Transactions Template JOURNAL OF ENGINEERING RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY, VOLUME 3, ISSUE 2, JUNE 2016 26 Exploring Residents‘ Attitude towards Implementing Housing Design Flexibility in the Gaza Strip Omar S. Asfour 1 , Raghda M. Alsousi 2 1 Department of Architecture, IUG, Gaza, Palestine, e-mail oasfour@iugaza.edu.ps 2 Department of Architecture, IUG, Gaza, Palestine, e-mail raghd489@hotmail.com Abstract—Population density in the Gaza Strip rapidly increases overtime. Considering the limited area of the Gaza Strip, there is a need to rationalise consumption of the limited available housing land. In this context, there is a need for innovative solutions that help increasing housing design efficiency. This study addresses the potential of housing design flexibility as a possible solution. It examines residents‘ attitude towards design flexibility as a starting point in this regard. To achieve this aim, the study carried out a field study based on a questionnaire. The quantitative analysis of the questionnaire leaded to accept the study main assumption that residents are satisfied with the idea of implementing design flexibility in residential spaces and furniture design in order to increase the efficiency of their housing units. This is true regardless several examined variables including income level. Thus, the study recommends implementing design flexibility in the housing market as a strategy that helps rationalization of resources consumption, in addition to securing adequate housing for all. Index Terms— Housing, design flexibility, urban planning, the Gaza Strip. I INTRODUCTION The Gaza Strip is a part of the Palestinian Territories, and is known as the southern governorates. It stretches along the Mediterranean coast with an area of 365 km 2 . Its population is about 1.7 million, distributed over 7 major cities, 20 villages and 8 refugee camps [1]. This Strip experienced different con- secutive political periods, which has negatively affected its stability and development. It has a high density of 4,661 peo- ple per square kilometre [1]. This high density requires careful planning of the different land uses. This includes housing sec- tor, where the increasing need is not met by a sufficient sup- ply, despite the fact that several stakeholders are involved in the housing sector. This includes Ministry of Housing and Public Works (MHPW), Palestinian Housing Council (PHC), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), and Unit- ed Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA). Some statistics [2] suggest that the projected need of hous- ing units in the year 2020 is expected to be about 242,505 housing units. When this figure is compared to the actual number of units supplied in the period from 2011 to the mid of 2013, which is about 15,000 units, it is possible to realise that there is a great annual deficit of about 70%. The deterio- rated economic situation is an additional challenge that re- stricts housing supply. This makes possession of an adequate housing unit a dream for majority of people in Gaza. To over- come the challenge of this increasing housing demand, a con- scious housing planning strategy is required to ensure the highest possible efficiency of housing land utilisation. Hous- ing designers and planners should get involved in this regard. Furthermore, efficiency of housing design and planning is fundamental in the saving of our natural resources, as 50% of the global resources go into construction [3]. Within this context, this paper discusses design flexibility as one possible solution that helps increasing housing design efficiency and, therefore, alleviating housing problem in the Gaza Strip. In general, the term ‗flexibility‘ refers to the use of a space for various purposes without making physical altera- tions, while the term ‗adaptability‘ refers to the ability to adapt the housing environment as user needs change [4]. The main aim of design flexibility is to save area on one hand, and to increase housing utilisation efficiency on the other hand. This helps reducing housing cost. It also promotes the concept of sustainable housing, where the rule of ‗reduce‘ in consumed resources is essential. Moreover, design flexibility is socially important as family grows up by time and becomes in need to satisfy the new requirements and aspirations without essen- tially replacing the housing unit [5]. This flexibility can be noticed in the works of several prominent architects including [6] the domino style of Le Corbusier, the open