It has long been said that an organisation’s greatest asset is its people. Employees are the driving force behind innovation, customer engagement, revenue growth, and company culture. In an era where political, social, and economic climates are in constant flux, particularly with ongoing debates surrounding diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI), it is more critical than ever for organisations to recognise the value of an inclusive workforce. There is a well-known saying: “When America sneezes, the rest of Europe catches a cold.” (often attributed to Charles Maurice de Talleyrand, a French diplomat from the 18th and 19th centuries). It rings particularly true today, as shifts in political and social climates challenge the notion of diversity programmes. This is evident in the recent ruling by the UK Supreme Court that the legal definition of a woman is based on biological sex. However, history has shown that political regimes and societal norms can change rapidly. Regardless of where one stands on these issues, the reality remains that for an organisation to thrive, its people must feel valued, supported, and included. Despite the growing focus on DEI programmes since 2020, many past initiatives have not been as effective as hoped. To move forward, the DEI industry and DEI professionals must conduct a rigorous retrospective analysis: What has worked? What hasn’t been effective? How can we improve? Without tangible metrics and data-driven insights, it becomes difficult to measure the success and impact of these initiatives, and this lack of clear outcomes may have contributed to what some define as the “backlash against DEI.” A common challenge has been the prioritisation of diversity over inclusion, leaving organisations ill-prepared to integrate diverse talent effectively. This has often resulted in short-term disruption - what change management refers to as the "storming" phase of team development - which in turn has led to team friction, a lack of belonging, and ultimately higher turnover rates among underrepresented employees. Organisations have not allowed enough time for teams to progress to the "norming" and "performing" periods in the face of high pressure to deliver results. To counter this, organisations must shift their mindset to focus on inclusion and belonging first. When a workplace fosters an inclusive culture, diverse talent is naturally welcomed, supported, and empowered to succeed. Rather than viewing differences as an obstacle, businesses must embrace them as strengths that drive innovation and growth. I often advocate for culture “add” rather than culture “fit”. As a former project and programme manager who transitioned into HR, I have witnessed firsthand the value of applying change management principles to DEI efforts. A successful change programme requires clearly defined goals, strong leadership buy-in, stakeholder engagement, a structured delivery methodology, and measurable outcomes. When these elements are absent, initiatives tend to falter. By adopting a structured, results-oriented, and data-driven approach, organisations can embed true inclusion into their core business strategy rather than treating it as a secondary initiative or a “nice to have”. It’s also important to regularly assess and reflect on what has worked, what hasn’t, and adapt and improve accordingly. In agile methodology, we call these retrospectives. Inclusion is key to successful DEI initiatives. In the past, these efforts may have created exclusion by failing to involve those who do not identify with the Equality Act's nine protected characteristics (age, disability, gender reassignment, marriage and civil partnership, pregnancy and maternity, race, religion or belief, sex, sexual orientation). This has led to defensiveness and fear instead of an understanding of historical inequity. When you are accustomed to privilege, equality can feel like oppression or exclusion and so we need to focus on how we can reframe inclusion work as being beneficial to all rather than to a few. Using storytelling, education, and relatability helps onboard more allies, understanding that equity is crucial to achieve equality. Inclusion means widening opportunities for everyone rather than limiting them to a select few. A wealth of research underscores the positive impact of inclusivity on business success. According to CIPD, 70% of employees report that a strong DEI culture positively impacts their job satisfaction. Forbes also discovered that 88% of consumers are more likely to be loyal to a company that supports social and environmental causes. Additionally, employees working in inclusive environments are 50% more likely to stay with their current employer for more than three years. Just over half of UK consumers (53%) say a brand's diversity and inclusion efforts, influence their purchase decisions. In fact, brands failing to act on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion risk losing out on £102bn annual spend from marginalised groups. Boston Consulting Group’s research demonstrates that organizations with diverse leadership see 19% higher innovation revenues. Beyond traditional meritocratic arguments, one principle is clear: inclusivity must be at the heart of every business strategy. Organisations where employees feel seen, heard, and valued naturally attract a broader, more diverse talent pool. Such employees tend to be more engaged, loyal, and productive, further strengthening the organisation's overall success and their bottom line. The UK tech industry is poised for continued growth and innovation, with a focus on emerging technologies like AI and quantum computing, however there is also a need to address challenges like talent shortages and international competition to maintain its position as a global leader.  Almost 95% of employers looking for tech talent have encountered a skills shortage in 2022, according to HR and recruitment firm Hays. In today’s job market, competitive salaries alone are not enough to attract and retain top talent. Employees now prioritise benefits, flexible working arrangements, career growth opportunities, and a sense of belonging. Organisations that prioritise inclusion, equal opportunities, and adaptability will be better positioned to navigate the evolving talent landscape and sustain long-term success. Ultimately, fostering an inclusive workplace is not merely a moral obligation; it is a business imperative. Companies that prioritise inclusion are more likely to attract top diverse talent, enhance employee engagement, and drive sustainable growth. Companies that fail to create inclusive environments are setting themselves up for failure. We are seeing more and more cases of sexual harassment, bullying and discrimination cases with high price tags. So, whether through loss of business, bad publicity or legal consequences, the price tag on exclusion can be staggering. Inclusion should not be seen as a separate HR initiative but as an integral part of an organisation’s DNA with all leaders owning an inclusion goal as part of their performance management. What gets measured, gets done! However, this can only happen if leaders and managers understand what inclusion truly means and they recognise that a diversity of voices, experiences and opinions will benefit their teams rather than hinder them. The future of work is about more than just employment—it is about providing opportunities for people to live, support their families, and achieve personal and professional growth. A poll, conducted by Ipsos for PA Mediapoint, indicates widespread support among the British public for key workplace DEI drives, including flexible working (71%), gender pay gap reporting (65%), and inclusivity training (64%). People care about wellbeing, inclusion and culture, which is why it is so important that organisations create workplaces where everyone is valued, empowered, and given the chance to succeed. True prosperity comes from ensuring that every individual, regardless of background and differences, can flourish. So, Inclusion does matter, particularly if you value creating a positive work environment that benefits employees, impacts the bottom line, and ensures everyone feels included rather than excluded. Read more about DEI in tech A lack of work-life balance and discrimination are among the biggest challenges for women in tech, finds Lorien When asked their opinions on the growing use of AI, girls expressed concerns about possible biases it will perpetuate, while boys were worried about cyber security

