Content uploaded by Kemo Usto
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Kemo Usto on Sep 13, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Aalborg Universitet
Safe Sink Tectonics
Towards a Metabolism of the Built Environment Within Planetary Capacities
Usto, Kemo
Publication date:
2023
Document Version
Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Link to publication from Aalborg University
Citation for published version (APA):
Usto, K. (2023). Safe Sink Tectonics: Towards a Metabolism of the Built Environment Within Planetary
Capacities. Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Ph.d.-serien for Det Tekniske Fakultet for IT og Design, Aalborg
Universitet
General rights
Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners
and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
- Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research.
- You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain
- You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal -
Take down policy
If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us at vbn@aub.aau.dk providing details, and we will remove access to
the work immediately and investigate your claim.
Downloaded from vbn.aau.dk on: september 13, 2023
safe sinK tectonics
Aalborg Univeristy,
Department of Architecture Design & Media technology
. K U .
Kemo U S T O
Dissertation Submitted 2023
S A F E
S i N K
T E C T O N I C S Towards a
M e t a b o l i s m
of the Built Environment
within Planetary Capacities
~ by ~
ii
iii
To
my family
and their patience.
Dissertation submitted: 24-5-2023
PhD supervisors: Associate Prof. PhD. Lea Holst Laursen,
Aalborg University
Professor, PhD, Marie Frier-Hvejsel,
Aarhus School of Architecture
PhD committee: Associate Professor Hanna Mattila (chair)
Aalborg University, Denmark
Professor Nicolai Bo Andersen
Royal Danish Academy, Denmark
Associate Professor Roberto Cavallo
Delft University of Technology, Belgium
PhD Series: Technical Faculty of IT and Design, Aalborg University
Department: Department of Architecture,
Design and Media Technology
ISSN (online): 2446-1628
ISBN (online): 978-87-7573-701-7
Published by:
Aalborg University Press
Kroghstræde 3
DK – 9220 Aalborg Ø
Phone: +45 99407140
aauf@forlag.aau.dk
forlag.aau.dk
© Copyright: Kemo Usto
Printed in Denmark by Stibo Complete, 2023
v
~
S A F E S i N K
T E C T O N I C S
.
~
Towards a Metabolism of the Built Environment
within Planetary Capacities
~ by ~
. K U .
~
Kemo Usto
Dissertation submitted May 2023
vi
Abstract
This PhD thesis is a theory-building exploration that attempts to build a material-
centered and metabolic architectural theory based on two complementary disciplinary
frameworks, i.e., that of industrial ecology and tectonic design theory.
Material flows in the built environment are a large and complex dynamic, containing
certain paradoxical mechanisms where intentions and material manifestations are
sometimes not aligned as intended (Jevons Paradox). As an extension of this, we can
observe that the practical and material dimensions of theory building are lacking in
architectural theoretical discourse. Specifically, even in cases where architectural
theory explicitly centralizes matter, it does not really integrate actual (metabolic)
material concerns but only uses matter as a stepping-stone for the legitimization of
more and more creative endeavors (and subsequent material flows). To deal with these
discrepancies, this doctoral study hypothesized the potentials of juxtaposing industrial
ecology (social metabolism) theory and tectonic theory towards the development of a
metabolic theory informed by industrial ecology. The questions are thus how such a
theory can be built, and what its subsequent analytic and design capacities could bring
in terms of new insights and critical reflections?
To explore this, this doctoral thesis structures a systematic interdisciplinary research
design by way of a mixed method abductive research approach. It uses a multitude of
relevant methods – both in the written papers as well as the dissertation chapters (of
building and testing of the theory) – to systematize the exploration and theory
development methods are needed: case study, research-by-design, method, literary
reviews, and several other methods for working with interdisciplinarity.
The findings resulted in a theory called (im)material metabolism which centralizes the
notion of Urban Sink and its nuanced spectrum of five key constructs of material and
immaterial considerations which are inter-relational and causal. The application and
testing of said theory also brought about new metabolic insights. In the instance of an
analytic application, the key finding was that of the (im)material surplus which
potential performs as a material investment. In the instance of the design application,
the theory permitted an exploration of large-scale urban systems of storage sites as a
way to deal with large amounts of construction waste. Both the analytic and design
capacities allowed for a further linking of other fields to define what is a seemingly
abstract “metabolic” understanding of the built environment could entail through the
notion of the Urban Sink.
While the theory promoted significant considerations, reflections, and findings
concerning material use in the built environment, further research should be done to
either explore new facets and trajectories as well as further qualify and substantiate
the found considerations and other variants they may have. The theory cannot replace
other theories and methods but acts supplementarily to both design theories, methods,
and tools.
vii
Abstract (Danish)
Denne ph.d.-afhandling er en udforskning af teori, der forsøger at opbygge en
materiale-centreret og metabolisk arkitekturteori baseret på to komplimenterende
disciplinære rammer; nemlig den industrielle økologi og tektonik design teori.
Materialestrømme i det byggede miljø er en stor og kompleks dynamik, der også
indeholder visse paradoksale mekanismer, hvor intentioner og materielle
manifestationer ikke altid er i overensstemmelse, (Jevons Paradox). I forlængelse af
dette kan vi i den arkitektoniske teoretiske diskurs observere, at den praktiske og
materielle dimension af teoriopbygning mangler, selv i tilfælde hvor arkitektonisk
teori eksplicit centreres omkring materie, integreres der ikke reelle (metaboliske)
materiale hensyn, men anvender blot materie som et springbræt for at legitimere flere
og flere kreative initiativer (og efterfølgende materielle strømme). For at imødegå
disse diskrepanser, udvikledes en hypotese PhD studiet om potentialet i at
sammenstille industriøkologisk (social metabolisme) teori og tektonik teori mod
udvikling af en metabolisk teori informeret af industriel økologi. Spørgsmålet er
derfor, hvordan en sådan teori kan opbygges, og hvad dens efterfølgende analytiske
og designmæssige kapaciteter kan bringe af nye indsigter og kritiske refleksioner? For
at udforske dette struktureres PhD undersøgelsen systematiseres med et tværfagligt
forskningsdesign ved hjælp af en mixed-method, abduktiv forskningsmetode. Denne
PhD undersøgelse bruger en række relevante metoder, både i de skrevne artikler og i
afhandlingskapitlerne (til opbygning og test af teorien) til at strukturere og
systematisere udforskningen og teoriudviklingen. Dette er gjort ved casestudier,
forskning gennem design, metode, litteraturstudier og flere metoder til arbejde med
tværfaglighed.
Dette resulterede i teorien, den (im)materiel metabolisme, som centraliserer begrebet
Urban Sink, sammen med dens nuancerede spektrum af fem centrale bestanddele af
materielle og immaterielle overvejelser, der er indbyrdes afhængige og kausale.
Yderligere resulterede anvendelsen og testen af denne teori også i nye metaboliske
indsigt. I tilfælde af analytisk anvendelse var den centrale indsigt af det (im)materielle
”overskud”, som potentielt fungerer som en materiel investering. I tilfælde af
designanvendelse tillod teorien en udforskning af storskala urbane systemer af
opbevaringssteder som en måde at håndtere store mængder bygningsaffald på. Både
de analytiske og designmæssige kapaciteter gjorde det muligt at skabe forbindelse til
andre felter for at definere, hvad en tilsyneladende abstrakt "metabolisk" forståelse af
det byggede miljø kunne indebære gennem begrebet Urban Sink. Mens teorien
fremmede betydelige overvejelser, refleksioner og fund med hensyn til materiale brug
i det byggede miljø, bør yderligere forskning udføres for at undersøge nye facetter og
retninger og for at yderligere kvalificere og underbygge de fundne overvejelser og
undersøge hvilke andre varianter, de kan have. Teorien kan heller ikke erstatte andre
teorier, men fungerer som supplement til både teorier, metoder og værktøjer.
viii
Structure and Content: A Reader’s Guide
This PhD dissertation is structured in a slightly unusual way given its explorative
interdisciplinary trajectory, as it aims to build theory based on two very different
theoretical frameworks. Each chapter is thus structured in a dual manner by first
elaborating material flow considerations and then correlating the considerations with
architectural thinking (theory).
The dissertation starts with an introduction (chapter 1)which maps the challenges and
inherent issues regarding the ways the built environment consumes and moves
materials. The chapter then maps the tendencies which may be at fault (at least
partially) for the lack of insight and challenges of material flows in the practice of
architectural theory/theorizing. The chapter ends with a hypothesis that a further
reading into industrial ecology and tectonic design theory is pertinent to explore the
potential consequence for architecture when juxtaposed with industrial ecology.
Based on the above hypothesis (chapter 1), chapter 2 proceeds to map respectively the
state-of-the-art: first industrial ecology theory and then tectonic design theory. With
an eye on the theoretical building, the aims of this chapter (2) are to find a middle
ground (i.e., of metabolism) between the two different theoretical frameworks which
would allow a systematic approach to the theory building. After having insight into
the disciplines’ potentials and key points, it is possible for chapter 2 to end with a
Research Question along with two sub-questions that deal with the building and
testing of theory in its analysis and design capacities, respectively.
Chapter 3 deals with the methodological systematization of working with two
complex disciplines, necessitating a range of interdisciplinary methods—i.e.,
metaphor, add, adjust, connect – among others.
Chapter 4 deals with the building of theory. While having insight into the state-of-art
(chapter 2), this chapter initiates the theory development of this concept by
disassembling the two theoretical frameworks to permit a systemic building process.
Prior to the testing/application of the developed theory, said theory was of a lesser and
more speculative nature. For the sake of effective communication, Chapter 4 of this
dissertation presents the "completed" built theory, incorporating the insights gained
from testing and applications discussed in Chapters 5 and 6. This approach avoids the
need for separate chapters on theory development before and after application.
However, Chapters 5 and 6 extensively elaborate on the lessons learned during the
process of theory development.
Chapter 5 deals with the analytical testing of the theory and continues as a case study,
anachronistic analysis, and critique, respectively.
Chapter 6 deals with the testing of built theory’s design capacities. This trajectory
proceeds as a Research-by-Design exploration, links with other relevant design
trajectories and concludes with a set of normative design considerations.
Chapter 7 is the final and concluding chapter and provides a synthetic overview of
theory-building exploration, reflections on methodology and possible future
explorations.
ix
Acknowledgments
This PhD study must acknowledge the many people who have made this it possible
and have influenced its process of becoming.
Firstly, I must thank the department of Architecture, Design & Media, Technology at
Aalborg University for giving me the tremendous opportunity to do research. In
particular, I want to thank the staff of this department who have helped and facilitated
the many aspects surrounding my research. I am immensely appreciative for the
opportunity to work in this environment.
I want to thank my supervisor, Marie Frier Hvejsel. Marie, who herself is a scholar in
interdisciplinary Tectonics. She has provided priceless knowledge and tireless
feedback on content, structure, readability, and needed provocation. I can only hope
to mimic your systematic way of thinking in the future. It is admirable.
I must likewise thank Lea Holst Laursen. Though Lea was not part of the PhD from
the beginning, her contribution was likewise immense. Lea has through her insight
into urban design, provided much-needed feedback on both content, structure and
methodological considerations which were central to this PhD project.
I thank my former supervisors who had to leave for different reasons. Thanks to
Camilla Brunsgaard, who was particularity influential on all things technical
concerning sustainability and likewise methodological aspects. Thank you to Marwa
Dabaieh with whom I had many great talks and who initially inspired me to dive into
industrial metabolic studies.
I did a digital stay-abroad (due to COVID-19) at the Weitzman School of Design at
the University of Pennsylvania as part of my stay-abroad during my PhD studies.
Franca Trubiano took me in and inspired me. Thank you, Franca, for your impeccable
and thorough feedback, inspiring talks, and for providing the space to engage in
activities with PhD students at UPenn. I am immensely grateful.
I also want to thank the people whose PhD studies timewise partially overlapped with
my own. Whether through fleeting conversation or longer talks, they too have
provided inspiration and insights. Thanks to Zakaria Djebbara, Søren Risdal Borg,
Mikkel Poulsen Rydborg, Elias Melvin Christiansen, Cecilie Breinholm Christensen,
Mads Brath Jensen, Andrea Victoria Hernández Bueno, and Avishek Das.
Though it was just before my PhD studies, I also must thank Anne-Catrin Schultz for
whom I contributed a book-chapter. During the development of the said chapter, the
many talks with her about architecture served as guidance for me and shifted my own
understanding of the architectural discipline which influenced the trajectory of my
PhD studies.
Lastly, I must thank my family for their support, sacrifices and patience. Thanks to
my mother, my wife, my daughter, my brother – and more generally family and
friends who have provided support from close and from afar. Thank you all. Thank
God.
Kemo Usto, May 2023
x
Contents
i. Colophon………………………………………………………….….…iv
ii. Tittle Page…………………………………………………………….…v
iii. Abstract………… …………………………………...……………...….vi
iv. Abstract (Danish) ...……………………………………………………vii
v. Structure and Content.: A Reader’s Guide.….…………………...……viii
vi. Acknowledgements ……………………..…..………………………….ix
vii. Table of Contents………………………………………………..………x
Chapter 1. Introduction ............................................................................................ 1
1.1. Motivation: Matter vs. Thinking ..................................................................... 1
1.2. Pertinent Currents in Material flows ............................................................... 4
1.3. Pertinent Currents in Architectural Thinking ................................................ 17
1.4. The Pertinent Disciplines and their Theoretical Frameworks ....................... 32
Chapter 2. State of the Art and Research Question ............................................ 37
2.1. Industrial Ecology ......................................................................................... 37
2.2. Tectonic Theory ............................................................................................ 45
2.3. Conclusion of SoA: Metabolism in the Middle ............................................. 58
2.4. Research Question ......................................................................................... 63
Chapter 3. Methodology and Research Design ..................................................... 65
3.1. Research Strategy .......................................................................................... 65
3.2. Theory Building ............................................................................................ 68
3.3. Theory Testing .............................................................................................. 82
3.4. Ontological and Epistemological considerations .......................................... 86
3.5. Conclusion: Research Design...................................................................... 106
xi
Chapter 4. Building Theory ................................................................................. 113
4.1. Theoretical Disassembling of the two Metabolisms ................................... 113
4.2. Industrial Ecology (Metabolism of chemical engineering) ......................... 114
4.3. Tectonic Stoffwechsel (Metabolism from Architecture) ............................. 127
4.4. Towards an (Im)Material Metabolism ........................................................ 153
4.5. Conclusion .................................................................................................. 202
Chapter 5. Testing Theory: Analysis ................................................................... 205
5.1. (Im)material Metabolism in Analysis.......................................................... 205
5.2. A Study of Multiple Cases .......................................................................... 206
5.3. Expanding the horizon – anachronistic analysis and critique ...................... 221
5.4. Conclusion .................................................................................................. 238
Chapter 6. Testing Theory: Design ...................................................................... 241
6.1. (Im)Material Metabolism in Design ............................................................ 241
6.2. Design Scenario – Research by Design ....................................................... 242
6.3. Expanding the Horizon – other prescriptive capacities ............................... 257
6.4. Conclusion .................................................................................................. 272
Chapter 7. Conclusion: Synthesis on Theory Development .............................. 277
7.1. Conclusion: The (Im)Material Metabolism ................................................. 277
7.2. Reflections .................................................................................................. 284
7.3. Future studies .............................................................................................. 286
Epilogue ................................................................................................................. 291
Bibliography .......................................................................................................... 292
List of Figures ........................................................................................................ 320
Table of Appendices .............................................................................................. 327
xii
Chapter 1.
Introduction
This PhD thesis explores the possibility of building theory across disciplines with a
focus on challenges of material consumption in the built environment. As the city is
behaving as a large-scale organism that has its own metabolic rates of material
consumption, the challenge is understanding how such dynamics can be reconsidered
concerning limited resources (and planetary capacities) through a critical tectonic
design approach to safely handle materials. While this is a brief look into what is to
come in later chapters. the purpose of this chapter is to explore the background
conditions and possibilities of relevant disciplinary challenges and insights that can
be used in the subsequent theory-building efforts.
Chapter 1 gives the background of the dual challenge of material considerations and
architectural thinking. The chapter elaborates on the key tendencies of the building
industry concerning materials use. Additionally, it juxtaposes the material flows
conditions with the “nature” of architectural thinking, allowing for the discernment of
discrepancies within architectural theory in terms of material flows concerns. The
chapter finally outlines the relevant disciplines and their theoretical frameworks for
the later theory development: industrial ecology and tectonic design theory.
1.1. Motivation: Matter vs. Thinking
With modernization and technological development, everything around us seems
more and more complex and interconnected. This is also the case for the built
environment and is especially true in the face of resource scarcity and climate change.
What otherwise should have been a simple profession of “four walls and a roof” (De
Graaf 2017), architecture is becoming more and more complex as a result of having
to integrate multiple knowledge forms from multiple disciplines while facing social,
economic and environmental challenges. The difficulty of such integration also
increases because architecture as a profession has branched out into many “sub-
professions” such an urban design, building design, planning etc., and architecture.
1.1.1. The Backdrop
Considering these frustrations, the first seed planted for this PhD thesis is rooted in a
book chapter I wrote before my PhD study. The book chapter “Real Architecture –
the object (cause) of desire” (Usto 2020)—is a philosophical and
speculative/polemical paper on the complex ontological nature of architecture which
attempts to consider empirical conditions of architecture as well as metaphysical
2
legitimizations as a whole. This chapter, along with another paper (Usto 2019) was a
kind of “shots in the dark” although they did have their own legitimacy. Unknown at
the time, both of the papers had significant metabolic implications and potentials but
lacked rigor regarding becoming an applicable theory and framework relevant for
architects, designers, and engineers.
A significant part of my motivation is the interdisciplinary challenges of the built
environment. The complexity and difficulty of the built environment contribute to the
fact that architecture is a complex entity with many disciplines, professions, and
fields. This complexity is why I remain fascinated by it. Architecture is a kind of
slippery Thing which can trick you into thinking you have finally understood it but
something always eludes your grasp of it. The building industry or building culture
(architecture included) can be considered by what in System Theory and Complexity
Science is categorized as a Complex Adaptive System (CAS). This categorization is
in and of itself a part of a larger network of socio-economic, cultural, and natural
conditions. As scholars have indicated, CAS is “at the heart of many contemporary
problems” (Holland 2006) – i.e., be anything from ecosystems, cities, markets etc., –
and thus constitutes what scholars in interdisciplinary research have categorized as a
“wicked problem” (Keestra et al 2016). Even in this push toward system-thinking in
architecture and planning, some potentially essential aspects of the building industry
are slipping through the grasp of the system such as architecture-itself (spatial
character, experience, spatial quality etc.) (Autrup 2021).
It is difficult to change the building industry, as it is a complex phenomenon involving
market forces, legislation, demographic shifts, trends etc. Perhaps a modest
contribution can be made by juxtaposing architecture with an engineering discipline
to try to re-actualize the importance of architectural design thinking and hopefully
provide theoretical simplicity to the vast complexity.
1.1.2. Architecture With Engineering – or Apollon et Medusa
Keeping in mind the challenges of complexity and integration of disciplines within
architectural discourse, we have seen historical and ongoing examples of both practice
and theory integrating technical engineering considerations with architectural ones.
Historically one could perhaps argue that the field of “engineer” was inherent to the
position of the architect, but in modern times these fields became separate professions
and disciplines which again would overlap and be integrated. The most significant,
and perhaps familiar, has been the integration of structural engineering and
architectural design. This has not only been done by taking into account structural
aspects in solving spatial problems. There are good examples where designers have
actively generated spatial configurations and phenomenological effects grounded in
an understanding of material properties aligned with structural geometries to “push
Introduction
3
the envelope” of what is possible in architecture. Examples of this could be the works
by Santiago Calatrava (Tzonis 2007), or the collaborations between Cecil Balmond
and OMA (Balmond et al 2007) among others.
There have been other types of integration of engineering into architecture, and indoor
climate and MEP/HVAC engineering should be a significant example. Integrating
such approaches into architecture can be done by attempting to accommodate
technical installations to a predefined spatial setup and its indoor climatic challenges.
Importantly, there are examples of how a fundamental understanding of the dynamics
of the indoor climate and energy performance allows for spatial configurations which
contain unique architectural qualities. This is exemplified in the works and research
of Phillipe Rahm (Clement, Rahm 2006) and Isak Worre Foged (2014; 2019) (among
others) who apply micro and macro climatic considerations as design drivers.
The integration of engineering considerations with architectural design has become
more and more common. The integration of engineering is pertinent given the many
challenges that come with the climate and sustainability. It is thus timely to explore
yet another engineering field – an engineering field that is highly relevant for the
hegemonic dynamics of the building industry and how it consumes materials (its
material flows). With all the current emphasis on sustainability, life cycles, circular
economies, and material consumption, the very first steps of this doctoral study were
concerned with exploring different applied sciences, looking for theoretical and/or
methodical frameworks which were pertinent to consider. This search arrived at the
theoretical and methodological framework of industrial ecology from chemical
engineering. In the following, this will be elaborated on why and how.
1.1.3. Issues of Matter and Thinking
While the current material flows tendencies of societies are manifested through our
actions and practices, if we are to make a shift in said patterns of material consumption
the challenge is approaching the mental structures and thinking which have
manifested said practices. With the abovementioned in mind, the issues in general can
be circumscribed into categories of materials and material movement (how building
materials are made, constructed, dismantled or demolished in the relations between
city and natural environment and generally concerning material finitude and scarcity)
and patterns of thinking in societal, aesthetical, cultural aspects which tend to “steer”
the movement of physical matter through demand for consumption. Thus, in relation
to the built environment and building industry, the fundamental challenge is situating
the building industry in material and immaterial beings and relations and
conceptualizing such conditions within an architectural discourse in meaningful ways
to apply in the architecture and engineering of the built environment.
Nonetheless, materials are understood differently and a variety of epistemological and
disciplinary approaches create differences in how materials are either analyzed and
4
observed as well as how they are treated, transformed, and applied. This means the
challenges and issues of matter are paired with the need to understand matter from
different and relevant disciplines and epistemological positions: the shifting from an
understanding of the material being infinite and endlessly malleable to an
understanding of material finitude within planetary scarcity.
Unlike the water of a river which flows irrespective of humans, the material flows of
society are dependent on their cultures of consumption. Since we are interested in the
issues of matter, one should of course acquire a mapping of the flows of materials in
the built environment and additionally get an idea of how the mental/ideological
inclinations should govern them. While there can be many different cultural facets
that sustain material consumption, this thesis is limited to architectural theory as the
point of attack/critique. Before we can change anything in practice, we have to change
how we think and theorize. Specifically, what is missing in the current theoretical
discourse which could address such uncritical use of materials? The assumption is to
thus attempt a contribution that may not make a significant dent in the current modes
of operation and practice in the building industry but at least lay grounds for different
perspectives and considerations and discussions.
There are many different tools, methods and theories which have or could have
immense consequences for architectural thinking. Firstly, the realm of material
consumption and material flows are in themselves very complex, and there is more
and more literature being written on what architecture and design has to implement to
be more sustainable path. Needless to say, it can sometimes be difficult to wrap one's
head around the many different theories, tools, and methods and how they influence
material consumption. While more and more data and scientific findings on climate
change (IPCC 2022) and material consumption (European Commission 2021) is
coming to light, it can be difficult to absorb and “architecturalize” such data and
knowledge and understand the architectural consequences of it. Generally speaking,
architects and designers/thinkers within built environments disciplines and
professions need their own architectural way of thinking which is inherently sensitive
to material (pre)conditions. To do this, we need an overview of material consumptions
juxtaposed with the structures of architectural thinking (theory) to first find gaps and
discrepancies before initiating the theory building.
1.2. Pertinent Currents in Material flows
This section has a dual purpose. Firstly, the key mechanism and tendencies in material
flows are mapped. Secondly, tendencies in architectural theory development and what
kind of misalignments are present in architectural theory are compared which could
prevent adopting a more ecological way of thinking the built environment. Starting
with the materials flows, the section outlines the general material flows tendencies
Introduction
5
(1.2.1), the shift to circular thinking and the challenges linked with that shift (1.2.2).
Finally, the section concludes by emphasizing the immense risk of different forms of
entanglement and the so-called “take-back-effect” (or Jevons Paradox), which can be
a problematic phenomenon in the built environment (1.2.3).
1.2.1. Material Flows in the Built Environment
Chemical engineering literature elaborates that a modern city compared to a medieval
city (which have the same size) consumes materials by an order of magnitude
(Brunner et al 1994), and since 1970 those material flows have almost tripled (IRP,
2019). This increase in material flows means that there is a larger accumulation of
materials within societal infrastructure, and it is projected to increase (possibly
double) by 2050 (from approximately 80 Giga-tons to 167 Giga-tons) (OECD 2018;
European Commission 2021, UNEP 2022). This is transpiring while consumption of
non-renewable materials is growing (IRP 2017; European Union 2019).
Figure 1. Principle diagram of material flows which increase the building stock
in the current “linear” fashion.
Generation of waste is estimated to increase by 70% by 2050 (Kaza et al 2018).
Buildings use approximately 40% of extracted recourses (in volumetric amounts) and
make up 40% of solid waste in developed countries (IPCC 2018). This puts great
pressure on how professionals within the building industry (architects, engineers, etc.)
transform and apply these materials more sustainably. Scholars who focus on the
aspect of “demolition” in architecture point out that demolition of buildings occurs
partially due to buildings being outdated and undesirable in the social and cultural
context (Cairns, Jacobs 2013) and not always as a result of material failure and tear.
This dimension of demolition is further complicated as authors speculate on the
inherence of “demolition” within the building industry. This speculation can create a
“circular” dialectic for a dynamic building market. In this regard, Jeremy Till –
6
architectural practitioner and scholar – shows that the market is indeed not interested
in creating flexible housing and is much more interested in demolishing and building
to maintain a high activity rate (Till, Schneider, 2005; Goodbun et al 2014). This
activity embodies the “planned obsolescence” (or “creative destruction”) of market
dynamics where the desire for consumption goes beyond actual material needs
(McGowan 2016; Jonsson, Wennerlind 2023).
The aspect of the high activity rates is an indication of the predominant functioning
of the building industry and its dependence on demolition which further necessities
service and materials/products along with building activity (Cairns, Jacobs 2014; Till
2009). We can thus hypothesize that the current market dynamics define the space (or
frame) within which problems can be solved. As Elenora Eberhardt—a researcher on
circularity and LCA from an engineering perspective—has indicated, industrial
ecology may be too radical as it does not permit an opportunity for profit (Eberhardt
2020). The problem field, as it seems to be defined today, is that we are looking for
solutions which will permit the building industry to maintain a high level of dynamic
flows and material consumption while being sustainable. It is my assumption that
there is an unspoken understanding of the building industry which has almost an
implicit “fantasy”, i.e., what we have to design a circular building industry where
more and more building activity will be more sustainable than a slow (and considerate)
building industry (and it subsequent material consumption). While this may seem
impossible, it is my claim that the general understanding (of the industry) is that this
is indeed possible in a circular economy. Design-for-disassembly (DfD), among other
strategies, could simply permit the continued input of more and more material and
thus the continued growth of the building stock. Both Cairns & Jacobs’ and Till’s
elaborations on the central function of demolition in the built environment permit us
to develop a hypothesis of the building industry having an implicit yet very systematic
agenda of a self-perpetuating loop of “bad circularity.” This “bad circularity” is
materialized when we design buildings, they are to some extent poorly made. This
could be due to a lack of experiential quality, poor material quality or poor reuse value.
Such buildings are usually cheap and fast and get “easily” demolished with little or
no outcry from the public. When buildings get demolished, new ones are built which
meet the new demands; however, they are at risk of being poorly made and
demolished. The high dynamic of the building industry is thus maintained which is
reflected by the end goal not being good, flexible, long-lasting buildings which people
love and care for, but the very “circular” dynamic of the industry of
building/demolishing which maintains profit opportunity and the need for
professional services.
Architects are more and more under pressure to deliver projects with less and less time
allocated for meeting client and developer needs. This is happening while
urbanization continues (Baeumler et al 2021), population increases (UNDESAPD
2022) and there is a rise in floor area pr. capita (International Energy Agency, 2019;
Bierwirth, Thomas 2019, pp. 15; EU Buildings Database 2023). All of these
Introduction
7
tendencies amplify the material increase in building stock and are among other factors
that cause an increase in CO2 emissions which in turn continue to increase global
temperature (IPCC 2022). On the “other side” of the great material accumulation
within the cities and overall building stock is the degradation of soil and thwarting of
biodiversity (IPCC 2019) which partially occurs due to deforestation (ibid),
excavations for materials (ibid), and the increasing footprint of urban areas (Du,
Mahendra 2019). Environmental literature highlights the importance of land use as
crucial (IPCC 2019; IPCC 2019b) which in turn creates pertinence to architectural
design and urban planning in possibly limiting the expansion of urban footprint
without limiting the lived quality of architectural and recreative spaces.
Figure 2. The growing urban stock and covered area due to urbanization, increase in
population and increase in floor area pr. Capita among other parameters.
This means that the structure of the market, given its many agencies, i.e., architects,
engineering stakeholders, different material and product manufacturers, all constitute
a complicated system which allows for the self-building of new smart cities in the
middle of deserts which lay as ruins (Easterling 2016; Wang et al 2019) and
uncoordinated building activity beyond actual demand in existing cities (Kjær 2022)
which are driven by concerns to increase profit (Love et al, 2012).
Given the increase in urban footprint, increase in population in urban areas, overall
population growth, and the increase in floor area pr. capita (Bierwirth, Thomas 2019),
the architectural character of the built environment is to be criticized and questioned.
There is a great deal being built –whether it is self-built, speculative investment
construction or buildings designed by architects (even by so-called starchitects) – and
there has been critique of such works due to their overemphasis on creating spectacles
without providing meaningful phenomenological and lived quality for people
(Buchanan 2015). While recent neuro-aesthetical and brain science has elaborated the
potential of aesthetics and heterogenous designs (Chatterjee et al 2021), a recent study
elaborates on (lay) people mostly taking a liking to old and classical aesthetics while
predominantly disliking bland modern buildings (Mouratidis, Hassan 2020). In other
words, there is simply great dissatisfaction among the public regarding different
aspects of the contemporary design of the built environment due to the cities lacking
8
varied and meaningful (Kristensen 2020) spaces in engaging human scales
(Christiansen 2020; Svenborg 2019).
Figure 3. The degradation of soils and biodiversity,
and aggressive excavation of hinterlands.
With the tendency to increase building stock, there is little emphasis on the built
architectural character (Kristensen 20220; Svenborg 2019) which as we have seen
increases the likely hood of demolition and the contribution to construction waste of
non-renewable materials. The above-mentioned, although not only constituted by
these tendencies, characterizes what is conceptualized as the age of the
“Anthropocene” which means that human activity is the factor that is geologically the
cause of the greatest flows of matter (Elhacham et al 2020). To this point, the building
industry is largely linear (as material consumption is expected to increase), which
maintains it within a growth paradigm (Schmelzer 2015).
Material scarcity is also an important issue. This issue is so important that leading
researchers are elaborating on the primary future recourse for new buildings being the
existing building stock and not virgin material sources. These researchers are
exploring different ways to map current building stock for such a scenario (Kleemann
et al 2017; Lederer et al, 2021; Honic et al 2023). This means that even if the carbon
footprints of any process related to the building would become minuscule compared
to now, material capacities and scarcity will remain an issue.
1.2.2. The Shift to Circular ways of thinking
Given these tendencies of the material flows – which have been oncoming for some
time – what is to be done to accommodate these challenges? We are seeing a grand
shift from a linear to a circular way of thinking from both a scholastic and practice-
based perspective as well as a political legislative perspective (Dansk Industri 2023).
Awareness is being raised of the circular way of thinking; however, analytical and
critical literature has indicated some issues in this transition towards circularity.
Introduction
9
Scientific literature on CE has shown that there are (at the time of the paper) 114
different definitions of how CE is conceptualized (Kirchherr et al 2017) and that there
are still great challenges to a serious transition to circular ways due to a “lack of
business case illustrating possible revenue” (Ritzén, Sandström 2017). It has been
noted that the complex disarray of the many conceptualizations of CE makes CE prone
to misinterpretation and misuse being conceptualized (Kirchherr, et al, 2017). This
prompts the speculation that complex and seemingly well-argued opportunistic
“greenwashing” endeavors can fall under the umbrella of CE as well. As Kirchherr et
al elaborated, the variety of understandings and conceptualizations of CE “collapse”
and end up in a “conceptual deadlock (Kirchherr et al 2017). In this deadlocked
situation, there is a great lack of emphasis on the social dimension (Kirchherr et al
2017). While CE possess the ability to attract business opportunities, it needs to
strengthen their scientific base regarding achieving sustainability (Korhonen et al
2018).
When it comes to the buildings industry disciplines, architects and architectural
engineers have been familiar with working with energy-optimizing designs such as
the Passive House concepts, Zero-Energy and other approaches of building
operational aspects (Malmqvist, et al 2018) which have been part of a “green” and
“sustainable” agenda but – given the great amounts of material flows from natural
resources to societal building stock – now is being replaced with a greater emphasis
on transitioning to a circular way of thinking and Circular Economy (EU Sustainable
Development Goals).
This shift towards circular thinking has come to mean an inclusion of aspects from
production, use to waste (Harris et al 2023) and circular economy conceptualization
in the building industry which is considered as “restorative” and “regenerative” via
principles of “slowing”, “narrowing” and “closing” of the circle (Bocken et al 2016;
Geissdoerfer et al, 2017) and thus seeks to preserve material resources and stock
(Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2012, 2015a; European Commission, 2020a). Thus, a
focus on re-loops (Reike et al., 2018), can create multiple loops potentially inside and
outside of a building (Rehberger, Hiete, 2020). The shift towards circular thinking in
the building industry is immense, and there is a growing number of conceptualizations
and contributions to this end. However, there is still no streamlined and commonly
accepted way to conceptualize CE in building (Hart et al, 2019). Contemporary
literature on Circular Economy in the building industry by “alignment” with LCA
(Life Cycle Assessment) and the predominant model of circular conceptualization is
based on the cascading model of the Ellen McArthur Foundation (Ellen Macarthur
Foundation 2013; 2015). A recent state-of-the-art paper illustrates a predominant
focus on “design for disassembly” (Hvejsel, Beim 2019) along with mapping a
number of other different CE design principles (Eberhardt et al 2020). When we CEs
applications in the building industry. Concerning life cycles, there has been a clear
emphasis on “down-cycling” (Di Maria, et al 2018) which also sees a lesser emphasis
on the assessment of environmental performance (Andersen et al 2020). Furthermore,
10
on account of the currently limited approach of mostly single-cycle assessments
(Malmquist et al, 2018), there is a need for a more “ambitious” multi-cycle perspective
as recently attempted via an alignment of LCA with CE (Eberhardt 2020). Eberhardt
et al conducted a literature review, mapping out all the current working CE principles
in the building industry (Eberhardt et al 2020). Even so, the authors did not consider
the explicit potential of the architectural and tectonic character and its proteins in
relation to material flows. The Danish Ministry of Environment postulates that the
main strategy for minimizing waste is the “prevention of waste generation”
(Miljøministeriet 2021, pp: 25). It is thus possible to postulate that architectural and
tectonic character could help with the prevention of waste generation. If this is the
case, what are the particular conditions and relations between material aspects and the
experiential ones? In extension of this, scholars from a metabolic study circle argue
for a need for a trajectory towards working and theorizing of social-natural “hybrids”
(Fischer-Kowalski 2003).
The architectural profession is attempting to implement and apply these
considerations. Examples such as the Circular House by Danish architects 3XN/GXN
(Circular House 2019; Circular House Lab 2020) remaking of waste materials and
growth of organic materials (Hebel 2014; 2017) and the Resource Rows, among other
projects (Lendager, Pedersen 2020), are precedents of “proof of concept” that it is
indeed possible to make circular considerations and reuse waste materials. Such
principles, however, are not applied on an industry-wide scale. Rather, when having
to reuse waste materials, it is often the case that they are used in the new building. It
is however not the practice to apply waste material in an outdoor urban design setting
as a recreational space. There is likewise an attempt to make co-called reduction
roadmaps which centralize total carbon emissions but not material flows and resources
capacities (Reduction Roadmap 2023; Petersen et al 2022), implying that material
volumes can circulate “conventionally” as long as their carbon footprint is lowered
through a shift to more organic (wood, straw etc.,) construction materials. Perhaps
more radically, scholar and urbanist Charlotte Malterre-Barthes suggested
construction moratoriums where selective and strategic ceases of the halt of
construction could both limit material use and increase social justice (Malterre-
Barthes 2023).
Research on clean organic materials is perhaps best epitomized by scholars such as
Anne Beim and the research group CINARK at the Copenhagen Art Academy. At the
forefront of this particular research is an emphasis on phenomenological quality along
with advocacy of less use of highly polluting materials (such as concrete which is non-
renewable and becoming scarce) (CINARK 2019) and the advocacy of more clean
organic materials such as wood and straw (CINARK 2019). Other Tectonic design
literature also engaged with the question of circularity and circular economy which
approaches the question of matter from a critical approach (Hvejsel, Beim 2019) but
also examines more opportunistic “enabling” conceptualizations by linking and
Introduction
11
transferring tectonic principles of detailing (assembling) to CE in the building industry
(Ejstrup, Munch-Petersen 2019).
General observations and concerns regarding material flows
While circularity is a complex concept and there is still a long way to go to implement
circular principles at the core of the design of products and services, many companies
are already using circular principles which limits waste, work hours, and saves costs
on making, transporting etc. Despite this, there has been a “reluctance” to implement
a circular economy due to the lack of possibility of increased revenue which is
significantly linked to the current capitalist dynamics of linear material consumption.
This is important as within the many and intertwined social, economic, and
environmental challenges, there is a significant shift towards more considered use of
materials relying on the literature of Circular Economy and life cycle thinking.
Figure 4. Diagram showing that "circularity" is largely a metaphor,
and a need safe handling of end-of-life is still needed.
At the same time, circularity is perhaps not a “radical” enough concept that could
provide a different trajectory outside of the current growth and consumption
paradigm. The prospect of transferring the omitted/suppressed industrial ecology
thinking into architectural discourse could nevertheless hold pertinent potential. An
industrial ecology approach may have to demand that we accept that material flows
are ultimately linear and that the quest is first and foremost to slow down the flux of
materials. Keeping that in mind, one of the ways to do that is to circulate elements and
materials.
12
Figure 5. Linear, despite re-strategies and thus needing safe handling of materials.
CE in its current iterations lacks what is needed to propose significant shifts in its
relations to nature (Bianchi, Cordella 2023), and perhaps more radically, the concept
of circularity “…will not be able to decisively reduce environmental impacts as it
operates in and supports economic growth” (Weidmann 2023). In relation to the
above, material consumption is intertwined with the conditions of the social, cultural,
and economic “addiction-to-growth” mentality (Constanza 2022). The use of
“circular” strategies and design is ideologically a call for a sustainable relationship
with nature while practically privileging economic circularity and thus risking the
manifestation of continued addiction to growth. This further indicates that even if
circularity can exist in some form, it is only partial and mainly operational within the
social spheres (cities etc.,), and the circular cascading system is still confined to the
“use” phase. Even if the use phase has more and more cascading loops, at some point,
a product or parts of it will fail or get demolished thus requiring safe handling (a safe
sink). It is thus pertinent to acknowledge that material flows between society and
nature will probably forever remain linear, regardless of how many cascading loops
are introduced. For this reason, the challenge is to slow down the “metabolic rate” of
society. We can introduce material loops which can ultimately minimize the material
input into society, but the material flows are still mainly linear. As we currently see,
the city (with its current physical, socio-economic, and ideological manifestations)
acts mostly as a facilitator which maintains and increases material input into itself
(and thus increases waste generation) thus necessitating a re-conceptualization of
what the building stock functions are and could be.
Introduction
13
Figure 6. Own redrawing of diagrammatic distribution of material flows from a Danish
national perspective (Miljøsyrelsen Affaldsrapporten 2019).
Recent CE literature speculates that hegemonic discourse has “deliberately” moved
away from the “industrial ecology” concept due to the lack of the economic dimension
while CE is more attuned to business opportunity (Eberhart 2020, pp.23). This simply
means that there is an inherent antagonism between making sustainable material flows
and making money (at least from the current cultural and social predispositions
perspective). The reason for “industrial ecology” being low-key “controversial” is
because it approaches the mapping and design of material and energy exchanges
between society and nature (hinterlands) on metabolic concepts as seen in chemical
engineering literature in Material Flow Analysis approaches which possibly prohibits
“freedom” for profit-oriented dynamics which are dependent on material use.
Furthermore, CE literature points out that there is great risk involved in planning for
buildings that are supposed to last for over 200 years (Eberhart 2020) while the risk
is lowered for strategies aimed at 30-50 years. The same authors also acknowledge
that there is no guarantee that the circular design principles will be realized in the
future as they are currently intended (Eberhart 2020). Studying the case of a +200
years life span, it is very clear that phenomenological value and overall architectural
character are not part of the estimate. Many such estimations of carbon footprints (or
other toxins) are not only here-and-now footprints but also estimates which include
considerations of the possible/potential lifespans of buildings and elements within the
estimate (Eberhardt et al 2020), indicating an initial footprint can “appropriate” itself
over time given a prolonged life span, reusability, circulatory etc.
Since then, and in parallel, more radical ideas are being brought forth from outside
the building industry professionals and scholars. These include ideas such as degrowth
and decoupling (Hickel 2022; Schmelzer et al 2022) along with pushing for the need
to develop an understanding of planetary boundaries and what kind of influence and
consequence this could have for the design and building of cities.
Other scholars have attempted to deal with the phenomena of material consumption
in the building industry. Specifically, there have also been attempts to systematize the
challenges of consumption through theories and models on planetary boundaries
14
(Habert et al 2020), i.e., the efficient categorization and management of building
industry components as systemized into a global carbon budgeting system. The
argument is thus, since it is not possible to “budget” architectural character, carbon
budgets are not necessarily a guarantee of architectural longevity through multiple
uses, architectural character. and appreciated phenomenological characteristics.
However, just as well as systematizing management models and normative systems
of organization can hold efficacy, there is likewise a well-documented critique of
efficiency optimizations and as such efforts can in turn have non-intended material
realizations and consequences which seem paradoxical in relation to the initial
intentions.
1.2.3. Challenges of Entanglement and Jevon’s Paradox
Related to the above conditions and challenges, the building industry is not a simple
system that can easily be straightened out and changed without having grave effects
on other conditions. In general, this issue is related to entangled conditions (Hodder
2012, 2018; Harman 2014) of not only material resources and their effects on natural
environments but also entanglements in the societal, economic and cultural realms.
Jevon’s paradox (Polimeni et al. 2009; Sorrell 2009), sometimes called the “take-back
effect” or “rebound” (Mavropoulos, Nilsen 2020, pp.9), posits that an
optimization/effectivization of a technique/technology will lead to more material use
and not less. There have already been observed phenomena in the built environments
where questions of improved efficacy have increased consumption empirically. An
example of this is the case observed between 1990-2009 where the energy efficiency
of European households increased but the final energy consumption also increased
instead of decreasing (McGranahan 2015). The literature indicates that these kinds of
“optimization” or new technologies tend to create new markets which promote new
growth dynamics (Schneider 2012, p.5) which, in turn, necessitates a shift away from
a linear economic growth paradigm which challenges the current ideological
presuppositions surrounding new optimized technologies. Another exemplification is
that of the seemingly irrational tendency that the “worst” projects are the ones that get
built (Flyvbjerg 2009). This tendency is connected to many social aspects of the
business as usual and the inherent behaviors distortions (biases) when acting within
the building industry as a decision maker (Flyvbjerg 2021). These aspects, among
others, manifest an immense waste of resources over time and the antithetical
consideration to this “business as usual” would be a modular system approach
(Flyvbjerg, Gardner 2023) in order to attempt to contain both monetary waste and
waste of resources.
“Circularity” is becoming a buzzword in the sense that CE strategies are mostly
implemented into industry insofar as they optimize production dynamics which make
production more efficient in order to increase profit. Similarly, literature on CE also
acknowledges that CE-strategies could perhaps not be utilized in the future as
intended. It is unclear what incentive profit-oriented agencies will have to reuse old
Introduction
15
materials/elements. For this reason, the main function these agencies have now is to
optimize material processes which minimize costs while legitimizing more and more
material consumption and building activity through a “circular” narrative. In doing so
there is a risk of materializing the Jevons Paradox. An example of that could be the
Nakagin Capsule Tower (Gardini 2022) which holds architectural and historical value
and can in certain ways be considered a proto-circular manifestation where modules
can be added and changed. There was no clear incentive to add to and change the
building and as such it got demolished.
Another important type of entanglement is the already mentioned notion of the “bad
circularity”. This hinges on the economic dynamics of the building industry where
poorly designed buildings are built and will followingly require either extensive
renovation or demolition. This then loops back to more demand for new buildings
(which again are built quickly in poor quality) - thus maintaining the economic
circular model of supply and demand by design (Cairns, Jacobs 2014). Jeremy Till
describes this phenomenon as architecture being dependent on demolition. He also
characterizes demolition as effectively inherent to architecture (Till 2009). Apart from
already having entangled in natural processes and resources, there are clear aspects to
criticize in this economic loop. The fact is that the building sector is a large industry
that employs many individuals thus entangling economic growth with growth in
building stock (Næss et al. 2019, pp. 2-3).
Figure 7. The prospect of building more in wood is "strung-up”,
or entangled with many factors, and probably many more than listed here.
If we consider the current popular trajectory of “building more in wood” then such a
trajectory is already problematized from several perspectives by taking on an
industrial ecology point of view. A particularly pertinent example of entanglement
across industries in relation to the well-being of both the natural environment and
16
perhaps in particular of human survival is the compound of phosphorus. This
compound is non-renewable but crucial for the cultivation of plants (meaning both
food needs and growth of trees for construction (Baccini 1997)). We should already
be careful about our phosphorous consumption according to t leading science
(Rockström 2009) which is why food waste is already a pressing issue. Likewise,
wood is also needed in other industries such as furniture and different sorts of paper
products (A4, paper cups etc.,). Since the capacity of forestry is limited, we cannot
simply build endless amounts of wooden buildings or replace all new buildings, now
and in the future, with wooden structures. There is already scientific research on how
large-scale application of forestry would greatly deteriorate soils and biodiversity
(Osman 2014). There are many instances of “shifts” in which one solution of a local
metabolic problem is simply transposed elsewhere for grave consequences
(Magadoff, van Es 2010; Goldenberg 2014) – while locally there is less pollution.
There is thus a need for dialogue and strategic balancing of different factors nationally
and internationally.
Entanglement is a complex phenomenon that could contain many more parameters
which have not yet been mapped out. The significance of Jevon’s Paradox is the
discrepancy between what is intended and what is materialized. One can have certain
intentions in architecture and design, but the physical manifestations can have a
reverse consequence This means that one can start with good intentions (i.e.,
minimizing effects on nature) but the result ends in an increase in negative impacts on
the natural environment. Many variants of “greenwashing” (where supposed good
intentions are either knowingly or unknowingly impossible to achieve or never the
goal) can be seen (Willis et al 2023). More radically, it is not that some external
circumstances skewed the process into undesirable effects. Rather, the intentions
were flawed to begin with, and the lack of the proper scope of the outcome led to the
opposite effect of those intentions. One could also add that no architect directly has
negative or bad intentions when building (i.e., “naturally” our intentions are “good).
Nonetheless, it is not enough to have good intentions. As the above indicates, there is
need for a critical reversal, a kind of “negative” perspective, of the current conditions
if we are to create a “sustainable” relationship between societal consumption and
natural environment as this requires shifts in ideological presuppositions regard the
“eternal” emphasis on “growth” to be able to make a significant dent in the material
flows from nature to society. This shift is perhaps best illustrated by Kate Raworth’s
work. Raworth maps a set of different industries and political agencies, where she
conceptualizes the need to shift away from linear, growth-oriented design thinking
towards a distributive network design orientation (Raworth 2017, pp 26-28). Such a
“network” oriented design could move away from an expansive ideology without
losing life quality.
Introduction
17
Figure 8. An experience of a paradoxical "disconnection" between action/intention and
consequence (cause and effect) due to the complex nature of material flows?
Jevon’s paradox is significant because it urges us to consider that “good intentions”,
along with their tactics and strategies, are not enough, as the “good” intent can have
unintended (“paradoxical”) consequences. We could postulate, that if we fail to adopt
a wider, holistic (“multi-cycle”) industrial ecology approach in the built environment,
we may indeed end up mobilizing (limited applications of) LCA and CE strategies
which risk not warding off but possibly achieving increased material consumption.
There might be too great an emphasis on short-term mitigation of carbon footprints
(which have manifested as the imperatives on more and more carbon construction).
While this is of course needed, there is also a need for wider temporal long-term scope
because an overly emphasized short-term approach could bring about unintended and
unforeseeable consequences long-term. If these tools and strategies allow for a certain
market optimism and remain applied on a single-building level, we may indeed either
achieve or overshoot the expected doubling of the building stock.
Not that we have some insight into the challenges of the material conditions, what are
the current corresponding lines of thought in architectural theory which allow it or fail
to question it? How does architecture theory consider such paradoxical discrepancies
between intention and manifestations, if at all?
1.3. Pertinent Currents in Architectural Thinking
When we have gained a fundamental overview of the many challenges of material
flows, we can perceive that phenomenon like Jevon’s Paradox (the take-back effect)
is a serious discrepancy between what is intended and the final consequences, how
are we as architects/engineers to understand our disciplinary material predicaments?
Specifically, what are the limitations of those ideas and ways of perceiving our reality?
How do architects conceptualize and theorize issues of matter/materiality? When we
observe and formulate the challenges and problems of material flows, how we
18
formulate the problem is also part of the problem. This means that the way we perceive
our conditions structures the (sometimes wrongful) approach to the problem.
There can certainly be many different social, cultural, and economic considerations
for this wrongfully defining problem field across any industry. However, in the case
of architecture, such a “defining of problems” could be structured by something more
fundamental, i.e., theoretical framing, which can steer our mental capacities in certain
directions rather than others. What are the common structuring logics of architectural
theory? Even with the vastness of theoretical variety in architecture, can we observe
some challenges and omissions in how theory is generally structured in architecture?
Stuck in the Growth Paradigm with our Problems
Different professions may seem to have different ontological positions which as a
consequence can have different presuppositions and assumptions regarding what
problems to approach and what solutions are viable for said problems. Technically
inclined professions (hard-fact engineering etc.,) may privilege technocratic
definitions of the problem field which implies “only” technocratic solutions, while
humanities and the arts are not necessarily inclined towards problem-solving in an
equally “rigorous” manner. In relation to architecture, we have seen the critique by
Jeremy Till (Till 2009, pp. 154) in reference to Reyner Banham of how
professionalism manifests itself in relation to problem-thinking:
“A professional is a man with an interest, a continuing interest, in the
existence of problems.” – Reyner Banham (Till 2005).
In the same spirit, the now famous Danish architect, Dorte Mandrup once proclaimed
in relation to a talk regarding loneliness in modern society, that we “should be able to
‘build’ it away” (Raun 2019) which would most likely be categorized in industry
terms as “optimism bias” (Flyvbjerg 2021). Loneliness is a complex issue and cannot
merely be solved through spatial arrangements. Nonetheless, architects can tend to
cling to problems and make them architectural thus making architectural services their
(seemingly only) solution. Jeremy Till further elaborates on how a problem-solving
agenda allows for a profession to strengthen and perpetuate itself (Till 2005).
Introduction
19
Figure 9. Problem-solution dialectics: conventional vs. alternative.
Conventionally, we perceive the built environment and observe pressing challenges
and issues. On account of this, we reflect and propose a solution. However, in such a
process the problem and the solution seem to be overlayed because of the way we
think we are solving the problem in truth perpetuates the existence of problems. The
very problem field has been conceived of as the conventional dialectic of
problem/solution which prompts us to question what a “solution” really entails and
what the scopes of the problem and solution are.
An example seen in today’s predominant analytical approach is the “culture” or norm
of how we define problem privileges as a growth-oriented outlook. This means that
we approach the space of the problem field and its possible solution by recognizing
they are confined within a certain capitalist realist framework. Architects and
designers as professionals in the building industry tend to construe problems in a way
where our services and subsequent building activity are the solution. Even in the
critique of circular economy, which seems to privilege the economic aspect of the
circular trident (omitting social and environmental), my reading here is that the main
implicit problem-defining and problem-solving agenda of the predominant modus
operandi of CE at a more fundamental level is how to “design” a (pseudo-) circular
edifice without it impeding on or even accelerating growth. In such a condition, we
see that the market is already defining the frame of the problem within which research
and innovation can contribute. These challenges are not only visible in practice but in
academia as well. While it is difficult to generalize the many different pockets of
research agendas there are many examples of industrial PhDs and practice-oriented
research which fundamentally act as an aid (or mere consultancy) for the industry to
solve their challenges at more complex and informed levels, while the industrial
norms are very difficult to shift in relation to the social and environmental challenges
of today.
The tendency of industrial PhD is in and of itself not necessarily negative, but it leaves
many dimensions towards who and how a problem field is defined. I think it is
20
important to explicitly speak of and critique this a priori definition of what and who
pre-defines what types of solutions and research is “meaningful” and useful to society.
By choosing impossible idée fixe (green, sustainable, circular), it overtime develops
and materializes an edifice which in a “circular” manner allows for incessant building
activity which “fails” to solve the problem by creating new problems – rather than
materializing “slow” and “narrow” design which stand the test of time while providing
functional, aesthetical and cultural meaning for the city and its population. As such
also fails to question the very space of the problem-definition. The maintaining of a
high rate of building activity for economic reasons fits very well with an emphasis on
DfD-concepts (Hvejsel, Beim 2019) because even if it fails to work as intended in the
future (of building materials and elements actually being reused) the general notion
of circularity functions here and now as a legitimization to maintain the continued
need for material use. What also complicates this challenge is that different
professions and disciplines have very different theoretical foundations and ontological
understandings of the built environment which implicates how they engage with it.
Since we find ourselves “stuck” within the growth paradigm, what are the theoretical
structures which allow this tendency from an architectural perspective?
1.3.1. General characteristics of Architectural Theory
Architectural theory is a seemingly complex edifice which itself can be written in a
complex language to a lesser or greater degree and at times necessitates a large amount
of knowledge and familiarity with philosophy, social critique, politics etc. While there
are many theoretical contributions with very different characteristics, a smaller
number of scholars have attempted to map the structures (or structuring principles) of
architectural theory and theorize them as such (meta-theory). Simply asking the
question “what is a theory” is almost faux pas. Few have attempted to discern the
structures along with providing much-needed critical reflections on practices of
theory-making. Architectural scholar, Karen Cordes Spence, argues that we have to
do away with this opaqueness of architectural theory (Spence 2017).
Introduction
21
Figure 10. Different types of writings in architecture
(own redrawing of Spence’s diagram) (Spence 2017, pp.86).
Spence conceptualizes different variants of architectural writing (Figure 10), which
both overlap and are to be distinguished. This could be compared to distinguishing
theory as one of three main categories in architecture: explanatory, normative and
design-polemical theory (Groat, Wang 2013, pp:111-120). Spence also elaborates that
different written contributions that theorize on the subject of architectural theory
either comes in the categorization of types (i.e., all theory that emphasizes matter
through history is one type) and groups through time (where theories are grouped
together through their historical chronology (Spence 2017, pp. 4). Spence also
elaborates that every theory is guided by ontological, epistemological and
methodological considerations which are likewise guided by four main types of
world-views (Spence 2017, pp. 50-62).
Franca Trubiano, an architect and researcher, in her magnum opus on theory in
architecture articulates the crucial missing dimensions in contemporary architectural
theorizing: those being the question of matter and the question of (the act of) building
(Trubiano 2022). Trubiano furthermore elaborates on the painstakingly simple fact
that architectural theorizing poorly acknowledges: its origins in the acts of building.
It is as if architects consider this aspect of building a pedestrian and common
dimension that they thoroughly understand to the point that they do not even have to
bother with it. In extension of this omission, the dimension of matter and its role in
creating and thinking of architecture equally is not unfolded.
Erik Nygaard, an architectural scholar and theoretician, elaborates very
comprehensively on how theory in architecture is very complex with a wide range of
categories and sub-categorization of theory types (Nygaard 2011). He describes how
architectural theory has developed throughout history and categorizes theory into four
main groups of how architecture is ontologically construed: form, emergence,
reception, and social/cultural product (Nygaard 2011) (figure 11). Nygaard also
highlights a significant distinction within the architectural theory, i.e., that of the
22
normative and descriptive (also sometimes called prescriptive (design) and
descriptive (analysis)). Within both of these categories, architectural theory
axiomatically hinges on either perceiving architecture as art or (merely) building
activity. Nygaard also goes on to theorize on the architectural theory as either being
more of an “objective” nature or more personal and subjective filled with values and
opinions (ibid., pp:43), meaning that it is more systematic and problem-solving or
driven by personal desires for expression and exploration. Furthermore, Nygaard
highlights that architectural theory is a vast and complex (open even) entity which is
made up of “…written architecture systems, whole or partial…” (ibid, pp:43). He
claims that architectural theory has been developed by architects, philosophers,
theologians etc., but also claims that architects’ own theory development tends to be
more “pragmatic” due to is the inclination of physical synthesis in the built form
related to the “nature” of the profession (ibid., pp:43).
Figure 11. A redrawing of Nygaard’s 4 categories of architectural theory (Nygaard 2011).
While Nygaard delineates the analytic and design capacities of each theory in the
introductory chapter before actually he elaborates on them in the book, he writes that
he describes the different theoretical positions (of understanding architecture) in a way
where he does not systematically differentiate analysis and design (Nygaard. 2011,
pp: 68). While this can be perceived as lack, it can also be seen as an ode to the integral
nature of descriptive and prescriptive capacities of many (if not all) architectural
theories.
When it comes to architectural analysis, Nygaard differentiates two types, i.e., making
and understanding, and offers analysis regarding which is related to the making of
architecture as building science (i.e., energy consumption, temperature, lux, etc.) and
Introduction
23
architectural analysis (as more usual spatial, phenomenological, etc.). Furthermore,
there are analyses which are aimed at understanding a historical analysis and history
of ideas (Nygaard 2011; pp.57) all of which have their methodologies and method.
Nygaard differentiates theory and analysis and does so by indicating a theory
consisting of core elements (constructs like in Norberg-Schulz trinity of assignment,
form, and technique), and the architectural analysis brings forth the relations between
the elements (Nygaard 2011, pp:61). The core elements or components of a theory are
according to Nyggard not the components of the building (brick, bolt, insulation, etc.)
as theoretical components are often more general (Nyggard 2011, pp:28) While this
seems to be the case in architecture, generally a scientific theory also includes the
relations between constructs. An interesting example of an analytical “construct” is
that of the type, which according to Nygaard is also easily translated to applied design
(Nygaard 2011, pp.62).
Constructs (Elements) in Architecture
Beneath the general categorization of theory groups, theories are often constituted by
their “first principles,” also often called elements or constructs. The use of such can
be considered central to theoretical endeavors and has spanned all theoretical groups
through the architectural history of theorizing. These groups can be termed
differently: principles (Groat, Wang 2013), constituents (Nyggard 2011), concepts
(constructs) (Colquitt, Zapata-Phelan 2007; Bhattacherjee 2012), or elements (Semper
et al 1989). Nygaard goes through a brief yet compelling history of constructs from
different theoretical efforts and starts with Vitruvius and his well-known constructs
of vensustas, firmitias, and utilitas. Vitruvius also proposed a set of sub-constructs,
where each had tridents of their own, i.e., venustas was comprised of the sub-
constructs ordinatio, eurythmia, and symmetria. This was a dominant lens into
architecture which was later challenged by Claude Perrault (in the early 1700s) who
proposed two constructs in his theory – the positive and the arbitrary –which occurred
at a time where beauty (venustas) was starting to get relativized (Nygaard 2011,
pp.30). Without going into much detail on all contributions throughout architectural
history, Nygaard elaborates on the history of components/constituents, emphasizing
the key founding texts of the different discursive shifts up to the late 20th century.
More recently, the same tendency continues, and we can observe that architectural
thinking is widespread. Scholar Alejandro Zaera-Polo attempted to map and theorize
the different dogmas, approaches, and styles of contemporary times in a kind of
architectural compass (Zaera-Polo 2016). More than anything, this indicates that there
is no one clear way or style which is currently dominant. Some more recent examples
of theoretical construct in contemporary theory are Turko & Hensel’s grounds and
envelopes (Hensel, Turko 2015) and Aksamija’s and Iordanova’s trident of issue,
concept, and form (Aksamija, Irdanova 2010). These too can be argued to be too
immediately pragmatic and professionally inclined as they mostly deal with design
tasks where the problem-solving is an a prior frame, and the challenge is to solve the
specific design problem at the given site, while potentially minimizing carbon impacts
24
and energy consumption,n etc.
Figure 12. A brief history of the evolution of architectural constructs (based on Nygaard’s
account) (Nygaard 2011) with the inclusion of Ruskin.
With regard to the theorizing with constructs/elements, we can observe a tendency of
theories often have few key constructs or elements (Figure 12), and it is highly unusual
that a theory has ten or fifteen elements (to maintain a level of simplicity and
comprehensibility) although such high numbers of constructs do exist (Spence 2017,
45-47). The quest is not to choose “all” constructs/elements but to balance a limited
set of constructs that implicates a certain dialectic between them which followingly
prompts critical consideration.
Introduction
25
1.3.2. The Materialist Discourse in Architectural theory
Since we are interested in material consumption and material flows, the theoretical
category of “architecture emergent from material (pre)conditions” is relevant to
consider. What are the tendencies of emphasis, approaches, and ways of constructing
architectural thinking structures? Materialism in architecture was initially and still
mainly concerned with materiality, tactility (Pallasmaa 2012; Böhme 2018), material
properties in relation to architectural performance (Hensel 2013; Hensel, Turko 2015),
whether structural (Gramazio, Kohler 2008) or microclimatic (Foged 2018). But
materialism as an architectural discourse can also imply several other considerations.
Here, I rely on the mapping of the materialist discourse in architecture provided by
Erik Nygaard.
Erik Nygaard postulates that, historically, the understanding of architecture as
“emergent from material conditions” is in sharp contrast to the category of architecture
as the “architect’s intention” (free creative will, etc.) (Nygaard 2011, pp 132). He goes
further to claim that the “old” perception of emphasizing the architect’s “free will”
was characteristic of “grand” architecture (large venues, religious complexes, etc.),
while materially emergent architecture was characteristic of approaches, especially
during industrialization, where more “common” architecture was to be built, e.g.,
housing, factories, offices (ibid). Nygaard also highlights that such an architecture
was more “earth-bound” – i.e., inspired by a Marxian approach - as it focused on
aspects of function, technique/technology, materials, economy, and legislation (ibid).
Nygaard designates a number of foci characteristic of the materialist approach in
architecture: function (housing especially), type, typology, climate, topography,
resources, construction, technique/technology, economy, politics, and legislation
(Nygaard 2011, pp. 133-153). Within these, there can be a range from hardline
material-realists such as Viollet-le-Duc (ibid, pp. 135), to more “loosened”
materialists who include many considerations on interiority and function such as
Gottfried Semper (ibid) and later variants of Marxist materialism in architecture where
general social and political conditions of buildings, cities and their social
consequences are subject to analysis and critique.
It can thus be claimed that there is a spectrum of materialist approaches from hardline
reductionist realism where everything has to be explained from material properties to
wider environmental and social conditions that influence how buildings and cities are
formed. This fundamentally hints at the differing philosophical nature of the two types
where one (the formal/structural strain) is concerned with material properties and is
the Analytical philosophical tradition (“old” conventional materialism), while the
other is more general and critique-oriented regarding tendencies of social and political
conditions which is foundational in Continental philosophical tradition (dialectical or
historical materialism). Materialist discourse in architecture is thus a practical and
pragmatic approach which deals with every day “socio-material” existence of
buildings and cities which largely deals with tectonic concerns. One could even go so
26
far as to claim that a “materialist” approach to architecture more or less equals the
tectonic discourse.
Black Boxes of Architectural Thinking
In extension of the fact that architecture is becoming more and more “practical” with
its problems at hand, there are tendencies in line with this which amplify the issue.
What seems to complicate things is that there is currently a “post-critical” dogma in
the architectural discipline (Spencer 2021; Trubiano 2022, pp.51-56) which is in a
way anti-theory. That is to say, some movements and practices in architecture are
convinced that theory (and criticality) is of little use, and we need only to be
“practical”, “pragmatic”, and action-oriented instead of still pondering theory. If we
do not rely on theory, what values of thought (epistemology, ontology, worldview)
then guide our actions? Simply being “practical” and “pragmatic” towards the
problems at hand does not automatically imply that one is acting in some profound or
ethical way. Rather one solves “real” problems for “real” people because one has no
concern for some grand, “pompous” abstraction. This also implies two crucial things.
Firstly, the reality is knowable and “rational”, and secondly, we know fully the extent
of our actions and intentions when we engage with reality so much so that theory is
not needed. However, as we have seen with the Jevons Paradox (paragraph 1.2.3.),
that is not the case. Just because we now know of the Jevons Paradox (take-back
effect) does not mean that it will stop from occurring. We are prone to repeat it given
the market dynamics and its “optimism bias” (Flyvbjerg 2021) among other reasons.
In our attempts to be “pragmatic”, one may indeed be subject to embodying
ideological constructions, without knowing it, within a “frame” defined elsewhere
(i.e., market dynamics, growth paradigm, etc.).
That is not to say that this design ideology only occurs when one is practicing (without
theory). Rather, it can likewise occur within a theoretical edifice which has been
“distorted”.
Architectural theory does not always stand on its own in the form of constructs, and
there can be some governing logics and assumptions which can “steer” how such
seemingly approachable elements of a theory can be used one way rather than another.
Historically, we have seen grand references of architectural production to God,
Nature, Music, etc., and we can perhaps thus claim that there is a kind of
“secularization” (Hartoonian 1994) of creative processes in architectural production.
I, however, would claim that creativity
1
is not yet fully demystified as even in modern
and contemporary times, there are new variants of such mystery boxes in architectural
creativity where creativity “ex nihilo” is rationalized through this spectral idée fixe.
These are not always explicitly written within the architectural theory, but they are
1
I do not mean the common instrumental creativity of solving simple or complex tasks
efficiently, but an “architectural creativity” which necessitates a reference to history, norms etc.
and their subversions.
Introduction
27
there, or in their absence, something else is imposed (personal or societal values).
Architectural discourses and dogmas are filled with a priori and presuppositions that
knowingly or unknowingly steer the architectural production in certain rather than
other directions. Such discourses usually fail to challenge the stuck-ness of
architectural production within the linear growth paradigm or even allow for an
opportunistic amplification of material consumption.
Even in modern times, there is still much effort to grasp the mysterious and mythical
genesis of architecture which is almost on par with fantasies of Abbe Laugier’s
primordial hut. Such texts usually deal with “truth” and “essence”, i.e., genesis and
roots (Bech-Danielsen 2014). Even if the purpose of these analyses was to deconstruct
such mental constructions, they somehow seem to have a grip on architectural
creativity. Architects can tend to fixate on these impossible (mental) objects which
are impossible to discern empirically as a minimal cognitive legitimization of the
design activity. Jeremy Till elaborates on the notion of ex nihilo, i.e., the architects'
creative urge to create “from nothing” as it were (Till 2009). Dominant or not, the use
of spectral objects (ex nihilo) is still a tendency both in academia and practice, where
non-scientific argumentation and design development is at the forefront. A reason for
this axiom (of the ex nihilo) may be that architectural production is axiomatically
stuck within the growth paradigm and one may need a simplified argumentation for
why and what to build. With reference to Frank Lloyd Wright, Alvar Aalto once
proclaimed:
“Architecture is the transformation of a worthless brick into something
worth its weight in gold” (Strasnick 2017)
On the surface level, this may seem a simple statement. At the same time, it reveals a
kind of architectural “magic,” a modern alchemy on which we remain fixated,
permitting us to transform finite, banal matter into a vibrant material. Another famous
example is Louis Khan who can “speak” with bricks. Such a mental construing of
material productions becomes an ideological edifice of “magic” and material animism
which “opens” (for better or worse) the creative frame, i.e., an edifice that can nullify
actual empirical facts and assert its creative will. Architect and researcher, Andrew
Benjamin, also theorized of a tectonic (or a kind of formal-materialist) ideology within
architectural design, where a seemingly materialist approach is fundamentally
disconnected from actual material concerns (Benjamin 2007) and where architectural
thinking becomes a kind of willful ignorance of actual, empirical material conditions.
Jeremy Till also (in a slightly simplified yet convincing critique of tectonic discourse)
elaborates how a theoretical discourse can “flatten” itself to what he calls a “phony
ethics” (Till 2009) where critical thought is replaced with a kind of “modest” way of
designing as the highest moral goal. Ultimately, this itself can turn into a kind of
arrogance where critical thought is pushed aside by a stern certainty of a design style
due to its supposed modesty. This tendency is not only characteristic of tectonic
discourse but a wider tendency which constitutes the ideological structures of
architectural thinking and production at large as a proper need to invent and
narrativize new ways to legitimize itself.
28
Whether it is a failure to know or an unwillingness to know, we assert a narrative into
this gap (Usto 2020). Given the vast complexity of both architectural production and
the building industry, as architects, we seem entangled (both materially and meta-
physically) in the current modes of production, and since we are unable to propose a
“way out” of the current mode of production we create ideological constructs as a way
in which we seemingly either follow or subvert the hegemonic coordinates, all of
which allow material consumption to continue or even increase.
Even in contemporary times with the most recent agendas in architecture and design,
something similar can arise. Especially regarding material consumption, we can see
how we conceptualize certain edifices to strive for something impossible like the
Sublime Circularity, (which will never be achieved because it is
physically/thermodynamically impossible). As such endless activity is “permitted”
and guaranteed. Current sustainable and ecological edifices can thus become equally
ideological, where ecological concerns can be argued to be entirely “cut off” from
actual empirical ecological facts and concerns and have everything to do with
ecological virtue-signaling. This is a sublime fascination with ecology (as ideology)
instead of the actual practice of ecological concerns. As such, and precisely because
we are stuck in the growth paradigm, circularity has to be an “endless” (suspended)
circularity that can be detached from actual material facts.
1.3.3. Overview: Observations and Challenges Regarding Theory
From Nygaard’s categorizations’ perspective, there is a shift away from architecture
being understood as a form to being understood as a relational, social system in
motion. This shift also tells of an epistemological clash and shift, which also indicated
that reality in its true complexity is unknown or even unknowable. Both ontological
positions of reading reality as either an object or a set of relations imply two
theoretical positions which allow certain ways of relating to reality. The question is
whether they are different enough to allow for a thoroughly different way of relating
to reality and whether will there be a need to consider both?
A theoretical position is ultimately a simplification of the true complexity of
architecture and hence the different variants/types of architectural theory according to
Nygaard (2011). The Thing of architecture ultimately eludes our cognitive abilities
and epistemological structures, making it evident that one single individual cannot
explain or discern the full empirical nor meta-physical complexity of architecture. So
too is the limit of the materialist approaches in the architectural discipline.
Introduction
29
Figure 13. An abstract diagram showing how one
must simplify architecture within the theory.
Generally, regarding theory, we see a development from a form- and object-fixated
approaches, and through the relativization of aesthetics, architectural theory becomes
more and more “open”, complex, relativized, and relational (Nygaard 2011). At the
same time, the architectural theory structure remains familiar and consists of a few
central constructs, which can have several sub-constructs that indicate the relations
between the constructs.
Figure 14. A general example: few core constructs/elements, along with sub-constructs -
possibly with branching complexity expanding into relation?
Sub-constructs are often isolated from other constructs or sub-constructs (like in the
case of Vitruvius mentioned in 1.3.2). We can see that architectural theory has clear
emphasis on the main constructs of a theory, i.e., well-known elements which are
sometimes the “outward” appearance of a theory. Sometimes a discourse or theory is
even simply referred to as its constructs directly: Semper’s four elements or Ruskin’s
seven lamps. We also see that most architectural theories can be mobilized both for
analytical purposes and design purposes.
The materialist approach
According to Nygaard, there are several approaches within materialist thinking which
30
emphasize different aspects of architecture and thus indicate that there is a spectrum
of the materialist position spanning from ontic material-realist (empirical) concerns to
a kind of expanded materialism (meta-material patterns) of the conditions of everyday
life (Nygaard 2011, pp. 133-155). Architectural materialism is thus a spectrum of both
stern ontic facts and immaterial considerations of social and political considerations
which nevertheless have material conditions and manifestations in everyday life.
While Nygaard is very critical of the materialists’ ability to explain or account for
everything, I do not think that this is the strength of the materialist approach. Instead
of merely listing the materialist approach as one among many others, what is more
important to observe is that the “material” conditions should be conceptualized to
provide a framework (whether monetary budget or environmental limitations etc.)
within which certain artistic freedoms, among other considerations, are possible.
These conditions could be seen as setting the boundaries or framework for what types
are solutions are feasible/possible/desirable from said perspectives. Something
similar can be said also of research and academia as we see more and more industrial
PhDs and collaborations across fields, industries and academia. Research is becoming
“industrialized” as to “serve society” more and more (Horst, Irwin 2018). Many types
of research can have pertinence but what kinds of research gets funded and prioritized
is up to the different stakeholders and agencies with monetary capacity. In cases where
for example “the intentions” were to protrude the frame from within (proposing too
costly or materially consuming designs etc.) it would simply not be chosen, or the
architects would be asked to simplify and minimize costs (depending on if it is a
competition or client situation).
While Nygaard conceives of the “material conditions” as one of many other
theoretical understandings for architecture, it should be expanded to “contain” the
other ones.
Figure 15. The material (pre)conditions provide the frame
in which maneuvering is possible.
The materialist position could hold potential if it were considered as a frame within
which there still is some leeway. In relation to today, given the current “plasticity” of
modern technology, many considerations on limits and capacity have seemed
unnecessary for a long time. We can see this where, regardless of site-specific
Introduction
31
conditions, one can accommodate any comfort level and modern standard of living.
How could architecture be conceptualized as “emergent from material conditions” but
the “material conditions” be conceptualized in ecologically relevant ways? The
challenge is then how to re-actualize and modernize this idea of making architecture
form within material boundaries? There are theories written outside of architectural
thinking which is relevant such as Kate Raworth’s donut model (Raworth 2017), and
Schmelzer’s concepts of degrowth (Schmelzer et al 2020). Given the complexity of
understanding and thinking about planetary scarcity or limits, it becomes very difficult
to conceptualize this in architectural terms in ways where it is both abstract (meta-
physical) and also both rigid and empirical to have specific approaches and normative
tactics. Nygaard does not explicitly conflate the materialist theoretical discourse with
tectonics as such, despite the chapter being initiated regarding Gottfried Semper.
Nevertheless, general concerns regarding the materialist approach (making,
production, function, climate, and resources) are today easily associated with the
tectonic discourse, and since the tectonic discourse generally circumscribes these
concerns, tectonics is of pertinent interest for the progression of this doctoral study.
