Punti di vista

torna su

Sustainable and Adaptive Design in Architecture and the City: multiscalarity and infradisciplinarity in the approach to project experimentation
Fabrizio TucciPDF




Aspects of approach to design experimentation

In dealing with the central question of the approach to an experimental design aimed at the objectives of Sustainability and Adaptability of Architecture and the City, it is necessary first of all to put on the table the need to deal with two aspects between strongly connected and by now unavoidable: a multicultural expertise characterized by an inter-disciplinary (and even ‘infra-disciplinary’, as shall be seen), also developed on the international dimension, and a marked propensity to move on a multiscalar dimension.
This central moment of experimentation is based on some profound considerations that have informed the very way of developing it, and which we want to remember: the way in which the current research in Europe identifies the built environment, and in particular city districts, as a preferential field of experimentation for the transition to a carbon-neutral society and a green and circular economy Un Habitat, 2011; IPCC, 2018); how the recent planning of national and international technical policies identifies the regeneration of urban areas as a catalyst capable of having positive repercussions on the development of effective measures against climate change and environmental, social and economic sustainability (ILO, 2016; EC, 2020); how the combination of the widely known and readily apparent problems  of suburbs and fringe areas is accompanied by what will be a worsening trend in climatic conditions, in the form of urban heat islands, heat waves, pluvial flooding, drought and aridity, plus dramatic increases in extreme and devastating winds (EEA, 2016; IPCC, 2019); and how these contexts, in recent years, have highlighted the imperative need for a concrete design experimentation in the field, characterized by a profound interdisciplinary approach that can effectively direct the processes of urban regeneration towards climate objectives of resilience and adaptability, framing them as part of broader trends of development based on the axes of ecology, energy and bioclimatic factors, with the further addition of strategies to improve the aspects of mitigation, safety, comfort, health and rational use of resources (OECD, 2016; EEA, 2020).
In the course of the complex fine-tuning of the possible directions of the experimental phases of the research, a fundamentally important step was the critical review of the recent, but already vast, body of international scientific reports on the experiments underway in the world, in which recent developments applied and implemented indicated the advantages of formulating urban design and planning in terms of resilience and adaptation to the effects of climate change, according to the key parameters derived from the characteristics of this complex approach that can be summarized with the international term of 'Adaptive Design'. This approach is able to combine the action of urban regeneration with objectives of effective and measurable reduction (in a predictive and simulative sense) of environmental risk, all in the broader perspective of the integrated pursuit of the three epochal objectives of increasing environmental quality, effectiveness of resource management and countermeasures against climate change.
The main features of the Adaptive Design approach, therefore, play a central role in the very way of conceiving and setting any future design experimentation, in line with the guidelines for the operational-applied development of cities provided by the European Union and the United Nations, ranging from the strategic initiatives alluded to in Cities of Tomorrow to those of the Climate-Energy 20-20-20 package; from the strategies of the 2030 Agenda to the 2030 Climate and Energy Policy Framework package; from the Roadmap 2050 initiative promoted by the European Climate Foundation to the guidelines of the recently approved European Green Deal 2050. It is no coincidence that these important documents all agree on the absolute priority of implementing urban regeneration programs based on principles of adaptation as a response to environmental and socio-economic challenges, further highlighting the importance of Environmental Design as a factor for the reduction of vulnerability and for the practical enhancement of the built environment, pointing to a change in perspective that makes technological innovation, primarily as applied to ecological, energy and bioclimatic aspects involving process, design and product, a tool to increase adaptability and urban resilience and to construct an effective, efficient bridge to what, by now, is the inevitable ecological transition.

 

Multiscalarity, infradisciplinarity

There are many areas of design experimentation subject to be developed in a multi-scalar way, with continuous operations of downscaling and up-scaling, and targeted feedback processes: the "green" governance of the processes involved in transforming cities, the climate-oriented regeneration of neighbourhoods and urban districts, the re-orientation of the bioclimatic and microclimatic behaviour of the built environment, the eco-adaptive redevelopment of infrastructures and open spaces, experimentation on intermediate spaces and on efficient, climate-responsive envelopes with variable properties.
The systemic vision used in conceiving the experimentation in a multiscalar sense, applied to many different areas of intervention, must push to implement a continuous shift of perspective from the parts to the whole and vice versa, in a word, it must emphasize the need to refine the ability to shift the attention between the various levels of the system, considered as areas with different degrees of complexity. In this way, in the design experimentation aimed at Sustainability and Adaptability, there is a logical passage from the dimension - already borderline - of "multiscalarity" to that of "non-scalar transversality", or more simply "a-scalarity", as we have said, which not only does not diminish the consideration of the characters and properties at the various levels, but, as we have just seen, corroborates the principle of diversification and interaction, in opposition to the well-known canons of homologation. A "frontier" point of view, where each part addressed by the experimentation is seen not only in terms of its intrinsic properties but, even  more importantly, in relation to its ability to relate to the contextual "whole", and where the shift from the parts to the whole must be considered a necessary, epochal transfer of our attention from objects to the interactions between them (which is proving, and not by chance, to be the essential element when  it comes to making real improvements in the adaptability and resilience of systems).

