Story by Will Viitanen – The world is changing at exponential rates leaving many to wonder about “sustainable” concepts and ideals simply because they are believed to be new. Sustainability is far from a new ideal; however being on the cusp of a paradigm shift, individuals need to be fully aware and active in the new “green” world.
Sustainable Ideas
In recent years environmentalists have introduced the word “sustainable” into everyday language. The word itself, “sustainable,” can be defined by the New Oxford American Dictionary as having the ability to be maintained at a certain rate or level. One unfamiliar to the context of the word used today would not quite grasp the full idea from this short and simple explanation. The true root of the word in the context concerning this paper was identified in 1983. It was created by a division of the UN created to assess the concern for our depleting resources as the discourse needed to work towards correcting human behavior for fear of further global social and economic problems. This division, The Brundtland Commission, formally known as the World Commission on Environment and Development, drives towards pushing this concept of sustainability. However, one must look towards finding their own concise understanding of the necessity of this change and how their individual participation is an integral part of achieving this goal. The pressing need for change is now; as all around us, our changing world is conforming to one species alone, Homo sapiens. I believe in sustainable practices and I believe in the necessity of sustainable practices.
Image by Joseph Rank aka “KRANKY” www.krankyscartoons.com
Over the course of time human observation has provided distinct association with similarities between ourselves and other species. Renowned psychologist B. F. Skinner observed in the seventies “Any elements of culture that do not contribute to the long-term survival of individuals and of the group tend to be weeded out and those elements that do contribute tend to be retained.” So how do we push to move away from our commercial driven materialistic world? To assess our damage on life (not just our lives) we can look toward how discovery has influenced society. One discovery may be groundbreaking but the intriguing aspect is how one leads to another which branch to many more evolved iterations. I tend to feel many of our greatest new inventions are a crock. The map and compass have been helpful way finding tools for centuries. 19 out of 20 individuals donʼt need GPS; we are caught away from our original individual needs in this space-age technological world. It is our accumulation of knowledge base through discovery that is fueling these spin-offs. This accumulation is exponential, resembling many of the worlds other greatest problems ie. population growth. A paradigm-shift must take place to correct this.
Sustainability is a concern for the future generations. It is a concern for all things that make up our lives, whether it is what we eat, to job security, to being lucky enough to have an HMO. Most individuals, however, find it hard to see this faint light of interconnectedness. Concern is inversely at the core of sustainability nay sayers. Whether it is a concern that they donʼt understand what they can do to work towards it, or just a lack of care due to a concern for how it will affect their lifestyle. I am sure these are two polar opposite realms, and these individuals fall all over the spectrum. Sustainability: Life Chances and Livelihoods, by Michael Redclift sheds light on a framework for understanding sustainability to work towards action, that I whole heartedly believe to be true.
According to Redclift, individuals must have an:
- Understanding of the natural world, and how our production and thus consumption impinge upon it.
- Understanding of human perceptions and motivations, so we can know why we indulge in behavior which is destructive to nature.
- Understanding of Ethical systems, so we can determine if human motivations which are destructive to nature might be morally constrained.
- Understanding of the effectiveness of various systems of incentives and restrictions on human actions, so that the appropriate restraining measures can be embodied by law.
Sustainable measures are often impeded by lack of this understanding. It is upon these individuals who have found understanding, to take measures to shed light on others, almost in a “pseudo-evangelistic” approach. It is tendency in industrialized northern culture to place emphasis on lifestyle. Life style, can be broken down to reveal what it embodies. The industrialized emphasis on this style of life has become far too prevalent to avoid. Any individual can fall victim to it, and tendency is to do so. This idea has been identified and observed for ages and seems to be one of the downfalls of culture and societal life. The tragedy of the commons, an issue facing cultures everywhere, was originally observed by Garrett Hardin in a publication of Science and ties environmentalism in regard to lifestyle. This tragedy once hardly disserving its mythical pretense, is increasingly becoming greater in magnitude and is further proving reason for many of the environmental issues facing the world today. Simply put, it is behavior brought about by an individualistic point of view that then when repeated and replicated by others proves disastrous to all society.