Considerations for later theory building effort
Nygaard mentioned that architectural theory refrained from speculating on universal
and metaphysical aspects and instead concerns itself with being practical and
problem-oriented. Having this in mind, it is not necessary for us to revert to the
outdated classical theoretical mindset. Instead, it is essential to recognize that certain
architectural theories exhibit a "problem-solution bias," wherein specific architectural
problems and their solutions are assumed a priori, requiring architects and their
theories to devise means (tools and methods) of addressing them. However, it
becomes challenging to critically examine this inherent (axiomatic) process. When it
comes to the aspect of architectural constituents (constructs/elements) there are also a
few things to take note of. There exists a general inclination in theories to consist of a
few simple constructs, often adopting a "bottom-up" and "open-ended" approach
(Figure 11). This openness implies that architects have the freedom to shape these
constructs according to their own imaginative and creative aspirations. Ultimately,
this tendency perpetuates architectural productions within the frame of a linear growth
paradigm. Nygaard hypothesizes that all architects have some form of theory that
helps them make (design) decisions (Nygaard 2011, pp.42). These types of loose
theories are not often explicitly called architectural theories because they are usually
“...implicit and part of the ‘silent knowledge’ of the profession…”
2
(ibid. pp: 42) in
architectural discourses. At the same time, we can observe that there can be other
“governing” aspects to a theory which may or may not be put forth explicitly: “logics”
and “boundaries” (Colquitt, Zapata-Phelan 2007; Bhattacherjee 2012) (more on this
later; 3.2.2.).
2
Own translation of the original Danish text.
32
Figure 16. Constructs are the most "visible" elements of a theory.
These aspects of a theory are often implicit and are often more of a “philosophical”
nature containing elaboration of how and why some key assumptions are made and
for what purpose. If architecture is to be positioned within material (pre)conditions,
the “boundary” considerations must in some way be present among the constructs.
What we are thus in need of is a theoretical position where within the set of constructs,
there is a “representative” of the material conditions. The perhaps “common” way of
constructing a theory would have been to create a set of constructs and elaborate on
the “logic” and “boundaries” that they are located within planetary boundaries
(physical boundaries) and the ontological and world-view axioms and assumption
(immaterial boundaries), with certain accompanying epistemological and ontological
considerations. Instead, there should be an insistence that the key component of the
theory (situating architectural production within planetary boundaries) is represented
within the construct already, however abstract and general that may be.
Architects have no ill intentions. Yet, we can observe that how our mental faculties
are steered (at least partially) by architectural theory or ideology can materialize
unintended or downright bad consequences.
1.4. The Pertinent Disciplines and their Theoretical Frameworks
When we consider the juxtaposition of challenges regarding material consumption
and material flows with how architectural theory develops thinking regarding material
conditions, we can see the radical potential of thinking about material boundaries (as
seen in the industrial ecology field and discipline of chemical engineering) has to be
coupled with architectural thinking. Followingly, the tradition or discourse of
materialist thinking is also vast, spanning from empirical approaches of material
properties to socio-material conditions on large-scale structures and infrastructure
(which could be designated as meta-material conditions).
As Nygaard conceptualized, there are several strains within materialist thinking, but
it can be observed that tectonic discourse holds considerable potential as it too
concerns itself with material production as well as social and cultural aspects.
Introduction
33
Figure 17. Redrawing of illustration inspired by “From Cleaner Production to Industrial
Ecology”, Hanssen and Abrahamsen (2012).
It can thus be said that while industrial ecology discerns and maps material flows,
tectonic discourse is the architectural “poetization” of how the built environment
consumes and moves/transforms materials. However, given the environmental
challenges of today, there is a need for a more complex and nuanced approach to
material flows. Industrial ecology, sometimes called metabolism, holds the potential
to rigorously mobilize a “multi-cycle” way of thinking. Thus, the Tectonic theory and
industrial ecology (metabolic studies) are pertinent for the proceeding of this doctoral
study.
The reason to proceed with these two key disciplines is due to them both having an
impetus in “matter” – although from very different epistemological and ontological
positions – some of which are explicit and some of which are more implicit. Another
crucial aspect, as per the given complexity of issues of material flows in society in
relation to nature, is that an approach is required which can include many scales
simultaneously. The span from the small scale (elements and buildings) to the larger
societal scale would permit critical positioning in relation to materials and how they
flow in relation to their ideological justification.
Figure 18. Juxtaposing of the key disciplines and their subsequent theoretical frames.
How can we outline the contours of the tectonic field and industrial ecology? What
34
are their strengths and how, if at all, do they theoretically overlap? Is it possible to
discern something “common” between the two theoretical frameworks which can help
construct an inter-disciplinary theoretical position in which material conditions are at
the forefront?
1.4.1. A Hypothesis
We have observed challenges in the patterns of material flows. Within these patterns
of how materials are applied in the built environment, we can also see that said
materials are used in great volume but very often in poorly designed conditions which
emphasizes optimization/efficiency within a capitalist realist framework of
minimizing cost, etc. Ultimately such a dynamic can seem minimally alienating to the
people who are supposed to use these buildings. In a sense one could say that there is
a triple challenge: consideration of the use of materials, the architectural character of
buildings and urban spaces, and the fact that the two above-mentioned are inherently
disconnected and should of course be considered in unity. There have been here many
efforts in the built environments, from scholars and practitioners, to provide design
tools, methods and approaches (of a normative and practical nature). As such we are
seeing a more and more practical approach to design (from immediate problem to
solution) whereas a refreshed reproach with critical thinking and theory could open
the scope of material consumption in the built environment which could link the
material and immaterial. Putting it in a slightly risky fashion, we know what we must
do (with tools, methods, normative imperatives, etc.,), but we may also need adjusted
ways of thinking (theory) to accompany the practical and pragmatic. Two very
different yet material-oriented theoretical frameworks become pertinent to consider:
tectonic theory from architecture and industrial ecology from chemical engineering.
Hypothesis
The hypothesis of this PhD study is thus that pertinent insights can potentially be made
by the connecting and juxtaposing of knowledge from chemical engineering and
architecture. More specifically the theoretical frameworks of industrial ecology and
tectonic theory can give us pertinent insights which we can use as we develop
architecture in the future. These two theoretical frameworks deal with material flows
in very different ways yet hold significance to each other in their juxtaposition to
potentially challenge how we currently understand the role of material thinking and
design in built environments. In the trajectory of juxtaposing these theoretical
frameworks, delving into the state-of-the-art of the two disciplines is necessary to
further specify the research questions and corresponding theory-building exploration.
Introduction
35
36
State of the Art
and Research Question
37
Chapter 2. State of the Art
and Research Question
In this chapter the two pertinent theoretical frameworks will be opened up: the
tectonic theoretical discourse and industrial ecology (metabolic studies) field. These
frameworks offer relevant ways to conceive material flow conditions from different
perspectives. The purpose of this chapter is to map and discern a potential middle
ground as a possible way for proceeding to theory-building purposes later. The chapter
starts by mapping industrial ecology and laying out its theoretical, methodological
aspects, and applications. The tectonic theoretical discourse is then fleshed out into
distinctive approaches and understandings. The chapter concludes by focusing on
commonalities between these approaches and understanding along with challenges
and objectives. It ends with the research question(s).
2.1. Industrial Ecology
Given that crucial observations and ways of working empirically with material flows
can be found in industrial ecology, what is the state-of-the-art in both methods and
theory and what key aspects could be considered in the later theory development?
With an eye on challenging these architectural axioms a priori and ideological fixtures
in tectonic theory and practice, industrial ecology and in general metabolic studies
allow for a wide variety of approaches that have a rigorous and critical understanding
of material conditions. In this chapter, the metabolic studies will be mapped out,
highlighting relevant aspects needed for later theory development purposes.
2.1.1. General Overview
Metabolism, whether societal metabolism or industrial ecology, is a field in chemical
engineering. Industrial ecology is most known as an applied method for mapping
material flows (Jelinski et al 1992; Baccini, Brunner 2012), but industrial metabolism
is also a theory which is both descriptive and prescriptive (Korhonen 2004; Graedel,
Allenby 1995) meaning that it can be used to both explain (analysis) and design
metabolic constellations
The term metabolism stems from biology and has become a metaphor used in practice,
albeit criticized (Graedel 1996), given the fact that cities are not exactly living
organisms or natural ecosystems. Despite the challenges and limitations of the
analogy and its application, it is nevertheless useful to conceive of the city (or
anthroposphere at large) as an organism (or eco-system) that metabolizes (moves and
transforms) materials in an exchange with nature. Theoretical development thus has
38
been made based on this metaphor in mapping input and output. At this level,
industrial ecology is the applied theory and methodology of metabolic “discourse”.
Deeper within the discourse, is material flow analysis which is a more specific method
that contains several steps in which evaluation of the material flow system can be done
through LCA as a tool.
Figure 19. From metaphor to the theoretical frame to methodology.
When it comes to metabolism and the terminology, theory, and method of the concept,
things can become a bit confusing for people who are not familiar with the
metabolism/industrial ecology. Architects are mostly familiar with the notion of
metabolism from the Japanese Metabolist architectural Avant Garde which does not
contain chemical engineering considerations. Industrial ecology deals with
“metabolism” differently. Industrial Ecology is a field within chemical engineering
that is often interchangeably called “metabolism”, “societal metabolism”, “industrial
metabolism”, or “industrial ecology”. At this broad level of the framework in this
disciplinary field, we are dealing with the theoretical framework. Deeper within the
field’s framework is the method of material flow analysis which also (very often) is
interchangeably called “metabolism.” In “shoptalk”, both the theory and method are
referred to as “metabolism”. While there are differences, my speculation on the reason
State of the Art
and Research Question
39
for the “interchangeability” is that the theory and method are very closely linked.
7
,
This slight confusion or ambiguity is also present in the application of metabolism.
As the literature on the theory of industrial ecology (metabolism) indicates, industrial
ecology using a descriptive or prescriptive approach (meaning analysis or design-
oriented proposing designs) has been unclear. (Korhonen 2004) –). As an extension,
this approach to metabolism is merely a framework. The question is does it simply
map and explain conditions, or can it also be used to prescribe conditions, meaning
design and manifest desired conditions and not only explain/observe.
Metabolic studies have evolved greatly over time. It started entirely on the metabolism
of human beings in the 16th century (Baccini, Brunner 2012, pp. 22). Later, the
invention of mass balance (Lavoisier in the 18th century) and input-output (Brunner,
Rechberger 2017, pp.9), among other inventions, would permit for empirical mapping
of metabolic exchanges of multiple individuals, households and cities, regions, etc.
(Ibid, pp.21-43). Marx’s theories regarding the metabolic exchanges between society
and nature (while initially very abstract) served as important inspiration for the
formation of metabolic studies and made the discipline more rigorous over time
(Fishcer-Kowalski 2003).
The notion of metabolism doesn’t hinge on one scholar or researcher but on many
who have contributed to the building and refining of the metabolic way of thinking
both in theory and method. From developing mass balance and input/output principles
to later eco-philosophical elaborations (Bourg 2003) on the metaphysical potentials
of metabolic thinking for how human existence is situated in relation to nature –
proposing a new metabolic “spirit” in being with nature.
2.1.2. Uses and applications
A very common method(ology) in metabolic studies is the use of material flow
analysis (MFA) which be used for analyzing/explaining and changing/designing in
different fields of societal material and energy considerations: i.e., environmental
management and engineering, industrial ecology, resource management, waste
management, and anthropogenic metabolism studies (Brunner, Rechberger 2017,
pp.19-39). While they are here listed as separate fields (to help limit, simplify, and
introduce rigor in analysis and findings), the methodologies are thoroughly
interconnected, and the notion of the “anthropogenic metabolism” (which can be
considered a type of expansion of the notion of industrial ecology as the large scale
society’s relation to the natural environment) can be said to contain all of the above
(Baccini, Brunner 2012).
7
For the sake of comparison, one could compare this to social sciences and the well know
contribution of Actor Network Theory by Bruno Latour (Latour 2005). In this case, ANT can
be both a theory and method/methodology which theoretically (generally) explains phenomena
as actors in a network. It is also easily applied as a methodical approach which needs particular
methods and tools to discern chosen actors and their relation in particular (empirical) situations.
40
As the base methodology is that of MFA, there may be a need for supplementary tools
and methods to acquire data and knowledge (ibid, pp. 40) to map and assess the
impacts of the material flows.
The general objectives of metabolic studies (material flow thinking) are many and
broad. They span everything from aspects of understanding better material flow
conditions to be able to design better products (ibid, pp. 46-47). While the focus is
normally on materials and substances, the usage of MFA for energy flows is possible
(Baccini, Brunner 2012; Brunner, Rechberger 2017).
In broad terms, mobilizing metabolic studies (through MFA) allows for the empirical
mapping of material flows. A specific aspect in this regard is related to Jevon’s
paradox (chapter 1.2.3) in which designers or policymakers can have certain
intentions and then mobilize certain techniques, technologies, and legislation through
a seemingly rational, pragmatic approach which amounts to certain consequences that
end up being opportunistic, unexpected, etc. Approaching the challenges of material
flows allows, among other things, MFA to permit discernment if the intentions
correlate with the materialized reality.
2.1.3. Different approaches and evaluations
There are a number of different approaches when conducting metabolic studies. These
differences span a range from the mapping of material flows to what is assessed and
how the mapping gets synthesized and presented/disseminated. And ultimately having
differing purposes of consulting and informing the public, private stakeholders,
policymakers, etc.
The main set of different approaches can be laid out as territorial vs. consumption
(Athanassiadis et al 2018), top-down vs. bottom-up, spatial, and temporal. All of these
have pros and cons in relation to what kind of data and knowledge is relevant and
needed to extract from a metabolic study. The territorial approach is generally less
precise and more appropriate for urban scale mappings, while consumption takes into
account indirect impacts and flows preceding the use stage of a product (Athanassiadis
et al 2018). The top-down/bottom-up approaches are used when providing aggregate
value for a city and estimating data for large constellations, while the bottom-up
requires on-field measures and surveys and is thus more precise but time-consuming
(ibid). The temporal approach considers several temporal situations in order to discern
a general pattern of a chosen system (city etc.). These can span from hourly to monthly
to yearly to up to 100 years (ibid; Krausmann, 2013). The spatial approach (unlike the
temporal which generalizes the entire boundary of a city) allows for the nuancing of
the spatial conditions within a city to map which parts of the city have higher
consumption than others (ibid).
There are likewise different methodologies to “measure” the metabolism of cities, i.e.,
data collection, material flow accounting, input-output analysis, and life cycle
assessment.
The general data collection approach is a broad approach of utilizing any available
State of the Art
and Research Question
41
data (papers, national and international statistics, reports, etc.) which requires many
additional data sets, tools, and methods, etc. (Kennedy, Hoornweg 2012). The
accounting methodology is that of material flow accounting. While there are several
different methodologies, perhaps the most common was developed by Eurostat
(Eurostat 2001) and sets a standard for which compounds and materials are important
to consider and under which input/output norms. Material flows accounting also uses
certain indicators to assess the material economy of a city (Matthews et al. 2000). The
material flow account approach is a thorough, tested, and developed method (Brunner,
Rechberger 2004; 2017; Baccini, Brunner 2012). The input-output table (IOA) allows
for the mapping of materials from one sector to another (Murray, Wood, 2010) or on
a larger scale between regions (Kanemoto, Murray, 2013). Another way to assess
material flows is the use of LCA (life cycle assessment). LCA typically takes into
consideration all inputs and outputs, ideally from all phases from extraction, to use to
end of life (EPA 1993; ISO 2006). LCA is a widely used and acknowledged tool but
is difficult to use on a large urban scale, as such a constellation holds many products
and materials.
When conducting urban metabolism studies, there are standardized indicators that can
facilitate the comparison of cities and/or strategic actions. The standards set are ISO
37120 (ISO 37120, 2018). Other standard cities can follow the ones developed by
GPC, which helps these cities meet their goals regarding emissions etc. (GPC 2023).
Some later supplementary approaches have been developed. Among them is the
method of assessing material flows systems through entropy (Brunner, Rechberger
2017) which later also uses “indicator materials” as a way to assess larger metabolic
systems (Roithner et al 2022).
In the current predicament of circular thinking, there is much theory and practice on
LCA. Nonetheless, LCA without the MFA dimension of designing material flows
risks keeping the current modus operandi of the building industry with incremental
optimization in footprint, cost, and time management. As an extension of this, life
cycle thinking is greatly hindered. While it does contain immense importance and
potential to map and analyze life cycles (also allowing to optimize them), life cycle
thinking does not directly include the design of material flows as chemical
engineering (MFA) which considers it pertinent. MFA methodology contains LCA as
a 7th phase out of 8, while emphasizing the importance of the overall material flow
scheme and necessitates interdisciplinary collaboration towards nurturing and
creating “metabolic designers” (Baccini Brunner 2012). Only relying on the
combination of CE with LCA on a methodical and tool-level is not sufficient, since
the LCA approach allows for too much linger space which can be filled with personal
and socially contingent beliefs and values (Cays 2021) as LCA is “qualitative” tool to
assess particular life cycles but not analyze and design metabolic systems at a more
fundamental level. Furthermore, given that the conducting of an assessment is the 7th
step of the metabolic approach implicates a great deal of mapping (or designing) of
material flows before assessing their effects; however, if we remain too focused on
the LCA as a design tool, this could hint at the fundamental acceptance of the current
42
material flows of the building industry and that we are merely optimizing and making
more efficient the current paths and cycle by way of LCA without redesigning at a
metabolic level.
The omission of a metabolic understanding in architecture (and in general the built
environment) should be taken seriously because of the immense possibility of
designing interconnected metabolic systems.
Metabolism in different scales and different fields/professions
Metabolic studies are useful if one’s aim is to map and assess single products and
materials/substances. It has additionally allowed for the mapping of households to
provide a general look into the material consumption of citizens, on average, while
mapping whole cities and potentially bio-regional cities to planetary scales (Allenby
1999; Baccini, Brunner 2012). It could be useful to segment the metabolic systems of
the anthropogenic boundaries (cities) into four main categories of activities—nourish,
clean, live/work, and transportation (Baccini, Brunner 2012, pp: 87; Brunner
Rechburger 2017) – as these largely make up for the main metabolic dynamics and
material consumption patterns.
Another important contribution in relation to material flows has been that of the
NetStadt (Oswald, Baccini, 2003). This was an initial interdisciplinary methodology
between chemical engineering (MFA and metabolic thinking) and architecture (in the
broad sense without emphasis on Tectonic) which ultimately seemed like a strategic
planning method. Given its complexity, it didn’t make itself approachable for
architects in spatial and phenomenological terms. Other architects and designers can
be said to have touched upon the notion of metabolism. Among them is Weinstock,
who has worked with “metabolism” but this was largely reduced to bio-mimicry and
branching systems (Weinstock 2008) in computational design (Weinstock et all 2010)
and does not consider “metabolism” as chemical engineering and urban metabolism
studies. Other architects have been working with designing “metabolic” flows such as
landscape architects Dirk Sijmons and Julie Marin, among others (Designing with
Flows 2017). The approaches of these landscape designers/architects are to a large
degree confined to landscape design and are mostly practical applications in practice
without developing the theoretical and methodological framework for their
“metabolic” approaches. In another significant contribution, the concept of
“Sustainable Urban Metabolism” further conceptualizes how to position different
disciplines and professions in relation to societal material flows in relation to the
natural environment by building upon the concept of “Industrial Ecology” (Ferrao,
Fernandez 2013). Ferrao and Fernandez also describe the position of architecture as a
discipline/profession in relation to a spectrum of being analytical (observational) or
synthetical (active/engaging) thus placing architecture as a heavily synthesis-oriented
discipline indicating that it is a dynamic and active profession which aims to “do”
(design, build and real-life problem-solving) and to a much lesser degree analyze and
understand, respectively compared to other disciplines/professions relevant to the
State of the Art
and Research Question
43
built environment (Ferrao, Fernandez 2013: pp. 50). Perhaps even the analysis which
is performed is mostly used as new form-giving knowledge. Hypothetically, exactly
this “synthetic” nature of architecture is what makes it prone to the risks of Jevon’s
paradox phenomena and thus remains within the growth paradigm.
2.1.4. A Planetary Approach through the Safe Sink
Another important contribution was the “Metabolism of the Anthroposphere” which
solutionitical approach to the organizing manifestation of material flows within
society in relation to the hinterlands (natural resources) ican bealanced way grounded
in crucial substances and their importance to maintaining the quality of life (Baccini,
Brunner 2012; pp. 107).
Figure 20. The planetary system boundary of the planet, air, soil, and water in relation to
each other and the anthroposphere (society) (redrawn diagram) (Baccini, Brunner 2012).
Thereunderstandingother contemporary contributiof planetary thinking, and thinking
in terms of planetary limitations with regard to any kind of consumption and industry
(Rockström et al 2009; Raworth 2017; Jackson 2019; Schmelzer et al 2020). Even so,
it has been difficult to situate architectural theory and practice in such lines of thought
which takes into account challenges of complex material flows, entanglements, and
Jevons paradox phenomena. Here, the chemical engineering field may have the
potential to provide some rignecessitateatic thinking regarding this challenge, and
what radically new consequence it would have for thinking in terms of planetary
boundaries. A metabolic approach is thus inherently “planetary” as its fundamental
functioning is that of mapping resource availability, capacity, and scarcity at different
spatial and temporal scales.
44
Chemical engineering fundamentally provides a methodology: the Material Flow
Analysis. This is the basic methodical approach to understanding (and thereby
changing) patterns of material flows in society. While the method of MFA is at its
core a part of the material flows practice and method, there are different fields and
approaches within chemical engineering. One of the most significant being the theory
of industrial ecology or industrial metabolism. Chemical Engineering thus provides a
rigorous way to conceive and conceptualize this challenge with the key concept of
“Metabolism of the Anthroposphere” (Baccini, Brunner 2012) via the methodology
of Material Flow Analysis (MFA also often using the metaphor/metonymy of
‘metabolism’ as in the above tittle) which hypothesizes that an:
“...essential part of a strategy to achieve sustainable development on a
global scale is the early recognition of metabolic processes and their
potential effects such as resource scarcity, environmental effects, and
socioeconomic implications.” (Baccini, Brunner 2012, pp: 16)
While metabolic studies deal with materials and substances, it is widely accepted that
social and individual aspects of people in cities are crucial in explaining the currents
of the material flows. This aspect cannot, however, be taken into consideration for
chemical engineering methodology and urban metabolic studies (Baccini, Brunner
2012: pp. 285). It is thus crucial to consider and juxtapose social aspects with material
concerns. A way to proceed, at least in the material path, towards a planetary way of
thinking is to map out the so-called bio-region and thus create networks across several
bio-regions globally (Ferrao, Fernedez 2013; Baccini Brunner 2012). As there is more
and more new data and knowledge, it can seem confusing to think in those terms and
absorb such trajectories within any architectural ethos. An important emphasis
regarding metabolic studies is the centralization of the key concepts of “sinks” as
scholars argue for an increased focus on facilitating and/or designing “safe sinks” for
materials and products (Kral et al 2019; Brunner, Rechberger 2017: pp. 395). This
concept seemingly holds a certain potential if we are, from metabolic perspective, to
architecturally theorize what the city is, what its role is etc. If the city can be
conceptualized as a “safe sink” (safe storage) of materials in its designed
manifestations, it would potentially, regardless of future developments in tools and
data, slow material consumptions and minimize its impact on natural environments.
Can we find any “metabolic” tendencies in tectonic design thinking which would
allow for such a metabolic re-conceptualization of architecture?
State of the Art
and Research Question
45
2.2. Tectonic Theory
Having the above insight in mind, what is the state-of-the-art of tectonics - what are
the general characteristics of tectonic theory, and can we also discern some of these
above-mentioned tendencies or potential for metabolic thinking in tectonic discourse
as well?
Although this PhD study is concerned with two disciplines, i.e. architectural tectonics
and industrial ecology, the aim is nevertheless to implement the metabolic lines of
thought from industrial ecology into architectural theory through tectonics. If we are
to transfer some of the circular metabolic considerations and concepts from industrial
ecology, what ideas, notions, and concepts would be necessary to consider in such an
endeavor? This chapter will attempt to map tectonic theory with particular regard to
material flows and metabolic considerations.
2.2.1. A Dualist Ontology: Material and Immaterial
The tectonic theoretical tradition, as we are currently familiar with, was brought into
being in the 1800s by Karl Bötticher, and further developed by Gottfried Semper
(Frampton 1995). The tradition however builds upon the Greek ancient history of the
tekton (meaning builder) (Holst 2017) which was more concerned with the craft and
making of built structures as a kind of proto-architectural immediate making or craft
(not yet architecture). This proto-architectural notion of making is termed techne
(Holst 2017) and is a kind of “organic” or balanced dualist idea of being artistic
through technical means (Holst 2017, Christiansen 2014). Followingly, the techne
discourse is wholly concerned with poetics and a kind of immediate/inward and
“organic” approach to making (Hartoonian 1994) where poetics (or styles, etc.)
concerns are at the forefront. Likewise, it is important to note that tectonic theory has
been subject to scalar stretch, as there have been developments regarding material
considerations, details (Frascari 1981), interiors, and buildings (Semper among many
others), and likewise urban design considerations with an impetus in Sekler’s writing
(Christiansen 2020).
As mentioned above, it was Karl Bötticher who attempted to intellectualize and
modernize (in his time) the “organic” idea of techne into a tectonic theory. Tectonics
in the modernized form was fundamentally brought into the intellectual sphere by Karl
Bötticher who proposed a fundamental distinction between kunstform and kernform –
kunst being linked with the beautifying and delicate applications, while kernform is a
rigid structural frame (Bötticher 1852). Bötticher, in his division/dualism (of the kern
and kunstform), argued that the two were inherently integral to each other. Regardless
of how thoroughly he develops the arguments for this, later (modern) understandings
are used in a segregated and split manner where the kern (material) concerns form at
the front. With these founding contributions, an ontological split was introduced
between material and immaterial considerations – even if their original authors
46
thought of them as inherently connected – which led to early examples of the formal
(structural) focus in architecture in the work of Viollet-le-Duc (Nygaard 2011) as well
as several other throughout later architectural epochs which usually emphasizes the
formal aspect through material performance and material properties.
Gottfried Semper proposed a radical shift away from an object-fixated approach to
that of (the activity of) making and thus veiling interiority in his stoffwechsel theory
(Semper et al 1989; 2004). Semper emphasized the “knot” as the primordial motif
(and not the Primordial Hut as was the norm at the time). This emphasis on the knot
paired with his stoffwhcsel (“metabolic”) way of thinking, allowed for a critical
deconstruction of the creative processes which further brought to light some of the
hidden “organic” (instinctual) processes of creativity (techne) - a kind of attempt to
“secularize” (or demystify) architectural production (Hartoonian 1994). Semper too
conceptualized a dualist ontology of structural-symbolic and structural-technical
(Semper et al 1989) with the first concept dealing with cultural aspects and the second
with the material-technical aspects.
Over the centuries, several architects have made their contribution to the dualist
“nature” of architectural thinking a production. While we see the material-immaterial
dualism historically, we also see more contemporary iterations of it. Edward Sekler
also makes a similar contribution but his contribution is more in line with Semper’s
founding axiom of “knitting” (as the essence of artistic and architectural production).
Sekler emphasizes the dual processes of constructing (concerned with the formal and
material aspects of making) and construing (concerned with immaterial aspects of
telling a story of the making) (Sekler 1965).
Theoretician Kenneth Frampton later conceptualized a similar ontological split in his
“poetics of construction”— a split of what he calls the ontological and the
representational with one being the true and authentic and the other being theatrical
or posing appearance (Frampton 1995). Framptom thus also introduces, as per Sekler,
the distinction between the tectonic and the atectonic, highlighting a difference in the
motif of whether an element follows its material-structural logic and the expression
of such (ibid, pp.20-21).
There are similarly more contemporary variants of such material-immaterial dualist
ways in tectonic thinking. While more a method than a theory, the contribution of
gestures and principles (Hvejsel 2018) is similarly a way to create a dualism of
material, formal, ontic concerns juxtaposed with the immaterial, phenomenal feelings
(of interiority, etc.). Sometimes material and immaterial dualism can be practiced but
perhaps misunderstood. As exemplified in a paper on insulation and tectonics, the
author equates ontological considerations with that of kern-form (Ejstrup 2019). As it
becomes clear in this article, the use of ontology (supposedly as opposed to
cosmogony) is not “ontological” but merely ontic, meaning that it deals with “mere”
material and/or technical aspects, while the terms “ontology” is much more
encompassing and includes the material and immaterial within the same edifice.
Ontology can furthermore not be put in opposition to the representational aspects, as
the representational are inherent to the tectonic discourse. Using the same logic,
State of the Art
and Research Question
47
Frampton’s split of tectonic/atectonic can also be considered false as the atectonic is
already inherent to the tectonic, i.e., it is not possible to have mere ontic (material)
being without its consequential expression, as “honesty” and “truth” in design is its
own theatricality (Usto 2020). As Paolo Tombesi indicated with an analysis of a
particular structural element in the Sydney Opera House (Tombesi et al 2022), there
may be no “true” continuity between technique, making, and the final “Tectonic”
expression. Tectonic is thus its theatricality and theatricality is inherent to tectonics,
albeit a theatricality which is to be taken as seriously as possible.
As such, through the dualist way of thinking—usually comprised of two main
constructs—tectonic discusses remaining as a kind of “conventional” mode of
production (where the old techne is split into a tectonic dualist discourse of material
and immaterial concerns) which fails to acknowledge some the inherent antinomies
and deadlocks of tectonic discourse. This results in these antinomies and deadlocks
remaining within the poetics of making circumscribed by the frame of growth and
material consumption paradigm.
For this reason, a more radical critical tradition in tectonic discourse is to be brought
forth along with the mapping of later (critical) ecological theorization. In proceeding
with doctoral study, it will be necessary to map the “critical tecotnics” as it tries to
deconstruct the instinctual, “organic poetics” of making as well as the “ecological” in
the coming paragraphs.
2.2.2. The “Critical” Tectonics
One could naively assume that all architecture theory is ultimately supposedly
“critical” either explicitly or implicitly because the premise of a theory can often be
that there are existing conditions that are not “good”, and a new perspective offers a
different way of looking at things. The use of critical thinking in architecture
distinguishes itself from this way of thought as criticality has been transferred from
the critical continental philosophical tradition (i.e., Hegel, Marx, and later Hanna
Arendt, Walter Benjamin, Adorno and Frankfurt School, to the later radical French
thinkers in psychoanalysis etc.). Perhaps the great popularizer of criticality in tectonic
discourse is Kenneth Frampton starting with his essay on critical regionalism with the
“critical” aspect containing reference to Adorno and Arendt (Mallgrave, Goodman
2011, pp. 101). Later there are variants such as “critical tectonics” (Hvejsel 2018) and
“circular tectonics” which certainly still contained the critical dimension.
Nonetheless, these authors along with Frampton would better be designated as a kind
of “applied-criticality” (as a counter against characterless opportunism) while the
critical tradition in architecture and tectonics in their more “radical” forms are
spearheaded elsewhere. While the critical trajectory in architecture goes beyond the
tectonic discourse (Rendell ed. 2007), there have also been iterations of radical
criticality in tectonic discourse which digs “deeper” into the ontology of making,
bringing forth some unpleasant truths or “cracks” in tectonic discourse and
architecture as such.
Gevork Hartoonian contributes in this regard, as he considers Semper’s theory a
48
significant break with the “conventional” poetics of techne. Hartoonian indicates that
much of architectural discourse is concerned with construction but that this is framed
by a number of aspects whether implicitly or explicitly; one of them being techne
(Greek word for technology or “art of making”) which is already an integral way of
making with an understanding of aesthetics and technical norms (Hartoonian 1994).
He furthermore suggests that it was already Semper who introduced a significant
distinction between meaning (immaterial aspects) and construction (and
material/ontic considerations). Furthermore, Hartoonian’s conviction is that this
distinction of Semper’s introduced a “break” into the “organic” and immediate
application of techne – a founding critical break in the canon of tectonic (perhaps
architectural as such) theory as it was a new direction compared to the aestheticisms
and “historicisms” of his time towards “secularization” or demystification of
construction. This, Hartoonian calls montage, i.e., a bringing together or seemingly
disparate and fragmented pieces that do not form an “organic whole” and for this
reason opens up an artistic space in the seam (joint or rather “dis-joint”) between them.
According to Hartoonian, the whole arises from these fragments, indicating a kind of
oncological “unfinishedness.” Hartoonian’s elaboration on the “dis-joint”, the
Negative entity of the seam which is not in coherence with the “organic whole.” This
would be like when Luis Khan famously asked his bricks what they wanted to be. One
of them might say that it does not want any of those things. The dis-joint is not just a
new aesthetic for the design of joints but more fundamentally a manifestation of the
problematization of architectural conception and humanist myths and subjective
expressions of architects (Hartoonian 1994).
Another important distinction Hartoonian makes in reference to Semper is the
dialectic of intention versus construction. Without refuting the poetic potentials of
such a dialectic, it can be further expanded in comparison to material flows studies
with which intentions and material manifestations are radically discrepant. Both
within the realm of architectural and aesthetic intention (people experiencing the work
completely differently than the architect intended) and in the current ecological
challenges this could demonstrate a Jevon’s paradox where the “sustainable”
intentions materialize opposite effects. As Hartoonian notes, the modern twist is laid
out by tectonics, as the radical disruption of old organic techne and that new epoch of
suspicion is born where montage “…drains the metaphysics of tectonics and unfolds
a new way of being.” (Hartoonian 1994). Metaphysics in this context means the
implicit ideological presuppositions, axioms, and aesthetic tautologies which have
accompanied architectural production in pre-modernity which now must be disrupted
by modern, critical thought.
Tectonics has, according to Hartooninan’s arguments, acting as a counter to pre-
modern “organic wholesome” architectural theory and practice in the sense that it
introduced a modern and critical self-reflective moment in the canon of architectural
theory and practice. One should here risk the possibility that within the tectonic theory
itself arises a kind of repetition of “organic wholesomeness” as well with its ever-
returning emphasis on making and poetics of transformative process into a final
product that tells its own story. In extension of this, architectural ideological
presuppositions remain in place even if a tectonic theory explicitly claims to be
State of the Art
and Research Question
49
critical. In extension of this, one could be inclined to agree with Jeremy Till who also
strongly criticizes tectonic discourse as an almost pompous discourse whose goal is
to search for “tectonic effects” from higher moral grounds, while thinking all other
works are of lower value (Till 2009, pp.177; pp.183). Even if these tendencies may
be present in tectonic discourses - where ideological modes of operation continue
(where architects instinctively know what is good, moral, wholesome, etc.) – I would
still argue that there is an inherent potential for radical critical thought within tectonic
discourse, since Till tends to slightly flatten the meaning of tectonics (ibid., pp.27).
Some theories and methods are simply there to enable more creative production, while
others require a critical introspective dissecting of architectural ideological
presuppositions along with material and transformational processes which cause
intellectual stagnation and as a consequence cause poor-quality in-built environs and
relations with nature. It can thus be surmised that, within tectonic discourse, there are
two traditions (the Positive and the Negative). On the one hand, is its very own
continuation of pre-modern poetic organicism (Positive) and on the other a radical cut
of critical reflectivity and introspection (Negative). The first instance is a kind of
Kantian field of Things, which is largely concerned with formal constellations and
structures and the poetics of such in which “tectonic designs” have an impetus in
realness and truth is at the front, while the other is a Hegelian field of Negativity in
which new ways of production are not proposed by arguing for a complex
ontologically and contingent view on the architectural production through the lens of
tectonics. The first is a positive, normative field while the other is not a direct opposite
but rather a Negative self-critical entity within the first. Sometimes, even the
“positive” strain describes itself as “critical” but in its applied reality it means that it
is merely critical of other theories and built works which are atectonic, un-real,
untruthful, or (according to its discourse) lack integrity. In opposition, the second field
can also be critical of other theories and practices but is centrally concerned with being
critical of itself through the dismantling its own meaningless fantasies, myths, and
ontological and world-view preconceptions which may be faulty and as a consequence
manifest undesirable physical effect as well as problematic ideological discourses.
After Hartoonian significant contribution in the 1990s, something new yet familiar
emerged in the early ’00s. Specifically, it was as if the radical critical gesture of
Hartoonian was too abysmal. Neil Leach et al. argued for a “structural turn” along
with the development of CAD (in the 1990s and 2000s) in what he and his co-authors
called “digital tectonics” (Leach et. al 2004). This argument returns us to the “usual”
poetics of form-making and the structural capacities of architecture and tectonics of
permanence. Critical of this tendency, Mari Hvattum, conceived of the mythical
(axiomatically founding logic) search of origins in architecture and considered that
perhaps it is not the permanent which deals with architectural essence but rather the
ephemeral and fleeting feelings of interiority and their “hazes of carnival candles”
(Hvattum 2001). In extension of this, according to Hvattum, it is the ephemeral and
not the long-lasting which is more essential to architecture, and the origin of
architecture is not in permanence but rather “…in the urges and acts that call forth
such form.” (ibid)
50
Even more radically critical introspective, is the contribution of Mark Rakatansky on
the tectonic acts of desire and doubt (Rakatansky 2012). He further inflicts
architectural and tectonic discourse with Negativity by way of inscribing desire and
its inevitable backside, doubt, alongside the founding principles of architectural
concept and production. What he fundamentally illustrates is how not only the desires
of the inhabitants, but equally, and perhaps more importantly how the desires of the
architects affect (distort even) the architectural production and his/her accompanied
doubts become discernable in the work. Perhaps formally comparable to the
primordial search for origins, Rakantsky too elaborates how a search for identity is
ultimately a failure, not in spite but because of this failure, desire persists, and the
incessant self-revolving activity to search for “identity” perpetuates itself in
designed/built physical manifestations.
The ”critical” dimension is in a way the diametrical opposite of the poetic techne, as
it is not a creating force but a negating force. The radical potential of the “critical”
tectonics is thus to acknowledge that the edifice is filled with logical and ontological
deadlocks where wholesome (organic) poetics of making is not only a profound aspect
of architectural production but likewise filled with personal and ideological
construction which in way risks of maintaining architectural thinking within the
“usual” growth paradigm. While it can be difficult to arise at a kind of “final critical
tectonics”, along the way it is always needed not only that we are critical of other
practices, but also question how we reason, why we reason the way we do, and what
axioms and a prioi structure our reasoning.
2.2.3. The “Ecological” Tectonics
As the pressing issue of climate change along with material consumption are ever-
more pertinent, and while the “critical” strain of tectonic is needed, it is likewise
important to consider the tectonic theory concerned with the issue of ecology.
In this regard, David Leatherbarrow’s elaboration of architecture being oriented
otherwise (Leatherbarrow 2008) holds potential. This theoretical contribution
implicates an ecological approach to design that was antithetical to the fetishes of the
object-fashion (and its crisis). This “otherwise” architecture, is an architecture that
embeds itself in the “web of life” as Leatherbarrow puts it (Leatherbarrow 2013).
Architecture should be considered a multifaceted entity with a large mixture of
affordances related to people, sites, terrains, and animal life potentially all at the same
time. This is a way of understanding architecture as playing along with the many
“points” in a complex network that does not pompously elevate itself into a supposed
ideal, grand aesthetic (empty) gesture. While very sympathetic, the challenge remains
of how to conceive of this so-called integration into the “web of life” and how
rigorously this integration could occur.
In a similar vein, Claus Bech-Danielsen argues for the need to reconstruct our
understanding of first nature to construct a new position of construction and
architectural making as well as thinking which is connected with a more sober
understanding of nature (Beck-Danielsen 2014). Among other issues, a way to
State of the Art
and Research Question
51
approach this challenge was the shift away from “..essence to assemblages….”
(Stylsvig Madsen 2014) – fundamentally mirroring the ongoing shift from discursive
objects to relations/processes. Stylsvig Madsen argues for a refreshed view of parts
and wholes in which he mobilizes Manuel DeLanda’s theoretical elaborations on the
assemblage (Delanda 2016), i.e, a complex object which is constituted by several
similar and/or disparate entities in a network (ibid).
Perhaps epitomized by Anne Beim, tectonic theory also started to engage with
ecological concerns, not unlike the abovementioned, i.e., Leatherbarrow’s intentions,
Beim envisioned a more rigorous, normative approach to material practices in editing
a book on tectonic and ecology (Beim, Madsen ed. 2014) and later developed ideas
regarding circular tectonics (Hvejsel, Beim 2019). She, along with the research group
CINARK, has helped develop significant contributions such as the material pyramid
(CINARK 2019). Given that the circular economy was starting to pose a challenge for
how tectonics are conceptualized, contributions emerged. Decoupling material
consumption from economic growth was also considered important, and tectonics
holds potential in this regard (Kjær Frederiksen, Munch-Petersen 2019). Furthermore,
as design-for-disassembly started to become a dominant agenda, contributions were
made to conceptualize tectonics and tectonic detailing for assembling and
disassembling purposes (Ejstrup, Munch-Petersen 2019). On the other hand, similar
contributions on circularity and tectonics have argued for the inclusion of aesthetics
and beauty in particular (Andersen 2019) and other immaterial considerations (Usto
2019) in circular practice and theory as there has been a predominant emphasis on
design-for-disassembly (Hvejsel, Beim 2019) in architectural practice. Currently, we
also see an emphasis on the need to build more with wood and other organic materials
(as per the material pyramid (CINARK 2019)). The challenge with this is that without
the “metabolic” dimension (as seen in chemical engineering) there will be an
advocacy of “building more with wood” without the understanding of its wider
entanglements and need for a “safe sink”. Likewise, the capacity of forestry is also
limited and entangled with other industries (food, furniture, paper, etc.), and there is
a need for a “metabolic” dimension within tectonic discourse.
As the theme of this doctoral study is materials and their transformation in different
forms, Gottfried Semper’s key notion of the stoffwechsel (sometimes translated as
metamorphism, but translated as metabolism) is of importance. Akos Moravanszky,
perhaps more than any other contemporary thinker, has re-actualized Semper’s ideas
on material changes/exchanges, making the relevancy given the current predicaments
of climate change and material consumption more prevalent. Semper’s application of
this theoretical notion aims to explain the different phases of how a material goes from
its original form to being transformed to finally becoming a built work (Semper 2004).
With reference to Semper, Stine Sundahl mentions that there is a higher metabolism
of skeuomorphism (of culturally relevant transformation of the form) and a “mere”
material transformation (lower metabolism). Sundahl deliberately differentiates the
notions of metamorphism and metabolism, where metabolism is more of a design and
formal consideration, as mentioned above, but the metabolism is a literal material
transformation, such as burning processes (Sundahl 2019, pp.88), which claims that
52
metamorphism is related to the metaphysical world while metabolism is an “ontic”
material process which is not concerned with immaterial properties of the
transformations. In pushing back on this division, Semper’s definition of the
stoffwechsel is equally immaterial and material (see chapter 4) and it may be
unnecessary to distinguish two types of “metabolisms” terminologically as
metabolism can be sufficient in containing both types of transformations (material and
immaterial). Recently, perhaps the most elaborate of the contributions to Semper’s
stoffwechsel has been the contribution of Akos Moravanszky simply titled
Metamorphism (2018). Moravanszky elaborates in detail Semper’s metamorphism
(stoffwechsel) and its different variants but fundamentally acknowledges that
Tectonic theory and stoffwechsel could be much more radically aligned with
ecological concerns in regards to positions architectural material
exchanges/transformations (metabolism) between society and natural environment
(Moravanszky 2018, pp. 212) and not remain at the same level of metaphorical
thinking concerned with the creative process as seen to this point.
Isak Worre Foged also develops, with direct reference to Semper’s stoffweshsel, his
own “stoffwechsel II” (Foged 2018), but this is more of a micro and macro climatic
“metabolic” exchange between materials and (material-atmospheric, if you will)
environment and does not conceive stoffwechsel (metabolism) in a large (industrial
ecology and societal) scale. Foged argues that Semper’s stoffwechsel is merely a
visual transformation, but I would argue that it may be indeed more than that and
Foged does not consider the material (wider industrial metabolic) potentials of such a
“immaterial” metabolism. Stoffwechsel II could be seen as an example where a
“metabolism” is conceived in the literal sense as chemical reactions (climate and
weathering reacting with the surface of the material) which change the (surface)
expression of an element/material. As such, an example where being literal (a la the
Analytical Philosophical Tradition) proves limiting in comparison to chemical
engineers’ field of societal metabolic studies (which knowingly utilizes the metaphor
for a large-scale application despite challenges of the metaphor).
While Semper’s theoretical writings are complex, and the precise outlook of the
notion of metabolism not outlined by him, later scholars have elaborated on the
centrality of stoffwechsel to Semper’s writings (Chestnova 2018) to Akos
Moravánszky indicating that all of Semper’s theoretical contributions on practical
aesthetics is fundamentally covered and encapsulated by the overarching notion of
stoffwechsel (or metamorphism as Moravanszky insists) (Moravanszky 2018).
2.2.4. An Overview: A Prolegomena to a “Critical-Metabolic” Tectonics
Tectonic is not just one theory. Rather it is a theoretical discourse that has spanned
centuries and continues to receive new contributions and is needed to somehow make
sense of the different strains of theoretical contributions as the conditions and aims
are different to the point of being contradictory or antinomic.
State of the Art
and Research Question
53
Figure 21. The four-leaf structure of tectonic discourses.
Generally, we can claim that there is a branching of the tectonic approach – all of
which spurs from the center that is making. It could be proposed that there are four
main strains of tectonic thinking: the “conventional”, the structural, the ecological,
and the critical. These overlap and contain elements of each other; however, all relate
to the central dimensions of making, as it either drives the tectonic strain or criticizes
and deconstructs it. The “conventional” and “formal” are mostly extensions of the
poetics of making, while the “critical” (Hartoonian) and “ecological” (Bech-
Danielsen) try to deconstruct and reconsider the essential dimensions of architectural
making.
Though I would argue for the four main discourses, it is also very difficult to divide
them as each scholar or practitioner within tectonic mobilizes more often than not all
four while arguing that certain considerations can have higher priority than others (i.e.
the priority of climatic and environmental relations in Isak Worre Foged’s works, or
the radical critical dimension of Hartoonian and Rakatansky, etc.). Semper’s
stoffweshsel has here a particularly almost universal status, as it potentially covers all
four discourses simultaneously and equally.
Furthermore, throughout the history of tectonic theory, the discourse of a dual nature
can be laid out as containing both material and immaterial aspects. Remaining at this
“conventional” dualism nevertheless allows for modern iterations of the pre-modern
mechanism of techne. Likewise, the crucial aspect to expand is the material
preconditions of architectural production. While there are developments in this
direction, we are yet to see an architectural theory that is ontologically imbued with a
critical metabolic understanding of processes as developed in chemical engineering.
In this trajectory, Semper’s idea of stoffwechsel holds the potential to be coupled with
the urban metabolic (chemical engineering) notion of societal material flows. As
Hartoonian elaborated, Semper intended to attempt to “secularize” architectural
production with inspiration from natural sciences, and the idea of metabolic
transformation was used to “segment” architectural production phases.
54
Figure 22. The material-immaterial dualisms (though not the only ones)
of tectonic discourse.
That is not to say that it would be pertinent to do away with the material-immaterial
distinction and return (reenchant/mystify) to a pre-modern organic unity of poetic
techne into a contemporary fetishism of the act of building, but rather provide more
nuance to the spectrum of the material-immaterial dualism. That is to say that
regarding material aspects, the material dimensions were conventionally limited to
meaning material availability and material properties, and recently we are becoming
aware of the need to also consider material consequences or limitations/boundaries.
Another missing aspect in explicit terms is a tectonic category which is perhaps that
of “function”. While this is indeed a difficult category (also indicated by Nygaard),
for the most part, we accept that function is often “fixed” to a form (Nygaard 2011).
Even so, function is and should be seen as important, as it is conceived in metabolic
studies (see chapter 4). Literature on material flows and metabolic studies also
furthermore highlight how “use-intensity” is an important factor to minimize material
consumption, meaning that there is a need to minimize buildings being empty and
make the most of every facility for any function it may house (IRP 2020, pp 90-94).
While it may be nonsensical to conceive of a “Functional Tectonics” (next to all the
different strains of tectonic discourse) as use inherent to the design, it may hold the
potential to consider functionality/flexibility in its own (metabolic) right.
Tectonic discourse can also develop its own “ideology” in which arguments (or even
critical thinking) can be flattened to a kind of automated mechanism of simply calling
something “true” or “authentic” tectonic and thus of higher morality. Given the many
implicit assumptions, axioms, and pompous ideological fixations in architectural
theory, the very notion of so-called (proverbial almost) Capital A Architecture
(usually the very opposite of mere building) gets sublimated into “mere architecture”.
The reason for this is that the very ontological being of architectural production has
become automated, where arguments of something once profound get flattened to
facilitate any design. Tectonics is guilty of this with its usual arguments that
State of the Art
and Research Question
55
something is “true” and “honest”; arguments which have given birth to lazy and
“phony” moralism (Till 2009) that fail to provide meaningful cognitive coordinates
on how to engage with reality. An important critique of the tectonic discourse is
provided by Andrew Benjamin who demonstrated that the materialist approach can
be entirely disconnected from empirical material conditions and concerns into a kind
of material/tectonic ideology (Benjamin 2007). Ultimately such a
disconnectedness/suspension may perpetuate the current hegemonic modes of
production within the linear growth paradigm, as it merely serves as mental inspiration
for creative endeavors and subsequent material consumption.
The “ecological” strain is in limited scope when it comes to tectonics. While it is
indeed a discourse that deals with materials and making (and the narrativization of
such), there is still a possibility to develop a tectonic theory which situates
architectural production within the wider material conditions and planetary
boundaries from an industrial metabolic way of understanding.
The best iteration of ecological tectonics is currently the theoretical (as well as
practical/normative) contributions to the notion of “circular tectonics.” This is a late
shift in a tectonic discourse which is fused with the ideas and strategies of circular
economy (Ejstrup, Munch-Petersen 2019) and has an extenuated emphasis on “design
for disassembly” (Hvejsel, Beim 2019). Since then, there has also been a movement
towards developing “radical tectonics” (Trubiano, Beim, Meister 2022) which is not
to be confused with the book on “radical tectonics” from 2001 (LeCuyver 2001). The
authors attempt to conceptualize a so-called “absolute sustainability” through a multi-
scalar approach (Trubiano, Beim, Meister 2022). While that paper argues for social
inclusion as well as material conditions, there are no explicit and immediate
conceptualizations of planetary boundaries and limitations, potentially in the ways
that we have familiarized ourselves with in the former chapter and paragraphs (chapter
1.2 and 2.1.).
Figure 23. The scopes of Ecological Tectonics.
56
But the contributions on both circular and radical tectonics are not yet fleshed-out
theories but more normative indications of possibilities, i.e.., material pyramids
(Munch-Petersen, Beim 2022; CINARK 2019), critiques (Hvejsel, Beim 2019) and
explorative texts on the similarities between circular economy and tectonic thinking
(Much, Frederiksen 2019), all of which lack the metabolic understanding as seen in
chemical engineering. That is to say that current tectonic fused with only “circular”
thinking cannot account for phenomena such as Jevon’s Paradox and may even be at
risk of repeating such phenomenon (e.g., increasing accumulated material
consumption across the industry while minimizing material use for a single building).
This is because researchers on CE and LCA argue that there is no guarantee that any
circular design strategy will be used in the future as intended (and calculated) when
designed and built today (Eberhardt et al 2020). Perhaps a different variant of tectonic
theory can be forged if it translated some of the key aspects of the chemical
engineering understanding of metabolism.
As Jonas Holst has reified in his historical analysis on the ecological potentials and
implicit connotations of antient Tectonic thinking, conceptualizing the proto-
architectural notion of Tectonics in its own right has tremendous potential and an
actuality of its own (Holst 2019) and could even be seen a pretext for metabolic
thinking in tectonic discourse. Metabolism can be considered a central notion in
Tectonic thinking, as scholars have brought renewed focus on this idea, and perhaps
the best known contribution is Akos Moaranvaksy’s on Semper’s stoffweshcsel
(Moravanszky 2018). As Hartoonian elaborated, Semper’s theory was a significant
break in architectural thinking as it tried at deconstruct the creative process and
attempted to demystify it. This is certainly relevant to this day, as it is important to
explore and highlight how the architectural creative process “construes” questions of
materials which allows for perpetuation of ever increasing material consumption
within the linear growth paradigm and beyond of planetary limits and boundaries. Not
only for purposes of deconstruction and critique, Semper’s stoffweshsel is also of
relevance as a foundation for a new tectonic theory which situates itself within
planetary boundaries as developed in urban metabolic literature.
State of the Art
and Research Question
57
Figure 24. Coupling planetary boundaries with tectonic metabolism.
There is currently no architectural theory that can include something like the
phenomenon of the Jevons paradox. It is a crucial phenomenon to consider regarding
material consumption and architecture theory is mostly confined to theorizing the
design of singular objects (buildings, urban spaces, districts, etc.). Even when
architecture attempts to be “sustainable”, it has no way of thinking about how “good
intentions” can be materialized in negative ways to increase, and not decrease,
materials consumed and impacts on natural environments. Architects obviously would
not claim to have “ill intentions”, so why are that good intentions materialize as their
opposites, we need a critical architectural way of also thinking in these terms. Aspects
such as planetary boundaries are mainly developed in natural sciences or applied
sciences among other research fields, and architects are indeed attempting to
implement these considerations in methods and tools and ultimately try to envision
what kind of architecture would fit such a “planetary” trajectory.
In the coming years, there will certainly be different attempts to “architectural”
planetary boundaries, and thus integration into architectural theory and practice, but
the challenge remains of how to do so. How can this be achieved in rigorous ways so
that we do not conceptualize too loosely in a way which will allow for many future
examples of materialization of Jevon’s paradox (we intend good things and we
manifest increased not decreased carbon footprint and material consumption etc.)?
It is in this relation that my hypothesis of the juxtaposition of tectonic theory with that
of metabolic studies (as seen in chemical engineering and industrial ecology) could
provide crucial insights.
58
2.3. Conclusion of SoA: Metabolism in the Middle
With tectonics and industrial ecology being two separate fields within two different
disciplines, they nevertheless hold immense potential when juxtaposed. The
commonality that they nevertheless potentially share is that of “metabolism” and
“metabolic” thinking. Concludingly in this section of this chapter, the challenges and
objectives will be laid out in relation which have a “metabolic” impetus.
2.3.1. Metabolism as common denominator
Given the many challenges regarding material consumption in the building industry
(as reified in chapter 1.2), we can observe that tectonic theoretical discourse holds
potential as a way to implement metabolic and planetary thinking regarding material
consumption in the built environment. Industrial ecology is solely concerned with
materials but does acknowledge that social and economic aspects greatly influence
material consumption. Rather, it is not something that is empirically mapped and
included in material flows analysis. Tectonics, on the other hand, includes social and
cultural considerations regarding the design of the built environment, and despite
having ecological trajectories is still limited in comparison to industrial ecological
ways of thinking about cities and material construction.
Both (tectonics and industrial ecology/metabolism) have their strength and limitations
as there are wider sociopolitical aspects to consider which are not included in either
of the two. We have seen that tectonics has width regarding scales and design
challenges, while metabolic studies allow for a similar cross-scalar approach making
it possible to freely choose both the temporal and spatial system boundaries of any
chosen of interest. Tectonics is a wide field, with built theory across scales from
material (on micro levels) (Foged, 2015) to detailing (Frascari 1981) to urban design
scale (Christiansen 2020). All of these approaches have impetus in material
understanding in relation to immaterial aspects while demonstrating a width of
approach in scales. Material Flow Analysis (also known as ‘metabolism’) has thus
been considered a good supplement due to its flexibility over scale (from a single
household to an entire city or even region) while having an impetus in materials
(Oswald, Baccini 2003; Baccini, Bruner 2012). The scientific disciplines and fields of
ecology and natural environment are many. There is anything from environmental
sciences to ecological sciences all of which overlap to a greater and lesser degree. But
chemical engineering is an applied science that relies on the knowledge and findings
of natural and environmental sciences and the theory of industrial ecology (and MFA
methodology) which can act as a lens or filter for making findings in other fields
meaningful and applicable.
State of the Art
and Research Question
59
Figure 25. The potential links of industrial metabolism with tectonics.
Regarding the challenges of being within a linear growth paradigm, even with the
latest developments regarding the circular economy and circular tectonics, it may not
be certain that material consumption will be minimized or slowed as there is always
a risk that curricular strategies will not be implemented and used by future generations
as intended.
While this issue and its challenges are = expansive regarding dealing with many other
aspects of the economy and social and political realms, from an architectural
perspective it would be pertinent to deconstruct and reposition how we think about
design. That is not to say that we are stuck in the linear growth paradigm because
tectonic theories are not critical enough, but we have to make ourselves aware of some
of the gaps in theoretical ways of thinking and the application of theoretical positions
in practice. Even if the industry currently finds itself within a shift from a linear to a
circular economy, such a shift would still be linear, and if the “economic” aspect of
circular economy is overly emphasized and the application of circular thinking in
practice is limited to “design-for-disassembly”, there is a risk that the industry will
perpetuate or even increase material consumption and not slow and narrow the flows.
For these reasons, the “crucial” and “ecological” strains of tectonic discourse are to
be coupled with industrial ecology (metabolism). As an extension, Gottfried Semper’s
theory of stoffwechsel (metabolism) could, in an extension of Hartoonian’s reading,
be conceptualized as a critical-ecological theory as it attempts to deconstruct
(materially and immaterially) the anatomic and ontological structures of architecture
design and creativity. Juxtaposing tectonic (metabolism) with industrial ecology
(metabolism) could prove fruitful in providing potentially new ways of thinking and
insights. However, as they are two separate disciplines having their immense
complexity, a way to proceed is to centralize the notion of “metabolism” as a
commonality between the two.
60
Figure 26. Metabolism in the middle.
Metabolism is mobilized very differently in the two disciplines, as they help to explain
two different “flows” of material (and immaterial) aspects. Specifically, one can deal
with entire cities in terms of how materials move through society, and the other can
be described as a kind of breakdown of architectural constituents and how the creative
process takes place with impetus in materials. Both are metaphors. A city is neither
directly an organism that has its metabolism, nor is the creative design process a literal
metabolism. There here is however utility in being aware of the uses as metaphors.
With these theoretical frameworks, theory building will proceed in chapter 4 by way
of a more precise “breaking” down of theoretical constituents in correlations to
presented methods and methodology (chapter 3.).
2.3.2. Key Challenges and Objectives
There are certainly many challenges and issues persisting regarding material flows,
especially regarding mapping and redesigning of these flows. This doctoral study has
observed a missing link for architectural theory to attain a different “materialist”
understanding informed by the chemical engineering discipline. As such, this doctoral
study is concerned with building an interdisciplinary architectural theory that
integrates consideration from the industrial ecology framework. The challenges are
laid out in relation to missing aspects of the currently available theory and the inner
structures of the theory.
Generally, it can be described in parallel to the conventional modes of production
(Figure 17, chapter 1.4) where each mode of production can be paired with a similar
“tectonic” tradition. The classical, or conventional, dualist tectonics tend to isolate a
single object, while stoffwechsel is a procedural cycle that comes from the
transforming material for usage, etc. The missing link is to be explored in this doctoral
study, metabolic tectonics.
State of the Art
and Research Question
61
Figure 27. Regarding Figure. 17, there is corresponding "tectonics" to the different ways of
making /producing.
With Jevon’s Paradox as a starting point, we could hypothesize a discrepancy
between what is being said/intended and what material consequences manifest, i.e., a
discrepancy between theory and practice. Tectonic theory in its current state does not
have a way to consider how and theoretically conceptualize that “good intentions” can
manifest materially entirely outside of our intentions and control.
Tectonic theory is missing the “metabolic” dimension, as it is known in chemical
engineering because such a perspective could potentially require rethinking ways of
design and creativity.
We also see a dualist ontology of the material-immaterial spectrum mostly made up
of two constructs. It could be of importance to nuance further this material-immaterial
spectrum and how it aligns and correlates the critical mechanisms (constructs) of
architectural thinking with material limits and conditions. This spectrum implicitly
contains both the Analytical and Continental traditions. The reason for this is that
something like planetary boundaries has to be dealt with Analytically (empirically)
while the challenges of deconstruction inner axioms and problematic “ideological”
construction within the tectonic theoretical edifice require a Continental thinking
(more on this in chapter 3).
One could argue that the predominant mode of research today is the Analytical
tradition, but the reason to also include the continental is due to its critical tradition.
Why? Because phenomena and notions such as techne and poetics are core dynamic
mechanisms, which can spur new “myths” at any time. Theoretically, we have to be
aware and focused on critical reflection and deconstructing of such constructs to
understand what we are “really” doing (what material consequences are there of our
ideological preconceptions). Just because we experience ourselves as rational, it does
not mean that our actions and their material consequences are equally rational.
Theoretical constructs (e.g. issue, concept, and form (Aksamija, Irdanova 2010), see
62
chapter 1.3.1) are too open, lacking a kind of material culpability, and open for endless
iterative variation. As Nygaard elaborated, they are too much inclined towards
“practical” problem-solving and do not allow critical issues such as a “problem-
solving” approach. While there is certainly another aspect that also cements the
architectural discipline within the current linear growth paradigm, the architectural
culture of making few and “open-ended” constructs does not allow for a critical
challenge of the current hegemonic ways of thinking.
Figure 28. Construct and boundaries.
Given the creatively inclined openness of architectural constructs, a newly built set of
constructs would need to contain considerations of both material and immaterial
“boundaries” – meaning that aspect of philosophical and ontological foundations
(critical theory) as well as empirical-material limitations (planetary boundaries
through metabolic thinking) of the theory should “represented” among the constructs.
Objective
This doctoral study’s main aim is to build a metabolic tectonic theory that could act
as an anchor when dealing with issues of life cycles, new tools, and
technologies/techniques in the building industry. The building of a theory needs to
contain both explanatory and observational capacity (analysis) and at the same time –
with the same theoretical framework – it should have the capacity to prescribe actions
normatively (design). Metabolic thinking can be very complex and in the future, more
and more data, knowledge, methods, and tools will be developed which means
professionals linked with the built environment (architects, engineers, urban
designers) will be required to utilize any of these as well have an understanding of
material consequences. Currently, such knowledge and tools are external to
architecture, but with an actualized metabolic theory for architects, designers, and
engineers, these professionals could be better versed for the challenges of any future
tools or conditions.
State of the Art
and Research Question
63
2.4. Research Question
Given the aforementioned challenges – and in the context of this doctoral study’s aim
to build a theory – this doctoral study proceeds to develop a theory through the
juxtaposition of tectonics and industrial ecology. Since theory development generally
deals with both theory building and theory testing, the overarching research question
of theory development, along with the sub-questions which are concerned with the
testing of theory in both analytic and design capacities are discussed below.
Research Question(s):
Main Question:
1. How can a joint tectonic-metabolic theory be developed, which is metabolic
through the centralization and transformation of the notion of “safe sink” into
architectural and design discipline, and to what degree can such a metabolic approach
provide pertinent insights, reflections, and understandings on material consumption
in the built environment? (chapter 4)
Sub-Questions:
2. How and to what degree can such a theory introduce a combined material and
immaterial (metabolic) understanding of construction in architectural analysis?
(paper 1 + chapter 5)
3. How and to what degree can such theory introduce a combined material and
immaterial (metabolic) understanding of construction in architectural design?
(paper 2 + chapter 6)
64
Methodology and Research Design
65
Chapter 3.
Methodology and Research Design
Towards the development of theory, this chapter gives an initial overview of the
research strategy and subsequent research methods for theory development as well as
the building and testing of theory. This chapter elaborates on the chosen
methodologies respectively for the building and the testing of the theory. Afterward,
the chapter delineates the ontological and epistemological assumptions of the doctoral
study and its endeavor toward theory development. Finally, the chapter concludes
with a research design and provides an overview of how the theory-building and
testing efforts are to take place.
3.1. Research Strategy
As theory development involves both the building and testing of theory, the doctoral
study is initiated by the need to first build an initial theory and then test it. The testing
of theory occurs on two main levels when it comes to architecture and design: analysis
and design. In this doctoral study, the Initial theory is built through reference to other
theories, but the testing occurs both about other theories as well as empirical inquiry.
Figure 29. Overview of the research endeavor.
3.1.1. Scientific Research Logic
The research logic which provides rigor to this iterative process is Karl Popper’s
circular logic for scientific research inquiry (Popper 1959). Popper elaborates on the
66
importance of developing hypotheses (or theories) which one then attempts to apply
and falsify (ibid). This aspect is of importance for this doctoral study as the initial
hypothesis of a joint tectonic-metabolic theory can be assumed to provide new
insights but requires applications and thus attempts of falsifications to both tests the
limits of said theory and subsequently adjust it in accordance to both other existing
theories and the findings of the testing efforts.
Figure 30. Iterative loops of testing and building.
Fundamentally, the research strategy is an abductive approach. Abduction is the
“…logical operation which introduces new ideas..” (Groat Wang 2013, pp.34), and as
this doctoral study is concerned with building a theory by way of building and testing
the theory, it will proceed as such.
Methodology and Research Design
67
Figure 31. Abductive research strategy - along with inductive (building) and deductive
(testing).
The research strategy is thus an explorative mixed-method strategy initiated by a
deductive approach of building a hypothesis and a theory. It then tests the research
empirically to inform inductively the initially theory building.
Furthermore, the research relies on both qualitative and quantitative data as the
research question is concerned with reifying how immaterial aspects can play a part
in slowing and narrowing of material flows. The conducted research of this doctoral
study is mostly qualitative, though it was also initially intended to do LCA
calculations (i.e., in the case study paper) but this proved difficult due to lack of access
to (historical) data regarding where materials of said cases actually went.
Figure 32. The dual process of abductive approach: inductive and deductive.
68
Towards building of a theory, there is an initial pre-synthesis of the theory, which is
in way a “specter from the future” (inductive process) that then needs to be applied
and thus tested (deductive). This is then an iterative process, as the testing of the
theory provides insight which allows for refinement and nuance of the initial theory.
3.2. Theory Building
In the following section, a mapping of the theoretical framework and methodological
considerations regarding theory development are laid out. Firstly, there is an
elaboration regarding the general scope which is an interdisciplinary approach due to
dealing with architectural (tectonics) and chemical engineering (industrial ecology).
There is then the theoretical elaborations on the development of theory and what
particular methodological considerations are crucial to structure the theory building
efforts of this doctoral study.
This paragraph will give a slightly complex account of the methodology as we are
indeed dealing with an interdisciplinary theory building exploration. While the overall
scope is to develop a theory which hinges on the use of metaphor (as method), it also
requires other sub-strategies, as method (of metabolism) is not enough on its own to
provide specific direction regarding how to explore the “safe sink” in tectonic terms.
3.2.1. Interdisciplinary Research
The premise for theory development of this doctoral study is that of interdisciplinarity.
While we are seeing more and more segmenting of different professions across all
markets (architecture diving into landscape, building architects, urbanist, planners,
interior designers etc.), the built environment includes the problems we are attempting
to tackle occurring and requiring being dealt with from a multi- or interdisciplinary
way of thinking, as one particular problem can span many fields and disciplines.
Along with a developing and more interconnected global society, approaching
different issues and problems often requires more nuance and insight from different
perspectives, both separately and from an integrated, interdisciplinary point of view.
Karl Popper famously proclaimed that:
“We are not students of some subject matter, but students of problems.
And problems may cut right across the boundaries of any subject matter
or discipline.” (Popper 1963)
Methodology and Research Design
69
The above is a statement is becoming more and more relevant today given the fact
that issues and challenges of contemporary society are intertwined (within itself and
nature) and perform as complex adaptive system (CAS) which are “at the heart of
many contemporary problems” (Holland 2006). Furthermore, when a problem is so
complicated that it is fundamentally hard to establish what the problem is to begin
with, they are categorized as “wicked problems because they “lack a definitive
formulation or solution” (Keestra et al. 2016). The overall issue of material flows
(from the perspective of architecture and the built environment) can be conceived as
such a “wicked” problem, since it is fused with social, economic and environmental
concerns in a complex array or web of agencies and actors.
There are different ways to define what a discipline is, and when we are dealing with
the dual nature of this doctoral study, generally accepted definitions from a scientific
understanding defines architecture as part of wider scope of disciplines (Keestra et al.
2016, pp:29) while, some architects themselves speculate and argue that architecture
is its own discipline (Leatherbarrow 2001). This doctoral study relies on the provided
definitions of two main groups of disciplines, i.e., natural sciences, social sciences
and humanities (Keestra et al. 2016, pp:29). As metabolic understanding from
chemical engineering necessitates an “multi-cycle” approach, it would be fruitful to
conceive of architecture as part of a larger scheme or network. At the same time, these
two opposing views are not entirely incompatible. Given the proclivity of this doctoral
study and its interest in an interdisciplinary approach to material flows, the his thesis
relies on the interdisplinary literature’s definition (ibid) to use the main disciplinary
groups. The firstly being “Geography and Urban Planning” from social sciences
which concerns itself with the built environment (which contain architecture and
tectonics); secondly, “Chemistry” from natural sciences which contains chemical
engineering (MFA and industrial ecology).
There are a number of reasons why this categorization and definition of disciplines is
pertinent to consider. Firstly, although it may appear superficial, the fact that this
doctoral study has a foot in the two main groups is important for considering it a
thoroughly interdisciplinary endeavor. Secondly, unlike the notion that architecture is
its own discipline, positioning architecture within a larger disciplinary context not
only demands an overview for potentially and critically positioning professions within
the built environment in a larger perspective internally within the discipline but also
externally towards to two sciences and the humanities.
With the two pertinently chosen disciplines, the doctoral study proceeds by relying on
the interdisciplinary research model “IIS” (Keestra et al. 2016, pp:52) which is made
up of the following phases: Identify the problem field or topic, formulate preliminary
research question, develop theoretical platform, finalize research problem, formulate
sub-question, develop research design and method, collect and analyze data, interpret
results, and conclude and reflect (ibid) (figure 33). This doctoral study and its chapters
are thus guided by the interdisciplinary research structure of the IIS-model in which
the introduction chapter (1) accounts for the problem field or topic which is the issue
70
of material flows within the built environment. The second chapter outlines the current
theory and practice along with a state-of-the-art (of the two disciplines of this doctoral
study) of the relevant two disciplines, i.e., finishing the chapter with the final research
question Chapter two accounts for the interdisciplinary reasoning and the research
design which oriented around theory building and a design scenario. Chapter four
develops a greater perspective of the theoretical background of the two disciplines and
build theory through an iterative process of conducting a design scenario in chapter 5.
Following this, chapter 6 presents the resulting theory of the (im)material metabolism.
The dissertation concludes and reflects upon the research in chapter 7.
Figure 33. The IIS-model (Keestra et al 2016) for interdisciplinary research
provides the working structure for this doctoral study.
The crucial initial step (step 1 in figure 33) is to define a problem with this
methodology (done in chapters 1 and 2). To do this one applies the Mind-map method
(Keestra et al. 2016, pp:61) (see appendix A) which isused prior to the mapping of the
state-of-the-art in order to create a methodical approach to map the problem (of linear,
growth-oriented material flows) and enables the choosing which disciplines and their
frameworks are relevant for the chosen problem and as such used as the background
for the writing of the introduction (chapter 1) in this doctoral study - concluding with
a hypothesis of the potential of juxtaposing two disciplines (step 2 in figure 33).
Subsequently (step 3), once the two disciplines and their theoretical frameworks are
chosen, it is pertinent to map them systemically via the tools of “data management
table” (see appendix B). This is a way to further map chosen frameworks and map
how these frameworks conceive of the chosen problem. Potential significance
regarding the mapping of the two disciplines according to the elaborated parameters
of theory, concept and method (Keestra et al. 2016; Repko, 2008) which outlines and
constitutes the state-of-the-art of the two disciplines for the purpose of finalizing the
research question in chapter 2 (step 4 and 5) can also be mapped. Within this chapter
(3.2.5.), methods of connecting the two disciplines will be laid out (step 6) regarding
the particularities of building theory and that of testing the theory, respectively. The
testing of the theory will occur in chapters 5 and 6 (steps 7 and 8) respectively with
Methodology and Research Design
71
partial discussion and conclusions within each chapter as well as a final conclusion
and discussion in chapter 7.
3.2.2. Theory Development
What is a theory, and how can it be built and tested? There are obviously very different
uses of theory in the wide spectrum sciences and disciplines. Perhaps the architectural
discipline in particular has a very broad understanding of what a theory can be and
what is necessary for a theory to be considered a theory (Nygaard 2011; Spence 2017).
As Nygaard indicates, theory has a certain structure and can be guide by “invisible”
aspects (Nygaard 2011). As such, Nygaard vaguely emulated in his own writing the
widely acceptable (scientific) definition of what a theory is: a theory uses a system of
constructs (concepts), propositions (relations between concepts) to explain a
phenomenon (Colquitt, Zapata-Phelan 2007; Bhattacherjee 2012). This doctoral study
relies on this definition due to the fact that it is an interdisciplinary endeavor mixing
architecture (social science) and industrial ecology (natural/applied science). A theory
mainly consists of four elements (abovementioned constructs, propositions/relations,
logics, boundaries). All theories consist of these 4 main elements, but not all theories
make them explicitly clear and are very often implicitly present in case where it is
missing explicitly. If we observe architectural theory from this perspective,
architectural theories do not fall outside of these proposed structures though these
theories occur in implicit aspects and are “hidden” within architectural thinking.
Theory can act at either a micro (idiographic) level, where it explains a single specific
phenomenon or macro (Nomothetical) level where it acts as a generalizable theory for
different situations (Colquitt, Zapata-Phelan 2007; Bhattacherjee 2012). Some of the
benefits of theory include providing the logic of phenomena and the sense-making
system for the found empirical data while having the capacity to identify other
constructs further exploration and testing.
Figure 34. Theory development is an iterative dialogue between building and testing-
often spanning long periods of time – sometimes decades (Spence 2017).
72
Theory development consists of two main aspects: building and testing. Testing of a
theory occurs in four ways with the first being the logical consistency which tests the
logic that brings together system of concepts, propositions and boundary conditions
(assumptions). The second is to test for explanatory power to see how much theory
can predict in which it better explains something compared to other theories. The third
is to test for falsifiable, where you test if some data goes against the theory and thus
avoid tautologies and requires rival explanations via explanatory power. Fourth,
parsimony considers how simple an explanation is in order to be considered the
good/understandable theory that contains as few as possible variables and
assumptions. (Colquitt, Zapata-Phelan 2007; Bhattacherjee 2012).
There are 5 degrees to testing a theory. Firstly, it should be determined whether it is
inductive or does it ground predictions with logical speculation (Colquitt, Zapata-
Phelan 2007; Bhattacherjee 2012). Secondly, it should to ground predictions with
reference to past findings (comparing to past theories) should be considered. Thirdly,
ground predictions with existing conceptual arguments as part of the logic should be
contemplated. Fourthly, grounding predictions with existing models, diagrams, or
figures should be examined, and finally, grounding predictions with existing theory
should be acknowledged (ibid).
Theory building requires the synthesis of a range of literature and studies to provide
evidence confirming an explanation to a given phenomenon and is thus an attempt to
plausibly explain a phenomenon in different way than done by previous theory. This
requires a knowledge of current theories which attempt to explain the same
phenomenon and how they are currently used.
Building theory occurs in four main ways. Firstly, grounded theory which builds
theory inductively on observed patterns and requires consistent explanations from the
researcher. Secondly, the Bottum-up conceptual analysis (inductive in nature) in
which is conducted to identify different sets of predictors regarding the phenomenon
by using a predefined framework. Thirdly, it is possible to build a theory by extending
or modifying existing theory which is a deductive approach. Finally, the application
of existing theory in a new context which is also a deductive approach (Colquitt,
Zapata-Phelan 2007; Bhattacherjee 2012). This PhD study thus combines exploration
of theory building and the use of existing theory as well as empirical findings.