Alongside the main character of multiscalarity/a-scalarity, there is another that is assuming a central role in the way of working in the field of Adaptive Design: what we might call "disciplinary interaction", "multiculturalism", to the point of arriving at the frontier dimension par excellence: that of "infra-disciplinarity". An outlook, the infra-disciplinary approach, that pushes those who govern the processes of design experimentation to move along the boundaries "between" the disciplines: not only a collaboration and integration of knowledge (multi-disciplinary), not only a transposition, an in-depth exchange of points of view on knowledge, as well as a synthesis (inter-disciplinary), but also a test of the osmotic interaction set in motion by the different places, all them to be explored, found within the boundaries (or along the potential lines of contact, depending on the point of view) of the “infra” mode of innovation, meaning that "between" disciplines.
At the same time, the specificity of the systemic, need-performance based approach, along with the multi-scalar, trans-disciplinary matrix of technological and environmental design, are particularly important and strategic in the management of the set of variables brought into play to ensure a constant expansion of knowledge, a strengthening of the administrative capabilities of the project, of guidance for the many specialised areas brought into being by the paradigm of sustainability. As a matter of fact, it is part of the DNA competences of technological and environmental design to prove capable in the experimental phase of the application experimental application to implement a very high level of disciplinary interaction, deep complementarity of skills competences, and of putting into system a multicultural vision with an effective operative articulation of the project enriched by the contribution of numerous by the contribution of numerous expertise, qualified advice and international relations of high profile. The contributions of ecologists, botanists, urban planners, sociologists, economists, hydraulic engineers, physicists/technicians, meteorologists, aerospace engineers, together with those of stakeholders at various levels and in different sectors, that are not only to be placed side by side but deeply interrelated, become integral part of the same approach to the setting and development of all phases of the project experimentation.
The involvement of a wide-ranging interaction of disciplines within what is, by now, an irreplaceable multicultural perspective has resulted in the experimentation addressing the difficult and complex frontiers of infra-disciplinarity, in addition to stimulating, and encouraging cross-fertilisation with, at least four sectors of themes and methods worthy of note for future developments.
First of all, it has prompted researchers, designers and those who experiment with adaptive design to deal with the most complex aspect of the method, and namely that represented by the term error-friendliness-approach, meaning an approach that not only “tolerates errors”, but stresses a "flexible, friendly cooperation" with them, transforming each error into a gradual "adaptive strengthening " of the system (Von Weizsäcker, 2010). As shown by the theory of evolution of species itself, evolutionary processes never involve the elimination of errors and failures, as, on the contrary, such occurrences make an indispensable contribution, and this is an element that should become irreplaceable, reinforcing the renewed vision of the future performance of the technological systems of our adaptive architecture and built environments.
The second intriguing area of comparison and cross-fertilization is the one that research in adaptive design can establish with ecological sciences. Thanks to this paring, experimentation carried out in the sign of design technology has learned that it must also enable environmental, urban and architectural systems to respond to the constant interaction with the transformations underway in a manner that proves synergetic, dynamic and appropriately "reactive". This outlook on managing the built environment, its underlying economy and the interaction between the two - the most natural and least resource-intensive approach possible, from an ecological perspective - relies on the specific ability of the technological features of the system to "dynamically reorganize themselves" in a way that is - to quote the international scientific literature – ‘dynamically responsive’ (Hausladen, Tucci, 2017).
The third area of infra-disciplinary interaction of adaptive design ranges from the absorption, reworking and implementation of the teachings of urban anthropology-sociology, as part of a dialogue with neuroscience, especially in terms of a heightened awareness, on the part of designers and researchers, of the cognitive-perceptive processes at work in the user-citizen immersed in the living spaces (exacerbated when under the effect of climate change) that give rise to such stimuli, and which the experimentation in adaptive design sets out to transform, bringing into play even the "changing shapes of architecture" (Hensel, Nilsson, 2019) and the innovative simulation capabilities of these processes that can now be integrated into methods of conceptual development and design.
Finally, with regard to this last logical step, which indicates the innovative potential of simulation procedures, there has been, in all experimental phases, a formidable mixture of adaptive design in the world of simulation with modeling, an approach that constitutes an important working methodology - for the future, but perhaps we can already consider it, even in the present, as indispensable and obligatory - for the further refinement of the apparatus of knowledge and understanding of environmental and microclimatic conditions, and for the most accurate simulations and predictions of results and performance of current design practice (Auer, 2017). A dimension of method and operational potential, the latter, which has given rise to virtuous processes of 'ex ante simulation - modeling - ex post simulation', of which an integral and fundamental component is constituted by the periodic moments of feed-back whose importance, when it comes to obtaining adaptive urban configurations and realities, I have already mentioned in a previous passage and which will increasingly come to represent a characterizing aspect of the way of designing aimed at intervening in Architecture and the City to raise the levels of Sustainability and Adaptability of the built environment.
Possible developments in the sustainable and adaptive design approach