Ookwemin Minising Aerial photo with project area outline. Credit: Waterfront Toronto Global professional services company, GHD, and Danish nature-based design studio, SLA, have been awarded the role of prime consultant by Waterfront Toronto for phase one of infrastructure and streetscape design for a new island community. Formerly known as Villiers Island, Ookwemin Minising is a new island born from an ambitious flood protection and river restoration project. The Don River, a historic gathering place, will be at the heart of this future community. The island, which is planned to be home to more than 15,000 people, will also be a destination where people will visit to relax and explore. The first new residents of this island community are expected to move in by 2031. For the project, GHD, the prime consultant and technical lead, and SLA, design lead for urban realm and landscape, will deliver a new urban environment that aims to honour the legacy of the Don River through an approach rooted in resilient infrastructure, cultural memory and deep ecological integration. Drawing inspiration from global precedents and local Indigenous knowledge, the team’s “Growing Streets” concept proposes streetscapes that evolve like living ecosystems. “This project represents a significant milestone for Toronto’s waterfront revitalization,” said Chris Hunter, GHD chief executive officer for the Americas. “By integrating innovative engineering with responsive design, our team will help create infrastructure that’s not just functional, but truly adaptive to community needs while honoring the ecological transformation nearing completion at the Don River mouth. This approach exemplifies our commitment to building resilient systems that evolve with the communities they serve.” The team, which includes architects Allies and Morrison, will integrate design for streetscapes and public realm with a review of the density and built form on the island, building on years of planning to realize this new neighbourhood. “Tri-government investment unlocked the potential of the Port Lands, allowing us to create a brand new island,” says Chris Glaisek, chief planning and design officer at Waterfront Toronto. “Now, renewed investment in waterfront revitalization means this new island is ready to launch. By integrating design for streets and public realm with a review of built form on the island, this team can build on the planning done by the City of Toronto, Waterfront Toronto and CreateTO to deliver as much new housing as possible, while building a truly world-class neighbourhood.” At the heart of the team’s vision for Ookwemin Minising lies a next-practice model for climate-adaptive urbanism. Guided by seven core principles, including surface-level rainwater management, soil repurposing, native vegetation and social spaces that foster mobility and interaction, the design will champion active mobility through integrated pedestrian and biodiversity corridors woven throughout the island. These corridors can provide optimal microclimates for outdoor comfort while managing storm water, linking and strengthening ecologies and connecting people with nature. Informed by leading examples from cities like Copenhagen, Oslo, and London, the design will seek to maximize sustainability without relying on future technologies. “We’re thrilled to bring our Growing Streets vision to life in Toronto,” said Rasmus Astrup, design principal and partner at SLA. “This is urban design at its most alive – where trees, water, wind, soil and people grow and flow together. The streetscape design of Ookwemin Minising is not just about infrastructure, it’s about creating a living cityscape that breathes with the seasons, nurtures biodiversity and supports everyday life in inspiring, joyful ways. In Ookwemin Minising, every street becomes a celebration – of the land, of the water, of our heritage and of all the life of Toronto.” The infrastructure designs for Ookwemin Minising will incorporate  plantings, nature-integrated public seating, and climate-buffering vegetation to create a vibrant and adaptive civic experience. The team envisions a design that would build public awareness of ecological processes while enhancing urban resilience and well-being. The vision embraces a holistic design approach that integrates street configurations, building scales, and public spaces to create a cohesive and sustainable community. Rooted in the values of the surrounding Port Lands and celebrating the area’s enduring industrial, maritime and Indigenous histories, the team’s design for Ookwemin Minising will aim to set a new benchmark for culturally and ecologically responsive waterfront development in North America. The project will be brought to life by a group of industry-leading consultants, including:  GHD (prime consultant): Engineering design services, planning services, environmental services and construction administration SLA: Design lead for urban realm and landscape Trophic Design: Co-designer with SLA for Indigenous landscape design and knowledge Transsolar: Sustainability and low-carbon infrastructure systems Monumental Projects: Public engagement and community outreach Level Playing Field: Accessibility services Allies and Morrison: Architectural lead   The post GHD and SLA teaming up to deliver major infrastructure design for Toronto’s newest island appeared first on Canadian Architect.

Project Render. Image credit: The Bentway The Bentway has announced its summer 2025 season of programming headlined by a new public art exhibition, Sun/Shade, a dance performance atop a large sand dune, and a city-wide installation of a moving forest. From now until October 5, Sun/Shade will explore the city’s changing relationship with these natural features. The art exhibition aims to bring together a mix of artists, designers, and researchers from Toronto and beyond to deploy natural light and shadow as creative tools, to reveal how new thinking about familiar resources can improve urban life. The Gardiner offers a canvas for the new art exhibition and experimentation. Stretching over 6.5 km, the elevated highway’s canopy provides the city with its largest continuous shadow, making the area a natural haven for those seeking sun and shade. This space will provide the benefits of both elements while also serving as a gathering place for community events, public art, recreation, and lively celebrations throughout the summer. “As extreme urban heat events rise in Toronto and cities everywhere, it’s even more vital to create accessible spaces where communities can maximize access to shade and stay protected from harsh light,” said Ilana Altman, co-executive director of The Bentway. “This season of programming explores how we must adapt to our changing climate and reshape our public spaces to balance the benefits of both sun and shade. Our creative collaborators are prompting us to recognize shade as an essential public resource and embrace sunlight as a creative collaborator.” Visitors will be able to experience the world premiere of Sand Flight from Norway choreographer Ingri Fiksdal and theatre director Jonas Corell Petersen, where eight dancers and a 50-person choir will descend on a massive sand dune exploring new traditions for changing climates. Carrying on the theme is Moving Forest by Amsterdam’s NL Architects, a mobile project featuring a flock of 50 trees travelling throughout the city, will bring shade to sunbaked urban sites across the Greater Toronto Area (GTA). A key dimension of Sun/Shade explores the importance of shaded spaces for public health, anchored by a new partnership with The Bentway’s official Sun-Safety Partner, the David Cornfield Melanoma Fund. “Skin cancer is the most commonly diagnosed cancer in Canada, and the incidence of melanoma – the deadliest form of skin cancer – is rising. The best way to prevent skin cancer is to protect your skin from the sun,” said Danielle Paterson, executive director of the David Cornfield Melanoma Fund. “We are proud to partner with The Bentway on Sun/Shade, an amazing sun safety initiative that emphasizes the importance of accessible public shade in Toronto.” For more information, click here. The post Sun and shade take centre stage with The Bentway’s immersive summer program appeared first on Canadian Architect.