Theory Development in this PhD
In continuing of this doctoral study, initial theory development was initiated by using
the literary review following the methodology of the IIS-model along with mapping
the two disciplinary frameworks done in chapter 2. As the purpose of this PhD is to
build theory, the literature on theory development categories four main elements that
constitute a theory: concept or constructs (the what), propositions (how concepts
relate), logic (why the concept are related), and boundary conditions (the assumptions
and circumstances for the efficacy of the theory) (Colquitt, Zapata-Phelan 2007;
Methodology and Research Design
73
Bhattacherjee 2012). These are in the context of this PhD segmented into two
categories: 1. constructs and propositions and 2. logics and boundaries. The first set
is the more immediately approachable aspects of a theory, while the second is usually
“more difficult” and philosophical in nature. All four elements overlap and are integral
but for the purpose of proceeding the doctoral exploration, the four elements are
segmented into two which can be explored separately though not independently of
each other.
Figure 35. Four elements of theory as two segments.
Initially, the first segment was built (constructs) and, with vague ideas of the relations,
the purpose was to explore the relations between constructs. Secondly, the building
of the second segment was informed by both the application of theory (analysis and
design) as well as by referring to existing theories and philosophical positions
pertinent to a “metabolic” shift in architectural theory.
3.2.3. Logical Argumentation
When one of the key intentions of a research endeavor is that of theory building, it is
of importance to engage with logical argumentation. The first aspect of this research
strategy is to construct first principles (Groat, Wang 2013, pp: 379) or, as has been
established that principles corelate to the notion of “constructs” in theory development
sub-chapter (3.2.2.).
74
Figure 36. Approach for logical argumentation for building of theory.
Working towards the building of a theory, the inner most layer is that of the theoretical
frameworks of the chosen disciplines and their “metabolic” elaborations. The inner
layer is mostly concerned with proposing and developing the main constructs of the
theory along with their relations (segment 1). The outer layer is mostly concerned with
providing insight for the structure for the logic and philosophical assumptions and
boundaries of the theory-to-be-built (segment 2). While this is the case for the most
part, the categories overlap as the inner layer also holds significance for the logics and
boundaries, and likewise the outer layer also holds significance for the proposal of
constructs and what relations they develop.
The inner layer deals with the given theoretical frameworks from architectural
tectonics (stoffwechsel or metabolism) and chemical engineering metabolic studies.
This juxtaposition creates both certain frictions and the bringing together of crucial
ideas. Thus, the need for an understanding of complexity and phenomena, such as
“multi-cycle” networks, and of paradoxical phenomenam such as the Jevon’s
Paradox, three key authors with overlapping ideas are crucial: Graham Harman, an
object-philosopher par excellence, (who shares similarities with) Timothy Morton, a
prominent eco-philosopher, and lastly Slavoj Žižek, a philosopher of ideology and
sublime objects. Harman and Morton share many similarities as their founding
philosophical onset is that of object-oriented-ontology, while Morton is much more
eco-philosophically inclined. Žižek’s relevance is pertinent as the dealing with
ecology and relations in general between subject and object (people and nature) can
turn out to have a complex, complicated and even paradoxical relations.
When developing theory through logical argumentation, one has to also take into
account what type of arguments and theory is to be developed and the literature that
elaborates a spectrum spanning from formal/mathematical to cultural/discursive (ibid,
Methodology and Research Design
75
pp: 385). In relation to Groat and Wang’s definition, the development of theory in this
doctoral study - while containing formal constructs - contain discursive elements
introduced through critical materialist thinking.
As the above diagram indicates, given the fact that the theory building of this PhD
study is rooted in two disciplines but is shaped by the ontological positions of the eco-
ontological materialist views, the theory intends to develop a set of constructs that are
in the primary category (groat Wang 2013. Pp: 389). The secondary category occurs
on a “deeper” level than that of the primary, an example being Stewart Brand’s six
elements (site, structure, service, space plan, stuff) which are directly applied in the
OPEN building concept (ibid). Similarly, in this doctoral study, the primary constructs
are developed to conceptualize the secondary notion of the Urban Sink. Furthermore,
as the theory development is tasked to nuance the tectonic material-immaterial
spectrum, we are dealing with spectrum category of constructs (first principles) (ibid,
pp: 408)
Groat and Wang further elaborate that logical argumentation tend to be
interdisciplinary as their founding constructs (first principles) tend to contain a certain
openness for differentiated applicability (ibid, pp: 388). These first principles (the
primary category) can have different “natures”, being that of principles of quantity (as
with Vitruvius’ firmitas, utilitas, venustas) or quality (i.e., the Greek eudaimonia or
“the good”), or principles of origin (as in the theory of Marc Antoine Laugier’s
Primitive Hut) (ibid. pp.393-395). While constructs are general an overarching
concept, in the context of this doctoral study, the constructs (or first principles) would
need to be made empirical in order to be juxtaposed and correlated to discover specific
relations for the purpose of critical assessment. The relations of these are to be mapped
and tested in the application of the theory.
Proceeding in developing logical argumentation is with the tactic of analogy (Groat,
Wang 2013, pp: 401) which is mobilized in this doctoral study as the main (founding)
tectonic/method but other sub methods are also needed as we are dealing with two
complex and very different disciplinary theoretical frameworks (tectonics and
industrial ecology) (more on this below in 3.2.5).
3.2.4. Methods in Building Theory
Given the overall scope of the research design (theory building) there is need for
supplementary methods that will structure and systematize the theory development.
As an interdisciplinary exploration of two very different disciplinary frameworks can
prove complex, multiple methods will be needed.
76
State-of-the-Art
For the purpose of informing the theory building and testing efforts as well as the
need to map existing theory (which is crucial for theory building), this doctoral study
proceeds by conducting a state-of-the-art (theoretical framing) on the chosen two
disciplines using “data management tables” (Repko, 2008; Keestra et al. 2016) which
will act as the “backbone” for the final research question (Keestra et al. 2016, pp:70).
Multiple “data management tables” will be needed to gain a proper understanding of
the state-of-the-art of the relevant disciplines and should “offer critical overview of
academic literature” in relation to problem field/topic, be based on the perspectives
and theories from the selected disciplines, and finally be a “coherent story” and not
just collections of concepts and theories etc. (Ibid, pp:71). The state-of-the-art literary
review is used in this doctoral study both in the introductory chapters but also in the
initial paragraphs of the theory building chapter (chapter 4) where a more in-depth
mapping of the two chosen theoretical frameworks is explored while they are
deconstructed critically for theory building purposes.
In mapping the state-of-the-art of two chosen disciplines (as done in chapter 2), the
“data management table” lists the categories of the table: discipline,
theory/hypothesis, concept, assumptions/methodology, and insight into problem/topic
(Keestra et al. 2016; Repko 2008). The first category simply names the disciplines
and relevant sub-disciplines. The second category is that of the theory or hypothesis
which broadly consist of mapping the key theoretical notion that are relevant to the
disciplines and its potential contribution to the doctoral study. The third category are
(key) concepts that constitute the theory. The fourth, is an analysis into the “behind
the scene” ontological, epistemological assumptions and methodological
considerations which often are unspoken or implicit in a text that govern an approach.
Finally, the fifth category holds key insights the disciplines contributions regarding
the chosen problem/topic (ibid; ibid).
There are many important considerations to consider. . One of them is to be critical
with the above mentioned categories especially regarding one’s own disciplinary
precondition since “all researchers operate with implicit assumptions based on
personal values and guided by their discipline...” (Lélé, Norgaard, 2005; Keestra et al.
2016).
Object-Oriented Ontology as Method
While object oriented ontology (ooo) is usually a theoretical effort to comprise a
philosophical description of realty as both material and immaterial objects, in the
context of this PhD study, Graham Harman quadruple structure of objects (Harman
2011) and provides the structural foundation for the theory building. Harman’s
theory’s (as will be elaborated further in the coming paragraph 3.4.2) fundamental
axiom is to be considered on equal footing with material and immaterial objects,
whether material thing of meta-physical ideas, as these assert effect onto each other.
Harman’s quadruple structure is applied to the theory building effort of this PhD, as
Methodology and Research Design
77
the “core” spectrum to form material and immaterial entities of tectonic thinking and
practice.
Figure 37. Graham Harman's quadruple of objects (Harman 2011).
Harmon asserts that both material and immaterial objects and processes
(effects/properties though he calls them qualities) can be objectified as a way to
comprehend them. As such in the theory building effort, this logic of ontologically
considering such disparate objects as potentially equally important and at the same
footing is what provides the “structuring” of the theoretical development. Harman’s
elaboration that objects can change properties/effects due to changing circumstances
etc. is a useful aspect which seems very similar to affordances (Gibson 2015), as an
object (a building) can function as something very different due to its characteristics
and imbued potentiality (affordance).
Žižekian Dialectics as Method
In addition to Harman’s structure, Žižek is perfect countermeasure from critical
theory. Žižek theoretical elaborations do not perhaps span as wide as Harman’s
(Haramn theorizies on everything, all objects (Harman 2018)). Žižek’s instead has
clear emphasis on the “immaterial” especially in human relations. If I could put it so,
objects of everyday life allows us to see how ideological presuppositions of any kind
(social and cultural positions, economic, political, personal taste etc.) allows for the
“construction” of narratives which can steer or “distort” reality in one way rather than
the other. Slavoj Žižek’s notion of the objet a is used as a dialectical mechanism to
explore and narrativize certain conditions and relations. The objet a is explained by
Žižek as a “positivization of a lack” (Žižek 2012) in which one’s inability to properly
map empirical circumstances forces you to provide a narrative to nevertheless make
sense of the situation. A very good way to explain Žižekian thinking is through a very
simplified and even banal example. For example, Santa Claus, which Žižek uses often
at lectures to explain objet a and ideology. Paraphrasing Žižek, we thus have
78
phantasmatic figure (Santa Claus), who supposedly brings presents for Christmas. The
children (at a certain age) do not believe that Santa brings the presents, but at times
they pretend they do as not to disappoint their parents. The parents in turn also pretend
to believe in Santa as to not disappoint their children. Thus, no one believes, but the
specter remains, and the acts of buying gift continue as as if everyone believed in
Santa despite the lack of actual belief in Santa. So how is this relevant to materials
flows? Žižek is of course not interested in carbon footprints nor does he make life
cycle assessment of all the “gifts”. He is, however, interested in the “Santa Clauses”
of different societal edifices. Namely the ideological (immaterial) objects which
ideologically maintain, legitimize, or fail to address the edifices’ mental structures
and their subsequent material flows.
While the objet a can be used to critically reflect the ideological objects of architecture
thinking, it can also be used as a sense making mechanism as well. As we are dealing
with ecological concerns, the many different material flows and material behavior, it
can very easily become difficult to wrap one’s comprehension around such many
different and seemingly not connected data points and knowledge. By wrapping it all
under one term, i.e., metabolism, things suddenly start to become understandable.
Even if this PhD also uses chemical engineering to build theory, the theory-to-be-built
is first and foremost intended for architects and designers, while chemical engineering
could also use it in multi and interdisciplinary efforts, it is perhaps of lesser significant
for them. Given this fact, there is a challenge in how to properly “translate” pertinent
consideration from industrial ecology (metabolism) to architecture through tectonics.
The analysis of Semper’s theory is thus done by differentiating between “form and
content” (Žižek 2012, pp. 176, 374) of this theory in the quest to re-actualize Semper
in modern chemical engineering metabolic fashion. Žižek also elaborates when having
to translate any author or work, one has to be true to the original. But in what way?
Merely copying his content (using the exact same 4 elements (Semper et al 1989)
perhaps with one new addition) would flatten the effort of Semper. The proper way to
be faithful to Semper is to equally consider his content while being true to his “form.”
This would implicate that one ought to repeat what and how Semper did it (i.e., the
form, meaning that he studied other sciences and attempted to address pertinent
societal issues) and not only reconfigure the content (i.e. add another element to the
existing four). One should thus speculatively ask the question what would a Semper-
figure do if he had all knowledge available of today (from environmental and chemical
engineering sciences etc.), and if he was put in the current predicament of climate
change etc. - what would that have done to his theory? Formally, what we also have
to consider, in extension of this question, is the fact that (as we will see in chapter
4.2.1) Semper was greatly inspired by the natural sciences of his time in constructing
a kind architectural “chemistry.” What would a new stoffwechsel look like if he
delved into industrial ecology and chemical engineering?
Metaphor as Method
Before the prevalent uses of metabolism as metaphors in chemical engineering and
Methodology and Research Design
79
architecture, the notion was used in biology and the metabolic systems of living
organism - but has since then been applied in very different ways in the two disciplines
of interest. In architecture, there has been several uses of metabolism with perhaps
the most dominant and ongoing being continued use of metabolism in architecture and
in particular tectonic discourses (Moravanszky 2018). Here we see the metaphor of
metabolism translated/transferred to poetically explain the process of becoming from
making to the finished manifest in use in architectural discourse. In industrial ecology,
literature has even been developed which puts into question the very use of the
metaphor and its “efficacy” while nevertheless showing the immense potentials in
taking a serious and critical approach to conceptualizing society as an metabolic
organism.
Given the fact that the notion of “metabolism” as a metaphor is quite central to
tectonic discourse as well as the chemical engineering field of material flows, both
disciplines demonstrate there is significant efficacy in mobilizing the metaphor. This
metaphorically links to the how metabolic rates of different size organism vary, where
a small entity has high metallic rate, and thus a city being a very large entity should
have a very slow metabolic rate.
There are different definitions of metaphor (Black 1955). Metaphors implement a
similarity and difference: when one claims that architecture is a metabolism, there is
already a similarity (architecture transforms materially) and a difference (architecture
is not a metabolism in biological terms). Max Black hypothesizes (with the
substitution theory) that the differences do not make a distinction for the meaning of
the metaphor and can easily substitute actual words, while a thinker such as Chaïm
Perelman, distinguishes metaphor and analogy, claiming that the difference does
make a distinction (Perelman 1979). Perelman believes this in the sense that one can
be confused about what is exactly meant when one says “architecture is a metabolism”
as association within language playing a big part in reifying the underlying meaning.
Daniel Rigney later conceptualizes “root metaphors” which according to him are like
that of “society”, i.e.,no one has ever directly touched “society” but it is like something
else (a forest, organism etc.) (Rigney 2001). In this sense industrial ecology
(metabolism) uses metaphors, since we cannot directly know it (e.g., the city), we
conceptualize it (the city) as a metabolism.
There is Here, there is a discrepancy between the two metabolisms in architecture and
chemical engineering, respectively. It is my position that the challenge is for
architecture and tectonic discourse to introduce a shift in how we conceptualize the
term metabolism to allow the metaphor to manifest more pertinent material effects.
One could here refer to Darbellay’s nomadic concepts (metaphors) (Darbellay 2012)
which circulates and swerves through different disciplines and fields. The challenge
for this PhD is to attempt to repeat the logic of metaphor in the architectural discourse
of tectonics. But how? Well, the challenge is to translate the metaphor in a more
80
“literal” way as seen in industrial ecology and metabolic study norms.
Metaphor Use and Architecture
Before simply explaining how the uses of metaphor will manifest in this research, it
is important to gain quick overview of how metaphors are already used in architectural
discourse as this will guide which type of metaphor mobilization would be relevant
for this study (as there are different metaphor mobilizations). While what is discussed
below is not comprehensive and is in no way an exhaustive inquiry into the uses of
metaphors in architecture, it uses the Žižekian notion of objet a (or as he
conceptualizes it dialectically: “a postivization of a lack”( Žižek 2012, pp.175) to
attempt to bring forth the roles metaphors have. Here Žižek explains how objet a
works by categorizing the signified and the signifier (Žižek 2012), i.e., in the sense
that a phenomenon may appear complex and complicated and by asserting a analogy
or metaphorical narrative of said phenomenon, it suddenly appear understandable and
approachable. While this has positive implications, it also has negative ones, as it is
possible to mobilize a narrative without a thorough analysis an understanding of a
phenomenon and the use of narrative becomes ideologically effective.
Architectural discourses have over time been keen on implementing other sciences
and types of thinking as ways to revive or reinvigorate itself, and architecture has a
very long and wide history of this. Relevant to this doctoral study is that some of the
early uses of metaphors and inspiration comes from biology and human body
(Nygaard 2011). These were initially mostly concerned with the proportions of the
body, and how to translate anatomic ratios into architectural ones to achieve
appearances of great sublimity and beauty. Sempers practical aesthetic approach in
Style (Semper 2004) of stoffwechsel (metabolism) was initially inspired by biology,
chemistry of his time. Post WWII, the Japanese Metabolist Avant Garde movement
also employed this metaphor/metonymy, and while there were some interesting
developments there in terms of interchangeable module systems which provide
flexibility (Koolhaas, Obrist 2011), the movement was not metabolic in the industrial
ecological sense. This movement was also aesthetically fixed on designing a
metabolism which was dynamic and accelerated (which perhaps reflected the
economic developing era of Japan at the time). It can be considered as an aesthetic
(architectural) acceleration of the metaphor of metabolism which did not contain the
critical understanding of planetary boundaries. To this day, we see “green” and
“ecological” designs which aesthetically emulate wetlands, quagmires, lush forests
but ultimately require high maintenance and do not significantly contribute to
biodiversity.
Considering the above, the use of metaphors in architecture, at least in the tradition of
referring to body/anatomy/metabolism, gets translated in ways which allow
architecture to revolve around itself. Žižek would designate the role of metaphor as
an objet-a in such cases which would act as a legitimizing/propelling entity and allow
Methodology and Research Design
81
for a continuation of ones’ activity while lacking proper cognitive coordinates of the
challenges and problems at hand. At the same time, the challenge is to consider some
metaphors as perhaps more useful than others, and at the same time attempt to take
them as seriously as possible on their own terms. To this point, the metaphor of
metabolism, as seen in chemical engineering, does hold much more potential than
mere alluding aesthetically in architectural terms to an appearance of rich ecosystem.
Method of Add – Adjust -Connect
But how to continue to transform the metaphor of metabolism in tectonics in the
“spirit” of the industrial metabolism? The crucial step is to take a notion from
industrial metabolism and introduce it into tectonic discourse: that of the “safe sink”.
Following and relying on interdisciplinary research literature and its methods for
integrating disciplinary insight, this doctoral study uses the overarching method of
“metaphor” but also mobilizes the methods of “adding”, “adjusting” and “connecting”
(Keestra et al. 2016, pp: 44-46).
…Add
It is possible to add an existing element from one discipline into another (Keestra et
al. 2016, pp: 44). The central aspect of this doctoral study is to add the element of
“safe sink” into tectonic discourse and centralize it towards a new tectonic thinking
of metabolism.
…Adjust
When there are commonalities in two disciplines, but they aren’t perhaps
immediately clear, adjusting a concept can be of use (Keestra et al. 2016, pp:45).
After introducing (adding) the concept of the “safe sink”, there are already some
commonalities between tectonic metabolism and chemical engineering metabolism
as they both construct notions of parts and wholes. The tectonic discourse will
however require an adjustment based on the addition of the “safe sink”.
…Connect
The method of connecting is used when there are concepts with that are similar but
have different meanings. It can be of used to draw out their differences and connect
them (Keestra et al. 2016, pp:45-46). This is precisely what is taking place at more
general level with use of metaphor. The notion of metabolism is exactly such a
notion which is present in both disciplines but has different uses and translations.
As the literature elaborates, one is not confined to having to use merely one of the
above methods (add, adjust, connect) of translating/integration across disciplines
(Keestra et al. 2016, pp: 46). Furthermore, this can also happen across three distinct
categories: theory, method, result.
82
Figure 38. It is possible to connect on three key levels.
(Redrawing of diagram Keestra et al. 2016)
In what has come to this point in this PhD study, the key concept from the industrial
metabolism (safe sink) is to traverse from the chemical engineering field into the
tectonic framework in the spirit of metabolic thinking as seen in industrial ecology
and thus attempt to introduce a shift in architectural/design theory of tectonics in order
to be attuned to industrial metabolic thinking and metabolic meta-physics (more on
this in chapter 4.2).
3.3. Theory Testing
In this section, the testing aspect of the overall theory development efforts will be laid
out. The testing of theory occurs in two main strains: testing of the theory in analytical
and design (prescriptive) capacities. These will require two main methodological
considerations (case study and research-by-design) along with supplementary
methods and tools which will structure and systematize the inquiries. The following
methodical considerations are used both in the two written papers 1 and 2 (Usto et al,
2022; 2023) and in the expanded explorations in the chapter 5 and 6.
3.3.1. Overall Methodology for testing theory
As literature on theory development shows, there are several ways to test a theory and
several degrees of theory testing (Colquitt, Zapata-Phelan 2007; Bhattacherjee 2012).
When testing a theory, one has to test for logical consistency, explanatory power,
falsifiability and parsimony (how ‘simple’ the theory is) (Colquitt, Zapata-Phelan
2007; Bhattacherjee 2012). In this doctoral study, the quest is to test theory through
gathering of data. The theory to be tested will act as a methodological framework in
the application of the theory where said theory will guide the methodology and the
subsequent methods and tools.
Methodology and Research Design
83
3.3.2. Case Study (Analysis)
The testing is to take place through a case study, and the choice of the case study is
applicability of the theory as framework and the constructs as parameters (units)
within the case study. The case study is a known way to also provide data and findings
which are useful for theory building (George, Bennet 2005).
The overall objective of the case study is to test the analytical applicability of the
theory. In doing so, the case study will specifically attempt to explore how a set of
“constructs” (spanning from material to immaterial) interrelate, and how immaterial
ones could affect the material conditions (if experiential properties can help to
minimize material consumption/flows)in particular. Specifically, the relationship to
be explored is how phenomenological quality of a house, and what “social narrative”
has gained over time have or could have affected material flows of the house (if there
has been additional renovation, repair etc.). Case studies are widely accepted as ways
to both test a theory and buildi upon a theory from findings from a conducted case
study (George, Bennet 2005).
The case study is of an explorative research “nature” and has an inductive approach.
This means that the case study proceeds to explore the relationship of the chosen
embedded parameter of the chosen cases (units) by hypothesizing that there could be
an intrinsic relationship between the material conditions and flows compared with the
tectonic quality of a case. It is furthermore mixes both quantitative data (material
conditions of the buildings such as structural system and history of renovation and
repair) and qualitative data (analysis of functionality, phenomenological analysis of
interiority gesture and social narrative of how the building is describe in society). The
case study proceeds as a multiple case study which is embedded (Yin 2003), meaning
that the study focuses on particular selected parameters (sub-units) which are to be
compared. This is unlike a holistic case study which covers a much broader set of data
to cover the case thoroughly (Yin 2003) with the latter being the more usual to the
choice of a single case.
84
Figure 39. Showing the multiple cases of embedded study and
exploring the relations between the sub-units (not to be confused with correlation research).
The unit of the case is thus a building, the surrounding buildings, and park area which
act as the immediate context along with the urban constellation surrounding it. The
sub-unit (embedded parameters) are the five constructs from the theory development.
They constitute a spectrum from material to immaterial across the five constructs:
“material flows”, “structural principles”, “use/functionality”, “experiential
conditions”, and “narrative” (see chapter 4.4.4).
The case study transforms the five theoretical constructs into five sub-unit as point of
inquiry, and furthermore hypothesizes that the immaterial conditions (spatial gesture
and social narrative) could positively influence the slowing of material flows as it
establishes links of data to proposition to explore that particular relationship (Yin
2003; pp. 26-27).
Towards establishing internal validity (Yin 2003; pp. 35), the case study chooses
similar building typology and function in order to discuss their similarities and
differences and thus discern more pertinent and nuanced findings.
3.3.3. Research By Design (Design)
For the purpose of testing the developed theory for design purposes, this PhD study
employs the methodology of Research By Design as developed by Jørgen Hauberg
(Hauberg 2011). In this relation, the PhD develops a Design Scenario in which to
apply and test the potentials of the theory and provide feedback for subsequent theory
building. Generally, experimentation is an accepted approach to testing and
application of a theory but can also be mobilized for theory building purposes
(Horváth 2016).
Methodology and Research Design
85
In the architectural profession—given the “creative” dimension of the discipline
which can be both informed by methods as well as guided by intuition – an
architectural researcher had to nevertheless develop a way in which it is possible to
explore and research design endeavors. Jørgen Hauberg elaborates that a “research by
design” methodology goes in the “opposite direction” in which you make the design
and then explore the methods and rationalization to “extract the design rules”
(Haubaeg 2011). This aspect of considering “design rules” (which can also be
understood as applicable design parameters/principles) asks for the particular variant
which Research By Design methodology of “research-into-design”. Hauberg
furthermore elaborates that such an endeavor can be similar to conventional
architectural production but differs in the fact that it is structured by use of
methodology for the purpose of being able to explain the process and thus its quality.
This methodology is relevant for this PhD as the methodology is intended to explore
openly how a built theory applies in a design scenario, what considerations it prompts
and what its lacks are in further development.
3.3.4. Methods for Testing Theory
While the above accounts for the methodologies as part of the research strategy, to be
able to conduct an inquiry into knowledge gathering, a set of methods are used to gain
insights. The method at the “meta-level” of this doctoral study is linked with
interdisciplinary research and theory development is described in paragraphs 4.6 and
4.7 while in this section are the method of the empirical inquires of the theory testing
qua case study and research-by-design.
Literature Review
While literature review is listed here, it was also earlier mentioned in relation to the
mapping of the two key disciplines using the data management method (Keestra et al.
2016; Repko, 2008). The same method is also used but on a much “smaller” scale in
mapping the literature written on the particular chosen cases in the case study. Here,
the literature was chosen that had scholars deliberately and explicitly analyze the cases
and give their takes on both the character of the architecture and how it embeds itself
into a wider cultural setting. Similarly, the literary review was also used in the
research-by-design endeavor (paper 2 and chapter 6) as it was necessary to found the
experiment in an existing frame of knowledge and issues related to material flows,
though it was not crucial for the conduction of the design scenario.
Document Analysis Method
When applied, the newly built theory as design application, archival material of
drawings and detailed descriptions of the material build-up of each case which can
provide an insight into buildings, their material build-up, what changes it has been
subject to (demolition, additions etc.). There is a wide body of archival data stored in
Danish municipal records on buildings (Filarkiv or Weblager). These contain building
86
permits, applications for renovations, neighbor complaints etc. In inquiring into this
data, the method of document analysis (Gross 2018) was used. Although this data is
archived as documents in Danish municipality archives spanning back decades and
centuries, the research methodology is a historical research strategy but the
conducting of embedded case studies in which particular sub-units are to be compared.
The literature distinguishes between primary and secondary sets of data in documents,
making my case documents of dated drawings and applications for re-
building/demolition are of interest (Gross 2018). This method is used both in the
design scenario (research by design) and in the case study (but also to a lesser degree
the design scenario)
Tectonics as Method
This method was used in the applications of theory in both analytical and design
capacities a pedagogical/communicative way to synthesize the findings. A Tectonic
Method analysis by way of Tectonic Gestures and Principles as developed by Marie
Frier-Hvejsel allows for the description of how the principles of the material
constellation provide (or does not provide) meaningful phenomenological gestures
(Hvejsel 2018) in a tectonic way. This method fundamentally combines two methods
(as one) where a phenomenological method is used to analyze and describe the spatial
gestures of the analyzed object/phenomenon and principle is used to describe a set of
material or ontic considerations such as material, structural system and as such already
is a method of juxtaposing immaterial and material considerations in architecture. The
researcher in this instance uses their own faculties in inquiring and analyzing the
phenomenological properties of the cases.
3.4. Ontological and Epistemological considerations
It can be very difficult to get an overview of how to consider “ontology” and
“epistemology” in relation to more comprehensive uses and references to methods
and tools. When we consider these terms, it very quickly becomes clear that theory is
both very complex and interconnected. Lack of clarity comes if an ontological
position came to be from a certain way of “knowing” or vice versa. Even what
methods and tools one uses, in relation to one’s goals and agenda, appropriate
ideological and ontological position can be “constructed” along with what role
knowledge plays in such an agenda. Before going further, I simply attempt to provide
an overview for how I understand and use these terms.
So, what is ontology? Ontology is the learning of reality. However, there can be
different understandings of what reality is and hence different ontological positions.
If you are a materialist, then reality is all that is material while ideas and ideologies
are not included as real. Since we are dealing with architecture, which is constituted
by material reality and also the immaterial, i.e., ideas, desires and assumptions, that
Methodology and Research Design
87
to lesser or greater degree incline us towards material reality in one way rather than
another. As such, when we use the word ontology (reality) then reality is both material
and immaterial aspects rolled into one study. The study of realty has a long history
and follows different traditions, as these tradition have differing attitudes towards
how to deal with reality, what it means to know etc.
In mapping the key terms of ontology, epistemology, methodology, methods, tools, I
use the sociologist’s, David James (James 2015) (figure 40), model of explaining
these terms in relationship to an iceberg: where the notions are interlocked and some
are more comprehensible (the visible tip over the surface of the water) while others
are more hidden and withdrawn. As James elaborates, the deepest edges of the iceberg
is a position of how one perceives the world. As often seen within research
environments, it becomes very clear what one’s analytic tools are but something like
World-view can be implicitly present but into explicitly brought forth.
Figure 40. The Iceberg Model (inspired by David James 2015) where tools and methods
are “visible” and the ones below the surface are “withdrawn” yet present.
The iceberg model can be compared to the of diagram of architectural theorists Groat
& Wang’s concentric model of System of Inquiry, School of Thought, Strategies, and
finally tactics (Groat Wang 2013). These largely correspond to ontology,
epistemology, methodology and method/tools, respectively but are missing a rather
important point, i.e., World-View. The reason the importance of World-view is that
even ontology isn’t “neutral”. Rather, it is already guided or predicated on a
Weltanschauung, which a priori guides one’s ontological positioning and steers ones
understanding of what is knowledge and what is worth knowing. In relation to this
doctoral study, this dimension is important to explicitly include as the with the current
predicament of global warming there is need for a “new spirituality” in the
88
fundamental attitudes and perspectives on how we approach and relate to our
surroundings.
As we have seen in the State-of-the-art (Chapter 2), architectural discourse and
chemical engineering can have a varied and mixed situation of ontological positions.
Tectonic metabolism, as Moravanszky argues is both Materialist and Idealist. This
implicates the ontlogical position and what kinds of knowledge are relevant or
important for it. Whether a person who positions themselves opportunistically or
critically in relation to reality, both can be contained within the same ontological
position. Something similar can be said of chemical engineering. While chemical
engineering ontology is more of a mechanistic with empirical data, it too can
nevertheless be mobilized to opportunistically lower costs (for a company/industry)
or more radically re-redesign material exchange between society and nature.
While these are the onto-epistemological tendencies of the two key disciplines which
are of interest for this doctoral study, this doctoral study itself will need to make
certain how it positions itself in proceeding, i.e., what to emphasize and include etc.
In the following section, the positions of the abovementioned categories will be made
explicit.
3.4.1. Philosophical Traditions
Given this doctoral study’s research objective and the differing “nature” of two chosen
disciplines, this section will attempt to highlight some important differences between
the different research “cultures” or traditions as this doctoral study is dealing with
chemical engineering (an applied science) and architecture and design (social
science). These two “traditions” in approaches are the analytic and continental. The
analytical tradition is usually in natural sciences and the continental is mostly
exclusive to the humanities. Even this is slight over-simplification and over-
generalization, as there can be crucial overlaps and shared traditions. Nevertheless, as
philosopher Kile Jones indicates, there can be some truth to such over-generalizations
(Jones 2009). Jones elaborates, with reference to Prado, that there are distinct
differences, particularity in methodology in the two traditions, and further what they
concern themselves with:
“The heart of the analytic/Continental opposition is most evident in
methodology, that is, in a focus on analysis or on synthesis. Analytic
philosophers typically try to solve fairly delineated philosophical
problems by reducing them to their parts and to the relations in which these
parts stand. Continental philosophers typically address large questions in
a synthetic or integrative way, and consider particular issues to be ‘parts
of the larger unities’ and as properly understood and dealt with only when
fitted into those unities.” (Prado 2003, pp.10)
Methodology and Research Design
89
Neil Levy also notes that analytic philosophy is a “problem-solving activity” (or as
Hans-Johan Glock puts it; “…uses specific techniques to tackle discrete problems
with definite results (Jones 2009) while continental philosophy is closer to humanistic
traditions and is politically engaged (ibid). In comparison to the research endeavor of
this PhD, it can be observed that a problem-solving approach is not necessarily an
exclusively a good or neutral activity, as the solving of problems, optimizing of
technologies, and acquiring of knowledge can turn out to have a “negative” impact
which opposes the initial intentions and as such fails to problematize the very way one
conceives of problems. In the above quote by Prado, we see the potentials in the rift
between the two traditions in face of the contemporary climatic challenges in the
building industry. For far too long the building industry has been dominated by a kind
of “divided” analytical approach lacking the “total” synthetic perspective.
Considering that today’s global predicament finds itself within “wicked problems”
this indicates that some issues/conditions are too complex and despite having
knowledge and empirical data, it can be quite difficult to define what exactly the
problem is. It is perhaps worth noting that this statement comes from an analytical
tradition but links or opens up towards continental thought. Here a contemporary
continental philosopher, Slavoj Žižek, elaborates that a problem is not just a problem,
simply and immediately there for us to solve. Žižek believes that how we define the
problem is already inherent to problem at hand. This hints at the possibility of many
implicit ideological biases and axioms already inherent in the problem-definition
which already invisibly guides how one attempts to solve the problem and under what
criteria the solution is a solution at all. An example of this could be that the current
“circular” ideology of the building industry is an implicit privilege for the circulation
of elements and materials and where the amplified circulation “will solve all
problems” because the market dynamics may prefer this type of solution over others.
In academia there much infighting on who and what is to be taken as serious at all
although science and academia is dominated by the analytical traditions (Vrahimis
2019) Of much more importance is the attempt to find a balance where the strong
aspects of both can feed into each other (Samuel 2010). There are already few (and
perhaps modest) examples of such crossings of traditions in relation to this doctoral
study.
The Two Traditions in the Two Disciplines
On account of the state-of-the-art, a hypothesis is developed for need of shift in
“spirit” for how we conceive of material consumption. While it can be easily claimed
with little dispute that the chemical engineering disciplines, including the fields of
MFA and industrial metabolism, are largely committed to an analytic tradition,
inherent in the literature there are requests for a meta-physical shift towards a “new
spirituality” as elaborated by eco-philosopher Dominique Bourg (Bourg 2003). This
meta-physical shift, although elaborated to greater extent in philosophical terms, is
also modestly requested in the writings of Baccini, Brunner, Rechberger as the need
for more social and cultural awareness in society and shift people’s consumption
90
behavior which would then fit a shift towards a “slowing” of material consumptions
and a more sustainable relationship between society and nature. Despite these
tendencies, chemical engineering stems from and operates within an analytic tradition.
Figure 41. Approaching Metabolism and Tectonic from "above" and "below.”
Architecture as a field is perhaps much more divided. Within architectural theory
throughout the 20th century, and especially post-WWII, we have seen a use of
continental philosophical thinking in theory development as well as analytical as
structural engineering and HVAC and indoor climate engineering became integral to
both theory and practice (materialist architecture). The entirety of architectural theory
and practice would be simply too expansive to consider, and even if we attempted to
circumscribe tectonic discourse, a wide variety of reference and approaches can be
seen. Contemporary tectonic discourse has since the time of Gottfried Semper, and
perhaps in the spirit of his writing, merged with the abovementioned engineering
fields. There are examples of reductionist material concerns (a la material science) in
tectonic discourse. We also have social and cultural concerns as well which often
require the use of an analytic research methodology. As Moravanszky shows
(Moravanszky 2018), even in Semper’s theoretical writings, there is a kind of
“struggle” of idealist and materialist lines of thought which very roughly can be
translated into both continental and analytical traditional thinking. The fact that
Semper as a theoretician was in some sense in the middle of idealism and materialism,
allows for an openness in his stoffwechsel which today affords opportunity for a
realignment relevant to the current ecological issues. Likewise, it is important to note
that the contemporary metabolic studies in chemical and environmental engineering
were initially inspired by Marx (Saito 2017; Pincetl et al, 2012).
Methodology and Research Design
91
Figure 42. Illustrating the interloping link between the field and traditions.
Marx was greatly influenced by the leading natural and applied science of his own
time when he developed the idea of the “metabolic rift” between society and nature
(Saito 2017). It can thus be conceptualized in a complex circular way that these field
and traditions interlink. The early chemical (alchemical) and ecological sciences
influenced Marxian thought. This has had an immense effect on the development of
material flow understanding and methodology (more in chapter 4). While Tectonic
metabolism (metamorphism) does not directly contain critical industrial metabolic
understanding, Moravanszky acknowledges the pertinence to a potential linkage
between the two (Moravanszky 2018). Since the “new spirit” of metabolic thinking is
already inherent in industrial metabolism, it is crucial to establish a link is between
tectonic discourse and industrial metabolism (red line in Figure. 42).
This doctoral study also inherently relies on two traditions and attempts to follow a
rigorous analytical tradition in developing arguments. It additionally integrates the
radically critical questioning, speculation and conceptualization from the continental
tradition as a guide to the analytical progress. This means that in the attempt to slow
(lessen the consumption of materials) material consumption in societal metabolism,
we have to radically rethink how we value the “solving” of problems, what problems
we define, and not only privileged problem-solving endeavors that will guarantee
more “problem-solving” activities.
3.4.2. Views from Dialectical Materialism and Object-Oriented Ontology
In proceeding with this doctoral study, there are two main schools of thought which
are pertinent to include: those that connected with dialectical materialism and object-
oriented ontology. These ontological positions are relevant to consider for different
92
reasons. While both o have already been included in methods section earlier in this
chapter, they also have ontological and epistemological implications for this doctoral
study.
Why ooo? When dealing with theory building which delves into industrial ecology
and material flow analysis (in quest of “thinking” about multiple-cycle networks),
there are several aspects and a few crucial differences which makes Graham Harman’s
object approach more pertinent that other assemblage (DeLanda 2016) and actor-
networks (Latour) approaches. As Harman elaborates, Latour’s ANT conceptualized
that something is only an object if it acts (Harman 2022), but this makes it difficult to
conceptualize the facts that metabolic schemes can have both flows (transportation)
and processes (of incineration of materials) but a “mere” process of storage is in some
sense a process of nothing, non-activity. Safe sink is thus potentially better
conceptualized from a ooo perspective as it allows for an acknowledgement of object
which does not have immediate efficacy onto material reality. Ooo is furthermore
present for its dual traditions and is indeed a continental theory greatly influenced by
analytical tradition and as such embodies a crucial balance of the two traditions.
Why dialectical materialism? Žižek’s iteration of materialism is an interesting one as
it ultimately concerns itself with immaterial considerations but emphasizes how such
social and subjective constructs (regardless of how fake and delusional) can have
severe material consequences. Furthermore, Žižek’s ontological conceptions allows
for the consideration of “paradoxical” conditions, as he highlights that reflexivity is
inconsistent meaning that there is no immediate and logical transfer from cause and
effects and that is ultimately not possible to fully understand one’s intentions and
how they fail in their material manifestation. This is relevant exactly due to the crucial
material flow phenomenon of the Jevon’s Paradox. While Dialectical Materialism and
Object-Oriented Ontology do have overlapping traits but also differ in how they
construct their ontological positions.
Figure 43. The "inner" and "outer" layers of the hybrid metabolism.
Methodology and Research Design
93
Generally speaking, as the metabolism is a hybrid entity, the two chosen ontological
positions allow for the tackling of challenges and issues of said metabolism. Slavoj
Žižek’s dialectical materialism allows for a critical approach to the “inner”
mechanisms of the metabolism, while Graham Harman’s object-oriented approach
allows for a hybrid way of thinking both the inner along with the “outer” perimeter
(material conditions, planetary limitations etc.).
Object-Oriented Ontology
Object-Orient Ontology has already been introduced because its particular sub-strain
(of quadruple objects (Harman 2011)) is to be used for initiating the theory building.
Object-oriented ontology, however, also holds pertinent perspectives which are
pertinent for the metabolic challenges of the built environment and theory building
exploration of this doctoral study. Graham Harman’s Object-Oriented Ontology is a
way of perceiving the world which is strongly founded in Bruno Latour’s Actor-
Network-Theory (Harman 2018, pp.106-113). Harman pushes this logic and its
potential to more radical directions where actants become both Real and Sensual
Objects which have Real and Sensual qualities and properties (Harman 2011; 2018;
2022) but also allows (unlike ANT) for hybrid (compound) entities being considered
new objects regardless of if they are passive or active (Harman 2018, pp. 113).
Harman conceives of reality as one of indeterminacy and inability of knowing reality.
There is reality out there. which is not a construction of human’s minds—an in-
itself—but it is withdrawn and unknowable which can materialize different
appearance and effects over time. According to Harman, this stands in a slight contrast
to Latour’s network, as Harman’s constellations of actants are put in in certain way
which can explain a phenomenon at the time of observation but can also explain why
and how the same entity/phenomenon which is comprised of the same elements
develops new and unexpected effects over time. He goes further to developing a
system of a quadrant of objects: Real Object (RO), Real Qualities (RQ), Sensual
Objects (SQ) and Sensual Qualities (RQ) (Harman 2011; 2018). The immense
potential of object-thinking in architecture is vast, and as Fischer-Kowalski (scholar
on metabolic studies) sees it, industrial metabolic thinking would benefit greatly from
a hybrid object thinking (Fischer-Kowalski 2003). Harman stresses that objects
(things) are autonomous, and the true quest is to discern the inconsistencies and
complexity between the being of the object and its properties effects as objects can
seem to shift radically over time, in different situations and contexts (Harman 2022).
This is a relevant ontological position assumption given the challenges of having to
work with “multi-cycle” networks and social-natural hybrid objects, as the way to
slow and narrow material flows is through objects (architectural works etc.). Given
that the doctoral effort to building theory of the material-immaterial spectrum,
Harman’s quadruple structure fundamentally mimics such a spectrum from real
objects and properties to immaterial (sensual) ones (Harman 2011).
Another key point of OOO is what Harman designates as “justified untrue belief”
(Harman 2018, pp. 181). The implications of this notion in ontological terms is that
94
reality cannot be known, so any theory/model of it is “untrue” (partial, limited,
problematic etc.), but it can be justified if it is pertinently useful. This is a key
consideration given the fact that the doctoral study uses the method of the metaphor
(of metabolism) as wrongful yet useful construing of a city or building (because cities
and buildings are not actual metabolisms).
Dialectical Materialism
So, what is reality according to Slavoj Žižek? Žižek is a thinker who positions his line
of thought in the spirit of Hegel – which ultimately has the ontological view of reality
as a Negative one (not bad but one of negation which a central concept/mechanism in
Hegelian thought). Žižek perceives reality as one which is un-finished. It is not a
Negative, anti-realist position which clams that reality simply does exist and that all
is a mental/social construct. Of course, there is reality out there, but it is not self-
contained, coherent reality as such which can be defined and mapped. Žižek here uses
examples from both the social, political realms as well as quantum physics to elaborate
how reality resists coherent conceptualization and thus knowability. Not unlike
Hegel’s shift from Kant, Žižek takes the step further from Harman (who says that
reality cannot be known) into the direction that the property of unknowability is not
only due to our finitude and lacking epistemological abilities, but rather an inherent
property of reality. If one assumes such an ontological potion, it would necessitate an
critical impassivity in how one engages with the world. As the logical conclusion of
such a position would be that whenever one develops a thesis about reality, and
attempts to change it, there is not always a clear link between cause and effect. An
exemplification of this dialect is the many ways in which Jevon’s Paradox has
materialized itself. If we again take up the example of “wicked problems”, an object
can be too indeterminate and complex to be definable (but this does not stop people
attempting to try). A Žižekian position would conversely take this very inability to
be part of the object itself, meaning that it is ontologically open and undefinable
(Žižek, 2012, pp. 741). Žižek emphasizes the Hegelian notion of the spirit being a
bone (Žižek 2012) which has implications for tectonics and its material-immaterial
spectrum. While it can be possible and useful to maintain some type of dualism (of
material/immaterial, social/natural, mental/real etc.), Žižek fundamentally claims that
it is not enough to say that there is material reality and appearance. Rather material
reality already contains disturbance or irrationality which allows for the emergence of
appearance and metaphysics. Thus, the spiritual (metaphysical, immaterial) aspects
emerge from material reality. The immaterial does not freely float irrespective of the
material conditions. The dualism of material and immaterial are not in opposition, but
the one is contained within the other. Furthermore, as Žižek elaborates on ideology,
he conceives that despite one’s inability to articulate a clear view of reality through
knowledge, this “lack" is supplemented by narrative. This dialectic is conceptualized
by Žižek, as a “positivization of a lack” (Žižek 2012) in which people assert a narrative
which propels activity even though one is unable to properly map a situation or
phenomenon.
Methodology and Research Design
95
Hegel’s elaboration of an entity or an idea follows the logic of going from In-Itself to
For-Itself. (Žižek 2012, pp.231) This means given phenomena realizes itself in a
particular context given particular conditions and reflexivity as responses of effect of
these particular reasons, but at some point it becomes evident that even beyond its
necessity for particular reasons, it starts to cause itself and self-perpetuate (Žižek
2012), i.e., “eppur si muove” (ibid, pp. 3-4) as Galileo proclaimed of objects which
kept on moving beyond any seemingly logic reasoning. Such a phenomena is inherent
within architectural creativity which is mirrored in Tectonic discourse where the
perpetuation and continuation of physically manifesting the Drive or Will of the
culture in new material transformation. Even further, this self-referential dimension is
seen as the very manifestation (built designs) which in its aesthetical traits and
affordance narrativizes its own process of its own becoming and making. Such a
mechanism is thus a “circular” one in which Architecture is never finished, and the
urge of “creativity” simply needs ways to manifest. Although there is the obviously
the poetic and profound aspects and potential of this, this Driven-ness is inherent to
any type of architectural discourse which renders creativity inherently ambiguous and
not only good and poetics. This implies a virtual “circular” reflexivity, in which the
need for “creative destruction” (McGowan 2016) does not embody the “pleasure” of
designing and making beautiful objects and so on but a desire for constant building
activity as such beyond any specific physical manifestation and as such serving the
market dynamics via this reflexivity.
Finally, “Objet a” is the dimension which on account of the epistemological deadlock
asserts a narrative or “fixates” on an object which acts a purpose-giving and sense-
making entity. While Žižek develops several uses of this dialectical idea, it is strongly
rooted in the Hegelian notion of Aufhebung (Žižek 2012; Žižek 2014). It is a
mechanism as developed originally by Hegel which has been further developed and
clarified by Žižek. This is a key fundamental dialectic mechanism taking place at
many different levels. Žižek elaborations on “repetition” (Žižek 2012, pp. 455, 491)
where a banal contingent phenomenon goes through a process of Sublimation and
becomes aestheticized/idealized and uplifted into a higher sublime being through
creative or ideological process. This particular dialectical “mechanism” also shows
itself in the Chemical engineering discipline and is the way that it uses the metaphor
or metonymy of “metabolism” as useful metaphor to proceed with gaining insight in
a given problem. Tectonics too, along with general architectural discourse (Picon,
Ponte, 2003; Gerber, Patterson 2013; Unwin 2019; Usto 2020), mobilizes metaphors,
narratives and other “objet a” to both design and puts forwards a design but also
explains it and makes sense of it in everyday life. Again, similar to the dimension of
Drive, there is an ambiguity in the use of metaphors in the sense that they can provide
cognitive reasoning to simply continue while lacking proper insight into the problems
regardless of if the outcome is positive or negative. In architecture, we have seen much
use of metaphors of nature etc., but they often get translated visually (sublimated) to
appear nature-like without following the fundamental mechanism of nature (actual
biodiversity, carbon storage etc.). The challenge becomes to take metaphors such as
96
in the case of this doctoral study— metabolism—more seriously.
Nature vs. Society and hybrid objects
In the current predicament, philosopher Bruno Latour develops quite a pessimistic
view on which discourses we currently have regarding planetary concerns. He
conceptualized 7 fictional planets which largely correspond to different ideological
predispositions and how they perceive the planet (Latour 2019). He elaborates that
there is very little chance that the fictional planets would merge into one holistic form
of thinking and that their existence influences both society and each other
simultaneously in very complex ways. In Latour’s seven “planets”, one can basically
discern the Worldview and implicit ontological positions of those seven views of
planets whose attitudes materialize and accumulate very different effects and
consequences for the one actual planet we live on. The most predominant attitude
(World-View) on Nature has been one of modern enlightenment perhaps best depicted
by Casper David Friedrich in The Wanderer Above The Sea of Fog, depicting Man or
humanity triumphing over nature or aimin to do so. This attitude is one which
continues to perpetuate itself within the current era of the Anthropocene—an era
where human activity has surpassed nature in terms of material flows (Elhacham et al
2020).
As a kind of sign from the future for what kind of attitudes, ontological thinking and
epistemological positioning we could assume, Timothy Morton attempts to develop
and push to more radical conclusions the need for eco-critique and eco-philosophical
thinking. Morton has built theory in reference to Žižek and New Materialism and has
elaborated the need to approach ecology not only in the terms of hard-facts sciences
but also integrate aesthetics – a critical and aesthetical way of Being ecological in the
current challenges of climate change (Morton 2018). I find this rather refreshing.
There is in contemporary times a certain amount of controversy attached to
revitalizing aesthetics. Some simply brush aesthetics off—sometimes from a post-
modernist position of relativizing subjective taste—while others consider it a
reactionary return to traditional values. Those who criticize this and consider it deeply
conservative revival which perhaps contains a secret perpetuation of Man-Master
Worldview. On the other hand, there are people who from this neo-traditional
revivalist position consider that a return to notions of Sublime and Beauty brings more
value leading to buildings perhaps lasting longer. It can be thus said that today, it is
largely the conservative, like Roger Scruton and his followers, who are or have been
spearheading the debate on aesthetics and are thus given free space to “angle” the
debate on aesthetics as inherently conservative. It is also here that Timothy Morton
perceives an opening and perhaps even an space of antagonism. Specifically, Morton
sees an opening for a way in which aesthetics, i.e., Beauty, is in tuned with an
ecological way of Being. In the book Ecology Without Nature, Morton elaborates how
the idea of Nature is already fused with many ideological aspects which problematize
our dealings with it and thus needs to “wither away” for serious ecological state of
Methodology and Research Design
97
human society (Morton 2007). This indicates that a rethinking of how we understand
nature is needed before establishing new relationships with it. Morton even goes on
to link the very name of “Ecology Without Nature” to Deleuze & Guattari (as they
developed the notion of Body Without Organs, but I believe that is of more significant
to link with Žižek’s notion of Organ Without Body which explains much better
Morton’s own position. Žižek’s notions allows for a conceptualization of, as he often
puts it, freeing the “baby” from “dirty bathwater” - i.e. gaining a critical view of an
entity without its ideological presuppositions (Žižek 2009; 2012). As I read it, what
could hold immense potential in what Morton elaborates is not the manufacturing of
some esoteric, complex and fused interrelationship with nature (man and nature in
extension of each other) but ] acknowledgment of the radical “otherness” of nature
could bring about a new attitude which is not based on mastering, manipulating and
exploiting of nature. In banal terms, one can perhaps easily conceptualize an esoteric
and poetic blurring of lines between human and nature, but if you were to find yourself
hiking in a mountain and a stone fell on your head, the distinguished of barriers are
phenomenologically reconstituted. The pressing challenge is thus perhaps not to
simply destroy and blur lines but shift in attitude.
This is basically what Morton elaborates as ecomimesis where the dualism of subject-
nature is simply laid aside (forgotten even) (Morton 2007, pp: 151). If you are
incessant in developing new relationships with an impetus in the subject-nature
dualism, the reality of both is relativized into new an unforeseen form of exploitations.
If we were here to compare with architecture, lets imagine a situation where an
architect designed a building in the middle of a serene landscape. The natural
surroundings have visual and aesthetic quality, and the architects have observed these.
There is Something in that place, a genus loci, which is worth appreciating and
respecting. On account of these observed qualities, the architect designs a house which
is “integrated into nature”, causing the house to leave a larger footprint thus increasing
its carbon footprint among other things. In such an example, the architects have a
certain understanding of what nature is, and the underlying ideology of design is to
“extend” into nature or connect with nature which simply materializes effects which
fundamentally are in contrast to the initial idea of “respecting nature” as the architects
impress a larger footprint and leave larger devastation of the local soil and biodiversity
etc. compared to if they design for compactness or simply did not build at all in such
a remote place.
In relation to this ecomimesis, as a shift in attitude or way of being, Morten
conceptualizes the HyperObject where one is simply within the “climate-object”
whether ones likes it or not regardless of your ideological predispositions (Morton
2013).
Lastly, in a more recent book, Morton (in a way) already speaks in an ecological way
as if sent to us from the future. He initially emphasizes that the book is not another
“information dump” and thus focus on, among other things, aesthetics and beauty and
its potential to ecological being. Beauty could play a big part in a shift towards
ecological Being as the feeling of beauty is “...neither about putting a label on to
things, nor of our being absolutely inert. Instead it's like finding something in me that
98
isn’t me.” (Morton 2018, pp:178). This feeling of Beauty is what is acknowledgement
of “otherness” within oneself which is already out there in “nature” or rather ecology.
In such a way, Morton opens up for the possibility that that aesthetics as a cognition
in relation to ecology could be mobilized into efficacy instead of bombarding people’s
(scientific/intellectual) cognitions with more “information dumps” Here it is of
importance and relevance to note what Žižek elaborates as “fetishist disavowal” where
people are able to cognitively understand a piece of information but nevertheless
continue their behavior as if it weren’t so. Thus, the challenge isn’t perhaps only to
inform people with ever-more scientific data and expect they will entirely shift their
behavioral patterns but to perhaps include aesthetics cognition (Harman 2018, pp:59-
103) with its potential for people to assume at a more deeper level the eco-ontological
way of Being. In the quest of “de-materializing” of our consumption, the notions are
that meta-physics (the immaterial) could make a dent in the current patterns of
material consumption and flows between society and nature.
3.4.3. Epistemology
Perhaps in the most common use of the term epistemology, one simply refers to
epistemological positions for how one understands what knowledge is. Those can be
phenomenology, empiricism, pragmatism etc. naturally link to how one gathers
knowledge and data and how one makes sense of the world in general. It also links
“upwards” in how very often particular ontological positions and Worldviews are also
greatly influenced, or at least have roots in, how ones perceive what knowledge is and
what is worth knowing. At the same time, there is a certain openness in the very
epistemologies which allows for different attitudes to manifest.
The above-mentioned ontological positions seem to be very pessimistic in terms of
what can be known about reality – and it is of course not so that they simply mean
that we cannot inquire into the world to gain knowledge. Rather, the above ontological
views are more of guiding attuited when one finds oneself having to “angle” and
choosing the epistemological positions as well as the choice of method and
intention/goals. Here, the goal is not to provide new knowledge which will prompt
ideas, methods, theory to increase material flows (which in line the current growth
ideology) but rather to find ways to slow and narrow.
New Materialism
While the term of “New Materialism” is very wide and disputed, the architecture field
has had many different names and/or sub-parts: post-humanism, agential realism or
new or vital materialism (Benson 2019). Together, if one allows for the common
circumscription of “new materialism”, it represents a shift away from the centrality of
human agency to a more inclusive and broadened perspective (ibid). While Graham
Harman argues for the OOO being a speculative realism, it can, given the above width
Methodology and Research Design
99
of the term new materialism be included in this new shift in spectrum of how reality
is understood. New Materialism, especially in the form of OOO is an ontology which
also has its own epistemological conceptions. This means that both sensual and real
objects are of interest, as imaginary entities can influence real life conditions and vice
versa which is unlike hard-line realism (or old materialism) which only acknowledge
material empirical facts. At this level, on account of the abovementioned ontological
positions, the fundamental way of understanding is already implicit. As Harman was
greatly influenced by Bruno Latour, Harman has acknowledged that the
epistemological and methodological approach of research for OOO would be very
similar to ANT. This basically indicates that such an understanding has world
phenomena construed as actants (as Latour would have it) which are engaged in a
network (Latour 2005). These phenomena can be of differing “natures” and would
then require subsequent and relevant method to be brought forth. As architecture and
both its aesthetic and phenomenological conditions could influence how materials are
consumed within society and what effect it has on nature, a network of material and
immaterial objects as a way of understanding could help to explore and bring forth
how the immaterial and material (qualitative and quantitative) interplay. Unlike the
old materialism where knowledge is only a product of investigation, the new
materialism poses the questions of ontology and epistemology are intertwined
(Benson 2019) which is again fitting in relation to the need for thinking “multi-cycle”
networks and Jevon’s Paradox (intention vs. real-life effects). The fundamental
assumption is that reality is (not relative) but relational. This also implies that causality
is relational and complex and it is thus difficult to claim one particular agent/actant
was the sole cause of something (Benson 2019).
Phenomenology
Not unlike the above, phenomenology is also a very open epistemological position. In
some cases, one could argue that phenomenology already plays a big part in other
ontological and epistemological positions. An example of this is OOO (Harman 2014;
2022). Phenomenology has a long history and has roots in Kant and Hegel’s
philosophies. Nonetheless, phenomenology as we know it today has been shaped by
the likes of Edmund Husserl and Martin Heidegger. While phenomenological
experience can be confined to simply explaining a momentary experience,
phenomenology as an understanding can also shape one’s ontological position and
Worldview, i.e., where your understanding of reality is shaped from immediate
phenomenal engagement within reality (Heidegger 1971). For the relevance of this
doctoral study and for analyzing the phenomenological traits of a design while
juxtaposing it to the material considerations, this doctorate uses phenomenology to
explain the immediate 1stperson perspective and qualities. The challenge is that while
it can be difficult to conduct, such phenomenological analysis is the most
“openminded” way possible – without the present social and cultural inclinations – in
the quest to bring out qualitative data.
100
Empirical Analysis
Empiricism is a way of knowing and approaching the world in which observable
measurable facts can be made of the phenomena/object at hand and is very often data
or knowledge of the quantitative kind (Groat & Wang 2013). Empiricism in its early
iteration has had significance for modern thinking, with key thinkers such as Francis
Bacon, John Locke and David Hume. Empiricism is a philosophy which assumes the
existence of reality as measured and sensed experiences. This would allow for gained
insight into the conditions and effects of an object/phenomenon in terms of what it is
(ontically) and how it performs. This is an important part of this doctoral study, as the
quest is to highlight how immaterial aspects push and materialize physical
consequences.
Hermeneutics
The fundamental trait of hermeneutics is that of circular interpretation of gathered
knowledge (Højberg 2004; Kinsella 2006). Simply having access or having acquired
some data does not immediately give its own reading. As Gadamer fundamentally
elaborates, the researcher has an active role in the creation and interpretation of
knowledge. The acquiring of data can be rather ambiguous in what it “means” and to
what the data will be used for (Brinkmann, Tanggaard 2010: pp.243)). In particular
relevance for this doctoral study, Højberg elaborates on the “double hermeneutic”
which is a kind of circular dynamic of interpretation that takes place with the subject
and object (Højberg 2004). As it is clear by now, the challenge is thus to interpret the
gathered knowledge in the critical and “materialist” fashion where the observed
phenomenon changes character along with how we relate to the subject. This PhD
study uses a hermeneutic approach in the iterative process in theory development
between testing, applying and building of theory.
3.4.4. Positioning this Doctoral Study (Delineations)
In the following section, some basic outlines and definitions (assumptions, axioms
etc.) of this doctoral study will be made explicit regarding what has “governed” the
the development of this doctoral study.
The Metabolism
As eco-philosopher Dominique Bourg argues that there is need for a negation of the
current modes of operation, and that we need a “new spirituality” – a new kind of
meta-physics—which aligns with the challenges of our global predicament of global
warming. Fischer-Kowalski postulates that a way to proceed is through a “social-
cultural-natural” hybrid approach which he sees as a requirement for a new spirituality
stemming from the very edifice of metabolic thinking. Conversely, Moravanszky
elaborates the need to realign Tectonic discourse through a kind “return” to a Marxian
understanding of metabolism. Furthermore, as we have seen, the origin of
contemporary metabolic thinking lies in Marx’s development of the metabolism
Methodology and Research Design
101
between nature and society (though he had an emphasis on how labor transforms
resources into commodities). With this overlapping of connections historically the
challenge is to conceptualize the Negative ontology and “social-cultural-natural”
hybrids. Preferably, the challenge is to proceed in developing a Negative perspective
which could be done through ontological and epistemological understanding of
hybrid-thinking. As is depicted in , the intention is not to to portray human agency is
as being privileged by “centrality” but rather that it is contained or even “belittled”
ontologically in order to finds itself within a larger scope of finite surrounding which
constitute the possibility of its agency.
Figure 44. A "hybrid" metabolism: a social-natural hybrid.
If we are to “negate” something, what is that which needs to be negated? To a large
degree, it can be argued that the current politico-economic fixation of “growth” is
paired with world-view that Humans considers themselves as a Master and
manipulator of reality and nature. In contrast to this, the era of the Anthropocene is
showing us that such an understanding of the world perpetuates conditions of
knowledge gathering and use of methods of tools particularly in the industry which
negatively effects the natural environment. It can be argued that “man’s” relation to
nature was always metabolic and thus merely hitherto metabolic relation has been one
of a linear, growth-oriented exploitation in which the current metabolic dynamic risks
of overshooting planetary boundaries and impeding on future generations’ ability to
sustain themselves. The “new” metabolic shift occurs when we firstly cognitively
assuming a new positions of finitude and relationship is conceptualized into a more
“concentric” relation between social and natural aspects. The metabolism entails many
aspects, from social to political to aspects of biodiversity and ecology, but in this
doctoral study the metabolism entails the architectural production within the building
industry as possibility for critical introspection as well as critical positioning within
material conditions and planetary boundaries.
Weltanschauung – Worldview (or Planetary View)
102
Questions of epistemology and ontology can be deemed quite open and thus any
epistemology and ontology can be mobilized with any attitude or world-view. This
doctoral study thus conceives two main different world positions to have when
deploying any epistemological or ontological position: that of the opportunistic
(engaged) and the critical (withdrawn) attitude/sentiment. It is of course possible to
mix them in the sense that one can be opportunistic towards an overall critical
trajectory and likewise one can be critical towards realizing opportunistic trajectories.
There is no such thing as the perfect, balanced synthesis between the two, and this
doctoral study wagers and risks the disparate nature between the two and insists on
keeping them separate despite overlapping.
Planetary Capacities (boundaries /limits etc.)
So, what are planetary boundaries and what does it really mean to be within planetary
boundaries? The most common use of planet boundaries is usually that of Rockström
et al. (2009) who posits that the concentric layered diagram of different
dimension/parameters which are considered crucial for the well-being of the planet
and the humans. Later contributions have also attempted to challenge this definition
and “benchmark” of limits (Running 2012; Persson et al., 2013; Mace et al., 2014;
Gleeson et al., 2020) as attempt have been made to conceptualize more local and
regional levels for a planetary understanding. Kate Raworth’s concept of the donut
model introduced the “social” dimension (Raworth 2012). Challenges nevertheless
remain regarding how to implement such models (Ferretto et al 2022) as such models
would need to provide more than general snapshots and give insight into the
temporality of the different limits and their trajectories (ibid). When it comes to
planetary boundaries there is also a minimal aspect of relativity where scholars have
proposed different boundaries and variables (Persson et al., 2013; Mace et al., 2014;
Gleeson et al., 2020). These boundaries and variables indicate that the current way we
live and embody “planetary boundaries” on an everyday level (e.g. living in
collectives, sharing economies, minimizing consumption, recycling etc.) could be
very different in the future as new technology or different material practices could
allow for “freer” movement compared to now or near future (Saito 2022, pp. 113). To
think and practice in terms of planetary boundaries is pertinent more now than ever.
At the same time, it is easier to conceptualize and theorize global models and very
difficult find a way to apply them on an everyday level (Ferretto et al 2022). The best-
known definition of planetary boundaries (Rockström et al 2009) is simply an
anthropocentric definition of the boundaries conditions, as the different parameters
and their well-being ultimately favor the benefit of the human population’s ability to
reproduce life as we know it. Here, Industrial ecology is concerned with planetary
boundaries given the fact that metabolic understanding necessitates the understand of
resource availability and capacities/limits of different substances within planetary
resource capacities (Wackernagel, Rees 1996; Baccini, Brunner 2012, pp.79; ibid,
pp.161). Particularly in the theory of the “metabolism of the anthroposphere”
(Baccini, Brunner 2012), planetary boundaries are conceptualized theoretically within
the model and thus propose a “more direct” conceptualization of planetary
Methodology and Research Design
103
boundaries/capacities through sinks, region, and bio-regions (Baccini, Brunner 2012)
implicating a slowing of consumption and “withdrawal” from said planetary
boundaries while aspects of politics and economics could pose a challenge for its
implementation.
While planetary boundaries are concerned with humanity and the planet at large, i.e.,
concerns of ecology, biodiversity, food etc., this particular doctoral study is concerned
with the built environment and thus the future trajectories of human populations and
urbanization are of relevance. Expectations of building stock doubling are correlated
with ongoing with urbanization and growth in population which may still require
material excavations. Since architecture and the building industry is a “slow” industry
compared to others, we may have to already now envision the future conditions of
end-stage urbanization and population growth by the end of 21st century, i.e., what
would it thus means to think “planetary boundaries” for the built environment? More
precisely, what would it mean for the architect who is asked to design a housing
complex today? Specifically, what does it mean practically on the everyday level of
design and use of a building etc.? We have seen that there may be risks involved with
only thinking in terms of circular strategies – and the architecture of the future is being
built today and not in the future. We should perhaps not strive for the design of a
circular building industry in which more and more material and elements can circulate
but rather how “still” the building stock can be and at the same time be as multi-
functional as possible. Because of planetary boundaries we must acknowledge that
growth as we know cannot continue as the material conditions are finite. Buildings
of today should be seen as investments for the future generations and as such there
are certain requirements that must be fulfilled. While we may still need additional
virgin material inputs, we have to think of future trajectories and the end-of-21st
century scenario thus envisioning an ambiguous and open-ended architecture which
can accommodate fluctuating trends in population and needs with more or less the
same building stock. Regardless of the future technological invention, the planetary
sentiment would perhaps argue for a kind of material asceticism on the scale of the
industry. Such a scenario, I claim, would perhaps cause a kind of architectural end-
of-history where the current mode of architectural creativity would need
reappropriation.
Material vs. Immaterial – or the (im)materialism
The old and new materialism conceive of reality differently (Benson 2019). Matter is
now “…produced and productive, generated and generative. Matter is agentive, not a
fixed essence or property of things” (ibid). On the other hand, being able to answer
what exactly matter is, is rather difficult as it cannot merely be claimed that is atoms,
quarks or strings, as quantum physics indicate a very complex nature of material
reality which can be seemingly paradoxical or even “immaterial” or in flux. The fact
is that we have yet to explicate the proper ontological consequences (Žižek 2012).
The immaterial can also be claimed to have material conditions which structure the
human (immaterial) experiences and judgments of phenomena. A feeling of idea can
have certain brain impulses caused by external physical stimuli etc., and such
104
conditions would make complex the ideas of a material-immaterial spectrum. This
doctoral study pragmatically assumes the existence of the material-immaterial
spectrum as it allows for useful application of the spectrum in an architectural and
design context. The material domain is concerned with dealing with ontic material
aspects relevant to the architectural discipline and built environment, and the
immaterial being designated as the subjective, social and cultural aspects which are
ground in and affect the material (pre)conditions.
In relation to this doctoral study, it is pertinent to conceive of a material-immaterial
way of relating to reality. As Andrew Benjamin has highlighted in his critique of
materialism in tectonics, there is a way that being a materialist can have close to
nothing to do with actual, empirical material conditions (Benjamin 2007). In extension
of the metabolic challenges of societal consumption such an understanding risks of
simply perpetuating linear growth paradigm conditions - because it fails to question
the legitimacy and necessity of such a mode of architectural production. Žižek
elaborates that his theoretical writing on so-called “dialectical” materialism, which is
a materialism which has nothing to do with matter (Žižek 2012; 2014). In an almost
similar, yet opposite way to Benjamin’s, he also conceives of a way of being
materialist without the ideology needed to know actual empirical facts. These are not,
however, the same as this may indeed be a similar way to conceive of reality the
ontological and world-view aspects differ greatly. Žižek’s position, unlike the type of
materialism that Benjamin criticizes, is one of a withdrawn and contingent nature in
which you not only do not fully need to understand something but cannot
understanding it. and In this failure to understand, one could/must assume a passive
observant attitude instead of an engaging/manipulative one. The fundamental
difference here is the first materialism being Positive and the other being Negative.
Object vs. Process – and back to Object?
We are witnessing a still ongoing shift from “object” thinking to processual or
relational thinking. The old object-oriented way of thinking in architecture can be
characterized by formalism from ancient times through the renaissance of the body
and proportions to a more contemporary deconstructivist formalism (Eisenman)
(Nygaard 2011). Today there is such extreme shifts away from conventional thinking
that people are questioning whether it no longer makes sense to theorize anything due
to the existence of vast amounts of data and complex algorithms (Anderson 2008)
which one might add that increased complexity may simply require something else of
new theories, as epistemological finitude does not allow us to “know all”. Tectonic
discourse has also made significant contribution in this regard as Gottfried Semper
conceptualized a “radical” shift from object to activity (Hartoonian 1994) into a kind
of tectonic materialism of both matter and ideas/stories (more in chapter 4).
Reality is an obscure entity and according to both Harman and Žižek reality is a Real
dimension which is indeterminate and inaccessible fully to human cognition. Thusly,
we have to accept that all theories and models of any phenomenon in reality is an
approximation of said reality. Whether reality is an object or a process (something in
between or something entirely else), both are ultimately epistemological positions
Methodology and Research Design
105
which allow for the approach of reality in different ways.
9
As Nygaard indicated,
architectural theorizing is also more and more pragmatically oriented towards
professionally solving problems (Nyggard 2011), and as such a conceptualizing based
on “process” is much more pertinent and relevant as the professionalism and
disciplinarity is becoming more stern and well-defined in the market dynamics. While
there is certainly profoundly new potentials for insight and knowledge, it can equally
be argued that a more inclusive and complex network oriented approach will not
necessarily solve all problems if the problem are still designed from within a linear
growth paradigm. As such the theoretical shift to process could only risk the opening
up the profession for more opportunism with more and more facets of the discipline.
Everything today is made into a verb, “architecture as verb”, building as verb etc. and
as much potential as this might hold, it equally risks becoming a way to guarantee
future ongoing activity within the current market conditions. While it is not pertinent
to simply return to an old object-understanding, there is nevertheless a need to
appreciate objects in the sense that Graham Harman argues in his object-oriented
ontology. There can be ambiguities of relativizing and relational ways of perceiving
the world in a non-agential perception of oneself (and the other) which relativize
phenomena and thus allow you to act in any way you may want, whether good or bad
(Žižek 2012; pp.134). This could risk simply perpetuating a familiar linear growth
paradigm but with slightly more complexity and relativism. Surely reality is indeed a
dynamic, ongoing process, but to slow it down (which is pertinent to material flows
in the building industry) a way to do so is to appreciate and conceptualize a “still-
ness” or “slowness” of objects. In the context of architecture and the challenges of
material consumption, if we develop a particular kind of respect or sentiment for the
object, its surrounding flows and effects could be slowed and narrowed. Even from
an eco-philosophical perspective, the obliteration of boundaries between entities is
not useful in wake of ecological challenges as this “monism” (i.e., all is one, there are
no distinct entities etc.) relativized the radical depth of nature, ultimately its non-
identity, by obscuring the differences between society and nature (Saito 2022, pp.
113).
Ultimately, the position of this doctoral study with regard the object-process divide is
the Harmanian sentiment of complex networks and multitude of relations being
designated as objects and likewise objects possessing interchangeable properties over
time in relation to other phenomena etc. (Harman 2016; 2018). Given the fact that
human cognition is finite and similarity out epistemological capacity is also limited,
9
Just consider the problem of indeterminacy in quantum physics, where photons are both waves
(network relations/process) or particles (objects) – both are models and the “true” reality eludes.
While in contemporary times it common to see critique of the old object-thinking which is static
and isolates phenomena, urging for a shift towards a more complex way of thinking to tackle
the complexity of phenomena and their issues. On the other hand, one seldomly meets critique
of process-philosophy. Zidek , while acknowledging potentials of such philosophies, is also
very critical about certain aspects; he interprets some potions as being a kind of return to pre-
modern mysticism and enchantment of reality (Zidek 2016).
106
we can only constructs models of reality without fully knowing. As such we cannot
ultimately claim that reality is either an object or a process as models and theories of
both can be mobilized to good use.
Multi-, Inter-, Transdisciplinarity
Architecture has a long tradition of having echoes and reverberations from other
disciplines and sciences (Picon, Ponte 2003)As the literature demonstrates, there can
be a variety of ways of translating different disciplines into an architectural way of
thinking. While some attempts to work with other disciplines in architecture can be
considered more radical and radical translations of external sciences into architecture,
others run the risk of slight “superficiality” in the sense of “flattening” of the science,
construe it and consider its usability insofar as it permits new formal relations and
explorations.
In the case of this PhD study, the task is to juggle two disciplines mediated through
methodological and theoretical frameworks. The PhD study is not a multidisciplinary
project as in such cases disciplines remain separate and not at all informed by other
disciplines at a deeper level. For this reason, the categories of inter- and
transdisciplinary become relevant. Transdisciplinary can be a rather complex and
problematic category. Nonetheless it can be argued that the theory-to-be-built is of a
transdisciplinary nature in an open-ended sense, as it would be open to any new
discipline which can add relevant knowledge gathering and provide crucial nuance to
the material behavior of the architectural field. This PhD can thus be claimed to be
more of interdisciplinary endeavor as it combines within the same edifice two main
disciplines and their integrative juxtapositions allowing for new insights. It is thus
perhaps possible that over time the built theory of this PhD study will provide a
founding of the formation of properly transdisciplinary theory.
It is important to mention that even though this PhD study considers two disciplines,
as the author is both architect and engineer, the juxtaposition of the two disciplines
perhaps hold most significance for architects since industrial ecology study has
contributed significant data and also ways of approaching issues of analysis and
design which seem to go beyond “mere” LCA thinking. Nevertheless, I am also
certain that environmental engineering and chemical engineering both of which are
disciplines which concerns themselves with metabolic challenges between nature and
society could also nuance their discussions by juxtaposing spatial considerations with
their quantitative findings and data gatherings.
3.5. Conclusion: Research Design
With focus on conducting the intended research, chapter 3 has elaborated the key point
of the research strategy.
On account of the findings of the literary review in chapter 2 for this research, it is
important to take into consideration the developed ontological and eco-physical lines
of thought as developed by Harman, Žižek and finally Morton. These are seen as
crucial due the fact that the “new spirit” of critical metabolic thinking is best
Methodology and Research Design
107
epitomized by this trident of philosophers as they can both provide critical thinking
and hybrid-object thinking as they consider how to re-conceptualize the relations
between society and nature. Epistemologies of New Materialism, Empiricism,
Phenomenology and Hermeneutics are mobilized to acquire the different and relevant
types knowledge for this doctoral study.
Figure 45. Diagram showing the research strategy in the iceberg model.
Given the fact that this PhD considers it a challenge to introduce industrial metabolic
ways of thinking into architecture, the research strategy has had to use “metaphor as
method” and the subsequent method of “add, adjust and connect” to methodical
control the interdisciplinary “translation”.
Figure 46. Partial research strategy and method: regarding interdisciplinarity;
Metaphor, add, adjust, connect.
108
Given that tectonic discourse is “missing” the metabolic way of thinking (chapter 2),
this PhD considers it pertinent to account for how such an element can be introduced
and how to build and test such a theory. It does so in two separate yet connected
realms of testing and building which contain the methodologies of logical
argumentation, case study and research-by-design.
Figure 47. Partial research strategy and methods: regarding testing and building.
