2.1 Balcony use in a post-pandemic world

During the COVID-19 pandemic, in Portugal and Poland activities (e.g. eating, gathering, reading, etc.) previously practiced in other parts of a dwelling were transferred to the balcony (Duarte et al. 2023). Similar findings were reported in Egypt (ElZein & ElSemary 2022), where the importance of exposure to fresh air and sunlight was also highlighted for pandemic-resilience. Both studies recommended the design of larger balconies that are mindful of privacy. Another study in Egypt (Khalil & Eissa 2022) uncovered an important change in the pattern of use of balconies during the lockdown. From being a ‘forgotten’ asset, the balcony became ‘an essential multi-tasking loose space’ for residents. Design qualities found valuable were also sufficient size and privacy as well as the view, orientation to the wind, shading, safety and quietness. This echoed a study in Iran (Molaei et al. 2021) that found that balcony use is inextricably associated with size, quality of view and safety. Another key design preference stressed in this study is the proximity of the balcony to the living room.

These investigations collectively highlight the importance of balcony design that considers space, privacy and functionality in enhancing experience, wellbeing and use in helping to tolerate difficult conditions in times of lockdown. No follow-up of these studies has been undertaken to the authors’ knowledge to confirm if these changes in use have been maintained or reversed post-pandemic. However, they all suggest that thoughtful balcony design is an essential feature and expectation from residents with regard to high-quality housing design.

Research in Poland (Smektała & Baborska-Narożny 2022) indicates that balconies continue to serve other functions than leisure. This study highlights a potential misunderstanding between developers, designers and users resulting in balconies that inadequately respond to residents’ needs. In a similar landscape, an architectural–anthropological analysis of several case studies explored balcony usage in Copenhagen, Denmark (Stender & Jepsen 2021), and also uncovered that balconies are becoming an extension of the living space for daily activities. Additionally, this study highlights the role of the balcony as a social boundary influencing interactions and blurring the lines between private and public spaces.

2.2 Balcony design in the Finnish context

The Finnish National Building Code (Ministry of the Environment n.d.) outlines balcony design guidelines regarding safety, structural integrity, fire safety and user safety. The danger of children falling was not addressed in the present study as is not considered a significant issue with existing legislative measures effectively mitigating this risk. A key limitation that specifically affects balcony design is fire compartments. Indeed, balconies should be part of a fire compartment to prevent fire from extending through fire-resistant barriers. This generally translates to balconies being compartmented by masonry walls or within sufficient distance to another fire compartment (i.e. a neighbouring balcony or 2 m from neighbouring windows). Furthermore, regulations define a balcony as an ‘unheated outdoor space that is not part of the building floor area’ (Rakennustietosäätiö RTS sr 2018), meaning that this space cannot be airtight, insulated or calculated in building floor area. However, a balcony can be protected with ventilated glazing structures (a 1–3-mm ventilation gap between glass panes). This solution has been implemented since the 1980s, predominantly to increase the usability of the balcony space in a context of Finland’s harsh climate (Heikkilä 1996). Local regulations may also apply to balcony design regarding environmental policy, historical preservation, noise control, accessibility standards and aesthetic guidelines (P. Akola, personal communication, 22 September 2024). It is not known by the researchers if these regulations are only specific to Finland, but they fundamentally shape Finnish balconies, and consequently facades, and the overall design of apartment buildings.

Additional design guidelines (not regulatory) commonly used locally by architects are provided by the building information service in a design card focused on outdoor living (Rakennustieto 2008). It suggests south- and west-facing balconies for warmth and sunlight, a minimum size of 6–8 m², and features such as a partially transparent railings (that enable sight through them) as well as the possibility to accommodate glazing which also should enable ventilation of the apartment during warm periods. Although the use of these guidelines is widespread, their basis is unknown by the authors, and references and authorship are non-existent.

2.3 The case of Finnish glazed balconies

While open balconies also exist in Finland, glazed balconies have become increasingly popular. By 2016, 75% of apartments were glazed (Hilliaho 2017), and it is now standard for new blocks of flats (K. Hilliaho, personal communication, 28 March 2024). Open balconies remain due to technical restrictions or owner preferences (Hilliaho 2017). This prevalence makes glazing a default in Finnish balcony design, complicating comparisons with non-glazed balconies elsewhere because they are either uncommon in Finland or the climatic context is so different.