plan of Mies van der Rohe, the service core of Kenzo Tange, and the capsule housing units of Kisho Kurokawa. A great deal of design flexibility in these works comes from the structural flexibility. Several other ideas can also be implemented to enhance housing design flexibility such as: - Functional swap between spaces. - Reusing a specific space for a new function. - Using the open space strategy. - Zoning modification using movable partitions. - Space expansion. - Using multi-use furniture. - Utilization of the third and fourth dimensions, i.e. volume and time. Omar S. Asfour, and Raghda Alsousi / Exploring Residents‘ Attitude towards Implementing Housing Design Flexibility in the Gaza Strip (2016) 27 It is essential to note that implementation of housing de- sign flexibility doesn‘t means design complexity. Simple ideas may do in this regard. For example, the use of foldable furni- ture can facilitate space multi-functionality. Figure 1 shows an example. In this example, two functional modes of a residen- tial unit are illustrated: day-time and nigh-time modes. It can be noticed that in the day-time mode the bed is folded to offer wider living space. Design flexibility is tackled in several studies. For exam- ple, Altas & Gzsoy [4] investigated the relationship between housing spatial adaptability and flexibility, and user satisfac- tion. They carried out their study with reference to Istanbul, Turkey. The study argued that residential satisfaction on dwelling space is a function of several variables. These in- clude users‘ characteristics and their perception of the space (social parameters), and the physical attributes of this space (physical parameters). Users‘ satisfaction on the space was evaluated using on the basis of 398 samples chosen from 4 different types of 2-bedroom dwellings. The study found that space consciousness in a dwelling is a function of several var- iables such as size, shape, solid and void ratio, furniture type, colour, etc. There is a complex relation between the perceived space and the real dwelling size. In this context, a proper or- ganization of the dwelling space can encourage adaptation and flexibility. Figure 1 Day-time (up) and Night-time (bottom) Functional Modes of a Residential Unit Wong [7] discussed the need of housing design flexibility and adaptability in high density mass housing projects with reference to Hong Kong. Wong argued that without this flexi- bility and adaptability, a great deal of the massive resources invested in these projects may be lost in the future when the need for upgrading arises. Wong analysed the design of 80 public housing units in Hong Kong through a field survey. The survey consisted of face-to-face interviews with residents to document the current situation and the need for any adjust- ments to the design. In addition, the furniture-level configura- tion in each unit was measured and recorded. A set of housing unit plans were produced, and residents‘ suggested alterations were tested including unit size, room size and merging, open- ing location, and shear walls location. The study concluded that a more systematic approach to incorporate spatial config- uration data in the massive housing design process is required. Cao et al. [8] carried out a study to specify the factors that inhibit promotion of skeleton and infill (SI) housing system in China. This system is known for improving residential adapt- ability and flexibility compared to traditional housing con- struction. However, the promotion of this system in China‘s building industry is not common. The study conducted an investigation based on Factor Analysis method. In this con- text, 56 semi-structured interviews were conducted with pio- neer enterprises, research institutions and government sectors in the country. In addition, 167 questionnaires were distribut- ed to professionals from all relevant stakeholders. The study found that the four major factors that confine the application of SI housing system in China are: costs and benefits, tech- nology and management, industrial chain and enterprise ca- pacity, and policies and regulations. II METHODOLOGY Post occupancy evaluation in housing is usually based on field studies that are based on questionnaires, interviews, and/or special analysis. This study aims to investigate resi- dents‘ satisfaction with the current status of their housing units in terms of satisfying their proposed functional role. The study also aims to investigate residents‘ attitude towards implemen- tation of design flexibility in these units. To