The housing crisis in Canada’s North, which has particularly affected the majority Indigenous population in northern communities, has been of ongoing concern to firms such as Taylor Architecture Group (TAG). Formerly known as Pin/Taylor, the firm was established in Yellowknife in 1983. TAG’s Principal, Simon Taylor, says that despite recent political gains for First Nations, “by and large, life is not improving up here.” Taylor and his colleagues have designed many different types of housing across the North. But the problems exceed the normal scope of architectural practice. TAG’s Manager of Research and Development, Kristel Derkowski, says, “We can design the units well, but it doesn’t solve many of the underlying problems.” To respond, she says, “we’ve backed up the process to look at the root causes more.” As a result, “the design challenges are informed by much broader systemic research.”  We spoke to Derkowski about her research, and the work that Taylor Architecture Group is doing to act on it. Here’s what she has to say. Inadequate housing from the start The Northwest Territories is about 51% Indigenous. Most non-Indigenous people are concentrated in the capital city of Yellowknife. Outside of Yellowknife, the territory is very much majority Indigenous.  The federal government got involved in delivering housing to the far North in 1959. There were problems with this program right from the beginning. One issue was that when the houses were first delivered, they were designed and fabricated down south, and they were completely inadequate for the climate. The houses from that initial program were called “Matchbox houses” because they were so small. These early stages of housing delivery helped establish the precedent that a lower standard of housing was acceptable for northern Indigenous residents compared to Euro-Canadian residents elsewhere. In many cases, that double-standard persists to this day. The houses were also inappropriately designed for northern cultures. It’s been said in the research that the way that these houses were delivered to northern settlements was a significant factor in people being divorced from their traditional lifestyles, their traditional hierarchies, the way that they understood home. It was imposing a Euro-Canadian model on Indigenous communities and their ways of life.  Part of what the federal government was trying to do was to impose a cash economy and stimulate a market. They were delivering houses and asking for rent. But there weren’t a lot of opportunities to earn cash. This housing was delivered around the sites of former fur trading posts—but the fur trade had collapsed by 1930. There weren’t a lot of jobs. There wasn’t a lot of wage-based employment. And yet, rental payments were being collected in cash, and the rental payments increased significantly over the span of a couple decades.  The imposition of a cash economy created problems culturally. It’s been said that public housing delivery, in combination with other social policies, served to introduce the concept of poverty in the far North, where it hadn’t existed before. These policies created a situation where Indigenous northerners couldn’t afford to be adequately housed, because housing demanded cash, and cash wasn’t always available. That’s a big theme that continues to persist today. Most of the territory’s communities remain “non-market”: there is no housing market. There are different kinds of economies in the North—and not all of them revolve wholly around cash. And yet government policies do. The governments’ ideas about housing do, too. So there’s a conflict there.  The federal exit from social housing After 1969, the federal government devolved housing to the territorial government. The Government of Northwest Territories created the Northwest Territories Housing Corporation. By 1974, the housing corporation took over all the stock of federal housing and started to administer it, in addition to building their own. The housing corporation was rapidly building new housing stock from 1975 up until the mid-1990s. But beginning in the early 1990s, the federal government terminated federal spending on new social housing across the whole country. A couple of years after that, they also decided to allow operational agreements with social housing providers to expire. It didn’t happen that quickly—and maybe not everybody noticed, because it wasn’t a drastic change where all operational funding disappeared immediately. But at that time, the federal government was in 25- to 50-year operational agreements with various housing providers across the country. After 1995, these long-term operating agreements were no longer being renewed—not just in the North, but everywhere in Canada.  With the housing corporation up here, that change started in 1996, and we have until 2038 before the federal contribution of operational funding reaches zero. As a result, beginning in 1996, the number of units owned by the NWT Housing Corporation plateaued. There was a little bump in housing stock after that—another 200 units or so in the early 2000s. But basically, the Northwest Territories was stuck for 25 years, from 1996 to 2021, with the same number of public housing units. In 1990, there was a report on housing in the NWT that was funded by the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation (CMHC). That report noted that housing was already in a crisis state. At that time, in 1990, researchers said it would take 30 more years to meet existing housing need, if housing production continued at the current rate. The other problem is that houses were so inadequately constructed to begin with, that they generally needed replacement after 15 years. So housing in the Northwest Territories already had serious problems in 1990. Then in 1996, the housing corporation stopped building more. So if you compare the total number of social housing units with the total need for subsidized housing in the territory, you can see a severely widening gap in recent decades. We’ve seen a serious escalation in housing need. The Northwest Territories has a very, very small tax base, and it’s extremely expensive to provide services here. Most of our funding for public services comes from the federal government. The NWT on its own does not have a lot of buying power. So ever since the federal government stopped providing operational funding for housing, the territorial government has been hard-pressed to replace that funding with its own internal resources. I should probably note that this wasn’t only a problem for the Northwest Territories. Across Canada, we have seen mass homelessness visibly emerge since the ’90s. This is related, at least in part, to the federal government’s decisions to terminate funding for social housing at that time. Today’s housing crisis Getting to present-day conditions in the NWT, we now have some “market” communities and some “non-market” communities. There are 33 communities total in the NWT, and at least 27 of these don’t have a housing market: there’s no private rental market and there’s no resale market. This relates back to the conflict I mentioned before: the cash economy did not entirely take root. In simple terms, there isn’t enough local employment or income opportunity for a housing market—in conventional terms—to work.  Yellowknife is an outlier in the territory. Economic opportunity is concentrated in the capital city. We also have five other “market” communities that are regional centres for the territorial government, where more employment and economic activity take place. Across the non-market communities, on average, the rate of unsuitable or inadequate housing is about five times what it is elsewhere in Canada. Rates of unemployment are about five times what they are in Yellowknife. On top of this, the communities with the highest concentration of Indigenous residents also have the highest rates of unsuitable or inadequate housing, and also have the lowest income opportunity. These statistics clearly show that the inequalities in the territory are highly racialized.  Given the situation in non-market communities, there is a severe affordability crisis in terms of the cost to deliver housing. It’s very, very expensive to build housing here. A single detached home costs over a million dollars to build in a place like Fort Good Hope (Rádeyı̨lı̨kóé). We’re talking about a very modest three-bedroom house, smaller than what you’d typically build in the South. The million-dollar price tag on each house is a serious issue. Meanwhile, in a non-market community, the potential resale value is extremely low. So there’s a massive gap between the cost of construction and the value of the home once built—and that’s why you have no housing market. It means that private development is impossible. That’s why, until recently, only the federal and territorial governments have been building new homes in non-market communities. It’s so expensive to do, and as soon as the house is built, its value plummets.  