As a final step, it is necessary to reflect on how the considerations of innovation in the design approach carried out so far can be measured against the fields of advancement that are being developed in the concrete experiments of recent years on the plane of the project. can be measured with the fields of advancement, being developed in concrete experiments in recent years on the international level international level, of the ability to adapt to climate change of architectures, districts, cities, as an integrated response, innovative and measurable, to the climate vulnerability of urban systems, starting from the recognition of priorities identified at the local scale, able to define methodologies, strategic guidelines, experimental design solutions and technological innovation, simulation and comparative assessment methods technological innovation, mode of simulation and comparative evaluation of the performance of those architectures, districts, cities.
During the experimental phases, it is becoming clear in practical terms, that the adaptive design  approach must be supported by a dynamic organisation of the overall design effort, geared towards lowering the intensity of the characteristics of the various components of the urban  system (complex urban elements, buildings, open spaces, infrastructures), with respect to the effectiveness of their climatic and environmental performance (Santamouris, 2016; EEA, 2018), reducing instances of climate vulnerability that are due in part to dependency on processes in the overall system characterised by conventional operating conditions (IPCC, 2019; IFC, 2020), and as regards the extent to which possible innovative responses affect building stock and available resources – socioeconomic and environmental, but also materials and energy – including their rational and efficient use, in relation to the specific features of the context (EC, 2020; EEA, 2020).
Scenarios must be simulated, design solutions must be proposed and the levels of technological and environmental performance must be assessed, focusing on the need to define methodologies, procedures and operational tools capable of directing initiatives involving the urban system towards adequate levels of adaptation and resilience in response to climate risk: targeted and flexible responses - characterised by an eco-systemic, procedural and technologically innovative approach when it comes to construction products, processes and design strategies – in keeping with efforts to reduce the vulnerability of the urban space and augment its resilience.
A very important part of the work is to investigate the specifics of the applicability and effectiveness of the methodologies, experiments and design solutions proposed, in order to obtain responses suitable for measurement and comparison, so as to contribute to the renewal of urban neighborhoods both through the reduction of exposure to climate risks and in terms of positive effects on the processes of social inclusion and economic sustainability. The outlook has stressed designing such proposals to be:

In short, it can be said that the final objective of this type of research and experimentation activities illustrated is to build a widely accepted framework of knowledge, proposing strategies of approach using climate-oriented models of urban governance, according to operational methodologies whose adaptive design solutions always prove to be comparable, repeatable and measurable.
The methodologies applied must be analytical-deductive, so as to ensure that the data collected from the reporting and the international literature could be compared and normalised, and they were also simulative, for the sake of analysing scenarios and comparing technical, environmental and systemic solutions within a framework of real applied case studies, in addition to being experimental, making possible advance formulation of processes of decision-making, prototyping and validation of results through the projects of corroboration applied to such case studies.
In translating this methodological approach into design choices, a first step is the need to develop inter-scalar operating modes by defining correspondences between the effective management of resources, the governance of processes and the activation of micro- and macro-interventions of regeneration, to reduce the climatic vulnerability of the urban system at the scale of the district, buildings and open spaces.
A second key point, after the elaboration of methodological frameworks related to strategic directions and actions of intervention, is the development of a simulative-assessment methodology that has in itself the ability to prove effective in the specificity of the individual case of intervention and at the same time generalizable and valid for adaptive application in different contexts.
The results of the simulations should show how it is possible to correct problematic situations affecting the urban built environment in which we intervene, renewing public spaces through the restoration of a more liveable environment, a higher bioclimatic quality and ensuring a greater ability to adapt to the primary categories of phenomena generated by climate change.
Climate Adaptive Design is being confirmed internationally as a suitable intervention methodology consistent with the redevelopment of open, intermediate and confined spaces, in line with the green-city format (OECD, 2016; CNGE, 2019), while the tools used have made it possible to gather the results sought with respect to responsiveness to situations that require adaptation, even in light of realistic forecasts indicating rising temperatures, increased incidence of heat islands and extreme manifestations of (among other phenomena) wind, typhoons, urban flash floods and rain floods, all due to ongoing climate change (WMO, 2020), with identification of spaces that are more resilient and adaptive to these effects, thanks to the defined characteristics and performance levels.
The advancement of design experiments will produce possible strategic models of parameterized increase in climatic adaptability and the parameterized increase of climatic adaptability and of the fruitive and environmental quality of the urban and residential space, which will be so implemented also with cross-assessments of the effects of performance resulting from the interface with the microclimatic factors microclimatic factors, with the ecological and intelligent management of water and with the bioclimatic enhancement of the role of green, model that is articulated in two prevalent categories:

