I have a bit of a problem with Maslow’s famous Hierarchy of Need. It’s not that I disagree with his classification of different types of human need, nor his emphasis on the importance of ensuring that all people, everywhere, have a right for their basic physical needs of nutrition, water and safety to be met. But I do wonder whether presenting these, along with other, ‘higher level’ needs as a hierarchy risks condoning inequalities, fragmenting our view of ourselves as human beings, and demeaning those who are less privileged?
The concept that human needs can be classified in different categories is not new; where Abraham Maslow differed from other researchers was in proposing that these categories could be ‘structured in a hierarchy of prepotency and probability of appearance’[1]: physiological needs; safety needs; belongingness or love needs; esteem needs; and the need for self-actualization.[2]
I fear I may be doing Maslow an injustice here.
In his seminal 1943 paper2, Maslow starts by pointing out that
the integrated wholeness of the organism must be one of the foundation stones of motivation theory.
Indeed, he goes on in the paper to point out several limitations and weaknesses of his theory.
Nevertheless, it seems to me that many people use this hierarchy to box off the different aspects of what it means to be a human, rather than seeing that we are, each one of us, a whole person: body, mind, heart and soul. It seems to me a basic fallacy to propose that only once a person’s basic physiological needs are met can he or she realise the next higher safety needs, and only once these are met, the even higher needs of love or belonging, esteem and self-actualisation.
This is not to deny the importance of ensuring that all people, everywhere, have a right to basic survival and safety needs, nor to recognize that we all carry some responsibility when many of our fellow human beings are denied these basic rights.
However, it seems to me that keeping such a focus ignores the inherent worth and agency of every human being, no matter what their circumstances. I would argue that even the most deprived communities and individuals seek relationships with others, self-esteem, and appreciation of beauty. If we recognise that, we will act to empower others whatever their circumstances, to show them respect and dignity, to treat them as our neighbours.
Some of the greatest expressions of
generosity, laughter, fun and creativity I have experienced have been when I have been privileged to spend time with friends living in some of the slum communities of Phnom Penh and Manila.
That sense of belonging and love, of esteem for self and others and of self-actualisation sits hand in hand with the dark reality of poverty, hunger, violence and lack of sanitation. It doesn’t deny the horror of those needs, but it does emphasise that the capacity to tackle them lies as much, if not more, in those who are living in such circumstances, as in those of us who are privileged enough to have those ‘lower level needs’ met. And it teaches me that I cannot go to those living in such realities as a ‘higher level’ human being who carries with him the resources and answers to those needs, but rather as a fellow needy person who has much to learn and receive from my neighbours.
It is with that in mind that I am both troubled and encouraged by a recently published report from ResPublica, A Community Right to Beauty: Giving communities the power to shape, enhance and create beautiful places, developments and spaces.[3]
The authors carried out a community survey (Ipsos-MORI) which demonstrated a striking correlation between individual wealth and access to beauty. Methodological weaknesses aside, they found that 45% of people in social rented property felt that they have access to beautiful places, as opposed to 57% among home owners. It seems to me that this is a simple issue of justice. Let alone the disturbing fact that by implication at least 43% of the population surveyed do not feel they have access to beautiful places, it does seem inherently unjust that those with less financial resources should be denied opportunities to experience beauty.
Beauty is, of course, found in many different, and often surprising places. It depends, in part at least, on our ability to see and appreciate it. But it is also something that we can create and protect for others. It may be found in the natural beauty of our countryside, its woods, hills, rivers and coasts. It may be found in parks and gardens; in the built environment; in gracious buildings and awe-inspiring structures. It may be found in art, in music, in poetry, drama and dance. It may be found in human faces and in children’s play.
In their report, Harvey and Julian call for the recognition of a community right to beauty. They suggest ways in which neighbourhoods, individuals and government can act to enhance beauty and make it more widely available to all. They propose that communities should have the powers to:
- Democratically challenge new development on the grounds of beauty; not in order to prevent development, but to enhance its visual appeal;
- Call for the improvement of derelict, void or unsightly buildings and spaces (including parks, green spaces, plants and trees), and take on the ownership or management of such assets to accelerate this process;
- Protect, maintain and improve local cherished, beautiful buildings and green spaces especially where there is no existing protection in legislation; and
- Genuinely shape, preserve and enhance their local area.
Beauty is at the heart of what it means to create a just society; it is a major contributor to good health and wellbeing, a strong and participative civil society, local economic growth, safe communities and the overall quality of a place… it is a determining factor and key driver behind the nature and ethos of a given community, to personal and communal connections, affiliations and emotions, alongside a wealth of inherent value that cannot be reduced to social and economic analysis. Beauty is also and ultimately a democratic concept; discerned personally and locally. It is central to who we are.
Perhaps if I strive to seek, create, appreciate and share a little more beauty each day, this world will become just a little more beautiful as a result.
[1] Wahba MA & Bridwell LG (1976) Maslow reconsidered: a review of research on the need hierarchy theory. Organizational Behavior and Human Performance. 15 (2): 212-240.
[2] Maslow AH (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review 50(4): 370-396
[3] Harvey A & Julian C (2015). A Community Right to Beauty: Giving communities the power to shape, enhance and create beautiful places, developments and spaces. London: ResPublica. ISBN 978-1-908027-23-8