In Finland, glazed balconies are considered a valuable technical element for housing. For example, studies show that balcony glazing can contribute to energy savings by lowering heating-energy demand in colder seasons (Hilliaho et al. 2015). However, this is case specific and dependent on many factors such as building location, orientation, and technical specificities of the glazing and building itself. Balcony glazing is also one way to control a facade’s moisture exposure, prolonging the service life of reinforced concrete (Mattila 2007).

In 1996, Jari Heikkilä surveyed Finnish people’s experience with balconies. At the time, glazing was a relatively new addition based solely on the advertising of companies with the claim that they extend the seasonal use of the balcony (Heikkilä 1996). The rapid generalisation of such a system spoke for its usefulness, but no investigation of its effect on user experience had been conducted thus far. Heikkilä’s study concludes that almost all glazed balcony owners consider that glazing had increased their balcony’s usability. Most significantly, it had reduced the inconvenience of snow, rain, dust, dirt and noise affecting the balcony space. Glazing did not seem to affect the feeling of privacy, but it extended the balcony use in both spring and autumn and resulted in a general reduction in heat loss and draughts. Nevertheless, some disadvantages were raised regarding glazing by Heikkilä, mainly balcony and apartment overheating in summer. This problem was, however, considered minor, perhaps because 80% of the glazed balcony owners declared having minimally one glass pane open for ventilation during summer. It was also noted that opening and closing the glazing can be difficult. Overall, it was unanimously agreed that the benefits of balcony glazing are worth the money invested.

Hilliaho (2017) concluded that glazing in Finland has no effect on the overheating of glazed balconies in summer if shading and ventilation are implemented. However, good practice on the optimal use of glazing is unknown by Finnish inhabitants in both winter and summer and that this situation should be remedied (Hilliaho et al. 2015).

2.4 Glazed balconies in other contexts

A recent and comprehensive literature review of the impacts of balcony design on the indoor environmental quality (IEQ) of apartments reveals the relevance of glazed balconies in cold climates to exploit the benefits of the microclimatic greenhouse effect to improve thermal comfort and reduce heating energy demand in winter (Ribeiro et al. 2020). However, it also shows that glazed balconies could potentially jeopardise overall IEQ by creating problems of overheating, lack of daylight and air infiltration rate in the main living space and adjacent rooms (Lehtinen et al. 2022, 2024). The conversion of open balconies to glazed balconies was also demonstrated to create thermal discomfort as well as practical usability issues for residents (Camponovo et al. 2006), yet this was the case with fixed window structures unlike the ones typically seen in Finnish balconies.

In the hot climate of Lebanon, Saleh (2015) concluded that although glazing is practically appealing, it has considerable disadvantages in terms of energy efficiency and that it should not be common practice.

Overheating, and consequently thermal discomfort, is associated with higher stress levels, sleep problems and cognitive fatigue (Riva et al. 2022). In warm climates, shading from balcony structures to the apartments below can be positively implemented as a protection against overheating, referred to as the overhang effect (Chan 2015). This outcome, however, may no longer be provided when a glass pane enclosure is added to the outer part of the facade, such as in glazed balconies. For example, a study of glazed balconies in Lebanon shows that a western orientation of balconies of ±30° is to be avoided first and foremost to mitigate additional energy use (cooling demand) and thermal discomfort (Saleh 2015). On the other hand, passive techniques such as shading and ventilation are seemingly effective to avoid overheating (Fernandes et al. 2020; Hilliaho 2017), as long as they are supported by residents’ adaptive behaviour.

Natural light conditions within an apartment were found to be greatly affected by the presence of a balcony (Pelsmakers & Warwick 2022), adversely affecting residents’ wellbeing and energy use. In fact, to achieve corresponding daylight conditions as without a balcony, the window behind a balcony should be significantly larger than an unshaded window, especially as balconies are often placed directly in front of the main living space (Lehtinen et al. 2022). It has been estimated that daylight could be reduced by 30–35% by a balcony structure (sized 1.5 × 2.5 m), and by up to 60% with added glazing structures (Wilson et al. 2000).

