Environmental cautiousness, assessment of positive and negative influences in architecture has become strongly embedded in the design process, with sustainability becoming integral to the decision making
While the discussion about the environmental approach in architectural design become vivid towards the end of 20th century. Different approaches trying to improve the environmental performance were developed over the years but there was not many practical application of the fundings.
In this context seams important to try to focus on establishing connections between architecture and constantly growing concern about its influence on the environment, ideally by investigating development of environmental friendly architecture in parallel to the development of the concept of environmentalism itself.
The concept of Environmentalism is a very large concept influenced by scientific, ethical and political ideologies. Sustainability though as such was introduce in Blueprint for Survival (1972) by Edward Goldsmith, and become more understand after publication of Our Common Future in 1987.
although the meaning of the world transform from; able to exploited indefinitely without degradation of the source to good for the environment.
Significant change in use word “green” was notice at the time as well, from strong association with Green Party to term descriptively presenting mindset against any capitalist and exploitative ideologies.
The word ecology, firs time used by Ernest Haeckel in 1878( Pope, Wheal, Appleton, 1991 p.85) comes from Greek “oikos” meaning house and “logos” meaning understanding, while the ideology develop as a study of relations between all living creatures , a vary delicate, balance system, as nothing lives in isolation to create understanding all elements are integral to achieve the ecological balance. While the instabilities within the system caused by human made imbalance between the elements like fast growing population, pollution or overuse natural resources have exponential harmful influence on the rest of the system.
Environmental architecture
Attempt of defining styles, theories and orders has always been a strategy strongly attached to architectural profession. Attempt to capture patterns is visible especially form the beginning of Neo classical period, withe the specially strong interest in tensions between styles like in 19th country differences between Classical and gothic and then in 20th century between Modernism and Postmodernism, encouraging profession to name and organise this design approaches. Even though Van Der Ryn and Cowan(1996, p.12) present the believe that architectural profession had no environmental understanding prior 1970’s there are a hand full examples of buildings that have been constructed with reflection on the man made influence and its place within trivial ecological system pre 20th century environmental revolution.
There is an agreement between such the authorities like Olgyay(1963), Hagan(2001) or Hawkes(1996) that the earliest evidence of taking under consideration the influence the builds may have on the environment is apparent in Vitruvius (image 3*), whom by taking under consternation the elements like climate, comfort of the user and the design itself created simplify, yet essential description of the fundamental considerations, requirements for architectural design.
Vernacular techniques of construction allowed to create the builds, by design, responsive to its surrounding, mainly by great understanding of seasonal changes of the site and then appropriate use of locally sourced materials, what makes vernacular architecture naturally environmentally aware, friendly.
The economic development strongly change the tendencies to follow vernacular knowledge, as the main motivation for the new builds became the current fashion, as the result the material choices become more detached form the context and sourced from further and further away.()as wells the design itself following the new trends became less appropriate for the local climate by unnecessary overloading the structure just to follow the new aesthetic.
The redevelopment of Vernacular methods in many developed societies had an interesting influence on architectural design. Susannah Hagan (2001, p.103-119) suggests that there is a division between the followers of the ideology of vernacular design. She describes them as revivalists, anti industrial and pro craft community and the second group as environmentalists trying to embrace natural development for passive, environment friendly design. Unfortunately in some cases this approach may seem be overlooked as patronising or even as culturally determining.
Colonial heritage of Western architects left its footprint in often forced development of new design proposal as well as construction technologies to help to cope witch savage climate of foreign land (Lutyens work in India).
The similarities are visible also in the development of the New Wold architecture of the time. Banham (1984) advocates that the significant factor of development of Art Nouveau around 1980’s was introduction of internal electric lighting, while Ruskin and Morris in they work, present believes of possible danger of industrialisation. In this context the early examples of environmentalism had strong relationship with development of Organicist and Arts and Crafts architecture in relation to Romantic Movement (Pepper, 1984)
Another example of study relations between man’s needs and the nature , in this cases not exactly conscious, and focused on man’s wellbeing and comfort was investigate by Le Corbusier itself, who’s concepts have been use by many others, with big names like Olgyay (1963) or Vale (1991, 1996).
