Just design

Inclusive design prescribes addressing the needs of the widest possible audience in order to consider human differences. Taking differences seriously, however, may imply severely restricting “the widest possible audience”. In confronting this paradox, we investigate to what extent Rawls’ theory of justice as fairness applies to design. By converting the paradox into the question of how design can be fair, we show that the demand for equitability shifts from the design output to the design process. We conclude that the two main questions about justice find application in design: the question about the standards of justice and the question about its metrics. We endorse a Rawlsian approach to the former, while some revision may be due regarding the latter

Space is the machine, part four: theoretical syntheses

Part IV of the book, ‘Theoretical Syntheses’, begins to draw together some of the questions raised in Part I, the regularities shown in Part II and the laws proposed in Part III, to suggest how the two central problems in architectural theory, namely the form-function problem and the form-meaning problem, can be reconceptualised. Chapter 10, ‘Space is the machine’, reviews the form-function theory in architecture and attempts to establish a pathology of its formulation: how it came to be set up in such a way that it could not be solved. It then proposes how the configuration paradigm permits a reformulation, through which we can not only make sense of the relation between form and function in buildings, but also we can make sense of how and why buildings, in a powerful sense are ‘social objects’ and in fact play a powerful role in the realisation and sustaining of human society. Finally, in Chapter 11, ‘The reasoning art’, the notion of configuration is applied to the study of what architects do, that is, design. Previous models of the design process are reviewed, and it is shown that without knowledge of configuration and the concept of the non-discursive, we cannot understand the internalities of the design process. A new knowledge-based model of design is proposed, with configuration at its centre. It is argued from this that because design is a configurational process, and because it is the characteristic of configuration that local changes make global differences, design is necessarily a top down process. This does not mean that it cannot be analysed, or supported by research. It shows however that only configurationally biased knowledge can really support the design Introduction Space is the machine | Bill Hillier Space Syntax Introduction process, and this, essentially, is theoretical knowledge. It follows from this that attempts to support designers by building methods and systems for bottom up construction of designs must eventually fail as explanatory systems. They can serve to create specific architectural identities, but not to advance general architectural understanding. In pursuing an analytic rather than a normative theory of architecture, the book might be thought by some to have pretensions to make the art of architecture into a science. This is not what is intended. One effect of a better scientific understanding of architecture is to show that although architecture as a phenomenon is capable of considerable scientific understanding, this does not mean that as a practice architecture is not an art. On the contrary, it shows quite clearly why it is an art and what the nature and limits of that art are. Architecture is an art because, although in key respects its forms can be analysed and understood by scientific means, its forms can only be prescribed by scientific means in a very restricted sense. Architecture is law governed but it is not determinate. What is governed by the laws is not the form of individual buildings but the field of possibility within which the choice of form is made. This means that the impact of these laws on the passage from problem statement to solution is not direct but indirect. It lies deep in the spatial and physical forms of buildings, in their genotypes, not their phenotypes. Architecture is therefore not part art, and part science, in the sense that it has both technical and aesthetic aspects, but is both art and science in the sense that it requires both the processes of abstraction by which we know science and the processes of concretion by which we know art. The architect as scientist and as theorist seeks to establish the laws of the spatial and formal materials with which the architect as artist then composes. The greater scientific content of architecture over art is simply a function of the far greater complexity of the raw materials of space and form, and their far greater reverberations for other aspects of life, than any materials that an artist uses. It is the fact that the architect designs with the spatial stuff of living that builds the science of architecture into the art of architecture. It may seem curious to argue that the quest for a scientific understanding of architecture does not lead to the conclusion that architecture is a science, but nevertheless it is the case. In the last analysis, architectural theory is a matter of understanding architecture as a system of possibilities, and how these are restricted by laws which link this system of possibilities to the spatial potentialities of human life. At this level, and perhaps only at this level, architecture is analogous to language. Language is often naïvely conceptualised as a set of words and meanings, set out in a dictionary, and syntactic rules by which they may be combined into meaningful sentences, set out in grammars. This is not what language is, and the laws that govern language are not of this kind. This can be seen from the simple fact that if we take the words of the dictionary and combine them in grammatically correct sentences, virtually all are utterly meaningless and do not count as legitimate sentences. The structures of language are the laws which restrict the combinatorial possibilities of words, and through these restrictions construct the sayable and the meaningful. The laws of language do not therefore tell us what to say, but prescribe the structure and limits of the sayable. It is within these limits that we use language as the prime means to our individuality and creativity. In this sense architecture does resemble language. The laws of the field of architecture do not tell designers what to do. By restricting and structuring the field of combinatorial possibility, they prescribe the limits within which architecture is possible. As with language, what is left from this restrictive structuring is rich beyond imagination. Even so, without these laws buildings would not be human products, any more than meaningless but syntactically correct concatenations of words are human sentences. The case for a theoretical understanding of architecture then rests eventually not on aspiration to philosophical or scientific status, but on the nature of architecture itself. The foundational proposition of the book is that architecture is an inherently theoretical subject. The very act of building raises issues about the relations of the form of the material world and the way in which we live in it which (as any archaeologist knows who has tried to puzzle out a culture from material remains) are unavoidably both philosophical and scientific. Architecture is the most everyday, the most enveloping, the largest and the most culturally determined human artefact. The act of building implies the transmission of cultural conventions answering these questions through custom and habit. Architecture is their rendering explicit, and their transmutation into a realm of innovation and, at its best, of art. In a sense, architecture is abstract thought applied to building, even therefore in a sense theory applied to building. This is why, in the end, architecture must have analytic theories