Research on glazed balconies, in Finland and globally, has focused on technical aspects (Hilliaho 2017; Mattila 2007; Saleh 2015) and has been translated into sustainability claims (Hurme 2023). Benefits such as energy efficiency, additional usable space and noise reduction make them attractive worldwide, driving industry growth. Although the impact of balconies on user experience in different climates has been investigated (Smektała & Baborska-Narożny 2022; Stender & Jepsen 2021), a notable lack of studies specifically address the user experience of glazed balconies which requires more attention to benefit residents first and foremost.

4.1 Sample participant characteristics and representation

A total of 393 questionnaires were returned and analysed. An overview of the survey sample participant characteristics in comparison with population statistics for Finland is presented in Figure 3.

Of the overall sample, most respondents were female (268; 68%), unlike the Finnish population which is much more equally characterised (Figure 3A). Although the female perspective may be overrepresented in the results, no distinction between gender was made in the analyses.

The households represented were mainly one person (154; 39%) or two persons (135; 34%), with fewer households consisting of three or more persons (Figure 3C), suggesting that participants were most likely not living in overcrowded situations that could have affected their use of balconies.

A large majority of participants have lived in Finland for over 20 years (341; 87%), therefore the responses of this group may be aligned with the long-lasting traditions and culture of Finland (Figure 3F).

The respondents were mainly located in Uusimaa (164; 43%) and Pirkanmaa (114; 30%) regions, which are representative of the two most populated regions in Finland, consisting of 31% and 10% of the population, respectively (Figure 3G). In the survey, other regions each averaged ≤ 5%.

An overview of the survey sample home characteristics is presented in Figure 4.

Of the participants, 337 (86%) lived in apartments, 41 (11%) in a single-family house and a few in other types of homes (Figure 4A). In Finland, almost half the population, or 47%, lives in apartment buildings, which indicates an overrepresentation of people living in an apartment in the survey sample. This could be telling of the interest and bias of said occupants for this survey as opposed to the inhabitants of other types of housing typology.

Most homes represented featured one private balcony (318; 81%), while some had none or other types (Figure 4D). In Finland it is estimated that 1.73 million homes (or 56% of all housing types) have a balcony (M. Ronkainen, personal communication, 15 August 2023), but specific housing types are unclear. Nevertheless, with 47% of the population living in apartments, this research is relevant for the general population.

4.2 Balcony design features

An overview of the survey sample balcony design features is presented in Figure 5.

Most balconies were 4–6 m² (135; 39%) or 7–10 m² (96; 28%) in size (Figure 5A), aligning with the 6–8 m² design guidelines (Rakennustieto 2008). However, many participants wanted larger balconies (Figure 9), indicating potential dissatisfaction, which will be further explored in Section 4.3.3.

The room usually connected to the balcony was the living space (264; 76%) (Figure 5C), which was the clear preference (Figure 11C). Though this is consistent with the sample characteristics and presents a potential bias, it is shown to be most enjoyed by users elsewhere (Molaei et al. 2021).

Balcony orientation (direction of the longer side of the balcony) was primarily towards the south (140; 40%) and the west (110; 32%) (Figure 5D). These orientations are common to take advantage of natural light, and fitting with the design recommendation guidelines (Rakennustieto 2008). Nonetheless, as seen in the previous studies in Lebanon (Saleh 2015) and Finland (Sukanen et al. 2023), orientation presents potential drawbacks such as overheating if passive solutions are not implemented. This is also the most preferred orientation generally (Figure 11B); however, respondents without a balcony have a more favourable opinion for west-facing balconies than respondents with a balcony. This could be indicative of a certain awareness of the drawbacks of west-facing orientations from participants who have balconies.

To provide information on balcony size and proportion, participants chose from five different layouts (Figure 5B) inspired by Aydin & Sayar (2020) and representative of the Finnish building stock where exposed balconies are a largely common type due to the compactness element. The balcony typologies (exposed, recessed, etc.) were partially explored through the balconies’ features (Figure 5E) via the question ‘wall on one side’/‘wall on two sides’. More insights could have been gained by asking participants information directly, before classifying the balconies’ shapes, ratios and typologies.