The costs of living are also very high. According to the NWT Bureau of Statistics, the estimated living costs for an individual in Fort Good Hope are about 1.8 times what it costs to live in Edmonton. Then when it comes to housing specifically, there are further issues with operations and maintenance. The NWT is not tied into the North American hydro grid, and in most communities, electricity is produced by a diesel generator. This is extremely expensive. Everything needs to be shipped in, including fuel. So costs for heating fuel are high as well, as are the heating loads. Then, maintenance and repairs can be very difficult, and of course, very costly. If you need any specialized parts or specialized labour, you are flying those parts and those people in from down South. So to take on the costs of homeownership, on top of the costs of living—in a place where income opportunity is limited to begin with—this is extremely challenging. And from a statistical or systemic perspective, this is simply not in reach for most community members. In 2021, the NWT Housing Corporation underwent a strategic renewal and became Housing Northwest Territories. Their mandate went into a kind of flux. They started to pivot from being the primary landlord in the territory towards being a partner to other third-party housing providers, which might be Indigenous governments, community housing providers, nonprofits, municipalities. But those other organisations, in most cases, aren’t equipped or haven’t stepped forward to take on social housing. Even though the federal government is releasing capital funding for affordable housing again, northern communities can’t always capitalize on that, because the source of funding for operations remains in question. Housing in non-market communities essentially needs to be subsidized—not just in terms of construction, but also in terms of operations. But that operational funding is no longer available. I can’t stress enough how critical this issue is for the North. Fort Good Hope and “one thing that (kind of) worked” I’ll talk a bit about Fort Good Hope. I don’t want to be speaking on behalf of the community here, but I will share a bit about the realities on the ground, as a way of putting things into context.  Fort Good Hope, or Rádeyı̨lı̨kóé, is on the Mackenzie River, close to the Arctic Circle. There’s a winter road that’s open at best from January until March—the window is getting narrower because of climate change. There were also barges running each summer for material transportation, but those have been cancelled for the past two years because of droughts linked to climate change. Aside from that, it’s a fly-in community. It’s very remote. It has about 500-600 people. According to census data, less than half of those people live in what’s considered acceptable housing.  The biggest problem is housing adequacy. That’s CMHC’s term for housing in need of major repairs. This applies to about 36% of households in Fort Good Hope. In terms of ownership, almost 40% of the community’s housing stock is managed by Housing NWT. That’s a combination of public housing units and market housing units—which are for professionals like teachers and nurses. There’s also a pretty high percentage of owner-occupied units—about 46%.  The story told by the community is that when public housing arrived in the 1960s, the people were living in owner-built log homes. Federal agents arrived and they considered some of those homes to be inadequate or unacceptable, and they bulldozed those homes, then replaced some of them—but maybe not all—with public housing units. Then residents had no choice but to rent from the people who took their homes away. This was not a good way to start up a public housing system. The state of housing in Fort Good Hope Then there was an issue with the rental rates, which drastically increased over time. During a presentation to a government committee in the ’80s, a community member explained that they had initially accepted a place in public housing for a rental fee of $2 a month in 1971. By 1984, the same community member was expected to pay $267 a month. That might not sound like much in today’s terms, but it was roughly a 13,000% increase for that same tenant—and it’s not like they had any other housing options to choose from. So by that point, they’re stuck with paying whatever is asked.  On top of that, the housing units were poorly built and rapidly deteriorated. One description from that era said the walls were four inches thick, with windows oriented north, and water tanks that froze in the winter and fell through the floor. The single heating source was right next to the only door—residents were concerned about the fire hazard that obviously created. Ultimately the community said: “We don’t actually want any more public housing units. We want to go back to homeownership, which was what we had before.”  So Fort Good Hope was a leader in housing at that time and continues to be to this day. The community approached the territorial government and made a proposal: “Give us the block funding for home construction, we’ll administer it ourselves, we’ll help people build houses, and they can keep them.” That actually worked really well. That was the start of the Homeownership Assistance Program (HAP) that ran for about ten years, beginning in 1982. The program expanded across the whole territory after it was piloted in Fort Good Hope. The HAP is still spoken about and written about as the one thing that kind of worked.  Self-built log cabins remain from Fort Good Hope’s 1980s Homeownership Program (HAP). Funding was cost-shared between the federal and territorial governments. Through the program, material packages were purchased for clients who were deemed eligible. The client would then contribute their own sweat equity in the form of hauling logs and putting in time on site. They had two years to finish building the house. Then, as long as they lived in that home for five more years, the loan would be forgiven, and they would continue owning the house with no ongoing loan payments. In some cases, there were no mechanical systems provided as part of this package, but the residents would add to the house over the years. A lot of these units are still standing and still lived in today. Many of them are comparatively well-maintained in contrast with other types of housing—for example, public housing units. It’s also worth noting that the one-time cost of the materials package was—from the government’s perspective—only a fraction of the cost to build and maintain a public housing unit over its lifespan. At the time, it cost about $50,000 to $80,000 to build a HAP home, whereas the lifetime cost of a public housing unit is in the order of $2,000,000. This program was considered very successful in many places, especially in Fort Good Hope. It created about 40% of their local housing stock at that time, which went from about 100 units to about 140. It’s a small community, so that’s quite significant.  What were the successful principles? The community-based decision-making power to allocate the funding. The sweat equity component, which brought homeownership within the range of being attainable for people—because there wasn’t cash needing to be transferred, when the cash wasn’t available. Local materials—they harvested the logs from the land, and the fact that residents could maintain the homes themselves. The Fort Good Hope Construction Centre. Rendering by Taylor Architecture Group The Fort Good Hope Construction Centre The HAP ended the same year that the federal government terminated new spending on social housing. By the late 1990s, the creation of new public housing stock or new homeownership units had gone down to negligible levels. But more recently, things started to change. The federal government started to release money to build affordable housing. Simultaneously, Indigenous governments are working towards Self-Government and settling their Land Claims. Federal funds have started to flow directly to Indigenous groups. Given these changes, the landscape of Northern housing has started to evolve. In 2016, Fort Good Hope created the K’asho Got’ine Housing Society, based on the precedent of the 1980s Fort Good Hope Housing Society. They said: “We did this before, maybe we can do it again.” The community incorporated a non-profit and came up with a five-year plan to meet housing need in their community. One thing the community did right away was start up a crew to deliver housing maintenance and repairs. This is being run by Ne’Rahten Developments Ltd., which is the business arm of Yamoga Land Corporation (the local Indigenous Government). Over the span of a few years, they built up a crew of skilled workers. Then Ne’Rahten started thinking, “Why can’t we do more? Why can’t we build our own housing?” They identified a need for a space where people could work year-round, and first get training, then employment, in a stable all-season environment. This was the initial vision for the Fort Good Hope Construction Centre, and this is where TAG got involved. We had some seed funding through the CMHC Housing Supply Challenge when we partnered with Fort Good Hope. We worked with the community for over a year to get the capital funding lined up for the project. This process required us to take on a different role than the one you typically would as an architect. It wasn’t just schematic-design-to-construction-administration. One thing we did pretty early on was a housing design workshop that was open to the whole community, to start understanding what type of housing people would really want to see. Another piece was a lot of outreach and advocacy to build up support for the project and partnerships—for example, with Housing Northwest Territories and Aurora College. We also reached out to our federal MP, the NWT Legislative Assembly and different MLAs, and we talked to a lot of different people about the link between employment and housing. The idea was that the Fort Good Hope Construction Centre would be a demonstration project. Ultimately, funding did come through for the project—from both CMHC and National Indigenous Housing Collaborative Inc. The facility itself will not be architecturally spectacular. It’s basically a big shed where you could build a modular house. But the idea is that the construction of those houses is combined with training, and it creates year-round indoor jobs. It intends to combat the short construction seasons, and the fact that people would otherwise be laid off between projects—which makes it very hard to progress with your training or your career. At the same time, the Construction Centre will build up a skilled labour force that otherwise wouldn’t exist—because when there’s no work, skilled people tend to leave the community. And, importantly, the idea is to keep capital funding in the community. So when there’s a