fulfil these aims, the study carried out a field study based on a questionnaire. The study then carried out in-depth quantitative analysis to examine and discuss study assumptions, as highlighted below. A. Sampling The targeted population is the households of Gaza city. Gaza city is the main and most densely populated city in the Gaza Strip. Thus, Gaza city is assumed to have a great need for housing flexibility. According to PCBS [9], Gaza city population in 2015 is estimated at 566,331. According to PCBS [1], the average Palestinian family size is 6.2. This means that about 91,343 families live in Gaza city. Consider- ing the conceptual nature of this study, a confidence level of 95%, and a margin of error of 10% are assumed. Thus, a sam- ple size of 96 sampling units is acceptable [10]. A total of 120 Omar S. Asfour, and Raghda Alsousi / Exploring Residents‘ Attitude towards Implementing Housing Design Flexibility in the Gaz a Strip (2016) 28 questionnaires were randomly distributed. Distribution was done in person to ensure high response rate. A total of 111 questionnaires were correctly filled and returned back for analysis. B. Questionnaire Description The questionnaire starts with the personal data of gender, age, qualification, profession, marital status, family size, and income level. This is followed by questions about respond- ent‘s housing unit aspects such as place of residence, housing unit ownership, area, type, number of rooms, and types of these rooms. Then, the main 32 questions are listed in three parts based on five-point Likert scale. These parts are: - Part 1: Functional adequacy of housing unit design: This includes 12 questions to measure this adequacy to the family needs from respondents‘ point of view. - Part 2: The potential of design flexibility in the unit: This includes 10 questions to measure this potential from respondents‘ point of view. - Part 3: The potential of furniture flexibility in the unit: This includes 10 questions to measure this po- tential from respondents‘ point of view. C. Validity and Reliability Firstly, the authors sent the questionnaire to three referees for review. Their comments were considered. Then, they con- ducted a pilot study to examine questionnaire face validity. 10 questionnaires were distributed. It has been found that all questions were clear to the respondents. The study examined questionnaire internal validity using Pearson correlation to ensure that each statement in the questionnaire is well- correlated to the part it belongs to. Structure validity was test- ed too using Pearson correlation to ensure that each part of the questionnaire is well-correlated to the questionnaire as a whole. Correlation coefficients in these two tests were signifi- cant at significance level α ≤ 0.05, which shows that the ques- tionnaire is valid. To examine questionnaire reliability, Cronbach Alpha Coefficient was used. As shown in Table 1, alpha coefficient value is good for parts 1 and 3, and is ac- ceptable for part 2. D. Study Assumptions and Variables Parts 3, 4, and 5 are used to test the following assumptions, respectively: - Assumption 1: The current status of housing unit de- sign satisfies the functional requirements from resi- dents‘ point of view. - Assumption 2: Residents believe that housing design flexibility increases housing utilization efficiency. - Assumption 3: Residents believe that furniture design flexibility increases housing utilization efficiency. The study examined the effect of several variables on the study assumptions mentioned above. These variables are: - The effect of gender using Independent-Samples T- Test. - The effect of age, family size, income, and housing unit area using ANOVA Test. III RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Data collected from respondents was entered and coded properly into SPSS program. The study used Kolmogorov- Smirnov test to examine data normality. Table 1 shows the results obtained. It can be noticed that Sig. value in all ques- tionnaire parts is higher than the significance level of α ≤ 0.05. This indicates that data follows the normal distribution, and that parametric tests can be used in the analysis. Table 1 Cronbach Alpha and Kolmogorov-Smirnov Tests Results Questionnaire Part Cronbach Alpha Coefficients Kolmogorov- Smirnov Sig.