Hagen(2001) and Slessor(1997) suggested that if the building influence the climate to provide comfort, that develops connection between Environmentalism and Modernism.
Although Banham challenge the ideology of the schools like Bauhaus, presenting concern that functionalists schools seemed to forget that the “human concepts of environmental quality” developed priory 1914. He also argue that one of the objectives of Modernists seams to eradicate inefficiency of vernacular architecture influences. Therefore there is a paradox in link Environmental friendly architecture and Modernism.
Interestingly, Olgyay (1963) similarly to Vitruvius, does not elaborate about aesthetics, moving the focus towards the importance of strong connection between the technology and good design. Following Olgyay thought process, Givoni (1969) presents more scientific outlook on the issues of comfort and climate, still with no suggestion how achieve aesthetically pleasing design from the technological development of the project.
The approach towards environmentally conscious design changed in face of the oil crises in 1970’s. As the the energy used to run a building in general had increased drastically, caused mainly by the introduction of building services, the new ideas to create passive sources of energy emerge. The main ideas defining the new eco friendly solutions of the time ,were passive ventilation and solar power. As much more easily adaptable, these concepts made huge impact on housing design of the time. The new concept of low energy buildings was apparent, unfortunately not on the bigger scale, as not many local authorities presented any interest in the new technologies mainly caused by luck of understanding of positive implication of applying passive energy sources.
There is significant difference with the approach to the Environmentalism or environmental design within a short time.
Givoni (1969) acknowledges the change of relationship with nature in the relise of the 2nd edition of his book published only 7 years latter in 1976.
Interesting categorisation comes from Banham(1984). Based on environmental approach he divides different types of buildings into four categories: Conservative, Selective, Regenerative and Exclusive. The first one, conservative mode, by design meant to protect from external environment by thermal storage mainly represented by thick walls to protect from heat licks.
The Selective tries eliminate the undesired conditions and it always exist with conjunction to conservative mode, represented by introduction shades, windows as well as ventilation devices.
The Regenerative Mode describes different sources of energy used like artificial light, heating and cooling systems.
In traditional construction, all the models are apparent but in most of the buildings the dominance of one or another is strongly visible.
Banham (1984p.226-227)
also present the concept that conservative and selective modes sees use of power as sort of anomaly.
The strong feeling towards it grew especially arena 60’s and 70’s caused by growing understanding of danger related to pollution, potential exhaustion of natural resourced placed in the spot light of growing energy cost. The solution in his opinion was passive solar energy. The movement was interested in developing ways of using not well explored at the time solar power, although he saw the some elements of the movement as a little bit extreme.
Banham’ s last mode Exclusive was not related to environment and is typical for highly serviced construction as the main concept of the mode was extreme separation external condition from internal.
Another authorities, Hawkes (1996) relates in a way to previous concepts presented by Olgyay, by presenting a diagram of relations between architecture, technology and biology, climatology alto following Banham classification of building types, presented as exclusive, selective and pragmatic modules.
Where pragmatic doesn’t take into account environmental approach at all, while exclusive is more concerned about design the Banham’s model yet still concept it terms of energy use stays the same. Lastly, the Selective mode is combination of the first three Banham’s modes – Regenerative, selective and conservative.
Later on the environmental architecture has been divided to two subcategories, both in relation to O’Riordan’s Ecocentric and Technocentric ideologies. One described as the voice of social responsibility for the environment and another as materialistic approach created around personal benefits form lower cost of energy and materials. Around the same time Lloyd Jones(1998) presents the concept of two contrasting environmental architectural approaches, Techno and Cultural fixes.