4.3 Use

Of the subsample having a balcony, a large majority of respondents declared they actively used their balcony (266; 77%), while only a small portion did not use it (58; 17%).

Analyses reveals that balconies on floors four and above are more actively used (Table 1). This could be linked to the overexposure of lower floors to the surrounding environment and more ambiguous boundaries between private and public spheres (Stender & Jepsen 2021). This is supported by the unfavoured idea of the balcony enabling social connections outside the private space as opposed to observing in isolation (Figure 11E). Though no mention of balcony floor is made, this finding is supported by the literature emphasising privacy’s role in balcony usability (ElZein & ElSemary 2022; Smektała & Baborska-Narożny 2022).

Higher balcony use on upper floors may also be due to more fresh air, sunlight and open views, as preferred by respondents (Figure 11A). More generally, preferred views from the balcony were ‘a green area’ and ‘a waterfront’ (Figure 11A), echoing previous studies emphasising the quality of the view associated with use (Khalil & Eissa 2022). Higher floors also correlate with the issue of overheating, which will be further explored in Section 4.3.3.

Larger apartments in the sample generally have larger balconies and balconies > 6 m² are more actively used (Table 1). This suggests that the balcony is not used to relieve the pressure of smaller apartments, unlike the findings of Smektała & Baborska-Narożny (2022). As the sample mostly included smaller households, further research with a different dataset is needed to confirm this finding.

As expected, and partially reflecting the sample representation, orientations showcasing higher active use were south and west. A separate analysis of glazed and non-glazed balconies regarding orientation reveals that overall usability is very similarly distributed for all orientations in both cases. Balconies facing north and other directions are shown to be appreciated elsewhere (Smektała & Baborska-Narożny 2022), and modifying the balcony’s direction could help to enhance privacy (ElZein & ElSemary 2022), which prompts for consideration and is highlighted for further research.

Actively used balconies (Table 1) had similar temporary features as the overall sample (Figure 5) with slightly more plants and sitting arrangement. While it is unclear if these features increase use or result from it, they suggest higher furnishability, essential for long-term adaptability (Smektała & Baborska-Narożny 2022) and pandemic-resilience (Molaei et al. 2021).

To reveal residents’ use and experience of balconies as well as potential problematics, three key themes were applied to the open answers: seasonality, activities and problems preventing use. Each theme outlines key findings with respect to the overall aim of the research, i.e. to reveal the implications of balcony design on residents’ experience, wellbeing and the way they use balconies.

4.3.1 Seasonality

Participants were asked to describe shortly when they might usually use their balcony (season, weather, for how long, etc.). A total of 325 different scenarios were submitted (i.e. 96% of the subsample having a balcony), which are summarised below and organised by season.

Spring

In spring, the balcony starts to be used as soon as the sun is more present and it starts getting warmer (mentioned 163 times in these scenarios, i.e. 50% of the scenarios) in the morning and evening with the main activities reported (in order of most mentioned) being: eating, planting/gardening, drinking coffee, reading and lounging.

Summer

While summer is the most preferred season to use the balcony, no matter the weather (mentioned 228 times in these scenarios, i.e. in 70% of the scenarios) it depends on two components: (1) that it is not too hot, avoiding certain times in the day; and (2) that there is no neighbour smoking. The main activities reported are similar as in the spring (in order of most mentioned): eating, planting/gardening, lounging, and drinking coffee, reading with the addition of sleeping (at night, separate from napping).

Autumn

In autumn the balcony is used almost the same amount of time as in spring (mentioned 150 times versus 163 times in the spring in these scenarios i.e. by 46% of the scenarios) until it is too cool to be outside without outdoor clothing. The main activities reported are similar as in spring (in order of most mentioned): eating, planting/gardening, drinking coffee, lounging and reading. However, other activities related to colder and darker weather start to arise such as decorating with lights and candles.

Winter

In winter, balcony use is much lower than in any other season due to colder temperatures (mentioned only 40 times in these scenarios, i.e. by 12% of the scenarios). Activities reported do not require the user to be physically present, such as: storage (for food or items resistant to the cold and not in use during that season, e.g. bicycles), decorating (lighting candles or seasonal lights) and airing things such as bedding.