-Value Part 1: Functional adequacy of the housing unit design 0.9 0.205 Part 2: Potential of design flexibility in the unit 0.7 0.571 Part 3: Potential of furniture flexibility in the unit 0.8 0.550 A. Sample and Housing Unit Characteristics Sample characteristics were as follows: - Gender: males: 61%, females: 49%. - Marriage status: married: 62.2%, unmarried: 37.8%. - Age: less than 20 years: 0.9%, 20-29: 51%, 30-39: 23.3%, 40-49: 10.6%, 50 and more: 14.2%. It can be noticed that majority of the sample falls within the age 20-39, which is much targeted in the study. - Economic status: low income: 28%, middle income: 38.7%, high income: 33.3%. Respondents‘ current housing unit characteristics were as follows: - Ownership: owned housing: 85%, rented housing: 15%. This supports study aim, where majority of res- idents have more freedom to implement alterations that serve design flexibility. - Housing type: villa: 3.6%, detached house: 34.2%, flat in multi-storey building (less than 7 floors): 54.1%, flat in multi-storey building (7 floors and more): 8.1%. - Housing unit area: less than 100 m2: 12.6%, 100 to less than 130 m 2 : 33.3%, 130 to less than 160 m 2 : 17.1%, 160 to less than 200 m 2 : 22.6%, more than Omar S. Asfour, and Raghda Alsousi / Exploring Residents‘ Attitude towards Implementing Housing Design Flexibility in the Gaza Strip (2016) 29 160 m 2 : 14.4%. The highest percentage can be ob- served in the category 100 to less than 130 m 2 . This area is sufficient for the average Palestinian family but requires good utilization of the space [11]. - Number of bedrooms: one: 1.8%, two: 30.6%, three: 43.2%, four: 19%, more than four: 5.4%. - Availability of guest room: yes: 82%, no: 18%. This could be a reason for the relatively high housing unit area in the Gaza Strip. 40% of respondents who don‘t have a guest room said that they use portable parti- tions in the living room to mind privacy when guest come, while 60% of them said that they use alterna- tive spaces for guests. Table 2 Respondents‘ Answers of the Questions Related to the First Hypothesis No. Statement Mean (0-5) Relative Weight (%) Sig.- value 1. Lobby area in your housing unit is suf- ficient 3.52 70.37 0.00* 2. Bedrooms area is appropriate for the required function and furniture 3.59 71.89 0.00* 3. You have separate bedrooms for girls and boys 3.67 73.45 0.00* 4. Bedroom area is sufficient for each cat- egory (girls/boys) 3.58 71.59 0.00* 5. Kids‘ bedrooms include sufficient area for study and play 3.06 61.12 0.339 6. Kids‘ bedrooms are flexible for future changes 3.01 60.19 0.472 7. Your living room is multi-functional (living, guests, and dining), and its area is sufficient for that 3.81 76.18 0.00* 8. Living room area is sufficient for your family size and furniture 3.83 76.70 0.00* 9. Kitchen area is sufficient for all func- tions and appliances 3.65 72.91 0.00* 10. Kitchen area is sufficient to include additional dining zone 3.03 60.56 0.422 11. There is a main bathroom and addition- al one for guests 3.83 76.51 0.00* 12. You have sufficient area for balconies 3.41 68.15 0.00* All Statements 3.5 70.0 0.00* * Mean is significant at α ≤ 0.05 B. Hypotheses Testing Firstly, the study examined the three main assumptions of the questionnaire. These three assumptions have been rewrit- ten as null hypotheses to facilitate the use of T-test, as follows: - H01 (part 1 of the questionnaire): The current status of housing unit design doesn‘t satisfy the functional re- quirements from residents‘ point of view. - H02 (part 2 of the questionnaire): Implementation of housing design flexibility to increase housing utilisa- tion efficiency is not supported by residents. - H03 (part 1 of the questionnaire): Implementation of furniture design flexibility to increase housing utilisa- tion efficiency is not supported by residents. One-Sample T test was used to examine the above- mentioned three hypotheses. Mean value of respondents‘ an- swers on each statement was estimated. Then, the total Mean of the questionnaire part was estimated. One-Sample T-test was used to find out if there is a statistically significant differ- ence between this total Mean and the mid value of the five- point Likert scale, i.e. 3, or between the total Relative Weight and the value 60%. As shown in Tables 2, 3, and 4, the total Sig. value for the three parts is less than the significance level (0.05). This means that the three null hypotheses can‘t be ac- cepted. Alternative hypotheses are accepted instead as fol- lows. Table 2 shows that the following hypothesis is accepted: ―the current status of housing unit design satisfies the func- tional requirements from residents’ point of view.