The Tragedy of the commons applies to consumption of near everything. When the assembly line was first noted as a brilliant practice of production, the basis was not consumption, it was production. Production could be quick due to interchangeable parts, efficiency of workers, and streamlined practices. This worked in the industrial age, but ideals were different and no one had concern for the overall impact of our ways. Hailed as the greatest invention of the 20th century the car has shaped every aspect of life as we know it. Infrastructure has been a point of our economic success through accessibility, but it has ruined our landscape and altered our values forever. Emphasis on “quick and fast” everything has helped ruined our cultural values and is in ways the antithesis of sustainability.
Today, proper education on sustainable ideals is not found many aspects of society. This can possibly be explained due to upbringing; the concept is deemed “new”, flashy, and trendy in some ways. The same applies to sustainable ideals concerning the built environment. Since inception, the built environment has always conflicted with the natural realm. Spatial consciousness of the built environment in context to the natural environment is an essential piece towards achieving purity of design. For years, in the post-modern era, all felt change arising, but what to move to was still quite unclear.
Context in design is now further reaching and expanding. I feel designersʼ jobs in many ways are more difficult than ever by means of rethinking the craft to fit a new way of life. However, Iʼm torn with the belief that it is also much more obvious in regard to the approach of a project. There are more “givens” than ever before. Sustainability out of necessity calls for a new view on our world as designers let alone individuals. A new view on materials (uses and reuses), a new stance on function, a new way of order, and most importantly a new definition of purity and beauty must be achieved out of this new architecture. Denver International Airport is one of the only airports in the country with terminals in the country to be mostly powered by means of solar power. While driving to DIA, upon approaching the structure, one can see open space between street infrastructures used for solar panel fields. I view this to have a quality of beauty. The same mindset should be and inevitably will be applied to all design.
Sustainable practices in architecture are slowly being pushed through policy. This is a very important shift. Construction practices provide a massive amount of waste year in and out. The Architecture 2030 initiative is at the forefront of this move. The initiative promotes not only new sustainable output from designers but retrofitting of all otherwise unsustainable structure. Sustainable architecture in my mind should concern not only the aspect of sustaining of the natural world but also the built environment. The life cycle of a building or structure should be assessed from day one. What if the life cycle was planned and construction of that structure were planned accordingly? I.e. The structure is planned to function for one use now and two uses later. Or, the structure is predetermined to be reconfigured for an alternative use at a certain point in its lifecycle, giving life to a new object itself. Iterations of our technology as discussed earlier evolve and evolve; this would be brilliant if applied to sustainable structure, which I feel will happen in less than a lifetime. Architecture 2030 as well as many upcoming Green Build, LEED and Eco policies promote reuse of higher percentages of materials than ever before. What society needs is this reuse of materials to be applied to all spheres of design. The use of modular units can be predated to centuries upon centuries ago. Given that architecture has succeeded in this form of order many times over, it wouldnʼt be hard to apply the aspect of modularity to sustainable design. This can be attained through experimentation; whether it is a module of material or of a reused structure. Order is grounded in the foundation of our craft, sustainable architecture will apply this order to a methodology of reduce, reuse, and recycle.
Education and Change
The philosophy of education can be recognized as one of oldest practices in history. The distinct abilities to associate, assess and comprehend are that which set humans apart from nearly every other species in the world. The human mind particularly, that of a young person, has the inherent ability to cognitively recognize and learn high capacities of new information all the time. The education ideology recognizes this and thus we find education to be a globally imperative practice. Human babies are born with essentially blank slates to write and fill in. “It is obvious that children are born illiterate and innumerate, and ignorant of the norms and cultural achievements of the community or society into which they have been thrust” (Phillips). The importance of education in no way can be disputed. A child learns from the world around them. However, help from individuals the child is exposed to is vital for development of the brain. This is where the educational institution comes into play. Schooling systems try to harness this room for educational growth, and replicate the vast cultural knowledge and understanding found over time by others.
The philosophy of education has come leaps and bounds over its history, however aspects still remain constant. The process of schooling for most individuals and their personal development during their schooling will have direct implications on their economic opportunities later in life. This has been at the foreground of debate for philosophers, teachers, parents, and pupils alike. The process of schooling has a tendency to weed out select individuals based on performance. Is this necessarily the way to go? I believe that there are students who donʼt test well, and the factors that produce these results are highly circumstantial for each individual. I believe also, in agreement with many tests and surveys, that there are specific areas an individual can excel in and other areas they may not. This is unique once again for each individual mind. I feel the schooling systems in America suffer in liberal arts programs. Children are raised to read and write, which I feel is all cultural education but harnessing creativity should be an integral part of education as well.
