The study investigated the relationship between design and flexibility. Proposals by designers on how to incorporate the ability of buildings to accommodate changes in the requirements of the activities to be housed in buildings over time has led to a diversity of ideas regarding the relationship between suggested design variables and the achieved flexibility. Though a number of studies have been made on specific organisations and buildings, there has been no overall investigation of the general relationship between design and flexibility. To investigate this relationship it was necessary to: 1. Propose a system of measurement by which the extent of incorporation of the design variables in design proposals could be assessed (Chapters II and III). 2. Propose a system of measurement by which the extent of flexibility of buildings in use could be assessed (Chapter IV). 3. Assess the extent of flexibility achieved by the incorporation of design variables in design proposals by a study of actual buildings in use (Chapters V, VI, VII, and VIII). The study has largely achieved these objectives. It provided methods to enable objective comparison to be made between alternative design proposals in terms of the incorporation of design variables. It provided methods to enable objective comparison to be made between buildings in terms of their flexibility in use. It became apparent that the flexibility of buildings in use was related to only certain aspects of design variables or even to only certain parts of buildings. The study demonstrated that the flexibility of buildings in use is largely predictable from knowledge about their design. It showed that current ideas on flexible designs contain many factors that are redundant to flexibility. It recommends that future proposals of designing for flexibility need to be more refined than those at the present and that will enhance the effectiveness of manipulating the potential flexibility of buildings at the design stage. The main area of further research to emerge was concerned with the operationalisation of other design variables and their testing in various building types utilising the methods defined in this study.

Den svenska bostadskrisens utveckling berör hela bostadsmarknaden men främst deresurssvaga hushållen. Anledningen till detta fenomen är att samhällsklyftorna i landet harökat som ett resultat av att inkomstfördelningen i Sverige har förändrats. Glappet mellan derika och de resurssvaga har ökat, men även hushållsställning i de svenska hushållen harförändrats från stora till mindre hushåll. Det finns således ett behov av boende som bemöterde mest grundläggande kraven för en resurssvag individ som är rimliga att hyra ur ettekonomiskt perspektiv. Detta har lett till en efterfrågan för ett bostadssystem som kan bemötabehovet som finns hos dessa resurssvaga grupper. I andra länder kallas detta system förAffordable Housing, men finns inte i Sverige i samma utsträckning. Syftet med denna rapportvar att undersöka hur svenska byggbranschen utvecklingsfond (SBUF) förslag på alternativabostadslösningar, med avsteg från byggregler kan leda till ett sådant bostadssystem.En opinionsundersökning som grundar sig på SBUF:s förslag, utfördes genom enenkätundersökning. För att vidare komplettera denna undersökning har intervjuer medämneskunniga gjorts. Resultatet tyder på att det finns en marknad för bostadslösningar likt deSBUF presenterat, då merparterna av respondenterna i enkätundersökningen ställer sigpositiva till förslagen. Mer specifikt de grupper som har låga inkomster och osäkraboendeformer som andrahandskontrakt och inneboende. Resultatet visar även att detta förslagpotentiellt hade kunnat sänka byggkostnaden genom ett mer flexibelt bostadsbyggande. Islutändan handlar det om hur detta system är motiverat ur ett socioekonomiskt perspektiv, ochhur det på bästa möjliga sätt ska introduceras in i det svenska bostadssystemet. Resultatet somdras ifrån intervjuerna med de ämneskunniga innebär att ett sådant system bör genomföras påett sätt som motverkar segregation. Att förmedla bostäder med alternativa bostadslösningartill resurssvaga kan leda till en kontroversiell diskussion om lägre boendestandard för dessagrupper, men en diskussion som behöver tas. Slutsatsen som kan dras är att SBUF:s förslagkan vara en väg att gå för att inrätta ett system som Affordable Housing, och att det potentielltkan bemöta det behovet av bostad som finns hos dessa resurssvaga hushåll. / The fact that the Swedish housing market is experiencing a housing crisis is widely known. Inparticular, there is a limited range of tenancies, as many of these are converted intocondominiums. This development mainly affects the resource-poor households, as the socialgap in the country has increased, as a result of the change in income distribution in Sweden.The gap between the rich and the resource-poor has increased, but households in Swedenhave also changed from large to smaller households. Thus, there is a need for accommodationthat meets the most basic requirements for a resource-poor individual, which is alsoreasonable to rent from an economic perspective. This has led to a demand for a housingsystem that can meet the needs of these resource-poor groups. In other countries this system iscalled Affordable Housing, but is not etablished in Sweden to the same extent. With this inmind, the purpose of this report is to investigate how SBUF proposes alternative housingsolutions, with the exception of building rules, can lead to such a housing system.As housing concerns people, an opinion poll has been made based on SBUF's proposalthrough a survey. In order to further complete this survey, interviews with subject expertshave been made. The result indicates that there is a market for the housing solutions such asthose SBUF presented, as the respondents in the survey responded positively to the proposal.More specifically, those groups that have low incomes and insecure housing forms as secondhandcontracts and lodger. The result also shows that this proposal could potentially havelowered construction costs through more flexible housing construction. In the end, it is aboutwhether this system is motivated from a socio-economic perspective, and how it should beintroduced in the best possible way into the Swedish housing system. The experts in the fieldclaims that such a system should be implemented in a way that counter segregation.Providing housing with alternative housing solutions to resource-poor households can lead toa controversial discussion of lower housing standards for these groups, but a discussion thatneeds to be taken. The conclusion that can be drawn is that the SBUF's proposal can be a wayof setting up a system such as Affordable Housing, and that it can potentially address the needfor housing that exists within these resource-poor households.