‖ The total mean is 3.5 and relative weight is 70%. Although this is not a high score, it is statistically significant considering sig-value (0.0<0.05). In addition, Table 2 shows the following observations: Omar S. Asfour, and Raghda Alsousi / Exploring Residents‘ Attitude towards Implementing Housing Design Flexibility in the Gaz a Strip (2016) 30 - Statement 3 shows that most respondents (73.5%) have separate bedrooms for girls and boys in their housing unit. However, the rest don‘t have. When we asked them about this issue, 26.5% said that they make special arrangements, such as using portable mattresses so that some kids can sleep in the living room. However, the rest, i.e. 73.5%, didn‘t mention any special arrangements. - 61.1% of respondents said that kids‘ bedrooms in- clude sufficient area for study and play (statement 5). However, this doesn‘t show statistically significant difference considering sig. value (0.339>0.05). This means that this design aspect requires further im- provement from residents‘ point of view. - Similar to above, 60.2% of respondents said that kids‘ bedrooms are flexible for future changes (statement 6). However, this doesn‘t show statistically signifi- cant difference considering sig. value (0.472>0.05). This means that this design aspect also requires fur- ther improvement to enhance design flexibility in kids‘ bedrooms. - The third aspect that requires further improvement from residents‘ point of view is kitchen area (state- ment 10). 60.6% of respondents said that kitchen area is sufficient to include a dining space. Table 3 Respondents‘ Answers of the Questions Related to the Second Hypothesis No. Statement Mean (0-5) Relative Weight (%) Sig.-value 1. Internal columns form a main obstacle to fu- ture design alterations 3.20 63.96 0.058 2. Open plan is a main advantage that facilitates future design alterations 3.73 74.63 0.00* 3. The possibility of vertical expansion to add new spaces to the housing unit enhances de- sign flexibility, if applicable 3.57 71.35 0.00* 4. It‘s an advantage to give residents more flexi- bility in changing spaces functions 3.99 79.82 0.00* 5. The use of adaptable partitions such as sliding doors and panels is better than the fixed ones 3.74 74.73 0.00* 6. Merging similar functions, such as living, guest and dining rooms, in one space helps enhancing design flexibility 3.46 69.19 0.00* 7. It is possible to designate two different func- tions to a space in day and night times. 3.28 65.56 0.00* 8. Multi-functional spaces reduce housing cost 3.42 68.47 0.00* 9. The possibility of horizontal expansion to add new spaces to the housing unit enhances de- sign flexibility, if applicable 3.87 77.45 0.00* 10. The use of studio housing units for the new families is practical, given that they will move to a larger one when family size increases 3.67 73.45 0.00* All Statements 3.67 73.41 0.00* * Mean is significant at α ≤ 0.05 As for the second hypothesis, Table 3 shows that it is ac- cepted. This hypothesis states that ―implementation of housing design flexibility to increase housing utilization efficiency is supported by residents.‖ The total mean is 3.67 and relative weight is 73.41%. This value is statistically significant con- sidering sig-value (0.0<0.05). In addition, Table 3 shows the following observations: - Respondents agreed on almost all the suggested de- sign flexibility measures. Flexibility in changing spaces functions comes on top (79.8%), which means that spaces shouldn‘t be designed and customized for a single use. - This is supported by other answers such as the use of portable partitions (74.7%), the use of open plan (74.6%), and the use of time dimension by using two different functions to a space in day and night times (65.6%). - 73.5% of respondents believe that the use of studio housing units for new families is practical under the condition that the family will move to a larger one when family size increases. This is important indica- tor since this type of housing is required in the Gaza Strip considering the high need and shortage of hous- ing supply and available urban land. Omar S. Asfour, and Raghda Alsousi / Exploring Residents‘ Attitude towards Implementing Housing Design Flexibility in the Gaza Strip (2016) 31 Finally, Table 4 shows that the third hypothesis is accepted too. This hypothesis states that ―implementation of furniture design flexibility to increase housing utilization efficiency is supported by residents.