Toward a Unified Language (and Application) of Salutogenic Design: An Opinion Paper

This opinion paper posits that there is a misalignment of how the theory of salutogenesis is defined by scholars and the way that salutogenesis is reflected in architectural practice. Many practitioners use this term to describe their work without a clear understanding of the social theory behind it. A background on the original theory, brief review of its subsequent development, and the importance of stress in determining health are explored. Antonovsky, originator of the salutogenesis theory, believed that health was represented by a spectrum ranging from disease to wellness and that stress and an individual's ability to respond to it determined where they would be on that spectrum. His work indicates that one's resources determined the impact of a stressor. The elements Antonovsky termed environmental generalized resistance resources (GRR) are considered because they are within the purview of design practitioners to influence. While Antonovsky's work became focused on an aspect of salutogenesis he termed sense of coherence (SOC), he encouraged exploration of additional aspects. This article proposes an expanded definition of salutogenesis that includes five aspects of environmental GRR that can address or alleviate specific causes of stress-SOC, biophilia, relaxation response, self-empowerment, and prospect and refuge. A more specific language and a common, consistent way of understanding what makes an environment salutogenic emerges with examples of each described. A common language will bring consistency to design practice and make complex social theories more accessible for practitioners, leading to them being more rigorously and universally applied in design.