The construction of a model for the use of different types of technological initiatives proves to be an innovative development both in terms of individual initiatives and at the systemic level, with respect to the possibility of replicating the efforts in future projects carried out in similar contexts, so as to benefit from the continuous improvements generated by subsequent applications (Tucci et al., 2020).
In conclusion, the experimental aspect of the reflections presented in this contribution is based on the attempt - still evolving, in the sense that it too must necessarily adapt to future developments in research and projects - to arrive at a model that is flexible, that lends itself to evaluation with respect to the overall effects on performance levels, that proves useful when applied to specific contexts, but that is also relevant in a general and systemic perspective.
The simulation and modeling tools used have ensured greater reliability, compared to traditional methods, making possible design approaches and other decisions that are more relevant and better suited to the problems faced, and therefore more likely to succeed. However, it would seem better, in the next developments, to act on some potentially evolutionary aspects by deepening the methodology for measuring the trend of biophysical and microclimatic factors in the phases of analysis of the current state of things; increasing the reliability of data collected through readings, with the sensors used, both random and systemic; the use of smart and digital technologies in an increasingly systemic and in-depth; the continuation of the continuous refinement of the framework of indices necessary to provide benchmarks to support design choices.
These are experiments that are constantly "in progress", as the design of city spaces, open or confined, in a way that respects the needs and requirements of today and tomorrow, along with the conceptualization of public spaces that can cope with, adapt to, and mitigate the effects of climate change, allows for the revival of spaces for social relations and collective life, fostering social integration and encouraging and supporting mutual coexistence and, ultimately, increasing the belief that a more desirable future awaits our cities.

 

 

References

Auer, T., Melis, A., Aimar, F. (2017), Disruptive Technologies. The integration of advanced technology in architecture and radical projects for the future city, Wolters Kluwer, Milan.
CNGE (Consiglio Nazionale della Green Economy) (2019), Programma di transizione alla Green Economy in Italia edizione 2019, Stati Generali della Green Economy, Ministero dell’Ambiente e della Tutela del Territorio e del Mare, Ministero dello Sviluppo Economico, Ecomondo Pubblicazioni, Rimini.
EC (European Commission) (2020), Green City Accord. Clean and Healty Cities for Europe, EU Publishing, Brussels.
EEA (European Environmental Agency) (2016), Urban Adaptation to Climate Change in Europe, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
EEA (European Environment Agency) (2018), Adapting to climate change: European countries assess vulnerability and risks, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
EEA (European Environment Agency) (2020), Urban adaptation in Europe: how cities and towns respond to climate change, Report No 12/2020, Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg.
Hausladen, G., Tucci, F. (2017), "Technological Culture, Environment and Energy: the Outlook for Research and Experimentation", Techne. Journal of Technology for Architecture and Environment, n. 13/2017, pp. 63-71.
Hensel, M.U., Nilsson, F. (2019), The Changing Shape of Architecture. Further Cases of Integrating Research and Design in Practice, Routledge, London.
IFC (Italy for Climate) (2020), Italy Climate Report. La roadmap I4C per la neutralità climatica dell'Italia, SUSDEF Pubblications, Roma.
ILO (International Labour Organisation) (2016), A just transition to climate-resilient economies and cities, ILO Editions, Geneva.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2018), Global Worming of 1,5°C. Summary for Policymakers. Cambridge University Press, Massachussetts, USA.
IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) (2021), Climate Change and Land, Cambridge University Press, Massachussetts, USA.
OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) (2016), Green Cities Programme Methodology, ICLEI Local Governments for Sustainability, European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, EBRD Publishing, London, Paris.
Santamouris, M., Kolokotsa, D. (Eds.) (2016), Urban Climate Mitigation Techniques, Routledge, London.
Tucci, F., Cecafosso, V., Caruso, A., Turchetti, G. (2020), Adattamento ai cambiamenti climatici di architetture e città green. Assi strategici, indirizzi, azioni d'intervento per la resilienza dell'ambiente costruito, Franco Angeli, Milano.
Un Habitat (2011), Saving Cities: Adaptation as part of Development, United Nations Human Settlements Programme Publishing.
Von Weizsäcker, C. (2010), "Fehlerfreundlichkeit", in Kornwachs, K. (a cura di), Offenheit Zeitlichkeit Komplexität. Zur Theorieoffener Systeme, Campus Verlag, Frankfurt [new digital edition].
WMO (World Meteorological Organization) (2020), Provisional Report on the State of the Global Climate, WMO, available at:https://library.wmo.int/doc_num.php?explnum_id=10444