‖ The total mean is 3.98 and relative weight is 79.6%. This value is the highest score observed in the three hypotheses, which shows respondents‘ support of design flexibility of furniture. This value is also statistically significant considering sig-value (0.0<0.05). In addition, Table 4 shows the following observations: - Respondents agreed on almost all suggested furniture flexibility measures. These measures were illustrated by colour illustrations in the actual questionnaire to ensure that they understand the idea. 89.5% of re- spondents understand that furniture selection is high- ly dependent on housing unit area. Considering hous- ing unit area limitation, 83% of them believe in mul- ti-functional furniture. - Respondents were given six examples on furniture design flexibility. They agreed on them all and results were within the range of 73% to 81.8%. This gives an indication for furniture manufacturers to invest in the field of multi-functional furniture. Some designs in this fields are quite simple and don‘t need high tech- nical capacity or significant cost. Table 4 Respondents‘ Answers of the Questions Related to the Third Hypothesis No. Statement Mean (0-5) Relative Weight (%) Sig.-value 1. You consider easiness of furniture disassem- bly and reassembly as an advantage 4.17 83.42 0.00* 2. Easiness of furniture disassembly and reas- sembly facilitates its portability 3.90 78.02 0.00* 3. You believe in multi-functional furniture 4.15 83.09 0.00* 4. New furniture designs should be introduced to fit small housing areas 4.48 89.54 0.00* 5. Master bedroom can be used as a living room at daytime, e.g. by using a sofa that can be spread to form a bed 3.65 72.97 0.00* 6. Multi-functional designs of kids‘ beds are practical, e.g. beds including study station and storage space. 3.77 75.50 0.00* 7. Multi-functional designs of dining tables are practical, e.g. tables that can be folded and converted to storage chest 3.74 74.77 0.00* 8. The conventional work station can be re- placed by portable one that can be folded down and stored 3.90 78.02 0.00* 9. In living rooms: multi-functional sofas can be used, e.g. for securing storage space 3.89 77.84 0.00* 10. It is practical to fold up the ironing table and use it as a mirror for instance to save storage space 4.09 81.80 0.00* All Statements 3.98 79.6 *0.00 * Mean is significant at α ≤ 0.05 C. Study Variables Testing The study examined the effect of five variables on the three main assumptions, discussed above, as follows: - The effect of gender using Independent-Samples T- Test. - The effect of age, family size, income level, and housing unit area using ANOVA Test. Table 5 shows the effect of gender on the main study as- sumptions using Independent-Samples T-test. The null hy- pothesis suggests that there is no statistically significant dif- ference between the means of male and female answers at significance level α ≤ 0.05. It can be noticed that means of female and male answers are close in the three parts of the questionnaire, which represent the three main assumptions of the study. The differences noticed between male and female answers are statistically insignificant, given that sig-value is higher than the significance level 0.05. Therefore, the following null hypotheses are accepted: - Part 1 of the questionnaire: At significance level 0.05, there is no statistically significant difference between males and females regarding their satisfaction with Omar S. Asfour, and Raghda Alsousi / Exploring Residents‘ Attitude towards Implementing Housing Design Flexibility in the Gaz a Strip (2016) 32 the current status of their housing unit design in terms of functional requirements. - Part 2 of the questionnaire: At significance level 0.05, there is no statistically significant difference between males and females regarding their support of the im- plementation of housing design flexibility to increase housing utilization efficiency. - Part 3 of the questionnaire: At significance level 0.05, there is no statistically significant difference between males and females regarding their support of the im- plementation of furniture design flexibility to in- crease housing utilization efficiency. Table 5 The Effect of Gender on the Main Study Assumptions Using Independent-Samples T-Test Question- naire Part Assumption Means T- Value Sig.