Architecture & Happiness

Unlike conventional wisdom, not only architecture, urban development or landscape design can be approached from economic analysis; it is also that economic analysis can provide a sound perspective, especially if sustainability is to be a guiding principle. This may seem paradoxical since economic development and growth, as we know them, have been blatantly unsustainable.

Sustainability overall is about the permanence of processes – something is sustainable because it can be sustained throughout time. On the basis of economic theory, sustainability is a capital transfer between present and future generations. Yet, capital is far from being a mechanistic notion of man-made or physical capital; it is also social capital, human capital, and natural capital.

THE BRAIN VS THE HEART

Under the sway of the last four decades of economic thought, a pervasive idea is evolving: the need to redefine prosperity, to recognise that a significant number of consumption and production patterns cannot be sustained without affecting the welfare of future generations and (potentially) basic balances in the Biosphere that could threaten life itself and its diversity. The concept of quality of life suffers from an embarrassing richness of possibilities but what kind of circumstances provide good conditions under which to live? What makes a life a good one for the person who lives it? What makes life a valuable one? And should not this be relevant for architects?

Despite what most people would reckon, economic analysis could provide some answers to some of these questions. It’s not just a question, though, of redefining prosperity on the basis of the absence of growth (or even the so-called ‘de-growth’); it’s also a matter of redefining growth itself, since growth has proved to be a driver for prosperity in many contexts.

To put it this way, the question is not so much whether to grow or not, but how it comes about. Growth based on inequality or environmental degradation, for instance, is notably unsound and undesirable. Yet, in many places and for many people, growth has been extraordinarily successful in ensuring prosperity and opportunity for a wide majority. Growth, prosperity, happiness are after all (perceived as) goods, from a mainstreaming perspective. If using the analogy between growth and happiness is not because one immediately leads to the other but rather because the quest for growth can sometimes prevent growth from being a source of prosperity in such a way as the search for happiness is very often a source of unhappiness.

Daniel Kahneman, a Nobel Prize Laureate in Economic Sciences (2002), presents our thinking process as consisting of two systems: thinking fast (unconscious, intuitive, almost effortless), and thinking slow (conscious, through deductive reasoning, and with significant effort).

We tend (want) to think the latter prevails over the former but we might be wrong. We often associate intuition with irrationality but it is not. On the other hand, the origin of much that we do wrong (as individuals or as an entire society), is also at the roots of what we do right.

Critical thinking, as we have discussed at IaaC, is about solving conflicts. The great game of life, for architects or alike, may not just be about reason versus intuition.

Let me pose some questions for you and feel free to comment on them.

  • It is very tempting to seduce ourselves, as architects or as anybody keen on architecture or otherwise involved in the design process that the answer to our problems lies with buildings. Do you actually believe you can separate buildings out from the infrastructure of cities and mobility of transit and the expectations and incentives of people?
  • Why do people tend to believe that what is financially profitable (for developers) is not actually equivalent to economically feasible (positive impacts on social welfare)? How would you show that this does not necessarily have to be like this (but rather the opposite)?
Posted in Uncategorized | Comments closed

No ; one cannot separate the building from the infrastructure of the city or the environment of the city. In my home town of Tehran there are examples of residential apartment buildings finished in white stucco. Given the fact that the city is highly polluted by carbon monoxide the buildings did not remain white for long. Read More »

Posted in Atessa Zandi, Economics of Sustainability | Comments closed

lbc-petals-diagram-e1328040936339

Economics of Sustainability

Nowadays in different areas of human being, economics has a great importance. It is every where.
Every thing what is around you is a part of a big complex economy system.
That is one of difference between human and animal. Is a complex system of relationships. And  economy is one of that systems.What does it mean Economic system for Architects.

