Logics of Sustainable Architecture (1)
What does make the most sustainable building? This question has been asked many times yet the answer is still unclear. As I mentioned in my previous post, my undergraduate thesis was about sustainable architecture with the case study of Pemulung (waste pickers). A number of attempts has been done to define what sustainable architecture is all about. These various interpretations cause different building types, with different technologies and different approaches. Yet, all can be justified as sustainable architecture from different point of views. There is a popular academic work on this issue which I will try to review in this article. The paper is titled "Reinterpreting Sustainable Architecture:The Place of Technology" written by Simon Guy and Graham Farmer (2001).
The six competing logics of sustainable architecture (Guy & Farmer 2001)
Guy and Farmer suggested that there is no need to define sustainable architecture in a single incontestable definition as this task is impossible due to the diversities involved. Rather, it will be more appropriate to embrace these diversities and reinterpret sustainable architecture by identifying different logics underlying these diversities. They introduced a typology of six different logics of sustainable architecture as shown by the image above.
The first logic is eco-technic, a techno-rational and scientific approach to solve environmental impacts of the built environment. This first logic deals with the measurement of the impacts and relies on technological solutions to achieve best sustainability performance in minimizing these environmental impacts. The eco-technic signifies that environmental problems can be solved by managing the environment through rational analysis and scientific method. High performing building (technologically) is the image of this logic. In my opinion, this logic is the most dominating logic in the real world architectural practice. The emergence of various green building rating tools around the world are also heavily driven by techno-rational backgrounds.
Central Park Development in Sydney was awarded a 5-star Green Star Rating (flickr.com)
The second logic is eco-centric, focusing on the nature and to think beyond anthropocentric, seeing human as only one part of a holistic ecosystem. Nature is seen as a fragile entity and easily disrupted by the non-nature elements such as buildings. Built environments are seen as parasites to the natural environment. In other words, the natural world is the top priority. An attempt to design a sustainable architecture that can be linked to eco-centric logic is the veggie house concept by Mitchel Joachim which I covered in my previous post.
Eco-aesthetic, the third logic comes from the understanding that sustainable architecture is "metaphorical" and it contains "New Age" dimension. As suggested by Peter Graham in one of his lecture which I attended last semester, eco-aesthetic logic sends a message: we sustain what we love. It also promotes the shift from utilitarian values to aesthetic and sensual values to solve environmental problems.
The next three logics are covered in the next post.
References:
Guy, S & Farmer, G 2001, 'Reinterpreting sustainable architecture: The place of technology', Journal of Architectural Education, vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 140–148, ISSN; 1046-4883.