- Value Male (μ1) Female (μ2) Part 1 The current status of housing unit design satisfies the functional requirements 3.28 3.49 -1.239 0.218 Part 2 Residents believe that housing design flexibility increases hous- ing utilization efficiency 3.64 3.72 -0.846 0.400 Part 3 Residents believe that furniture design flexibility increases hous- ing utilization efficiency 3.98 4.12 -1.394 0.166 * Means‘ difference is significant at α ≤ 0.05 ** H0: μ1 = μ2 Table 6 shows another set of variables, which are age, fam- ily size, income level, and housing unit area. The aim here is to examine the effect of these variables on the main study assumptions. This was done using Analysis of Variance (One- Way ANOVA Test). The null hypothesis again suggests that there is no statistically significant difference between the three specified means in each variable considering a significance level of α ≤ 0.05. Table 6 shows the following results: - As for age variable, it can be noticed that it has an ef- fect on residents‘ satisfaction with the functional as- pects of their housing units. Observed means for the three examined age categories were between 3.08 and 3.55. This shows statistically significant difference as sig-value is less than the significance level of α ≤ 0.05. Younger people showed more satisfaction with the functional requirements of their housing units. This could be possibly due to the relatively small size of their families. However, this is not the case for the second and third assumptions. Results show that there is no statistically significant difference between the means provided by the different ages at signifi- cance level α ≤ 0.05 regarding their support of hous- ing design and furniture design flexibility. This shows that these ideas are supported by all age categories. - As for family size variable, it can be noticed again that it has no effect on the three assumptions of the study. Results show that there is no statistically sig- nificant difference between the means provided by the different family sizes at significance level α ≤ 0.05. - As for income level variable, it can be noticed that it has an effect on the first assumption, i.e. residents‘ satisfaction with the functional aspects of their hous- ing units. Observed means for the three examined in- come categories were between 2.99 and 3.54. The least value of satisfaction is observed at the lower in- come category. As for the second and third assump- tions, results also show that there is no statistically significant difference between the means provided by the different income categories at significance level α ≤ 0.05. This shows that housing design and furni- ture design flexibility are supported by all income categories. - Finally, the effect of housing unit area is examined. It can be noticed that housing unit area has an effect on the first assumption of the study. Residents‘ satisfac- tion with the functional aspects of their housing units increases as area of the unit increases (from 2.24 to 4.01). This is also true for their support of furniture design flexibility, where people having smaller hous- ing units showed more enthusiasm to the suggested measures. Omar S. Asfour, and Raghda Alsousi / Exploring Residents‘ Attitude towards Implementing Housing Design Flexibility in the Gaza Strip (2016) 33 Table 6 The Effect of Age, Family Size, Income Level, and Housing Unit Area on the Main Study Assump- tions Using ANOVA Test Questionnaire Part/ Assumption Means According to Age F- Value Sig.- Value 29 & less (μ1) 30-39 (μ2) 40 & more (μ3) 1 3.55 3.24 3.08 3.494 0.034* 2 3.75 3.65 3.52 2.457 0.091 3 4.11 4.02 3.89 1.753 0.178 Questionnaire Part/ Assumption Means According to Family Size F- Value Sig.- Value 2-4 (μ1) 5-6 (μ2) 7 & more (μ3) 1 3.28 3.50 3.36 0.562 0.572 2 3.63 3.73 3.68 0.361 0.698 3 3.97 4.09 4.07 0.586 0.558 Questionnaire Part/ Assumption Means According to Income F- Value Sig.- Value Low (μ1) Middle (μ2) High (μ3) 1 2.99 3.48 3.54 4.590 0.012* 2 3.60 3.79 3.59 2.401 0.095 3 3.94 4.11 4.01 1.042 0.356 Questionnaire Part/ Assump- tion Means According to Housing Unit Area F- Value Sig.- Value 100m 2 & less (μ1) 100-159 m 2 (μ2) 160m 2 & more (μ3) 1 2.24 3.28 4.01 28.025 0.000* 2 3.54 3.72 3.69 0.652 0.626 3 4.14 4.14 3.89 3.138 0.018* * Means‘ difference is significant at α ≤ 0.05 ** H0: μ1 = μ2 = μ3 IV CONCLUSION Housing sector in the Gaza Strip faces several challenges. This includes the limited available resources including urban land, the deteriorated economic situation, and the great defi- cit between housing demand and supply. These challenges require housing solutions that help families find adequate housing that respond to their present and future needs. In this context, this study particularly pays attention to the is- sue of housing land consumption and the role of design flex- ibility to rationalise this consumption. Implementing the principle of design flexibility in the Gaza Strip housing sec- tor has been discussed and expanded to include furniture