All year round

Certain activities are mentioned as being undertaken all year round, although perhaps more frequently during certain times of the year, such as: a hang-out place for pets, cooling off after a sauna, drinking coffee or taking a short break/breather. Regarding seasonality, and as expected, the balcony is most used during summer followed by spring and autumn. It is also used during winter, but much less so. The co-occurrence of seasonality and moment of use during the day (Figure 6) reveals that the balcony is mostly used during the evening and morning. In summer, this is explained by the fact that it is reported to be too hot during the day. Generally, it can also be speculated that these times correspond to when most residents are at home as most of the sample respondents are employed (62%) (Figure 3E).

Figure 6 

Co-occurrence of seasonality and moment of use.

There is a likely connection between balcony glazing and the increase of usability of the balcony space (Table 1), which would confirm the initial added gain of glazing mentioned by Heikkilä (1996). This benefit is most notable in spring and autumn (Figure 7), which showcase an increase in the number of times participants with glazing mentioned using the balcony in relation to these seasons. However, it is also the case for summer, winter and all-year-round activities.

Figure 7 

Co-occurrence of seasonal use and balcony glazing.

Although evidence suggests that other balcony features may influence seasonal use, no notable results show enough significance to justify further discussion in this study.

4.3.2 Activities

Open questions revealed that balconies are used for direct (e.g. lounging, smoking, sunbathing) and indirect (e.g. storage, drying laundry, airing things, etc.) activities. Activities fall into practical tasks, leisure and connection to the outside or nature, often overlapping (dual-purpose activities). Figure 8 shows all the activities reported by respondents (10 or more times).

Figure 8 

Direct and indirect activities: number of times mentioned by participants in open answers.

A slight change can be seen in the way people tend to use the balcony in comparison with the previous study in Finland by Heikkilä (1996), where some of the most frequent activities were (in order of importance): airing things, drying laundry and storage; followed by leisure activities, a place for pets and taking a child outside. Overall, the findings align with other research indicating that activities have extended from within the living space to the balcony, which was the case both during the COVID-19 pandemic (Duarte et al. 2023; ElZein & ElSemary 2022; Khalil & Eissa 2022) and post-pandemic (Stender & Jepsen 2021). Despite this shift, the results also indicate that balconies continue to serve other functions other than leisure, which has also been highlighted in the literature (Smektała & Baborska-Narożny 2022). The cross-sectional data collected prevent the correlation of the observed change in use with the COVID-19 pandemic, as was the case in other contexts (Duarte et al. 2023; Khalil & Eissa 2022). Nevertheless, this is a potential explanation and highlights the importance of adaptability to a variety of uses for long-term resilience.

There is a consensus from participants that smoking should not be allowed (Figure 11D), differing from the previous study (Heikkilä 1996). This is the case for respondents either with or without a balcony. Anticipated activities were (in order of most agreed with): relaxing (or lounging), chatting, eating and gardening (or planting), followed by drying laundry, baby nap, working and exercising (Figure 11D). This is consistent with the activities for which the respondents currently declared using their balconies, which could be indicative of general satisfaction in that regard. Participants without balconies strongly favoured the use of the balcony for drying laundry. This could be telling that this activity is unaccounted for in apartments without a balcony. However, both in the section ‘other’ of this same question as well as throughout open questions, two other activities stood out: sleeping and a place for pets.

Having pets was mentioned 37 times by 11% of the subsample of participants having a balcony as a problem preventing its use mainly due to the risk of escape or fall if the glazing is opened. This is an important factor to consider for balcony design as, as of 2022, nearly one-quarter of Finnish households owned at least one cat or dog (Statista 2022).