Students in America tend to not always reach the same level of critical thinking when finished their schooling system. This could be viewed as failure of the system but I feel strongly to say that itʼs a combination of each unique individual and the schools that they attended. However, I feel there is a direct correlation between development of creativity and the acute understanding of how to analyze and think critically. Students at a young age should be subjected to art courses as well as the two givens, math and reading/writing. Tests have shown that the “best” thing to give a baby is the original set of blocks. This helps to develop cognitive recognition of shapes and geometry, develops visualization skills, and harnesses the creative brain at a young age.
Montessori schooling system is a private system that defies traditional stereotypes. Childrenʼs minds are cultivated towards a unique educational approach. At a young age, a childʼs education is based around analytical thinking through hands-on exercises. This strengthens their abilities to develop critical thinking and comprehension. Montessori classrooms tend to be unique because the age group of a classroom can span up to three years different. This can be seen as a lack of the structure other schools have but the schools direct hands on approach is successful in its own right. I also feel the weeding process of schooling should rework itself with a fine toothcomb. There are left-brain thinkers and there are right-brain thinkers and combinations of the two. I believe that the philosophy of education should work towards catering to each student. “The concept of competency cannot, in fact, be reduced to its function of articulating education with the demands of the labor market.” (Stoera, Magalhães)
The place that a child receives education is just as important as the education itself. Educational systems should be designed in conjunction with the sense of place. Larger more open classrooms with daylight ambiance should be key in the design. Schools should push to be sustainable. The concept of education itself is a sustainable practice, so the connection is there. Children at a young age as already discussed learn from culture and action. Right now our world is in a state, all cultures included, where sustainability needs to become commonplace. The arguable best place to start would inevitably be schooling where it has already begun to permeate through curriculums. If children were taught from a young susceptible age to act towards sustainable practices then they would develop the mindset out of necessity. There are clear parallels between the “place of education” and the relative “education,” so when put in a sustainable environment, individuals will recognize, understand and rationally adhere to sustainable practices.
The defining of a place in congruence with sustainable architecture in my mind would only have beneficial results. The children would have a sense of belonging that is of dire importance to sustain their attention and focus. From an economic standpoint initial build estimates of a sustainable school are much higher than a non-sustainable school, however considering that the longevity of a deconstructable reusable structure is so great it is more reasonable off paper. One thing is certain however, in a paradigm shift a change occurs and the new ideology instilled is there until the next related change. The necessity to educate humans to live non-destructive paths and be sustainable is cementing the need for unique educational institutions for many years to come.
Sources
Redclift, Michael. Sustainability: Life Chances and Livelyhoods. New York: Routledge, 2000.
Gardner, Gerald T., and Paul C. Stern. Environmental Problems and Human Behavior. Boston: Pearson Custom Publishing, 2002.
Skinner, B. F. Beyond Freedom and Dignity. New York: Bantam Books, 1971.
Hardin, G. “The Tragedy of the Commons.” Science 162 (1968) 1243-1248.
Architecture 2030 Ed. Edward Mazria. 2008. Architecture 2030. 17 January 2009 <http://www.architecture2030.org/home.html>.
Philosophy of Education. Ed. D. C. Phillips. 2008. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. 16 January 2009 <http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/education-philosophy/>
Thompson. “High Performance School Study” SECO. State and Energy Conservation Office. 18 January 2009 <http://www.seco.cpa.state.tx.us/zzz_re/re_reporthighperformance. doc>
Siegal, Martin A. “Future of Education” Wisdom Tools. Wisdom Tools. 19 January 2009 <http://www.nmc.org/pdf/Future-of-Higher-Ed-(NMC).pdf>
Cirillo, Jen.. “About the Sustainable Schools Project” Sustainable Schools Project. 19 January 20, 2009 <http://www.sustainableschoolsproject.org/about/>
Grobstein, Paul. “Parallel Changes in thinking about the brain and Education.” Serendip (2007) 18 January 2009 <http://serendip.brynmawr.edu/sci_edu/brainedparallels.html>
Foster, Jane. Young People at the Centre : Participation and Social Change. London: Commonwealth Secretariat, 2001.