Entrepreneurial Roles Along a Cycle of Discovery

The literature on entrepreneurship recognizes a variety of entrepreneurial roles, and the question arises what roles are played when and by whom.In this article, roles are attributed to different stages of innovation and organizational development.A central theme is the relation between discontinuity, in radical innovation (exploration), and continuity, in application, diffusion and adaptation (exploitation).Use is made of a concept of a 'cycle of discovery', which seeks to explain how exploration leads on to exploitation, and how exploitation may yield exploration, in a step-by-step development towards radical innovation.Parallel to this there are processes of organisational development.entrepreneurship;innovation;discovery;organizational learning

Developing an organic strategy of change to challenge gendered stereotypes around the technological (in)ability of women in architecture

Architecture is characterised by a lack of women in the profession and a significant drop–out after qualification all over Europe, despite decades of policies of inclusion. The practice of architecture requires the use of specialised instruments and technologies that often collide with the social assumptions and stereotypes around the conflicted relationship between women and technology. Women are socially perceived as inadequate users of technology in terms of: knowledge of the specific characteristics of objects, ability to use an instrument other than for its basic outcomes, and capacity to use technology in collaboration with co–workers. What can be done to challenge this widespread social perception? The suggestion offered here is to develop an organic strategy of combined actions able to foster a simultaneous change on different levels: individual, relational, cultural and structural. The paper offers an outline of a possible framework of analysis to be initially applied to the architectural field as a specific case study, with the possibility to subsequently adapt it to other STEM sectors. The framework draws upon the concepts of Technologically Dense Environments and Integral Theory’s AQAL method, used respectively to collect and organise empirical data

cartOut. Cardboard architecture 4 climate challange.