new arena that needs to get built, when there’s a new school that needs to get built, you have a crew of people who are ready to take that on. Rather than flying in skilled labourers, you actually have the community doing it themselves. It’s working towards self-determination in housing too, because if those modular housing units are being built in the community, by community members, then eventually they’re taking over design decisions and decisions about maintenance—in a way that hasn’t really happened for decades. Transitional homeownership My research also looked at a transitional homeownership model that adapts some of the successful principles of the 1980s HAP. Right now, in non-market communities, there are serious gaps in the housing continuum—that is, the different types of housing options available to people. For the most part, you have public housing, and you have homelessness—mostly in the form of hidden homelessness, where people are sleeping on the couches of relatives. Then, in some cases, you have inherited homeownership—where people got homes through the HAP or some other government program. But for the most part, not a lot of people in non-market communities are actually moving into homeownership anymore. I asked the local housing manager in Fort Good Hope: “When’s the last time someone built a house in the community?” She said, “I can only think of one person. It was probably about 20 years ago, and that person actually went to the bank and got a mortgage. If people have a home, it’s usually inherited from their parents or from relatives.” And that situation is a bit of a problem in itself, because it means that people can’t move out of public housing. Public housing traps you in a lot of ways. For example, it punishes employment, because rent is geared to income. It’s been said many times that this model disincentivizes employment. I was in a workshop last year where an Indigenous person spoke up and said, “Actually, it’s not disincentivizing, it punishes employment. It takes things away from you.” Somebody at the territorial housing corporation in Yellowknife told me, “We have clients who are over the income threshold for public housing, but there’s nowhere else they can go.” Theoretically, they would go to the private housing market, they would go to market housing, or they would go to homeownership, but those options don’t exist or they aren’t within reach.  So the idea with the transitional homeownership model is to create an option that could allow the highest income earners in a non-market community to move towards homeownership. This could take some pressure off the public housing system. And it would almost be like a wealth distribution measure: people who are able to afford the cost of operating and maintaining a home then have that option, instead of remaining in government-subsidized housing. For those who cannot, the public housing system is still an option—and maybe a few more public housing units are freed up.  I’ve developed about 36 recommendations for a transitional homeownership model in northern non-market communities. The recommendations are meant to be actioned at various scales: at the scale of the individual household, the scale of the housing provider, and the scale of the whole community. The idea is that if you look at housing as part of a whole system, then there are certain moves that might make sense here—in a non-market context especially—that wouldn’t make sense elsewhere. So for example, we’re in a situation where a house doesn’t appreciate in value. It’s not a financial asset, it’s actually a financial liability, and it’s something that costs a lot to maintain over the years. Giving someone a house in a non-market community is actually giving them a burden, but some residents would be quite willing to take this on, just to have an option of getting out of public housing. It just takes a shift in mindset to start considering solutions for that kind of context. One particularly interesting feature of non-market communities is that they’re still functioning with a mixed economy: partially a subsistence-based or traditional economy, and partially a cash economy. I think that’s actually a strength that hasn’t been tapped into by territorial and federal policies. In the far North, in-kind and traditional economies are still very much a way of life. People subsidize their groceries with “country food,” which means food that was harvested from the land. And instead of paying for fuel tank refills in cash, many households in non-market communities are burning wood as their primary heat source. In communities south of the treeline, like Fort Good Hope, that wood is also harvested from the land. Despite there being no exchange of cash involved, these are critical economic activities—and they are also part of a sustainable, resilient economy grounded in local resources and traditional skills. This concept of the mixed economy could be tapped into as part of a housing model, by bringing back the idea of a ‘sweat equity’ contribution instead of a down payment—just like in the HAP. Contributing time and labour is still an economic exchange, but it bypasses the ‘cash’ part—the part that’s still hard to come by in a non-market community. Labour doesn’t have to be manual labour, either. There are all kinds of work that need to take place in a community: maybe taking training courses and working on projects at the Construction Centre, maybe helping out at the Band Office, or providing childcare services for other working parents—and so on. So it could be more inclusive than a model that focuses on manual labour. Another thing to highlight is a rent-to-own trial period. Not every client will be equipped to take on the burdens of homeownership. So you can give people a trial period. If it doesn’t work out and they can’t pay for operations and maintenance, they could continue renting without losing their home. Then it’s worth touching on some basic design principles for the homeownership units. In the North, the solutions that work are often the simplest—not the most technologically innovative. When you’re in a remote location, specialized replacement parts and specialized labour are both difficult to come by. And new technologies aren’t always designed for extreme climates—especially as we trend towards the digital. So rather than installing technologically complex, high-efficiency systems, it actually makes more sense to build something that people are comfortable with, familiar with, and willing to maintain. In a southern context, people suggest solutions like solar panels to manage energy loads. But in the North, the best thing you can do for energy is put a woodstove in the house. That’s something we’ve heard loud and clear in many communities. Even if people can’t afford to fill their fuel tank, they’re still able to keep chopping wood—or their neighbour is, or their brother, or their kid, and so on. It’s just a different way of looking at things and a way of bringing things back down to earth, back within reach of community members.  Regulatory barriers to housing access: Revisiting the National Building Code On that note, there’s one more project I’ll touch on briefly. TAG is working on a research study, funded by Housing, Infrastructure and Communities Canada, which looks at regulatory barriers to housing access in the North. The National Building Code (NBC) has evolved largely to serve the southern market context, where constraints and resources are both very different than they are up here. Technical solutions in the NBC are based on assumptions that, in some cases, simply don’t apply in northern communities. Here’s a very simple example: minimum distance to a fire hydrant. Most of our communities don’t have fire hydrants at all. We don’t have municipal services. The closest hydrant might be thousands of kilometres away. So what do we do instead? We just have different constraints to consider. That’s just one example but there are many more. We are looking closely at the NBC, and we are also working with a couple of different communities in different situations. The idea is to identify where there are conflicts between what’s regulated and what’s actually feasible, viable, and practical when it comes to on-the-ground realities. Then we’ll look at some alternative solutions for housing. The idea is to meet the intent of the NBC, but arrive at some technical solutions that are more practical to build, easier to maintain, and more appropriate for northern communities.  All of the projects I’ve just described are fairly recent, and very much still ongoing. We’ll see how it all plays out. I’m sure we’re going to run into a lot of new barriers and learn a lot more on the way, but it’s an incremental trial-and-error process. Even with the Construction Centre, we’re saying that this is a demonstration project, but how—or if—it rolls out in other communities would be totally community-dependent, and it could look very, very different from place to place.  In doing any research on Northern housing, one of the consistent findings is that there is no one-size-fits-all solution. Northern communities are not all the same. There are all kinds of different governance structures, different climates, ground conditions, transportation routes, different population sizes, different people, different cultures. Communities are Dene, Métis, Inuvialuit, as well as non-Indigenous, all with different ways of being. One-size-fits-all solutions don’t work—they never have. And the housing crisis is complex, and it’s difficult to unravel. So we’re trying to move forward with a few different approaches, maybe in a few different places, and we’re hoping that some communities, some organizations, or even some individual people, will see some positive impacts.  As appeared in the June 2025 issue of Canadian Architect magazine  The post Insites: Addressing the Northern housing crisis appeared first on Canadian Architect.

In Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Parks in California, trees that have persisted through rain and shine for thousands of years are now facing multiple threats triggered by a changing climate. Scientists and park managers once thought giant sequoia forests were nearly impervious to stressors like wildfire, drought and pests. Yet, even very large trees are proving vulnerable, particularly when those stressors are amplified by rising temperatures and increasing weather extremes. The rapid pace of climate change—combined with threats like the spread of invasive species and diseases—can affect ecosystems in ways that defy expectations based on past experiences. As a result, Western forests are transitioning to grasslands or shrublands after unprecedented wildfires. Woody plants are expanding into coastal wetlands. Coral reefs are being lost entirely. To protect these places, which are valued for their natural beauty and the benefits they provide for recreation, clean water and wildlife, forest and land managers increasingly must anticipate risks they have never seen before. And they must prepare for what those risks will mean for stewardship as ecosystems rapidly transform. As ecologists and a climate scientist, we’re helping them figure out how to do that. Managing changing ecosystems Traditional management approaches focus on maintaining or restoring how ecosystems looked and functioned historically. However, that doesn’t always work when ecosystems are subjected to new and rapidly shifting conditions. Ecosystems have many moving parts—plants, animals, fungi, and microbes; and the soil, air and water in which they live—that interact with one another in complex ways. When the climate changes, it’s like shifting the ground on which everything rests. The results can undermine the integrity of the system, leading to ecological changes that are hard to predict. To plan for an uncertain future, natural resource managers need to consider many different ways changes in climate and ecosystems could affect their landscapes. Essentially, what scenarios are possible? Preparing for multiple possibilities At Sequoia and Kings Canyon, park managers were aware that climate change posed some big risks to the iconic trees under their care. More than a decade ago, they undertook a major effort to explore different scenarios that could play out in the future. It’s a good thing they did, because some of the more extreme possibilities they imagined happened sooner than expected. In 2014, drought in California caused the giant sequoias’ foliage to die back, something never documented before. In 2017, sequoia trees began dying from insect damage. And, in 2020 and 2021, fires burned through sequoia groves, killing thousands of ancient trees. While these extreme events came as a surprise to many people, thinking through the possibilities ahead of time meant the park managers had already begun to take steps that proved beneficial. One example was prioritizing prescribed burns to remove undergrowth that could fuel hotter, more destructive fires. The key to effective planning is a thoughtful consideration of a suite of strategies that are likely to succeed in the face of many different changes in climates and ecosystems. That involves thinking through wide-ranging potential outcomes to see how different strategies might fare under each scenario—including preparing for catastrophic possibilities, even those considered unlikely. For example, prescribed burning may reduce risks from both catastrophic wildfire and drought by reducing the density of plant growth, whereas suppressing all fires could increase those risks in the long run. Strategies undertaken today have consequences for decades to come. Managers need to have confidence that they are making good investments when they put limited resources toward actions like forest thinning, invasive species control, buying seeds or replanting trees. Scenarios can help inform those investment choices. Constructing credible scenarios of ecological change to inform this type of planning requires considering the most important unknowns. Scenarios look not only at how the climate could change, but also how complex ecosystems could react and what surprises might lay beyond the horizon. Scientists at the North Central Climate Adaptation Science Center are collaborating with managers in the Nebraska Sandhills to develop scenarios of future ecological change under different climate conditions, disturbance events like fires and extreme droughts, and land uses like grazing. [Photos: T. Walz, M. Lavin, C. Helzer, O. Richmond, NPS (top to bottom)., CC BY] Key ingredients for crafting ecological scenarios To provide some guidance to people tasked with managing these landscapes, we brought together a group of experts in ecology, climate science, and natural resource management from across universities and government agencies. We identified three key ingredients for constructing credible ecological scenarios: 1. Embracing ecological uncertainty: Instead of banking on one “most likely” outcome for ecosystems in a changing climate, managers can better prepare by mapping out multiple possibilities. In Nebraska’s Sandhills, we are exploring how this mostly intact native prairie could transform, with outcomes as divergent as woodlands and open dunes. 2. Thinking in trajectories: It’s helpful to consider not just the outcomes, but also the potential pathways for getting there. Will ecological changes unfold gradually or all at once? By envisioning different pathways through which ecosystems might respond to climate change and other stressors, natural resource managers can identify critical moments where specific actions, such as removing tree seedlings encroaching into grasslands, can steer ecosystems toward a more desirable future. 3. Preparing for surprises: Planning for rare disasters or sudden species collapses helps managers respond nimbly when the unexpected strikes, such as a severe drought leading to widespread erosion. Being prepared for abrupt changes and having contingency plans can mean the difference between quickly helping an ecosystem recover and losing it entirely. Over the past decade, access to climate model projections through easy-to-use websites has revolutionized resource managers’ ability to explore different scenarios of how the local climate might change. What managers are missing today is similar access to ecological model projections and tools that can help them anticipate possible changes in ecosystems. To bridge this gap, we believe the scientific community should prioritize developing ecological projections and decision-support tools that can empower managers to plan for ecological uncertainty with greater confidence and foresight. Ecological scenarios don’t eliminate uncertainty, but they can help to navigate it more effectively by identifying strategic actions to manage forests and other ecosystems. Kyra Clark-Wolf is a research scientist in ecological transformation at the University of Colorado Boulder. Brian W. Miller is a research ecologist at the U.S. Geological Survey. Imtiaz Rangwala is a research scientist in climate at the Cooperative Institute for Research in Environmental Sciences at the University of Colorado Boulder. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