flexibility as well. In this regard, the study carried out a field study based on a questionnaire. The questionnaire examined three assump- tions. The first assumption states that the current status of housing unit design satisfies the functional requirements from residents‘ point of view. The second one states that residents believe that housing design flexibility increases housing utilization efficiency. Similarly, the third one states that residents believe that furniture design flexibility in- creases housing utilization efficiency. The quantitative anal- ysis carried out leaded to accept these three assumptions. This means that residents are generally satisfied with the functional capacity of their housing units. However, they accept ideas that enhance this capacity such as the use of design flexibility and furniture flexibility. Statistical analysis of study variables revealed that design and furniture flexibility is accepted by all the examined cat- egories classified under the gender, age, income level, fami- ly size, and housing unit area. Despite the statistically insig- nificant differences observed within these categories, the principles of design and furniture flexibility seem to be gen- erally accepted in the Gaza Strip. Thus, it is recommended to promote these deign strategies in the local market in order to improve efficiency of housing supply. Furthermore, it is essentially vital for the Gaza Strip to encourage the culture of ‗reduce‘ in natural resources consumption. Considering the scope of this study, this sustainable principle is achieva- ble in the housing sector through implementing the princi- ples of housing design flexibility. This could have a great impact on the housing sector in terms of increasing supply, reducing cost, and improving residents‘ satisfaction towards their housing units. Omar S. Asfour, and Raghda Alsousi / Exploring Residents‘ Attitude towards Implementing Housing Design Flexibility in the Gaz a Strip (2016) 34 REFERENCES [1] PCBS, Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, Condi- tions of Palestinians residing in Palestine. Ramallah: PCBS, 2013. [2] MPWH, Ministry of Public Works and Housing, Hous- ing situation in the Gaza Strip. http://www.mpwh.ps, Retrieved 28/5/2015. [3] O. Asfour, E. Kandeel, ―The Potential of Thermal Insu- lation as an Energy-Efficient Design Strategy in the Ga- za Strip‖. Journal of Engineering Research and Tech- nology, 1 (4), 117-125, 2014. [4] N. E. Altas, A. Gzsoy, ―Spatial Adaptability and Flexi- bility as Parameters of User Satisfaction for Quality Housing‖. Building and Environment 33 (5), 311-323, 1998. [5] M. Prins, The management of building flexibility in the design process: a design decision support model for op- timization of building flexibility in relation to life cycle costs. In: M.P. Nicholson (ed.), Architectural Manage- ment (pp. 65-75), London: E & FN Spon, 1992. [6] W. Tannous, Z. Mouhana, O. Fakoush, ―Design flexibil- ity as one of the most important standards for economic housing‖. Damascus University Journal of Engineering Sciences, 29 (1), 619-638, 2013. [7] J. F. Wong, ―Factors affecting open building implemen- tation in high density mass housing design in Hong Kong‖. Habitat International 34, 174–182, 2010. [8] X. Cao, Z. Li, S. Liu, ―Study on factors that inhibit the promotion of SI housing system in China‖. Energy and Buildings. 88, 384–394, 2015. [9] PCBS, Palestinian Central Bureau of Statistics, Locali- ties in Gaza Governorate by type of locality and popu- lation 2007-2016 estimates. http://pcbs.gov.ps/Portals/_Rainbow/Documents/gza.ht m. Retrieved 6/6/2015. [10] M. Dhamen, Fundamentals of scientific research. Am- man: Dar Al-Massira, 2007. [11] O. Asfour, ―Towards an effective strategy to cope with housing land scarcity in the Gaza Strip as a sustainable development priority‖. Habitat International, 36 (2), 295-303, 2012. Omar Asfour is an Associate Professor of sustainable architecture at Department of Architecture, Islamic University of Gaza. He holds a PhD degree in architecture from the University of Notting- ham, UK. He has a research interest in sustainable architecture, housing policies, energy efficient design, and urban planning. Raghda M. Alsousi is an architect since 2012. She holds a Master degree in architecture from Department of Architecture, Islamic University of Gaza. She has a special interest in furniture design and its relation to architecture. She also has a research interest in Islamic architecture and its integration into the modern context of architecture.