Sustainability in Architecture and the Limitations of Environmental Assessment Tools

Authors

  • Işıl Ruhi Sipahioğlu

Keywords:

Building Environmental Assessment Tool, Sustainability, BREEAM, DGNB Certification System, The Procedure HQE

Abstract

The methods to achieve sustainability in architecture have continuously entered the architectural scene with different conceptualizations of the tie between the elements of the 'tripolar mode l:' Society, environment, and economics. Although the roots of this model are first delineated in Brundtland report (1987) and concretized at the Rio Conference (1992), there is actually no consensus on how to conceptualize its framework. The model acts as a discourse, but it hasn't yet reached such a status to define a Khunian paradigm that might lead to a universal way of interpreting the elements of the model. Despite the lack of a generally accepted paradigm, the field is in the search of defining "best practices." Current researches on building environmental assessment tools best illustrate this trend. The paper aligns itself with researches that aim to take benefit from multiple perspectives of designing sustainably to enable the making of "green knowledge." In order to pave the way for this multiplicity, the paper discusses the influence of environmental assessment methods on design process, through three case study methods: BRE Environmental Assessment Method (BREEAM), la Demarche Haute Qualite Environnementale (HQE) and Deutschen Gesellschaft for Nachhaltiges Bauen (DGNB) certification system. While underlining the aspects of design process that is tom between objective and subjective decisions, the paper discusses the role of assessment methods in framing these decisions. The paper first delves into the epistemological and theoretical point of views that have prepared these methods. This examination bases on the design epistemology of Nigel Cross, that is, the study of "designerly ways of knowing." The paper, then criticizes these tools as to their positivist approach to design problems and their influence on limiting the design alternatives. This discussion is essential because due to the appeal of these assessment tools in marketing the projects, they would become the mainstream practice.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Bartneck, C. 2008. What is good?: a comparison between the quality criteria used in design and science. In CHI '08 extended abstracts on Human factors in computing systems. ACM, New York, 2485-2492.

Berger, P. L. and Luckmann, T. 1966. The Social Construction of Reality A treatise in the sociology of knowledge. Doubleday & Company, New York.

Cole, R. J. 2005. Building environmental assessment methods: Redefining intentions and roles. Building Research and Information 33, no.5, pp. 455- 467.

Cole, R. J. 2003. Building environmental assessment methods: a measure of success. Special issue article in: The Future of Sustainable Construction.

Crawley, D. and Aho, I. 1999. Building environmental assessment methods: Applications and development trends. Building Research & Information 27, no. 4-5, pp. 300-308.

Cross, N. 2006. Designerly Ways of Knowing. Springer-Verlag, London.

Ding, G. K. C. 2005. Developing a multicriteria approach for the measurement of sustainable performance. Building Research & Information 33, no. l, pp. 3-16.

Ding, G. K. C. 2008. Sustainable construction-the role of environmental assessment tools. Journal of Environmental Management 86, no.3, pp. 451-464.

Dorst, K. 2004. The Problem of Design Problems-Problem solving and design expertise. Journal of Design Research 4, no. 2.

Foucault, M. 1972. The Archeology of Knowledge and the Discourse on Language, translated from French by A. M. Sheridan Smith, originally published in French in 1969. Pantheon Books, New York.

Groat, L. N. and Wang, D. 2002. Architectural research methods. Wiley & Sons, New York.

Guy, S. and Moore, S. 2007. Sustainable architecture and the pluralist imagination. Journal of Architectural Education 60, no. 4, pp. 15-23.

Kuhn, T. S. 1996. The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. 3rd ed. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago. First published 1962 by The University of Chicago Press.

Rittel, H. 1972. On the Planning Crisis: Systems Analysis of the First and Second Generations. Bedriftsokonomen, no. 8, pp. 390-396.

Downloads

Published

2012-11-17

How to Cite

Sipahioğlu, I. R. . (2012). Sustainability in Architecture and the Limitations of Environmental Assessment Tools. ICONARCH International Congress of Architecture and Planning, (ICONARCH-1, Proceeding Book), 283–293. Retrieved from https://iconarch.ktun.edu.tr/index.php/iconarch/article/view/84

Issue

Section

Using Computer Software in Architectural and Urban Design Processes