Van der Ryn and Cowan (1996) present idea that specialised aspects of design like understanding location, nature, biodiversity of the site as well vernacular approach and then manifestation of learning from all of that trough design process is extremely important. Later on, developed as a concept based on importance of observation of nature and transition this knowledge to design new construction solutions(Kilbert 2002) This group presents opinion that by alienation from nature by our on creation, we no longer are environmentally savvy and we have to redevelop this relationship the same way. This idea, Ecomorphism, were building is a representation of the system, was born in opposition to Biomorphism, were construction is representation of an organism. They also though this concept is more scientific methodology then ideology itself.
Thomas and Fordham (1996), as technologists, suggest to take under consideration elements like site planing, use of energy, daylight, comfort to provide energy balanced building, solar exposer, materials qualitiy, as well as air quality and ventilation. Great examples of technological approach to architecture are work done by Foster, Hopkins, Rogers and Grimshaw (Slessor, 1997).
Further, Hagan(2001) describes environmental architecture in stages of Symbiosis, Differentiation and lastly Visibility. The first
Next one Hagan differentiate to Cultural mode showcasing understanding of social aspects as well as vernacular approach and Climatic by use suitable data to developed concept of geographical and mythological state. Both strongly responding to Vitruvian ideology through Hawkes and Olgyay seam to reflect on Darwinian concept of determinism.
The last aspect- Visibility was an idea of honesty in terms of correlation of aesthetics and environmental approach within the building design, still supporting concept of architecture looked as a form of art. There is also an understating that even though all of the categories are present in work of many architects, usually on of them will be dominant. As they are integral part of the environmental design process. Using an example of designing symbiosis by achieving all the requirements by responding to local climate and than make an attempt to show are the efforts to the building user.
While Guy and Farmer (2001) present environmentally informed architecture to six subcategories by combing ecological approach with technical aspect.
Todays approach to sustainability exist based on play of the balance of all there elements of socio economic environmentalism, were the design solutions come form the balance of the main points not determinism itself.
Attempt to organise the main stream of architects within the context of environmental architecture has been proven difficult as some of them showed flexibility to they approach with great names like Le Corbusier presenting his building concept as a machine contrasting with his work in India. Another examples, like Erskine have grown over the years, shifting the preferences form one concept to another. While others created they own ideologies, great example is Yeang by introducing the Concept called Bio climatic architecture approach born form Olgyay geographical and climate protection principles while enabling expression and experimentation through use of new materials and construction forms. The main idea behind his architecture was reduction of energy use with simultaneous improvements in therms of user comfort. Yeang’s work is being used by Guy and Farmer(2001) as a representation of they Eco technic concept, Hagan (2001) sees it as Differentiation of climate while Jencks (2002) describe him as Organitech.
Yeang’s early work presents lots of common points with of Givoni, Olgyay and Banham, placing him in less technological approach. Close study of his work shows less intent towards distinctive performance calculation and focus moved towards low technology solution like choice of appropriate materials, introducing planting or water features. Suggesting that environmental approach, Hagan’s Visibility concept, may dominate the other two strongly altering her theory of environmental design.
Jencks (2002) argue that there is no way to fully analyse architecture from its connection with environment (perspective), as all writes, designers or architects create they own interpretation of the definitions, trying to express they ideas by presenting them in context their own work or they strong opinion about others work in relation the discussed environmental issue. The heritage of environmental architecture is still apparent, although the concept itself is not an aesthetic style as it is, the different movements overlapping strongly influence the final design form.
The similarity between environmentalism and its influence on architecture is especially visible in how the profession responded to the environmental insanities like …
Boulding’s message representing new relationship between man and environment was not directed at architects. There are may examples of postwar experimentation in how architectural design fits its surrounding, in many aspects like efficiency of construction, use of passive sources
Of energy but mainly understanding the form and orientation of the building, as well its materiality and how it all fit local climate.
In decades following World WAR ll many developments of the time
Lead to search for new ways of representation, experimentation, innovation
In the Case study house program- was created specifically to showcase how by using modern technology and understanding materials could