We can see that in different countries there are different economy conditions.
It influences on quality of food, water,  fuel,etc. And It influences on buildings also.
For architects it is quiet important to think about economy. Because when you (Architect) starts to work about project, you start from research.
Research suggests that you exploring everything in live around your future project.
When you get information you start to think how can you build your project, and you should think about who much could it coast.
Obviously It is really important to understand that modern world is rapidly goes straight forward.
Like people trying to produce a new biological fuel, that would be better than petroleum.
People trying to develop an alternative to different kind of materials and things, because we cant use nature resуrves indefinitely and
most of a products that human produce now are really heartfull for a nature.
I understand Economics of Sustainability as complex of details that we should use when we design a building.
Imagine that you are design a small country house for someone. You should start from what kind of materials you will use.
It is better to use a local products. For example wood.
Next Is  that 80% of sustainability achieved by the type of structure.
Of Course  to save money on electricity it is important to think  abou correct orientation of a building, by it is possible to increase quantity of a nature light.

All of the tips that you can use in design could help you to produce a better Sustainable situation around.
We should thing about it every time we sit down to work.

 

 

Posted in Economics of Sustainability, Rodion Eremeev | Comments closed

“ARCHITECTURE AS A WHOLE”

main-pichuman-head

It is very tempting to seduce ourselves, as architects or as anybody keen on architecture or otherwise involved in the design process that the answer to our problems lies with buildings. Do you actually believe you can separate buildings out from the infrastructure of cities and mobility of transit and the expectations and incentives of people?

I would say, NO a building cannot exist in “Isolation”.

A building is very much “Context Driven” .

A building needs a good Infrastructure to thrive and live. Each one cannot co-exist without the other. We are living in times where our natural resources are depleting . We cannot afford the luxury of ignoring the environment and the urban fabric while designing buildings.

We shouldn’t approach designing buildings as just walls and roof but approach it like we are designing Eco-Systems.

Architecture has to be good understanding of a wide range of subjects from physical geography, through to social science, and an appreciation for disciplines, such as real estate development, urban economics, political economy and social theory.

Architects therefore need to consider a lot of parameters before constructing a building. The main task of architects is to incorporate the basic human consumption of these resources into our natural environment. There is a need for a solution for future development which doesn’t restrict us to the current lifestyle but improve it in a better way.

With an intelligent infrastructure the architect can thus save cost, time and money/respect the economy and the expectations and incentives of people ,providing them with a perfect environment to live in.

A sustainable project should improve way of life and make sense economically.

 Why do people tend to believe that what is financially profitable (for developers) is not actually equivalent to economically feasible (positive impacts on social welfare)? How would you show that this does not necessarily have to be like this (but rather the opposite)?

Developers are only interested in what is financially profitable for them and think only about short term. The architect doesn’t typically choose a site for the developers; he is given the site and told to design accordingly. The way out of the damage causing the environment could be an sustainable and thoughtful, sustainable development. Hence sustainable development is about finding better ways of doing things, both for the future and the present. We might need to change the way we work and live now.Creating a sustainable architecture is one of the way. Having local materials for the building, considering the social need, with green and self-sufficient technology, collecting informations of  the neighbor, etc can get along together. Think and act sustainable can join these two of approaches. It creates the best behavior for developing an architecture. This is a challenge for us as architects, or as the users.

Posted in Archana Kadaba Ramesh, Economics of Sustainability | Comments closed

earth001

The profession of architects is completely unpredictable and it varies from every individual, also depends of type of exposure and knowledge in the field of architecture. Hence one is able to see the variety of projects, which defines the city. But being an architect it is merely impossible to negate the idea of separating building from it is infrastructure, mobility, transit and expectation and incentives of people. The reason is building is meant to be occupied the people. They are going to be the part of the building in future, hence it is very important to determine the functionality of particular building depending upon its end users. Read More »

Posted in Boney Virendra Keriwala | Tagged | Comments closed

Then and now

urban-development-mainimage source-http://weburbanist.com/2011/02/21/then-now-the-stunning-speed-of-urban-development/ Read More »

Posted in Akanksha Kargwal | Comments closed