Generally, the doctoral study is tasked with testing and building, but these aspects
occur in multiple iterations (figure 48). The first instance is the initial building of a
tentative theory (hypothesis) which leads to the initial theory. Followingly, the theory
is tested through application in an analytical capacity (Paper_1 (Usto et al. 2022))
after which the theory is adjusted (adjust_1). Likewise, the (adjusted) theory gets
applied in a design capacity (paper_2 (Usto et al. 2023)) and consequently adjusted
(adjust_2). Following the initial applications of theory in both analysis and design,
the expanded form of analysis (critique) (expanding_1 in chapter 5) and likewise the
design/prescriptive capacities are expanded upon (expanding_2 in chapter 6). Finally,
these go through an iterative process of synthesis which amounts to the material
presented in this doctoral monography.
Figure 48. The iterative (hermeneutic) loops of theory development: testing and building.
Methodology and Research Design
109
3.5.1. Research Design
A research design has been formed (Figure 48) and research initiated by a state-of-
the-art which proposes the research question. The research strategy singles out the key
notion of “safe sink” from industrial metabolism to be added into architectural theory
as the first step. While the “safe sink” notion is central, surrounding logics from the
two fields are implemented and adjusted through logical argumentation towards the
development of 4 main elements of the theory. As architectural theory concerns itself
with analysis and practice, two empirical studies are conducted to test the theory using
case study and research-by-design mythologies and relevant subsequent methods. As
the two empirical study mainly test the construct and propositions of the theory while
logic is initially assumed, they too are later given feedback post-findings with the aim
of fine-tuning and engaging in iterative theory development. In the building of the
four elements of the theory, it can generally be said that the constructs and relations
are mainly developed on account of the testing, while the logic and boundaries are
developed via ontological considerations (Žižek, Harman, Morton) and logical
argumentation. At the same time these do overlap as it is illustrated, among other
aspects, in Figure 49.
110
Figure 49. The whole research strategy:
a monadic diagram of the research process.
Methodology and Research Design
111
112
Building Theory
113
Chapter 4.
Building Theory
This chapter deals with the building of a theory structure through the aforementioned
methodological considerations by juxtaposing the theoretical frameworks of tectonic
theory and industrial ecology. The chapter is initiated by more thorough mapping and
disassembling of the two theoretical frameworks with regard to an interdisciplinary
research agenda. With reference to interdisciplinary research literature and the use of
the method of “data management table” the purpose is to map the literature of the two
disciplines according to the elaborated parameters (Keestra et al. 2016; Repko, 2008)
(Specifically, sections 4.2 and 4.3). In extension of the state-of-the-art from chapter
2, this chapter contains (4.2 and 4.3) a more nuanced and detailed dismantling of the
two “metabolisms” following the fourfold anatomy of theory: construct, relations,
logic, and boundaries. There are within both theoretical frameworks both significant
theoretical aspects and seemingly practical/methodic aspects, but as the doctoral study
is concerned with theory development (and not new tools, methods, or models) some
of the methodical considerations will also be considered (as Nygaard also indicates
that theory and method intertwine (Nygaard 2011)) in relation to the theory building
purpose. Fundamentally, this PhD thesis is concerned with building a theory which
critically reflects both inwards and outwards (meaning that it is aware and critical of
the inner ideological mechanisms of architectural productions as well as how such
mechanism materialize into material effects and consequences).
Referring to Research Question 1 (Chapter 2.4), in this chapter the building of theory
is initiated. The aim is to build a theory which critically situates itself within with
regard to both material and immaterial considerations. It does so through the
centralization of the key concept “safe sink” and explores ways to translate such a
notion into architecture while looking at the consequences and potentials are for
architectural thinking and practice.
4.1. Theoretical Disassembling of the two Metabolisms
Building a theory which relies on existing theoretical frameworks will rely on the
initial mapping (data management table, see Appendix B) and a subsequent further,
more articulated disassembly through the four main theoretical elements: constructs,
relations, logic and boundaries (figure 50). This will first be done for industrial
ecology (paragraph 4.2) and then for tectonic theory (paragraph 4.3.) The proceeding
exploration of building theory is elaborated step by step (paragraph 4.4.) with
114
reference to the existing theoretical frameworks as well as other theory (and
subsequently findings from theoretical application).
Figure 50. Theory Constituents.
Semper’s theoretical writings are quite difficult, with parts missing, and it is a well-
known fact that a major (final) work after Style (Semper 2004) was supposed to be
made but never was. Things can also seem complicated, since some of his earlier
writing remerge in a new form later (initial four elements (Semper et al 1989)
transform into a new variant (Semper, 2004)). Semper has made a significant and
comprehensive contribution which can seem as very complex by way of containing
several sets of elements (4 elements of architecture) and “drivers” such a knitting and
veiling/dressing (ibid). While Semper does not explicitly outline the “structure” of
his theory in a systemic way, it is nevertheless still possible to use Colquitt and
Zapata-Phelan’s definition of theories on Semper’s stoffwechsel. This chapter and its
paragraphs will attempt to lay out Semper’s writing according to Colquitt and Zapata-
Phelan general theory of theories and before doing so, industrial ecology will be
subject to the same procedure.
4.2. Industrial Ecology (Metabolism of chemical engineering)
In this section, the four main elements of the industrial ecology theoretical framework
are explored—constructs, relations, logics and boundaries. This is followed by a
concluding text on the limitations and openings for the interdisciplinary theoretical
development found in this doctoral study.
4.2.1. The Outline
The metabolic studies from environmental and chemical engineering hold significant
insight for architectural production, and its juxtaposition will require a significant shift
regarding the thinking and practicing of architecture. The outline of this mapping is
Building Theory
115
the aim of theory building. Industrial ecology theory along with material flows
analysis method hold significant depth, and as the context of theory development,
conditions of both theory and theoretical axioms make the methodological framework
of individual ecology operable and applicable and must be considered for theory
building potentials and considerations. There is rigorous precision particularly in the
methodological aspects would later allowed for tool building and methods
development (i.e., metabolic design tools within architect’s 3D work environment
such as Rhino and grasshopper) This doctoral study will, however, aim to
conceptualize a more general level regarding what it means to think “metabolically”
in order to transfer the same metabolic thinking into architectural theory.
4.2.2. Constructs
In the common visualization of a material flows systems, we see a societal
“metabolism” consisting of stock and process. This almost mirrors the Graham
Harman line of thought from object-oriented ontology where Object being and
becoming have intricate relations which can change or remain over a given amount of
time. In simple chemical engineering terms, a process is a transformation or a storage
process. This is significant because an object does not have to move to “move”, i.e.,
a still object is equally a process albeit one without any change.
Figure 51. Four main components of industrial metabolism.
In the definition of MFA, process, stock, flow and system boundary are the key
components (Baccini, Brunner 2012, pp: 99). Using the dichotomy of “part and
whole”, the encompassing aspect being the system boundary can be described as the
“whole” which is being analyzed or observed while being at the level of “parts” is
where stocks and flows are. A process could be a burning, storage or use of any sort,
and a stock could be that of a landfill. Nonetheless, the notion of the safe sink is not
“included” here. The notion of sink can be considered a general term but within that
116
taxonomy of constructs (Figure 50) a sink would thus be a process (with
corresponding stock) and is attributed to such when it acts an end station for a given
material (Baccini, Brunner 2012). Although defined as a process, the process of the
sink can also be considered as a “storage” process. Additionally crucial is that even
as an entity that stands still (doing nothing), the sink is still performing the act of
storage, meaning it does not have to move, be transported or transformed to be a
process because it is a process as such. The is sink usually found in the context of
waste management where the final resting place (final sink) of a material or element
is a landfill or incinerator. During the initial and naïve reading of the term sink, one
could simply think that it is only a landfill; however, the notion of the sink has a
certain “elasticity”. The literature indicates that the building stock (built environment
embodied as buildings and urban spaces etc.) can also be conceptualized as a sink for
building materials such as gravel, metals etc. Herein lies the great challenge in
properly understanding the depth of what a sink could be and what significance it
could have for the built environment.
This was not instantly clear to me, but later I realized that the challenge was to
understand the city as a (potentially) beautiful and meaningfully engaging “landfill”
sink which archives/stores materials safely by the very act of being architecture. This
would mean that a safe sink performs as such for building stock due to both materials
firmness and experiential character.
Figure 52. Sink; an object and/or activity.
A “sink”, in the chemical engineering sense—or that facility which functions as the
sink—is in our human experience something which is often phenomenologically
pushed far away (both physically and mentally) from our immediate everyday
experience. A “sink” is where our trash and excrements go. A kind of deep
netherworld which “magically” absorbs all our undesired entities and substances. This
netherworld is the other side of the coin of our everyday reality, i.e., the Real which
is necessary for our “nice-surface” everyday life to be what it is. Phenomenologically,
a true moment of horror would be for the excrement to return. Thus a lot of effort is
done to keep such things away from sight. Herein lies the challenge for future
generations when it comes to material consumption—grasping = and accepting the
horrible behind-the-scenes Real which is generated by our “nice” everyday life and
Building Theory
117
acceptance of it as part of this life and not keep sweeping it under the rug and out of
sight.
4.2.3. Relations
Although thoroughly inherent to each other, it is possible to conceptualize two types
of relations . One is general which allows a kind of “part-whole” understanding of a
system boundary and its many inner stocks and flows. The second is the general
relationship between society (anthroposphere) and its relations to natural environs.
Part-Whole
The set of 4 elements are related in the sense that the first three categories are
contained within a chosen system boundary. While not entirely mirrored to the part-
whole relation as seen in tectonic theory (Frascari 1981), an industrial metabolic
system boundary can contain many parts which can also contain other smaller parts
(Brunner, Rechberger 2017). The notion of metabolism circumscribes “all physical
flows and stocks of energy and matter…” (Baccini, Brunner 2012, pp: 16) which are
perceived over long periods of time through usually hourly, daily or yearly intervals
(Baccini, Brunner 2012; Brunner, Rechberger 2017).
Figure 53. Within Planetary boundaries; Soil, Air, Water and the Anthroposphere.
Chemical Engineering stresses the importance to situate the social infrastructures in
relation to the hinterlands which the surrounding landscape which provides resources
and ecosystem services (Baccini, Brunner 2012). MFA is considered a methodology
118
with 8 main phases where LCA is merely the 7th step, which gives the opportunity to
firstly observe/analyses and potentially design material flows in particular system
boundaries before assessing their effects on to natural environs and society via LCA
(Baccini, Brunner, 2012). Chemical Engineering acknowledges the social importance
in relation to the realized material flows but does not include it in qualitative ways
(ibid.).
Hinterlands
Another foundational relationship within metabolic thinking is the division of society
and hinterlands (Baccini, Brunner 2012; Brunner Rechberger 2017):
humanity/society and nature. Though it is not divided into opposing entities, but rather
as the diagram above indicates (figure 53), it is a sub-division of the larger system
boundary within which the anthroposphere is located. In contemporary times, a
significant amount of theory has been developed to address the need to halt the old
dichotomous division of “human vs. nature” (Benson 2019). In practical terms
however, this is difficult and there is still much use in the mobilization of the human-
nature dualism in order to properly understand this division and the relationships that
come with the division. In the context of chemical engineering ontological and
epistemological constructing of nature, hinterland is understood in the mechanist
sense of being a service, resources, or capacity and does not include any consideration
of experiential qualities of such landscapes or terrain. By extension, the theory of
entanglement has been developed based on the fact that things are connected and
entangled (for better or worse). Industrial metabolism is perhaps quite sympathetic
towards different understandings of relations between people and nature; even so, in
its approach to understand the complex entanglements, it divides the two into separate
entities despite the applicability of metabolic studies onto cities, forests, ecosystems
etc. It can seem abstract to simply conceive of the relation “human vs. Nature”. In the
application to theoretical frame of the industrial ecology, it can mean both to position
societal stock and activity in a global sense (Baccini Brunner 2012) or locate it within
a bio-region in relation to a chosen city or urban area (Ferrao, Fernandez 2013).
Industrial metabolism experts often act as consultants and in a specific analysis of a
particular city,, they isolate a city, district, or company and observe the input-out,
stock, flows etc. of only that particular system boundary. The purposes of such
“limited” approach can be both sustainable and circular (to minimize consumption
and environmental pollution of a city/company etc.) but it can also be merely to
optimize conditions in order to minimize waste in only few flows/paths for the sake
of cost optimization.
4.2.4. Logics
There are likewise several aspects to consider when dealing with logics of industrial
ecology. The most general sense-making logic is that of the metaphor as industrial
ecology theory which certainly does not deal with self-governing eco-systems or
Building Theory
119
organisms. The aspect of input-output is circular logic that allows for rigor in both
theory and methodological application, while the aspect of openness prevents the
possibility of a closed circulatory system.
Metaphor
Firstly, it is important to highlight that industrial ecology hinges its practice and theory
in the use of the metaphor of metabolism. Unlike the architectural discourse of
tectonics, the application of the metaphor of metabolism in initial ecology is very
criticized and meticulously deconstructed for evaluation of the usefulness of the
continued use of the metaphor and where it fails in its application to mimic an actual
metabolism (Graedel 1996). Among the things that complicate the use of the metaphor
is that the city is not an organism or organic eco-system but is more of an un-natural
eco-system which acts sometimes “unnaturally” or “irrationally” due to social
conditions, economy, and politics. For this reason it cannot be easily flattened into a
bio-mechanical entity.
Input-output: balance of mass
Partly due to the inability to apply the metaphor of metabolism one-to-one certain
logical axioms are needed to structure the logic of industrial metabolism. One of the
founding axioms of metabolic approach is that of input-output logic. In extension of
this, a metabolism must confine itself to the principle of mass balance in which input
equals stock and output. As an extension of this, another key axiom of the industrial
metabolism is that it must obey the law of conservation of matter (Baccini Brunner
2012) where input equals stock and output.
Figure 54. Logic: input-output (mass balance)
Temporality – open systems
Another constitutive logic and founding axiom is that of systems being open and thus
in motion over a chosen time frame. Although this can be dealt with in different terms,
120
entropy can be considered a key logic of the system (Brunner, Rechberger 2012). As
most (perhaps all known) physical systems are open, this means that they in some
respect keep materials in motion, deteriorate, and increase entropy (increased
irreversible order of “chaos” in the material world). This is significant because
thinking in metabolic terms without coupling them with sustainable theory means that
metabolism is a “free” concept which can be interpreted to increase metabolic rates.
This means that its own dynamic and activity would increase material input from
nature to society. For the metabolism to be sustainable, it would need to minimize
material demand to significantly lower it (Ayres 1994).
4.2.5. Boundaries
We have seen that industrial metabolism as metaphor was not directly applicable, and
that it required additional logics to maintain a useful application. Nevertheless, the
reason why metabolism is useful is that there are some good parallels and assuming
boundary conditions which are relevant even if a city or society isn’t a living organism
itself. Mobilizing the metaphor of metabolism implicates the considerations of
suitability (the ability to sustain in future generations), its metabolic rate and overall
condition (health if you will) of the organism (is it consuming too much of a particular
substance and what are the effects of that in relation to the wellbeing of that organism
in its environment). Despite this, industrial ecology and metabolic studies qua
material flows analysis is an applied science and can be claimed to be part of
materialism (in the old “conventional” science sense)\ but was also influenced by the
“other” materialism (i.e. Marx).
Materialism
It is important to point out that the contemporary understanding of material flows as
it has come to be known via Material Flow Analysis in industrial ecology and urban
metabolisms in chemical engineering field can be traced to Marx (Pincetl et al, 2012).
It is also important to mention that Marx died before being able to finish his book
Capital III which was in fact dealt with the metabolism between society and nature
(Saito 2017; 2022). It is interesting to note that in the last years of his life, Marx was
fascinated by the notion of the “metabolic rift” between society and nature. He was
invested in reading state-of-the-art (at the time) natural and environmental science and
already started to develop an understanding of material resources (and scarcity) of
such within society which could influence nature negatively in the long run (Saito
2017). While the Marxian dimension is not explicitly present in the contemporary
state-of-the-art chemical engineering literature on material flows and societal
metabolism, it still harbors a logical “spirit” and critical approach and understanding
which (generally) aims at conserving resources, biodiversity, and overall natural
environments while stressing the ethical dimension in dealing with material flows and
material consumption between society and nature (Baccini, Brunner 2012).
Literature on metabolic studies further emphasizes the need for public education and
Building Theory
121
awareness of material flows (ibid; Brunner, Rechberger 2017); and although MFA is
usually practiced as an consular and analytic measure, the methodic and theoretical
literature highlights the importance of applying it for designing purposes as well (ibid;
Brunner, Rechberger 2017). Materials need sinks and more importantly “safe sinks”
which must be facilitated and/or designed (Brunner, Rechberger 2017). This indicates
that having “safe sinks” is central and key for sound and sustainable material flows as
is argued in chemical engineering literature (Brunner, Kral 2014; Kral et al 2019,
Mavropoulos, Nilsen 2020) Furthermore, so-called “closed loops” are physically
impossible which can be put as follows:
“When we examine a biological cell or a city... not only are these systems
open, but also they exist only because they are open.”
(Prigogine, Stengers, 2017 , pp: 127)
We should concern ourselves with not only “closing” but, more importantly,
“slowing” (higher quality products) and “narrowing” (higher material efficiency i.e.,
cunning use of less material volume) (Jørgensen et al. 2018; Bocken et al 2016).
Although the latter does not have an explicit emphasis on aesthetics and spatial
phenomenology along with multifunctionality, the Tectonic implication is
nevertheless there since the long-lasting capacities of architecture have the material
and immaterial fused.
Figure 55. From growth to circulation (or preventions of waste) -
still linear, but slow and narrow.
Chemical engineering thus provides methodological rigor to situate design activities,
while providing an overview and ability to design material flows on a large scale
which includes consequences for many underlying disciplines and fields. Even so, he
ontological and epistemological dimension of Chemical Engineering, which
constitutes “reality” as a mechanistic systems and components, problematizes how it
inscribes itself practically. This means that since social dimensions and aesthetics are
not part of the charts and system boundaries but are merely implicit or in the
122
background with little to no understanding of their potential with regard to material
flow challenges, because they are difficult to make empirical in the MFA method.
The edifice thus remains too much on a technocratic bias towards solving the
challenges of material flows. This mechanist ontology is discernable in the human-
nature relation as the two are kept apart ontologically and methodologically. What
becomes important here is the possibility that the mechanistic ontological world-view
is not the problem as such . One could imagine since we might get a more complex
and interconnected understanding of the world that could provide new or at least
different horizons for further exploitations within this interconnectedness. It is very
much a question of attitude supporting any given world-view and ontological position
which goes slightly against the architecture attacks on mechanistic ontologies. I argue
that such a ontological world-view is much more neutral than it may seem, since one
could just as easily position oneself within such a divided dichotomy and instead of
perceive it as “humans against nature”. One could furthermore assume a stance of
humility and modesty in maintaining this division instead of “withdrawing” from
affecting and exploiting it. Metabolic theory and method can both be applied merely
for short term and cost-oriented aspects without any genuine concerns for the
environment, while also harboring and laying the foundations for new sentiment and
world-views which are both radically critical and sympathetic towards ecological
concerns both for humans and nature. In this regard, Kohei Saito, a degrowth scholar,
elaborates that it is ontologically possible to view the world as interconnected without
ontological distinction between society and nature. The argument here is that
methodologically it can be critical to keep them separate (Saito 2022) as it is
humanity’s effects on nature which should not be relativized.
Literature on industrial ecology and the built environment, while not explicitly
excluding architecture ability to have plants on the roofs or facades or other
biodiversity services, emphasizes the ability of building elements to be
disassembled/maintained, flexibility/adaptability, and use-intensve in the forms of
buildings being able to performs as many functions as possible while each building
being empty as little as possible. The implication here that architecture should be
designed to not hinder a variety of uses with as minimal as possible transformations
(i.e., move a light wall and the like) and that there is some sort of sharing economy
of interior space. Some of the key parameters these strategies try to meet a include
generation of waste avoidance and reuse of exactly same elements/material. For the
theory building purposes of this doctoral study. The implication here is that that use
or application is one of the key components of buildings from a metabolic perspective.
One of the key strategies to slow and narrow material flows is that of prevention of
waste generation (Miljøministeriet 2021, pp: 25). There can be several ways to
implement this including flexibility in use and function regarding the building stock.
If we separate material soundness and buildings being well made from technically
and materially (which would allow for long life spans), the key consideration of
functionality of building is also what allows for its survival over long spans of time
Building Theory
123
(Kendall 2011). By extension, the use-intensity is also important to consider so that
each building is used at maximum capacity (ideally all 24 hours a day) for multiple
purposes and ”intensive” use (and multiple function over the course of days, weeks,
months years etc.) (IRP 2020, pp 90-94) thus minimizing the demand for more
buildings which will also be empty at give amounts. While other immaterial
considerations could also play a part in the functioning of the building stock as “safe
sink” for materials, a key factor is the wide and ambiguous usability of building stock.
Metabolic Eco-philosophy
In a meta-physical analysis of the shift from old World-View of domination of nature,
the eco-philosopher Dominique Bourg refers to a Hegelian shift (of negation) which
he considers inherent to metabolic thinking (Bourg 2003). As we have seen that well-
intended technologies can and have produced undesirable effects (Jevons Paradox),
Industrial metabolism and ecology brings about a “spiritual” retraction (withdrawal)
from nature that acknowledges the unsurpassable “otherness” of nature (ibid). This is
a radical shift away from the usual ideology or fantasy of “the all-powerful” human
or of conquering and dominating nature (Bourg 2003). This acknowledgement of the
“otherness” of nature which is brought about with ecological and metabolic thinking
has brought about a “new spirituality” as Bourg sees it. This “spirituality” can not
simply solve all our problem as this would be the old idea of control. Rather it
requires that this “spirituality” enter the social and economic realms to have a serious
imprint (Bourg 2003).
While chemical engineering is usually more practical and pragmatic which allows for
engineers to conduct analysis and act as consultants for different agencies, who on
account of the findings can reconfigure their systems, there is also a more expanded
understanding of what metabolic thinking can and should contribute in the given
environmental, social-political, and cultural conditions. More conceptualizations have
been developed regarding industrial ecology (metabolic) thinking which already takes
a step further in not only being a “neutral” method of mapping material flows but
acknowledges the potential and need to construct complex ecological thinking with
the aim of minimizing metabolic exchange of materials (and energy) from nature to
society (Bourg, Erkman, eds 2003). Similarly, the methodology of material flows has
both inspired theoretical development (Fischer-Kowalski 2003) and allowed for
speculation on metabolism in relation to both metaphysics and politics (Bourg, 2003).
These fundamentally observations show that there is a need to shift away from a
fixation on economic growth in the so-called “cowboy economy” to a more holistic
understanding as that of the “spaceman economy” (Fischer-Kowalski 2003).
Furthermore, the writings observe needs an ideological shift from seeing that society
and technology changes nature toa complex understanding of nature shaping society
in a way in which industrial metabolism seems to hold the “new spirituality” (Bourg
2003). Chemical engineering literature acknowledges the importance of
interdisciplinary collaboration, integration, and projects as through these
interdisciplinary interactions we have to nurture the development of “metabolic
124
designers” (Baccini, Brunner 2012).
One can thus consider of how the core methodology of MFA (metabolism) from
chemical engineering can bring about a new spirituality. To this end, it could be
valuable to compare chemical engineering to structural engineering. When we
consider how structural engineering is structured at a meta level, we must
acknowledge that one uses and applies different tools and methods to arrive at a
structural system which is to be realized in a certain material. While there are different
standards and norms for structural solutions -- whether from a legislative perspective
or economic – the usual way of doing things is to provide a design which implicitly
arrives at the least amount of material which gives an acceptable performance in a
cost-effective way. It is important to know that life span is often not an explicit design
parameter. This would be an example of what Žižek elaborates as a “contorted field”
in which an axiomatic inclination (to lower costs) is present in how the tools and
methods operate. As we have seen with Jevons’ paradox, a optimized technology can
in the long term increase (not decrease) material flows, as structures are designed for
short terms parameters. In comparison, a critical metabolic approach is an edifice
which implicitly and explicitly poses a challenge to design material flows which
manifest an interconnected edifice which goes towards minimizing material flows and
as such embody this Negative “spirit.”
As chemical engineers develop approaches on industrial ecology in relation to larger
spatial schemes, they see system boundaries of bio-regions (Ferrao, Fernandez 2013,
pp. 99), meaning that when we design material flows, a bio-region must be able to
sustain itself. And while a bio-region is a crucial impetus, the approach further
emphasizes the need for interconnectivity of bio-regions in a larger continental and
global approaches to material flow design (Ferrao, Fernandez 2013), pp. 100).
This approach emphasizes the need to “close” the loop of material flows between
society and nature (Ferrao, Fernandez 2013, pp. 102-103), while nevertheless
illustrating that this parameter is not fully possible, as a minimized amounts of waste
is inevitable thus requiring new material input.
Such an approach would necessitate a shift in thinking and doing, and in the
architectural discipline it would require sub-disciplines across all scales of design and
result in having consequences for both theory and practice in building design,
planning, urban design, strategic planning etc. (Ferrao, Fernandez 2013), pp. 167).
Seen from an chemical engineering discipline’s perspective, architecture and
engineering is considered a “synthetic” discipline which concentrates more on the
activity of manifesting and synthesizing theory and method into physical
manifestations, while its analytical capacities are oriented towards the purposes of
synthesis (Ferrao, Fernandez 2013), pp. 50).
The immense potential of metabolic thinking (industrial ecology/metabolism) is
precisely to think and design in terms of complex interconnectedness and
entanglement of societal, meta-physical phenomena in relation to natural conditions
Building Theory
125
with the aim of slowing and narrowing material flows. While much of the industrial
metabolic thinking and Mater Flow Analysis have provided mostly tool and
methodical approaches, the very methodology and the challenge they put forth has
been a foundation of more theoretical elaborations on the significance of metabolic
approach for both material and metaphysical considerations society in relation to
nature.
A basic concept of industrial metabolism is that the “…industrial system and its
societal interactions are embedded….” and has a critical metabolic approach which
should accompany the approach in policy making as well as assessment and design of
material flows (Bringezu 2003). In a historical analysis of how metabolic thinking
came to be, Fischer-Kowalski provides insights into the influences that formed early
metabolic thinking (by Marx among others) as well as the later re-introduction (by
Ayres, Baccini, Brunner and more) (Fishcer-Kowalski 2003). Fischer-Kowalski
shows the expansive interdisciplinary and complexity of an industrial metabolic
conception and as Fischer-Kowalski conclusively writes in reference to Bruno Latour,
there is a need to stop separating of social “subject” and natural “object” as the
contemporary predicament necessitates the development of “social-cultural-natural”
hybrids (Fishcer-Kowalski 2003) to properly deal with social-natural entanglements
in an age of global warming and climate change.
4.2.6. Interpretation: Limitations and Openings
In this paragraph, the limitations and potentials/openings are put forth with regard to
the theory development effort of this doctoral study. It can be argued that industrial
ecology theory and methodology is very deep, and its complexity can be used for
many different purposes, i.e., potential for making new tools and methods in
architecture. However, this delineation outlines the challenges of industrial ecology
with regard to the juxtaposition with tectonic theory in architectural discipline and the
overall scope of theory building.
Figure 56. An overview of the industrial ecology metabolism.
126
Limitations
One of the crucial limitations of the industrial ecology (metabolic) approach,
especially on the methodological side, is that it requires immense knowledge and
experience to properly conduct, balance and extract useful knowledge for the findings
in relation to one problem. Furthermore, to properly map all material flows can be
both difficult and time consuming sometimes requiring several years to provide a
result which then gives a snapshot into conditions with 2-5-10 years latency. While
chemical engineering wishes for more inter- and multidisciplinary collaborations and
research, industrial ecology shows itself to be very difficult to apply on a methodical
level for architects, urban designers etc. The fact that industrial ecology is such a
rigorous methodical tool allows for future implications regarding architectural design
processes potentially being a “translated” method and more easily usable for architects
and urban designers.
11
In an almost mirrored fashion to tectonics, albeit in an entirely different discipline, i.e.
industrial ecology, Semper’s stoffwechsel (paragraph 4.3) emphasizes objects and
transformations processes in a kind of part-whole set of relations. Industrial ecology
does not consider this in a spatial/tectonic way, but rather in its own ontological
understanding that system boundary contains many processes and flows, and each
process can itself be made up from several inner flows and processes. Unlike tectonic
discourse, industrial ecology does not contain a significant “narrative” dimension in
this regard, as narrative does not influence the mapping of materials and what sets of
parts and whole describe them. There is through another dimension of the “subjective”
in industrial ecology which is comparable to LCA. While everything may seem
“objective” and scientific, the founding gesture, so to speak, is that we have to choose
a system boundary which may pose problems for either only individuals, larger groups
or even larger eco-systems of both people and environments which may perhaps
privilege particular (individual or community biased) problems and not address a
wider set of problems across communities, nations etc.
Opening/Potentials
One of the founding potentials (for this PhD study) of industrial ecology is that it
becomes a tool which can position any practice (whether clothing, transportation or
in this case building industry)within planetary boundaries. Conducting a material flow
analysis allows for a pragmatist view of material flows irrespective of what is said,
claimed, or intended by the people responsible. What of course becomes important
now is that almost all industries have a green, sustainable, or circular agenda to
juxtapose what is being said/intended to be done (build green, have sustainable
industries) with the material reality and consequences of those intentions. It is by use
of metabolic studies that “take-back” effects or Jevon’s paradoxes became observable,
meaning examples where a technology (optimized) should have decreased
11
This has not been the focus of this PhD study, but in future endeavors this would be pressing
matter to consider, potentially with other researchers.
Building Theory
127
consumption of some particular material/elements ends up increasing it due to
lowered cost, increased availability and wide spread use etc., can be observed
Industrial ecology theory and method does not directly extend itself into architecture
and design practice and theory, but it does harbor some sentiments which can be
translated meaningfully without necessarily demanding that each and every architect
and designer becomes a chemical engineer as well. Focusing on the importance of the
sink as a concept (which can be transferred into architecture and design) ought to be
considered crucial to understanding spatial and architectural terms. While the sink
and material have their ontic, scientific material properties and technical
considerations, architects could situate their discipline by centralizing the notion of
the sink since building stock is the largest sink in terms of weight and volume. When
we in general terms consider the building stock in relation to the concept of the “safe
sink”, what then influences material consumption is the building stock’s ability to
function as a “safe sink” for the materials it is comprised of. This implication here is
that the building either performs as “safe sink” or not based on the meaningful
architectural (read tectonic) application of those materials related to not only material
concerns (robustness, sturdiness etc.) but immaterial ones as well (usefulness,
phenomenological and social/cultural considerations).
Underthe guise of the current environmental challenges, chemical engineers have
urged the need for more interdisciplinary collaborations and the need educate what
they designate as “metabolic designers” (Baccini, Brunner 2012). This is not a return
to the Japanese avantgarde of the post war era; nonetheless by situating and infusing
as many disciplines and industries as possible with metabolic understanding, the
space would open to align different understandings through a common terminology
and agenda across disciplines and within each respective discipline and industry.
4.3. Tectonic Stoffwechsel (Metabolism from Architecture)
Similar to the prior section on industrial ecology, this section regarding the tectonic
metabolism will be “disassembled” as a zero-level step prior to the building of a
theory. Giving initially brief insight into the context and historical epoch along with
the influential forces in “the background”, the following section will contain a
fourfold structure of the theoretical elements (construct, relations, logic, and
boundaries). These elements will be mapped, described, and critically considered for
their theory building potentials.
128
4.3.1. The Outline
Tectonic discourse is found within architectural discipline and is not to be confused
with the geological notion of “tectonic plates”. Tectonic discourse in architecture is
perhaps an unusual phenomenon as it is a theoretical strain which remains relevant
and active over a few centuries. I am of the opinion that this is because tectonics
somehow managed to “cut” into the core architectural thinking and practice , revealing
the “anatomies” of both and remains relevant and potent. Architecture is a vast
profession and discipline which often is an umbrella of all sorts of desi, i.e., furniture
design, interior design, buildings, urban space, planning etc., and recently design
video-game environments (Harris et al ed. 2020). Tectonic theory holds significance
for several reason. It has simultaneous emphasis on the design process and critical
material understanding with many cross-scalar approaches, e.g., tectonic approach to
furnishing, interior space, buildings (Semper 2004; Hvejsel 2018; Moravanszky
2018), and urban design (Sekler 1965; Christiansen 2020). Additionally, tetonic
theory emphasizes the integration of tectonics and structural engineering (Schwartz
2018) and material “sciences” (Thomas ed. 2007; Borden, Meredith ed. 2012; Hensel
2013). A crucial dimension of tectonic theory is that of “criticality” (Hartoonian 1994;
Frier-Hvejsel 2018). One should also take note of the fact that tectonics as theoretical
endeavor has been an ongoing debate and theorization crossing multiple historical
epochs, paradigms and styles in architecture to which scholars and practitioners still
return to. And it is my speculation that this is so because tectonics deals with
something fundamental than mere proposing new stylistic normativity. For these
reasons, tectonics can be considered a much more fundamental, ontological even,
dimension of architecture as it delves into the very “fabric” of architectural creation
and thinking – on both a meta-level and in the most immediate engagements. Inn this
strain, Semper’s “metabolic” thinking was a crucial attempt to dissect this fabric
(Hartoonian 1994).
The Metabolism
Gottfried Semper’s theory is both a descriptive and prescriptive, though Semper
himself used its descriptive capacities to explore and elaborate in meticulous detail
both historical works and creative/transformative processes (Semper 2004). Semper’s
theory is a general theory which is not limited to the explanation of one particular
design but can be applied to explain much of built works and used to design any
facility in any size. There is much literature on Tectonics Unlike many other
architectural theories, Tectonic, which stems from ancient Greece, was explicitly
developed during the enlightenment in the Hellenistic turn in Germany by the likes of
Carl Bötticher and Gottfried Semper. Today there is still much ongoing literature
developed on Tectonic theory within architecture across different scales and concerns.
This doctoral study thus conceives and considers Semper’s concept of “stoffwechsel”
as a central theoretical notion of importance for this interdisciplinarity of this doctoral
study. The central notion is thus the metabolism (stoffwechsel) and not necessarily
only Semper’s iteration of it thus making this doctoral study is open to other re-
Building Theory
129
iterations, comments, and elaborations of it.
“Stoffwechsel” is usually translated as “Metamorphism” to avoid a misunderstanding
of the Japanese Avant Garde Movement (Moravanszky, 2018, pp: 20), but the more
literal translation of “stoffwechsel” from German is “metabolism” hence lending to
the potential for interdisciplinary integration. Semper was greatly influenced by the
natural sciences of the times (biology, chemistry (alchemy) etc.) (Moravanszky 2018,
pp:187) in a time when Germany was gaining a national identity and sought to find
ways to “build” a society in reference to Greek democratic values in the face of
industrialization challenges of modernizing a society. The concept of Semper’s
stoffwechsel (Metabolism) was later criticized for being too “materialist” by Riegel
(Moravanszky, 2018, pp:53). But later, a deeper analysis has shown that Riegel
misunderstood Semper and that Tectonic notion of Metabolism was already much
more inclined towards Idealism and not purely materialist aspect (technical principles,
material scientific facts etc.) (Moravanszky, 2018). Moravanszky even goes as far as
to elaborate the relationship between Idealism and Materialism in relation to Tectonics
as to highlight that Semper did not intend Tectonics to be a materialist (technical)
approach (ibid). Compared to today, but in slightly different variation, we have seen
tectonic approaches which are to greater degree concerned with material science
(algorithmic optimizing of form design), while others emphasize the “critical”
dimension in Tectonics which is culture stemming from the legacy of Hegel, Marx,
and the later Frankfurt School philosophers like Adorno who was heavily inspired by
Hegel among others.
Historical setting
Although capitalism was already booming at the time, figures like Karl Marx had
already postulated and theorized ideas of resource limitations in the face of capitalist
dynamics and ecological exploitation prior to Semper’s work. (Saito 2017:
2022).Semper’s worries lay elsewhere but were nevertheless timely and relevant to
the societal challenges at hand (the construction of a new nation/identity). Semper’s
motivation for the theoretical endeavor was the “decadence” or “decay” in
architectural and artistic expression of his time (Hvattum 2001; 2004). This was a time
of grand change as industrialization and use of metals (perhaps iron most
significantly) were being introduced which along with the “decadence” issues posed
a great challenge to “construct” a society. This was also a time in which Germany was
working to develop a national identity and the reference to Hellenism and Greek
traditions (hence tectonics) was imperative to construct a national building culture
which tapped into that sublime Hellenic tradition—though exemplified in a German
setting.
While it can be argued that Semper’s stoffwechsel is something completely else
compared to his theoretical elaborations of the “four elements”, scholars have implied
that the notion of Stoffwehcel metabolism is the overarching frame of Semper’s line
of thinking and thus contains other writings such the four elements (Chestnova 2018;
130
Moravaszky 2018). This doctoral study proceeds as such.
4.3.2. Constructs
Semper’s theory has almost become proverbially known as the “four elements”, but
to avoid misunderstanding in the context of the theory building investigation,
Semper’s are the equivalent of “constructs” and not the whole four elements:
constructs, relations, logic, boundaries.
Semper describes his own key constructs (the 4 main elements (Semper et al 1989))
as “techniques” or “main artistic activates”, but he nevertheless named them as well-
known entities (or even objects) within the practice of architectural production:
carpentry, textile, ceramics, stereotomy (Figure 57).
Figure 57. Four main elements of Semper's theory:
carpentry, textile, ceramics and stereotomy.
As Moravanszky elaborates, textile is often understood/applied as the wall, while
ceramics is often applied as brick or clay as hardened via a “fired” transformation and
carpentry is often applied as the roof with stereotomy being often applied as the
terrace/base on which buildings are situated (Semper 2004; Moravanszky 2018;
pp.99-129). Moravanszky furthermore demonstrates, that Semper’s four categories of
activities/objects are loose definitions of ways of appearing. An example of this would
be an element which is apparently stone (stereotomy) but is applied in such a delicate
way (with intricate detail) that it is more in tune with a textile (albeit made in stone).
With this flexibility and inherent ambiguity of each of the elements, each is shown to
be both a material and immaterial object as they can be dealing with an actual textile
Building Theory
131
and (the sublime feeling of or Thing of) textile-ness.
Figure 58. The four elements containing a certain "plasticity” in application.
Although Semper’s final iteration (figure 57) of the four elements is as described
above, they were derived from an earlier iteration of the 4 elements (figure 58). One
could argue that Semper’s first set of elements went from being of a more “static”
object orientation to more of being “metabolic” categories centered around a material
and its processes. Though he “transformed” the early set of elements, the old
iterations are still of value. What is of significance in the old quadruple of elements is
that, as Moravanszky also elaborates, the category of the hearth is not “necessarily
connected with materiality” (Moravanszky 2018, pp. 96). While we can claim that
three other categories are more archetypal formal architectural elements linked with
familiar material and structural principles, the category of the hearth is perhaps more
linked with a function and/or spatial configuration and application rather a particular
material or technique, as such is more ambiguous category. In the spirit of Semper
himself, the hearth should not necessarily be understood as merely an actual hearth. It
can be the hearth (as an essential spatial gesture) of any room/function (table in the
dining room, or a desk in an office etc.) or even be further conceptualized as the very
“fuel” or burning Will which is already inherent and fundamental to the other three
categories, making them take shape one way rather than the other.
4.3.3. Relations
In this section, the ways in which aspects of design relate to each other are brought
forth. There are a number of them and each will be elaborated upon though the
132
chronology of them does not indicate a hierarchy as they certainly echo into each
other.
Transformation
When observing a piece of architecture, one could observe how the four elements
(figure 57) are composed as to ascertain the apparent relations between them (i.e..
color dynamics, proportions, compositions, contrasting textures etc.). However,
Semper elaborates on a more central set of relations which are crucial not on the
particular level (proportions, relation between roof and wall etc.) but are generally
present regardless of the particular compositions. Semper’s elaborates on the
transformative relations between elements in very broad terms, and he steers away
from defining one particular relation as that would merely explain one building or few
buildings:
“When an artistic motive undergoes any kind of material treatment, its
original type will be modified; it will receive, so to speak, a specific
coloring. The type is no longer in its primary stage of development but has
undergone a more or less pronounced metamorphosis. If the motive
undergoes a new change of material (Stoffwechsel) as a result of this
secondary or even multiple transformation, the result new form will be a
composite, one that expresses the primeval type and all the stages
preceding the latest form. If development has proceeded correctly, the
order of the intermediate links that join the primitively expressed artistic
idea with various derivations will be discernable.” (Semper 2004; pp:250)
If we try and dissect this formula of transformation, several things are implicated by
its formulation. The first sentence indicates a kind of Platonic logic regarding ideas
and material manifestations of that idea. In such an application, transformation of its
“type” occurs. This type can then transform further, by way of articulation and
detailing etc., into composite which expresses the founding idea while containing the
former steps of transformation.
Building Theory
133
Figure 59. The process of relations as a monadic diagram.
If the entire process is to be a “success”, the initial idea along with the n-number of
transformations ought to be didactically readable and discernable within the final
form. Such a composite is not merely a modest material thing which performs as a
practical entity for our everyday lives but exactly a composite of material and
immaterial aspects that, by its own presence, emanates and speaks its own story of
creation and conception in its final form (a self-relating entity). Another elaboration
on this inherent view of material and immaterial considerations already indicates
Semper’s thinking regarding a complex system
“Semper proposed a metabolism theory in which materials and
instruments, hand movements and body parts blended with religious myths
and carried the memories of earlier materials into later ones as ornament
and ultimately into monumental art, from textiles through clay, wood, and
metals to stone (Payne 2021)”
As such, the transformational process implicitly indicates that there is a “periphery”
(what is designated as hinterlands in industrial ecology) from where materials arrive.
These then undergo multiple transformations, while the idea is seemingly universal.
Part-Whole
Yet another relationship-factor which is used by Semper in a rather undefined fashion
is that of parts and wholes without having a particular section in his book which
elaborates how parts and whole are related. Throughout the book (Style (Semper 2004)
he inherently or integrally describes particular design by using the part-whole
relations in which he describes the relations at hand of a given design object etc. It
134
spans from the descriptions of a motive which is entirely an isolated “part” without a
whole (Semper 2004; pp.85) to describing how the ”whole” can be repeated as a
decorative detail as the “whole in its parts” (Semper 2004; pp. 640) – along with
everything in between the two extreme of part-whole relations.
Self-Relating – or Panpsychism/animism
Seemingly, for the first time since the ancient pre-modern tendencies where the final
reference of almost any piece of work was in some way Nature, God or spectral motif
(e.g. Primitive Hut), with Semper architectural thinking, the discipline gained an (self-
aware) introspective gesture by referring back to itself. In extension of this innate
narrative of a thing, the notion of animism becomes of particular architectural
relevance. This is seen in later architectural theoreticians’ analyses which describe
and depict or analyze an architectural work in its built form as if the architectural
elements are alive and self-aware and are doing something = in particular setups while
speaking with other elements - as if a fable. In a book chapter, Caroline van Eck
elaborates on this animism of building elements (van Eck 2010; 2013, pp.136). This
animism (or even panpsychism) occurs not only on the small scale of (architectural
elements i.e., wall, mound etc.) but also on larger level where creativity ensures a
“cultural continuity” with each new building (Moravanszky 2018) . This, as Mari
Hvattum attempted to highlight, is a problem of historicism (Hvattum 2004). What
implicitly happens with such an “animi-sation” of the architectural discourse is that
architecture becomes too much of an isolated object and seems to come “alive” on its
own making us, as architects, merely observers as architecture itself has an inner Will
to explore itself as we facilitate/enable these variants and stories. It becomes a set of
coordinates which facilitate and (indirectly) maintains building activity while leaving
out the possibility of critically situating architecture within planetary boundaries with
a non-growth agenda. Heidegger also fundamentally developed this in his text on
architecture with the trident of building, dwelling, thinking, where to build is to dwell
and to dwell is to build – and thinking being an interstitial dimension in both
(Heidegger 1971). Van Eck also elaborated on animism in Semperian Tectonic
discourse as being an “empathic projection” (van Eck 2010) of the architect
empathically projecting “life” into inanimate matter, and while there are parallels in
the self-relating aspect (i.e., a living entity telling the story of its own making), the
quest is to link the immediate animation of objects (at hand) with the large-scale cross-
historical progression of “cultural continuity”. This is because, following a Žižekian
line of thought, the object may gain “life” through personal empathic projection but
once it is “already-alive” (as an established discourse among thinkers and practitioners
etc.), it simply causes itself.
Although tectonics usually positions in more critical corners compared to mainstream
building practice, this aspect of animism makes it entirely possible to place tectonic
discourse within the usual “swinging of the pendulum” tendency as it aims to
“merely” explore more and more new/different variants in the inevitable “continuity”
of culture without necessarily having a critical angle on why and how.
Building Theory
135
Consequently, it can be argued that Semper’s theory is a self-relating entity with
monadic relations between materials, properties and expressions and is made clear in
the process of becoming when the final step tells the whole story of its own creation
(figure 59). As Mari Hvattum demonstrated, Semper’s analysis of the Assyrian chair
mainly focused on the innate properties of the chair while entirely omitting the fact
that the chair was positioned in the king’s room and performed as the throne (Hvattum
2001). Tectonic discourse in the contemporary setting is explicitly concerned with
surroundings and context—whether material or immaterial—in different fashions.
Although in Semper’s work, perhaps especially in his built work, one can argue that
he does nevertheless take into consideration context and surrounding conditions. He
should not be refuted for this, because Semper still considers the conception of
interiority central to the creative acts in architecture while structural elements are of
course needed to facilitate that the feeling of interior and the possibility of considering
context on similar footing. As such, Semper is to a lesser degree a formalist concerned
with the structural form but emphasizes the atmosphere of the feeling of inferiority,
almost “suspending” interiority as essential.
Figure 60. A strong sense of “suspended” interiority constructed entirely from inventory and
furniture: hanging drapes in the ceiling, light fixture, furniture, carpets etc. almost
irrespective of structural function and its appearance.
Semper writes:
“Hanging carpets remained the true walls, the visible boundaries of space.
The often solid walls behind them were necessary for reasons that had
nothing to do with the creation of space…” (Semper et al 1989)
As to whether Semper would entirely dismiss structural and formal exploration and if
so, to what exact degree, is up to historical scholars of Semper to decide; however, I
would argue that the Semperian position is quite open to the structural element
providing or being an actor in the manifestation of the dense atmosphere of the
136
interior. One can here make a comparison to a contemporary case, i.e., of Sou
Fujimoto’s box-in-box house (Meinhold 2011), where the peculiar, layered structural
shells are at the same time what provides the intensity of the interior of a kind of
sublime confusion of inside and outside relations - thus making the structure not
merely withdrawn to facilitate interior effects.
The emphasis on interiority speaks of Semper’s willingness to create
separated/isolated ideas and subsequent object/forms whether via interiority or
details/ornament. One could thus postulate that such a seemingly irrational suspension
and isolation of the interior could be a better guarantee for a rich architectural space
instead of an bland integration of all factors at once as it is the parameter to which all
other (composition of HVAC, placing of beams and columns, etc.) are subservient.
In extensions, another potentially important thing to take away from this “isolated”
approach to objects, is the meticulousness and care that Semper shows to them outside
of its context (Hvattum 2001). While today we certainly need to take contextual
considerations into account, perhaps more than ever, there is an immense respect of
the object which may be mirrored in its inherent qualities which make it persist over
time in becoming a “monumental” form. Compared to today, there is now perhaps too
much emphasis on relations and flows and fluxes, and a more care-full respect of
objects could both be more embedded into its surroundings and minimize material
consumption.
4.3.4. Logic(s)
In this paragraph, the different logics which structure the operability of the theory are
laid out.
Metaphor
Perhaps, the fundamental and grounding logic of the Semper’s metabolism is that of
“metaphor” (i.e., metaphor of metabolism) though he does not explicate this
methodically. As elaborated in earlier chapters, mobilizing a metaphor is already a
methodology for positioning and endeavoring multi- or interdisciplinary work, and as
we have seen, Semper was not only inspired by the sciences but also called his theory
“stoffwechsel” and must have used metaphoric reasoning (though there is no explicit
methodology chapter on metaphors in his book (Semper 2004)) to extract useful
architectural knowledge from other sciences. In the early days, Semper’s writing was
inspired by sciences of the times (biology, chemistry (alchemy) among others
(Moravanszky 2018) and aimed at developing an understanding in architecture which
laid out (perhaps similar to the periodic table in chemistry) a founding set of elements
which constitute the “nature” of architecture. Using metaphors in architecture is rather
common and also used in applied sciences (industrial ecology). There are different
ways of mobilizing metaphors. Specifically, how, to what end, and how “literally”
can a metaphor be mobilized.
Building Theory
137
Knitting and Veiling – the Will for making
Since we are dealing with a metaphoric use of the notion metabolism and can see that
it is an dynamic entity at is ontological core, the question becomes – which are then
the logics which animate this tectonic metabolism? The logics are two forces and
come in a “lower” and “higher” form: knitting-on (weiter stricken) and veiling (i.e.
dressing) (Moravanszky 2018). This dualism basically mimics the Žižekian use of the
dichotomy of Drive and Desire (Žižek 2012). At the lower end, the drive is this “blind”
creative energy (“instinctual” act of knitting, merely the act itself) which animates the
building and creative activity - and the higher is that of the social and cultural need to
manifest veiling interiors, emanating the spirit of “carnival candles.”
Semper elaborates the different kinds of yarn, stitching, weaving etc. While these
appear in the chapters and paragraphs on textile, one of them, the knot, is of particular
importance going beyond a mere category of making among many others. As different
scholars have emphasized (Hvattum 2001; Moravanszky 2018), the significance of
this in Semper’s writing is the fact that he argues that knitting (or the knot) is a
fundamental or primordial “motif” and not the proverbial “primitive hut” which was
widely popular at the time.
While Semper was against the mental constructs such as the Primitive Hut, Semper
nevertheless sketched a primordial motif of his own. Semper’s wreath is a kind “first-
knot” mythological motor of architectural production. It became, in some way, his
own “primordial hut” but a primordial knot of sublime making (Mallgrave 1996,
pp.292). The wreath embodied that which later was put forth by Riegl; namely, the
Will or urge to make the knot and knitting which is an embodiment of creativity-itself.
Figure 61. Semper's Wreath (own redrawing) (Mallgrave 1996; pp.292)
Semper’s wreath becomes very interesting because it is transformed from merely
indicating the “origin” of architectural production to also explaining the logic of
making. It is not this particular wreath which is of importance but the “circular”
dynamic of making-as-such of this and the endless productions of “wreaths”.
138
Again, the significance of this is that Semper positions an activity (of making) as the
core of artistic and thus architectural creation and not an object of a spectral
imagination of a “primitive hut” motif. Similarly, to the 4 categories of making
mentioned earlier, the knot is not necessarily an actual knot (while it too can be that).
The knot is also transferred into a metaphysical realm where it is the activity of
“knitting” together spatial elements into experiences which have the “carnival haze.”
This dimension of the essence of architectural creation has also been developed by a
Semper contemporary, Alois Riegl. Although his critique of Semper has proven a miss
as elaborated by later scholars (Moravanszky 2018), Riegl’s own elaboration of
Kunstwollen (Will to Art) (Mallgrave 1996, pp.379). can be argued to have some
similarities to Semper’s centralization of an activity as essential architectural creation.
As we are dealing with the notion of metabolism (stoffwechsel) which is a dynamic
entity, we cannot claim that it is merely the material realm which animates and
manifests material transformations but exactly this activity of the creative Will on
behalf of the human creators and users. The will to make corresponds to the
“knitting” activity. Semper, as later scholars also argue, is not a materialist who thinks
architecture can solely be explained from material conditions as the logic of architects’
free will certainly also influences how building take form (Mallgrave 1996).
Semper defines stoffwechsel as a “material transformation” which “explains the
ability of materials to undergo change by considering the product of human techne.
(Moravanszky, 2018, pp: 10). However, regardless of which material is in question
there is a kind of “truth to material” paradigm which served a background for Semper
before he developed the theory of stoffwechsel (Moravanszky, 2018, pp: 133).
Semper was keener on the theory of mimesis (from ancient Greece) which allows
“forms to slip from one material to another” – which stands in contrast to the “law of
being true to materials” (Moravanszky, 2018, pp:25; pp:133). In today’s conditions
and challenges in terms of material flows, this allows and asks for defining a different
“truth to materials” which both hold metabolic concerns in relation between society
and nature, along with new creative possibilities for application as well.
Throughout his book on Semper, Moravanszky reifies different manifestation of
“metabolism” which includes phases from drawing to construction and reconstruction
(Moravanszky, 2018, pp: 181) and by doing so already indicates a kind of circular
material flow along with the “flow” of culture since stoffwechsel is concerned with
material transformation but also cultural continuity (Moravanszky, 2018).
stoffwechsel thus becomes reified as a kind of “self-causing entity”, elaborating the
genesis of its own becoming into being thus making it (stoffwechsel) a
“hypothesis…which signifies constant renewal” (Moravanszky 2018, pp: 213). This
alludes to a kind of “inner” drivenness or creative Will of the very material element
which is fused with a kind of animism (albeit an ideological justification for activity)
as seen in Kahn’s talking bricks. Relevant to this as well is Semper’s demands of form
making where “free human work that appears as a necessity of nature and becomes
the generally understood and perceived formal expression of the idea” (Moravanszky,
Building Theory
139
2018, pp: 176). This in itself is no longer a guarantee for high quality character in
architecture or ecological critical understanding since it simply can invite any type of
creativity activity which can be all from pseudo-sustainable, greenwashing
opportunism and just as well as a critical ecological understanding. In this relation,
Tectonics contains a dimension of creative opportunism in which “cultural continuity”
sees a need for new and refreshed aesthetic expenditures within Tectonic discourses
which utilize new techniques and manufacturing technologies. Since its inception,
Tectonics have always been a hybrid discourse of the physical and metaphysical.
Nonetheless, a metabolic approach as seen in industrial ecology may require a
deconstructing of the Will for creativity if architectural production is to locate itself
within planetary capacities.
Figure 62. Semper's Wreath (own redrawing) and Lacan's “objet a” (desiring logic as
diagram). (Slavoj Žižek 2001. Enjoy Your Symptom, pp.56)
In structure, Semper’s wreath is incidentally almost identical to the elaborations on
desire and drive first developed by Lacan then further extended by Žižek (Žižek 2001,
pp. 56). The wreath is almost a diagrammatic mirror of the desiring logic developed
by Žižek (Žižek 2001). When one has an edifice and fails to properly understand this
edifice in its entirety, the emergence of a single object (story, aim etc.) is what
provides meaning to it. One could even compare it to the primitive hut discourse,
where the hut itself is the “a” which is an ideal, yet unattainable, (fictitious) specter
that one must strive for. While Semper’s theoretical contributions provide a significant
shift in understanding of architectural production, it does not fall outside of the
driving/desiring logic.
Nature likewise had a significant presence is Semper’s writing. He conceived that man
strives “… to make the laws of nature evident in the object he adorns.” (Herrmann
1984, pp.219; Hvattum 2004). Nature is something full of “wonder and forces”, and
for Semper the origins of art are located in the need to create order through play and
ritual (Hvattum 2004, pp.65). This need is to be read as the Will. But if “nature” is to
be repeated within the human made objects, and thus propel the “continuity of
culture”, what sort of an understanding did Semper have of nature? While this in and
140
of itself a difficult question to answer, one could certainly speculate as to whether it
could have been an early variant of “materialist” bio-mimicry which later generations
would fully expand (Benyus 1997; Weinstock 2008; Pawlyn 2016). Bio-mimicry is
not however necessarily metabolic at its core ethos of design. There is thus a founding
ideological construction at the core of the creative act in ones’ relation to nature(i.e.,
how one construes nature is mirrored in the built environment), and if one conceives
nature as merely a system (or metabolism) of growth, then such property is translated
(metaphorically) into the conception of the cities that frame our cultures and society.
While the free will of the artist (or architect) is what initiates creative activity, the
larger scheme of historical progress becomes the object-cause of desire – the
impossible specter guiding all activity beyond and beneath any actual necessity or
needs -which is to see “cultural continuity” through more new design variants. In
extension, thus remaining within the hegemonic growth paradigm.
Interpretative Plasticity
Much more implicit within the theory is a kind of interpretative plasticity. One could
easily miss this aspect because we as architects often work in such a way that allows
for some leeway room for interpretation, which is what I am claiming. This plasticity
can be asserted as a product of the material-immaterial dualism of Semper’s
metabolism or even a “structuring” necessity (a logic) with which the theory can be
manifested since we are not actually dealing with a chemical or biological
metabolism. An example, which is quite central, of this plasticity in how any
element/construct (roof, wall or material technique like ceramics, stereotomy etc.) can
either be aligned with itself (a wall being a textile) on one hand or on the other hand,
a stereotomy element in which the stone is intricately made to mimic a textile in which
opposites (heavy and light) seem to synthesize into a higher manifestation, a
“transformation”, of material. This logic can give birth to many different variants in
design by juxtaposing different architectural elements with techniques, motifs, effects,
experiential qualities etc., but one could likewise mobilize this logic when having to
construe industrial ecologies thinking into an architectural and tectonic theory.
4.3.5. Boundary
The final aspect of the Semperian metabolism are the philosophical (ontological)
assumption and boundary conditions that have formed and structured the metabolism
and its operability.
Architectural Setting
Circumscribing Semper’s stoffwechsel theory at a more immediate level in terms of
its applicability and efficacy is a theory which applies itself in architectural design
Building Theory
141
and practice. There have been later developments on linking tectonic theory and with
urban design (Christiansen 2020) or linking stoffwechsel with environmental factors
(Foged 2014). Stoffwechsel does not attempt to speak on social hierarchies or politics
or even ecological concerns. It rather largely confines itself to architectural
production. Even as such, stoffwechsel has different ontological and world-view
implications brought forth to “reveal” the hidden dimensions of Semper’s theory.
Semper’s theory holds a grounding ambiguity regarding whether the theory is
descriptive or prescriptive. It is clear that Semper practiced a significant amount of
historical analysis to the point of being considered an architectural and art historian,
but he also designed and built a few works as well a basis for his theoretical endeavors.
This is something that architectural theory “struggles” with in general because as
architects we have to conform to differing conditions and historical settings as well as
social and economic fluctuations. To this day, we also see different mobilizations of
and practical uses of Semper’s theory in experiments and built works.
This ambiguity has later become more distinct as contemporary theoreticians have
metamorphosed tectonic theory (with impetus in Semper) into a method. An example
of this is Marie Frier-Hvejsel’s tectonics as method approach of Gesture and Principle
(Hvejsel 2018). However generally speaking, it can be argued that tectonic theory,
given its practical orientation on making and material, makes it easy to learn from
analytic applications and apply similar thinking when designing and thus analysis and
design are two sides of the same coin.
Idealist-Materialist Hybrid (quasi-Hegelianism)
The fundamental “twist” in architectural and art theory which was Semper’s
contribution was the shift from a “fetish” for an imaginary object (the Primitive Hut)
to the ceremonial/social act of making as exemplified in the primordial motive of the
knot. This shift has an ontological significance. While it was said that the influence of
Hegel was minimal (Mallgrave 1996; pp.35) on Semper’s writings, I would argue the
content of the Semper’s theory is fundamentally Hegelian,. Hegel’s main contribution
was that of “relations” (as seen in Hegelian aesthetics). While Kant insisted on the
Thing-In-Itself and the autonomous character of every Thing, Hegel radicalized this
Thing into a self-relating entity which often gets boiled down to the expression of
“…from the Thing-In-Itself to the Thing-For-Itself”. This fundamentally conceives of
the idea that a thing exists because of its relations and when it has grown sufficiently
it starts to cause itself in a kind of circular self-reflectivity (Žižek 2012; 2014). This
is a central axiom of Semper’s theory as the shift from an object (primitive hut) to an
activity of making (knitting) was precisely centralized. This too is present in the
discourse of architectural elements and their innate vibrance and incontinence of
telling the story of their own conception and making. This line of thought remains
within a realm of idealism and thus adds to the argument (against initial critique by
Alois Riegl) that Semper was not a materialist. This sidelining of the creative
“vibrance” of architectural production onto materials is furthermore comparative to
today’s notions of “vibrant matter” as developed by Jane Bennett and a kind proto-
ANT animism of objects. Bennett’s vibrance is to a larger degree founded in material
142
sciences, and she points to the fact that all matter is in fact vibrant and not inanimate
as we have long thought--although it conceives of a more flexible temporality which
also stretches to longer periods of time in which matters and compounds would react
over time (Bennett 2010). Herein lies the biggest difference between “vibrant matter”
and the tectonic discourse, as the former (at the time) conceives more or less of matter
as inanimate and the “animism” of architectural production was fundamentally an
idealist and meta-physical phantasy imbued into matter while Bennett develops the
theory that matter is in reality vibrant.
As mentioned, Riegl had initially misunderstood Semper as a materialist and, as
Semper himself would refute this, despite some modest materialistic consideration,
Mallgrave too would argue and agree that Semper was not a materialist. One can only
wonder why architects have such a strong reaction against materialism. It almost
seems as if they view it as a dirty word. This fact was not merely reiterated for the
sake of historical accuracy. Riegl initially misunderstood Semper. Specifically, he
thought that Semper conceived architecture as deterministically emerging from
material conditions (Mallgrave 1996). Later, Riegl, had to acknowledge that
architecture emerges out of material, climate, site, culture, politics and perhaps most
importantly the free will of the architect. The push against this supposed “material
determinism” may be linked to the need for asserting Architecture as its own
discipline which perpetuates its existence by problem-solving qua the architects’
creative will by showing a respect of it. The juxtaposing of industrial ecology with
tectonics (as is the aim of this doctoral study) would need to problematize such an
assumption and architecture could in a re-conceptualized manner be understood as
emergent from an expanded understanding of the (im)material conditions, be against
the primordial need to make, and place itself within material conditions (i.e. planetary
boundaries/capacities or planetary scarcity).
Though the “knot” and its significance indicate a fundamentally idealist stance of
Semper’s thinking, he does not entirely remain there. There is most certainly a
pragmatist spirit in Semper’s writings. While he was inspired by the natural sciences,
he was also observant and socially aware and was even politically active (Mallgrave
1996). As he perceived the “decadence” in art and architectural practice, his main
contribution was a “practical aesthetics” which in very modest terms could be
understood as a guiding hand to the lost and perplexed artist and architects of the time.
A key axiom (logic) of Semper’s theory is that of masking or dressing. While other
tectonic theoreticians emphasize the equal importance and integration of material and
immaterial concerns (i.e., Karl Bötticher’s Kunst- and Kernform), Semper emphasizes
the “kunst” as the power of veiling and creating interiors. He basically links this to
the inherently artistic “drive” in both artistic creation and experience which
“…presumes a carnival spirit” or put slightly differently to create a “…haze of
carnival candles” (Semper 2004; pp.438,n. 85). Semper continues;
Building Theory
143
“The destruction of reality, of the material, is necessary if form is to
emerge as a meaningful symbol, as an autonomous human creation” (ibid,
438-9).
The “destruction of reality/material” is not to be understood merely as the material
processes of transforming raw matter into building elements. Rather, the statement is
more profound as it is my interpretations that ontologically material is of lesser
importance than the idea. Here again is a Hegelian dimension apparent in Semper’s
writing. Another of Hegel’s famous phrases is that of “spirit is a bone” (Žižek 2012,
pp. 534). Hegel developed this as a relational conception that a “spirit” (some
immaterial quality) cannot be a free-floating entity and any particular “spirt” stems
directly from its particular “bone” (material existence). This indicates that Semper’s
simultaneously has a material and scientific understanding of the “fabric” of
architectural making, but he conceived of the possibility that how material is
transformed into “spirit” from a mere bone. Semper is neither materialist nor entirely
idealist (concerned with meta-physics). There are aspects of both in the privileging of
“suspended” interiority in which surface (textile/wall) is of utmost/prime importance.
Figure 63. Substance vs. meta-physics;
surface as interstitial mediator.
Although conventionally, Semper’s ontological structure is also that of a material and
immaterial dualism, similar to that of Bötticher’s dualism (and many other tectonic
dualisms over the centuries (figure 22, chapter 2.2.4)), t is my interpretation that
Semper’s emphasis on the interiority and the surface is in fact already a further
distillation or nuancing of the dualism into a stratum of three (figure 63) as the
experiential dimensions of veiling qua surface.
At the opposite end of his idealist stance, Semper thought it pertinent to develop a
formula for architectural style (Hvattum 2001) which almost becomes a kind
“mathematization” of aesthetics, or a kind mathematical-material pragmatism. While
this formula was left behind and fundamentally a “failure” (Hvatuum 2004b), it
144
nevertheless reveals a thinking which is inherently material and immaterial but
through the lens of a kind of practical “scientification” of the creativity and making
in architecture. Semper acknowledges, in pragmatist ways, that we indeed have to
understand the properties of materials (which was perhaps why Riegl misunderstood
him as a materialist). He nonetheless entirely mobilized this knowledge for the sake
of larger meta-physical considerations. The ontological world-view challenges of
architecture are not only confined to tectonic discourse. Christopher Alexander is of
the opinion that contemporary architecture has a fundamental worldview which is
“…essentially mechanical in nature – what we might call the mechanist-rationalist
world-picture…” (Alexander 2002, pp.7). He does not mean that we have become
architectural bureaucratic engineers, but rather that even when we are dealing with
aesthetic and immaterial conditions, we are treating them in a mechanical way even
if consciously we consider ourselves motivated by “spiritual” concerns. Keeping in
mind this elaboration by Alexander, one may indeed also observe that Semper
himself, albeit motivated by mythical and spiritual considerations, nevertheless
develops a practical aesthetic which is dealt with in a kind of “mechanistic” sense.
Alexander also claims that this (mechanistic worldview) is what governs our
understanding of what matter is (Alexander 2002; pp. 8). This particular world-view
of matter is one which of exploitation and manipulation, and Semper does not fall
outside this position especially qua his formula on styles and monadic process of
transformation.
Historicist Progress (of inevitability)
As a way to further unfold the aspect of the animism discourse in Semper’s writing,
as earlier mentioned, the aspect of historicism is important to consider. Here, it is
important to clarify that historicism can be used in different ways. We have seen
architects use the notion of “historicist architecture” to describe a style or way of
designing buildings which are referenced to some particular historical era etc.
(Moravanszky 2018). The other kind of “historicism” is more complex and
philosophical in regard to history and historical progress (historicism) (Žižek 2012;
Hvattum 2004)). Historicism in this respect is a fundamental position in the
understanding of history as epochs and eras which “necessarily” usurp each other in
a “necessary” (linear even) historical progress/continuity”. Ultimately, the two kinds
of historicisms possibly overlap. As both can be said to be present in Semper’s
thinking, it is the latter which is of interest to highlight with regard to metabolic
thinking and material consumption.
A quick exemplification of the historicist self-animism of architecture could be very
briefly shown in this limited genealogy of the column (Figure 64). Obviously, the
whole genealogy and history of columns is complex, these are but a few chosen cases
which highlight this incessant progress of architectural creativity.
Building Theory
145
Figure 64. A simplified narrative of progress.
Exemplifying the progress of narrative (figure 64) the first is the Greek Doric column
where it is treated aesthetically but serves to hold the roof (Moffert et al 2003). The
next entry is an example of one of many later renaissance column bases which afford
the possibility to sit on it. Next, Jørn Utzon much later designed a column which is
shaped to allow sunlight in the top at the Kuwait parliament (Weston 2008). Next,
Greg Lynn designed a branching column in an unbuilt restaurant which affords sitting
and leaning (DesignBoom 2012). Lastly, it is Toyo Ito’s Sendai Mediatheque
building, which was designed with columns that provide structural stability, light and
contains all the technical installations )i.e., pipes and cables etc.) (Balmond et al.
2002).
Such a genealogical “analysis” invites one to continue to speculate and keep adding
more affordances into a column. Although very limited, such a genealogy implicates
a creative progress which further invokes such experimental speculation and
manifestations and implicitly hints at that there being an innate necessity (out there in
the future iterations) thus drawing you and provoking you to continue this narrative
of progress. It would be possible to attempt a more scientific mapping of the
genealogy of columns in their messy genesis and complex relations, but that is not the
point. The point is rather that architects, in the materialization of the historicist
animism, hinge on partial and incomplete narratives, where full knowledge of all
empirical columns would kill desire and creativity. Architects would usually, I
postulate, conceive of such a progress/genealogy of the column (or any other element)
to tinker further with. Such a conception of historicist narrative of architectural
elements echoing and commenting on each other through history can be compelling
and interesting. It is equally, however, a “danger” which provides ideological footing
for more and more material consumption.
The above elaboration on progress is an indication that there is an experienced
necessity in that “progress” and things inevitably flow towards their seemingly
predetermined conditions. This would be in stark contrast to a contingent or open view
of historical conditions (where things and events could have easily turned out
differently due to details and conditions) as shared by Hegel and Žižek among others.
This kind of “historicism” is of interest in Semper’s work (and perhaps even in
Tectonic discourse at large today as well as then). Nevertheless, within this necessity
146
of progress Semper did not conceive the progression of architectural works in a linear
way but insisted on the creativity of the architect which could cause leaps in the
continuity (Mallgrave 1996; pp. 305) As such his idea of the historical progression is
manifested by the free will (or true creative impulses) of the designer/architect with
each new built work. Progress nevertheless remains axiomatic, and its story has to be
told in physical manifestations. Within this historicism, there is a kind of blind
optimization which has architects think that any new design variant and iteration (even
if a grand failure) serves a larger purpose for progress while more skeptical and
critically inclined thinkers and practitioner would disagree with this “necessity” of
progress. Another example would be Charles Jencks’ famous table (theory of
evolution) which maps a genealogy and progress of styles and movements in
architecture (Jencks 2000). One could also ponder on whether exactly this need for a
dynamic edifice is why the metaphor of metabolism was chosen in his writings.
Specifically, we could consider if he put it there because as a metaphor, metabolism
is in search of “constant renewal” (as Moravanszky puts it).
4.3.6. Interpretation: Limitations and Openings
In conclusion, this section will attempt to highlight the most pertinent limitations and
potentials/openings within the tectonic metabolism in relation to the later theory
development efforts. Having “disassembled” Semper’s theory does not mean that one
should simply re-apply the very content of his writing or simply add one extra
“construct” among his four (wall, roof, mound, hearth) to make it relevant to today’s
material flows challenges. What is perhaps more significant and poised with potential
is to “repeat Semper” at a formal level – meaning what he did instead of what he
wrote. What is important to consider is that Semper’s theory was very much a
response to the tendency of his time. Given the historical fact that Semper perceived
the challenges of architectural quality and the challenges that industrialization was
bringing about, he saw it pertinent to construct a theory and a way to approach
architectural production which would attempt to guarantee a certain level of tectonic
character and critical thought and thus steer away from mindless and vulgar aesthetic
expenditures. Another aspect on the formal level was the fact that he worked not ex
nihilo but tried to expand his horizon and developed his theory by attempting to embed
himself into other sciences (perhaps most notably chemistry as his four elements (read
constructs) can almost be read as a kind of architectural periodic table). This was not
to apply them as merely visual metaphors but to use them as new lens to critically
deconstruct and understand the creative processes in architectural production.
Building Theory
147
Figure 65. An overview of the tectonic "metabolism" and its particular points within each of
the four theoretical categories.
Limitations
Ultimately, given Semper’s emphasis on the activity of making, his emphasis on
interiority with little (or no) regard for the loadbearing capacities and his emphasis on
the “destruction” of material for purpose of making– I would go as far as to claim that
Semper’s metabolism (stoffwechsel) is as such the creative Will manifested through
knitting and subsequently veiling in which artistic efforts materialize the cultural
continuity. One could even go as far as to say that Semper’s metabolism is materialist
ideology as comparable to Andrew Benjamin elaboration (Benjamin 2007) which is,
in a way, materialism without matter qua-creativity. As such there is no clear emphasis
on the Marxian variant of metabolism of material exchange between society and
nature.
When architects are given a theory or model of architecture (like that of Semper’s four
elements) it is not in and of itself a guarantee for architectural quality or critical
thought. When any set of architectural elements (e.g., Semper’s roof, wall, mound,
hearth or Michael Hensel’s grounds and envelopes) is given to architects, their
immediate approach is to challenge the coordinates of that theory and play or
experiment with new and different relations between the elements, potentially
subverting them and transgressing their usual applications. These architects possess,
so to speak, the Semperian historicist animism which animates their architectural
production regardless of if it is motivated by aesthetics, rationality, or concerns
regarding costs or the environment. It can be made furthermore clear that the later
form of the four elements (carpentry, textile, ceramics, stereotomy) are transformed
to “mirror” the applied materials to a larger degree compared to the former set of
elements (roof, wall, mound, hearth) because they are more immediately and
practically are applicable in the process of design for practitioners (as Nygaard argued
in former chapters). It is again important to highlight that the original set of elements
148
contains a “difficult” element which is not linked to a material directly and is inclined
towards a more functional and cultural/ceremonial dimension of architecture. Again,
as Nygaard elaborated, function is commonly imbued with form and is seldomly a
standalone entity. At a conceptual level, this small fire within the edifice opens said
edifice. In extension of Nygaard’s observations, Semper’s constructs can also be
described as open-ended which allow and perpetuate the linear growth paradigm or at
least fail to question creative Will, or what Hvattum calls “historical organicist”
(Hvattum 2004). While this is seemingly a limit of the Semperian metabolism, there
lies a potential or rather challenge herein for the theory development effort of this
dopctoral study at hand. As such, the will is a thoroughly metabolic dimension of
design and creativity in both tectonic and industrial ecology as it either causes or
legitimizes material flows.
Another limitation of Semperian thought is the definition of the process and
transformation (Figure 59). Although Semper conceives of the metabolism as a set of
processes of transformation - yet from a modern and contemporary perspective the
monadic process does not include (but could have included) a few steps before the
“idea” in which process of cultivation (construction wood) or excavations process (of
stone minerals etc.) could also influence the processes of transformation. Likewise at
the opposite end, there could have been a process of use and post-use application and
handling of materials after demolition, disassembling or tearing etc.
The relating gesture of elements being animate, “speaking” to each other etc., is not
necessarily problematic as a narrative can be quite “neutral” if it is properly situated
and not merely mobilized for the sake of constantly manifesting new, never seen
before, variants of relations between elements. In extension, the self-reference is
merely misunderstood and misapplied, at least from an (industrial) metabolic
perspective. The aspect that architecture conceptually closes onto itself in meta-
physical terms (as a kind of circular self-reflexivity) currently holds a given set of
material consequences. Instead of refuting entirely this self-refence, one may get
more use of it if the subject was to “shift” in perspective in this regard. Instead of
maintaining an understanding and application which perpetuates growth-oriented
material consumption, the very same notion can be used to withdrawn architecture,
first meta-physically and then hopefully materially. As was Semper’s intent (and
according to Hartoonian) the quest of Semper’s metabolic thinking has been to
“secularize” (make into a science) the creative production process and not keep
hinging on some “ex nihilo” magic of creativity. I, however, claim that they both
failed to do so, and this black-box remains. There are two versions of the black-box:
“inner” and an “outer”. Firstly, creativity as the freewill is still a “dark” force which
is not relative to other considerations but is its own factor similar to how materials,
contexts etc., are factors in production (Mallgrave 1996). On the “opposite” end, the
ever-present idea of the necessity of historical progress – which is an extension (I
claim) of the creative will – as it provides meaningful coordinates for the dynamic
mechanism of the free will. Indirectly, such progress consequently perpetuates or
aestheticizes/narrativizes the linear growth paradigm at least within the current
Building Theory
149
coordinates of the social, political and economic frameworks.