An emerging activity not reported in previous work (Heikkilä 1996) was sleeping at night. Despite often being associated with hot weather, only five respondents of this subsample mentioned being ‘too hot’ as a problem preventing use of the balcony. Interestingly, the space connected to the balcony was mainly the living room (29; 95%), with no respondent having a balcony connected to the bedroom having declared sleeping on the balcony. This could indicate that residents with a bedroom connected to the balcony do not feel the need to sleep on the balcony itself because it helps to ventilate the bedroom at night-time. It must be noted that in Finnish housing, although natural ventilation is possible in all living spaces, the balcony door is often the only real openable window/door that can be used for intensive summer-time purge ventilation. Consequently, in times of high temperatures, effective cross-ventilation for night-time cooling is difficult to implement effectively, particularly in the sleeping areas. As respondents did not associate sleeping at night on the balcony with overheating, such an activity could be a result of thermal discomfort within the living space (as opposed to just the balcony) during night-time (i.e. residents’ adaptive behaviour).

4.3.3 Problems preventing balcony use

Participants were asked to describe issues preventing the use of their balcony. A total of 194 answers were submitted (i.e. 56% of subsample having a balcony), revealing the following main problems: overheating (n = 65), small size (29), smoking (19), noise (18), dust, together with bugs and pollen (13), and lack of privacy (13). A total of 14 respondents of the subsample (7%) who answered this open question declared having no problem hindering the use of their balcony, which could be due to the potential bias of the sample.

Overheating

Overheating was by far the main factor hindering balcony use (i.e. 33% of the open answers indicating problems preventing balcony use), followed by the balcony being ‘too small’ or ‘too narrow’. It was expressed as either being ‘too hot’ or there being ‘too much sun’, which according to the responses was the same issue simply framed differently.

With the current changing climate leading to longer and more frequent summer-time heatwaves in Finland, it is unsurprising that the excessive heat of glazed balconies is the biggest concern cited by respondents. As seen in the literature review (Hilliaho 2017; Mattila 2007), glazed balconies can be effective at reducing the heating demand of apartment in colder months and protecting facades from moisture exposure, but do risk causing overheating of the balcony in the warmer months, and subsequently the apartment, a risk considered minor by Heikkilä (1996). Overheating has multiple negative impacts on residents’ wellbeing related to thermal discomfort associated with higher levels of stress, sleep problems and cognitive fatigue (Riva et al. 2022). To prevent overheating risk in apartments, the overhang effect is implemented as an effective solution in warm climates, which is, on the other hand, ineffective with Finnish glazed balconies due to deep sunlight penetration at low angles in the apartment during long summer days.

Previous studies strongly suggest avoiding western orientations for glazed balconies to mitigate overheating risk (Saleh 2015; Sukanen et al. 2023). In the present study, the sample of Finnish balconies predominantly offered such orientations, which potentially exacerbate the issue. In fact, respondents who mentioned overheating had a balcony primarily facing south (30; 52%) and west (11; 19%). Interestingly, when asked about the ideal orientation, of the 58 respondents who mentioned overheating as an issue preventing balcony use, 38% (22) answered ‘strongly agree’ for west, while 14% (8) equally answered ‘strongly agree’ to south and east, and 5% (3) answered ‘strongly agree’ to north, similarly as the overall sample. This could indicate that participants do not necessarily associate south or west orientations with potential overheating risk, or it may be also a culturally related behaviour (i.e. long and dark seasons outside of the few summer months in Finland may lead to southern and western orientations being sought-after to maximise the benefits of the sun when available). A few respondents mentioned wanting to face their balcony east and most importantly the sunrise; a few stated that north would be satisfactory to avoid direct sunlight and other unpleasant views or pollution, while a few others mentioned wanting simply to avoid the southerly direction because of strong sunlight and overheating. Some participants mentioned that the view outside should be prioritised over orientation by stating that outlook can compensate for a non-ideal direction.

An interesting point from the results is the potential connection between overexposure and balconies on higher floors, because of the subsample of residents mentioning overheating as a problem, the largest share is located on the fifth floor (14; 44%) and generally on higher floors compared with the overall sample. Interestingly, this does not seem to affect balcony use as declared by respondents (Table 1). Furthermore, of this subsample mentioning overheating, 49 (84%) also declared having a glazed balcony compared with 245 (71%) of the overall sample, potentially highlighting that glazed enclosures may increase overheating risk. Balconies from respondents who mentioned overheating mainly do not have added privacy screens (45; 77%), do not have added shading (37; 64%), but do have flowers and plants (42; 73%). While previous work by Hilliaho (2017) in Finland concluded that ventilation and shading methods effectively mitigate overheating risk, participants reported that shading systems were difficult to put in place, blocked outside views and were ineffective by themselves.

