use, Int J
Drug Policy, 2004.
19. Rhodes, T. Place matters. Drug injecting and the “risk environment”, Australian Professional Society on Alcohol and
other Drugs National Conference, Melbourne, Australia, 2005.
20. Metsch, L. R., McCoy, C. B., Shutz, J. M., Oage, J.B., Philippe, E. & McKay, C. Gender comparisons of injection
drug use practices in shooting galleries, Popul Res Policy Rev, 1999.
21. Wiebel, W. Ethnographic contributions to AIDS intervention strategies, In: T. Rhodes, R. Hartnoll, editors., AIDS,
Drugs and Prevention: perspectives on individual and community action, London Ruthledge, 1996.

Greta Ballschuh