Potentials/Openings
On the other hand, there are immense potentials in the tectonic metabolism. A place
to start would be to consider the potentials in the part-whole relation. This is important
because, as we will see later, this leaves the potential to open up the possibility to link
Semper’s metabolism with chemical engineering metabolism (industrial ecology).
Part-whole logic is very common and broad, and we have seen in both tectonics and
industrial ecology (in 4.2 and 4.3). The ontological “construction” of object-oriented
ontology is seemingly also compatible with such a logic, while Žižek’s materialism is
more fixated on the “part”, i.e., the partial object (objet a). Perhaps the theoretician of
part-whole relations in architecture is Marco Frascari with his elaboration on details
or joints and how Parts and Wholes engage in differentiating situations and scales
(Frascari 1981). In many ways this pushed for consideration of design and analytic
tasks to observe the object or phenomenon of concern as a kind of “anatomy” or bodily
entity of disparate entities/organs contained within a “whole.” The approach then
makes one sensitive of how the process of making and becoming materializes the
relations between parts and wholes. While Frascari’s theory is not directly
“metabolic”, the edifice and key constructs of the theory are relevant to consider and
hold potential in connecting theories as it indicates a strong link and acts as “extended”
writing of Semper’s own elaborations on (and not only inclusion of) part-whole
relations.
The use of metaphor in architectural production is well-known (Picon, Ponte 2003;
Gerber, Patterson 2013; Unwin 2019). Historically, we have almost everything from
referring to nature and biology (golden ratio, plant structures etc.), God, music, and
one can even postulate that we have returned to mobilizing metaphors from nature
with bio-mimicry and the concept of metabolism. Graham Harman elaborates in
general terms how architecture has implemented/assumed philosophical concepts in
an over-simplified and merely visual fashion (Harman 2022). Without repeating and
going too deeply into the history and general challenges of metaphor in relation to
architecture, architectural use of metaphor tends to have a certain “usual metabolism”
of its own. Through its own transformative sublimating mechanism - meaning how it
is translating and assumes a notion within the edifice – architectural discipline tends
to transform metaphors for formal expenditures. The weakest types of transformations
of metaphors by architects are that of taking a natural notion, concept, or motif (e.g.,
tree) and applying them as a mere visual trait. This is perhaps not in itself negative,
but certain types of metaphors demand more of a sublimation into the architectural
edifice. In contemporary times we have seen theories and practice which are basically
bio-mimicry where phenomena appear “natural” but do not function as such which
could possibly increase undesired waste product generation in type and amount. Such
a poor application of good metaphors is precisely why we have phenomena such as
green-washing where building are clad with greenery or have seemingly
150
modest/organic appearance while its carbon footprint and experienced quality
manifest a different reality from the intentions of sustainability. Semper’s own use of
the metaphor helped him create a different and critical understanding of architectural
production and its process. Nonetheless, the metaphor still remained too poorly
sublimated and could have been applied much more thoroughly without an creative
bias which included aspects at opposing ends of the transformative process, i.e.,
acquiring of materials and their end of life (as a metabolism both consumes and
discards matter).
Moravanszky himself implicitly acknowledges the limits of the current tectonic
understanding of “metabolism” and in relation to sustainability and environmental
concerns, Moravanszky elaborates:
“A much more promising approach would be to reflect upon what Karl
Marx described as ‘metamorphism’ between man and nature, and to
reconsider the interaction between technology and nature in the light of
current social conditions.” (Moravanszky, 2018, pp:212)
Moravanszky hits the nail on the head with regard to the potential of the concept in
metabolism. Although Moravanszky here translates Marx using the term
“metamorphism”, the original was again “stoffwechsel” which translates to
“metabolism” (Moravanszky, 2018, pp: 163). As mentioned in this chapter (paragraph
4.2), Marx’s idea (Saito 2017) of the “metabolism” between man and nature was an
early inspiration to the formation of the chemical engineering methodology and theory
of Material Flow Analysis—a rigorous scientific method that could make probable
that which Moravanszky hints at with reference to Karl Marx. This methodology of
Material Flow Analysis and its theoretical frameworks is also referred to as
“metabolism” and, regarding the relationship between “man and nature” is further
conceptualized as “metabolism of the anthroposphere” (Baccini, Brunner 2012).
Moravanszky reifies the “openness” within Tectonic discourse to construct a
contemporary understanding of Metabolism which contains critical understanding of
both “material flows” (industrial ecology) and ideological critique (Slavoj Žižek)
along with new critical eco-aesthetics (Timothy Morton as the leading figure today).
Despite the above quote on ecological awareness of the stoffweschel (though a link to
Marx), I understand Moravanszky’s to mean the elaboration of metamorphism is
positioned in an opportunistic inclination within the tectonic discourse and thus
prioritizes “new” variants of creative production. Another aspect to consider is
Moravanszky’s insistence of moving Semper out of the materialist category.
Materialism, while initially merely meaning a simple understanding of the ontic
(material) world, was already at the time of Semper politically charged as Karl Marx
was perhaps the dominant (historical) materialist thinker. This could be the grounds
for Moravanszky calling his stoffwechsel “metamorphism” rather than "metabolism”.
In spite of this, Moravanszky acknowledges the need to push tectonic discourse in the
Building Theory
151
Marxian direction given the current climatic and socio-economic conditions. This is
not say that Marx directly influenced Semper’s ideas. Rather, this emphasizes that
Semper not being a materialist seems extreme. I speculate that if the Marxist
dimension were to be extrapolated in contours of Marx’ metabolism and “metabolic
rift,” this could radically impede on the creative Will which is still present within
tectonic discourse. Not unlike Semper himself, who earlier in his career aimed at
deciphering the constitutive parts (essential even) of form which were not form
themselves (Hvattum 2004, pp.65). In a similar fashion, the quest is to explore the
constitutive parts (constructs) of the metabolism which are not metabolic themselves
(i.e., bio-mimicry, branching systems, tree or other natural motifs etc.).
Given its split ontological foundation of being both “idealist” and “materialist”,
Tectonics ultimately ends in a very ambiguous condition in which is a combination of
both concepts. Interstitially, tectonics thus reifies a kind a circular, self-causing
“animism” and inner vitality, i.e., a Will or Drive for creativity which a kind of a
priori which is by no means profound nor a guarantee for ecological and critical
understanding in and of itself. Although there are critical approaches to the challenges
of material flows, the ontological nature of Tectonics can both be heavily driven
towards building more (albeit in higher quality) along with more variety of material
constellations as an end in itself. It additionally can be seen as a “slowing” of building
activity and less opportunism towards a more critical slowing of material flows by
way of high quality and spatial meaning. Nevertheless, it is possible to claim that a
fundamental part of how tectonic discourse “views” or “construes” reality is that of
an ontological position of Parts and Wholes; several smaller parts which are
circumscribed by an edifice in which the parts and whole are in some sort of material
and immaterial balance.
Some disparate, yet relevant considerations
As architects have an “organic” or instinctual (read ideological) inclination to search
other disciplines for inspiration for the sake of form giving, Trubiano also reifies how
Semper’s stoffweschsel might be a kind of facilitator for “thinking through making”
(own italics) (Trubiano 2022, pp.311). This is in my view not necessarily a redemptive
and profound dimension, as it ultimately seems that something metaphysical (a
historical progress) is more important than the material manifestations. This cannot
and must not be the final horizon of architectural thinking because such an edifice has
thinking (theory) which is only used insofar as it guides our designing actions. This
further gives the implication that the common understanding that the architectural
discipline often conflates analysis and design into the same theory should be
reconsidered. It may seem merely rhetorical, but dialectically the theory differs, and
we may need to conceive of a slow (non-) making through (which is guided by)
critical-metabolic thinking.
Nygaard elaborates that theoretical components (chapter 1.3.) are not building
components as such but more abstract or general notions (Nygaard 2011, pp: 28).
152
However, Semper’s contribution is particularly interesting since his four core
elements are in a way both very specific (linked to a building element and technique
of making) and at the same time being ambiguous and abstract as to allow artistic,
“metabolic” transformations of motifs. One could say that Semper “grounds”
architectural theory in the material practices of the discipline, while also allowing
creative expenditures and the artistic will.
Jonas Holst, a contemporary philosopher, in his historical analysis of ancient Greek
tectonics elaborates how “original” tectonic approach had indeed a proto-metabolic
(though he calls it circular) understanding of how consumption of resources should be
considered in a “circular” manner with an understanding of the capacities of forests
(for construction wood) etc. (Holst 2019). Although this does not contain in any
explicit conceptualizations of metabolic thinking an inherent critical and materially
and immaterially appreciative approach which can be expanded into a pertinent
metabolic understanding towards potentially situating architecture in a trajectory of
slowing and narrowing of material flows within planetary capacities exist. With a kind
of proto-metabolic potential and critical approach, Holst indicates the necessity of to
nurturing cultural values (immaterial/meta-physical aspects) when we intend to
reconsider how we consume material and what kind of exchange these materials have
between society and nature. While Semper’s stoffwechsel (metabolism) builds on
Greek heritage, Holst here demonstrates that a kind “essential” look into the origins
of the tekton (builder) and the fact that earlier builders have had their own
understanding of how the building activity was related to the hinterlands.
Tectonic discourse and theorization is usually structured in the dualist way of being
material and immaterial, physical or meta-physical, or measurable or immeasurable.
It can be argued that how one conceives of the “material” aspects (i.e., stones/wood
which is to be transformed) is significantly linked with what “immaterial” notions are
brought forth (i.e. space, concept, beauty etc.). In this case, the ontological position of
what matter is influences what kind of reality materializes on account of the
ideological presuppositions, axiom, values, norms, and prejudicesas well as the need
for creative expression (Kunstwollen). What would happen if the material dimension
“below our feet” (the base or mound) were to be defined in the metabolic (MFA)
sense? What kind of immaterial values would follow as consequence of that and
would such a reconceptualization introduce a new/different kinds of creativity?
As indicated above, the notions of metabolism—while being a crucial concept which
hold significant potential for reaching or perusing a sustainable relationship between
society and nature—architecture’s conceptualizations of “metabolism” are
superficially stylistic (aesthetically emulating the metabolic properties) and therefore
limited but not irrelevant, requiring realignment for a more pertinent
conceptualization of the term within architectural theory and design given the current
challenges found in the hegemonic modus operandi of the building industry. As
Moravanszky elaborates, the crucial way to perhaps “realign” Tectonics would be in
by looking to the original “materialist” (critical) metabolic understanding developed
by Marx (Moravanszky 2018) as its contemporary and more elaborated iteration is
Building Theory
153
industrial ecology. To align tectonic thinking with a critical metabolic understanding,
Negative philosophical traditions stemming from Hegel and continuing through Marx
and following through contemporary critical theory where acts of designing and
building are to be radically Negated or withdrawn in terms of material consequences
onto nature as well as society is implicated.
4.4. Towards an (Im)Material Metabolism
This paragraph of chapter 4 builds an expanded metabolic theory and juxtaposes both
Semper’s stoffwechsel and industrial ecology. After having deconstructed the two
former theoretical frames into four main elements (of construct, relations, logic,
boundary), this chapter thus proceeds to utilize these building blocks to build a further
nuanced variant of tectonic theory which is fused with the cunning understanding of
material flows as seen in industrial ecology and with critical meta-physics.
It does so by mobilizing several methods. In reference to the methodology chapter
(chapter 3), the metaphor of metabolism is a fundamental one. The methods of
addition and adjustment (Kesstra et al 2016) introduce the notion of the “safe sink”,
and adjusting (ibdi) to implicate immaterial aspects which are relevant in an
architectural production context. The overall building and description of the theory is
likewise structured by the fourfold structure of constructs, relations, logics and
boundaries.
4.4.1. Preliminary – lessons from the two disciplines
Keeping in mind the agenda to translate metabolic thinking into architecture through
the juxtaposition of tectonics and industrial ecology, the challenge is to highlight the
parallels and how to transfer ideas and concepts.
A significant difference between the tectonic metabolism and the industrial ecology
metabolism is that of “interpretative plasticity.” Whereas tectonic theory from permits
itself to “transform” reinterpreting things loosely as “needed” for design thinking
purposes and expressive exploration, industrial metabolism limits their use of the
metaphor and is highly aware and persistent in mentioning and elaborating on the
limitations of the metabolism metaphor. One could here simply say that architects of
course permit themselves to interpret concepts and ideas somewhat loosely for the
sake of design application, but just as much as this promotes new ideas and creativity
it is at the same time a problem. Namely, this axiomatical accepts the design discourse
that permits this type of loose interpretations of what partially constitutes the
architectural ideological apparatuses. The “interpretative plasticity” is perhaps a key
axiom of architectural theory and practice which is not even questioned seemingly
due to its form giving potential. To what extent can we critically interpret metaphors?
Considering this is an important aspect as we have learned from industrial
154
metabolism. Instead of mobilizing different metaphors for every new design, we
should instead use one “good” metaphor and make it ever better: the metaphor of
metabolism.
The juxtaposition of tectonics and industrial ecology and the delineations of their four
theoretical elements (construct, relation, logic, boundary)) revealed the need for
architectural theory to radically rethink its old metaphysical constructions and
ideological assumptions which guide and steer both the making of (new) theories and
their applied physical manifestations. Perceiving materials in an “ideology-free” way
(as is done in industrial metabolism) made it evident that architecture was filled with
loose assumption which at times seemed dogmatic thus perpetuating what remains of
architectural thinking and production with the linear growth paradigm. So, before we
can do anything in the real World, we have to reshuffle our mental constructions.
Figure 66. Searching for the material-immaterial spectrum:
Interpreting parallels of the two metabolisms.
Furthermore, coupled with the “ideology free” approach to material creativity, it is
pertinent to reconsider how architecture could indeed be “...founded in material
condition” as industrial ecology allows for such trajectory. In between those two
extremes of the material conditions and immaterial “constructions” is the faculty of
architecture constituted.
So, what are we looking for in the spectrum of material and immaterial? It has to
conceptualize a spectrum of “hybrid” consideration, which constitute a hybrid
metabolism or a tectonic metabolism: an (im)material metabolism.
Building Theory
155
4.4.2. Metabolism Metaphor
The overall scope of this theory development endeavor is that of the overarching
method of metaphor as this a common way to bring together frames of thought which
do not seemingly belong together conventionally. In this case, we are dealing with the
metaphor metabolism. The aspect of the metaphor prompts other crucial
considerations regarding how to “appreciate” the fact the it is only a metaphor (and
not an actual metabolism of an organism as in biology) and followingly what the
metabolism-metaphor itself means—what its potentials are – in order to potentially
establish a way in which metaphors are to be taken seriously without being taken
literally in ways relevant for the challenges of material consumption.
How can we rethink how we use metaphors in architecture, and when we consider the
aspect of Negativity, what sort of perceptive should we attain with regard to
metabolism? In banal terms, a beautiful building which has lasted for centuries or
millennia is an example of an indefinite storage process. This hints at the term
“metabolism”, which is usually understood as something dynamic (and is usually
sublimated as such in architecture, i.e. bio-mimicry etc.), can also (and more
importantly) be a metabolism of stillness and inactivity, i.e., a negative metabolism,
so to speak. There is always wear and tear on building material and elements etc., and
the current state of the art in relation to practice places an emphasis on design for
disassembly which in a way introduces more and more materials and elements which
may amplify metabolic processes in the sense of maintaining and perpetuating
material flows.
This is not to say that we ought to return to some classical aesthetics and thereby some
outdated and pompous notions of permanence. However, the application and
interpretation of the metaphor of metabolism should perhaps be more cunning so that
we are able to mobilize any measure possible to minimize material flows. This should
not comewithout and at the cost of architectural quality but potentially through
architectural quality. As seen in biological metabolic studies, the size of an organism
indicates its metabolic rate; namely, a small organism (mouse) has a high metabolic
rate while a large one (elephant) has a lower metabolic rate. The larger the entity, the
lower the metabolic rate. If we conceptualize the city as an organism or eco-system (a
metabolism), it then,, as a very large spatial entity, has metabolically illogical
behavior where the anthroposphere moves more matter than the natural planetary
dynamics (Elhacham et al 2020). Regardless of the logical gymnastics and scientific
incomparability (mouse, elephant, city), there is practical potential in mobilizing such
a mental construction towards radically slowing material flows.
It becomes important to be wary of the dangers of hitherto known architectural
sublimation of the concept of metabolism. As we have already seen in the example,
the Japanese Metabolist movement (Koolhaas, Olbrist 2011), the idea of
“metabolism” fundamentally serves to animate more a material movement and acts as
an enabling concept or narrative to design buildings in the post war era of Japan. Other
156
examples are those bio-mimicry where complex constellations are proposed and
designed to look like trees or wings etc., while harboring the risk that such designs
could in fact increase carbon footprints with its intention to manifest an appearance
of a tree (building looking like a tree) based on a branching logic. Finally, one could
also mention the many even more literal applications of natural metaphors into
designs such as Simon Unwin’s writings on metaphors in which plan drawings and
facades appear as metaphors (Unwin 2019). As less recent contributions on metaphors
indicate, metaphor and analogy are not the same despite both being covered by
“metaphor” research (Gerber 2013, pp.21). The difference is that metaphor is a
“replacement” of the signified thing, while analogy uses comparison to highlight
similarities and differences. It is my understanding that architecture usually uses
mobilized metaphors, while industrial ecology uses a deconstructed analogy for the
sake of pragmatic application. Both variants are needed in this doctoral study, as the
metaphor “constructs” the object/Thing metaphysically, while the analogy is a
practical application.
To merely claim that we ought conceptualize the city as a metabolism can be very
broad and abstract, and the challenge is pinpoint concepts which can embody and
make particular the metabolic considerations while positioning itself in very practical
terms with that of empirical metabolic studies of material flows. As Hegel put it, the
spirit is a bone; however, in this case we have the “spirt” (of metabolism) and the
challenge is to make it concrete and not an abstract metaphor. The metabolism at hand
is a kind of “alloyed” metabolism, which further stretches the metaphor of metabolism
into also including material and immaterial aspects.
How then can we apply the metaphor practically in meaningful way? In the quest to
achieve this in practical terms, a key concept of industrial ecology in general and—
likewise of this doctoral study’s theory—building endeavor is the notion of the sink.
4.4.3. From Safe Sink to Urban Sink
While we are searching for constructs to represent the material-immaterial spectrum,
the conceptual frame has to be provided. What are the constructs constituents of?
While metabolism is the wider “abstract” frame, the “safe sink” is a way to materialize
metabolic thinking and make it “local” and concrete corporeally and within the
everyday function of building stock. While “safe sink” is more materially and
ontically constituted concept (as in metabolic studies of industrial ecology (Baccini,
Brunner 2012), the notion could be transformed to contain tectonic (partial,
experiential) considerations. On the basis of this, the notion of the Urban Sink is
formed to include immaterial aspects.
Building Theory
157
Figure 67. From safe sink to Urban Sink.
Let that Sink in
The central idea of the new metabolism is that of the “safe sink” in an architecturally
articulated and transformed nature. A sink in chemical engineering is a concept which
can absorb particular materials or elements. If it can do so safely, it is called and
conceptualized as a “safe sink.” The quest is thus to consider the city as a “safe sink”,
i.e., a kind of “beautiful landfill”, which safely archives/holds building materials,
preventing them from becoming waste. In doing so, it therefore potentially limits the
danger for the environment and thus ourselves qua its tectonic (material and
immaterial) characteristics. If we perceive the city as the accumulated material—what
is often in technical terms called the building stock—then we can already observe that
some parts of the build stock sink act and perform better as “safe sinks” for material
while others merely act as sink or intermediate/temporary sinks which will later have
those stored material become waste. In a very broad elaboration, we can currently
conceptualize that old classical buildings are mostly well persevered and kept in place,
while we have seen many instances of modern buildings (post WWII) and
contemporary buildings getting demolished. This indicates that the sound
performance of a piece of architecture as a “safe sink” depends on several aspects
which can be categorized into a spectrum of material and immaterial considerations.
Surely a building gets to stand if it is solid and sturdy, but what also has a building
stand the test of time is that its design provides meaningful material and immaterial
qualities. When a building or any piece of design by the virtue of its architectural
quality and meaningful being within society slows and narrows material flows from
nature to society, we can start calling it an Urban Sink. But what kind of a sink is an
Urban Sink to be?
As mentioned above, a sink (chemical engineering) is an entity which can
continuously absorb materials and elements. However, as we have seen with actual
examples of landfills, spatial perimeters become a boundary and landfills fill out their
capacities. The challenge is to conceive of the city (Urban sink) as a sink for materials
which, while for now and for some time may still require new material input, would
require (even if it is a physical impossibility) to strive for a "detached” Sink which
158
does not require new material input, at least very minimally compared to today. The
city goes from a Thing-In-Itself to a Thing-For-Itself, i.e., a self-causing entity. The
very first strategy of circular material consumption and metabolic design approach is
the prevention of waste generation followed by strategies of reuse and re-circulations
etc. (Miljøministeriet 2021, pp: 25). Practically, such a city (For-Itself) would slow
down its metabolic rates by either utilizing buildings without demolitions and both
maintaining and repairing circulation of elements in strategic ways.
As has already been implied, the building stock is very heterogeneous and certainly
performs very differently in many regards. Nonetheless, in relation to performing as
a “safe sink”, and thus an Urban Sink, certain architectural (material and immaterial)
conditions are important to consider as well as what relations they enact. Even when
a building is acting as a part of the safe sink—given the heterogenous nature of
building designs—there may be different parameters in differing constellations which
enact this performance. There is therefore need of a systematic way of observing,
explaining, and experimenting with the Urban Sink which requires an ability for
“inner” distinguishing of locate sets of relations of architectural constellations.
Given the fact that sinks, or rather safe sinks, are crucial to metabolic thinking, it was
not possible to simply say that one of Semper’s elements equals the safe sink notion.
Rather it was clear that the safe sink notion is a more central, yet encompassing,
concept to the theory and thus needed to be “deconstructed” into separate working
constructs. The challenge is thus to determine how to construe the safe sink notion as
composed of architecture elements which has an architectural work perform as a safe
sink (safe storage) for materials.
4.4.4. Constructs
Given that we know that we have to construct a material-immaterial spectrum, there
is a need to make specific “points” within the spectrum in order to differentiate it and
not leave it entirely vague.
There are a few steps in the initial proposal of the constructs. While this also was an
intense iterative process, this section will describe the founding logics of how
concepts and aspects were introduced (added) from a discipline, and what methods
are used to expand upon these.
As earlier stated, the need is to construct a material-immaterial spectrum whose
constructs are not “open-ended” which, so to speak, questions themselves or hold
themselves accountable. The need for this has be present at both the material aspect
and the immaterial aspects levels. The construct must be general and not
“professionally pragmatic” yet at the same time applicable to the point of becoming
specific when dealing with chosen analytic or design situations.
The first key step of building the spectrum is the impetus in chemical engineering
Building Theory
159
literature and metabolic studies (industrial ecology) and drawing forth the initial three
aspects (). Firstly, the notion of the sink or safe sink (and its translation into an
architectural application). This would the encompassing aspect of the two others:
those being the stock (the body or material) and the function (process). Function could
itself be explained as hybrid-object, fusing material and immaterial conditions along
with mere utility (process and stock in industrial ecology terminology). As we are
dealing with the built environment, literature broadly conceptualizes functions
(Oswald, Baccini 2003; Baccini, Brunner 2012; Brunner, Rechberger 2017) and
emphasizes the need of flexibility and use-intensity (IRP 2020, pp. 90-94), which
through the very premises of architecture allows for a “metabolic” approach by
minimizing need for virgin material input through optimized use. At the lower end of
the spectrum, there is need to consider the “sink” in relation to a larger scheme of
material boundaries (or capacities and /or consequences), otherwise the sink-concept
would have no substance.
Figure 68. "Inserting" the key initial constructs
from industrial metabolism.
Further aspects are added and overlayed (Figure 68) with and onto the hitherto added
elements (Figure 69). The lower (material) levels are paired and connected to the
constituents of the tectonic metabolism. While its elements are usually (but not
always) applied matter-based in conventional architectural elements
(mound/stereotomy, wall/textile, hearth/ceramics, roof/carpentry), there is need to
“borrow” elements from the “logics” (Figure 69) to introduce the immaterial
dimension to the spectrum. At the lower levels, elements such as roof, wall, and
mound would be contained within the category of the stock (in the material sense).
The function of hearth would occur in the “middle” and act as a kind of joint between
the material and immaterial in its fused, alloyed nature as use or function.
160
Figure 69. Further adding and connecting the tectonic “metabolic” components.
Going beyond functionality is an experiential dimension of “knitting” and “veiling”
concerned with manifestation of interiority which generally deals with
phenomenological properties and qualities of a thing at hand. Finally, extracted from
the tectonic metabolism, the meta-physical aspect of narrative and storytelling is at
play. As discussed in section 4.3.4., while all other aspects are present and are
conditions for design, the dimension of “telling the story”oof its own creation is
foundational and constitutes the whole edifice.
Starting from the bottom, the mound is a kind of material foundation (material limits
or planetary limits ultimately) and when juxtaposed with industrial ecology, this
dimension becomes a kind of ontic material precondition on which both design
decision hinge. This precondition reveals the material consequences of our material
choices and accompanying consumption.
Figure 70. Towards a new set for construct through a transformed hybrid metabolism.
Building Theory
161
Until now, the five-point metabolism has been constructed through an exercise of
adding, adjusting, and connecting elements, but this is not their final form as this is
the frame with which the constructs can be further solidified and legitimized with
reference.
Objectifying the Constructs
Considered altogether, each of the five constructs are fundamentally a Thing, i.e., all
contain both a material and immaterial dimension.
Figure 71. Each Construct is its own Thing according to Harman’s quadruple structure
(Harman 2011)
The reason for this is, again in a similar strain as Semper, not to make each of the
constructs overly dependent on one type of empirical manifestations (e.g., “narrative”
equals architect’s intention) of each of the five constructs but to demand that the single
researcher/architect (in the application of the five construct) critically considers how
the five constructs make themselves apparent in any particular situation regardless of
if one is dealing with a furniture design or a whole city. Following a Harmanian line
of thought, each are a Thing (an Object) because they cannot in their fullest reality be
mapped, explained, and made empirical, i.e., there are always hidden facets that elude
and effects which actualize later due to changing circumstances etc. As Žižek would
claim, such effects are inaccessible not only because of human epistemological
finitude (failure to understanding inherent complexity fully) but because they are in
and of themselves open, or incomplete. Unlike the theoretical division of these
constructs, these compounds are never stand-alone in any specific empirical situation.
Instead, they always have implications for each other to lesser or greater degree. An
example of this would be proposing a structural system cannot help but have
162
consequences for “use” and “experience” etc.
Figure 72. As if a chemistry-like periodic table of
founding compounds of architecture.
The next sections will explore, expand and describe five main constructs of the theory:
being narrative (surplus-value, object a), experiential condition,
performance/application (use), material and structural systems, and ontic conditions.
Each will be explained in the above-mentioned chronology. These constructs have an
impetus in Harman quadruple structure (Harman 2011) and have already been
attempted as an architectural application in a tentative and speculative paper (Usto
2020). Through the earlier mappings and critical analysis of the two types of
metabolisms, five constructs are proposed as constitutive of architectural thinking.
Being aware of both Harman’s and Žižek’s emphasis on material and immaterial
intricacies and how immaterial objects can assert material effects, awareness of how
such entities could be constitute of a new edifice was pertinent. In the following
expanding of the construct, i.e., the explorative elaborations will done “in reverse”
and start from the material conditions and “upwards”.
Construct: The Ontics – material flows and system boundary
The “bottom” dimension is the material foundation which is important in the situating
of architectural design and built environment within material conditions of material
flows (which ultimately amount to planetary boundary and tendencies of material
flows on a global scale). With reference to Harman, this is the Real object and qualities
in material terms. Industrial ecology has made significant contributions in rendering
knowable some of the opaque effects human activity has had on the environment.
Although things may differ in the future, a very good snapshot into the current
tendencies are provided by Haas et al (2020), where we can learn the current material
flows and their increasing tendencies – headed towards a doubling of total building
stock material by the year 2050. Thus, whenever we now on propose new design
techniques, technologies, and solutions (narratives even), it is of crucial importance
Building Theory
163
to see whether their application correspond with the actual material consequences.
In accordance with Harman’s ontological view, Things contain a temporal and spatial
spectrum of possibilities, affordances, and effects. So too does the Ontic dimension
of the (im)material metabolism. It contains a span from more close-at-hand material
properties to the large scale material flows and behavior. The dimensions of the
immediate ontic material can be material properties, material density, as well as
physical and chemical properties which can act or react in relation to use and weather.
These more immediate material conditions are what directly influence how a design
takes form, what materials are chosen and for what functional and experiential (tactile)
purposes they serve. In extension, other aspects should be considered as well in the
immediate macro and micro scale ontic effects and properties which we can/should
observe and include. This could be anything from capacities to insulate, storage heat,
amounts of consumed energy etc., all of whichcan be relevant towards gaining insight
into how the other four constructs could have had a material (ontic) effect or
consequence.
On a large scale scope, the ontic dimension constitutes the material conditions as a
wide understanding of planetary boundaries and finitude which necessitate a shift
away from the hegemonic linear growth paradigm in the building industry. As such,
the ontic dimension at its largest scope should be understood in a chemical
engineering sense where planetary boundaries, bio-regional conceptualization are
manifested through the ”safe sink” concept in accordance to metabolic frameworks
(Oswald, Baccini 2003; Baccini, Brunner 2012; Brunner, Rechberger 2017 )
While the notion of “context” has its conventional understanding in architectural
discipline, in chemical engineering, the material (pre)conditions are to be understood
as kind of extended context with the more immediate contextual conditions such as
sun, weather, topography (with its inherent materiality etc.) are certainly also present,
the extended context is that the material (pre)conditions of any work. As industrial
ecology has it, a system boundary is also its own construct while spatially being very
encompassing. In the challenge to include the system boundary, the fifth (bottom)
construct is that of the ontic conditions which becomes a category which can be
observed and made empirical in any case (whether design or analysis) and since a
system boundary as a “whole” circumscribes the observable constructs, it can
therefore be very difficult to fully account for. For this reason, the fifth construct (of
the ontic conditions) becomes a stand-in which is indicative (stand-in) for the material
aspects of the system boundary. In relation to the phenomenon of Jevon’s paradox,
we are in this construct not interested per se in the narrative or intentions of the
architects but the material consequences and effects. Cause and effect may not always
correspond from a seemingly rationalist perspective. In some profound sense, all there
is is context. In other words, everything is “out there” in the context—whether
material, climate, nature, or ourselves—and we are building with and in (with-in)
context.
Construct: Structuring Principles - material and structural systems
This construct is related to the performative anatomy of a piece of design. This
anatomy of any design is the founding frame or formal principles for the function and
164
material, utilitarian and /or immaterial performance permitted and afforded further up
the ontological ladder. With refence to Harman, this would also be a real (material)
object. While the immediacy of this category would imply the structural systems and
the appropriate material considerations, the aspect of “principles” implies several
other aspects as well. It can fundamentally also imply principal consideration
regarding room and function composition, distances, modules, size, typology in
relation to sun and thermodynamic of the indoor climate.
Figure 73. Structural systems as structuring principles.
There are many examples of architecture being conceptually driven by structural
principles (i.e., the work of Santiago Calatrava, Cecil Balmond among others):
however, it is equally possible to allow other “organs” of anatomical taxonomy to
provide both material utility as well as experiential affordances. Conventionally, one
could use the design and placing of HVAC systems and its accompanying pipes in
ways in which they amplify the interior space (). A more radical version of such
thinking would be that of Phillipe Rahm, who envisioned spatial conditions on
account of thermal and atmospheric conditions conceptualized as “interior weather”
(Clement, Rahm 2007).
Building Theory
165
Figure 74. HVAC as a structuring principle; while the HVAC system provides a utilitarian
performance of indoor atmosphere in the literal sense (air quality, temperature etc.,) -
it likewise provides prime opportunity to manifest the interiority and its immaterial
atmosphere.
While there are many examples of one particular principle or system being privileged
for exploration and experimentation etc., conventionally there is a multiplicity of
principles and systems which play parts within architecture as a whole. Just as the
formal composition of the structural (or other) system serves an immediate structuring
function, its intricate composition and supplementary conditions (i.e., technical
solutions for flexibility etc.) can afford further possibilities for the current and future
use. These strategic principles require considerations, regarding the overall structural
principles, indoor climatic consideration in relation to HVAC systems or etc., or
supplementary flexible modules for space making.
Supplementary to the above considerations, as much as such structuring principles
have their material equivalents, they are very often also paired with an “immaterial”
aspect of technique, labor
12
as well as legislative dimension of laws, norms, codes
which have to be upheld.
Construct: Use and functionality – Application and performance
Conceptualizing the city as an organism or metabolism requires its adaptability and
malleability by its context and users. As this is the case, the function of such a
metabolic entity is crucial to consider. Not a function but function as such needs to be
essentially generalized. With reference to Harman, function would be both a Real
object with Sensual qualities. The fascination with function and performance in
architecture has a long tradition. Even so, at the same time, the aspect of performance
or function has had difficulty being properly conceptualized. While it can be argued
12
Labor is usually conceptualized a “immaterial” commodity.
166
that functionalism certainly applies itself to solve architectural scheme for the purpose
of well-functioning unity between users and the everyday use of buildings (Nygaard
2011). The opposite can also be claimed as functionalist having equally been
fascinated by a “functional aesthetic” in order to emit the appearance of high
performativity. In all actuality the users of such spaces fail to use the building as the
architect intended because the form of the building seems to be counterproductive to
its supposed performance (Harman 2022, pp.23). As Nygaard highlights, function is
usually linked with form (Nygaard 2011). The question is how we can reconceive of
(dynamic/ambiguous) form so that it allows for multi-function. This does not mean
that the use-construct is a theoretically general one which, when applied in design and
analysis situations, gains a particular use (a particular usage and thus function). Rather
“use” should also be considered as ambiguous as such in its own right.
Usefulness goes both “down” and “up”. This Means that the everyday use of a house
which has phenomenological quality and performs as a immaterial function, apart
from “mere utility” of sleeping, sitting, reading, cleaning, maintaining etc., is also
grounding the material and structuring principles. A “good” house functions well as a
house if it also makes you feel at home and spiritually grounds you, apart from
providing mere utility of sleeping sheltered from the outdoors.
Figure 75. Use in the middle; a hybrid of both material performance,
everyday utility, and fleeing of home.
Likewise, usefulness also points downward, as some architectural constellations
afford different possibilities and/or flexibilities (dismount elements, easy
maintenance, easy repair etc.) which are linked to systematic principles of the design.
For these reasons, the different kinds of use can be conceptualized as affordances
(Gibson 2015) which linger across their own border into the realm of both the
phenomenal and the realm of the structural and material. Any material, element, or
design thus provides an immediate useful application along with its properties in
material, form, and treatment allowing for material and immaterial affordances
Building Theory
167
relevant to architectural production. The phenomenological feeling of home and
grounded-ness can be strengthened by material and technical affordance, as they
could, for example, allow for easy introduction of an extra room or for new additions
to the family etc. If we, on the other hand, are dealing with an urban space or urban
area, the function would be its capacities to gather people, provide good sense of place
and belonging through recreative niceties along with the outdoors space’s ability to
be flexible while also gathering rain water to prevent flooding etc..
Regardless of what we are designing or analyzing (whether a house or a masterplan),
there four important categories of “function” which according to chemical
engineering literature are important to consider: dwelling (residing and working),
moving (transportation), eating (food management, production etc.), and cleaning
(sanitation systems) (Baccini, Brunner 2012; Oswald, Baccini 2003). Sometimes
architects simply accept a program (a function) and attempt to provide a building to
contain those needs. What is equally important here is to be creative and innovative
with these four categories in order to propose new ways of living (or the possibility
thereof), share systems and facilities, produce food in inner city areas, and create more
better interconnected infrastructure which is inhabitable and recreative etc., while
considering what kinds of new design could allow for new relations in the city.
Use and functionality does not only contain the current use and function. Rather, it
contains the hidden dimensions of potentiality as developed in object-orient ontology.
This can also be understood as affordance of elements, materials, forms, solutions
which permit change over time, emergence of different or new (intended, or
unintended) properties and effects that relate to people’s needs, and the needs of
living or non-living entities. While this potentiality can seem abstract and general, a
way to work with it more particularly in the context of architecture (as plans) would
be in line with the open building tool of so-called “capacity analysis” (Kendall 2003)
which is a kind of diagrammatic mapping of many different use-potentials of a plan
design etc., though this tool could be further systematized and expanded (Franke
2022). Ideally, such capacity or potentiality of a given (open) design could also be
considered more than merely on the level of plan design, and could consider
affordance relation between both spatial function, technical services, disassembly
details in relation to both utility as well as experientiality.
168
Figure 76. Diagram of generalized aspects of “use”.
Another important addition to the category of performance and function is that the
architecture performs as a “safe sink.” This hints at a technical and material dimension
but can only do so by containing both material and immaterial considerations. Having
the building perform as a “safe sink” is a kind of zero-level function, a universal
function which potentially contain all aspects of a built work (material as well as
immaterial) thus acting (functioning) as a Urban Sink. What then does Urban Sink
entail? There can be different manifestations of the Urban Sink. Different sorts of
designs at any scale can function to minimize material consumption. While it is
possible for such designs to be both fixed and open/flexible, the open/flexible
solutions are preferable to the fixed building body (more on this in chapter 5,
especially paragraph 5.3). For these reasons, function has to coincide with its
“opposite”, a kind of “sublime uselessness”. This sublime uselessness is of course not
useless but demonstrates a kind of functional ambiguity (where the form is not overly
specific to particular commissioned function) which allows an entity to perform in
various ways over time without needing material (ex)changes.
Construct: Experiential Conditions
When we are veiled in phenomena, such veils prompt both feelings and stories in
one’s mind. This construct is what Harman would call a Sensual quality.The
experiential conditions are founded on the characteristics of the material, structuring
and functional conditions, but also extend to constituting of the narrative. While
overall narratives of a piece of architecture do not always logically come in extension
of the phenomenological traits (of the building, materials, spaces, the harboring
experiential qualities (or lack thereof) can have an immense impact on the users and
Building Theory
169
thus the overall societal narrative. A building or any spatial configuration in any
context can provoke phenomenological experiences. Adam Schaar, in relation to the
relevance of Martin Heidegger’s phenomenology to architecture, elaborates how
immediate phenomenological experience helps people make sense of their
surroundings through an emotional response to them (Schaar 2007). Heidegger
elaborates that one can occupy a building but not necessarily feel at home in them.
Thus, regardless of the actual function of a building, (house, office etc.) this homeness
and a sense of belonging is an important factor. It is of importance to also mention
Husserl’s phenomenology, as it has pertinent emphasis on bodily immediacy in how
dwellers of a house engage with it (Harman 2022). A fictive example could be when
an inhabitant enters the house by gently caressing the door handle which is framed by
the embrace by curved brick wall. Phenomenological experiences are unique and
cannot be retold in ways which fully cover the experience. It is important to note that
sometimes a story can itself provide its own surplus. The experiential conditions
implicate the senses and immediate haptic ways of relating with the world. Following
Harman’s logic from his quadruple object elaborations (Harman 2011), a phenomenon
like tactility, which is usually pondered upon in tectonic discourse, can thus be
explained as the combination of experience which hinges on material conditions.
Such phenomenological conditions surely lay the ground for what kind of stories one
can tell with the resulting narratives not necessarily being directly linked with that of
the phenomenological experience. While phenomenological conditions can influence
how one tells stories of the experience, it is at the same time influenced by the
dwelling conditions and function of a building along with material choice and formal
as well as structural applications of those materials.
While one could remain at the level of senses, this category could also contain
questions of mental well-being, and the general feeling of being in space or place.
When it comes to the didactic telling of the making of an architecture (as known in
tectonic discourse), just as well as the final product can “appear” to merely tell the
humble story of itself, it can likewise make itself appear more complex and esoteric
with all its visible details to a lay person or even some architects. It is uncommon that
phenomenological experience and its narrative are thought apart, but they should be
given that crucial gaps arise between them, for better or worse. It is as if the narrative
and the experience do not always overlap perfectly, mystery and (perhaps as Semper
would have had it) mystique emerges from all the seemingly modest details. At the
same time, it is equally possible that a strong story can cheat your senses from
“actually” seeing the architecture as it is (e.g., a poorly made design, interior etc.)
which is narrated and legitimized through some unhinged esoteric story.
For these reasons, the experiential dimension can be considered thoroughly
ambiguous. Specifically, it can both be “in line” with the overall narrative of a design
and even be “in line” with the function and everyday use of the emitting of central and
intimate feelings of homely interiority. But from the lesson of Heidegger, whose
phenomenology is concerned with the stepping outside of mere appearance (Zizek
2012, pp. 892,) into a kind of unattainable (noumena) dimension behind the
appearance of things. In the same strain, any spatial arrangement can induce a kind of
uncanny fleeing of the un-homely, an uneasy felling which disturbs the feeling of
170
homely interiority. This unknown dimension can indeed be an accidental property
even despite the best efforts of an architect to manifest a positive experience of home.
Construct: Narrative - or Surplus-value
Whether we invent stories or retell them, storytelling is a common occurrence in
architecture. With reference to Harman, Narrative is a Sensual object, or as Žižek
would call it objet a. Without focusing on a singular specific story, the general
tendency of the mechanism of storytelling as such is of interest. In the architectural
profession it is rather commonplace to tell stories as well as to highlight the profundity
and potential for form-making and design through storytelling. It is also equally
important to expand upon the risks imbued with storytelling. Narrative can be seen as
a very immediate approach to architectural design as a narrative mechanism can help
to steer or structure or even help evolve ideas and concepts in the mind before the first
sketch is even made. The role of the narrative does not stop there as narrative can
drive the overall design phases and iterations to the final detail. There are many
examples of how narratives are a driving force in architectural production and
creativity. Narrative can be tied to a single building or a whole scheme of architectural
paradigms and tendencies (Coates 2012). Furthermore, in situations of analysis or
mere experiences of a space, it can instill stories in the mind.
Semper’s own theory is heavily structured by storytelling. While he does not explicate
“narrative” directly as a constitutive element (e.g., roof, wall, mound, hearth, story)
of his theory, it is indeed by the force of narrative that the physical manifestation takes
specific shape. This is exemplified by his self-referential metabolic mechanism of
material elements which undergoes transformations only to end up telling this very
same story of its own transformations and process of becoming. The final product is
thus a physical manifestation of a process which thoroughly “angled” onto itself by
the need to narrativize the final product. Narrative thus becomes constitutive of the
final form. It all starts from an idea, as Semper would have put it. The Idea initiates
the transformations processes. But as will see, an architecture is initiated on different
levels meaning that it starts with an Idea of an idea. As the case study paper will
exemplify (chapter 5), different pieces of architecture are conceived from an idea
which occurs on different level with some prioritizing experiential aspects while other
technical innovations. Thus, in extension of Semper’s writings, within the tectonic
discourse there is a doubling of narratives, i.e., one at a level of content of the theory
and the other on a formal level. The story of the idea that the final design makes occurs
at the content level. The other narrative is more fundamental to the whole edifice
where “narrative” as such constitutes the ontological being of the design which then
necessitates its own narrative that tectonic design is in such a way self-referential and
does not tell a separate story. This second type of narrative is what taps into the self-
perpetuating loops of (linear) growth paradigm of cultural continuity. Similar to what
is discussed in chapter 1.2, conceptually there is fascination with self-perpetuating
loops which maintain production within the linear growth paradigm and thus manifest
different types of Jevon’s paradoxes or other ways of maintaining or amplifying
material consumption. While architectural production is surely within finite material
Building Theory
171
conditions, it is as if narrative is a “immortal” dimension which aims at impossibilities
with grand story arcs, canons and physically impossible circularities. It wills into
existence even that which has no legitimacy in all its ambiguity, for better or worse.
For these reasons we have to make ourselves aware of the narrative-mechanism and
thus critically think of its role. To do so, Slavoj Žižek elaborates in relation to the
notion of objet a (Žižek 2012; Žižek 2014) (see also chapter 3.4.2.). Narrative helps
constitute imaginations and fantasies in everyday life. These narratives help in
constituting a sense of reality in one’s complex and confusing everyday
phenomenological experience. Hinging on a story provides meaningful coordinates in
this confusion. For this reason, reality is ontologically impenetrable and is contingent
and withdrawn from us. What thus also becomes relevant to consider is the possibility
that the narrative and physical manifestation do not go hand in hand. This Mean
something is said or intended but the manifested reality is materialized/constituted
differently. This can span from anything from an aesthetic intention of an architect
being perceived and experienced differently, to intended sustainability actually being
green-washing, or to larger societal failures of initially intended modern living
conditions becoming ghettos with bad reputations. The narrative mechanism holds the
capacity to speak things unto existence, so to speak, while introducing a gap or
discrepancy between what is said/intended and what is manifested materially.
Narratives can at times become instrumental in legitimizing any material conditions
or mode of production, and regardless of the antinomic and contradictory and partial
stories, any edifice can be explained or legitimized (despite its actual legitimacy or
necessity).
Let’s consider a simple thought exercise to exemplify how narrative can distort reality.
Imagine a “pristine” natural landscape, and a building that is to be built there which
is conceptually narrativized as a house which is embedded in nature. By embedding
architecturally, and thus spreading the program out on top the landscape, you embrace
nature more but get a higher carbon footprint and more literally destroy the landscape
and its soil etc. when compared to if you made a compact volume (or didn’t build at
all). In such a case, the narrative of being “one with nature” or “embracing” nature is
almost exactly the opposite, but you “feel” One with nature.
One must initially wonder why constitute narrative at all as key principles or
constructs of the metabolism. There are several aspects to unpack (which will be
addressed in this section), but the fundamental ones are that of an ontological
discrepancy between cause and effect: epistemology and reality. In relation to Jevon’s
paradox and green washing (chapter 1.2.3.), the capacity of architectural storytelling
is thoroughly problematic and ambiguous in the dimension of design, as a compelling
story can be atheistically poetic but equally opportunistic (knowingly or
unknowingly) ill-intended. Storytelling, whether it be architects’ intentions or grand
ideas for sustainability and servitude/connection with nature, there is no guarantee
that such intentions manifest and may indeed materialize as the opposite
(unsustainable and polluting more etc.). Narrative, for the above reasons, is not
essentially a good and profound poetic dimension, but thoroughly ambiguous which
can always “distort” (our perception) of the actual reality at hand for better or worse
and our according engagement with it.
172
On the other side of the coin of the “narrative” is that which I have to very un-
creatively call non-narrative or bliss. It should be conceptualized as a kind of failure
of the very mechanism of narrativizing things or phenomena. This can occur both
when architects explain their works. Often very artistically driven works are by the
architects somehow confusingly explained, and you still do not understand anything.
There is something there, but it is perhaps impossible to put into words
comprehensively. Likewise, this bliss can also be experienced when you find yourself
in a space. Usually, there is a kind of pressure-for-narrative whenever you look at or
experience architecture, but every now and then you find yourself in a space where
your narrative mechanism either fails or refuses to narrativize, and you simply are
immediately within a breathtakingly beautiful space.
4.4.5. Relations
There are two main relationship types in the (im)material metabolism. One is more
immediate regarding the particular constructs’ relation to each other – both generally
and in specific situations of design and analysis at different spatial scales. The other
is the large-scale relationship between human activity (society, or the anthroposphere)
and natural environs which can be generally described as the relation between the
Urban Sink and the hinterlands.
Society/Nature, nevertheless…
The Hinterlands are in this case a comprised entity which contains the all the bio-
regional considerations up to even larger constellations. As we have seen (chapter 3),
dealing with planetary boundaries can be very difficult to implement. So too is the
approach through regions and bio-regions (Baccini. Brunner 2012) because defining
a region can be difficult as a geographical, social and political task. Literature on
planetary boundaries and state-of-the-art papers argue that there is vagueness in
translating the general theory into concrete action on an everyday level.
Building Theory
173
Figure 77. Metabolism; Urban Sink in relation to planetary boundaries.
The general attitude of this theory is that of the need to break with the conventional
linear growth-oriented paradigm, through “degrowth”, i.e., through slowing and
narrowing of material flows. As such, the general relation between the Urban Sink
(city, building stock etc.) and the hinterlands (nature) is that of the activity of
“construction”. This implies that the city ought to withdraw from the current
perpetuation and amplification of material consumption qua both material and
immaterial strategies. In a similar fashion, and as seen in industrial ecology, this
theory also fundamentally conceives of a dualist dichotomy of society and nature, and
thus building stock (the city) and the hinterlands (the outside area from where material
recourses are excavated and brought into society) as material flows are perceived in
this relations. Obviously, the condition of reality is impenetrable and not fully
compressible by human cognitions, and reality is thus a complex interconnected entity
with humans, cities, and society as mere parts of a large system. Since the observed
material flows are flowing mainly in one direction and this tendency is one which
perpetuates negative effects on natural environs, it is of great importance and practical
utility to maintain this distinction of society-nature. Planetary boundaries/capacity
are indeed “out there” by are hard to grasp but to affect or leave them be “out there”
something needs to be done “here” (in our everyday life and behavior).
Interconnectivity of Constructs
What particular relation could be present for a sound performance of the Urban Sink?
How do they manifest? There are already indications of relationship between the five
constructs in the above descriptions of them (4.4.4.). The five constructs constitute a
spectrum in which they overlap with each other while having influence and
consequences for each other.
174
The (im)material metabolism is modestly unique in relation to the general tendencies
of “constructs” in theories (chapter 1.3.2.) in that the sub-constructs are shared
between the main constructs (Figure 78). However, the constructs and sub-constructs
can be at odds with each other. An example could be that an architect’s intention
clashed with social narrative, or the experience of house. Or one could experience an
architecture as bland and characterless, but an architect’s clever concept-narrative
makes you “experience” the building in a positive light. The spectrum that the five
constructs form is not necessarily a linear one. The five constructs also relate across
the “apparent” linear hierarchy and can demonstrate different hierarchies and design
constructs which can act as driving mechanisms in different cases. The elements also
seep out into the system boundary. The lowest construct of the ontic material
conditions seeps into the system boundary as dynamics within society and has
immense material consequence for both itself and the hinterlands. Narrative is an
“open” category as well but not in the same way. It too can seep into society, or
narratives from nature (sometimes as metaphor) can enter into architecture. It is
important to note that narrative has a more immediate effect in facilitating
transformative dynamics which in the end have material consequences for both itself
and nature.
Building Theory
175
Figure 78. Key constructs and the first set of sub-constructs which constitute relations.
176
Figure 79. Key constructs and first set of relations
depicted in “circular” interrelations fashion – pointing towards other sub-constituents.
More appropriately, the five constructs are suspended in a very complex set of
relations and for pedagogical and communicative reasons, this very complex set of
relations need to be theoretically simplified. However, their complexity can remain
when having to map empirical data points and properties in order to explain or design
certain relations and things. One could here say that at the very core, Ring 0 (Figure
80) of the pentagon has the “quantum” space of uncanny, undiscernible currents, sub-
conscious ideas, drives, fantasies, myths, ideologies, and drives (which we are yet to
tame or “secularize”) while at the outer layer are the many empirical (tangible)
objects, effects and relations (observable phenomena and data) and ultimately the
planetary periphery of limitations and finitude.
Building Theory
177
Figure 80. Three (plus zero) rings of the metabolism.
The first set (Ring 1) is the five main constructs of the theory, and the following set
(Ring 2) is the set of sub-constructs which constitute relations across the main set of
constructs. The outer layer (Ring 3) is the one which itself acts as a spectrum of
different yet vastly complex empirical conditions. The last ring is thus the dimension
in which a multiplicity of disciplines become relevant to consider as any action in
architecture hold consequences not only for itself, material consumption etc., but also
regarding whether knowingly or unknowingly has influence for other fields and
disciplines.
Figure 81. “Narrative” is the representative of the “mythical” core, and “Material flows” is
the representative of the materials (pre)conditions and planetary boundaries.
The structure of the constructs is intended to contain a self-reflective introspection in
which potentially all constructs are prone to scrutinization. The purpose of the
“Material Flows” construct is ultimately to question whether or not the intentions and
spoken agenda of sustainability etc., actually corresponds with the actual materialized
effects. Similar to how “material flows” construct is a stand-in for the ontic material
conditions which allows certain kinds of practices and modes of production, the
178
“Narrative” is the stand-in for the inner sublime hysteria of architectural creativity,
i.e., the many myths and ideological constructs of capital-a architecture. This
construct in particular should be mobilized to deconstruct all the other constructs as
well due to the fact that any story/narrative can be told of any of them. These two
constructs become of particular importance as they permeate the whole discourse in
wanted and unwanted ways. Regardless of what we say and followingly do, these
constructs will have both short- and long-term material consequences. It thus becomes
discernable how the axiomatic mental constructions and stories (used for
legitimization and argumentation) can manifest physical effects onto reality (as
elaborated in chapter 1.2.3.). Knowing the need for a material foundation for
architectural production, it is equally crucial to critically questions the (sometimes
blind) ideological mechanisms of architectural production (even when they are
supposedly capital-a architecture, i.e., the so-called real thing). This would exemplify
the need to break out of the ideological texture that has architectural production
remaining within conventional growth paradigms under whatever agendas it finds
itself (green, sustainable or circular and whatever else will be conceptualized in the
future). We can easily imagine a scenario where architects use “blind mechanisms”
as an argument to build/design their ideas through the argument of calling it a “true”
or “honest” design. Things can naturally get even more complex when grand
narratives of subversion and transgression of hegemonic norms can be mobilized with
seemingly good purpose. Through a critical reproach, one should always tarry at these
blind mechanisms because even the most sympathetic subversive discourse can show
itself to be fully fit or aid the established hegemony within the usual linear growth
paradigm
13
, not in spite but because of the supposed subversive storytelling of the
endeavor. Such “flattened” subversions can maintain or simply displace negative
impacts elsewhere and generally contribute to the usual material consumption –
whether such subversion be small-scale, self-builder off-grid communities, or intricate
CE (DfD etc.) design strategies. From a metabolic perspective, we have to remain
critical even of seemingly “critical” edifices and practices.
13
It could relevant here to consider the work of Tina Veteran Olsen who has done substantial
research on informal communities.
Building Theory
179
Figure 82. A particular manifestation of a chosen construct can act as design driver.
Projects and design can have different driving parameters, which then can have great
consequences for the other constructs. In an analytic application, it important to
observe how a built work performs in all the separate constructs, in relation to or apart
from its narrative or intention. In general terms, the five constructs thus form more of
an interlocking logic of the relations, but different cases or design process will
prioritize different elements as driving for the overall design and its narrative. At the
same time, in a general sense, the constructs can overlap into each other and can
constitute relation both directly (when construct are considered in an integrated way)
or indirectly (when other construct merely has indirect consequences for another one).
Figure 83. In a simplified way, we may acknowledge that the external relates,
but also emphasize the inherent internal relations.
180
4.4.6. Logic(s)
In very complex sets of relations between the constructs and their situated conditions,
things can become very complicated and even incomprehensible if there is no
overarching logic and structure to the different empirical conditions of a design or
analytic endeavor. To provide comprehensibility and to be able to discern a pattern in
any observed phenomena a set of logics are needed. The development of “logics” used
the methods of metaphor and the adding of elements (from metabolism and tectonics)
in addition to the case studies. Furthermore, the methods of connecting and adjusting
has also been used to link ideas across the disciplines. This paragraph will explore and
elaborate on how the two disciplines are engaged to build the (im)material
metabolism.
Metaphor
As elaborated in methodology chapter 3, metaphor is used in two ways: as metaphor
and analogy. Metaphor is used to (mentally) construct the object of metabolism, while
the analogy is used to introduce logics of effectivity which structure the metabolism.
There are obviously big differences in Semper’s metabolism and the one of industrial
ecology and chemical engineering. Semper’s fundamental logic of the self-referring
material and elements does not necessarily directly explain why material flows
continue as seen in industrial ecology studies. This holds conceptual potential because
it reveals a fundamental mechanism of architectural creativity and what kinds of line
of thought architects mobilize to develop narratives (and concepts) which perpetuate
and facilitate material flows in the building industry. This is done without directly
causing them as many other societal and economic considerations should be included
to fully explain why materials flow as they do. Metabolic understanding of edifice is
a grounding one. There is thus a large-scale metabolic exchange which situates minor
metabolic exchanges in particular buildings, designs, or areas. At the same time, as
architects we have to understand that there are larger forces (societal, economic,
political) which manifest those material flows. Even if such conditions are very
complex, we still have to be aware of how architectural creativity itself forms a
circular metabolism of its own which in many regards provides narrative drive to how
the “inevitable” material input gets shaped and designed into place which in the end
influences how long it stands, if people like it, and will use it.
More fundamentally within this metabolism, three notions which structure the logic
of the metabolism are present. These concepts are taken from the chemical
engineering literature: slowing, narrowing, and closing. While the current building
industry is very concerned with circular economy, the concepts are developed in
relation to this “circle” which needs to be slowed, narrowed, and closed. In the
metabolic theory building of this PhD, the most important concepts are slowing and
narrowing where closing is inherent to both. Given the fact that material flows are
inevitably linear (forever), we ought to accept this work towards slowing as the
Building Theory
181
primary concept, narrowing as secondary, and closing as an inherent strategy where
the circulation of materials and elements ultimately minimizes the overall need for
material input.
Although the sink is also a metaphor, the founding metaphor is still metabolism and
not sink (for washing hands, nor a sinking ship) because the concept of the sink is
centralized, and it is its elements and relations which are structured by the metaphor
of the metabolism. The metabolism metaphors can be seen as metabolizing certain
relations of material exchanges between society and nature in general terms while the
urban sink is the particularization of the metabolism. The metaphor of metabolism
when mobilized requires careful, critical thought regarding how to translate it into
architecture. Similar to how industrial ecology literature puts forwards the need to
consider the use of metaphors. Metabolic entities (organisms) also have behavior
which should not be mirrored (i.e., certain organisms can be aggressive and attack
both their own species and others etc.). An architectural metabolism and its success
do not hinge on how well it “appears” metabolic but on how well it slows materials
consumption.
Temporality – Metabolism In Motion or the Slow Ship of Theseus
Another founding axiom of the theory is that reality is in motion. A key constituent of
any metabolic dynamic is that it flows, moves, and thus “closes” circles, loops, or
systems which are physically impossible as systems deteriorate and increase entropy.
This flow can be anything from the natural deterioration of building materials due to
usage or weather, or the human induced processes of transformation of virgin
materials in the process of making. Circularity is thus an illusion, and we ought to
perceive the flows of materials as linear flows which are in dire need of being slowed
by more means than only circulating elements and design-for-disassembly. Thus,
entropy is a constitutive logic of the reality in which built environments take part.
Because everything is motion everywhere simultaneously, conceptualizing
phenomena in one’s immediate context as objects (slowness) could help in the
slowing of material consumption rather than conceptualizing an ever-constant flux.
Thus, the flows are always linear. The question is, however, how we can slow the flow
down through (slow, yet open) metabolic design. There are two types of time in this
metabolism: the general and specific. The “general timeframe” is concerned with the
fundamental notion that time is not independent of material realit. Rather time is a
property of material existence and its movement because matter is vibrant (Bennett
2010). In extension of this, the prime property of metabolism is that of constant
motion, where material reality is increasing in entropy. The “specific” is related to
when dealing with a particular design boundary, one has to choose the observed time
span of an entity or envisioned durability.
We cannot remain in Euclidian division of space and time. As Hegel says, the spirit
is a bone and time is inherent to the very notion of the metabolism. Otherwise, it is
not a metabolism. As material reality is vibrant, as Jane Bennett would claim (Bennett
2010), and a metabolism is inherently dynamic, as we have seen in biology, different
182
organisms or ecosystems have varying metabolic rates. A small entity has a high
metabolic rate, while a large one has a slow (i.e., a mouse and elephant). A city is thus
a large entity which unfortunately in its current manifestation can be said to have a
too high metabolic rate of particular ´materials and elements which endanger future
generations’ ability to sustain themselves. Time is thus inherent to the material entity
in which entropy is a fundamental and inevitable fact. The ontological implication of
entropy is that reality is finite and contingent. At the same time, entropy indicates that
reality is always going towards increased chaos. As we sometimes see, architects
aesthetical and conceptual sublimations of ideas (i.e., wild formal expenditures which
require complex composite materials which cannot be dismantled) can entirely
maintain or amplify the increasing rate of entropy, and just because reality is headed
inevitably towards chaos, it does not necessitate we mimic it in our designs and
strategies.
How entropy makes itself evident in the buildings and materials more immediately is
related to how we design elements (Roithner et al 2022; Brunner Rechberger 2017).
If an architectural element is a composite which does not allow for mechanical (or
otherwise) dismantling, then we have an increased entropy as it would be difficult and
costly to reverse the design decision. Keeping designs to a minimal number of
materials, with little to none composites which are mechanically dismountable would
be preferable to the opposite. Even with the ‘good’ design decisions, entropy is always
increasing as energy and some form of excavation is required among other processes
which inevitably increase “chaos” (diminished the possibility of potentiality, so to
speak).
With notion of the Ship of Theseus, Graham Harman elaborates on how an idea of a
thing can still remain the same object even if all its material/physical constituents are
replaced by new ones (Harman 2018). Usually, the Ship of Theseus is a mental
conundrum on whether or not the object is the same after all its transformations.
According to Harman one can designate the being of an object despite having changed
materially, not unlike how biological bodies change all living cells after a number of
years (and still remain the same organism or person etc.). Many buildings are such
ships, and while some get demolished, others have stood the test of time with lesser
or greater degree of interchange and replacement of physical anatomy. The next step
would be to conceive of the whole building stock as an Urban Sink which is a Ship
with a significantly slows metabolic qua regarding its tectonic characteristics.
At a more immediate level, any action has metabolic consequences whenever we act
whether we know it or not. Whenever we enact a material change or transformation,
it will have prescribed and unprescribed immaterial (experiential) effects. Likewise,
when we develop or envision immaterial notions, concepts, or narratives, the way it
materializes in reality can vary greatly and either more or less in line with expectations
or in totally unknowable and unpredictable ways. With temporality striving for
inevitable chaos (entropy), a condition of this process is that causality is not always
known to us.
Building Theory
183
Philotechne – or the smokeless fire
When we observe the human-induced material flows, is it possible to claim that the
material flows of the built environment are rational and oriented towards peoples’
actual need for shelter in given numbers in time and space? No, because there are also
indications that the industry operates “irrationally” meaning a search for profit is its
own end-goal apart from actual “needs” of the inhabitants. Building or making as an
activity has an actuality of its own, for better or worse, and is not only a means to an
end.
Semper was greatly criticized for being a materialist. Being a materialist implicated
that his position was that architecture must deterministically emerge from material
conditions. Riegl, (who initially called Semper a materialist) later changed his opinion
aimed to redeem Semper obviously also acknowledges that architecture emerges from
material, technical, social, political, and climatic conditions as well as the artist’s free
will (Kunstwollen) (Mallgrave 1996, pp.379). Riegl’s early misinterpretation of
Semper thus prompted him to develop his own idea of Kunstwollen (inspired by
Semper), the Will or urge for making and creativity. Not unlike Semper’s radical shift
from “primitive hut” to the “primordial knot”, philotechne is a shift from the Will for
art objects to the will of making, the makers-will. This idea of free will as a kind of
love for making/art is to be taken as either serious precognition or logic or creative
thinking and conception. Riegl, perhaps Semper as well, differentiated two types of
free will: the true creative impulse and the mechanical drive to imitate (Mallgrave
1996, pp.379-380). While one can be sympathetic to the need of separating the two,
they are thoroughly intertwined. Whether we are dealing with the true creative
impulse or the mechanical drive, both are “blind” mechanisms which assert
themselves while propelling and perpetuating activity in a actualizing and assertive
manor onto physical reality; as such, this will is a radically ambiguous entity. As
Jeremy Till indicated, there is force ex nihilo (Till 2009), a kind of strange space of
“nothingness”, from which creativity springs. There is thus a mechanical aspect even
in the supposed “true” creativity, as the basic mechanism of subversion or
transgression is central to creativity (i.e., you establish a norm, which your
“creativity” subverts). Philotechne is thus a “radicalized” techne, i.e., the urge/love
(philo) of making (techne), which undergoes a Žižekian (Hegelian) sublimation from
a Thing-In-Itself to a Thing-For-Itself and in the end is conceptualized as an incessant
makers-urge. I claim this is par excellence for the inner motion of architectural
creativity which starts to cause itself in the that was already exemplified by Semper’s
self-referential (metabolic) logic. Techne is the Greek word for the integral technical
and artistic making (Hartoonian 1994). As Heidegger already established, the essence
of “building is letting to live”. While Heidegger acknowledges the intertwined nature
of the acts of building and dwelling, a more radical position would then be that instead
of the essence of building being external (“letting live”), building is causing itself the
pleasure to build apart from any essence outside of this self-relating.
184
Figure 84. Philotechne: almost as a sixth construct central to the edifice, yet “invisible”.
In the Danish language, there are a set of words which describe this dynamic:
“skaberglæde” (makers joys, joy of making), “skabertrang” (urge/need to make),
“skaberlyst” (desire for making) or “virkelyst” (acting desire, desire or will to act/do).
Coupled with this should also be the Danish term of “selvsving” which is translated
as a self-animation in which an entity or person is behaving without reference to
causes and effects. Drive is such a constellation as described by these Danish terms.
Another description of this, apart from Žižek terms of Drive, is the notion of the
“compulsion to repeat”. supplementarily Žižek also terms this notion as a “partial
object” (Žižek 2012). Philotechne is a kind of invisible entity, almost a sixth construct
of its own which animates the whole edifice (). Using the compulsive self-referential
logics of both Semper’s stoffwechsel (articulated as the wreath) and dichotomous
division of society and nature, a new tautological self-reference can be expressed. We
know from chemical engineering that societal metabolism is not a natural ecology (or
eco-system) but a human-induced metabolism which is driven by people in their
relation to natural surroundings.
Ginger Nolan elaborates that Death Drive (Nolan 2018) in relation to the earliest
“modernist” gesture by Marc-Antoine Laugier’s Primitive Hut as a purification. This
elaboration further conceptualizes this gesture as a compulsion for purification which
manifests as a measure of erasing the past while constructing a new measure in order
to construct a new present and future. This is par excellence of the modernist
compulsion (repetitive loop within the discourse) (ibdi). On the other end of the
spectrum, Juhani Palasmaa’s book “The Thinking Hand” was written as an ode to the
pleasure of making (Palasmaa 2009) in which the profound and poetic dimension of
creativity and making are at the forefront. Although both of these describe a tendency
in architectural phenomenology, Ginger Nolan exemplifies the Drive (Makers-Urge)
within the modernist discourses as the eternal search for purity and truth, while
Palasmaa’s elaborations exemplify a multitude of pleasures in the making process
from a phenomenological and proto-neuro architectural fashion without regard for
purity or perfection but merely the poetics of the process of making itself. Regardless
Building Theory
185
of the differing context the creative compulsions, beneath or even within both of these
is a blind mechanism which comes prior to the desiring coordinates manifested. In the
case of Laugier, the Makers-Urge which pushes him to manifest a new set of desiring
coordinates (logic and ideas) of a pure, true architecture is seen. The Makers-Urges is
in itself an ambiguous entity. Obviously, one has to accept all the potentials of poetics
of making, but with this elaboration on Death Drive, it is important to consider the
Makers-Urge as an ambiguous and incontinent entity which is not inherently good,
true, and poetic. It is perhaps more of a blind mechanism which persists beyond and
beneath any actual circumstances and searches for legitimacy to actualize itself. The
makers-drive mobilizes creativity and storytelling in clever and slippery ways and at
times one cannot tell the difference between pretentious charlatanism and sublime
authenticity (irrespective of authors intentions). The drive can equally be destructive
and manifest uselessness and ugliness. The need for making comes prior to what is
required to be made. Another example of this circular, or perhaps the other side of the
creative coin, is the ceaseless “destructive creativity” of the building industry as such
in which, as Jeremy Till has argued, demolition has become an integral part of
architecture (Till 2009). This can be further hypothesized into current conditions
where buildings are being built very fast, on a low budget, with an overly specific
form and a corresponding function, and of perhaps questionable or poor aesthetic and
phenomenological characteristics. Such buildings are not necessarily intended as
future “building heritage” nor are they expected to last 300 years. It can be perceived
as a strategy which guarantees future building activity and market dynamics and thus
is a self-fulling circular drive.
As Ginger Nolan indicates, architecture is essentially split between engagement and
withdrawal. As scholars have observed, the building industry is overly active and self-
perpetuating with architects being one of the enabling and driving agents. Juhani
Pallasmaa makes a relevant elaboration in this regard when he writes on the relations
between creativity and boredom (Pallasmaa 2009, pp. 81). In the endless striving of
creativity, one does not achieve perfection or beauty by keeping up the creative
activity. The challenge is to know when to stop and basically restrain oneself from
making more. Creativity is an incontinent entity, as one can allow oneself to keep
working and keep adding more and more layers. A truly creative gesture (fused with
that of critical awareness) is to contain/restrain oneself. The proper Žižekian synthesis
in this regard would be in our inability to fully contain (restrain) the incontinence of
creativity leading us to assert compelling (sublime) narratives to legitimize our
creativity.
The makers-urge can empirically be considered in three different variants. First, as
the metabolic dynamics of the building industry can be claimed to hinge on multiple
actors and agencies, the makers-urges can be seen as multiple. One of the core
mechanisms that drive material consumption can be said to be the “developers” or
clients (whether private, community, or government). At this level, the agenda of the
urge is to make/create profit which can span to anyone from clients, who want
something that the architect envisions for them, to manufacturers, who want to claim
market shares, and developers or investment foundations, who aim to capitalize on
186
market conditions for profit whether for monetary gain or due to grand vision/delusion
of personal or cultural legacy. The second is the architect. The architect’s intentions
of creative expenditures during creative progress towards the making of new objects
etc. The third is the users and inhabitants of the works. These consumers have a kind
of nesting-pleasure which has them (due to boredom, desire, need etc.) self-build,
partition, rebuild, refurbish, decorate etc. as ways to make the house more “homey”
not necessarily as a means to an end but possibly as an end-in-itself.
The creative/design process in architecture is not and cannot entirely be a aseptic, and
objective process in which the architects/designers robotically solve the problem of
the users’ need. There is always a surplus pleasure at hand linked with creative
endeavors. One’s proposal and synthesis (whether design or text) is a transgression or
subversion of a known hegemonic norms for the sake of variation in progress of
historical continuity. Regardless of the relevance and significance of any contribution,
whether built or written, the creative (circular) mechanism persists first and foremost,
and we should consider the possibility that we need to “tame” creativity. There is thus
not necessarily anything profound or automatically poetic in this Makers-Urges.
While also acknowledging the positive potentials of it, I am not refuting the potential
of the immense wealth of creativity energy. Nonetheless, it is important that at the
same time there is an understand of the regarding of it as an ambiguous entity that
perpetuates the building industry as a dynamic system of material consumption.
Inter-dis-connectedness
Considering material flows (among other thing), interconnected-ness or
connectedness (Krogh ed. 2020) has become an important way of perceiving relations
under the guise of ecological challenges. It is also a very complex topic which
generally speaking implicates material, immaterial, social, political, environmental,
technological etc. aspects. The purpose of this would be the development of a more
complex understandings as well as an understanding of more connected and
intertwined relations between society and nature. State-of-the-art social theory pushes
for such an understanding of increased interconnectedness while ultimately dissolving
the usual epistemological distinction between society and nature. Yet the world is
already an very complex and intertwined entity where any (human) activity can have
grave consequences for nature and itself even as we still discover more and more
facets of this interconnectivity. As the world itself is already interconnected beyond
our ability to discern it fully (as per the lessons from chemical engineering and
industrial ecology) the challenge is to perhaps not dissolve the borders between self-
world and society-nature but rather to attain a more respectful attitude within this
dualist distinction. Elevated relativizing narratives can be problematic. Žižek
exemplifies this in an elaboration on Zen-Buddhism and its application in military
combat during World War 2. Žižek elaborates and emphasizes the ambiguous nature
of any position using D.T. Suzuki, a former supporter of the Japanese military activity
who went to on to become a Buddhism-spokesman in the West as an example. Žižek
uses him as an example as he in his early years provided ideological, Buddhist
justification of military violence by way of relativized narrative of dissolved
Building Theory
187
phenomenon of self and the other by saying that a sword or knife merely happens to
wound the other, meaning it was not you directly who did so (Žižek 2012; pp.134).
Another example which demonstrates the applied ambiguity of process philosophy is
the elaborations of Eyal Weizman who analyzes and elaborates how Deleuzian theory,
along with other post-modern theory, is used to bring about new approaches to
military actions and targets (Weizman 2017, pp.186; ibid. pp.200, ibid. pp.215). This
indicates that a “relative” (non-static or process-oriented) epistemology is not
necessarily profound in bringing about a radical shift in paradigms, agendas, and
intentions in socio-political realms, and so on, but rather indicates that the “old”
visions and intentions can easily remain the same while the means/tools are new, more
complex, and perhaps more effective in one’s in manifesting one’s usual agenda. A
relativizing of the relations between society-nature and the disregard of constitution
objects privileging processes, relations, and properties (e.g., there are no individuals
as such, only bones, skin, brain activity etc.) could just as well bring about new and
more complex forms of domination, exploitation, and violence onto nature whether
intended or unintended. There is a risk of, a la the Jevons’ paradox, people’s very
“good” intentions may materialize as the opposite which is not due to some people
not use it with opportunistic (ill) intention. Ultimately, an emphasis on the networks
in both objects and processes in such a relativizing way risks manifestation of a
“...premodern enchantment of the world…” (Žižek 2016, pp.55) and thus mystifies
ourselves and our relations to our surroundings thus permitting a kind “anything
goes” attitude under an umbrella of scientism where any person, entity, set of relations
or things can be de-substantialized and ultimately permit the agenda of business-as-
usual. An important reminder is therefore that this would not always be the case, but
it is a risk which needs to be taken seriously.
Figure 85. Towards a slowing of material flows.
A crucial aspect is to acknowledge the immense potential of process and network
188
theory modestly and pragmatically while likewise acknowledging that certain bundles
of properties and effects circumscribe an entity which asserts effects onto other
bundles of properties. As such, there are crucial patterns of processes and effects
which cannot be relativized, like the relations between society and natural
environments with regard to material flows. We cannot afford to insist on merely the
“here and now” immediacy and forget larger (meta-)schemes and questions of
essence. The city (with its current needs) is already materially interconnected with
nature by requiring more and more material inputs. The challenge is to “disconnect”
from the material world. How? Many architects concerned with haptics and
embodiment argue for the need for a “re-connection” with the material world
(Pallasma 2009; 2012). To avoid a misunderstanding, I am certainly sensitive towards
this necessity in architectural design, and I do not argue antithetically in that regard.
My claim is rather that good design (as posited by Pallasma etc.) could also be
achieved through reconceptualization of “connecting with materiality” by minimizing
material consumption and as such we can have healthy haptic experiences (immaterial
connection with the material world) while withdrawing the city as a sink from material
over-consumption (materially disconnecting from the material world).
Figure 86. Diagram showing the principle of slowing and narrowing,
thus minimizing need for materials by “disconnection” and “interconnection”.
