When nature is the driver: Rethinking ecological design in architecture

Abstract

Objective Evolution of the architectural technique has been considered by Modernity as an ideal aiming at controlling nature under men’s purposes. Although this anthropocentric paradigm is still very much in force, new visions qualify this approach to technique and nature as restricted. In this article, it’s endorsed a different way of facing architectural design based on negotiation scenarios that introduce natural hazards as an active negotiation driver in the ecological design. Methodology The article explores ecological design strategies distanced from anthropocentrism, by systematizing selected architectural study cases. The analysis is done by questioning the deterministic heritage of science, according to M. Serres assumptions. As defended by M. Serres, Nature is assimilated by The Social Contract of J.J. Rousseau, establishing new discussion frameworks. These new discussion frameworks drive into different liasons between humans and non-humans, by a later influence of P. Descola and B. Latour. This approach to ecological design in architecture reformulates a classic topic in social sciences: the relationship between nature and culture. Conclusions After reflecting on selected examples of ecological design the article concludes, firstly by stating that ecologic design is not in crisis as suspected, but the relationship that designers and architects have with it, which is still pre-modern and almost religious; and secondly by identifying nature as an ally instead of an enemy in ecological design, following pragmatism premises. Originality Its originality is based on its critical contribution on the design process and its impact in terms of significance. The main conclusion of the article opens a potential field of investigation and a required reflection from practitioners.