Potential reasons for not sufficiently opening the glazing (more than one or two glass panes) were listed by respondents as: a fear of pets falling or escaping, a concern about furnishings that are not weatherproof, the difficulty in operating glazing or that it is time-consuming, which means residents think it is not worthwhile if it is for a few hours of the day and entails constant manoeuvring. The difficulty of opening and closing the glazing was also noted in the survey by Heikkilä (1996) and is possibly physically challenging for people with physical limitations.

It is important to note that the balcony door is often the only real openable window/door used for purge ventilation; if this is not possible when the balcony temperature is too hot, proper ventilation and the IEQ of the apartment are jeopardised.

Size

The small size of a balcony was mentioned a total of 29 times as a limiting factor for use (i.e. in 15% of the open answers indicating problems preventing balcony use), and when combined with inappropriate shapes (generally little depth) leads to limited usable floor area. Correlations between balcony size, usability and type of activity performed clearly indicate that a larger balcony size > 6 m² is linked to higher usability for direct activities, as was seen with sleeping on the balcony. This is supported by other studies inextricably linking use with size in order to accommodate various functions (Duarte et al. 2023; ElZein & ElSemary 2022; Khalil & Eissa 2022; Molaei et al. 2021; Smektała & Baborska-Narożny 2022). Figure 9 shows that respondents generally agreed that current balcony size should be increased. However, a few mentioned the problem of balconies taking the whole width of the apartment and the negative consequences of this to the living space in terms of poor daylight. As shown in the existing literature (Lehtinen et al. 2022; Wilson et al. 2000), this is often the case for deeper balconies where design qualities decrease daylight conditions.

Figure 9 

Ideal balcony size.

Overall, respondents largely agreed that having a balcony is a priority and that it has a positive effect on wellbeing (Figure 10). However, to the claim that having a balcony has more importance than before the pandemic, the largest share said ‘neutral’ for respondents with a balcony and ‘strongly agree’ for respondents who do not currently have a balcony. This is a surprising finding not in accordance with studies in different contexts showing a high importance and satisfaction with balconies following the COVID-19 pandemic (Duarte et al. 2023; Molaei et al. 2021). This could be because Finland, unlike other countries worldwide, did not go through harsh periods of lockdown restricting the balcony as the only possibility to be outside. Another potential explanation is the large share of one- and two-person households in the survey sample, which could mean that the opinion of respondents does not represent those households that faced overcrowded situations or lived in dense urban areas during the pandemic. Additional insights pertaining to changes in balcony appreciation or use during or after the pandemic were found to be limited with the cross-sectional data presented in this study. A cross-analysis with other data could be insightful and is highlighted for further research.

Figure 10 

Balcony perception.

Figure 11 

Balcony preferences.

4.4 Key findings and insights for design strategies

Research internationally underscores the universal need for larger balconies that ensures privacy and functionality (Duarte et al. 2023; ElZein & ElSemary 2022; Khalil & Eissa 2022; Molaei et al. 2021; Smektała & Baborska-Narożny 2022; Stender & Jepsen 2021). This aligns with findings in the Finnish context and confirms the global applicability of these design features for enhancing balcony use.

Balcony glazing is prevalent in Finland and more generally in colder climates. Key findings revealed, as anticipated by previous work (Heikkilä 1996), that balcony glazing has positively increased the usability of the balcony space in all seasons, but particularly in spring and autumn. However, if not used appropriately, glazing can potentially affect the overall IEQ, increasing overheating risk, reducing daylight in the living rooms and lessening the possibilities for intensive ventilation. Results clearly showed overheating as one of the main factors hindering the use of the balcony space, which is further exacerbated in southern and western orientations, and on higher floors. Practices to mitigate overheating, such as shading and ventilation, are implemented to an insufficient degree by residents, not implemented (also for reasons other than lack of knowledge) or not sufficiently effective. These results underpin a previous study by Hilliaho et al. (2015) highlighting the need to promote good practices on the optimal use of glazing by residents in both winter and summer.