It is thus crucial to instead conceptualize a disconnect from nature (as much as
possible) by interconnecting society more and more with itself. This would be a more
“precise” metabolic way of conceptualizing the current metaphysical consideration on
interconnectivity in an attempt to minimize the ambiguous relativism of abstract
dissolutions of entities and borders. Even if nature in this regard is entirely compatible
with Timothy Morton’s idea ecology (and not some idealized romantic idea of
Nature), by disconnecting cities from nature materially along with more separate
interconnectivity conceptualizations which can be created by allowing the existence
Building Theory
189
of the dualist separation of society and nature which is beneficial both mutually and
separately. Since nature (or the planet) is not some Gaia-Mother who “knows” how
to recreate natural balances (as catastrophe is equally risky), initiatives can be made
to (artificially and with human aid) make design, and control natural areas for the
purpose to increasing biodiversity which also can be further achieved by a more
disconnected society from nature. In such a condition, given the need for metabolisms
always being linear, it can be of great utility to still mobilize the “good, old” dualist
distinction of society-nature even if practically they are more intertwined than ever.
Instead of the usual exploitation and mastering logic in this dualism, it could be a
more respectful, withdrawn position in which a minimal material input is ideally
required.
It may very well turn out that if we are to achieve this “cutting” of the city from nature
in practical terms, we may still require additional amounts of materials by allowing
the current material flow tendencies. Even a slight surplus to provide a minimal buffer
or a material investment could provide “insurance” for any contingent situation in the
future.
Figure 87. Disconnecting by interconnecting; in material and immaterial terms.
As Žižek has argued, a challenge that we must be aware of in this regard is that of the
risk of “re-enchantment” (Žižek 2016, pp.55). Žižek himself is fond of object-
oriented-ontology and accepts its potential; however, he is also critical of certain
aspects of it with re-enchantment being one of the areas that he sees critically. The
problem seems to be that given the many tendencies in modern society, there is a
critical distance and perhaps intellectual cynicism regarding many, if not all, all
relations with the world where one feels minimally alienated. Along these lines, when
reading Žižek, object-oriented-ontology poses a challenge because it would allow for
a kind of return to some pre-modern “organicism” and animism/panpsychism
meaning that the critical capacities are (willfully) deprioritized and the world is “re-
enchanted” (made magical again, if you will). When it comes to architecture and
especially to tectonics, it is again important to be aware of how we, for example, use
Jonas Holst’s historical analysis (Holst 2019). Holst’s analysis could easily be used to
argue for a kind ontological return to pre-modern mythology; however, his analysis
190
holds more important considerations than simply this. By highlighting how with
fetishism of the “Architect” (and diminishing of the tekton) we went from proto-
ecological potential (respectively in those times) ways of thinking cycles to what we
have to today in object-fixated architecture (not to be misunderstood as object-
oriented), he shows that there were (potentially) moments of “modern” thought
already within pre-modern, ancient practices which had disappeared with modern
“efficiency”. Instead of thinking how to return to some pre-modern ideal, the
challenge is to be radically modern with new and accompanying knowledge, tools,
sentiments etc.
Tectonics Without Architecture
As we have seen, architects and their theories are more and more disconnected from
the actual facts of matter and building with their theories being to lesser or greater
degree suspended in some meta-physical space (Benjamin 2007; Trubiano 2022) with
the antidote seeming to be a return to theorizing on the act of building (Trubiano
2022). I would thus claim, despite the immense value of such writings, that new theory
of building could risk of fetishizing the act of building into a sublime act in (in spite
of the any given author/architect’s intentions) and thus risk the maintenance of
architecture within a linear growth paradigm. Perhaps the suspension could be of use,
but should it be a material instead metaphysical suspension? Since architects don’t
actually build, but design/advise, could we instead theorize the act of non-building as
well?
Just as material withdrawal is a material necessity, it is equally an artistic gesture of
withdrawal. Based on the idea that the city could be a self-sufficient sink, a beautiful
landfill, or a transformed geological crust which happens to be inhabitable, we not
only need a different way of relating to nature but also society and the built
environment. The city itself does not necessarily need to be constantly “renewed”
(disassembled etc.) materially to be an adapting, ambiguous entity of multiplies.
Rather, the city should first and foremost be conceived as something to maintained
and kept “still”. This could be done perhaps not only through “design for disassembly”
and other material performances, but equally by carefully and meticulously designing
usefulness and spaces with a imbued metabolic sublime ambiguity (this ambiguity will
be explored in chapter 5, especially 5.1)..
Tectonics Without Architecture
14
is fundamentally an architectural heresy at least with
regard to the capital-A architecture which I paint as being stuck within the growth
paradigm. This notion is an architectural mirror of the Žižekian idea of organ without
body (Žižek 2004; 2012) as Negation of the linear growth paradigm which essentially
describes an entity which is a free floating, in its own right, and detached from its
usual ideological presuppositions. This Negation is furthermore founded in a similar
14
This term was coined previously (Gusto 2019), but it was very tentative and speculative and
needs further grounding and expansion.
Building Theory
191
sentiment of Timothy Morton’s Ecology Without Nature (Morton 2007), who also
elaborates an eco-critique of how our current preconceptions and ideological
presuppositions of Nature (as an overly romanticized entity) maintain our current
controlling and exploitative relations. It is not enough to simply say or write “ecology”
to have it mean “ecology without nature” and thus make a deliberate distinction
between the two. As with Morton’s notion, to give more emphasis to Tectonics, one
has to emphasize that tectonics should be “without architecture” without it meaning a
return or re-enchantment of the mythic techne.
Just as Nature is imbued with ideological constructions, so too is the complex notion
of Architecture. Architecture is not simply a modest building activity. Rather, it is
almost an alchemical animistic entity which asserts itself for the apparent necessity of
historical progression (linear “cultural continuity”). Architecture, especially when it
is supposedly capital A architecture, is usually filled with ideological presuppositions
and self-animated maxims which structure how we approach and understand design
thinking and doing. As such, a once sublime idea of cultural continuity becomes an
ideological justification or perpetuation of liner growth paradigm. Architecture with
capital A keeps perpetuating new grand narratives, new modern and pre-modern
myths, revived canonic narratives of progress. Tectonics does this as well with
tectonic visions and poetic “tectonic” designs, but the radically critical instance within
tectonic discourse is the “without architecture” tectonics. Tectonics is usually
understood as the “poetics of making” (Beim 2004; pp. 47), but tectonics without
architecture is the critical self-reflexivity, a concept initially introduced by Semper
then radicalized by Hartoonian, and as a self-critical withdrawal from this kind of
making. Tectonics is therefore not automatically “tectonics without architecture” as
some of the old presuppositions remain in tectonic discourse, albeit in a tectonic
fashion (honesty, truthiness etc.), as the presuppositions fundamentally remain within
a growth-paradigm of the historicist inevitability of progress and the fetish of the new.
It is a self-reflective instance where architects and designers are able to critically
reflect our own roles in perpetuating material consumption. Even if it is not architects
who directly move materials from nature to society, much of architectural theory,
writings, critique, utopian experimentation opens up space for any agency in society
to be caught by (architectural) narratives and desires of building and making.
Architectural narratives (in any shape or form) facilitate and act as justification for
perpetual material consumption, i.e, where this type of materials consumption
basically acts as a guarantee for the need of more material consumption. Narratives of
transgressions are very often fundamental to architectural creativity, in the sense of
how a new design or theory breaks with the “old” doctrines, norms, and dogmas etc.
While this can indeed be sympathetic, there is a danger within such transgressive
discourses where grand gestures of subversion are sublimated (swallowed) within the
hegemonic practice to the point of acting as yet another way to maintain current
conditions or reinvigorate the existing growth dynamics (i.e., new built works using
the same terminology and ideological thinking to justify new designs and ideas).
Being subversive today is simply mainstream, and my wager is, to change anything
in actual reality we will have to a assume an abstract meta-physical equivalent and
192
jump out of this bad “circularity” that has been created to assume a kind of Negative
Tectonics: Tectonics without Architecture.
Tectonics Without Architecture is thus a Negative artistic sentiment (in the Žižekian
sense) of a way of relating through Negative contemplation and minimal material
engagement. Fundamentally, this is all a testament to the fact that both material reality
and our engagement with it or within it is one of finitude. This means that both our
material precondition (finite reality, finite resources) and that our human Being is a
finite being in the world where we cannot approach nor fully understand anything in
to its full extent, necessitating a radical shift in attitude. Tectonics Without
Architecture is not simply a position where one does not do anything. Rather, if we
do not do anything, the predominant conditions will perpetuate or perhaps lead to
some form of disaster. We do have to do something, but we must do something which,
put in abstract terms, amounts to Nothing –not necessarily just in the immediate at
hand level but also in the accumulated, meta-material level of material flows. We must
invoke a culture of making which has little to no effect on the natural environment.
Any attempt to particularize such an abstract universal idea risks failure and
necessitates a slowness in our engagements. Spoken as plainly as possible, Tectonic
Without Architecture is a design ethos where one critically facilitates everyday life
with minimized material flows without any reference to some ideological injunctions
of historical progress. Stand-alone Tectonics, in their etymological origins, means
building as a verb (i.e. building more and more), whereas Tectonic Without
Architecture indicates a Negation of growth activity. In the mental transition from
Capital-A architecture to a Tectonics Without Architecture, we proceed from the
growth-oriented building industry of “cultural continuity” (of individual creative
drives) to a “cultural continuity” of each building persisting over several generations
and centuries through care, maintenance, adaptation, flexibility, gentle and modest
beautification, as a cross-historical collective effort – a building culture.
4.4.7. Boundary
This section will outline the theory: what immediate limitations and boundaries
characterize the theory and its application and what ontological assumptions
circumscribe it. The theory is limited to the dealings of the built environment with
emphasis on material flows, albeit including immaterial considerations which
influence these material flows. For this reason, two types of materialisms are of
interest which circumscribe the (im)material metabolism: the old and the new. More
precisely, it is a combined outline of firstly the chemical engineering and the scientific
assumptions on reality and knowing and is akin to the old scientific materialism.
Secondly, the materialism and realism of contemporary thinkers Slavoj Žižek and
Graham Harman also ground the (im)material metabolism. Žižek is of importance as
his theoretical elaborations help to outline the ideological (inner) dealings of the
metabolism, while Harman’s ontology provides the structuring principle of objects,
which as per his realist approach allows for an integration with the science of
Building Theory
193
industrial ecology (metabolism) as well as its sensibilities. The development of
“boundaries” used the methods of adding, connectin,g and adjusting which are also
used to link ideas of ontological significance.
The Built Environment
As a theoretical contribution in architecture, design planning, etc., my metabolism
cannot be used as a substitute to all the already known methods, tools, and theory of
those fields. It is an addition which can demand a repositioning regarding how we
apply our known tools, in what way, and to what end. Furthermore, when as architects
and designers, we find ourselves in the current circular agenda which incessantly tries
to dissolve borders between society and nature, this theory can also provide some
overview into the many confusing renditions of both. As material flow and metabolic
concerns are already being evoked through LCA, and it will only increase toward a
more rigid conceptualization of the built environment as a metabolism, this theory
could act as a bridge for architects, engineers, and designers to better understand
environmental sciences, chemical engineers as it provide nuances of terminology and
conceptualization of slowing and narrowing instead of open-ended circularity.
Another aspect to clarify it that this theory fundamentally does not subscribe to the
now common conception that tectonics are only linked with carpentry, but tectonics
is more generally concerned with that of the act of building and modesty. It is my
opinion that tectonics, at least potentially, is an ontological conception of the act of
building. Even though the initial Greek builder mainly dealt with wood, it was merely
a question of what materials were being dealt with and what accompanying techniques
etc., would be used.
The Scientific Materialism (Analytical Tradition)
Dealing with material flows from a scientific materialist view entails the the
understanding of metabolic be founded on an empirical understanding of our material
preconditions as done in the chemical engineering discipline and the field of industrial
ecology. Even if the theoretical frame and its methodical approach uses a metaphorical
notion (of the metabolism), there are core scientific notions of understanding which
make assumptions about reality, i.e., input/output, mass balance, entropy (see chapter
4.1). Such an understanding assumes the existence of objects and treats them in
mechanistic sense.
Another significant outline or limitation provided by industrial ecology is that of
planetary carrying capacity (or boundaries, while metabolic studies use more the
“capacities” terminology instead). These are not precisely the same as the best-known
iteration of planetary boundaries as developed by Rockström et al. (2009).
Conversely, metabolic studies approach such questions in the layered elaboration of
sinks, regions, and bio-regions up to planetary limits and emphasize the fundamental
role of “sinks” (Brunner, Kral, 2014; Kral et al 2019). While Rockström’s (et al) key
parameters are more of an “abstract” and universal concern (which can be difficult to
apply at level of everyday life), industrial ecology provides an immediate practical
proposal for how to enact “planetary boundary thinking” in metabolic ways (by
194
confining living in the cities with regional limits first and foremost). As Semper
mentions, architecture is an extension of nature, or a sublime repetition of it. What
could that mean without it meaning yet another edifice of “organic” growth?
Given that industrial ecology ultimately deals with metabolic considerations of sinks
and flows of a given system boundaries, the outermost boundary is that of the planet.
Followingly, it is possible to choose any physical and spatial boundary (a country,
region, city, districts or building, technology etc.). Thus, when dealing with
(im)material metabolism, whether in instances of designing or analyzing, it is crucial
where you put the system boundary because as such, it allows or necessitate that you
either only design/analyze a single building or also include to lesser or greater degree
the surrounding areas (context) and their material and immaterial conditions (whether
they be micro and macroclimatic, material flows, phenomenological characteristics
etc.).
Given the fact of reality which is entropy, systems and materials ultimately fail at
achieving full circularity, and we have to accept flows are forever linear. The quest is
to slow these inevitable linear flows through multitude of sub-strategies by narrowing
(limiting amount of material required) and circulating (through various ways of reuse,
recycle, waste preventions etc.). Much can achieved by way of the circular economy
strategies, LCA calculations or other designations (LEED, BREEAM, DGNB).
Nontheless, if the there is no impact on the predicted increase in material consumption
(European Commission 2021), and it merely perpetuates the same material flows, then
it is not a slow metabolic design.
Figure 88. Slowing as the all-encompassing strategy (with narrowing and closing as sub-
strategies) since flows are ultimately always linear.
Building Theory
195
The Meta-Physical Materialism (Continental Tradition)
The (im)material metabolism is not just a materialist position. While it is of great
necessity to minimize material flows, the meta-physical (immaterial) aspects likewise
hold much significance to that end due to the fact that materials do not move
themselves (animism is an ideological construction nevertheless) and it is people (i.e.
social, cultural, economic and political aspects) which cause the movements.
Is reality a social construction (nature included) (Castree 2013) or should all aspects
of realty be included in the social realm and constructed to a scientific ( what Harman
would designate as overmining versus undermining (Harman 2018))? If we answer no
to both of these questions, a particular kind of ontological positioning should permit
us to approach reality in its hybrid constellations. As with Semper, and the notion of
the builder or tekton (and not the archi-tect), ontologically speaking this theory is
ontologically open, and for the very same reason is also open epistemologically,
methodologically, and methodically. The fact that the theory is ontologically open
means that it does not evoke some teleological narrative of progress and growth which
inevitably causes its own necessity. In ontological concerns, this (Im)material theory
positions itself along the lines of Graham Harman and Slavoj Žižek. Even though
their ontological positions differ, they share some similarities in practical terms.
Harman conceives of reality being withdrawn and impenetrable while Žižek claims
that it is open and contingent (unfinished). Regarding epistemological concerns, there
is need of multi-epistemological approach to approach the challenges of material
flows. This means that in acquiring empirical data on the five constructs and their
relations would require a spread of epistemological position to reify the five constructs
in relevant ways towards either design goals or analytic objectives. We could imagine
how instead of personal phenomenological analysis the same case could be used to
conduct a neuro-architectural analysis of how brain mechanics perceive the rooms.
Methodologically, it can help to position a design or analysis and help structure
specific methods of inquiry in the quest to map or design the five constructs and
relations.
More precisely regarding the ontological considerations of the (im)material
metabolism, and similar to an early speculative text (Usto 2020), Harman’s quadruple
structure of real and sensual objects provides the core structural build-up, while
Žižek’s contribution is that of Negativity. Specifically, attaining a kind of impassive
ontological position towards reality and its phenomena which does not immediately
urge to change, manipulation, or mastering it as it were. There is likewise eco-
philosophical justification in the choices of Žižek, and especially Harman, as
arguments are made for the usefulness of thinking objects as separate and conceiving
nature as an entity of “non-identity” (Görg 2011, pp.49; Saito 2022, pp.109-110). This
thus has similarities in the indeterminate and contingent natures of Harman and
Žižek’s ontologies, respectively.
196
The prominent contemporary eco-philosopher, Timothy Morton, develops ideas of
how aesthetics, art, and beauty need to play an important role in the current
predicament. The key continental philosophical outline of this doctoral study is that
the problem of material consumption in many ways lies outside of material concerns
as such. This leaves the challenge of aestheticizing the material impassivity as an eco-
ontological way of artistic-being within society and nature simultaneously. In the end,
this would or could have the desired outcome in societal-nature relations. Thus, we
continue to develop the Negative form of thinking in positioning the endeavors of this
doctoral study. But what exactly does this mean in relation to ontology and
epistemology? Specifically, how do we construct an understanding of what reality is?
Further, how dowe understand it, and what are the limits of our knowledge are in
relation to it?
Nature and reality at large is ontological in an open entity and is an imbalanced entity
which has no original natural balance to which we can return. Just as reality is an
open, indeterminate category, so too is the epistemological approach to it. The
(im)material metabolism necessitate and relies on the critical (towards slowing and
narrowing of material flows) by mobilizing both idealistic materialist eco-
philosophical epistemologies as well the hard-science mechanistic construing of
realty, as long as it is a non-opportunistic worldview (Weltanschauung) which aims
to slow (or in other words de-grow) material consumption.
The ‘Hybrid’ Object (…still the Meta-Physical Materialism)
As we are dealing a hybrid metabolism of both very different objects, and a hybrid
metabolism that includes material and immaterial aspects, it is also important to
outline what kind of hybrid metabolism the metabolism is. While generally speaking,
New Materialism sees it pertinent to conceive of relational dynamics and processes
and does not ultimately acknowledge the existence of object or even individuals
(Benson 2019) who encapsulates Graham Harman’s variant of object-oriented
ontology into new materialism philosophical discourse, but there is a slight nuance to
be aware of.
Building Theory
197
Figure 89. Do Things exist, or are relational processes all there is?
Graham Harman outlines similarities with new materialism but at the same time
distinguishes and differentiates OOO from the epistemological an ontological
construction of new materialism and designates it as Speculative realism (Harman
2018). The key ontological distinction is that Harman conceives of the importance of
constituting objects and things and recognizing that not all is simply an intertwined
chaotic muck of social constructions where everything is relativizes and de-
substantialized. While one must accept that there is vast empirical wealth within
materialism and immaterial reality in the form of complexity, antinomic relations and
conditions, and contradictions, when it comes to questions of sustainability through
the metabolic lens of material flows, certain patterns reveal themselves because some
objects cause certain effects when compared to others. Phenomena can be designated
as objects regardless of whether they are actual material things or processes and very
often they are both at the same time. Incidentally, almost in an extension of the above
considerations, eco-critical literature on “social metabolism” insists on the seemingly
“conventional” dualism of society-nature divide (Saito 2022, pp. 103), and the same
scholar also have argued against a ontological “monism” (relativized epistemology of
all is one) where nature does not exist (Castree 2013, pp.177) and thus argues for the
insistence of the dualism of society-nature.
Figure 90. Object-oriented Ontology nevertheless acknowledged the potentials
of constituting objects/things.
198
Thus, the type of hybrid relevant to consider, is one where immense wealth of reality
(dynamic fluxes and processes) is included and conceived as asymmetrical relations
where society is contained within nature. These relations also certainly overlap and
between the two extremes many different ontologically unclear hybrids can be
constructed. As there are significant patterns of material flows at each end of the said
flows, it is of use to conceive of them as objects/things but envision new relations
between them. The metabolism is not a metabolism qua its own efficacy – that would
the ideology of animism – but it is a metabolism qua human agency and is thus a
hybrid object. Whereas the single human has its own agency, the metabolic approach
implicates a collective understanding and collective agency. If not for the collective
understanding, the metabolic approach would only be yet another style or dogma
which would merely concern itself with exploring the formal-aesthetic potentials of
new styles of the metabolic shift.
Drive and Desire of the Metabolism (…still the Meta-Physical Materialism)
Since we are dealing with a (dynamic) metabolism, what is that which animates the
metabolism? While there are many such “animators”, since the built environment
necessarily pulls into itself and has consequences for many other disciplines, in the
architectural sense the fundamental dimension of architectural creativity is key. Even
Semper’s theory has a fundamental impetus in the observation (of his time) that
architectural creativity has run amok and that in the guise of the initial modernization
and industrialization challenges, architecture has become flat, meaningless and vulgar
in its creative unfolding. While one can agree or disagree with such statements, is it
possible to elaborate something more general about creativity? Žižek elaborates on
the more fundamental notions (a priori) which condition us towards creativity: the
expansion on the notions of Drive and Desire (Žižek 2012, pp. 205-207) for whom
the drive is a philosophical idea. We are familiar with it in architectural and art theory
as the variant of Kunstwollen from Alois Rigel (a Will to/for Art or making)
(Mallgrave 1996, pp.379). which was also inherent to Semper’s own metabolism.
Here we attempt to translate the philosophical notion of Drive and Desire into
architecture. Drive is the “lower” vitality, the material energy which animates – a kind
of “material” a priori (a material vibrancy even) which conditions the architects
towards a creative inclination. A vector if you will which satisfies immediate material
needs (shelter etc.). Desire – or objet a – on the other hand becomes the set of
theoretical (desiring) coordinates which can provide direction to that drive-
inclination. The Drive, or the urge or will to simply create, is prior to what and how
to make something. A desire (or even theory as such) is a way in which the Drive is
given a realm for unfolding, that which provides a surplus-value beyond any
immediate utilitarian aspect (e.g., “honesty”, “truth” in design, historical animism,
narratives of legacy or the sublime idea of cultural continuity etc.). As such, a common
way the objet a manifests in everyday life is through narrative and storytelling (of
sublime ideas objects), and thus, what stories we tell, how we word them can have
significant consequences.
While such a Drive can be difficult to make empirical and clearly discernable, the
drive of creativity is simply the on-going, un-dead, formless, creative hysteria which
Building Theory
199
keeps iterating and experimenting shapes and designs apart from any immediate
necessity or problem-solving. A kind of disconnected blind mechanism which is
creative forever. A kind of primordial condition which propels forward motion and
cannot sit still. It can also be described as the pleasure of thinking and designing
deeply on architectural conundrums where explorations are made before even
knowing what problems are being solved and where to apply it. As mentioned earlier
(in 4.3.6. Logics), such a force is ambiguous and can be as equally destructive as
creative.
Given the fact that the metabolism of interest is one which is human-driven, the
building industry contains many disciplines, agents, and actors with differing agendas.
Some of these agents are creative, while some are monetary. Regardless, there are
different “wills” that animate the creation and production of the built environments
and thus the material consumption. At times, these drivers are even beyond any actual
reference to cause and effect (demand for housing among people etc.) and simply
cause themselves to be perpetually in profit seeking within the growth paradigm. In
exemplifying this, we see differing percentages of newly built buildings which are
simply empty and, in more extreme cases, so-called ghost towns (Wang et al 2019).
These ghost towns can be found in different countries and on continents. They were
built, never finished, and never inhabited as intended. Here a self-feeding circular loop
can be observed. The question then is does the creative Will manifest the growth
paradigm, or does the growth paradigm create and/or amplify the creative Will?
Regardless of this tautology, the creative Will, I claim, partakes in situating the current
metabolic exchanges in the growth paradigm. As much of today’s radical ecological
theory proclaims, we will need to shift not to “green growth” but “degrowth.” The
degrowth agenda is radical antithesis to the current growth-paradigm and situates
itself in diametrical opposition to the current tendencies of material input linked to
profit growth. When it comes to the economic aspect, the challenge is conceptually to
decouple material input from economic growth and understanding of life quality
(Ferguson 2018; Jackson 2019; Schmelzer et al 2020). There are of course many
challenges in this regard, and if a noticeable shift in material flows will not be
immediately observable, society needs create more awareness to arrive at that shift
and become more critically introspective of the norms and behaviors that keep us
connected to the “growth” (and thus consumption) paradigm of today. As society at
large is quested with this, architecture and design professions likewise need to attain
such a critical introspective dissection of our ideological presuppositions which has
us firmly planted in the current growth/consumption paradigm. Since we know that
built environment is a human-induced metabolism, it is crucial to consider and
question why architects/engineers or any other professional within the built
environment are so “naively” convinced that our problem-solving approaches is
inherently “good”. This technocratic optimism and opportunism (Saito 2022, pp 34),
which conceives that more technology is the solutions, requires reconsideration.
Eco-philosophy (…still the Meta-Physical Materialism)
Since objects (Things) do indeed seem to hold certain gravitas ontologically, what
could it mean to “appreciate” things and objects in ecologically relevant and pertinent
200
ways? Literature on ecology and politics highlights that modern “instrumental
reasoning” lacks reflection which ignores the non-identity of nature and only reduces
it to a tool to be controlled and exploited (Saito 2022, pp. 113). If we can never attain
full scientific knowledge of a thing (despite intellectual cognition having its obvious
advantages) perhaps an aesthetic way of knowing can also have its efficacy. Eco-
philosophy is becoming more and more prominent (also in metabolic studies Bourg,
Erkman 2003) and is perhaps best epitomized by the leading thinker Timothy Morton
(Morton 2007; Morton 2018), whose ideas have roots in ontological orientations
developed by Graham Harman (Harman 2018, pp:59-103). As elaborated in the
chapter 3, aesthetics (aesthetic cognition) is a way of knowing differences in
intellectual knowledge/cognition (Harman 2018). Aesthetics is not however simply to
be dismissed as a kind of reactionary return to tradition, as mostly classical aesthetics
are imbued with growth ideology. Morton sees immense potential in aesthetic
knowing for ecological Being within the world (Morton 2018, pp:178), and the
potential lies in the opportunity to construct an artistic edifice of being-ecological in
which you do not require more new “green” technologies or more and more
knowledge and tools because there is a paradoxical causality between our intentions
(with new technologies etc.) and their ultimate material consequences which is
entirely in our control. Phenomenology in architecture often elaborates the importance
of phenomena and their haptic richness (Husserl’s phenomenology). However, as both
Harman and Žižek emphasize, the Heideggerian phenomenological has much more
important and critical realization in terms of appearance, revealing and the
Unhintergebar. Such a notion is the insistence on questioning why phenomena appear
as they do regardless of their immediate phenomenal richness (in texture and
materiality and all forms of heterogeneity and so on) as one may be tricked by this
richness and fail to see the “true” being behind it. Why do the phenomena appear as
such? What are the behind-mechanisms that make these phenomena appear (a Thing-
in-Itself)? Heidegger furthermore simply acknowledges this deadlock of the
transcendental horizon and that it is ultimately hard to say anything of substance with
regard to the transcendental. Žižek, Harman, and Heidegger thus advocate for critical
understanding of not merely embedding oneself into the “richness” of the appearance
of material/immaterial phenomena, since they can be quite problematic and deceiving.
Rather, these authors suggest a critical approach of this understanding. More
importantly, since reality is an impenetrable/indeterminate entity where, as Žižek
would put it, you enact a change onto/in reality, and it reacts paradoxically in ways
we could not have predicted. The commonsense “cause and effect” cannot be used to
explain or predict such consequences (Jevon’s paradox par excellence). This does not
mean that we should simply keep doing everything we can to our physical
surroundings (natural and built) until we can “fix it”. Ontologically, however, the
impenetrability of reality (the inability to fully predict any application of a technology
and future consequences) requires a seriousness and slowing down of one’s activities
as well as a withdrawn and highly considerate approach to any activity. This
ontological position does not implicitly require an overly humanist or mechanistic
understanding of reality as both can be mobilized with good intention. It is thus more
important to a worldview which is more delicate, meticulous, modest and respectful
within both ontological positions and the minimization of opportunism.
Building Theory
201
Closing Statement on Boundaries
So what does all of this have to do with the Urban Sink? The idea is to be able to
differentiate between Things. Not all buildings are the same, especially when it comes
to material flows. Some building stock acts as a safe storage for materials to a greater
degree qua both material and immaterial properties, while others do not. Moreover,
reality is not a relativized process-network even if may appear so. Through relations
of the constructs, it is possible to differentiate the building stock where particular
relational structures permit or show a pattern of less material flows thus allowing for
the designation of those sets of relations as the object, i.e., Urban Sink. While those
buildings/works can appear similar (size, typology, style even etc.) a unique
constellation between five constructs can turn out to have unique effects in the
metabolic sense.
The metabolic position necessitates a stance that we should be able to think a kind of
spiritual end of history for architecture. The almost “organic” (or inborn) assumption
that there will always be need for more new buildings (along with new concepts, new
aesthetics qua play and experiments with new technologies etc.) should be seriously
reconsidered and/or dismantled with regard to how we mobilize our creative
cunningness in the relationship between the built and natural environment. In such a
societal constellation, art and aesthetics could have a central performativity in the
maintaining of the ecological way of Being in the world.
4.4.8. Descriptive and Prescriptive (analysis and design)
Similar to the dual nature of both industrial ecology and tectonic metabolism of being
simultaneously descriptive and prescriptive, so too is the theory of the (im)material
metabolism. In general terms, the fact that the theory is prescriptive does not make it
a method as such. Rather, it can be mobilized as a methodological framework which
is further guided by specific methods. This can be compared to the applications of
Bruno Latour’s A.N.T. (Latour 2005) which as a framework requires additional
methods and tools in either the design of a piece of architecture or any phenomenon
or its analysis.
The overall usability is that of a starting point in the architecture and design field. If
architecture students, researchers, or even practitioners were to analyze a piece of
design or architecture, 5 fundamental points of attack would be necessitated (although
these fundamental points can further be expanded given specific situations). Each of
the 5 points may either need separate methods and tools of inquiry, or some can be
covered by multiple methods/tools at once. The overall purpose is to situate
architectural design within a metabolic agenda with the full knowledge that the
architectural ideological implications and discourse at large therefore makes it
necessary to compare what is said and what is done and the material consequences of
both in whatever capacity it is possible and relevant to the problem and questions at
202
hand.
The same dimension is of great necessity when having to design. While it can more
difficult as architecture to-be-built does not have embodied history, it can generally
be difficult to explain the relations between the immaterial and material conditions as
per the consequence of material flows. This could be through a more nuanced risk
assessment (as to include immaterial properties and potentials), and in general by
approaching design with much greater modesty with regarding materials thus
acquiring a much greater understanding of what kind of designs are sustainable and
which are merely “green washing”.
Finally, analysis and design, i.e., the descriptive and prescriptive capacities of the
(im)material metabolism, are to be considered as joint or inherent to a metabolic
thinking of the built environment. As (im)material metabolism emphasizes the ability
to do nothing as an active measure, analysis can be considered a mode of practice or
“negative” design action because analysis can provide insights as to when one should
not build etc. (an active non-activity).
4.5. Conclusion
The chapter starts with the state-of-the-art respectively on industrial ecology and
tectonic metabolism. It does so as a prolegomenon to the theory building effort, which
deconstructs the two theories in relation to the 4 main building elements of a theory
(construct, relations, logic, boundary). The chapter then proceeds to building theory
by using the same 4 main elements. The initial aspect of metaphor usage, which works
as a way to mutually include the metabolism of tectonics and the metabolism of
industrial ecology, the metaphor obviously being “metabolism”. Followingly, the
notion of the sink is centralized as a key concept. The sink is then deconstructed into
5 main constructs which interrelate in differing ways but have cross-related nature.
Theory is constructed by mobilizing logical argumentation to form the synthesis of
the metaphor of metabolism, t sink and both “external” logics and assumptive
boundaries of the theory.
Figure 91. An overview of the (im)material metabolism.
While many theories highlight their construct and relations, the logic and the
Building Theory
203
boundaries are often left implicit. This theory building effort thus focuses on explicitly
highlighting all 4 aspects of a theory, and thus intertwines the “boundary” setting of
environmental concerns and preconditions within the constructs with “Material
Flows” and “Narrative” as vessels for mapping the material consequences of human
activity in the built environment and the ideological presuppositions that maintains
the discipline in the still expanding growth paradigm. So, what kind of theory is it?
Figure 92. Placing the theory.
The theory is certainly not one which can replace all other theories or methods but
acts more as supplementary “layer” () which could potentially permeate other layers
and allow one’s own known and oft-used theories, methods, and tools to potentially
attain a metabolic dimension. It does so by already containing some complex aspects
of ontological and epistemological considerations, as well as questions of Worldview
which are ecologically pertinent to consider. It likewise insists on juxtaposing the
five key constructs of the theory as there can be both significance in their particular
constellations regarding the slowing of material flows or an instance of a certain story
being told (of sustainability) while the material manifestations shows something
entirely different (increased consumption either in immediate context or allocated
elsewhere).
204
Testing Theory: Analysis
205
Chapter 5.
Testing Theory: Analysis
This section will elaborate on the first round of attempts to test theory by applying the
theory for analytical purposes. Referring back to Research Question 2, after an initial
building of the theory, it is crucial to attempt an application of said theory to explore
what kinds of new insights and potentials a tectonic theory which is fused with
metabolic understanding could provide.
The very first instance of theory testing occurred in a published paper, paper 1 (Usto
et al, 2022). This chapter will reference this paper, build further upon considerations
and findings, and open further pertinent discussion on the case study conducted in the
paper. While the case study was an analysis on specific cases, their juxtaposition
allows for discussion of generalizable observations which will be further explored in
the expanded analysis (5.3). This constitutes an attempt to open the analytic capacities
by comparing other relevant tendencies and efforts (anachronistic analysis) which are
relevant for a metabolic perspective even though these efforts are not explicitly
metabolic and furthermore leads to an application of the theory as metabolic-critique
based on discrepancies observed both in the case study and anachronistic analysis.
5.1. (Im)material Metabolism in Analysis
In the application of the theory, case study methodology is used as it is a well- known
foundation for theory building purposes (George, Bennet 2005). Given the many
considerations in current theory and practice which seem to heavily favor material
concerns, this case study tries to explore how immaterial considerations can influence
material consumption and flows. In the application of the theory and its analytical
capacities, the endeavor to test the theory mobilized a case study methodology as case
study is a very broad approach which can be used in many sciences, fields, and
professions. Comparatively, when industrial ecology (metabolism) experts or
consultants also conduct an analysis of a city, country, or forest, it is also considered
a case study of a particular system boundary – albeit one which requires its own and
appropriate supplementary method, tools to acquire data and knowledge of the
different set of data needs. Similarly, as social sciences could use Bruno Latour’s ANT
framework to guide a case study (to acquire data on multiple actants of perhaps both
material and immaterial constructs), so too is this case study guided by the theory
development developed in chapter 4. In this case, it is an embedded (non-holistic)
multiple case study as the focus on the five constructs of interest. In proceeding to
apply the theory, there is need of inquiry of five main points across three cases. It is
thus of interest to explore those five points (constructs) and followingly map their
206
relations (through a mixed method approach) in order to discuss how and to what
extent (constitutive) immaterial considering can affect material flows and
consumption. Following the case study, the analytical capacities of the theory are also
explored as anachronistic analysis and critique.
5.2. A Study of Multiple Cases
The chosen cases (Usto et al 2022) are three low-dense housing cases located in
Denmark in different cities. Case A is a housing settlement which has been located in
Hellebæk from 1978 and was designed by Bente Aude and Boje Lundgaard. (Aude,
Lundgaard 1975) Case B is located in Amager and was both designed and built by
Fællestegnestuen in 1975 (Holmberg 1979). Case C was (in its first iteration) built in
1966 and is located in Aalborg. It was designed by Jacob Blegvad and Arne Kjær
(Arkitekten 1965).
Figure 93. Three cases: A. Sjølundsparken (left), B. FlexiBo (middle), C. ConBox (right).
Courtesy of “Styrelsen for Dataforsyning og Effektivisering” (SDFE)).
The following analysis will rely upon and reference the findings of the paper (Usto et
al 2022). This analysis is not structured like the original paper (by the case A through
C) but instead structured by the five constructs (with crucial considerations on the
cases within each). Compared to the paper, this chapter will add further layers such as
elaborations of each construct, historic backdrop, further critical reflections, and an
exploration of a concluding hypothesis with an expanded scope compared to the
original paper.
5.2.1. Situating the Cases
The cases are built in separate decades: mid/late 60’ies to mid/late 70’ies. While
differences can be observed during this time period, the building culture, and
tendencies both globally and in Denmark at that time differ quite a bit from today.
Even so, some predominant traits can still be seen. The international influence today
was from the time period of these iterations. Specifically, frin 1960-1970 the
Testing Theory: Analysis
207
predominant influences were still modernist to a large degree and were coupled with
the evolving tendencies of brutalism and biological, organic approaches like the
Japanese Metabolists and Archi gram (Nygaard 1984, pp:188). The building industry
at the time was not as concerned with sustainable and ecological concerns as we are
today (even though oil-crisis in the 1970’s required some adaption). The building
industry was to a large degree marked by lack of housing and during this time period
(‘60-‘70’s) a building boom was imminent (Nygaard 1984, pp:13).
Regardless of the circumstances, the chosen cases in the current PhD study, whose
architectural styles are seemingly comparable to today’s styles and have existed for
several decades, permit us to observe how these styles have fared in terms of
renovation/demolition etc., in relation to the architectural character.
Figure 94.Geographical locations of cases in Denmark.
Considerations regarding the choices
In applying the theory through a case study, some background is needed. As the whole
of the building stock is very diverse: different area, materials, typology, program, and
function. Generally, there can be challenges in mapping the building stock, but we
can at least rely on the general data on materials flows (i.e. the national statistics etc.).
Ideally it would be interesting to differentiate all of the building stock (and not rely
on average data sets); however, for practical reasons there is need to limit the scope
of the case study. It is thus important to start differentiating the building stock both
in terms of function (typology and size). It is important to acknowledge the differences
within these very categories and to discern material flow differences within them. A
significant amount of material flows within the building sector are caused by the
housing segment as this is one of the largest segments of all the building stock (IRP
2020; EU Factsheet 2021).
Knowing that housing would be an important segment to focus on, it became from
then on difficult in both finding and choosing good cases as there is a great number of
housing types/sizes etc.. Given that we in architectural design and theory have put
significant emphasis on circularity and that being translated in praxis as “design for
disassembly”, this case study aimed at comparing a set of cases which have
208
significantly different architectural character and manufacturing techniques. The aim
was to compare cases which would have some similarities to today’s “circular”
thinking along with more conventional manufacturing techniques. The 3 chosen cases
have been chosen to demonstrate this variation: one being very conventional
(Sjølund), one being proto-DfD and/or OPEN building concept (FlexiBo), and the last
having the most complex manufacturing of whole spatial modules to be clicked-on
(ConBox). Another consideration was also to choose a high-density building
typology, and even though the chosen instances are categorized in this regard as low-
dense, it would also have been interesting to choose larger, multistory housing
projects. This turned out to be difficult, as it was a challenge to find multi-story
buildings with such variation in manufacturing techniques. For this reason, the chosen
cases were in the low-dense category. Another important consideration was the
choosing of modern buildings. Old, classical building are today usually well-
persevered (although that was not always the case (Bendsen, Morgen 2018)). The
challenge of today, as demonstrated by Till & Schneider (2005) and Cairns & Jacobs
(2014), is to also find discrete ways in which modern buildings could also become
cultural heritage or in any case be more persevered and not so easily demolished in
order to minimize excessive material consumption.
The respective cases demonstrate three significantly different starting point or
“designer-drivers.” In extension of the key differences in manufacturing techniques,
there is also a vague assumption that the three different cases had three different
design-drivers (Figure 95) which also influenced the choice of cases. Specifically,
case A was assumed to be mainly driven by phenomenological considerations while
case B was assumed to be mainly driven by functional considerations, and case c
assumed to be driven by technological innovation.
Figure 95. The three cases and their assumed "design-drivers."
When we observed the building stock from an architectural point of view, there was
an increased complexity in mapping the immaterial aspects in additional to mapping
ontic material flowsin in order to ascertain how the immaterial considerations could
influence the material flows. As the Danish ministry of environment reports, the main
strategy for minimizing material flows and waste is the “prevention of waste
Testing Theory: Analysis
209
generation” (Miljøministeriet 2021, pp: 25). In architecture, this does not only apply
as material strategies but requires an inclusion of (immaterial) architectural character
and the experiential value as well. Architects have perhaps for many decades assumed
that “good” architecture is already sustainable because it has a permanence if it is
made well (meaning acting as safe sink for materials by the virtue of its architectural
characteristics), but can we somehow discern this assumption and further nuance it?
5.2.2. Cases through the Constructs
In this section, the five constructs will be elaborated. We will also consider how they
relate as to finally consider how these conditions could have had influence or
consequence for material flows. As it written, the following paragraphs are based
upon an already published paper (by the author of this PhD study and co-authors).
Given the format of the paper, only so much can be included in the findings of said
paper. The juxtaposition of the three cases across the five constructs allowed for many
considerations between the time of the original writing (Usto et al 2022) and
publishing of the above-mentioned paper. These considerations will be further
explored here. Another important addition in these paragraphs is that the explorations
will be done on a construct-based chronology and not one case at a time (which the
published paper did). While the paper was a stand-alone entity, the monography is
concerned more with the theoretical constructs (as these were being applied and
tested) which was the reason for this adjustment.
Though the paper (paper 1) has a different structure in relation to the chronology of
the constructs (spectrum from material to immaterial), this chapter will reverse the
original chronology of the paper, and start from “narrative” and go downwards to the
material conditions. The reason for this reversal is for communicative as well as
explorative reasons of potentially discerning if what is said and/or intended corelates
with what is built.
Furthermore, some key considerations from the original paper will be included and
expanded upon, while some will be highlighted and reflected upon for their metabolic
potentials, as not all findings in the original paper prompt crucial critical reflections
nor provide important lessons for metabolic understanding of the built environment.
Narrative
The “narrative” dimension of the three cases was largely held to the way it appeared
outwards based on the availability of literature and writing that had any indication of
such (Usto et al 2022). Case A is a liked building (Nygaard 1984) to the point of being
labeled an architectural “pearl” (Usto et al 2022). Case B was to lesser degree known
and did not have social “footprint” of being known and liked in the same capacity as
the case A – though it later has been re-actualized through its modular living concept
210
(Beim et al. 2012). Case C was initially subject to skepticism even before being fully
built (Arkitekten 1965) and was likewise later subject to criticism due to lack of spatial
character (Nygaard 1984). These considerations were the basic outline of the
“narrative” dimension of the case study in paper 1 (Usto et al 2022). Many other
aspects could have certainly been included as well.
An important thing to include would be to consider the narratives that initiated the
architectural production. That is not to say that these were the reasons someone
wanted to build something there as there are of course a priori conditions of capital
intentions, market conditions and demographics which necessitate the building
activity at these places. Rather, this aspect concerns itself with the driving narratives
(intentions) of the designers. These differ in the three cases. Sjølund (case A) case can
be said to be drive by phenomenological consideration of highlighting the
characteristics of site conditions and in particular the existing flora along with nearby
sea and lake on site (Figure 96) (Aude & Lundgaard 1975, pp. 3). However it also
included modest considerations on “flexibility” (ibid, pp.4) which used simple
technical solutions and “familiar” materials such wood and clay (ibid., pp. 6) whose
“warmth” plays into the feeling of the spaces as well. FlexiBo (case B) was initiated
with significant considerations for use and flexibility (Holmberg 1979, pp. 4). The
architects also considered user participation in the development of the project but
drawing on earlier experiences, this can prove difficult to properly implement (ibid.).
The architects thus proposed flexible solutions which had initial enthusiasm (ibid, pp.
5) but was later shown to be mainly used when people move out and others move in
(Beim et al. 2012). The ConBox (C) has an impetus on being an innovation modular
manufacturing system. Particularly, the hope was to invent a system which could used
for very different functions: housing, institutional and hotel facilities “and more”
which would have a “high level of rationalization” by having most components
manufactured off-site (Arkitekten 1965). This level of ambition is noteworthy.
The third level to consider, is how narrative of the architecture permeates into society.
This particular dimension can be difficult to discern and handle, but there are
indications of it even if we cannot detect social narratives of three cases in their
entirety. When it comes to the case of Sjølund, it is already an area that people tend
to associate to in a positive manner in Danish society (Hellebæk being a quite
attractive place to live). By extension, the Sjølund case situates itself and further
embeds into the preexisting attractiveness of this area in a beautiful fashion. It can be
generally hypothesized (and potentially further explored) that the Sjølund case can be
considered the high-end upper-class example. FlexiBo can be considered a middle-
class example, and ConBox a middle to lower-class example. Perhaps the biggest
contrast would be that of Sjølund being a “nice” (possibly an upper middleclass)
neighborhood while the ConBox housing settlement is a modernist complex next to a
busy road and industry (see Figure 96). Geography, landscape and topography are not
created equal, so to speak, and some places are simply more attractive than others -
though architecture can have a gravitas on its own in to create a sense of place despite
Testing Theory: Analysis
211
lacking lakes and forest (like the Sjølund case has).
Experiential Conditions - phenomenology
The three mentioned cases also demonstrate differing experiential conditions and
characteristics. Although the original paper the explored experiential characteristics,
these were limited to including the body of the building only (Usto et al 2022), the
case of Sjølund qua its structural system emphasized a spatial “embrace” between two
main shear walls (Usto et al 2022). The case of FlexiBo has a similar structural system
(shear wall) but the emphasis is on the interior as the external effect of shear wall is
diminished compared to the Sjølund gesture (Usto et al. 2022). FlexiBo, given its
heavy and characteristic presence of wooden beams (which service the technical-
flexible purpose) dominates visually as a “covering” gesture in the interior. Regarding
Conbox case, as has already been revealed, the spatial qualities were put into question
very early (Arkitekten 1965) which prompted a kind of cell-like dwelling and not in
any positive sense (Usto et al 2022).
Figure 96. Case A. Sjølund (top left), Case B. FlexiBo (op rigth), Case C.ConBox (bottom)
Courtesy of “Styrelsen for Dataforsyning og Effektivisering” (SDFE)).
While the initial paper focused on the body, in this expanded elaboration, site
conditions will also be considered as these also influence the experience of the place.
The prior conditions of both the characteristics of the place and some of the narrative
structures of the cases’ reputations in society also influence the experience of them.
In the case of Sjølund, the overall phenomenological reading is that the housing bodies
seemingly arise almost as terrain elements into architectural form for inhabitation, and
that the structural shear wall system has an embrace phenomenological gesture (ibid).
212
The simple shear wall principle is “shifting” over the whole site, and this shifting
principle partakes in constituting of an experiential embeddedness into the site
conditions. Embedded and surroundings of the forest, lake and sea, the site is already
unique and carries a lot of experiential qualities on its own. As the authors of the
project folder and the design, the place had a very strong character, and the placing of
the houses was done to commemorate and emphasize this (Aude & Lundgaard 1975).
Figure 97. Case A: the shear walls are subject to a shifting principle
in relation to site conditions. Though elaborated in the experiential construct, they belong in
the construct of the structuring principle.
In the case of FlexiBo, the conditions are more withdrawn and conventional to the
time and place of the suburban setting of Amager. The contextual conditions are not
as noticeable as in the case of Sjølund. Given the fact that a road nearby is adjacent
with the building in a long straight line, so too is the housing body on this flat terrain
and low structures in the nearby vicinity. The site is very long, and the composition
of the building are made to create a small interior “street” which connects the
buildings through a walkable boulevard.
In the case of ConBox, the housing area is placed close to a highly busy road. The site
is very long, and the placing of the buildings does little to embrace and create a sense
of place via their composition and arrangement on the site.
Figure 98. The three cases (respectively A,B, and C) and their characteristic expressions.
In the case of Sjølund as an “positive” outlier, the houses are row houses which have
a seemingly clear definition of each unit by the heavy sheer walls (Usto et al 2022).
Testing Theory: Analysis
213
These indicate individuality and a feeling of home within a dense and vibrant natural
area as the units are arranged in a dynamic way given the terrains, water etc. In the
case of ConBox as the “negative” outlier, on account of building system limitations,
(the original) facades amplified the elongated volumes (especially through placement
and articulation of swallow passage), as the manufacturing system privileges the
stacking of boxes in rows into long volumes (Usto et al 2022).
Function - Use
The cases certainly also differ with regard to functionality as they have had different
ambitions and agendas with regard to the interior. In the case of Sjølund, which
seemingly had the more “relaxed” approach regarding plan and functionality, the
concern was making a good, functional plan distribution but with minimal opportunity
to make an extra room (new office, or children room etc.) (Aude &Lundgaard 1975;
Usto et al. 2022). On the other hand, in the case of FlexiBo, the ambition was already
a strong concept on flexibility while living in the unit. While this had potential, the
current use of the vast flexibility was minimized to people only putting a few walls
up when moving in (Beim et al 2012).
Figure 99. Plans of three cases –
red lines indicate flexibility as possibility of partition walls.
In the case of ConBox, there was already skepticism regarding the spatial and
functional quality of the project even before its full realization (Arkitekten 1966;
Nygaard 1984). ConBox had a very fixed setup in its plan and each spatial module
had its own function (room, bath, kitchen etc.). The same concept was not been used
since in a Danish context.
The ConBox case thus holds the least value in terms of function (and flexibility), while
the other two are worth taking note of. While the FlexiBo case was in a sense a
“failure” in comparison to the intentions of ever-changing interior in vast network of
possibilities, the fact that it nevertheless is still used but only when new inhabitants
move is a significant find as it indicates a balance in application and that people do
not want to experiment endlessly. The Sjølund case on the opposite end, indicates a
very limited yet meaningful flexibility at designated spots. Almost in opposition to
case B, the Sjølund case shows that less can be enough in the sense that well-made
214
plan organization may require only a small addition to accommodate needs.
Structuring Principles
The published paper elaborates on the structuring principles of the three cases and
mainly highlights the structural (loadbearing) system with Case A having a very
conventional shear wall system, case B also having a shear wall system through
stabilized by cores (wc), and case C having rather a conventional frame system with
special box modules (Usto et al 2022). The positive outliers were case B with the
beams in the ceiling allowing for easy mounting of new light wall elements (which
are stored in a common facility for everyone to borrow if needed). Furthermore, it is
also worth noting, that in addition to the modest flexibility of plan design in case A,
its façade system was sectioned into modules into which additional changes (new
larger windows etc.) could be placed (Aude & Lundgaard 1975, pp. 7) thus allowing
changes without impeding on the character of the architecture.
Figure 100. Façade system of Case A and ceiling system (and detail) of Case B.
Case C, ConBox, also holds significance in the negative sense. As earlier elaborated,
the technological innovation was very ambitious, where a modular system was to
contain variations of applicability to housing, institutions, hotels and more (Arkitekten
1965). One could consider that this ambition of applicability as many functions were
what perhaps impeded on its spatial character of the housing variant. On the other
hand, what could have complicated this was the fact that the concept was centralized
around whole spatial modules and not singular structural elements (a la design-for-
disassembly in circular economy thinking in contemporary architecture).
Material Consequences
Given the fact that a significant amount of time has passed since the construction of
these buildings, we have the benefit of time to see what has taken place since then.
Initially relying on archival data, the quest was to find documents and data on the
transformational history for each of these cases, meaning how much has been
Testing Theory: Analysis
215
renovated or if something has been demolished. The most significant finding was that
the initial skepticism of Case C was well founded as this case has had the most
significant transformations (Usto et al 2022) (see Figure 101). While click-in elements
can be good for repair etc., making “circular” elements can also be risky.
Figure 101. Images of two major renovations of case C: the hitherto appearance (middle)
and its current ongoing transformation (right). (First image of original facade (left):
courtesy by Aalborg Stadsarkiv. Photo 1966 by J. Brems)
The main take-aways lies in the cases of A and B. Case B, although being a mild
“failure” with its immense ambitions for instant flexibility, is still a good lesson.
people still use the buildings but not necessarily as the architects intended. Case A on
the other hand mobilized spatial quality to more significant degree. By providing a
minimal possibility of flexibility, the architectural character remains of high
phenomenological quality while providing meaningful flexibility. These cases do not
demonstrate all-encompassing design-for-disassembly strategies where every single
element can be removed but instead allows for minimized click-in strategy with the
main building body remaining as is for an indefinite time period. Perhaps case A in
particular demonstrates this “gesture” of surplus (im)material effort which
hypothetically acts as an investment (higher phenomenological quality) to minimize
future material flows.
(Re)considering the Findings
In answering the research question, it is thus not as easy as to saying yes or no
regarding if some buildings designs perform as a “safe sink” (Urban sink) for
materials. The cases demonstrate that it is a question of degree. As all the cases have
shown lesser or greater levels of transformations over time (renovations/demolition),
some cases do indeed demonstrate a more careful understanding of how to minimize
material consumption over time. It can indeed be observed that immaterial conditions
can influence material consumption. Especially in the case of Sjølund whose
architectural character is known and appreciated and at the same time legislated and
maintained through guiding instructions for renovation and additions over time thus
limiting the types and amounts of material changes (Usto et al 2022).
One could furthermore risk a more daring reading. While the original paper is more
216
delicate and careful about the potential correlation between immaterial characteristics
and their potential influence on material flows, a few considerations could have been
brought forth to potentially emphasize this. Firstly, on account of Harman ontological
view, the potential of the (im)material surplus is not an addition of such as a sign or
sculpture onto the building body, but an integral part of it. So, when a building acts,
it performs as unity despite being comprised of many material and immaterial sub-
elements. Another important aspect to highlight from the original paper (which
original paper did not emphasize enough) which was also elaborated earlier (Figure
100) was that in the case of Sjølund, the architects’ drawings and instructions
(prescriptions) acted as local plan law which guided future additions/renovations
made by the inhabitants. While the descriptions did hold some qualitative descriptions
(i.e., wood being “warm” and “familiar”), the instructions as normative prescriptions
were integrated with the aesthetic qualities which indicated where and how changes
were possible, at least regarding the façade, which did not impede on the character of
the architecture. For these reasons, this aspect could have been included in the
“structuring principle” construct, i.e., one which took into account architectural
character and changing needs over time.
The paper also hypothesizes a (im)material surplus as potentially metabolic
performativity, the original paper did not attempt to further explore this given its
limited format. Given the slightly obscure contours of such a concept, it will be
explored in the following section.
5.2.3. The Hypothesis of the (im)material Surplus
As Slavoj Žižek has developed, objet a or surplus-value is a paradoxical object that
can be added to an edifice to makes sense of said edifice. The nature of the object is
that it is fundamentally immaterial but can be (often is) embodied in some physical
form which acts as the material manifestation of the surplus (like the crown of the
king etc.,). When it comes to the immaterial conditions of architecture, as we have
seen in the case study, we can argue for the existence of a surplus, most prominent
perhaps in the case A of Sjølund; and while the initial variant of the hypothesis of the
(im)material surplus was related to the overlapping of structural principle and spatial
gesture (Usto et al 2022), this exploration will attempt to further nuance it as it can be
observed that the shear walls “shift” (structuring principle) creates a dynamic and
embedded phenomenological relation (experiential construct) to site conditions.
Testing Theory: Analysis
217
Figure 102. Images of chosen cluster.
Courtesy of “Styrelsen for Dataforsyning og Effektivisering” (SDFE)).
For this reason, given that we can phenomenologically discern the immaterial surplus,
an important question is thus what material consequences does this architectural
surplus have and can we discern the surplus in material terms? To answer this, a
limited exploration was conducted with impetus on a cluster in Sjølund project. The
task is to take the housing cluster (see Figure 102) of 3 dwelling units (unit names Is,
Ns, Ls) (Aude, Lundgaard 1975) of the Sjølund project in its original manifestation
and compare it to a fictional “rationalized” cost-effective version. Although the
architecture would radically change, the experiment will maintain amounts of square
meter and function as the most import parameters. The roof girders and roof in its
entirety were not included in accumulated volume as drawing material was not
available (for more specific delineation of background conditions of this comparison,
see appendix C).
Figure 103. The surplus volume is a metric which is to be viewed as volume pr. floor area.
But in this case, floor area is constant in the two versions.
This exploration attempted to model the building body (external walls, interior walls
etc.) of the original and fictive variant as to discern the differences in the material
volume of the two. We can thus see a surplus volume of materials in the original
design compared to the modified and rationalized version (which incidentally had
218
similarities with case C in external expression). One would have initially thought that
the surplus would have been much more but due to having to change lengths in the
modified version, volume was added as well in order to attain functionality and the
same amount of floor area on both ground level and first floor. The surplus volume of
1.3 cubic meters (see Figure 103) is perhaps not much which adds an immaterial
quality compared to the potential of acting as a metabolic/material investment. It can
be argued that the extra envelope area of the façade in the original (by way of complex
geometry compared to the rationalized version) increased the energy. This is due to
the fact that the floor-area to building-envelope-area ratio is worse in the original
design. By merely considering use of material in volume, the surplus of 1.3 cubic
meters is in a simplified and abstracted sense what provides the immaterial quality in
the Sjølund case. Obviously, due to good work by the architect, this hypothetical
surplus is masterfully composed and not a mere addition (sign or sculpture). This
surplus is furthermore not some exquisite material (marble etc.) and is merely the
average of the main body of the building which is composed mainly of brick, concrete
and wood along with other materials. This surplus of 1.3 cubic meters is also an
abstract measure as it does not say anything about what the composition of materials:
its merely, at this point, an abstract volume. What is clear about this hypothetical
comparison is that the architecture greatly suffers in the modified version compared
to the original in relation to the intended dynamic relation with the terrain, almost
given the impression that it is an extension of said terrain. That is not to say that the
modified version would not have its own qualities and tectonic niceties. Rather, they
would perhaps be less sensitive to the contextual conditions. By adding a surplus of
material volume, and by masterfully composing it, (surplus of 1.3 cubic meters) the
building contains a (im)material “investment” which add character to the built
environment. I would argue that this surplus has the potential to act as an insurance
for the minimizing future material flows through both interior spatial character and
variation as well as a phenomenological grounding in the “spirit” of the site.
The ’surplus’ is already a familiar notion in design and particularly in engineering via
the concept of “abundance”. In the engineering context, abundance is usually used as
a surplus of materials or design which is a safety measure or fail-safe. As exemplified
in the above exploration, the aspect of abundance could also include an “abundant”
wall element (like case B) which can actualize itself in the future. At the same time,
there is an immaterial dimension to the surplus, which is not hands-on like the stored
wall elements but an integral part of the architectural character. At the same time the
challenge would be to avoid a kind of fetishization of this surplus, which could
introduce complex aesthetic expressions beyond any efficacy and relevance (for users,
site, culture etc.) for the sake of esoteric appearances. Here the edifice becomes
problematic as aesthetics presents itself as constitutive for what kind of surplus is
relevant in what social and cultural contexts. The intention is not to claim that the
(im)material surplus can always be brought forth in such an exercise as the “feeling”
of the surplus may vary in its materializations.
Testing Theory: Analysis
219
The conclusion is thus paradoxical: to be properly “efficient” with regard to slowing
material flows, a seemingly “irrational surplus” is required. Mere utility and efficient
performative alignment within the capitalist realism could turn out to have a negative
effect (like case C) while a sensitivity to interior experience and site specificity could
strengthen the overall narrative in everyday use, in society and potentially minimize
the need for future material input. The significance of this type of surplus is that it is
not an ornamental excess (which is very costly and time-consuming today) but
something very conventional which is feasible within a contemporary building
practice.
5.2.4. Relation between intention and material consequences
Juxtaposing the five constructs across the three cases has encouraged the examination
of many considerations. While the paper was aimed at exploring if and how the
immaterial aspects could or did influence the material flows, this section of the
monograph more precisely explored a different chronology of the constructs for the
purpose of exploring constructs. It has been observed that each construct can hold a
multiplicity of empirical points. The five constructs can thus have many sub-
constructs simultaneously which relate to both the case as well as external site
conditions and social context. While relations and sub-construct as presented in theory
building (chapter 4.4.5., Figure 78) are a “balanced” example which contains general
points, a specific case could have multiple empirical points in each construct to the
point of containing multiple narratives or multiple intention which could be
contradictory.
Figure 104. Abstract example: each construct can have multiple empirical counterparts.
When applying the (im)material metabolism theory as analysis there is significance is
conducting the analysis (i.e., case study) by initiating the inquiry with the construct of
the “narrative” dimension then going through “experimental conditions”, “use”,
and“structuring principle” to finally arrive at the “material flows.” This is due to the
fact that the object of analysis already exists (and does not need to be designed) and
220
because such a chronology allows for critical reflection in order to observe what is
said/intended/narrated and how such intentions are materialized. Ultimately, such a
dialectical process allows for observation if the final matericorresponducts
corresponds with the intentions or if there is Jevons Paradox phenomena (where good
intentions materialized negatively).
Figure 105. Starting from Narrative, through the middle,
and relating all to material consequences.
In actuality, the process was not linear. While it was pertinent to start from the
“narrative” dimension, it was always necessary to iterate and reflect in relation to other
constructs throughout the analytical endeavor. After an initial look into the “narrative”
(step 1), it was useful to read the design drawings and gain an overview of the
functional and organizational aspects. Followingly, the construct of “use” (step 2) was
immediately set in relation to the experimental (phenomenological) conditions. Next,
the couple “use” and “experience” are related to the “structuring principles” (step 3)
in order to gain insight into how the above-mentioned functionality and its
experimental properties were manifested through construction and material
considerations. Next, the three constructions in the middle were again related to the
respective “narrative” (step 4) in order to ascertain if the projects’ own intentions were
met. Finally, the whole edifice composed by the architects is related to the actualized
material consequences (though in a limited scope).
Concludingly, it was not possible to find any written intentions or design
considerations explicitly dealing with sustainability, but the intentions that were found
have their own material flow consequences regardless of the missing explicit
considerations regarding sustainability. Hypothetically, even in another future
application of the (im)material metabolism, a chosen case which may have explicit
sustainable goals could turn out to have a very different material consequences.
Furthermore, in relation to the Urban Sink concept, it is not unequivocal that site-
oriented phenomenological intentions (like case A) are always positive regarding
material flows, nor should it be taken that technologically driven concepts (like case
C) are always doomed for failure. This juxtaposition of phenomena nevertheless
prompted considerations, gave new insight and critical reflection, and will be further
Testing Theory: Analysis
221
explored to consider other possibilities which could be relevant for expanding of the
notion of the Urban Sink in a critical metabolic approach.
5.3. Expanding the horizon – anachronistic analysis and critique
While the first part of this chapter, i.e., the empirical application (analytical tradition)
of the (im)material metabolism, was mainly concerned with exploring the constructs
and their relations, the second part, i.e., the expansion of the horizon, is concerned
with exploring insights which could provide contours for the last to elements of theory
building: the “logics” and the “boundaries”. To do this, the exploration follows a
continent tradition in which a more general approach to analysis is needed. Likewise,
a larger set of cases are needed without delving into the complex empirical facts of
each and only hinge on aspects relevant to expansive exploration of what the Urban
Sink concept could entail. How can we use metabolic thinking in an application of a
more general analysis and critique? The purpose here is to both explore the width of
(im)material metabolic analysis and apply it as critique. The intention with this
exploration is at the same time to expand the meaning of metabolism and thus nuance
the debate on material consumption in the built environment. If any design or system
ought to perform as Urban Sink, what should we also keep in mind, apart from the
initial findings and considerations from paper 1 (and paragraph 5.2)?
5.3.1. Anachronistic analysis – towards a spectrum of the Urban Sink
On basis of the case study only having 3 variants (acting as Urban Sink to lesser or
greater degree), it became pertinent to further explore what the Urban Sink notion
could entail. The urban sink is potentially its own spectrum, there are many examples
of practices which are worth noting in the development of the spectrum in the quest
to explore and nuance the Urban Sink concept.
On grounds of the above case study, findings have allowed for insight into the
empirical data on conditions in the three cases as they allowed for speculation and
qualified discussions on the relations and correlation between the five constructs of
inquire, albeit in differing hierarchies and constellations. The case study has also
prompted more general insights regarding challenges of metabolism by opening
“visibility” to other relevant fields which are very relevant but not directly
“metabolic.” Circular economy strategies, such as design-for-disassembly
fundamentally also holds Urban Sink capacity, but it is not necessary that all elements
need to be disassembled if building design is to slow and narrow material flows. As
already mentioned, the concept of the Open building (Habraken 1962; Kendall,
Teicher 2000) design is not merely a concept. Rather it has its own history and is also
a field, edifice, or discourse within architectural design. It differs from circular
economy as the support is usually permanent and the infill only is designed for
222
disassembly and not the whole building though there can also be variants of open
buildings which also include the whole body intended for disassembly.
Figure 106. Principle of Open Building Concept; support (structure) and infill (light walls
etc.).
Prior to the study, the author(s) were vaguely aware of the notion of the OPEN
building concept (support/infill). They were not, however, aware of its full potential
until they conducted the study and discussed the findings. When it comes to metabolic
considerations in relation to building design and analysis, the concept of the OPEN
building design is highly relevant; nonetheless, there are also other pertinent
considerations to include and consider.
The FIXED building concept (own naming)
It is possible that particular constellations of the five constructs within a architectural
work where the particular compositions and internal relations of spaces, functions,
technical service etc., allow for flexibility without needing any movable (infill)
elements other than furniture. The idea is to differentiate this particular type from
other classical architecture because it also has a contemporary relevance to material
flows as this allows for certain ambiguity without any or very little material unput.
Testing Theory: Analysis
223
Figure 107. Internal variety and composition permitting flexibility and adaptability
(own redrawing based on (Alexander et al 1977)).
The reference here is Christopher Alexanders who very briefly, yet interestingly,
elaborated on flexibility (Alexander et al 1977). Alexander elaborated that old
classical houses (), due to their organization, proportions, and compositions allow for
an easy shift from acting as a home to performing as an office. Alexander emphasized
the different rooms sizes, and their different ceiling heights which afforded (Gibson
2015) themselves for a differing functional application. The particular case that
Alexander shows (as redrawn in aforementioned figure) is not the only way such a
setup could be organized but should prompt further investigation. Many buildings can
be said to contain such composition setup, or something similar to it. The quest is
nonetheless to discern particular relations in its given contexts. One is almost tempted
to accept that there is fundamental formalism (one of ambiguity) at play in such a
performativity of a fixed variant of the Urban Sink.
Mixing Sacred and profane - Islamic Architecture
In a comprehensive contribution of the vast movements in Islamic architecture, Robert
Hillenbrand notes a few founding characteristics of how Islamic architects would
conceive of spatial and architecture challenges. He elaborates Islamic architects were
“…not relentlessly experimenting with new forms...” but preferred to “…refine
existing ones…or to load them with extra decoration.” (Hillenbrand 1994, pp.24). As
we have later learned from scholars such as Michael Hensel, some of these “simple”
forms with “extra decoration” have been observed to have intrinsic tectonic character
with structural capabilities and abilities to act climatically within the surrounding
physical and atmospheric conditions (Hensel 2013). This hints at the attitude of
refinement of known principles instead of mere formal exploration, and in more ways
than merely visual decoration. This particular way of thinking of adaptability,
flexibility etc. with “permanent” heavy elements allows for a cultural continuity and
recognizability in terms of local and national heritage etc.
224
Figure 108. An additive logic of simple (“refined”) elements.
In extension of this, Hensel also elaborates how the sacred and profane function (i.e,
ceremonial use and everyday use) are to be contained within one and the same
module/form and containing a flexibility and functional ambiguity within a simple
and beautiful form. Hillenbrand brings forth an example where a madrasa (an
religious educational institution) was also used as a hostel (Hillenbrand 1994, pp. 202)
along with other examples of much wider flexibility affordance of a single piece of an
architecture having more than two different functions (ibid, pp.246). Finally, there is
an interesting passage from Hillenbrand regarding a “palace” (ibid., pp.426-7). This
particular “palace” contain an uncertainty of the functional performance even though
the remaining structure is that of a beautiful form which has a functional ambiguity.
Yet paradoxically, as it may seem that Islamic architecture is very “formalist” (object-
fixated), the fact is exactly the opposite. Interior are given much more weight than
exteriors where the façade was basically “…moved inside...” (ibid. pp.126).
Incidentally, though not crucial for my main arguments, a later scholar also postulated
that Gottfried Semper, although using Greek architecture as main reference, may have
been inspired by Islamic architecture for the concepts of bekleidung, as Islamic
architecture is more concerned with the “surface” than the structural “body” (Klein
2014). With this shift away from “idolatry” of the body/material onto space, the shift
was intended for “...inwardness and contemplation...” (Klein 2014). The historical
Islamic building culture can thus be said to be mirroring of Semper’s emphasis on
interiors, veiling, and the haze of carnival candles. Comparing to more recent
architectural practice, we can perhaps clearly see, as is already known, how the work
of Danish architects Jørn Utzon was influence by Islamic architecture, not visually
but perhaps especially in the development of his additive systems and the Espansiva
system (Weston 2008).
Testing Theory: Analysis
225
Figure 109. Own diagrammatic redrawing the Utzon Center (by Kim and Jørn Utzon) -
showing the "openness" of the plan (red lines indicates possible walls).
There are some important lessons to translate from Islamic architecture. Not to repeat
the visual characteristics (content), but there is deep lesson in the meta-formal attitude
and way of thinking which can be translated into a modern setting in relation to
climate change and challenges of material consumption. While the historical
tendencies in Islamic architecture can be said to have similarities to the “fixed”
building concepts, there is likewise a mental flexibility in Islamic architecture which
allows for a mixing of sacred and profane program due to a kind of functional
ambiguity in the formal designs. As the architectural challenge is to think in both large
constellations and eco-systems, it is likewise a challenge to consider the immaterial
dimensions in how the building body is shaped as to make it functionally ambiguous
and beautiful at the same time.
Architectural Association School of Architecture, London
An example of an early OPEN building design (sometimes referring to as loose-fit) is
none other than the Architectural Association, London. This design is exemplified in
Georgian townhouses which, given the adaptable affordances, have evolved over time
but kept their character (Wright 2017). Seeing the building from the outside, one could
think that is an entire housing complex. At one point, these townhouses were indeed
seven former family homes which have continuously evolved to provide facilities for
teaching and designing/making for circa 1000 people (Wright 2017).
226
Figure 110. Georgian housing turned architectural studios
(Photo: Public Domain by Jeremysm.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architectural_Association_School_of_Architecture#/media/File:
Aabedfordsq2.jpg)
As Wright reifies, there has been significant growth over time which testifies to the
fact that the design of the Georgian houses has allowed for the spaces to remain
attractive and functional despite changing needs over time and while retaining a social
and contextual character.
Modernism and Modernity
We can also see how different debates, which have spanned decade in architectural
discourse, get a new light from the perspective of metabolism and open building
designs. For a long time, we have debated the extent to which the architect is expected
or allowed to “control” how you live your life (Sarnitz 2020, pp.94-103). From
another famous example of the modernism positions, we have seen the “battle” of
Farnsworth House by Ludwig van der Rohe whose client was very dissatisfied with
his design (Craven 2019). While modernism is usually seen as being more radical
regarding its control of how the inhabitants dwell, there are also examples of early
modernism which testifies to the opposite. Dutch architect Gerrit Rietveld‘s design of
the Schröder House is an example of building that is open, with no fixed furniture
and thus allowed for differentiated setup according the needs within those perimeters
(Habraken 1998,pp. 75). Rietveld’s design also featured a set of sliding walls that
allow for flexibility in plan design and variation in use (Bosma et al 2000, pp. 28).
Testing Theory: Analysis
227
Figure 111. The Schröder House by Gerrit Rietveld (Photo: creative common. Photo: Sailko.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rietveld_Schr%C3%B6der_House#/media/File:Casa_Rietveld_
Schr%C3%B6der_11.jpg)
Although later in the century higher sensitivity towards flexibility arose, perhaps
especially the early and high Modernism with its “modernist realism” had the
character of striving for total control. While modernism also contributed significant
increase in life quality of more space, functional uses and in general a kind of
democratization of space, it still retained a kind of un-modern gesture within its edifice
which can be said to be present today. Jeremy Till, as well as David Leatherbarrow,
from respectively different perspectives, elaborate how, well beyond our perceived
visions of control, architecture certainly contains uncontrollable characteristics and
properties which are to lesser or greater degree out of reach for designers while at the
same time having aspects which we indeed can influence.
Late Modernism and Post-Modernism
Modernism was slowly developing into post-modernism through movements such as
brutalist and the Avant grade movements of Archi zoom and Japanese Metabolist, we
started to see example of modular systems and dynamic architectural solutions. Some
considered themselves more radical as with the example of the Japanese Metabolist,
while later movements and dogma simplified the notion into more of an tech-like look
or appearance (high-tech style of Norman Foster and Richard Rogers among others)
but lacking the actual possibility for adapting (Lifschutz 2017).
228
Figure 112. Nakagin Capsule Tower by Kisho Kurokawa (Japanese Metabolist)
(Creative commons. Photo: Jordy Meow,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nakagin_Capsule_Tower#/media/File:Nakagin.jpg)
Perhaps comparable to both OPEN building concept and the circular agenda of today,
the example of Nakagin Capsule Tower (Gardini, A., 2022), was an example a click-
on system of whole spatial modules with slight similarities in principle to case C in
the case study above. The current situation of this building is one of deterioration and
lack of maintenance (and failure of the concrete) has led to the decision to demolish
and partially remove (Block 2021). This can serve as an example that the proto-
circular affordances will not necessarily be used as intended, as both materials can
fail, they could have produced new better modules compatible with the given system.
This was not the case as there was no incentive to continue an outdated technology.
This prompts the consideration, with the open building in mind as well, that a kind of
“total” circularity of the architectural anatomy is perhaps not desirable as much
uncertainty arises over long spans of time – whereas having a more ambiguous
“permanent” form supplemented by light weight “infill” would be a safer approach in
terms of material consumption. On the other side of this coin, as in the case of
Architectural Association building, the character of the architecture in relation to the
surrounding park and urban area is maintained.
It would also be relevant to mention Le Corbusier’s Domino system, as its intention
was to allow for flexibility in both plan and façade, but the practical and physical built
works were not entirely in spirit with open building concept (Bosma et al 2000, pp.
105-6). John Habraken - one of the founding figures and popularizer of OPEN
building concept - elaborated in a book that the technical and structural component of
the Domino system is not entirely the same as the OPEN building concept. Habraken
develops the notions of “support” and “infill” across scales (city, tissue, support,
allocation, infill) (Habraken 1962) and distinguishes from what he designates as
“support” from the domino system, as the support is already a category which is not
merely the structural system but a body of the architecture which supports flexibility
Testing Theory: Analysis
229
(which includes more considerations than mere resisting gravity). The Open Building
concept is flexible as to contain considerations for not only buildings but also urban
design, building, products, but also management and finance among others (Kendall,
Teicher 2000, pp.40-49).
Another important contribution to the open building concept was that of Stewart
Brand in his book on “How Buildings Learn” (Brand 1994, pp.13). Here he made the
now famous image of concentric layers of the building’s anatomy and its
approximated life spans (stuff, space, service, skin, structure, site). Stewart Brand
notes:
“Almost no buildings adapt well. They’re designed not to adapt; also
budgeted and financed not to, constructed not to, administered not to,
maintained not to, regulated and taxed not to, and even remodeled not to.
But alle buildings (except monuments) adapt anyway, however poorly,
because the usages in and around them are changing constantly.” (Brand
1994)
Another good example of later post-modernism, John Habraken, designed a home for
his parents in Apeldoorn in 1998. The home was composed of two separate volumes
which are not functionally distinct (in the sense of one of them being private rooms
for sleeping and the other the active rooms like living room, dining etc.). In the larger
volume there is a interior colonnade which can add options to segment the larger space
if needed to create intimate nooks etc. But more than anything, the concept is open
building which would allow the layout to be different or even an entirely different
function all together. One could easily imagine how such a design could act as small
restaurant or café, with sitting area in the large volume and kitchen in the smaller. A
point of critique of this design would be the detailing and lack of tectonic finesse. This
could be made into a general critique of open building concepts, as they often fall
down into a kind lower form of sublime “flat” appearance which lack expression.