May 30, 20252 min readLawmakers Form First Extreme Heat Caucus, Citing ‘Deadly Risk’The House of Representatives’ first caucus to address extreme heat is being launched by a Democrat from the Southwest and a Republican from the NortheastBy Ariel Wittenberg & E&E News A construction worker in Folsom, Calif., during a July 2024 heatwave that brought daytime highs of 110 degrees Fahrenheit. David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty ImagesCLIMATEWIRE | An Arizona Democrat and a New York Republican are teaming up to form the Congressional Extreme Heat Caucus in an attempt to find bipartisan solutions for deadly temperatures.“We hope this caucus can make sure the United States is better prepared for the inevitable increase in temperatures, not just in Arizona and the Southwest but all across the country,” Arizona Rep. Greg Stanton (D) said in an interview.He's creating the caucus with New York Rep. Mike Lawler, a moderate Republican who bucked his party last year by expressing support for the nation's first proposed regulation to protect workers from heat by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.On supporting science journalismIf you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.“Extreme heat kills more Americans each year than any other weather event — over 1,300 lives lost, including 570 in New York alone — and it’s a growing threat to the Hudson Valley,” Lawler said in a statement. “That’s why I’m co-chairing the Heat Caucus to drive real solutions, raise awareness, and protect our communities from this deadly risk.”Stanton said he was excited to team up with Lawler, who understands that heat jeopardizes health even in northern climates.“He is from New York and I’m proud he recognizes how heat is important for workers,” he said.The caucus will be open to House lawmakers who have bipartisan ideas for addressing extreme heat. Noting that many Republicans have slammed OSHA's proposed heat rule, Stanton said the caucus doesn't have to find consensus on every policy, but members should be willing to search for common ground."It is important to have that conversation on what we can come together and agree on because that's how we get legislation passed in this town, even if we don't agree on how far to go," he said.Lawler and Stanton teamed up earlier this spring to protest workforce reductions at the Department of Health and Human Services that could degrade heat-related programs.In April, the pair wrote a letter to Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., protesting layoffs that purged the entire staff of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s Division of Environmental Health Science and Practice as well as the Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program, which helps families pay for heating and cooling.“As we head into another summer — with projections suggesting 2025 will rank again among the warmest years on record, we cannot afford to limit our ability to counter the impacts of extreme heat,” they wrote in April with nine other lawmakers.Among the caucus' priorities is making LIHEAP funding more evenly distributed to southern states to help pay for cooling assistance. The program was initially created to help low-income families pay their heating bills during winter, and the majority of its funding still goes toward cold-weather states.“We have had too many deaths of people in their homes because they are unable to access programs that would help them access air conditioning,” Stanton said.Reprinted from E&E News with permission from POLITICO, LLC. Copyright 2025. E&E News provides essential news for energy and environment professionals.

In today’s homes, the boundaries between indoors and outdoors are becoming beautifully blurred, and courtyard design plays a key role in that transformation. No longer just decorative pockets of greenery, modern courtyards are fully integrated living spaces that bring natural light, fresh air, and a sense of calm right into the heart of the home. Whether you live in a city apartment or a suburban retreat, a well-designed courtyard can create flow, function, and serenity. It becomes more than an outdoor space, it becomes a natural extension of your daily life. In this guide, we’ll explore practical, creative courtyard design ideas that help you connect your interior with the outdoors. From lush garden rooms to cozy side patios, each idea is crafted to inspire a home that feels open, grounded, and alive. 1. Open-Plan Layouts That Frame the Courtyard Image Source: The Architect Diary An open-plan layout that wraps around a courtyard transforms the entire home experience. By strategically positioning living areas,like the kitchen, living room, or dining space,around an open-air courtyard, the outdoors becomes an organic extension of your indoor life. Floor-to-ceiling windows or sliding doors allow natural light and garden views to flow freely. This setup not only maximizes the courtyard’s visibility but also encourages daily use, blurring the lines between inside and outside. It’s especially effective in warmer climates, where fresh air and sunlight can be enjoyed year-round. This courtyard design creates a social hub and a serene retreat in one integrated space. 2. Use Vertical Space for Planting Image Source: HomesandGardens When square footage is limited, think upward. Using vertical space in your courtyard lets you enjoy lush greenery without compromising walkability or functionality. Wall-mounted planters, trellises, living green walls, and tiered shelves can host herbs, flowers, or trailing vines. This strategy not only maximizes planting room but also adds visual depth and texture. It’s ideal for urban courtyards or narrow side patios, where ground planting space is scarce. Vertical gardening also draws the eye upward, creating a sense of openness and scale. With thoughtful positioning, these green walls can mirror or complement interior design features, further connecting your indoor and outdoor worlds.  3. Water Features to Add Tranquility Image Source: Houzz A water feature, whether a bubbling fountain, koi pond, or minimalist wall cascade,adds peace and movement to your courtyard design. The gentle sound of flowing water soothes the mind and masks urban noise, turning the space into a true sanctuary. Water also reflects light and greenery, adding a dynamic visual layer. Compact courtyards benefit especially from wall-mounted or vertical designs, which save floor space while enhancing ambiance. Water features pair well with lush plants and stone elements for a naturalistic setting. Plus, they bring an added cooling effect in warmer climates. It’s a small feature with big sensory benefits. 4. French-Style Courtyard Image Source: The Spruce A French-style courtyard adds classic romance and timeless charm to your home. These courtyards often feature symmetrical layouts, gravel pathways, wrought iron furniture, climbing vines, and a central focal point like a fountain or statue. Boxwood hedges and potted lavender or citrus trees evoke the ambiance of a Parisian garden café. Ideal for homes with European-inspired architecture, this courtyard design feels elegant yet grounded. French-style courtyards blend effortlessly with interiors that favor neutral palettes, antiques, and organic materials. Even in modern homes, this style offers a sophisticated counterpoint to sleek lines. It’s a refined yet welcoming space that makes every day feel like a getaway. 5. Don’t Overcomplicate Your Space Image Source: HomesandGardens When it comes to courtyard design, simplicity often wins. Trying to incorporate too many features, like oversized furniture, mixed themes, or excessive décor,can make even a spacious courtyard feel cramped or chaotic. Instead, focus on clear, functional zones: a place to sit, a patch of green, perhaps one focal point like a water feature or tree. Neutral tones and natural textures help create a calm, cohesive atmosphere. Minimalism doesn’t mean boring, it means intentional. By keeping the design clean and uncluttered, your courtyard becomes a restful extension of your home, not an overstimulating departure from it. Simplicity creates harmony and usability. 