Leadership in Architecture
Architects have the power to influence people’s views and actions in the way that architecture has the ability to promote and teach people about certain issues. For example, a building that is LEED-certified or a zero carbon footprint building is constantly reminding its occupants of strategies that the building itself uses to protect the environment and therefore, makes them more conscious and self-aware of their own day to day decisions that may impact the environment in a positive or negative way. The responsibility that architects carry needs to be taught in school. For me, it was not until graduate school when we participated in the COTE 10 competition that I started to think about implementing environmental strategies onto the buildings I designed. I wish this was something that would’ve been brought to our attention earlier. I believe students must be reminded throughout their education that they have every ability to influence the environment and society and change architectural norms. We often conform to the way things operate and get used to these routines, even if that means not always thinking about the environment or letting other people influence our work and decisions. Today in class it was mentioned that innovative architecture is always the most expensive kind of architecture but does it have to be that way. Can we find a way to innovate without spending colossal amounts of money? If we can, we will be able to take matters into our own hands without having to rely on all the funds necessary to move the profession forward.
Thaly,
ReplyDeleteThe issue that is the economics of architecture deemed "sustainable" is one our generation is going to be wrestling with for awhile. There seems to be no easy answer on how we can continue to innovate without the expenditure of large amounts of capital. But maybe there are two approaches to solve the issue. Solution #1 is to redefine what "large amounts of capital" is and in doing so direct the conversation towards the value of investment architecture can produce. Then there is solution #2 where we rethink our current understanding of comfort, in turn reducing our consumption of artificial air systems and replacing it with adaptation to natural climates.
When we start architecture education, we should begin with the project examples that save money or reuse materials in innovative ways. I think that would be amazing to start out as. Everyone has the ability to be creative to some extent, but what sets us apart as architects is how we use the knowledge of the built world to solve problems for each community or client. I understand starting school how we do (or how I did almost 3 years ago), but if we begin by designing for people and the environment instead of just ourselves, we could change the way future architects think... maybe?
ReplyDeleteExpensive architecture is expensive. Those are the facts. The reason why it's expensive is for a few reasons but one of the main reasons being that it's a new method of using a material or doing something to the form that would be extreme. The reason why we hear about the "innovative" buildings is because we like the flashy things. I would say that a building that uses conventional building materials with good craft is not definitively "innovative" but it is beautiful. Arguably more beautiful than the flashiness of a new construction that probably isn't perfectly designed or constructed.
ReplyDeleteIn practice, I always have struggled to see why we couldn't incorporate more environmental strategies. You are right - these strategies cannot be added without also making the project more expensive, and even getting buildings certified costs a lot of money that clients don't want to spend. We all should be focused on finding less expensive ways to make built projects more environmentally-friendly without compromising the budget.
ReplyDelete