Our cities suffer from the urban heat island phenomenon, in which climate change is reflected and amplified. Becoming aware of this and understanding how it is happening is necessary for developing a strategy to curb the problem. Cardboard is an ancient material that has only recently been used in architecture. Today it is being rediscovered as a versatile material that can be worked quickly via digital technologies. The algorithmic study of geometries and automated processing present many avenues of research. Today’s computational power allows us to insert and verify different geometries in realistic contexts in which the microclimate and its effects can be investigated. In architecture, the use of cardboard has always implied a technological challenge in improving construction techniques to allow for temporary and permanent constructions. Architects have been interested in using this semi-finished material given its unique characteristics. It is a light, versatile material that can yield various construction solutions through the use of different techniques. Its durability has been improved over time while maintaining a low impact on the environment due to its renewable life cycle. Today, using cardboard outdoors means solving various technological problems in an innovative way while respecting the environment and architecture has thus responded to climate change through sustainable production and realization. The aim of this research is to use cardboard to create outdoor elements capable of controlling the microclimate in built areas. The studies made have shown how effective geometry can be in controlling the microclimate. Regenerating outdoor spaces through the use of geometrically designed cardboard elements regenerates and enriches the heritage and acting on the factors that affect comfort means improving the quality of the outdoor environment. Improving the usability of outdoor spaces is even more important in light of the ongoing pandemic, due to which outdoor spaces have gained new importance in conducting social activities

Climate in architecture: revision of early origins

This dissertation expands the comprehension of the history of climate in architecture by examining the evolution of the architectural meanings, uses, representations, and simulations of climate between 1800 and the present by means of a historical critical analysis of two scientific artifacts that attempted to model climate for the first time in the fields of geography and architecture. The Naturgemälde (1799 – Alexander von Humboldt) was a type of infographic image that simulated conceptually climate as a global system. The Climatron (1954 – Victor Olgyay) was a laboratory machine that physically simulated climate to test building scaled-models. Primary data was collected in the places where both artifacts were created, and where related archival materials are currently held. The method of analysis compared the models against each other, against contemporary computer simulations of climate for architects, and against their early theoretical foundations. The dissertation reflected on the universality of science in architecture and the role of the places and the technology involved to produce knowledge about climate, while challenged the concept of climate in architecture. It endeavored to find more holistic scientific approaches to design-with-climate that consider hard data alongside art. The tangible outcomes are four articles advised by one of the committee members according to their expertise: MODELS OF CLIMATE AND WEATHER explains the attempts to simulate conceptually and materially climate and weather in order to reduce their complexity to a human scale; ARCHITECTURAL INSIGHTS FROM EARLY DRAWINGS OF CLIMATE AND WEATHER: NATURGEMÄLDE, ISOTHERMS, CLIMATE PORTRAITS, AND THE BIOCLIMATIC CHART, reflects about the paradox of drawing climate and weather; PACKAGING NATURE FOR ARCHITECTS: EARLY ORIGINS OF DESIGNING WITH NATURAL MORPHOLOGY AND CLIMATE, focuses on how ideas travel from environmental sciences into architecture; and UNDERSTANDING THE CHARACTER OF PLACE: HUMBOLDT’S PHYSIOGNOMY OF NATURE, VICTOR OLGYAY’S BIOCLIMATIC REGIONALISM AND THE OUTLINE OF A PHYSIOGNOMY OF CLIMATE examines, from an architectural standpoint, the role of the beauty of climate in the understanding of the character of a place

An aesthetics of touch: investigating the language of design relating to form

How well can designers communicate qualities of touch? This paper presents evidence that they have some capability to do so, much of which appears to have been learned, but at present make limited use of such language. Interviews with graduate designer-makers suggest that they are aware of and value the importance of touch and materiality in their work, but lack a vocabulary to fully relate to their detailed explanations of other aspects such as their intent or selection of materials. We believe that more attention should be paid to the verbal dialogue that happens in the design process, particularly as other researchers show that even making-based learning also has a strong verbal element to it. However, verbal language alone does not appear to be adequate for a comprehensive language of touch. Graduate designers-makers’ descriptive practices combined non-verbal manipulation within verbal accounts. We thus argue that haptic vocabularies do not simply describe material qualities, but rather are situated competences that physically demonstrate the presence of haptic qualities. Such competencies are more important than groups of verbal vocabularies in isolation. Design support for developing and extending haptic competences must take this wide range of considerations into account to comprehensively improve designers’ capabilities