230
Figure 113. The original plan from 1961, and the house with the later extension in 1998.
(Own redrawing)
While we can observe the potentials and lack Japanese metabolic thinking, which was
in tune with the contemporary tendencies of Archigram, who also had similar
considerations on moving parts and cities – the spirit of the post-war metabolism can
be argued to have remained with its core principles in the OPEN building concept.
But for the open building concept to gain a proper metabolic angle, would mean that
it is a measure towards slowing and narrowing of material flows from nature to
society. Open building concept could equally be used in a overly opportunistic manor
as it can become yet another way to explore aesthetic appearances which would have
the pertinent principles squandered of their inherent potential and thus flattened to
merely a new appearance, like it happened with the early works of Foster and Rogers,
as Lifschutz argued.
Testing Theory: Analysis
231
Figure 114. A contemporary example of the open building concept - large portions of the plan
are simply open to large variety of uses and infills (own redrawing).
Solid11 by Tony Fretton Architects (Kruit 2022).
While the open building concept may seem simple, its challenge is that it is not widely
applied despite the fact that it is not significantly more expensive to realize such
buildings for developers (Franke 2022).
We can thus observe that it is not necessarily a question of style in the sense that
Modernism is “bad”, or some other style is supposedly better for open building
concepts. The principles of open building can potentially permeate any style, and
styles can add a surplus value to an ambiguous structure.
A Contemporary Return to “Permanence”
A recent significant contribution designated as architecture of persistence (Fannon et
al 2022) is of urgent relevance when we attempt to outline the Urban Sink in different
scales of building design. Although the following descriptions does not do the
literature justice, the “architecture of persistence” is a significant expansion of the
OPEN building concept, provides much significant nuance and background while
relying on differentiated existing literature to develop the different facets of what it
means for architecture to be “persistent”. The authors Fannon et al. designate a variety
of ways in which a building can be persistent (an expanded form of architectural
permanence) which is constituted of three main elements (constructs), i.e., Material
Ecology, Changing Use, Alternative Futures, all of which have accompanying sub-
elements (ibid). Respectively, they include all from the material performativity of the
“essential” (structural) elements and facilitating changes in services and technologies,
to highlighting the need for the capacity for changing uses over time, and the cultural
232
memory of building in social setting (ibid). Speculatively, they indicate (qua one of
their interviewees) that buildings (in concrete) could potentially last centuries—up to
a thousand years (ibid. pp.24). Concludingly, the authors synthesize a diagram of
considerations to have in mind when designing a persistent architecture: strategic
structure (not impeding on future use), tactical tampering (enclosure and active
systems), and flux form (meeting longevity and change) (ibid, pp. 285-88).
Furniture and Inventory
In both material (utilitarian terms) and immaterial (experiential) terms, furniture and
inventory also holds significance for a building’s capacity to perform as Urban Sinks.
Specifically, furnishing and inventory can also come in both fixed and floating
variants though the most common tendency is obviously that of movable furniture
along with other more or less fixed or movable inventory. This category can span
anything from tectonic wallpaper (Hvejsel, Kirkegaard 2013), to visible or non-visible
technical services (as considered in 4.4.4), to moveable and fixed furniture, among
many other aspects of interiority (Sarnitz 2020, pp.191-202).
Detail
As we have seen both in this chapter (especially case B) and with several references
(Kjær Frederiksen, Munch-Petersen 2019), the detail is also a crucial aspect of
manifesting the Urban Sink. Given the “circular” turn in the building industry, the
detail has gotten a fresh breath of life, as disassembly is a pertinent design parameter
for buildings. The detail additionally does not have to be only “open” to be able to
dismantle the entire building. It does need to be more in tune with the open building
concept in order to possibly partially dismantle where the “support” is fixed while the
infill is open/loose. It is not impossible that a building whose every detail is “fixed”
can perform as a Urban Sink given its masterful application of principles, materials,
experiences, use etc.
The (Im)Material Surplus
This category is more ambiguous. It does have, first and foremost, a material
dimension and material performativity, not unlike abundance in engineering as
guarantee for robustness, regardless of if it is structural, indoor climatic, or something
else. Similarly, some minimal surplus could also be ascribed to flexibility and
adaptability. The final aspect of this category could thus be that a more “irrational”
excess, whether or not in extension of material performativity, is a gesturing surplus
(as in the case of Sjølund). While seemingly useless from an utilitarian and cost
effective point of view, the category may hold “performative” significance in relation
to the contextual, social, and cultural dimensions of experience and heritage.
…some reflections regarding the Urban Sink variants
In the ideal future, where we no longer demolish buildings, and many buildings will
be made to be open and adaptable. Along those lines, there would still be need for a
metabolic design approach because the infill dimension would show tendencies of
Testing Theory: Analysis
233
potentially becoming a whole new market and industry of its own (Kendall 2011).
This would mean that the very aspect of the infill, regardless of whether the instance
is of new or old buildings, would require that the interior would always need to
change. The prospect of the infill aspect becoming an industry could potentially turn
from a mere need to have to all kinds of luxury variants, to changing trends in dwelling
etc. This would be a Hegelian/Žižekian reversal from In-itself to for It-self, and in this
instance, there would be a need for aligning and relating material flows with the
overall scheme. The implication is thus that the support and infill are two separate
markets, where the support is made by the architects and the infill is given to someone
else. This is perhaps be challenged by the practice of the case B (local storage of light
walls).
When we consider the Urban Sink spectrum in relation to contemporary challenges of
material flows, tit can be argued that there is more need for open building concepts or
“architecture of persistence” which is an open and adaptable category of buildings,
rather than the fixed variants of the Urban Sink. Furthermore, it is also important to
point out that, while Urban Sink does have variation, it is not entirely clear which
variant would be more or less fitting in any given context (whether that context be the
fixed types or the open types of buildings). Open building concepts strategies can
easily be perceived as a very technical architectural solution to environmental
challenges. The challenge at the same time is thus how to introduce a significant shift
in tectonic character in what is usually mostly associated with a technical solution of
environmental problem. How beautiful can such seemingly technical solutions be?
While the listed variants of the Urban Sink in the building scale need to be considered
for each building, more metabolic relations can be manifested and explored if we also
start relating buildings to each and to other infrastructure in the city. This is significant
as a particular building design may seem arbitrary with respect to the examples of the
“persistence” perspective exactly because such considerations partake in a wider
metabolic scheme (this “wider scheme” will be explore further in chapter 6.).
5.3.2. (Im)material Metabolism as Critique
Based on the observed discrepancies in both the case study and in the anachronistic
analysis, the dealing with the limitations of “sustainable” concepts (circularity, reuse
etc.) containing the risk of such concepts being misused or not used in the future as
intended or as its potential allowed. These observations prompted a need to consider
these and similar phenomena from a metabolic-critique perspective.
In what comes below, the hitherto built theory of the (im)material metabolism is also
tested as an applied method of critique. The theory provides a particular kind of
“materialist” ontological grounding from which other phenomena can be critiqued.
While a case study is more systematic (analytical philosophy), critique moves more
234
at the surface level of phenomena (in the spirit of continental philosophy) by focusing
on only chosen objects/construct and a limited (yet critical) set of relations between
constructs which assert effects and consequences of interest for criticism.
Dialectical Materialism is often linked with the critical tradition in philosophy, and
thus one would assume that this doctoral study would have strong foundations in
critical thinking – and it does through use of Žižek’s writing, accompanied by Harman
(who is not a part of the critical traditions). One would perhaps also assume that
because of this, this doctoral study positions itself in the architectural discipline as
such while being critical architecture. Nonetheless, things are a complex here and
need outlining. Critical Architecture spans and can be different things; it entails both
an emphasis on the autonomy of architectural discipline and a dissolution (post-
critical) of the discipline into a multiplicity of performances or practices (Rendell
2007, pp.3). Michael Hays, a paragon of the critical trajectory in architecture,
elaborates that the critical entails “…the constant imagination, search for, and
construction of alternatives...” (ibid). In relation to the Semperian “cultural
continuity” in each new building, the critical trajectory is not necessarily a kind of
proto-degrowth antithesis to it, whereas the critical advocates for a kind of “disruptive
continuity” which continually transgresses the old horizons of knowing and practice
with some sort of sublime disruption. This is not in itself a profound view in relation
to metabolic concerns and as such a position may easily perpetuate material
consumptions or amplify them in its search for alternatives. Ultimately, the critical
trajectory or critique, is to be considered a practice in-itself on which companies
design practice (Rendell 2007). The trajectory has a wide variety of applications,
ontological implications, and general attitudes towards design (Worldviews). The
critical trajectory thus contains many directions and as such there is an “openness”
where critical practice is not necessarily metabolic (minimizing and slowing material
flows and tectonic application within planetary boundaries). Likewise, critical
practice could also absorb the metabolic dimension, and it is thus my aim to construe
a metabolic thinking which is a way critical with regard to material flows and
planetary capacities. A kind of metabolic-critical architecture if you will.
Intentions and Manifestations
As with the three cases in the case study in the beginning of this chapter, there are
likewise other examples of buildings which have had intentions which were not
realized as intended. As Edwin Heathcote indicates, when it comes to OPEN building
concepts, architecture can start to fetishize flexibility (Heathcote 2017). This could
translate into, as we have in case B of FlexiBo, that the flexibility-way of living was
intended as its own kind of sublime dwelling while the truth is that people sparsely
applied it in limited yet practical ways only when moving in (Beim et al 2012).
Moreover, it is also important to not allow this fetishism to introduce unnecessary
overdesigned measures as these measures would pose no positive benefit or
affordances. More to the point, as a “fetish” the measures can introduce some market
optimism and risk of increasing material consumption with more and more new
Testing Theory: Analysis
235
building built with such design strategies.
As mentioned earlier (5.3.1), the high-tech style was initially “spiritually” linked with
OPEN building concepts, and was concerned with democratization of spaces and
allowing the inhabitants to freely dwell as they please – but got interpreted into a mere
style deprived of its critical substance or depth (Lifshcutz 2017). This can be called a
Hegelian sublimation (of the bad sort), where a thing “transforms” (like coffee without
caffeine) and loses its crucial “essence”. When this happens, any current and future
sustainable design agenda risks undergoing such a transformation for the sake of
“lightening the mood” in an opportunistic trajectory. One could also consider a
positive example of such a transformation. As mentioned earlier, before the current
emphasis on sustainability, the open building concept field and both its
methodological and theoretical literature emphasized contingent design in order to
often allow freedom from an architectural ethos of being anti-modernist so that
architects could provide people with the opportunity to dwell as they please. In today’s
setting, and with climate change, there is more material necessity for the open building
designs (and similar variants of it) and for architects to explore better variants of this
design while refining it to be of high architectural quality (high art) by providing
modest and simple “profane” flexibility.
The abovementioned phenomenon and tendencies can be used to extract a new
hypothesis in relation to today’s shift towards circular economy. If we put this into
perspective, this to the large-scale linear material flow conditions (Figure 4 in chapter
1) in which the building stock is expected to double by the year 2050, it becomes
pertinent to speculate on new hypotheses. The new hypothesis to be aware of, and
which will require further exploration in future studies, is that there is risk that current
measures (theoretical, practical, legislative) of LCA and CE could act as the enabling
measure which, in the end would either meet the expected doubling of material input
into society or even amplify it. As CE strategies provide a set of tools which allows
for a continued optimism in the building industry and as architects and engineers are
become better versed in LCA and CE, the optimism could allow for continued material
input. As the techniques and tools are becoming easier to use, more and more of it
will be used and more and more buildings will be built with “good intentions”, as the
Jevon Paradox would have it. Whether it be circular economy, an architecture of
persistence or any variant of critical architecture, all stand to risk a perpetuation of
material consumption if they fail to introduce the metabolic aspect.
Tools…
Another aspect also to highlight, is—especially in engineering—whether structural or
indoor climate (HVAC) (when elements are calculated and simulated) is inherent
“capitalist realism” already present within how such tools are used. The quest is
usually to design something whose dimensions are minimal yet acceptable according
to some decency or written norm of the elements performance. This is considered
while minimizing the amount of material needed and cost. When elements are
calculated, what are they being dimensioned for - certainly not extended life span. In
236
a Danish context regulation and law are made regarding structural and energy aspects,
and LCA is also becoming integrated into building law (Dansk Industri 2023).
Although this is not yet in its final form and is expected to become more ambitious, I
would argue that there is cause for caution and careful considerations on architectural
and tectonic character in relation to this legislation. If LCA and CE, as they sometimes
do, are ultimately only used to optimize cost by focusing on efficiency (and if this
tendency gets amplified) LCA and CE could be used to make bland and characterless
architectural works which are not appreciated, easily removed, and do not perform in
any socially and culturally significant capacity in its given social context (i.e.,
becoming cultural heritage or some equivalent to it). Even if they are made following
circular principles (i.e., DfD), there is still risk that any particular technique (DfD etc.)
would be outdated and not reused – possibly as in the instances of case C and Nakagin
capsule tower described earlier in this chapter. The risk is thus that this could become
the future scenario (doubling of building stock by 2050), not in spite of LCA, CE and
other sustainable agendas but because of them. Such measures have inherent lacks
partly due to being linked with mostly building scale design. On the other hand, urban
design could also be mobilized to introduce new and pertinent facets in the strategic
approaches to slow and narrow material flows. Design Tools (or methods) are thus
never neutral and can be imbued with certain agenda for growth efficacy; however, at
the level of content, its form allows for an application in any given agenda.
The radical critical synthesis of this critique-exploration is thus that whenever there is
a noticeable discrepancy between what is said/intended and what manifests materially
(no matter what theoretical framework or school of thought is used_ fundamentally
goes from being that to being an ideology which fails to critically address the wider
scope. The metabolic approach of this doctoral study is thus not the final way to
address this as it too still holds significant gaps but could modestly provide a platform
for such critical reflection.
5.3.3. Synthesis on Analysis
The Urban Sink can safely be considered a spectrum across several levels of
consideration: furniture/inventory, elements (wall etc.) and support with the first two
acting as infill. While the spectrum indicates that both fixed and open variants of each
aspect could hypothetically permit the functioning of the Urban Sink, it is still
important to note that the open variants are currently of critical importance given the
uncertainties and expansion of urbanization and climate change. Anything from an
entirely fixed furniture scheme to conventional use of furniture, can both strengthen
the performance of the Urban Sink (thus minimizing need for additional flows) with
the same being relevant to consider with both elements and the supports. What could
differ is the particular nuances of context, social, and cultural currents as well as
(dis)likability of heritage value in general at any level (or lack thereof) of the built
work which can solidify it as Urban Sink or not.
Testing Theory: Analysis
237
Paper 1 (Usto et al 2022) concluded that the buildings only acted partially as Urban
Sink. Nonetheless, later analysis and reflection (in this dissertation) has shown it
important to distinguish (a la OPEN building concept) between the support and the
infill. This means that the support did perform as safe sink while for the interior and
parts of façade didn’t (case A). This implies that there are separate sinks for support
and infill.
Figure 115. The Urban Sink spectrum of furniture/element/building scales
in open/fixed variants.
Generally speaking, it could be considered a safer approach to employ the “open”
category of each aspect, but there will be need for a more systematic exploration of
such nuancing though further case study analyses (or any other type of analysis) to
also be able to indicate more precise prescriptive trajectories and not only propose a
generic open approach. This second aspect (of more specific nuance for which type
of Urban Sink strategy should be employed) is precisely what links to the critique
paragraph (5.3.2). There is a need to gain a more nuanced understanding of when a
building body performs as a safe storage for material qua tectonic characteristics
(Urban Sink). This is because there is a risk that even a supposed metabolic approach
will get flattened when we design with open strategies. Furthermore, in relation to the
notion of “sublime uselessness”, there is much to explore. Finding more nuance in the
possible spans of functional ambiguity (the building body having affordances
permitting different uses) in order to systematize according to the context, topography
etc. exactly how much or how little span is enough, because not every building needs
to be able to be any function. Such a building would be an impossible myth which
could risk increasing material consumption or using materials in questionable terms.
There are modest considerations in this regard in the case study (paper 1) which
discusses the extremities of case A (Sjølund) and case B (FlexiBo), where case A offer
one modest possibility for light wall partition, whereas case B is perhaps too open,
and people use it sparsely. In extension, there may be potential to develop a different
238
architectural language or even style with the Urban Sink, but the risk is equally, as
elaborated earlier in this chapter, like that of the early variant of Open building
concepts which was simplified into High-tech style.
There is no way around it, the everyday use (utilitarian) aspect of a building is central
in its ability to prevent waste generation, while the immaterial considerations can help
to strengthen such a building body to perform as an Urban Sink.
In a careful linking back to Semper, it could be argued that the support is what steps
back and is usually associated with the material/principle considerations, while the
infill is what potentially constitutes the experimental “haze” of interiority
(immaterial). Whether in some fixed or open arrangement, the support and infill can
be said to respectively be dealing with the material and immaterial consideration. Not
unlike how Semper conceptualized, the structure is there to facilitate the “haze of
carnival candles.”
5.4. Conclusion
This chapter explored the analytical application of the built theory having a dual
purpose to first apply the theory and attain findings in its immediate application and
then to explore what significant insight can be gained from its application.
The built theory (chapter 4), and particularly its constructs were applied as a case
study as to discern relations. The case study provided the basis for both interesting
empirical comparisons between cases and their constructs (and relations) as well as
interesting conditions along with the hypothesis of the “surplus volume.” The findings
of the case study showed indications of immaterial considerations possibly helping a
building body perform as a “safe sink” at least with regard to the main “supporting”
structural elements as there has been changes in floors, windows etc. over time. While
the cases were within the same typology and function, they were made from differing
“philosophies” of being more or less conventional (Case A), open-building-like (Case
B), and a high-tech solution of click-on modules (Case C). This differentiation
allowed for crucial discussion which fed into the anachronistic analysis of the Urban
Sink spectrum and paragraph on critique thus allowing the constructs and its relations
to be expanded, generalized, and discussed in order to explore the contours of the
“logics” and boundaries of the theory building effort. The further expansion of
analytic capacity indicates that the Urban Sink is a spectrum which varies across the
scales of furniture/inventory, element (wall) and support. The findings additionally
promoted a linking or inclusion of another design field within architecture which is
not usually categorized as metabolic or tectonic bus is rather the category or field of
OPEN building design and so-called “pattern-book” housing concepts. This
realization greatly opened the scope in relevant ways for metabolic thinking and was
significant for both analysis and future designs. Since the Urban Sink is varied, much
more research could be done to contextualize which variant is more appropriate
where. Nonetheless, for the time being, the open variants is considerable importance
Testing Theory: Analysis
239
given the urbanization tendencies and climate change challenges.
The “use/function” construct has been considered in the case study only as flexibility
within the same functional category (housing), allowing for extra room for an office
or newly born child etc. This type of analysis (capacity analysis (Kendall 2003)) could
also have been applied to test the same building body for other functions (office, hair
salon, boutique etc.) to property test Urban Sink performance and perhaps explore the
threshold of the functional variability possible in the same building.
5.4.1. Contributions to Theory Building from Analysis
The initial application as the juxtaposition of cases and their constructs in the paper,
along with subsequent unfolding in this monograph allowed the findings to prompt
many considerations which were scaled up, so to speak, to both more general
considerations in the anachronistic analysis and the critique. The testing of the theory
in its analytical capacities provided feedback for the initial theory building. Looking
further back than this monography, the very first instance of testing (the written paper)
required further expansion of the analytic approach as it was clear that both precise
empirical gathering was possible as well as anachronistic analysis and metabolic-
critique. At the same time, the metabolic approach allowed for equally pertinent
comparative analysis and critique which was less rigorous and systematic (akin to
continental philosophy) but equally useful as it provided possibility for speculative
thinking which could further allow for pertinent hypotheses for future research.
Likewise, after the writing of the first paper (Usto et al 2022) there was a seemingly
inborn “perplexity” of notion of Urban Sink, and it did not contain clear indications
of how to outline such a notion – necessitating further reflection and elaboration in
this dissertation. While the original paper (Usto et al 2022) was concerned with testing
and applying the constructs (and relations) (see chapter 4.4.4 and 4.4.3.), the written
paper permitted reflection which allowed for the development of the “logics” (4.4.6.)
and “boundaries” (4.4.7.) of the (im)material metabolism.
While the analytical capacities of the (im)material metabolism started to get its
contours (figure 115) the question of design was becoming pressing.
240
Testing Theory: Design
241
Chapter 6.
Testing Theory: Design
This chapter will elaborate the second round of attempts to test theory by applying the
theory (im)material metabolism in its prescriptive capacities (design). Referring back
to research question in chapter 2 (sub-question 2), the aim is to further explore how
the theory can be applied in a prescriptive/design capacity and what new significant
findings and considerations a metabolic tectonic theory could prompt.
This chapter is first and foremost based on the exploration and finding from paper 2
(Usto et al, 2023), but the chapter will attempt to further explore design capacities
based on the lessons and reflections from the original paper 2. In comparison to
chapter 5 (analysis) this chapter will explore the design capacities in an urban design
and planning scale. In the expanding of the scope (6.3), the chapter explores more
varieties, so the Urban Sink is further linked to relevant design theory and practice is
made. Finally, I propose a set of normative design rules/indicators on account of the
lessons and reflections in both analysis and design chapter explorations.
6.1. (Im)Material Metabolism in Design
As the purpose of this chapter is to explore the design capacities of the theory,
experimental design research (research-by-design) (Hauberg 2011) is used as a
method to test and build theory (Cash 2018; Horváth 2016). As the quest is to test the
prescriptive (design) capacities of the theory, an experimental research-by-design
approach is used to explore and develop so-called ‘design ‘rules’ which act as
prescriptive principles for designing.
Similar to the original paper, the challenge is again to attempt to explore conditions
which could bring forth further nuance to the Urban Sink concept and as such explore
possibilities that can potentially facilitate reuse of larger amounts of construction
waste. This will, however, attempt to increase complexity and scale. The first paper
(paper 1) and paper 2 are connected thematically in the sense that the three cases
generate waste to a lesser or greater degree, and the task is to explore what could have
been done with such waste. As we are still seeing limited practice of reuse of
construction waste materials, how could an urban scheme propose potential
trajectories instead?
Not unlike the case study, the testing of the theory is done by again mobilizing the
five main constructs of the (im)material metabolism: however, in the case of the
design scenario, the quest is to iteratively develop and explore the relations between
the five constructs and not to map and analyze as was the case in the case study. As
242
Research-by-design requires a method or logic which indicates the design steps
(process) (Hauberg 2011), the constructs were attempted and explored in such a
capacity that aimed at discovering relations and ultimately proposing “design rules”.
Lessons and reflections from Case study
Based on lessons and reflections from the case study paper (paper 1) and the analysis
chapter of the PhD study (chapter 5), a few considerations were crucial for initiating
the design testing of the (im)material metabolism. On account of the original paper 1,
and the subsequent further reflections in the analysis chapter (chapter 4), it was
considered pertinent to expand the scope in scale to urbanism as a metabolic design
approach is not only confined to the building scale and further insights could be gained
by relating material concerns with both other building stock and outdoor areas.
Another consideration was the interesting phenomena of case A and the fact that its
design drawings and instructions performed as local plan law. This indicated that
design or “prescription” as expanded to “legislation” (prescription for how people
build, renovate etc.), could hold immense potential.
6.2. Design Scenario – Research by Design
The quest is to explore a future scenario of a possible urban strategy which could
minimize the need for new material input and increase reuse rates in the current
conditions of waste generation. Exploring the potentials, challenges, and limitations
of the design scenario has the aim of legitimizing and rendering plausible the urban
sink and metabolic approach through design application of the waste material. This
intention is mirrored by the original design paper, paper 2 (Usto et al 2023). Similar
to the in the original design paper (paper 2), the storage function qua architectural
application is key but further exploration could be done regarding the reappropriation
of the stored materials and networks they could engage in. The materials could
otherwise remain at the storage site indefinitely. The difference in this section will be
that instead of exploring the single design site and its possible functions as recreative
urban space, the aim of the investigation is that of the “whole” network as was
hypothesized in the conclusion of the original paper (Usto et al 2023).
Figure 116. Waste materials - from a building volume
to an urban space (storage site)?
Testing Theory: Design
243
If we are to make the potential of the hypothesis of larger urban system plausible, and
by relying on the potentials and reflections from the original paper (paper 2), how
would the five constructs be applied on a much larger scale, and what considerations
do they entail across the (im)material spectrum?
Figure 117. Urban Sink: the storage site as an important Detail.
The green line (Figure 112) is the representation of the currently known examples of
“proof of concept” where we have seen that it is possible to use waste materials in
new buildings. The challenge is, nonetheless, the amount of waste materials and thus
the subsequent facilitation and design application of large amounts of material waste.
The red line indicates the ideal solution but is currently halted due to warranty issues,
lack of awareness in public, legislation and more. As time is a pressing issue (due
short timeframe from request to approval of demolition) and since the green line did
not permit the expansion of red line, there is need of a different system or network
which can redirect material flows qua the storage sites as they were elaborated in paper
2 (Usto et al. 2023).
244
6.2.1. Situating the design scenario (vol 2)
In situating the design scenario, it is important to consider some empirical material
flows conditions. From a global perspective, the building industry is one of the major
polluting industries (IPCC 2021). As anthropogenic flows are overtaking natural
flows (Elhacham et al 2020) , and we can see how these materials move (Haas 2020),
can we somehow minimize the ever-increasing consumption of materials in urban
area? In a Danish context, as it is with many countries, there are similar tendencies
which are coupled with the fact that significant amounts of waste materials is
transported internationally to other countries or poorly reused (crushed)
(Miljøministeriet 2021; Building-Supply 2021). If we consider these tendencies more
precisely, in Denmark there is approximately 5 million ton of building waste: 7%
incinerated, 36% reused and 52% reused “otherwise” (meaning crushed for roads etc.)
(ibid.). As there are ideas regarding so-called material banks or archives, could we
perhaps store large amounts of construction waste materials outside as creative
structures in the city?
Figure 118. Aalborg and Nørresundby provide the spatial footprint
for the design scenario (vol.2).
The premise for this design scenario (i.e. the expanded version of this chapter in
comparison to paper 2) is to propose an outer periphery of the design scenario to that
of the urban (and sub-urban) areas of Aalborg and Nørresundby, respectively. The
reason for this expansion is to increase the possibility of shareability and potential
Testing Theory: Design
245
variety of materials, since Aalborg Municipality holds data on all addresses approved
for demolition. The reason for limiting it on (dual) city level is because both Aalborg
and Nørresundby are within the same municipality, and they are additionally their
near in proximity. It would have been too complex to include the whole of Jutland or
Denmark, and the intention was not to propose long transportations of elements. The
intention was to instead keep them within the Urban Sink capacities of the proposed
urban footprint.
The design scenario of this chapter does not deal with the actual waste materials from
the case study (paper 1) but instead works withmore conventional and generic waste
materials from housing building stock which is fundamentally comparable and similar
to the case study materials. Fundamentally, the waste materials could be any other
segments of the building stock and not only housing as industrial buildings would
perhaps have larger structures which could make it more interesting to apply them
spatially in order to allow for more grand gestures, unique shapes and designs etc. The
challenge is nevertheless the large amounts of conventional materials as they are
usually applied in housing functions and thus find interesting and meaningful ways to
appropriate the waste materials.
Initiating Intentions
Given the abovementioned conditions, could there be different ways to conceptualize
material flows and thus propose new designs and strategies to better deal with material
consumption and waste generations in the quest to minimize material flows? Not
unlike the original paper (Usto et al 2023), this design scenario initiates with intentions
of material flows (Figure 119), i.e., the large amounts of construction waste.
Figure 119. The design initiator: the design agenda starts from the
material conditions and the narrative of material flows.
246
6.2.2. Design through the Constructs
The noticeable difference from the analytical application of the (im)material
metabolism is that the constructs are opposite in chronology in order to initiate from
the “material flows” aspect. The reason for this is that due to the intended task finding
ways of re-introducing waste materials into the building stock (without it being
crushed) necessitated an approach which starts from the available materials instead of
a conventional design process where concept and ideas come before choosing
materials. In the following paragraphs, the design process will be described where the
first step is the gathering of materials through the structuring principles, etc., and
finally ending with the “narrative”. Though the “narrative” was also an initiator,
“narrative” will also finalize the chapter in a more finished form.
The design exploration is a conceptual and diagrammatic abstraction of principles and
ideas elaborated in the paper 2 (Usto et al, 2023).
Design ‘step’ 1 – material conditions:
The main aspects of the first step in the design process was to find materials. This had
its own delineation, both in finding a site for the design scenario and the finding and
choosing of building materials (Usto et al. 2023). This was proceeded by relying on a
municipal list of addresses approved for demolition and on account of which two were
chosen. Followingly, in the paper, the building stock from said addresses were
remodeled in 3D software in order to facilitate the design process.
Even so, something more is needed in an extended version. Paper (2) provided the
core of the process (demolition addresses, building stock, modeling), but in this
chapter these elements will instead be conceptualized a network of addresses instead
of choosing two new ones.
Figure 120. All addresses approved for demolition (blue dots)
by Aalborg Municipality (an abstracted conceptual version).
Testing Theory: Design
247
The challenges with this are many. Firstly, the political aspect of collaborating
systematically with the municipality. Secondly, the reading of the archival material of
the demolition addresses and modeling/mapping of the available material. The reading
and mapping of waste materials on account of archival municipal data can be very
time consuming and difficult as sometimes the drawings can be difficult to properly
comprehend. It was thus necessary to corelate with areal footage (skårfoto.dk) and
google satellite imagery to discern the current conditions. Together these two tools
gave initial insight. Even so, due to contamination risks, personnel would be needed
to categorize the usability of said materials. The mapping of available waste material
would require much effort and potentially many manual work hours. Given that A.I.
tools are becoming more and more prominent, there could potential for systematizing
the mapping of all addresses approved for demolition.
Design ‘Step’ 2 – structuring principles:
When having to deal with such an amount of construction waste, there is need to
facilitate it. In the original paper (Usto et al 2023) the brick and concrete elements are
cut in 1-meter-long segments while the full height (2,35 m) is maintained. This allows
for later uses to maintain the room height if the elements would later move from the
urban setting into a new building. While the elements would have these dimensions
they could still be freely used as either full height wall, half height wall or flooring
elements.
Figure 121.Cutting and applying principles.
To facilitate the large amount of construction waste, a city-wide strategy is needed,
i.e., a “web” of storage sites (white dots). Each of these sites would then be made in
accordance with the exploration recreative affordance and potentials as presented in
248
the original paper (Usto et al 2023).
Figure 122. The city of Aalborg (and Nørresundby) with a conceptual overlay of storage sites
(white dots) - and addresses approved for demolition/renovation (blue dots.)
A significant principle would furthermore be that of the address of approved for
demolition should have its construction waste material contained at the nearest storage
site (Figure 123) a “proximity principle” so to speak. From an initial perspective, the
purpose of this is to minimize the traveling distance of materials from address to
storage site. Later the experiential aspects of this principle will also be elaborated.
Testing Theory: Design
249
Figure 123. Diagrammatic principle (algorithm) for allocation of materials (blue dots)
to available sites (white dots).
Once there is an overview of storage sites (and their principles for receiving
materials), the next crucial step is to include the addresses where new building will be
made. This implies available materials at the storage sites, as well as a digital
corresponding catalog that allows architects to use said materials.
Figure 124. From demolition to construction, through the storage sites.
In extension of Figure 36, the yellow dots are the mappings of
addresses approved for building new structures.
250
Design ‘Step’ 3 – functional application:
Applying an increased amount of waste materials would require the mapping of
designated storage sites and categorization which could indicate what function would
be pertinent to gain. In the original paper 2 (Usto et al. 2023), the main types of
function were that of recreative urban affordances (i.e. seating area, biodiversity
tower, pavilion etc.,) (Usto et al 2023), and there is likewise a need of a wider range
of functional application of construction waste materials as many more affordances
can be imbued into storage sites. This is not to say that the repertoire of design
proposals could not be applied in very different settings than merely urban/recreative
areas.
Figure 125. A bus stop made from the same waste materials. The wooden elements are used
for canopy, while the folded brick walls are stabilized via the seating elements.
The expanding of the catalogue of possible applications necessitates variety in storage
sites. This could be, for example, systematic use of construction waste materials for
a new bus stop (figure 125) or it could be used as additional material to an existing
one (repair etc.). It could also be the application of construction waste as a sound
barrier along the highways in the near vicinity of housing areas.
Testing Theory: Design
251
Figure 126. Waste materials used as noise barrier on highways.
Generally speaking, when it comes to the application of construct and different uses,
there can be an unknown number of types and functions. It should thus be considered
that there can be two main types of storage sites. One could solve a problem or in
some sense provide a certain level of meaningful recreative potentials which permits
and invite interaction. The other would be art installations which can be viewed from
a distance and are not necessarily intended for close encounters.
Design ‘step’ 4 – experiential properties:
As there is a variety of utility of the different design, there is equally a variety of
experiential potentials and qualities. The challenge is to create meaningful urban
structures which can provide phenomenological experiences and have people engage
with waste materials while not having a feeling of being near something disgusting
like a trash heap or dump site. As it was developed already in the paper (Usto et al.
2023), there can be immediate haptic and corporeal niceties of each designed structure
at the storage sites, i.e., like that of closeness and embrace especially on windy day.
252
Figure 127. Small, human scale spatial enclosure with seating and wind protection.
As the separate installations at the storage sites may have their particular spatial and
reactive properties and purposes, there can likewise be a more general experience of
the network, or at least parts of it in one’s daily dealings and mingling within the city.
Let us then try and imagine an everyday life scenario.
Figure 128. Partial image of the city. An everyday cycle of living in area A,
shopping in area B and working in areas C.
Testing Theory: Design
253
Imagine (Figure 128), you live in area A, you shop in area B, and you work in area C.
The principle of moving waste materials from their address of demolition to the
nearest storage site (white dots) will play a significant part in the potenial experience
of the storage sites. On a daily basis you pass these sites and may think of them as
peculiar or strange art installation. You may notice them every now and then and
observe people having a closer look or children playing in and on them. Sometimes,
when taking a walk with family or friends in the area or taking your bike for shopping,
you notice that there are a number of them that are difficult to categorize. These could
be the are sometimes playgrounds, art installations, or something else entirely. You
notice that they are both very different and at the same time very similar. You noticed
these art forms elsewhere in the city and recognize that they must have a larger
purpose or are perhaps somehow connected. Let’s furthermore imagine that you have
lived here for some time and have noticed that one of the peculiar “art” installations
seems very familiar. And entirely by chance something struck your eye. You
remembered that a house from your street recently had a significant renovation inside
and out and you happen to recognized your neighbor’s old facade at one of the storage
sites.
Design ‘Step’ 5 - Narrative:
The dimension of “narrative” is present both at the level of intended narrative and
experienced narrative. This means the narrative of the material is embedded in the
immediate context (the proximity principle). At the same time, it is a narrative of a
slow “cultural continuity” (with reference to theory building, chapter 4) of material
life within site specific conditions.
The story above is one of unfinishedness which is in constant motion. This may
manifest both in the literal sense of materials and elements being transported to a
storage sites and later moving to become parts of fabçade or interior in new building.
On the other hand, the unfinished-ness is also an aesthetic and conceptual category of
the lived spaces that we would find ourselves in in the near future; namely due to the
potential increase in use of construction waste, our structure may seem “confused” or
“irrational” which sets a different design burden or challenge on the designer. A new
or different sentiment would be needed among the public, in addition to significant
effort on the part of the architects, engconsultantsd other consultant etc., to provide
meaning in what could appear chaotic. This hints at the mortality and finitude of
materials and their dynamic which ought to prompt consideration on how we as
individuals consume and how our behavior affects material flows. Apart from the
intended and overall narrative of the design, the very conceptual unfinishedness of the
design opens up a dialogue with users and visitors. This could by allowing people to
form their own narratives and engage in dialogue of their own prompts’ reflection and
introspective consideration regarding consumption of materials. As it is important to
design strategies to reuse larger amounts of materials, it is just as important to not only
educate citizens on material consumption but at least make people reflect and
254
contemplate their own roles and potentials with regards to material consumption and
its effects on the built environment and global warming in general.
Synthesizing Findings – design rules:
Concludingly, the purpose of the design scenario has been to extract design rules –
given that the overall research agenda of this PhD is to test the prescriptive capacities
of the theory and as such include them in the iterative process of building theory. The
four design rules that the paper proposes are “keep the materials, transform as little as
possible, bottom-up approach, metabolism should be slow” (Usto et al 2023). In
addition to the design rules from the original paper, there are aspects to consider in
utilizing as much construction waste as possible.
Figure 129. A prescriptive monadic diagram which ends in
well-known and familiar circular strategies (Cheshire 2021).
Testing Theory: Design
255
In approaching any challenge or “design” problem when it comes to waste materials
and reuse old structure in any capacity, it is important to try and save as much as
possible on account of different considerations— both in regard to the inherent
possibilities of the structures and materials in comparison to the intentions and agenda
of clients, municipality etc. at any site.
When it then comes to any specific site and its materials, an analysis is first needed of
spatial configuration (size, ceiling height, composition, experiential quality, and
potentials) as well as the structures and materials which facilitate these spaces (if they
are support or infill, movable, texture and experiential quality). On account of these
mappings, it is possible to categorize into “good” and “bad” conditions. Sometimes a
building can have poor ceiling height and poor composition which can make it
difficult to simply retain it as is and can thus be limited in use as other functions.
Structure and materials can likewise be either “good”, and thus useful and workable,
or “bad”, i.e., damaged or contaminated by chemicals etc., which poses a hazard in
some way for either human or non-human actors or conditions. This necessitates at
this level of categorizing spaces, structures, and materials be observant in relation to
the specific conditions. Just because materials are contaminated, it doesn’t necessarily
mean that they ought to be demolished. There can be instances where the hazardous
elements is safely contained and not a problem if other structural and spatial
affordances allow for retainment, refitting etc..
If this is the case, the elements could be cleane although there are no such cleaning
machinery within Danish borders (e.g. in case of asbestos) which is why contaminated
materials and elements are sold internationally (Building Supply 2021). While we are
waiting for this ideal situation of approaching systematically construction waste and
building stock reuse, a large amount of construction waste is being generated
irrespective of the different categories of the above diagram as the owners simply
apply for a demolition permit. As the design scenario explores, it could be possible to
find a way in which demolished materials can be recycled as a way to ‘retain’
materials instead of shipping it off or crushing it. Here, the aspect of ‘retaining’
materials is usually understood as allowing materials in the building body to remain
in their current form and location, whereas the design scenario explored the potential
of expanding this category of ‘retaining’ in a more dynamic form through storage
sites.
Reflection
The further elaborated design scenario (of this chapter) revealed a problem that will
require addressing, ideally in potential future 1:1 experiment - a problem which the
original paper 2 (Usto et al. 2023) did not prompt due to paper focusing on an isolated,
single site and not a network. This reflection occurred in design step 2 (structuring
principles, paragraph 6.2.2.). That is the problem of how materials stored at the sites
are to be taken from the storage sites. The implication is that either entire structures
are taken and reused - or the structures are made in a way which permits partial
demounting for only certain materials at the storage site without needing to take the
256
whole pavilion/structure.
While this design scenario used archival document as basis for design exploration, the
future challenges would to approach a similar issue but on larger scale and with more
rigor for large amounts of material. Here different method could be used to mapping
and estimate larger quantities of materials in the urban stock (Honic et al 2023).
6.2.3. Constructs as Design Steps
The design process is thus initiated as a dual or joint approach of “narrative” and
“material flows”, meaning there is an inherent vague narrative in mind from the start.
The initial intent of this PhD study was to attempt to apply the constructs as design
steps in chronological order starting from material aspect. However, in the application
of the construct, the process could not help but become intertwined across the
constructs as a proposal of principle for cutting the material would automatically have
implications on sizes, scales and possible applications for recreative function and thus
experiential conditions. The actual design process of the design scenario will be
elaborated in later (see figure 130).
The design scenario was initiated from material concerns (and material availability of
demolished addresses) (step 1), but the following considerations on “principle” (step
2) promoted simultaneous reflections for what kind of experiences and spatial
conditions. As a consequence of this, the “structing principle” was itself partially
“structured” by use and experiential considerations. Following, the utility aspects
were further explored (step 3) to analyze the consequences and possibilities as well as
limitations of the proposed principles in relation to the former two constructs. The
experiential possibilities were them more closely considered (step 4) and ended with
the narrative dimension of synthesizing all other considerations through the prospect
of the telling a metabolic story. This indicates that a linear process is impossible as
Testing Theory: Design
257
one is constantly forced to iterate across all the constructs.
Figure 130. The process was initiated by with a joint priority of “narrative” and “material
flows”.
The process was thus not linear as any proposal on one construct has consequences
for any of the other ones. It turned out to be almost impossible not to develop
reflections and considerations on other construct (looking forward) in order to
constitute the current one (i.e. look at “use” and “experience” when having to deal
with “structuring principles”). Looking backwards from “use”, “experience” and
“narrative” it is likewise needed to see if the structuring principles are either adequate
or lacking in some regard. With both of these in mind, in the final synthesis (in
developing the umbrella of the narrative) there is much non-linear iterative adjustment
and reflection needed (step 5). Despite this t, there is still significance in initiating the
design process in a material condition (of the construction waste).
6.3. Expanding the Horizon – other prescriptive capacities
Doing design (prescription) can contain many considerations but is usually manifested
as iterative design drawings/sketches in different media (whether technical or
diagrammatic). The quest is now to explore an expasionof the design prescription
capacities. The original papers on analyses (Usto et al. 2022) and design (Usto et al.
2023), along with the subsequent further exploration and expansion promoted the
consideration of how to include design prescription in building legislation.
This section furthermore develops a future scenario which argues for a temporal as
well as an spatial understanding of metabolic thinking in the built environment, whose
purpose is to “telegraph from the future” how we are to proceed in metabolic terms
here and now. Concludingly, the section will end the chapter with bringing together
258
reflections from both the analysis exploration (paper 1 and chapter 5) along the
reflections and findings of this chapter.
6.3.1. Other Relevant Design Prescription
With an (im)material metabolic understanding, we need to expand what “objects” we
have to design and likewise what “design” further entails. There is little chance of
merely changing material flow patterns by designing good houses or urban spaces,
and as such, we have to include more “objects” of design, or at least an “object”, that
have immense potential for what and how things are designed. In expanding the
prescriptive capacities, there is need to further categorize the types of “design”
possible through metabolic thinking.
In extension of the chapter on analysis of the case study of three housing projects
(paper 1 and chapter 5.2.) and the notion of the “surplus”, ideas and prescriptive
principles or rules arise regarding how to design new building stock in the future. The
following section will be structured based on four main activities (or functions):
dwelling/working, eating, transporting, cleaning (Oswald, Baccini 2003; Baccini
Brunner 2012).
Dwelling/working
The category of dwelling/working is most commonly associated with architects who
design buildings, urban design, and master planning with the aim of arranging
dwelling and working conditions. That includes many already mentioned tendencies
and trajectories founded in open building and circular design trajectories. The plethora
of the “dwelling/working” potentially spans from the smallest detail to large
infrastructural consideration of the city.
How we live can immensely influence our carbon footprint, and researchers are
looking deeply into how we can facilitate changing needs over time with the building
stock. Among others, David Cheshire, practitioner on circular building, has shown,
integrating flexibility and affordances can occur at many levels (Cheshire 2020).
Providing flexibility and adaptability both in plan and section (possibility of adding
an extra floor in double high rooms) can prove crucial for transitioning to a “circular”
thinking and perhaps more critically a metabolic understanding of the built
environment. There can likewise be more social considerations on livability in a more
collectively oriented approach (Chan, Zhang 2020). Such approach on dwelling
necessitates a decrease in square meter pr. capita, through collectives and sharing of
facilities, equipment etc., towards achieving a decrease in total footprint and foot
prints pr. capita thus minimizing material input from nature to society.
Eating
This particular category does not necessitate a deep insight into gastronomy but, like
the former category, implies an understanding of planning for an alternative way of
Testing Theory: Design
259
providing nourishment, not necessarily only for humans, in increasingly sustainable
ways. There is both practice and theory regarding such tendencies (Tornaghi, Certoma
2019), and the examples are becoming more and more ambitious (Croxford et al
2020). Fundamentally, the core dynamic deals with bringing production back to the
city. However, as this has a sustainable consideration (minimizing transportation etc.),
there are likewise new possibilities and trajectories for developing new cultures of
consumption.
Transporting
The category implicates many different things simultaneously: the transportation of
goods as well as people or other aspects also in need of being moved in one way or
another. Perhaps the most commonly known and immediately relevant field to
consider when it comes to architecture, urban design, and planning would the field of
mobilities. While mobility is its own field, mobilities have been part of metabolic
studies including flows of people, goods, information etc. (Oswald, Baccini 2003, pp.
54). There are likewise variants of mobiles known in the discipline (Jensen, Laang
2016) which also deals with sustainability considerations as well as connection along
with the phenomenological consequences of designed mobilities. Furthermore,
scholars and practitioners are developing life cycle assessment tools in particular for
mobility and transportation (MobiTool 2023)
Cleaning
Waste management is field of its own and contains many aspects: anything from
landfills, sewage systems to reuse schemes and much more. Very often such
mechanisms are crucial for the wellbeing of the city but are not always visible and
architecturally significant in people’s everyday use of the built environment. In a more
immediate and familiar type of “cleaning” relevant to architecture and urbanism is the
consideration of how we clean and maintain building and urban areas, how we design
spaces and areas which are easily cleaned and maintain, and how we choose and apply
materials which are likewise easily cared for.
Design Criteria and Scales
The design method and model for NetStadt (Oswald. Baccini 2003) likewise proposes
a set of design criteria to consider when designing metabolic schemes in urban
settings. Those are that of Identification, diversity, flexibility, degree of self-
sufficiency, and resource efficiency (Oswald, Baccini 2003, pp. 49-52). These
respectively deal with making a meaningful and recognizable urban area;
differentiation and variation of functions and possibilities for any needs; ability to
adapt to changing needs; ability to provide for a city within regional boundaries; and
ability to efficiently utilize resources (ibid). already indicated in chapter 4.1, several
levels of spatial scales should be considered as well: those of the individual (house,
the local (neighborhood), the community, region, nation (Oswald, Baccini 2003, pp.
54).
260
Reflective considerations
While the four main activity types of stem from industrial ecology and chemical
engineering studies, it is important to note that there are differences from those of their
counterparts in architecture and urban design disciplines. The variants of the activities
outside of industrial ecology, with their very different theoretical frameworks and
methodical tools, are not necessarily metabolic approaches. As was brought forth in
the introductory chapter (chapter 1.), there is always a risk of manifesting Jevons
Paradox when optimizing urban systems thus requiring a critical metabolic
understanding.
Compiling activities and things - Symbiosis
We are seeing more initiatives and designs regarding sharing economies where the
planning practice allows and facilitates sharing communities of anything from tools,
books etc. even up to walls (as seen in case B in chapter 4). Industrial ecology also
allows for the design of energetic symbioses where (Gulipac 2016) where given
energy systems produce an energy or heat surplus which get appropriated elsewhere.
Such practices are commonly used in industrial areas and industrial parks. There are
likewise modest attempts of this in the central urban area of Skive (Blå Diamant).
Such practices are called urban or industrial symbiosis (ibid). To increase the
likelihood of such “symbiosis”, new and appropriate master planning practices could
be developed which allow for larger heterogeneity of building programs (such aa more
production in cities next to housing, working etc.) to allow for different and more
positive affordances between them both materially (less energy use, less material
needed etc.) and immaterially (new or different spatial character, social practice and
cultural values).
Figure 131. Urban Symbiosis; city as an interrelated network of
sharing economies of facilities, tools, books, products, walls, energy, heat etc.
It is thus possible to expand on the scales of design of the Urban Sink and thus explore
new ones. Urban Symbioses and industrial ecology are closely related terms, and they
are complex notions with many definitions and variants. It may seem that such notions
are mostly related to the design and planning of industries and industrial facilities, yet
their principles can also be considered in relevant ways in urban areas for everyday
Testing Theory: Design
261
use. Making buildings dependent on each other based on specific technologies
(whether related to energy or heat) can seem to pose a challenge due to technologies
being prone to change over time. However, as literature on persistent architecture has
pointed out, it is also possible to facilitate adaptations and change in technical services
and technologies within a building anatomy (Fannon et al 2022) thus allowing for
potential “symbiotic” design considerations.
Each of the four activity categories are design platforms which contain design criteria
and scales with which new constellations and relations can be designed both within
each of the categories and in the relations to each other. Each of the categories are
complex, but central “objects” as way to design conditions of the built environment
which meets human needs in the most “material” (utilitarian) sense.
Linking Metabolic Thinking – Urban Sink across variants
When we are engaged with designing and prescribing material conditions the general
quest is to prescribe from a position of awareness of material conditions as well as
regional, national, and ultimately planetary boundaries. As the concept of metabolism
can seem immediately complex, there are several ways to make it approachable as
elaborated in prior chapters and paragraphs. The purpose of this paragraph is to create
an overview of the different approach and scales of metabolic design thinking. It can
be difficult to comprehend all aspects at once, but it would be preferable to have basic
insight into all metabolic scales and aspect while dealing with one’s own particular
interest.
Figure 132. There can be different variants of the Urban Sink;
Surplus, detail, furniture, elements, support, urban symbiosis, storage sites, city web, law and
norms.
In our endeavors to design and prescribe conditions, several aspects can be
considered. As shown in figure 132, there is a spectrum of scales and considerations
262
which exemplify the possible attacking points in the quest for designing a sound
Urban Sink through a (im)material metabolic approach. Each of the scales (furniture,
wall elements, support, urban area/district, city “web” strategic network, writing new
law and guidelines) are to be considered exemplifications and possible starting points.
There can be many more interstitial scales to explore, and many variants in type and
typology of each scale as they can be adjusted according to new data and analysis
contributed potentially from any discipline, science or profession. The manifestation
of the Urban Sink thus has very tangible and physical strategies to consider the meta-
physical and immaterial (experimental, social, political and economic) considerations
while considering the slowing and narrowing of material flows. All of these have to
be grounded in material preconditions in order to promote a critical metabolic
approach. The last level of the prescribing of laws and norms ought to have influence
on all the former scales and approaches.
The range of the Urban Sink in the above figure (132) is illustrated in a way to
communicate relevance for this doctoral study and its exploration. More precisely, the
category of the “symbiosis” could practically contain all the other considerations
(except the “law” dimensions). Despite this, the most common application of the
concept is materialized in industrial parks and similar industrial settings. The reason
for this application was to lay out the different “attack points” and not conflate all of
them to the urban symbiosis concept. The applications placing in the middle is thus
fitting of the possible range of the concept of urban symbiosis. That is not to say that
the concept of symbiosis is entirely interchangeable with the Urban Sink because the
Urban Sink incorporates immaterial considerations for the purpose of slowing and
narrowing material flows alongside the material considerations (material, function,
energy performance etc.).
When we are designing, we are not only designing objects (elements, buildings, urban
areas/districts, networks or normative guidelines or law etc.) but also the conditions
from where we design. Specifically, we are also “designing” a new generation of
metabolic designers, designing new educational and teaching practices, and a mental
space from where metabolic design manifestations can be conceptualized before they
take physical form. With all the different attack points of designing metabolically,
regardless of scale or activity, when we design, we are not just making a new design
for a space or disassemble construction detail, we are also ultimately proposing
designs for new or different (material) cultural practices along with new or different
building cultures which could be liked with new modes of well-beings (Delhey 2010;
Pandelaere 2016).
6.3.2. Metabolic Design Prescription as Law?
It is not uncommon that a municipality makes new land plot available for
buildingwhen the municipality has not provided a corresponding local plan law for
that land. Once the land is sold for real estate (i.e., to a private actor), the municipality
also requires both designs and proposals for a local plan and design. The challenge
Testing Theory: Design
263
here is not to rely on the “good willed” clients and the consulting architects to include
circular and metabolic design conditions within such a design and plan law proposal.
Firstly, there would be many differences if such efforts were relied on. Secondly, such
a hypothetic “ideal” sustainable approach would only be present within a few new
sites whereas the challenge is to expand metabolic design thinking to as much of the
city as possible to possibly guarantee a systemic sustainable approach. If we are to
propose metabolic design considerations becoming part of building legislations, how
could such a trajectory be approached in Danish legislative setting of the built
environment?
There can be several ways to approach the question of legislation in relation to design
that occur on several levels. As there is already dialogue to phase in LCA into building
law in the Danish context, the challenge is how to prescribe such considerations to
attain desired outcomes. The potential is to “design” metabolic legislation or, more
precisely, to prescribe the form/outline of material consumption in order to minimize
it overall. There are different possibilities of implementing such considerations. The
different levels of legislative possibilities are hierarchical and have different efficacy
compared to each other. The different facets of planning law are local plan, municipal
plan, regional plan, land planning law, and land zones (RealDania 2004). Of these,
four will be highlighted;
• Local plan law
• Municipal plan
• Plan law
• Building law
The place to start would be to initiate a dialogue with the municipality, politicians,
and general public as this aspect of dialogue and sharing of knowledge/ideas is crucial
for any of the levels. Only through the creation awareness in both the social and
political realm can any consideration be implemented into legislation.
Local Plan
Another opportunity could also be to rewrite or approve new local plans which could
have integrally written aspects of reuse rates, but this could perhaps be a lengthy
process as a city has many different local plan laws for each area, requiring significant
effort to change all of them. At the same time, the local plan has openings and already
allows architects (as was done in principle done case A, see paper 1 and chapter 5) to
include (more ambitious metabolic) design instructions for how to reuse, maintain etc.
which are designated as a “project local plan” (where a new project is coupled with
an accompanying local plan (RealDania 2004, pp.7). The challenge would be to not
avoid the risk of keeping buyers away. Rather, there should be an offer that allows for
a range of possibilities which can be of higher or lower metabolic ambitions in order
to slowly phase in such design principles. Local plans are mainly concerned with
external placement of the building volumes and external appearance (among many
other aspects). It is thus crucial that plan law does not necessitate characteristics of
the interior and that there is likewise no need for building permits and approval when
264
wanting to change the interior. Due to the urgency of climate change, it could be
pertinent to mimic already existing legislation related to cultural heritage buildings
which do have instructions for the interior and require subsequent building permit
applications in case of intended renovations and changes. While it cannot directly be
translated as cultural heritage buildings having other complex concerns, this
nevertheless opens up the possibility of developing legislated design strategies for the
interior as well which could follow metabolic design principles from open building
concept and “persistence” architecture principles for the infill and not only the
support. While there is potential in local plans and project local plans, there are
likewise risks of leaving out citizens participation among other down sides.
Municipal Plan
A place to initiate dialogue with the municipality is what in a Danish context is called
a “municipal plan”. This is a legally binding document with a set of intentions and
agendas which are important and pressing for the municipality. Such plans are made
every 12 years. Many municipalities generally have many intentions towards being
sustainable and green and promote themselves accordingly. The challenge to
introduce more precise strategies to be included at this level. While Plan Law and
Building Law are indefinite, and though 12 years is can seem a long time, it is
nevertheless a component in legislation which is to be considered.
Plan Law
Perhaps preferable to this would be to write in legal sections (e.g., for reuse and
limiting of demolition etc.) which cover all local plan laws at the city, municipal or
national level. This could occur on the plan law (“planloven” not to be confused with
local plan law) as this is higher in hierarchy and thus above the local plan law as it
would allow a potential inclusion of metabolic measure to circumvent the need to
change every single local plan law and the writing of supplementary appendices and
declarations for each. The plan law is at state level, and covers all municipalities
simultaneously. To change anything at this level would require politicians from the
environmental ministry to initiate change which would then be put in effect through
plan law, and followingly practiced within each municipality.
Building Law
Over time, the ideal situation would that of having included metabolic design
considerations within building law. Metabolic design ambitions could be included not
unlike how the newly added legislation on carbon footprints in the building
legislation. As already mentioned in chapter 4, the current LCA legislation is not
ambitious enough but has initiated modest steps in the right direction. Based on the
finding and reflections (in the papers and this PhD in general), it would likewise be
important to find ways to include “architectural character” into the building law as
well as OPEN building principles among other aspects to potentially avoid a new
manifestation of the Jevons Paradox where an emphasis on optimizing single
buildings would allow a perpetuation of materials flows.
At the state level, the challenge would be to somehow incentivize implementation of
metabolic design principles.
Testing Theory: Design
265
Something in between?
As legislation related to “planning” (plan law, local plan) is concerned with urban and
master planning of cities, the building law is concerned with the single buildings more
directly. For this reason, there is potential for legislation in the gap between building
law and plan law two, as a metabolic understanding makes it evident that inter-
building relations (within a given proximity) can have many positive affordances by
relating buildings in a metabolic (symbiotic) sense. Such an “Inter-building law” does
not necessarily need to be a law on its own on par with the plan law and building law.
Instead, it could potentially be a continuation/expansion of the plan law and contain
instruction and normative guidelines for intra-district, intra-municipal or intra-
regional metabolic design principles.
Figure 133. A proposal of including Urban Sink into legislation; the Urban Sink scale are
covered differently by existing legislation, and possibly missing something
in between (Inter-Building Law).
Conclusive considerations and reflections
Another central dynamic which is also at the heart of metabolic concerns is the
mechanisms behind how land use is practiced. Whenever a municipality frees new
terrain from other purposes and makes it available for private uses, such terrain is
usually allocated for either agriculture or real estate (Lyle 1985; IPCC 2019, p.6).
From a metabolic perspective, there may be indeed need for some additional material
input with subsequent new plots to build on (all the while we also increase the waste
prevention and reuse etc.). There is likewise need for strategic understanding of how
and towards what end such plots are made available so that we do not merely
perpetuate current linear growth dynamic under the umbrella of “metabolic design”
or any other sustainable agenda.
Requesting implementation of more sustainable principles within legislations of the
entire built environment is very complex will thus require time and many minor
implementations before something of significance can be achieved. At the same time,
a sense of urgency is needed based on the alarming indications of the latest IPCC
reports (IPCC 2022). There is need that we always press for more awareness, debate
266
and knowledge on challenges of material flows and the consequences of consumption.
6.3.3. What are we designing towards?
In this section, I want to initiate a hypothetical object, i.e., a sensual object, as Harman
would put it. Similar to how in mathematics there are imaginary numbers, through
which comes their very irrationality which allows for the making of sense of very
complex systems, there is a similarity that is to be imagined here. This aspect of design
is seemingly “useless” speculative imagination, but as an immaterial (sensual) object
(in the Harman sense), there could be possibilities of utilizing such imaginary objects
for our current predicament of climate change and material flows in the building
industry.
This is a vision of the future which has to be considered critically at any step of the
way. It may be fully and entirely flawed, but the purpose is nevertheless to force us to
think critically about our current predicament. The speculative future scenario is based
on current scientific predictions, but only through insinuation. The goal would be to
afterwards find ways to make the vision more workable and useful for current
conditions.
The” Future-Object”
When architect, designers or engineers design or prescribe at any level, to what end
are we doing it? The final aspect of the prescriptive capacities of the (im)material
metabolism is to discuss and speculate the future. Knowing well that it is impossible
to predict the future, it could nevertheless be useful to attempt to do so in very broad
terms. The development of the future scenario should be based on current tendencies
and predictions made in scientific circles. The tendencies highlighted are as follows:
• expected increase/doubling of building stock by 2050 (European
Commission 2021, UNEP 2022)
• population growth possibly to 11 billion by 2100, (UNDESAPD 2022)
• increase in urbanization (Baeumler et al 2021)
• increase in floor area pr. capita (Bierwirth, Thomas 2019, pp. 15; EU
Buildings Database 2023)
• global migration patterns (Davis et al 2013)
These considerations manifest a very ambiguous "future-object” (figure 134) (in the
Harmanian sense). Depending on many complex current and future circumstances,
different variants of the “future-object” could materialize. Whether the overshooting
of building stock volume beyond actual societal needs (only for economic speculation
and profit) and with an increased floor pr. capita, with little to no flexibility and
adaptability integrated. Or the opposite could also materialize. While latter “opposite”
scenario would be more desirable, the danger of the first one should always keep us
on our toes.
Testing Theory: Design
267
Figure 134. The future-object: future scenario S(f).
The future scenarios’ two main takeaways should be that of the needs of the people in
the future. In the context of this PhD study, this is to be facilitated by building stock
volume. While the passing of time is certainly not predictable, and many unexpected
things could happen, it nevertheless be possible for each city (based on the future
scenario) to propose an approximation (as a starting point) regarding how much city
do we need for a given (S(f) figure 134) amount of people. If, and they will, these
numbers fluctuate, could we also propose a contingency plan regionally? What we
have to avoid is, in the case of a halted global population, building stock and city
footprint growing endlessly. Even with a halted global population, there is still the
risk of the buildings stock’s continued growth. If different migration tendencies
actualize due to climate change, social and political development, or popularity etc.,
and this could create demand for cities to continue growing. Something like would
necessitate global scale cooperation and close dialogue at any level, especially
socially and geopolitically.
Further speculative imagination
When we consider the prospect that building stock volumes will double by 2050 and
the risks with the current optimism with circular strategies and LCA tools, there is a
risks that we might overshoot building stock volume unnecessarily. There are other
important aspects to consider as well. If we attempt to model a future on the
projections of current material flows and in relation to projects of both urbanization
and population growth (and its expected stagnation by circa 2100), then the 2050
projections of building stock volume issue get a few more nuances. From a
contemporary perspective, more and more materials will be needed to accommodate
future generations and the influx from rural areas for some time to come. Even if the
2050 projections is overshot by a significant amount, this overshot-surplus can have
positive effects. However, it will need to be made with the future in mind so that it is
268
indeed flexible in 2100. There will need to be a kind of building stock volume “cap”
or valve where it can be possible to significantly slow and narrow flows at a time
where population size, urbanization etc. can be argued to correspond to the existing
volume of the building stock (having included a surplus for unplanned activities etc.).
This could possibly be developed as a working model based on mathematical
estimation of population number as well as models on demography in relation to rural
and urban compositions. Along with other factors, and on account of those estimates,
a certain volume of building stock material will be needed for such a future scenario.
Several scenarios can thus be developed in this regard: conservative proposals versus
more liberal proposals. One aspect to consider is the possibility that the tendency of
increase in floor area pr. capita can possibly be legislated or prescribed against (a
legislative upper limit of area) where it is considered socio-economically and
ecologically feasible and strategic to do so.
Figure 135. future scenarios; 0,1,2,3.
This does not mean that we today should build insane volumes of building stock to
accommodate such a future scenario. Doing so would merely mean that we know what
we are designing towards and where the threshold could be in terms of building. The
future scenario is thus open and if we continue the current practice in the built
environment, we may materialize a thoroughly undesirable future scenario and
consequential impact on the natural environments. Likewise, if there should be a
metabolic shift in practices, it could be possible to facilitate meaningful living
conditions through as little as possible material consumption. To enact metabolic
design –-we have to design and prescribe at almost any level, necessitating the taking
activity at a social, economic and environmental level with both designers and
activists.
Testing Theory: Design
269
Figure 136. Building volume at a given time is influenced by the needs of people and the
accompanying building practice.
The building volume of the future (BV) will obviously be accompanied by an
additional building volume (ΔBV (delta building volume)). The challenge is to make
this delta (ΔBV) in a metabolic way so that it is both open and at the same time
appropriate the current building stock in accordance to metabolic principles.
With our current building practices, we may indeed materialize undesirable scenarios
(current rate) and 3 (amplification of material use) in Figure 135. Scenario 0 is entirely
impossible as such a solution would indicate that a perfect circularity is achieved. It
is not an unlikely scenario that building volume could double or perhaps even triple
by 2100. This is because if there is modest increase in population by 2050, the building
stock volume would double making it unlikely that some ideal variant of scenario 1
would actualize. This could be due to the still increasing global population during the
21st century which will lead to rise in wealth on average and boost the subsequent
need for increased floor area pr. capita. If current tendencies in building practice and
material consumption perpetuate, it is highly unlikely that any of the positive variants
of scenario 1 will materialize.
There are risks attached to any sustainable agenda, whether Open building concept or
circular strategy, because there are always risks that such strategies (if they remain
single-building-oriented) could perpetuate material consumption on an accumulated
level. Even if single buildings have to minimize impacts, more and more new
buildings can be built and risk accumulatively increased regarding impact and
material consumption through legitimization of a single building polluting less when
compared to a given benchmark. Since such sustainable concepts are also at risk of
not being used as intended in the future, there is need for guaranteed or increased
likelihood (e.g., through legislation) that such principles will be used purposefully and
strategically in order to avoid the scenario that current circular design merely acted as
an opportunistic measure to maintain growth-oriented material consumption.
Today we see the prediction of the doubling of building stock materials by 2050 could
be legitimate consideration (European Commission 2021). Given the fact that 2050 is
27 years away (from the time of writing this), how we the design this additional
building volume (ΔBV) is of immense importance. Would it be possible to design
such additional building stock (ΔBV (delta building volume)) which complement the
current building stock so that the 2100-scenarion could be to a great degree facilitated
270
by the 2050 scenario building stock? As we are building today, we of course have to
minimize climate impacts on each new building. However, at the same time, can we
make our buildings ready for the future scenario (through functional ambiguity,
flexibility and adaptability). There is a need not only gives us spatial planetary
boundaries but also
temporal boundaries (e.g., the year 2100 scenario) where we envision how society
with a stagnated global population will be facilitated and what accompanying (Urban
Sink) building stock could facilitate this.
6.3.4. We ought to…
If we are seriously attempting to minimize material consumption, we have to use
critical knowledge and find ways to implement it. This section will attempt to outline
a number of normative design prescriptions which contain both findings from chapter
5 (analysis) as well as chapter 6 (on design). As both the analysis chapter 5 and design
chapter 6 have explored different trajectories and brought together different fields and
approaches into a metabolic framework, there is a sense of urgency to find ways to
implement metabolic design considerations and different variants of the Urban Sink.
That is not to say that all aspects of metabolic design thinking ought to be legislated
as that would also be impossible and could risk becoming counterproductive for
unpredictable reasons. The following design prescriptions are mixed in both
advocating for design and more public awareness as well as more political actions as
to potentially introduce more and more ambitious metabolic considerations in plan
law and building law including both material and immaterial considerate.
Including more immediate and small-scale considerations into higher scales and
general conditions of the metabolic design trajectory, we ought to:
• find ways to innovate and design new relations within and between the four
main activities: eating, dwelling, moving, cleaning.
• not demolish, and promote more renovation. Instead we should reuse, refurb
etc.
• keep all materials with as little as possible entropy increase due to future
scarcity.
• consider a complex and multi-material and multi-principle strategy instead
of opportunistic “green highways” of mere focus on more wood and more
design for disassembly etc. Not all building should be able to fully
disassemble, and there is need for strategic overview, what amount of
elements circulates for different temporary purposes, while others are more
permanent (or as long the material allows it).
• include and mobilize immaterial aspects.
Testing Theory: Design
271
• consider a large-scale strategic approach which kinds of Urban Sink variants
are relevant in a given time and place.
• design beautiful OPEN, persistent, “permanent” structures which allows
flexibility and adaptability.
• develop (FEM-type) tools that simulate life span and do not merely show
minimally acceptable performance with a minimal material application at
best cost effectivity.
• legislate for storage sites but also introduce both OPEN dimension of
building legislation, as well as “beatification” (for lack of better word).
• find ways to challenge the trend of increasing floor area pr. capita.
• envision (to the best of our ability) the future scenario in this crucial time
when global population may stagnate, where urbanization possibly halts etc.
and define a building stock which can house such a scenario even with
changes. Such a scenario would allow for the potential development of a
metabolic strategic model for now and the future. One that we know what
we are building towards from now.
• provide reasonable flexibility and adaptability within a purposeful range.
• consider and advocate not only legislation on single buildings/complexes but
also more metabolic consideration of a larger, inter-building, city, region
schemes etc.
• approach any level or problem of design from a metabolic understanding
because any concept or agenda can diverge from its intentions, and the
overall purpose is to relate design intentions and actualized material flows.
• define the city perimeter/periphery as a legislative (not actual physical wall)
line which limits the city’s spatial footprint. This would promote dense living
and not grab more and more land for real estate but consider biodiversity.
• be aware of and reconsider the notions of “cultural continuity”. Here, we are
not referring to the one which acts as ideological justification of a continued
linear growth paradigm where the cultural continuity is materialized as each
new building in the progress of history. Rather, we are referring to a variant
of cultural continuity where buildings qua their tectonic characteristics
remain and where new additions, adaptations, decorations or even ornaments
are gently added overtime, beautifying the building and solidifying it within
the culture.
• always be aware that any new design imperative (build more like this or that),
any new tools, ideas, or new future iterations of the sustainability agenda
always have the possibility of being misconstrued and mobilized as yet
another legitimization of the perpetuation of material flows (and their
subsequential socio-political conditions). Does the (im)material metabolism
also risk being flattened is such a way? Perhaps, if one willfully ignores its
scope. It would again be possible that some might equate a particular style
or design ethos (as the “phony ethics” of tectonics as elaborated by Jeremy
Till) with metabolism, but that would not be metabolic but more of an
ideology imposed onto it. Through the emphasis on minimizing material
272
flows, we have to cunningly and critically consider which relational nuances
are pertinent in what contexts as to minimize material consumption.
• always be aware that many new design prescriptions (agendas) and
imperatives will be developed, making it necessary to always couple
prescriptive approaches with an inherent metabolic, critical-analytic, and
reflective angle.
These are but a few of the design prescriptions to consider when approaching the built
environment from a metabolic understanding. There can of course be many more;
however, the (im)material metabolic understanding (through the Urban Sink concept)
allows for further reflection, critical thinking and the proposal of new and more
pertinent design prescriptions when designing, proposing awareness and education,
creating dialogue and advocating for legislative and political action. When we are
designing, we have to be painstakingly aware of if we want to design a “building
industry” (which maintains the need for its services) or the “built environment” and
its subsequent building culture. These two are not the same. The question is thus are
to remain at the level of defining the problem of material flows as to “design” a
circular economy which will enable us consume material as we have known it (profit-
oriented growth paradigm) – or are we to design a built environment which will
minimize its material consumption through lasting structures. The creative agencies
within the built environment have to face this inherent struggle of building practice
before anything can meaningfully change.
6.4. Conclusion
This chapter was concerned with exploring the prescriptive capacities of the
(im)material metabolism. Relying on the lessons and reflections on analytic efforts
(paper 1 and chapter 5), this chapter further attempted to discern the variants of the
Urban Sink and explore different or unique design capacities which were brought
about with (im)material metabolic design thinking.
When designing with the (im)material metabolism, the design process necessitates an
approach which is initiated from material concerns and considerations. In the instance
of the paper 2 (Usto et al 2023) and its subsequent further exploration in this chapter
(6.2), there is an indication that a seemingly “reversed” design process (compared to
the analytic approach) is mobilized and that the process starts from material conditions
(the flows of construction waste thus necessitating a design endeavor towards
facilitating large amounts of such waste through outdoor storage sites).
This chapter also expands on the Urban Sink notions, relying on lessons and
reflections from chapter 5 (on analysis) regarding the exploration what other, perhaps
more unusual, design/prescriptive capacities could be considered with an (im)material
metabolic approach. Chapter 5 thus, in expanding the notion of Urban Sink, brings
Testing Theory: Design
273
together other relevant methods, theoretical positions, practices, schemes, and
methodical considerations for further contouring of what it means to think metabolic
design through Urban Sink notion. The testing of the theory happened through
research-by-design methodology used the theory of (im)material metabolism’s own
constructs as design steps initially. Later, a more iterative process occurred regarding
the exploration of further potential between the constructs and their relations. With
the example of the design scenario, the design process had to occur “in reverse”,
relatively speaking, when compared to more conventional design processes where
architects first find a concept then choose material and volumes of materials on
account of that. The five constructs served as design steps which both needed to be
developed in their own right and needed to be developed in order to engage in a
relation with the other four constructs of the (im)material metabolism.
The notion of “design” or prescriptive capacities can thus be claimed to have common
“design” applicability when designing an object or a urban system. But it can
furthermore be considered as having a more expanded design and prescriptive ability
regarding speculative thinking which indicates what ought to be considered, i.e., what
new agendas, new and different material consumption patterns and subsequent social
practices we could manifest, in order to potentially influence public awareness and
legislation. Through the use of the five constructs to guide the design process – the
methodology of research-by-design had the purpose of both extracting “steps” and
concludingly “design principles.” The paper was for this reason equally a test of the
theory’s capacity to acts as a guide for the process and extract design ‘rules’
(prescriptive trajectories). Ultumately, it showed that there is potential in thining of
the construct in a processual manor along, and also allow to develop rules or principles
for each construct and rules in general.
274
Figure 137. Different variants of the Urban Sink at different scales.
The explored variants of the Urban Sink (figure 137) are still tentative, as new aspects
and considerations could very well become relevant both in the near and distant future
– while some could need further refinement or be left behind as other conditions and
challenges need addressing.
In potentially making this Urban Sink considerations more probable, dialog with
many parties would be necessary: municipalities, private owners of real estate. There
are many ways to strategically approach the built environment, and several more
variants of scale, typology and strategic design of the Urban Sink can be explored and
developed in future studies. While we ought to develop theory, methods, and design
tools, there is need of the accompanying of larger scale political involvement and
strategic thinking regarding how to design and prescribe conditions and tendencies in
the built environment.
6.4.1. Contributions to Theory Building from Design
The combining of tectonics and industrial ecology, i.e., the (im)material metabolic
approach, seem to open up a new “design space” or field which nuances design
considerations more extensively not merely as a way to optimize life path or cycles
but metabolic systems and sub-systems. This new “open space” will need much
further exploration especially on the side of methodology and methods and tool
development.
Testing Theory: Design
275
The testing of the theory in its design/prescriptive capacities provided feedback for
theory building and subsequent adjusting. As the prescriptive capacities of the theory
necessitated an increase in scale and thus complexity which not only had indicated a
need for including other relevant design consideration (which are not developing from
a industrial ecology approach) but were still relevant for a (im)material metabolic
approach. The increase in scale and complexity, as well as the impetus in material
conditions, reified how the five constructs relate and, in particular, how the “reversal”
of starting from material wastes affects “narrative”, implying that narratives are not
self-evident and given but socially constructed through alternative practices. The
increase in scale and complexity also made it evident that both social and political
aspects must be included into metabolic thinking. This would implicate questions of
general social attitudes and world-view of individuals and communities and with
questions of what it means to consume and what social practices could be constructed
towards a slow of materials consumption.
276
Conclusion: Synthesis on Theory Development
277
Chapter 7.
Conclusion: Synthesis on Theory Development
This concluding chapter will provide an overview of the findings and will
concludingly reiterate how the theory development process proceeded, how the “safe
sink” notion got transformed in relevant ways for the disciplines architecture,
engineering and design, and what sort of notion (object) the Urban Sink is and what
it could further entail. The chapter will also reiterate the theory elements: constructs,
relations, logics and boundaries. With these, the chapter will outline the found insights
and potential for new insights qua the (im)material metabolism. Followingly the
chapter will outline limitations and challenges of the (im)material metabolism
potential future research.
7.1. Conclusion: The (Im)Material Metabolism
The development of the theory is informed by two pertinent theoretical frameworks.