6. Introduce Outdoor Lighting Image Source: HomesandGardens Outdoor lighting is essential for enjoying your courtyard after dark and for enhancing safety, mood, and aesthetics. Use layered lighting: overhead string lights or sconces for ambient glow, path lights for navigation, and accent lights to highlight plants or architectural details. Solar-powered options make installation easy and eco-friendly. Smart lighting systems let you control brightness or color temperature from your phone. Choose fixtures that echo your home’s interior style,modern, rustic, or industrial,for cohesion. Well-designed lighting doesn’t just extend courtyard use into the night,it also turns the space into a visual feature from inside, contributing to a seamless indoor-outdoor design. 7. Use Exaggerated Verticals to Maximize Space Image Source: Living get In courtyards with limited square footage, exaggerating vertical elements can dramatically expand the visual experience. Tall hedges, statement sculptures, narrow water walls, or climbing plants draw the eye upward, giving a sense of height and airiness. This is particularly useful in enclosed or urban settings where lateral space is tight. Pair vertical lines with mirrored surfaces or slim lighting fixtures for added effect. Inside, echo this verticality with tall windows or vertically stacked shelves that overlook the courtyard. These upward design cues establish continuity and give the entire area a modern, architectural flair while making it feel larger and more open. 8. Side Patio Courtyard Image Source: The Spruce A side patio courtyard is a smart solution for homes with narrow or awkwardly shaped outdoor areas. Tucked alongside the house, this type of courtyard can become a cozy, private retreat or a secondary dining and lounge zone. Maximize the space with slim furniture, vertical planting, and clean lines. Use glass doors or large windows to open interior rooms,like a kitchen or hallway,directly onto the courtyard, improving light flow and visibility. Even modest side courtyards can feel spacious when thoughtfully designed. With the right layout and materials, they become stylish outdoor rooms that serve as peaceful escapes or vibrant entertaining spots. 9. Built-In Benches or Daybeds Image Source: BetterHomes&gGardens Built-in benches or daybeds are functional and beautiful additions to any courtyard. These features maximize space and invite relaxation without cluttering the area with bulky furniture. Often integrated into low walls or along garden beds, they offer a clean, minimalist look while providing ample seating. Top them with weather-resistant cushions and fabrics in colors that echo your interior for design harmony. A daybed turns your courtyard into a sunlit lounge, ideal for reading or napping. Built-ins also make cleaning and maintenance easier and can be customized to fit awkward corners. Their permanence gives your courtyard design a polished, intentional finish. 10. Backyard Turned Courtyard Image Source: Living get If your backyard feels underused or too open, consider transforming a portion of it into a courtyard. You can define the space by adding partial walls, fencing, or tall plantings like bamboo or hedges to create a sense of enclosure. Incorporate a central feature such as a tree, water fountain, or fire pit to anchor the space. Add comfortable seating, outdoor rugs, and potted plants to bring warmth and purpose. This approach turns a generic backyard into a functional, intimate zone,perfect for reading, relaxing, or hosting. A backyard courtyard offers structure while preserving openness, giving your outdoor area new life. 11. Bring the Inside Out Image Source: HomesandGardens To achieve true indoor-outdoor harmony, replicate the feel of your interior design in the courtyard. Choose outdoor furnishings that mirror your indoor color palette, materials, and style. For example, use similar wood tones, textiles, and decorative elements like lanterns or throw pillows. Outdoor rugs, weatherproof sofas, and even coffee tables can make your courtyard feel like a living room under the sky. Add art, mirrors, or bookshelves with planters to soften the transition. This strategy helps the courtyard feel like a true continuation of your home rather than a separate zone. It enhances comfort, flow, and everyday livability. 12. Indoor Courtyard Turned Private Garden Image Source: Architectural design An indoor courtyard can become a hidden garden sanctuary with the right design approach. Enclosed or semi-enclosed by glass or open ceilings, these courtyards are perfect for curated greenery, from ferns and moss to small trees or flowering vines. Add gravel paths, benches, or a water feature to create a peaceful retreat visible from multiple rooms. This setup is especially useful in dense urban homes, where privacy is valued. The garden becomes a quiet core for reflection and relaxation, away from the outside world. It not only improves aesthetics but also enhances indoor air quality and emotional wellness. 16. Multipurpose Courtyard Space Image Source: Architectural design Why settle for just one use? Design your courtyard to serve multiple functions,such as a morning coffee nook, a kids’ play zone, or an evening yoga space. Use movable furniture, foldable tables, or modular seating that can be reconfigured as needed. Zone the area with rugs or planters to subtly divide uses without crowding the space. This flexible approach makes the courtyard dynamic and relevant to all members of the household. It’s especially useful in smaller homes where every square meter matters. A multipurpose courtyard adapts with your day, making it not just beautiful, but deeply practical. 17. Courtyard with Kitchen Access Image Source: Decorpad One of the most functional courtyard design ideas is positioning it directly off the kitchen. This setup makes alfresco dining a breeze and encourages more frequent use of the outdoor space. Add a BBQ grill, outdoor sink, or even a full mini kitchen with countertop space. For seamless service, consider installing a pass-through window or fold-up bar. It’s perfect for entertaining or simply enjoying a quiet breakfast outside. This courtyard becomes a social hub and culinary extension, combining practicality with pleasure. With the right setup, your kitchen and courtyard will work in tandem to elevate daily life. 18. Rustic Mediterranean Courtyard Image Source: Houzz Create the warm, welcoming feel of a Mediterranean escape by combining textured walls, clay pots, terracotta tiles, and flowering plants like bougainvillea or rosemary. Wrought-iron furniture, mosaic tables, and rustic wooden beams bring that sun-soaked, timeless atmosphere to life. Use soft, earthy tones, like sand, stone, and rust, to match your interior and make the courtyard feel grounded. This style blends perfectly with both traditional and bohemian interiors. With some soft lighting and olive trees, your courtyard becomes a rustic retreat that feels far away, even when it’s just a step from your living room. 19. Create a Spa-Like Feel With a Bathroom Courtyard Image Source: Living get Transform your daily routine into a wellness ritual by connecting your bathroom to a serene courtyard. A small, private outdoor space just off the bath or shower instantly adds a spa-like vibe. Think smooth stone pathways, tropical plants, soft lighting, and perhaps a water feature to enhance tranquility. Frosted glass doors or large windows maintain privacy while allowing natural light to pour in. Even a compact courtyard can elevate a bathroom into a peaceful retreat that feels worlds away from daily stress. This seamless connection between your indoor sanctuary and outdoor calm fosters relaxation, mindfulness, and luxurious everyday living Wrap Up  Great home design isn’t just about what happens inside four walls, it’s about how your living spaces connect, flow, and breathe together. Whether it’s a peaceful garden retreat, an alfresco dining space, or a flexible zone for work and play, the right courtyard design creates harmony between indoors and out. At Home Designing , we believe the best homes are the ones that reflect how you live, and how you want to feel. These courtyard ideas are just one way to craft spaces that are not only functional, but deeply personal and inspiring.