A Social-Ecological Approach to Architecture and Planning
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Journal of Architecture and Construction Volume 2, Issue 4, 2019, PP 33-44 ISSN 2637-5796 A Social-Ecological Approach to Architecture and Planning Richard Graves1*, Bonnie Keeler2, Maike Hamann2, Elizabeth Kutscke1 and Chris Nootenboom3 1Center for Sustainable Building Research, College of Design, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA 2Institute on the Environment, Humphrey School of Public Affairs, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA 3Institute on the Environment, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA *Corresponding Author: Richard Graves, AIA, Director and Associate Professor, Center for Sustainable Building Research, College of Design, University of Minnesota, 1425 University Ave SE, Room 115, Minneapolis, Email: [email protected] ABSTRACT Sustainable design has failed to fundamentally transform the performance of the built environment in the most critical indicator: social-ecological impact. Design has focused on making systems more efficient, instead of redesigning the system to continually enhance natural processes and center the welfare of the people who live, work, and experience the built environment. Buildings, neighborhoods, and infrastructure must be reimagined using a social, ecological, and technological systems approach connecting the social needs of the community within the constraints of biophysical systems. We present an approach in the evolution of sustainable design, one that builds on green design and regenerative design, but advances a social-ecological design methodology - one that is sensitive to scale, adopts a systems approach, is future- oriented, and centers social needs in design. Keywords: Regenerative, Social-Ecological Systems, Design, Planning, Ecosystem Services INTRODUCTION University of British Columbia states: ―green design is directed at reducing degenerative To respond to the challenges of a dynamic impacts… this is insufficient for an ecologically world characterized by climate change, resource sustainable future and is an insufficient aspiration crises, and widening economic inequalities, to motivate design professionals and their architecture must be redefined using a social- clients.‖(Cole, 2015) This is not transformative ecological systems approach that grounds social enough to be truly ‗sustainable‘—that is, to needs for food, water, energy, and health within create a pattern of development that supports the biophysical capacity of the surrounding human health and well-being with renewable environment at relevant scales. Thus far, resources.. Social-ecological design aims to sustainable building design has focused on create site developments that enhance the making existing systems more efficient or potential of a place to support sustainable, ―green‖ instead of designing them to integrate equitable, and healthy human communities by with and enhance the social-ecological system incorporating benefits provided by local or landscape within which they are embedded. ecosystems, and understanding the social needs This is the difference between green design and in that place. social-ecological design, a fundamentally new approach that is required of architecture across Sustainable design has been focused on reductive scales (building to neighbourhood to city) to approaches of efficiency and mitigation that have achieve sustainable and resilient urban not challenged the traditional assumption of an development in a dynamic world. unlimited supply of materials, energy, and water The architecture and built environment that can flow through the system to support life. community have addressed sustainable urban John Tillman Lyle calls these systems: ―one way development with incremental ―green‖ guidelines throughput systems.‖ (Lyle, 1994). Lyle that make buildings marginally better than outlined an approach to system design that standard practice. Dr Ray Cole from the focused on mimicking the function of a living Journal of Architecture and Construction V2 ● I4 ● 2019 33 A Social-Ecological Approach to Architecture and Planning system or a ―regenerative system.‖ He proposed energy storage and the regeneration and a closed loop system leveraging resource and recycling of outputs. (Figure 1) Figure1. John Tilman Lyle: Regenerative Design for Sustainable Development. 1994. The social-ecological approach to design that into account multiple temporal and physical we describe in this paper draws heavily on scales, design should integrate people and place. principles of regenerative design. This kind of approach to design is a non-linear We advocate for a social-ecological view of the process, since needs and outcomes need to be role of design that does not separate design, constantly re-assessed and iteratively improved development, and architecture from an idealized or managed. It requires interdisciplinary nature, but integrates buildings and engagement between architects, ecologists, neighbourhoods with living systems in time and engineers, community members and other space. The process involves not only designing stakeholders, and a shift in architectural systems of resource flows to be self-renewing, vocabulary. In the following sections, we but also understanding a new way of ―social, describe the social-ecological design approach ecological, and technological systems thinking‖ in more detail. for design. Background In their 2012 article, Bill Reed and Pamela Mang, outlined four key premises to guide One of the core principles of a social-ecological regenerative design and site development: (1) systems approach is that society is embedded understand the potential of the place, (2) define within, and wholly dependent upon, the the goals for the capacity to be developed, (3) biosphere. People and nature are intertwined and ―partner‖ with the place, and (4) co-evolution shape each other in complex ways across local (Mang and Reed, 2012). Expanding on the work to global scales (Berkes et al. 2000; Folke et al. of Mang and Reed, our team developed a social- 2016). Ecosystems provide many benefits to ecological process for design that aligns with humans that are co-produced by nature and updated thinking in architecture, design, ecology society, such as clean water, food, flood control, and environmental science. temperature regulation, and mental health. These ―ecosystem services‖ are the The social-ecological approach to design begins contributions of nature to people‘s well-being by exploring the needs of a community, and and quality of life (MA 2005, IPBES 2016). elicits a desired future state of the site as a goal Ecosystem services are often undervalued, and to work towards. In this future state, the built the costs of degrading nature‘s ability to provide environment improves human well-being by ecosystem services are underestimated, if addressing basic social needs and enhances the realized at all (Daily et al. 2009). Drivers or provision of ecosystem services to help meet stressors (such as climate change, pollution, and those needs, within the environmental limits set habitat degradation) affect ecological structures by the surrounding landscape. Social-ecological and processes that drive the provision of design asks architects to create buildings that are ecosystem services. Changes in ecosystem not just ―less bad‖, but beneficial to the social services affect human well-being through and ecological landscapes they inhabit. Taking impacts on food production, water supply and 34 Journal of Architecture and Construction V2 ● I4 ●2019 A Social-Ecological Approach to Architecture and Planning quality, recreational opportunities, cultural service measures and the desire to add rigor to identity, or other benefits. the holistic thinking of regenerative design. However, this approach does not explicitly link In the past, ecosystem services have typically ecological conditions and design goals with the been assessed at the landscape scale, mostly in self-determined social needs of the community, rural environments. However, recent advances and instead prioritizes the regeneration of ―pre- in ecosystem service science have led to more development‖ ecological conditions that existed fine-scale assessments that are applicable in the at a site. It also de-emphasizes the role that urban context, taking into account the provision design can play in providing cultural ecosystem of ecosystem services by green infrastructure services, which is a category of often intangible such as street trees, urban parks, community services that contribute to well-being aspects gardens, coastal habitats etc. (Keeler et al. such as physical and mental health, recreation, 2018). There is growing interest in ecosystem spiritual and cultural practices, scenic beauty, services in the urban planning communities, social cohesion, and sense of place (Daniel et al. particularly in the context of climate change and 2012). In contrast, we take the position that the potential of nature in cities to mitigate previous, ―natural‖ conditions are often no negative climate impacts through strategies such longer relevant within the context of rapidly as ―ecosystem-based adaptation‖ (Geneletti & changing, constantly evolving social-ecological Zardo 2016). There is little overlap in ecosystem systems in the Anthropocene, and that design service research and the built environment, should instead focus on achieving future particularly at the scale of individual buildings conditions that improve social-ecological or sites. Many questions emerge when outcomes for the community, including culturally considering the relationship