The juxtaposing of tectonic theory with industrial ecology (societal metabolism) in
relation to challenges of material flows within the built environment was done through
the centralization of the notion of “safe sink” from industrial ecology. The industrial
ecology notion of “safe sink” is mainly concerned with the material aspect of safely
storing materials. As this notion of safe sink (or more generally sink) is central to a
sustainable approach in any industry, its transition into architectural discourse
necessitated a nuancing of the “safe sink” notion towards being more sensitive
immaterial as well as material consideration.
This was done through a meticulous process of adding, the adjusting and connecting
(Keestra et al 2016) of notions and concepts from the two theoretical frameworks. The
process was furthermore supplemented by an overall scope of the metaphor of
metabolism, logical argumentation, using existing tectonic and industrial ecology
theory (and methodology) along with existing philosophical texts (as was described
in chapter 3 and done in chapter 4).
The (im)material metabolism was thus manifested as a spectrum of material and
immaterial constructs and relations (unlike the usual tectonic material-immaterial
dualisms) which were also coupled with a set of logics and boundaries which grounds
the constructs in critical (and self-critical) discourse regarding design and its
subsequent material consequences.
278
The (Im)Material Metabolism
The (im)material metabolism is theory built by juxtaposing industrial ecology and the
tectonic stoffwechsel theory. This was further supplemented by the use of the
metaphor method, along with the adding, adjusting, and connecting of ideas concepts.
So, what kind of metabolism are we dealing with? The metaphor of metabolism can
seem very complex. The metabolism is certainly not something which can directly be
touched, perhaps you can. Rather it is something that one partakes in, i.e., space of
movement whose contours and metabolic rates are socially constructed. It can be said
that the planet has its own metabolism as well, but the (im)material metabolism does
not include the whole of the planetary dynamics. Such an aspect would be too complex
to include in (im)material metabolism. There are thus two metabolisms to be aware
of, i.e., the planets own and the societal metabolism though only the latter is
considered, which can be seen as a concentric relationship (as shown in chapter 4).
The overlapping dimensions between the two metabolisms is the matter. The
continued dynamics of the metabolism are caused by what we do and how we apply
said matter. The (metaphor of the) metabolism is thus the meta-physical idea which
certainly could have been translated into architecture in very different ways, but the
pertinent way to make it architectural is through the concept of the Urban Sink. This
is not unlike how in industrial ecology theory and methodology the “metabolism” is
the whole scope. The emphasis on “safe sinks” is a way to manifest a slow and narrow
metabolism. One cannot simply change the whole metabolism in its full (planetary)
scope, you do so through the Urban Sink as the vessel.
Figure 138. The Metabolism, not total and universal,
but societal and planetary via matter.
Conclusion: Synthesis on Theory Development
279
Urban Sink
While the planet-in-itself (all complex interrelation dynamics) cannot be known or
comprehended, the way to relate to planetary capacities (or scarcity, limits,
boundaries) is thought to be the conceptual centralization of the “safe sink” notion
and its architectural reiteration, i.e., Urban Sink, through a slowing and narrowing of
materiel flows. The Urban Sink is the key contribution of this doctoral study, as it is
the particularization of the (complex) overarching idea of the metabolism. So, what is
the Urban Sink? While the metabolism is the general idea, the Urban Sink is a way to
comprehend and enact a metabolic understanding because it is difficult if not
impossible to “directly” affect the metabolism (and ultimately the planet). The
complex notion of the metabolism can be approached indirectly through the Urban
Sink. The initial assumption of the doctoral study was if the “safe sink” concept is to
be transferred into architectural thinking, something new will be invented. This,
however, was not the case. There were already existing edifices within the
architectural discipline which could be included in a metabolic approach such as the
Open building concept (see chapter 5 and 6) along with the general attitude of the
tectonic ways of thinking. I do think, with all due respect, that some of these fields
(e.g. mentioned in 6.3.1) could attain a further metabolic inclination. The Urban Sink
is constituted by many variants at different scales of design. These span from the
surplus, the detail, inventory, elements, and support to urban symbiosis, storage site,
city web and legislative action. Most of these can be both fixed and open /movable
as any particular building stock’s ability to perform as safe sink for materials. The
Urban Sink will need a multi-material (not only wood and straw but also concrete
etc.,) and a multi-strategy approach (not only DfD but also Open building, storage
sites etc.). The Urban Sink is thus both the materials objects and the surrounding
immaterial cultures which constitute the underlying processes of the performance of
the Urban Sink.
Figure 139. The Urban Sink is a spectrum from Object to Process: a single object (house,
storage site), to the network of objects and finally the very relational process which allows the
circulation and storage of materials. All are the Urban Sink simultaneously if they have the
capacity to store materials through material and immaterial aspects.
280
Figure 140. Urban Sink specified across variants/scales and constructs.
Across its different variants and scales, the Urban Sink is still constituted by the five
construct of material-immaterial spectrum (figure 140). These 5 constructs are not
perfectly segmented as it is diagrammatically depicted in the above-mentioned figure
as categories can overlap to lesser or greater degree (e.g., integrated furniture within
a wall etc.).
Constructs, Relations, Logics, Boundaries
The material and immaterial spectrum of the metabolism spans from material flows,
structuring principles, use/function, experiential conditions and narrative. Each of the
constructs can have many different specific counterparts in the cases of analysis or
design. There is likewise a set of sub-constructs which overlap and as such constitute
the possibility for complex sets of relations in any empirical situation.
Conclusion: Synthesis on Theory Development
281
Figure 141. Five constructs - two overlapping sets of threes which
provide crucial juxtapositions – towards a horizon of the metabolic designer.
The five constructs of the theory are “material flows”, “structuring principles”,
“use/functionality”, “experiential conditions”, and “narrative”. These can, for
communication and pedagogical reasons, be explained as two sets of threes with the
upper and the lower being slightly oversimplified in a “conventional” way. The upper
would be the scope of the architect, and the lower deals with the engineering aspects.
Together, both of these ideally make up the whole spectrum which permits us to think
in metabolic terms about the design of the built environment.
Figure 142. The metabolic dialectic.
The constructs constitute a central dialectic or metabolic mechanism which
necessitates a critical relating of constructs. When using the (im)material metabolism
in either design or analysis any process can be initiated with a “narrative” (or
282
intention) - through the mapping of architectural characteristics - and finally arrive at
the materialized consequence (of a building). Or in the other direction, a process can
be initiated from the material concerns which ends in “narrative” (advocacy, social
awareness of material use etc.). This inter-relation of constructs is also presented in
the descriptions of the (im)material metabolism’s logics and boundaries as the
Narrative-dimension is the critical and self-reflective object while the material flows
construct deals with actualized material consequences of a given edifice or approach.
As such, the epistemological and ontological reflection of the logics and boundaries
of the (im)material metabolism theory are both reflected and dialectically practiced
through the application of the constructs. Regarding the dialectic (figure 142), there
could be a possibility of employing it in a different way. Imagine that we arrive at
some ideal sustainable situation, which would surmise that the “material flows” are
“optimal”, the consequence of interest would thus not be the material consequences
but the social and experiential (immaterial) ones. Depending on a given case study or
experiment, different research aims can be developed in order to discern particular
relations of interest.
Analysis and Design (Descriptive and Prescriptive capacities)
In the cases of applying the (im)material metabolism as analysis and design, there are
differing approaches to consider. Fundamentally, in the case of applying the
(im)material metabolism in a analytic capacity, it should be considered to initiate the
analysis from the “narrative” dimension in order to conclusively map/analyse the
material consequences and thus discern to what extent there might be a
correspondence between intentions and final product. In the case of design, it could
be considerable to initiate from the material conditions (flows) as to arrive at new and
different (constructed) narratives which could permeate into society towards more
awareness and shift in consumption and making cultures.
Figure 143. The approaches (arrows)of analysis (from top) and design (from bottom).
Though the processes are more complex (as was elaborated in chapters 5 and 6), they
are not entirely linear although it still can be largely claimed that the general processes
Conclusion: Synthesis on Theory Development
283
of analysis and design can be initiated either from the “top” (analysis) and from the
“bottom” (design) (see figure 143). As was already elaborated at the end of chapter 4,
the (im)material metabolism cannot be used as a substitute for a different method. In
the ambiguity of the analysis and design, the (im)material metabolism is a theory
whose edifice can be mobilized as methodological frameworks in both analysis as
design and thus necessitates the use of additional supplementary methods and tools
which are guided/framed by the theory.
Significance of the (im)material metabolism
The (im)material metabolism theory’s significance lies in its nuancing of the material-
immaterial spectrum and the possibilities that the juxtaposition of the five key
constructs (and the many particular counterparts in an empirical applications) allows
for the discernment of pertinent relations that can have consequence for material
flows. That is to say that a wide range of known facts can be put into a “metabolic”
framework in order to discern key relations which should be emphasized over others
thus making a difference for the synthesis of lessons or design principles etc. This is
the concept of the parallax view (Žižek 2006), where the same known facts are given
a different meaning due to a shift in perspective (this being a metabolic one) due to
an expanded scope. An example could be that a building is deemed “sustainable”, but
an actual tracking of the material flows shows it is in fact “green washing” whether it
knowingly or unknowingly done. The study thus shows that if we ought to propose
sustainable, viable solutions to the challenges of the built environment, a metabolic
approach is pertinent.
The spectrum likewise necessitated the inclusion of other research fields’ knowledge
and principles to make the metabolism, an otherwise complex and abstract notion,
into approachable particularizations within different scales (see figure 137 or figure
140) . With the (im)material metabolism empirical conditions of, for example, the
“narrative” or “experiential conditions” can only be considered as non-causal
correlation to “material flows”. Nonetheless, through the relational spectrum of the
metabolism (i.e. figure 78), it can potentially be discerned or nuanced into an (in)direct
causal relation.
The (im)material metabolism is obviously a theory, but it is not linked to a more
“conventional” architectural theory as much as it is an architectural, or rather tectonic,
ontology, of the architectural discipline. Given the purposefully “general” nature of
the constructs, it is possible that they could also be used to include and consider other
fields, lines of thought, and disciplines. Furthermore, despite needing much more
research towards the placement of the architectural discipline within planetary
capacities/boundaries (potentially via the bio-regional approach as developed in
industrial ecology - yet through the centralization of the “safe sink” notion), future
knowledge and contribution developed in other sciences or within the architectural
research could easily be implemented into a more specific “planetary” approach
within the (im)material metabolism.
284
Figure 144. The (im)material metabolism (grey ring) as platform
for future metabolic interdisciplinarity both for collaboration and integration.
New Insights
The application of the (im)material metabolism prompted new insights in the case of
analysis and design, respectively. In the initial analytic application, it was
concludingly hypothesized in paper 1 (Usto et al 2022) that a kind of (im)material
“surplus” which potentially could perform as an material investment for the future and
thus potentially strengthen its cultural relevance as well as its performance as a Urban
Sink (safe storage of materials qua architectonic characteristics).
In the case of design application of the theory, the metabolic approach allowed for
very different approaches to that of so-called material banks or archives (which are
often envisioned as physical facilities for storage of construction waste materials) and
allowed for reconceptualization of the storage function through architectural and
recreative qualities in the city.
7.2. Reflections
Initially within this PhD, there were also ambitions of pedagogic and educational
research in order to provide the theory to students at different levels of education,
Conclusion: Synthesis on Theory Development
285
monitor and evaluate student projects, and observe what direct (if any) influence it
has had on their design when thinking metabolically.
In retrospect, the theory building effort proved more complex than anticipated.
Considerable amounts of time was necessary to attempt to understand material flow
analysis, the chemical engineering field and its sub-field of industrial ecology.
Likewise, it was complex to couple all of this in a simplified way with the tectonic
framework. Because the proceeding theory building effort was not based on
grounded theory (on basis of empirical observation) but via existing theory
supplemented with empirical findings, the gap between them was significant and
thus necessitated an elaborate methodology to work with the two chosen disciplinary
frameworks as to meaningfully transfer metabolic thinking or make architectural
discipline metabolically inherently. It is not enough to only focus on the method of
metaphor; additional methods were needed for the theory development.
The metaphor as method could potentially be much more explored, especially in the
“analogy” variant. It would be interesting to explore a trajectory already put forth by
Benedikte Zitouni with her exploration on a more particular mechanisms within
actual living organisms (Zitouni 2013), and its potentially architectural relevance if
translated in relevant ways. Such an aspect is modestly already contained within this
PhD study in the idea of “slowing” which can be said to “mimic” a metabolic
characteristic in the sense that small entities have a “fast” metabolism while large
ones have slow metabolisms. To explore new/different trajectories similar to those
of Zitouni could potentially provide new inspiration for “inner” relations of the
metabolism and its different variants of the Urban Sink which could potentially
provide new insights for how to “slow” material flows further. Such a trajectory
would require a “deep dive” into biology, though without a considerable and new
theory building effort in mind and only with focus on the metabolic mechanisms
which could hold meaningful conceptual translation for design principles or design
criteria.
Obviously, it would also be of interest to analyze more cases and explore other
design variants but given the immense emphasis on constructs and their relationality,
the implementation of different levels of complexity could have also promoted a
research approach of correlation research (Groat, Wang 2013). While this was not
fully relevant for the scales of analysis and design in this PhD study, such an research
methodology could be necessary. This may be so because, as with industrial ecology,
a metabolic approach necessitates a largescale understanding regarding where
questions of public opinions, general public attitudes, data on use etc., (which could
not possibly be directly linked as causality to certain material flows, but patterns and
lessons) could still be discerned through hints of causality (correlation) which could
be pertinent to consider. In this regard, there is an early variant of New Materialism
called “correlationism" developed by Quentin Meillassoux (2010).
286
Thinking in terms of planetary limitations or capacities is difficult and more research
will be needed in this regard as well – hence the subtitle of this doctoral study being
“towards” a planetary understanding of the built environment. While there are
separate attempts to think “planetary limitations” (Rockström et al 2009; Petersen et
al 2022), the particular approach from industrial ecology (of bio-regional thinking)
would require further research. Perhaps the biggest challenge is the international and
geopolitical dialog and awareness of the need to define and agree on the spatial
perimeters of such regions and followingly provide political incentive to enact them.
7.3. Future studies
There will be need for further research with regard to the (im)material metabolism,
both in refining the hitherto built aspects and further development of normative design
principles. Additionally, there is potentially a need to look at methods and tools. The
PhD study at hand was the initial step (A1 in figure 145) and was concerned with the
development of the general theoretical and methodological framework.
Figure 145. Possible future research trajectories.
The further exploration (B2 in figure 145) on a student level would rely on the hitherto
theoretical findings along with the analytical and design considerations and reflections
of students at different levels. The students’ experimental application of the theory
Conclusion: Synthesis on Theory Development
287
(im)material metabolism would have the purpose of monitoring to what extent a
metabolic approach could influence their work as well as to what extent the written
text (perhaps a shortened version of this dissertation) is comprehensible and
applicable to both the undergraduate and graduate levels. This would further give
feedback to the future development and adjustment of the (im)material metabolism
theory to either lessen certain aspects or add or emphasize other ones. Lastly, (C3 in
figure 145) based on the findings, potentials and challenges of the application on a
students’ level, more considered and reflected design principles and consideration (in
a future simplified and shortened version of this PhD study) can be provided at a
professional level. Here, it would be interesting to conduct and workshop experiments
with a number of different disciplines in order to discern the feasibility of the theory
in multi-disciplinary effort. Generally, the idea is to test if the (im)material
metabolism, given its dialectic relation between constructs, could indeed embody the
many “difficult” philosophical considerations (logics and boundaries) through the
application of the constructs only. Will it always be necessary for both students and
practitioners to familiarize themselves with the whole of the (im)material metabolism,
and not just its construct (and relations)? It would be pertinent to explore all different
scales as well as principles. My ultimate ambition in this regard would be that students
and practitioners only be familiar with the “constructs and relations” without the
“heavy” epistemological and ontological considerations of the “logics and
boundaries” of the theory and still enact/practice metabolically.
Figure 146. A proposal of the different possible types of "labor"
- whether machine, human or natural.
288
Since industrial ecology already permits the inclusion of energy, future research
endeavors would also focus on implementing flows of energy along with the material.
Just as the creative design process requires energy, many different types of labor
(whether human, machine or other), will need implementation. The aspects of labor
and energy are interstitial and inherent to all the constructs and the (im)material
spectrum. While it is already a fact that scholars are thinking material flows and
energy consumption are as a whole an accumulated footprint, it could likewise be
pertinent to align and relate the two in relation to the reflections of case A in chapter
5 where a surplus of building envelope may cause increased heat loss. This hints that
material investment and energy performance may point in separate directions at times
and indicate a “sustainable” conundrum or a paradoxical relation between the two. In
conceptualizing the aspects of “labor” (an immaterial commodity), it would be
important to include all the different types of labor (figure 146). Each has their
appropriation, spatial and time scales of operations. They can be anything from natural
forces, physical human labor and intellectual labor to machines transforming or
transporting materials etc..
Figure 147. A hypothetical (fictive) overview of different scales and their construct-values -
(speculation for future research possibilities).
Conclusion: Synthesis on Theory Development
289
Lastly, I will keep an open eye for any cases from which we could learn from (Figure
147). I imagine there must be not only single buildings and complexes, but also
neighborhoods or districts that possibly demonstrate a significantly lower material and
energy consumption and whose particular sizes, dimensions, principles, proportions,
practices, flexibilities, adaptabilities, experiential conditions and narratives could be
discerned and understood to allow reflection and consideration when designing new
inter-building relations and larger infrastructural constellations or reconsidering
existing ones. One would need high resolution material and energy flow data (not
general for whole city) and juxtapose it with the spatial conditions. Generally, I also
intend to work more with LCA tools in order to further qualify different considerations
and possibly attempt to translate (ideally) collaborations with chemical engineering
the MFA into a workable design method/tool which can be used in a commonly
applied 3d environment among students and practitioners (ideally Rhino).
290
Epilogue
291
Epilogue
Steve Jobs once said that musicians played their instruments but that he himself plays
the orchestra. We cannot remain fixated on merely one instruments (read building) at
the time, and the challenge is exactly to design the whole orchestra (read metabolism)
at once and have it play a beautifully slow and tender yet vigorous, lively and powerful
tune. But at the same time, we have to know the instruments as well; we have to know
the tension of the strings, their elasticity, the density of air molecule which the strings
set in motion to create vibrations that stimulate our senses.
There is an immense challenge in conceptualizing the whole of architecture-as-such
(building industry/culture), because thinking about architecture and building in
expanded scope we can start to observe complicated and paradoxical mechanisms and
patterns which are both transposed onto it (from outside) or which are inherent to it
already. And while the whole of the building industry and culture practices still seem
outside of a comprehensive onto-epistemological grasp, the (im)material metabolism
was my modest attempt to think of the architecture-Thing as a metabolic entity.
292
Bibliography
Aksamija, A., Iordanova, I. 2010. “Computational Environments with Multimodal
Representations of Architectural Design Knowledge,” International Journal of
Architectural Computing 8(4): 442– 460.
Allenby, B. 1999. ‘Earth systems engineering: the role of industrial ecology in an
engineered world’, Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 2, No. 3, pp.73–93.
https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Alexander, Christopher, Sara Ishikawa, and Murray Silverstein. 1977. A Pattern
Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction. New York: Oxford University Press,
Alexander, C. 2002. The Nature of Order - The process of creating life. Book 1:
Phenomenon of Life. Center for Environmental Structure. Berkely.
Andersen, C. E., Kanafani, K., Zimmermann, R. K., Rasmussen, F. N., & Birgisdóttir,
H. 2020. Comparison of GHG emissions from circular and conventional building
components. Buildings and Cities, 1(1), 379. https://doi.org/10.5334/bc.55
Andersen, N. B.. 2019. Beautiful Tectonics: Corporeal Aesthetic in Tectonics as
Sustainable Parameter. I PJS. Cruz (red.), Structures and Architecture - Bridging the
Gap and Crossing Borders (s. 134-142). Taylor & Francis. Structure and Architecture
Bind 1
Anderson, C., 2008. The End of Theory: The Data Deluge Makes the Scientific
Method Obsolete. Wired. (Last accessed: 25-02-2023)
https://www.wired.com/2008/06/pb-theory/
Arkitekten 1965. Conbox, et præ-fab system. Last Accessed: 20-10-2021:
https://docplayer.dk/17401660- Forblad-conbox-et-prae-fab-system-tidsskrifter-
arkitekten-1965.html
Athanassiadis, A., Christis, M., Bouillard, P., Vercalsteren, A.,,. Crawford, R. H,
Khan A. Z., 2018. Comparing a territorial-based and a consumption-based approach
to assess the local and global environmental performance of cities, Journal of Cleaner
Production, Volume 173, Pages 112-123
Aude B., Lundgaard B., 1975. Sjølund – en bebyggelse I Hellebæk. Last accessed:
20-10-2021: https://xn--sjlundsparken-cnb.dk/wp-
content/uploads/2020/12/Projektbogen.pdf
Autrup, L., 2021. “Lars Autrup om BR18-kritik: Arkitekturen forsvinder stille og
roligt ud af Bygningsreglementet” Byrummonitor,
Epilogue
293
https://politikenbyrum.dk/Debat/art8090329/Arkitekturen-forsvinder-stille-og-roligt-
ud-af-bygningsreglementet, last accessed 04-01-2023
Ayres, R.U. 1994. Industrial Metabolism: theory and policy. In Ayres, R.U. and
Simonis, U.E., (eds) Industrial Metabolism: Restructuring for Sustainable
Development. Tokyo: United university Press.
Baccini, P., 1997. A city's metabolism: Towards the sustainable development of urban
systems, Journal of Urban Technology, 4:2, 27-39, DOI:
10.1080/10630739708724555
Baccini, P., Brenner, P H., 2012. Metabolism of the Anthroposphere: Analysis,
Evaluation, Design, Cambridge, MIT Press.
Balmond, C., Smith J., Brensing C.,, 2002. Informal. Prestel, Munich
Baeumler, A., D’Aoust, O., Gapihan, A., Goga, S., Lakovits, C., Restrepo, Cavadid,
P., Singh, G., Terraza, H., 2021. Demographic Trends and Urbanization. Washington,
DC: World Bank. doi:10.1596/978-1-4648-1112-9.]] License: Creative Commons
Attribution CC BY 3.0 IGO
Bech-Danielsen, C. 2014. An abstract Culture's Search for Concrete Roots. I A. Beim,
& U. Stylsvig Madsen (red.), Towards an Ecology of Tectonics: The Need for
Rethinking Construction in Architecture (s. 55-65). Edition Axel Menges.
Beim, A., 2004. Tectonic visions in architecture. Kunstakademiets Arkitektskoles
Forlag
Beim, A. & Madsen, U.S. (eds), 2014, Towards a Ecology of Tectonics – The Need
for Rethinking Construction in Architecture: 110. Stuttgart/London: Axel Menges
Beim, A., Stylsvig U.M., & Beck, T. 2012. At bygge med øje for fremtiden: visioner
i det industrialiserede boligbyggeri 1970 - 2011. (1. udgave udg.) Kunstakademiets
Arkitektskoles Forlag. CINARK Forskning http://www.arkfo.dk/shop
Bendsen, J.R., Morgen, M.A., 2018 Fredet Bygningsfredning i Danmark 1918-2018.
Strandberg Publishing.
Bennett, J. 2010. Vibrant Matter – A political ecology of things. USA: Duke
University Press
Benjamin, A. 2007. “Plans to Matter: Towards a History of material possibility.” In
Material Matters – Architectural and Material Practice.” Ed. Katie Lloyd Thomas.
London & New York. Routledge
294
Benson, M. H. 2019. NEW MATERIALISM: AN ONTOLOGY FOR THE
ANTHROPOCENE. Natural Resources Journal, 59(2), 251–280.
https://www.jstor.org/stable/26800037
Benyus, J.M., 1997. Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by Nature. Perennial, New
York.
Bhattacherjee, A., 2012. Social Science Reeach: Principles, Methods, and Practices.
Textbooks Collection. Book 3. Access Online:
http://scholarcommons.ufs.edu/oa_textbooks/3
Bianchi, M., Cordella M., 2023. Does circular economy mitigate the extraction of
natural resources? Empirical evidence based on analysis of 28 European economies
over the past decade, Ecological Economics, Volume 203, 2023, 107607, ISSN 0921-
8009, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2022.107607.
Bierwirth, A., Thomas, S. 2019. Energy Sufficiency in buildings – concept paper.
Energy Sufficency. ECEEE
Black, M., 1955. Metaphor. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, New Series, Vol.
55 (1954 - 1955), pp. 273-294
Block, I., 2021. Nakagin Capsule Tower to be dismantled and turned into rental
accommodation and exhibits. Dezeen. https://www.dezeen.com/2021/07/16/nakagin-
capsule-tower-dismantled-news/ (last accessed: 15-04-2023)
Bocken, N. M. P., Ingrid de Pauw, Conny Bakker & Bram van der Grinten (2016)
Product design and business model strategies for a circular economy, Journal of
Industrial and Production Engineering, 33:5, 308-320, DOI:
10.1080/21681015.2016.1172124
Borden P., Meredith M., eds. 2012. Matter: Material processes in architectural
production. Routledge, New York
Bosma, K., van Hoogstraten, D., Vos, M., 2000. Housing for the Millions John
Habraken and the SAR (1960-2000). NAI Publisher, University of Michigan.
Bourg, D, & Erkman, S (eds) 2003, Perspectives on Industrial Ecology, Taylor &
Francis Group, Saltaire. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central. [16 April 2023].
Bourg D., 2003. Industrial ecology: philosophical and political meanings. In Bourg,
D, & Erkman, S (eds) 2003, Perspectives on Industrial Ecology, Taylor & Francis
Group, Saltaire. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central. [16 April 2023].
Epilogue
295
Brand, S. 1994. How Buildings Learn - What Happens After They're Built. Penguin
Putnam Inc.
Brinkmann, S., Tanggaard, L. 2010. ‘Toward an Epistemology of the Hand’, Studies
in Philosophy and Education, 29(3), 243-257. Gadamer, H.G. (ed) (1996) Truth and
method (Joel Weinsheimer & Donald Marshall, Trans.), 2nd edn, New York
Continuum.
Brunner, P. H., H. Daxbeck, and P. Baccini. 1994. Industrial metabolism at the
regional and local level: A case-study on a Swiss region. Pp. 163-193 in Industrial
Metabolism: Restructuring for Sustainable Development,
Brunner, Paul H., Rechberger, Helmut, Handbook of Material Flow Analysis: For
Environmental, Resource, and Waste Engineers, Second Edition, CRC Press, 2016
Buchanan, P., 2015. Empty gestures: Starchitecture's Swan Song«, The Architectural
Review, February 27, 2015, (last accessed 27-4-2023). https://www.architectural-
review.com/rethink/viewpoints/empty-gesturesstarchitectures- swan-song/867901
0.article
Building-Supply. 2021. ‘Kæmpe nedrivning i gang – Brøndby skyline forandres et
betonelemtn ad gangen. Building-Supply. Last Accessed: 18-05-
22:https://www.building-
Bringezu S., 2003. Industrial ecology and material flow analysis – basic concepts,
policy relevance and some case studies. In Bourg, D, & Erkman, S (eds) 2003,
Perspectives on Industrial Ecology, Taylor & Francis Group, Saltaire. Available from:
ProQuest Ebook Central. [16 April 2023].
Brunner, P.H., Kral, U. 2014. Final Sinks as key elements for building a sustainable
recycling society, Sustainable Environment Research, 24 (6) 443-448
Building a Circular Future (Guldager, K.J., Sommer, J. (ed., aud.) 2016. Building a
Circular Future. Denmark: KLS PurePrint: Accessed 02-08-2020
https://gxn.3xn.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2018/09/Building-a-Circular-
Future_3rd-Edition_Compressed_V2-1.pdf
Böhme, Gernot. 2018. Atmospheric Architectures – the Aethetics of felt space.
London: Bloomsbury.
Bötticher. Carl. 1852. The Principles of the Hellenic and Germanic Ways of Building
with Regard to Their Application to Our Present Way of Building. In Foged, I. W., &
296
Hvejsel, M. F. eds. (2018, Apr). Reader: Tectonics in Architecture. Aalborg
Universitetsforlag, Aalborg
Cairns, S., Jacobs, J.M., 2014. Buildings Must Die: a perverse view of architecture.
Canada: MIT.
Cash, P. J. 2018. Developing theory-driven design research. Design Studies, 56, 84-
119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.destud.2018.03.002
Castree,. N., 2013. Making Sense of Nature. London Routledge
Cays, John. 2021. “An Environmental Life Cycle Approach to Design: LCA for
Designers and the Design Market.” An Environmental Life Cycle Approach to Design:
n. pag.
Chan, J.K.H., Zhang, y. 2020. Sharing By Design. Cham, Springer
Chatterjee A, Coburn A, Weinberger A. The neuroaesthetics of architectural spaces.
Cogn Process. 2021 Sep;22(Suppl 1):115-120. doi: 10.1007/s10339-021-01043-4.
Epub 2021 Aug 27. PMID: 34448969.
Cheshire, D., 2020. The Handbook to Building a Circular Economy. RIBA
Publishing.
Chestnova E., 2018. Substantial Differences: Semper’s Stoffwechsel and Truth to
Materials. In Architecture and Knowledge Ed. Sonja Hildebrand, Mondin, Grignolo.
Mendrisio Academy Press
Christiansen, E.M., 2020. Tectonic and the City -in search of a critical perspective on
assembling the city. Aalborg, Aalborg University Press
Christiansen, K. 2014. An Etymology of Tectonics. In Beim, A. & Madsen, U.S. (eds),
2014, Towards a Ecology of Tectonics – The Need for Rethinking Construction in
Architecture: 110. Stuttgart/London: Axel Menges, pp.26-30
Circular House 2019. Circle House - Denmark's first circular housing project. (last
accessed 18-05-2023)
https://issuu.com/3xnarchitects/docs/2019.01.14_circle_house_book_englis
Circular House Lab 2020. Circular House Lab – selektiv nedrivning, 2020, Green
paper 02/06 , Last viewed: 10-5-2023
http://grafisk.3xn.dk/CAC/CircleHouseLab_GreenPaper02_SelektivNedrivning.pdf
CINARK 2019, Beim, A., Jensen, J.Z., Arnfred, L., – Circular construction: materials,
Epilogue
297
architecture tectonics. Copenhagen: KADK-
https://issuu.com/cinark/docs/circular_construction_080919_low
Clement, G, Rahm, P. 2006. Environment: Approaches for Tomorrow. CCA and Skira
Publishers
Coates, N., 2012. Narrative Architecture. Chichester. Wiley
Craven, J., 2019. Mies van der Rohe Gets Sued - The Battle with Farnsworth.
ThoughtCo. (Last accessed 23-3-2023) https://www.thoughtco.com/mies-van-der-
rohe-edith-farnsworth-177988
Croxford, B., Domenech, T., Hausleitner, B., Hill, A. V., Meyer, H., Orban, A.,
Muñoz Sanz, V., Vanin, F., & Warden, J., 2020. Foundries of the Future: A Guide for
21st Century Cities of Making . TU Delft Open.
https://books.bk.tudelft.nl/press/catalog/book/ISBN_9789463662475
Colquitt, J.A., Zapata-Phelan, C.P. 2007. Tends in theory Building and Theory
Testing: Five-decade study of the Academy of Management Journal. Academy of
Management Journal, 50 (6), pp.1281-1303
Costanza, R., 2022. Addicted to Growth Societal Therapy for a Sustainable Wellbeing
Future. Routledge, London.
Dansk Industri 2023. Bæredygtighed i byggeri og anlæg. Byggeri – Dansk Industri.
Last accessed: 16-04-2023. https://www.danskindustri.dk/brancher/di-
byggeri/baeredygtighed-i-byggeriet/
Danish Government, 2018, Strategi for Cirkulær økonomi, Miljø- og
fødevareministeriet, Accessed: 26-7-2020.
https://mfvm.dk/fileadmin/user_upload/MFVM/Miljoe/Cirkulaer_oekonomi/Strategi
_for_cirkulaer_oekonomi.pdf
Darbellay, F. 2012. "The Circulation of Knowledge as an Interdisciplinary Process:
Travelling Concepts, Analogies and Metaphors." Issues in integrative studies 30: 1-
18.
Davis K.F, D'Odorico P, Laio F, Ridolfi L. 2013. Global Spatio-Temporal Patterns in
Human Migration: A Complex Network Perspective. PLoS ONE 8(1): e53723.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0053723
De Graaf, R., 2017. Four Walls and a Roof - The Complex Nature of a Simple
Profession.
298
DeLanda, M. 2016. Assemblage Theory. Edinburg: Edinburg University Press
DesignBoom 2012. Greg Lynn Interview. DesignBoom. (last accessed: 27-02-2023)
https://www.designboom.com/architecture/greglynn-interview/
Delhey, J. 2010. From Materialist to Post-materialist Happiness? National Affluence
and Determinants of Life Satisfaction in Cross-national Perspective. Social Indicators
Research, May 2010, Vol.96 (3), p.65 (20)
Designing With Flows 2017. Designing With Flows – a series of masterclasses
organized by OVAM: https://www.vlaanderen-
circulair.be/src/Frontend/Files/userfiles/files/Summary%20report%20Masterclasses
%20Designing%20with%20Flows_2017.pdf (last accessed. 26-12023)
Di Maria, A., Eyckmans, J., & Van Acker, K. 2018. Downcycling versus recycling of
construction and demolition waste: Combining LCA and LCC to support sustainable
policy making. Waste Management, 75, 3–21.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2018.01.028
Du, J., Mahendra, A., 2019. Too Many Cities Are Growing Out Rather than Up. 3
Reasons That’s a Problem. In World Resources Institute. January 31, 2019. (Lasted
accessed 23-5-2023). https://www.wri.org/insights/too-many-cities-are-growing-out-
rather-3-reasons-thats-problem
Easterling, K. 2016. Extrastatecraft: The Power of Infrastructure Space. Verso
Eberhardt, L., Birkved M., Birgisdottir, H. 2020: Building design and construction
strategies for a Circular Economy. In: Architectural Engineering and Design
Management
Eberhardt, L. C. M., 2020. Qualifying Circular Economy in Building Design Practice:
Developing Life Cycle Assessment Design Concepts that Support Implementation of
Circular Economy in the Building Sector. Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Ph.d.-serien for
Det Ingeniør- og Naturvidenskabelige Fakultet, Aalborg Universitet
https://doi.org/10.5278/vbn.phd.eng.00084
Ejstrup, H. 2019. Isolating the Tectonics of Insulation. I P. J. S. Cruz (red.), Structures
and Architecture: Bridging the Gap and Crossing Borders: Proceedings of the Fourth
International Conference on Structures and Architecture (ICSA 2019), July 24-26,
2019, Lisbon, Portugal (1 udg., p. 93-100). CRC Press.
https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315229126-11
Ejstrup, H., Munch-Petersen, P., 2019. The compatibility of architecture and circular
economy. I P. J. S. Cruz (red.), Structures and Architecture: Bridging the Gap and
Epilogue
299
Crossing Borders: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Structures
and Architecture (ICSA 2019), July 24-26, 2019, Lisbon, Portugal (1 udg., p. 67-74).
CRC Press. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315229126-11
Elhacham, E., Ben-Uri, L., Grozovski, J. et al. 2020. Global human-made mass
exceeds all living biomass. Nature 588, 442–444. https://doi-
org.zorac.aub.aau.dk/10.1038/s41586-020-3010-5
Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2013, Towards the Circular Economy: Economic and
Business rationale for an accelerated transition:
https://www.ellenmacarthurfoundation.org/assets/downloads/publications/Ellen-
MacArthur-Foundation-Towards-the-Circular-Economy-vol.1.pdf
Ellen MacArthur Foundation, 2015, Growth within: a circular economy vision for a
competitive Europe:
https://emf.thirdlight.com/file/24/_A-
BkCs_h7gRYB_Am9L_JfbYWF/Growth%20within%3A%20a%20circular%20econ
omy%20vision%20for%20a%20competitive%20Europe.pdf
EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) 1993: Life Cycle Assessment: Inventory
Guidelines and Principles. Cincinnati, Ohio, USA: Office of research and
Development
European Commission, 2021 EIP on Raw Materials, Raw Materials Scoreboard 2021
EU Buildings Database (European Commission). 2023. EU Building database.
Filters; “Item: Average floor area of permanently occupied dwellings”. “countries: 29
”, “years: 20”
https://ec.europa.eu/energy/eu-buildings-database_en
European Union, 2019, Construction and Demolition Waste. EU, Viewed 26-7-2020.
https://ec.europa.eu/environment/waste/construction_demolition.htm
Fannon, D., Laboy, M., Wiederspahn P., 2022. The Architecture of Persistence –
Designing for Future Use. Routledge, New York
Ferrao, P., & Fernandez, J. E.,, 2013. Sustainable Urban Metabolism, Cambridge,
MIT press,
Ferretto, A.,, Matthews, R., Brooker, R., Smith, P., 2022. Planetary Boundaries and
the Doughnut frameworks: A review of their local operability, Anthropocene, Volume
39, 100347, ISSN 2213-3054, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ancene.2022.100347.
Ferguson, P. 2018. Post-growth Politics A Critical Theoretical and Policy Framework
300
for Decarbonisation. Cham: Springer International Publishing
Fischer-Kowalski, M., 2003. On the history of industrial metabolism. In Bourg, D, &
Erkman, S (eds) 2003, Perspectives on Industrial Ecology, Taylor & Francis Group,
Saltaire. Available from: ProQuest Ebook Central. [16 April 2023].
Flyvbjerg, B. (2009). Survival of the unfittest: why the worst infrastructure gets
built—and what we can do about it. Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 25(3), 344–
367. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23607068
Flyvbjerg, B. (2021). Top Ten Behavioral Biases in Project Management: An
Overview. Project Management Journal, 52(6), 531–546. https://doi-
org.zorac.aub.aau.dk/10.1177/87569728211049046
Flyvbjerg, B., Gardner, D. 2023. How Big Things get Done. Penguin Random House,
New York.
Foged, I. W. (2015). Environmental Tectonics: Matter Based Architectural
Computation. Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Ph.d.-serien for Det Teknisk-
Naturvidenskabelige Fakultet, Aalborg Universitet
https://doi.org/10.5278/vbn.phd.engsci.00010
Foged, I. W. 2018. Environmental Tectonics: Convergences Between Six Causalities.
In Foged, I. W., & Hvejsel, M. F. (2018, Apr). Reader: Tectonics in Architecture.
Aalborg Universitetsforlag, Aalborg
Franke, C., 2022. Open Building in Finland. In Kendall, S. (ed), 2022. Residential
Architecture as Infrastructure – open building in Practice. Routledge, London
Frampton, K., 1995, Studies in Tectonic Culture, MIT Press, Cambridge.
Frascari, M., 1981. The Tell-the-tale-detial. VIA7: The Building of Architecture, VIA
Publcations, University of Pennsylvania.
Gardini, A., 2022, December. Tearing Down Nakagin Capsule Tower. JSTOR Daily.
Last Accessed: 09-04-2023. https://daily.jstor.org/tearing-down-nakagin-capsule-
tower/
Geissdoerfer M., Paulo Savaget, Nancy M.P. Bocken, Erik Jan Hultink, 2017. The
Circular Economy – A new sustainability paradigm?, Journal of Cleaner Production,
Volume 143,ges 757-768, ISSN 0959-
6526,https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.12.048.
George A. L., Bennet A., 2005. Case Studies and Theory Development in the Social
Epilogue
301
Sciences. MIT Press, London
Gerber, A, Patterson B., (eds.) 2013. Metaphor In Architecture and Urbanism -an
introduction. Transprict verlag, Bielefeld
Gerber, A., 2013. Introduction. In Gerber, A., Patterson, B., Eds. 2013. Metaphor s
in Architecture and Urbanism- Transcript Verlag, Bielefeld
Gibson, J. J. 2015 (1975). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception, New York.
Psychology Press
Gleeson, T. Wang-Erlandsson, L. Zipper, S.C., Porkka, M. Jaramillo, F. Gerten v,
Fetzer I., Cornell, S.E., Piemontese, L. ,. Gordon, L.J Rockström, J. Oki, T.,
Sivapalan, M., Wada, Y. Brauman K.A., Flörke, M.. Bierkens, M.F.P, Lehner, B.
Keys, P. , Kummu, M.,. Wagener, T, Dadson, S., Troy, T.J., Steffen, W., Falkenmark,
M.,. Famiglietti, J.S., 2020. The water planetary boundary: interrogation and revision
One Earth, 2 (3), pp. 223-234, 10.1016/j.oneear.2020.02.009
Goldenberg, S. 2014. ‘CO2 emissions are being ‘outsourced’ by rich countries to
rising economies’. The Guardian. 19.Jan. 2014.
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/jan/19/co2-emissions-outsourced-
rich-nations-rising-economies (Accessed: 29. Nov. 2018)
Goodbun, J., Klein, M., Rumpfhuber, A., Till, J.,. 2014. The Design of Scarcity (p.
1). Strelka Press. Kindle Edition.
GPC 2023. Global Protocol for Community-Scale Greenhouse Gas Inventories - An
Accounting and Reporting Standard for Cities Version 1.1:
https://ghgprotocol.org/sites/default/files/standards/GPC_Full_MASTER_RW_v7.p
df (last accessed 26-1-2023)
Graedel, T.E., 1996. On the Concept of Industrial Ecology. Annual Review of Energy
and the Environment 1996 21:1, 69-98
Graedel, T.E. and Allenby, B.R. (1995) Industrial Ecology, AT&T, Prentice Hall,
New Jersey. pp.8–10, 93–96.
Gramazio, F., Kohler, M. 2008. Digital Materiality in Architecture. 1st ed. Zurich: gta
Verlag
Groat, L., Wang, D., 2013. Architectural Research Methods (Second Ed.), Wiley,
Hoboken.
Gross, J. 2018. Document Analysis. In Frey B.B., (ed) 2018. The SAGE Encyclopedia
302
of Educational Research, Measurement, and Evaluation. Vol. 4. Thousand Oaks,, CA:
SAGE Publications, Inc. Available at: https://doi.org/10.4135/9781506326139>
[Accessed 18 May 2023].
Gulipac, S. , 2016. Industrial Symbiosis: Building on Kalundborg's waste
management experience, Renewable Energy Focus, Volume 17, Issue 1, Pages 25-27,
ISSN 1755-0084, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ref.2015.11.015.
Görg C., 2011. Societal Relationships with Nature: A dialectical Approach to
Environmental Politic. In. Critical Ecologies: The Frankfurt School and
Contemporary Environmental Crisis, Ed Andrew Biro. 43-72- Toronto, University of
Toronto Press.
Habert, G., Röck, M., Steininger, K., Lupisek, A., Birgisdottir, H., Desing, H., …
Lützkendorf, T. 2020. Carbon budgets for buildings: harmonising temporal, spatial
and sectoral dimensions. Buildings and Cities, 1(1), 429–452. DOI:
http://doi.org/10.5334/bc.47
Haas, W., Krausmann, F., Wiedenhofer, D., Lauk, C., Mayer, A., 2020. Spaceship
earth's odyssey to a circular economy - a century long perspective, Resources,
Conservation and Recycling, Volume 163, 105076, ISSN 0921-3449,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2020.105076.
Habraken, J., 1962 (1972). Supports: an Alternative to Mass Housing. London: The
Architectural Press, and New York: Praeger. First English-language edition.
Originally published in Dutch under the title: De Dragers en de Mensen. Amsterdam:
Scheltema en Holkema, 1962.
Habraken, N. J. 1998. (Teicher, J. ed) The Structure of the Ordinary: Form and Control
in the Built Environment. Paperback. The MIT Press.
Hanssen, O.J. & Abrahamsen, U. 2012, Forebyggende miljøvern i Norge – 20 års
tilbakeblikk, (In Norwegian), OR.10.12, Ostfold Research, Fredrikstad
Harman, G., 2011. The Quadruple Object. Alresford: Zero Books
Harman, G. 2014. Entanglement and Relation: A Response to Bruno Latour and Ian
Hodder. New Literary History, 45(1), 37–49.
Harman, G., 2016. Immaterialism, Cambridge, Polity,
Harman, G., 2016. Speculative Realism - An Introduction. Polity Press
Harman, G., 2022. Architecture and Objects. University of Minnesota Press
Epilogue
303
Harris, H., Hyde. R., Maracaccio R., 2020. ARCHITECTS AFTER
ARCHITECTURE: Alternative Pathways for Practice. Routledge, London
Harris, S., Érika Mata, André F.P. Lucena, Paolo Bertoldi, 2023, Climate mitigation
from circular and sharing economy in the buildings sector, Resources, Conservation
and Recycling, Volume 188, 106709, ISSN 0921-3449,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106709.
Hart, J., Adams, K., Giesekam, J., Tingley, D. D., & Pomponi, F., 2019. Barriers and
drivers in a circular economy: The case of the built environment. Procedia CIRP, 80,
619–624. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procir.2018.12.015
Hartoonian, G., 1994. Ontology of Construction: On Nihilism of Technology in
Theories of Modern Architecture. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
Hauberg. J., 2011 ‘Research By Design’. Disseminated at The third International
Conference on Architectural Research, Lisbon.
Heathcote, E. 2017. The Fetish of Flexibility: Farrell/Grimshaw Partnership, 125 Park
Road, London. Archit. Design, 87: 64-67. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.2217
Hebel, D. E. 2014, et al., Building from Waste: recovered materials in architecture
and construction, Birkhauser,
Hebel, D. E.., 2017. Cultivated Building Materials: Industrialized natural Resources
for Architecture and Construction, Birkhauser,
Heidegger, M.. 1971. Building Dwelling Thinking. In Poetry, Language, Thought,
translated by Albert Hofstadter, New York: Harper Colophon Books.
Hensel, M., 2013. Performance-oriented Architecture: Rethinking Architectural
Design and the Built Environment. London: AD Wiley,
Hensel, M., Turko, J. P., 2015. Grounds and Envelopes – Reshaping Architecture and
the Built Environment. 1. Oxon: Routledge
Herrmann, W. (ed. and trans.), 1984. Gottfried Semper: In Search of Architecture.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: MIT Press, p. 168.
Hickel, J., 2022. Less is More – how degrowth will save the world. Penguin Books
Random House, UK
Hillenbrand, R. 1994. Islamic Architecture – Form, Function and Meaning. Edinburgh
304
University Press, Edinburgh
Hodder, I., 2018. Where Are We Heading? : The Evolution of Humans and Things,
Yale University Press,
Hodder, I., 2012. Entangled - An Archaeology of the Relationships between Humans
and Things. Wiley-Blackwell
Holland, J.. 2006. Studying complex adaptive systems. Journal of systems Science
and complexity, 19, 1-8
Holmberg, H. (red), 1979. Indret selv Deres bolig: bogen om Flexibo, Følfodvej. KAB
(Københavns Almene boligselskab).
Holst, J., 2017. “The Fall of the Tektōn and The Rise of the Architect: On The Greek
Origins of Architectural Craftsmanship.” Architectural Histories 5.
Holst, J., 2019. Connecting ends with beginnings – Conceptual framework for a
circular art of tectonics. In Structures and Architecture - Bridging the Gap and
Crossing Borders
Honic, M., Peter Ferschin, Dominik Breitfuss, Oliver Cencic, Georgios Gourlis, Iva
Kovacic, Catherine De Wolf. 2023. Framework for the assessment of the existing
building stock through BIM and GIS, Developments in the Built Environment,
Volume 13, 2023, 100110, ISSN 2666-1659,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dibe.2022.100110.
Horst, M., & Irwin, A. 2018. Hvad vil vi med universiteterne? Informations Forlag.
Moderne ideer Vol. 11
Horváth, I., 2016. Theory Building in Experimental Design Research. In: Cash, P.,
Stanković, T., Štorga, M. (eds) Experimental Design Research. Springer, Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33781-4_12
Hvattum, M. 2001. Gottfried Semper: Between Poetics and Practical Aesthetics.
Zeitschrift Für Kunstgeschichte, 64(4), 537–546. https://doi.org/10.2307/3657236
Hvattum, M. 2004. Gottfried Semper and the Problem of Historicism. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press. doi:10.1017/CBO9780511497711
Hvattum, M. 2004b. A complete and Universal Collection: Gottfried Semper and the
Great Exhibition. Pp.124-136. In Tracing Modernity: Manifestations of the Modern
in Architecture and the City. Ed. Hvattum., M., and Hermansen C., Routledge,
Oxon/New York
Epilogue
305
Hvejsel, M. F., & Kirkegaard, P. H. 2013. Wallpaper & Tectonics - A critical
discussion of the state of the architectural discipline. In P. J. S. Cruz (Ed.), Structures
and Architecture - Concepts, Applications and Challenges: Proceedings of the second
international conference on strcutures and architecture (pp. 119). CRC Press.
Hvejsel, M. F., 2018. Gesture and Principle: Tectonics as a critical method in
architecture. In Reader: Tectonics in Architecture, In Foged, I.W. and Frier-Hvejsel,
M., 395-409, Aalborg University Press, Aalborg.
Hvejsel, M. F., Beim, A., 2019. Circular Tectonics? – A critical discussion of how the
architectural discipline can drive ecological continuity. In Structures & Architecture :
Proceedings of ICSA2019 Fourth International Conference on Structures &
Architecture. ed. / Paulo S. Cruz. CRC Press/Balkema,.
Hvejsel, M. F., & Kirkegaard, P. H., 2013. Wallpaper & Tectonics - A critical
discussion of the state of the architectural discipline: Extended Abstract. I P. J. S. Cruz
(red.), Structures and Architecture - Concepts, Applications and Challenges (s. 119-
120). CRC Press.
Højberg, H., 2004. ’Hermeneutik’. in Videnskabsteori i samfundsvidenskaberne : på
tværs af fagkulturer og paradigmer. eds. L. Fuglsang and P. Bitsch Olsen. 2nd eds,
Frederiksberg: Roskilde University Press, 289-324.a
IPCC, 2019: Climate Change and Land: an IPCC special report on climate change,
desertification, land degradation, sustainable land management, food security, and
greenhouse gas fluxes in terrestrial ecosystems [P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, E. Calvo
Buendia, V. Masson-Delmotte, H.-O. Pörtner, D. C. Roberts, P. Zhai, R. Slade, S.
Connors, R. van Diemen, M. Ferrat, E. Haughey, S. Luz, S. Neogi, M. Pathak, J.
Petzold, J. Portugal Pereira, P. Vyas, E. Huntley, K. Kissick, M. Belkacemi, J. Malley,
(eds.)]. In press.
IPCC. 2019b. Land is a Critical Resources, IPCC report says. Last accessed:
https://www.ipcc.ch/2019/08/08/land-is-a-critical-resource_srccl/
IRP. 2020. Resource Efficiency and Climate Change: Material Efficiency Strategies
for a Low-Carbon Future. Hertwich, E., Lifset, R., Pauliuk, S., Heeren, N. A report of
the International Resource Panel. United Nations Environment Programme, Nairobi,
Kenya.
IPCC, 2021. Working Group. Climate Change 2021. . Last Accessed 03-10-2021
(IPCC 2022) M. Pathak, R. Slade, P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Pichs-Madruga, D. Ürge-
Vorsatz,2022: Technical Summary. In: Climate Change 2022: Mitigation of Climate
306
Change. Contribution of Working Group III to the Sixth Assessment Report of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [P.R. Shukla, J. Skea, R. Slade, A. Al
Khourdajie, R. van Diemen, D. McCollum, M. Pathak, S. Some, P. Vyas, R. Fradera,
M. Belkacemi, A. Hasija, G. Lisboa, S. Luz, J. Malley, (eds.)]. Cambridge University
Press, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY, USA. doi: 10.1017/9781009157926.002.
ISO, International Standard Orgnaisation 2006. IOS 14040:2006 – Nevironemtnal
management – life cycle assemesment – Princoples and Framwork:
https://www.iso.org/standard/37456.html (last accessed: 26-1-2023)
ISO 37120, 2018. Sustainable cities and communities — Indicators for city services
and quality of life. https://www.iso.org/obp/ui/#iso:std:iso:37120:ed-2:v1:en
Jackson, T., 2019. Post-Growth – Life under Capitalism. Polity Press
James, D., 2015. How to get clear about method, methodology, epistemology and
ontology, once and for all. Talk and workshop for the 2015 ESRC Doctoral Training
First Year Conference, Cardiff. Publication Date: Jan 29, 2015 (last accessed 02-05-
2023= https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b83ZfBoQ_Kw&ab_channel=WalesDTP
Jelinski, L.W., Graedel, T.E., Laudise, R.A., McCall, D.W. and Patel, C.K.N., 1992.
‘Industrial ecology: concepts and approaches’, Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences, Vol. 89, February 1992, pp793–797.
Jencks, C., 2000. Jencks’ theory of evolution, an overview of 20th Century
architecture. The Architectural Review. 12. July. 2000. https://www.architectural-
review.com/archive/jencks-theory-of-evolution-an-overview-of-20th-century-
architecture
Jensen, O.B., Laang D. B., 2016. Mobilities Design: Urban Designs for Mobile
Situations (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi-
org.zorac.aub.aau.dk/10.4324/9781315723099
Jones, K.. 2009. Analytic versus Continental Philosophy. Philosophy NOW. Last
accessed: 10-04-20023.
https://philosophynow.org/issues/74/Analytic_versus_Continental_Philosophy
Jonsson, F.A., Wennerlind, C., 2023. Scarcity A History from the Origins of
Capitalism to the Climate Crisis. Harvard University Press
Jørgensen, M. S., Remmen, A., Guldmann, E., Brodersen, S., & Pedersen,
S., 2018. Slowing and narrowing resource flows as part of circular economy
business strategies. Afhandling præsenteret på Third International Conference of the
Sustainable Consumption Research and Action Initiative (SCORAI), Copenhagen,
Epilogue
307
Danmark.
Kahambing, J.G. 2022. Heidegger's Spectral Abyss in the Žižek & Harman
Duel/Duet. Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy 18
(1):302-330.
Kanemoto , K., Murray, J., 2013. "What is MRIO: Strengths and Limitations" In: Joy
Murray and Manfred Lenzen (Eds.), The Sustainability Practitioner's Guide to Multi-
Regional Input-Output Analysis, Common Ground Publishing, Illinois, U.S.A.
Kaza, S., Yao, L.C., Bhada-Tata, P., Van Woerden, F., 2018. What a Waste 2.0: A
Global Snapshot of Solid Waste Management to 2050. Urban Development;. ©
Washington, DC: World Bank. http://hdl.handle.net/10986/30317 License: CC BY
3.0 IGO
Kendall, S., 2003. An Open Building Strategy for Converting Obsolete Office
Buildings to Residential Uses. Presented at International Lean Construction Institute
conference held in Blacksburg, VA, July 22-24, 2003
Kendall, S., 2011. "Developments Toward A Residential Fit-Out Industry", Open
House International, Vol. 36 No. 1, pp. 86-94. https://doi.org/10.1108/OHI-01-2011-
B0010
Kendall, S.H., & Teicher, J. 2000. Residential Open Building (1st ed.). Spon Press.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203056769
Kennedy, C., Hoornweg D., 2012. Mainstreaming Urban Metabolism. Journal of
Industrial Ecology 16(6): 789-782
Keestra, M., Rutting, L., Post, G., de Roo, M., Blad, S., & de Greef, L. 2016. An
Introduction to Interdisciplinary Research: Theory and Practice (S. Menken & M.
Keestra, Eds.). Amsterdam University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1bc540s
Kinsella, E., 2006. ‘Hermeneutics and Critical Hermeneutics: Exploring Possibilities
within the Art of Interpretation’. Forum Qualitative Sozialforschung / Forum:
Qualitative Social Research, 7(3)
Kirchherr, J., Reike, D., Hekkert, M.. 2017. Conceptualizing the circular economy:
An analysis of 114 definitions. Resources, conservation and recycling, årg. 127, 12-
2017, s. 221–232
Kjær, M., 2022. “Rekordmange lejemål står tomme: Men ét sted bliver de nybyggede
lejligheder revet væk.” Jyllands Posten. https://jyllands-
posten.dk/jplokal/jphorsens/ECE14635262/rekordmange-lejemaal-staar-tomme-
308
men-et-sted-bliver-de-nybyggede-lejligheder-revet-vaek/ (Last Accessed
13.02.2023)
Kjær Frederiksen, L., & Munch-Petersen, P. 2019. Building circular economy:
Strategies for decoupling in architectural practice. I P. J. S. Cruz (red.), Structures and
Architecture: Bridging the Gap and Crossing Borders (Bind 1, s. 117-124). Taylor &
Francis. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315229126
Kleemann, F., Lederer, J., Rechberger, H. and Fellner, J., 2017. GIS-based Analysis
of Vienna's Material Stock in Buildings. Journal of Industrial Ecology, 21: 368-380.
https://doi-org.zorac.aub.aau.dk/10.1111/jiec.12446
Klein, R., 2014. Some Cosmological Roots of Modern Architecture. YBL Journal of
Built Environment 2(1) DOI: 10.2478/jbe-2014-0001
Koolhaas, R., and Obrist, H.U., 2011. Project Japan: Metabolism Talks. New York:
Taschen.
Korhonen, J., 2004. Theory of Industrial Ecology. Progress in Industrial Ecology, Vol.
1, Nos. 1/2/3
Korhonen, J., Honkasalo, A., Seppälä, J., 2018. Ciruclar Economy: The Concept and
its limitations. In Ecological Economics, January, Vol. 143, pp.37-46
Krausmann, F., 2013. A City and Its Hinterland: Vienna’s Energy Metabolism 1800–
2006. 10.1007/978-94-007-1177-8_11.
Kral, U.,Morf, L.S. Vyzinkarova, D., Brunner, P.H. 2019. Cycle and Sinks: two key
elements of a circular economy. Jounral of Material Cucyles and Waste Management
21 (1): 1-9
Kristensen, F. B., 2020, “Peder Batlzer: det er fanme copy-paste i hovedparten af
bygherrernes og arkitekternes forslag, så det er faktisk mere os i kommunerne, der må
skubbe på. ByrumsMonitor. Viewed: 26-7-2020
https://byrummonitor.dk/Nyheder/art7843030/%C2%BBDer-er-fandme-copy-paste-
i-hovedparten-af-bygherrernes-og-arkitekternes-forslag-s%C3%A5-det-er-faktisk-
mere-os-i-kommunerne-der-m%C3%A5-skubbe-
p%C3%A5%C2%AB?utm_campaign=byrum&utm_content=02-07-
2020&utm_medium=newsletter&utm_source=byrum
Kristiansen, K., 1994. Arkitektur kunstruktioner – reflektioner mellem æstetik og
teknik. Århus: Århus Arkitektskole.
Epilogue
309
Krogh, M. ed 2020. Connectedness – an incomplete encyclopedia of the
Anthropocene. Købnehavn. Strandberg Publishing
Kruit, C., 2022. Open Building’s recent Developments in Netherlands. In Kendall, S.
(ed), 2022. Residential Architecture as Infrastructure – open building in Practice.
Routledge, London
Latour, B. 2005. Reassembling the Social – An Introduction to Actor-Network-
Theory reassembling the social. Oxford, Oxford University Press
Latour, B. 2019. “We don’t seem to live on the same planet…” — a fictional
planetarium for the catalog. In edited by Kathryn B. Hiesinger & Michelle Millar
Designs for Different Futures, Philadelphia Museum of Art &The Art History of
Chicago (initially given as the Loeb Lecture, Harvard, GSD) 2019, pp; 193-199.
Leach, N., Turnbull, D., Williams, C., (eds) 2004. Digital Tectonics. Wiley
Leatherbarrow, D. 2001. Architecture Is Its Own Discipline. In A. Piotrowski & J. W.
Robinson (Eds.), Discipline of Architecture (NED-New edition, pp. 83–102).
University of Minnesota Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.5749/j.cttttqm2.9
Leatherbarrow, D., 2008. Architecture Oriented Otherwise. New York: Princeton
Architectural Press
LeCuyver, A., 2001. Radical Tectonics. Thames & Hudson
Lederer,J., Fellner J., Gassner A., Gruhler K., Schiller G.. 2021, Determining the
material intensities of buildings selected by random sampling : a case study from
Vienna .J Ind Ecol. 2021;25:848–863.https://doi.org/10.1111/jiec.13100
Lélé, S., Norgaard, R.B., 2005. Practicing Interdisciplinarity, BioScience, Volume 55,
Issue 11, November, Pages 967–975, https://doi.org/10.1641/0006-
3568(2005)055[0967:PI]2.0.CO;2
Lendager, A., Pedersen, E., 2020. Solution – Circular Building. Hørsholm Arkitektens
Forlag.
Lifschutz, A., 2017. Introduction. In Lifschutz, A., (ed) 2017. Loose-Fit Architecture:
Designing Buildings for Change September/October 2017 Profile 249 Volume 87 No
5 ISBN 978 1119 152644
Love, P.E., Niedzweicki, M., Bullen, P.A., Edwards, D.J., 2012. Achieving the green
building council of Australia's world leadership rating in an office building in Perth.
J. Constr. Eng. Manag. 138 (5), 652e660.
310
Lyle, J, T., 1985. Design for Human Ecosystems: Landscape, Land Use, and Natural
Resources, In Ndubisi, Forster (ed), Ecological Design and Planning Reader,
Washington, The Island Press, 2014
Mace G.M., Reyers B., R. Alkemade, R. Biggs, F.S. Chapin III, S.E. Cornell, S. Diaz,
S. Jennings, P. Leadley, P.J. Mumby, A. Purvis, R.J. Scholes, A.W.R. Seddon, M.
Solan, W. Steffen, G. Woodward. 2014. Approaches to defining a planetary boundary
for biodiversity Glob. Environ. Change, 28, pp. 289-297,
10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.07.009
Magadoff, F., van Es, H., 2010. Building Soils for Better Crops: Sustainable Soil
management. College Park, MD: SARE Outreach.
Mallgrave, H. F., 1996. Gottfried Semper: Architect of the Nineteenth Century. Yale
University Press
Malmqvist, T., Nehasilova, M., Moncaster, A., Birgisdottir, H., Nygaard Rasmussen,
F., and Potting, J., 2018. Design and construction strategies for reducing embodied
impacts from buildings – Case study analysis. Energy and Buildings, 166 pp. 35–47.
Malterre-Barthes, C. 2023. A Global Moratorium on New Construction. (last accessed
15-05-2023) https://www.charlottemalterrebarthes.com/practice/research-practice/a-
global-moratorium-on-new-construction/
Matthews, W. E, Amann, C., Bringezu, S., Fischer-Kowalski, M., Hüttler, W., Kleijn,
R., Moriguchi, Y., Ottke, C., Rodenburg, E., Rogich, D., Schandl, H, Schütz, H., van
der Voet, E., Weisz, H., 2000. The weight of nations: Material outflows from
industrial economies, World Resources Institute Report, Washington D. C.
Mavropoulos, A., Nilsen, A.W., 2020. Industry 4.0 and Circular Economy: Towards
a Wasteless Future or a Wasteful Planet? Wiley,
McGranahan, G. 2015. Urbanization. In International Encyclopedia of Social and
Behavioral Sciences, edited by James D. Wright, 958-964. Amsterdam: Elsevier
McGowan, T,, 2016. Capitalism and Desire – the psychic cost of free markets. West
Sussex: Columbia University Press
Meillassoux, Q.. 2008 After Finitude: An Essay on the Necessity of Contingency.
Translated by Ray Brassier. London: Continuum,
Meinhold, B. 2011. Sou Fujimoto’s House N Captures Sunlight and Fresh Air in a
Series of Nested Boxes. InHabitat. Last accessed: 11-04-2023.
Epilogue
311
https://inhabitat.com/sou-fujimotos-house-n-captures-sunlight-and-fresh-air-in-a-
series-of-nested-boxes/
Miljøministeriet. Juli 2021. ’Handlingsplan for cirkulær økonomi. Miljøministeriet,
Denmark.
Miljøstyrelsen 2019. Afffaldsrapport. 2019, pp.42, Last Accessed 03-10-2021
https://www2.mst.dk/Udgiv/publikationer/2020/12/978-87-7038-249-6.pdf
MobiTool 2023. MobiTool. Last Accessed: 10-04-2023. https://www.mobitool.ch/
Moffert, M., Fazio M., Wodehouse L., 2003 A World Hsitory of Architecure.
Laurence King Publishing. London
Moravanszky, Akos. 2018. Metamorphism -Material Change in Architecture. Basel:
Birkhäuser.
Mouratidis, K., Hassan, R., 2020. Contemporary versus traditional styles in
architecture and public space: A virtual reality study with 360-degree videos, Cities,
Volume 97, 102499, ISSN 0264-2751,
Morton, T., 2007. Ecology without Nature. Cambridge: Harvard University Press
Morton, T, 2013. Hyperobjects – Philosophy and ecology after the End of the World.
Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press
Morton, T., 2018. Being Ecological. New York: Penguin Books
Munch-Petersen, P., & Beim, A. 2022. The Construction Material Pyramid: ‘Upfront
impacts’ as a methodical change in architectural design. 129-131. In Structures &
Architecture: A viable urban perspective? : Proceedings of the Fifth International
Conference on Structures and Architecture. . Hvejsel, M. F. & Cruz, P. J. S. (red.).
CRC Press
Murray, J., Wood, R.., Lenzen, M., 2010. Input-Output Analysis - Strengths and
Limitations. In Murray, J., Wood (eds) 2010. The Sustainability Practitioner's Guide
to Input-Output Analysis. On Sustainability. Common Ground, Illionois. pp..23-39
Nolan, G. 2018. Architecture’s Death Drive: The Primitive Hut Against History. Log,
42, 91–102. http://www.jstor.org/stable/44840731
Nygaard, E., 1984. Tag over Hovedet – dansk boligbyggeri fra 1945 til 1982.
Arkitektens Forlag, Kbh.
312
Nygaard., E. 2011. Arkitektur Forstået. Bogværket
Næss, P., Saglie, I. L. & Richardson, T., 2019. ‘Urban sustainability: is densification
sufficient?’, European Planning Studies 0(0), 1–20.
OECD 2018, Global Material Resources Outlook to 2060 – Economic drivers and
environmental consequences, OECD Publishing, Paris. oe.cd/materials-outlook
Osman, K.T., 2014. Soil Degradation, Conservation and remediation. Dordrecht,
Springer
Oswald, F., Baccini, P., 2003. NetStadt – designing the urban. Birkhäuser, Basel.
Pallasmaa, J., 2009. The Thinking Hand - Existential and Embodied Wisdom in
Architecture. John Wiley And Sons Ltd.
Pallasmaa, J., 2012. The Eyes of the Skin: Architecture and the Senses. West Sussex:
Wiley.
Pandelaere, M., 2016. Materialism and well-being: the role of consumption. Curr.
Opin. Psychol. 10, 33–38
Payne, A. 2021. Gottfried Semper and the Global Turn. Architectural History and
Globalized Knowledge: Gottfried Semper in London.
Pawlyn, M. 2016. Biomimicry in Architecture. Taylor & Francis Group
Pincetl, S, Paul Bunje, Tisha Holmes, 2012. An expanded urban metabolism method:
Toward a systems approach for assessing urban energy processes and causes,
Landscape and Urban Planning, Volume 107, Issue 3, Pages 193-202, ISSN 0169-
2046, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2012.06.006.
(https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0169204612001922)
Potter, M., 2019. The Rise of Analytic Philosophy - From Frege to Ramsey. Taylor &
Francis Ltd
Rakatansky, M., 2012. The Tectonic Acts of Desire and Doubt Tectonic Acts of
Desire and Doubt:" Architectural Words 9 (Architecture Words, 8). Anyone
Corporation. Any (New York, N.Y.), 1996 (14), p.36-43
Raun, T., 2019. Ensomhed bør kunne bygges væk. Dagens Byggeri. Last Acessed:
09-04-2023. https://www.dagensbyggeri.dk/artikel/105485-ensomhed-bor-kunne-
bygges-vaek
Epilogue
313
Raworth, K., 2012. A safe and just space for humanity: can we live within the
Doughnut? Oxfam.
Raworth, K., 2017. Doughnut Economics – Seven ways to Think like a 21st century
economist. London : Random House Business Books
Rendell, J. 2007. Introduction: Critical Architecture: Between Criticism and Design.
In Rendell, J., Hill, J., Dorrian, M., (eds) 2007. Critical Architecture. Routledge. Pp.1-
9
Rechberger, M., Hiete, M. 2020. Allocation of Environmental Impacts in Circular
and Cascade Use of Resources - Incentive-Driven Allocation as a Prerequisite for
Cascade Persistence.
Repko, A.F. 2008. Interdisciplinary research: Process and theory. Thousand Oaks,
CA: SAGE
Rockström, J., Steffen, W., Noone, K. et al. 2009. A safe operating space for
humanity. Nature 461, 472–475. https://doi.org/10.1038/461472a
Running S.W., 2012. A measurable planetary boundary for the biosphere Science, 337
(6101), pp. 1458-1459, 10.1126/science.1227620
Rønning, A. 2017. Travels with LCA: the evolution of LCA in the construction sector.
Aalborg Universitetsforlag. Ph.d.-serien for Det Tekniske Fakultet for IT og Design,
Aalborg Universitet https://doi.org/10.5278/VBN.PHD.TECH.00016
Perelman, C. 1979. Analogy and Metaphor in Science, Poetry and Philosophy. In: The
New Rhetoric and the Humanities. Synthese Library, vol 140. Springer, Dordrecht.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-009-9482-9_7
Persson, L.M., Breitholtz, M., Cousins, I.T., de Wit, C.A., MacLeod, M., McLachlan,
M.S., 2013. Confronting unknown planetary boundary threats from chemical
pollution. https://doi.org/10.1021/es402501c
Petersen, S., Ryberg, M. W., Birkved, M., 2022. The safe operating space for
greenhouse gas emissions. Last accessed: 09-04-2023
https://www.4til1planet.dk/reduction-roadmap
Picon, A., Ponte, A., (eds.) 2003. Architecture and the sciences. Princeton Press, New
York
Polimeni, J., Mayumi, K., Giampiettro M., Alcott B., 2009. The Myth of Resource
Efficiency: the Jevon’s Paradox. Eartchscan, London
314
Popper, K., 1959. The Logic of Scientific Discovery. In University of Michigan.
Popper, K. 1963. Conjectures and refutations: the growth of scientific knowledge.
Routledge & Kegan Paul.
Prado, C.G. (ed), 2003. A House Divided: Comparing Analytical and Continental
Philosophy.
Prigogine, I., Stengers, I. 2017. Order Out of Chaos - Man's New Dialogue with
Nature. Verso, London
RealDania 2004. Fornyelse af Planlægningen – plansystemtet, hvordan virker det.
https://realdania.dk/-/media/realdaniadk/saadan-stoetter-vi/filantropiske-
programmer/samlet-projektliste/fornyelse-af-
planl%C3%A6gningen/hvordanvirkerdet304pdf.pdf
Reduction Roadmap. 2023. Reduction Roadmap. Last Accessed: 09-04-2023.
https://reductionroadmap.dk/
Rigney, D., 2001. The Metaphorical Society: An Invitation to Social Theory. Rowman
& Littlefield.
Reike, D., Vermeulen, W. J. V., & Witjes, S., 2018. The circular economy: New or
Refurbished as CE 3.0? — Exploring Controversies in the Conceptualization of the
Circular Economy through a Focus on History and Resource Value Retention Options.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 135(August 2017), 246–264.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2017.08.027
Ritzén, S., Sandström, G. Ö.. 2017. Barriers to the Circular Economy – integrations
of perspectives ad domains. Procedia CIRP, årg. 64, 2017, s. 7–1
Roithner, C., Cencic, O., Honic, M., Rechberger, H., 2022. Recyclability assessment
at the building design stage based on statistical entropy: A case study on timber and
concrete building, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, Volume 184, 106407,
ISSN 0921-3449, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2022.106407.
Saito, K., 2017 "Karl Marx's Ecosocialism: Capital, Nature, and the Unfinished
Critique of Political Economy." Monthly Review Press,
Saito, K. 2022. Marx in the Anthropocene – Towards the Idea of Degrowth
communism. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
Samuel C. Wheeler III. 2010. Analytical vs. Continental Philosophy: Bridging the
Epilogue
315
Gap, The European Legacy, 15:7, 897-900, DOI: 10.1080/10848770.2010.528910
Sarnitz, A. 2020. Relations in architecture : writings and buildings. Birkhäuser.
Schmelzer, M., 2015. The growth paradigm: History, hegemony, and the contested
making of economic growthmanship, Ecological Economics, Volume 118, Pages 262-
271, ISSN 0921-8009, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecolecon.2015.07.029.
Schmelzer, M., Vetter, A., Vansintjan, A., 2022. The Future is Degrowth – a guide to
a world beyond capitalism. Verso, London.
Schneider, F. 2012, ‘Jevons paradox and sustainable housing’, Responder; Linking
SCP and Growth Debates www.SCP-RESPONDER.eu (March), 1–8.
Schwartz, C., 2018. Introducing Architectural Tectonics - Exploring the Intersection
of Design and Construction. Taylor And Francis
Sekler, E. F., 1965. The shaping of Urban Space, Connection, Harvard Student
Magazine, 28-43
Semper, G., Mallgrave F.,H (translator), Herrmann W., (translator), 1989. The Four
Elements of Architecture and other Writings. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.
Semper, G., 2004. Style: Style in the technical and Tectonic Arts; or, practical
aesthetics. Getty Research Inst.
Sharr, A., 2007. Heidegger for Architects. Thinkers for Architects Series. Routledge,
London.
Sorrell, S. 2009, ‘Jevons’ Paradox revisited: The evidence for backfire from improved
energy efficiency’, Energy Policy 37(4), 1456–1469.
Spence, K. C., 2017. A Primer on Theory in Architecture. New York: Routledge
Spencer, D., 2021. Critique of Architecture - Essays on Theory, Autonomy, and
Political Economy. BirkHauser
Strasnick, S., 2017. See How This Age Old Material Can Work for Any Architecture
Style. AD Magazine. Laset Accessed: 10-04-2023.
https://www.architecturaldigest.com/gallery/see-how-this-age-old-material-can-
work-for-any-architecture-style
Stylsvig, U. M., 2014. Constructing immediacy. In A. Beim, & U. S. Madsen (red.),
316
Towards an ecology of tectonics: the need for rethinking construction in architecture
(s. 98-111). Edition Axel Menges.
Sundahl, S., 2019. Materiale Adfærd. Det Kongelige Danske Kunstakademis Skoler
for Arkitektur, Design og Konservering . Kailow, København.
https://adk.elsevierpure.com/ws/portalfiles/portal/63272322/Materialeadf_rd.pdf
Svenborg, J., 2019. Arkitektformand: Ja, der har været meget ureflekteret nybyggeri,
men..” Berlingske, (Last accessed: 12-7-2020).
https://www.berlingske.dk/kommentarer/arkitektformand-ja-der-har-vaeret-for-
meget-ureflekteret-nybyggeri-i
Till, J., 2005. The Negotiation of Hope. In Architecture and Participation. Eds. Jones,
P. B., Petrescu, D., Till, J., Routledge and Span Press. New York
Till, J., Schneider, T., 2005. Flexible housing: The means to the end. Architectural
Research Quarterly, 9(3-4), 287-296. doi:10.1017/S1359135505000345
Till, J., 2009 Architecture depends. MIT Press
Tombesi P.,, Stracchi, P. , & Cardellicchio. L., 2022. The forgotten column at the
Sydney Opera House. In Structures & Architecture: A viable urban perspective? :
Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Structures and Architecture. .
Hvejsel, M. F. & Cruz, P. J. S. (red.). CRC Press
Tornaghi, C., & Certomà, C. (Eds.). 2019. Urban Gardening as Politics (1st ed.).
Routledge. https://doi-org.zorac.aub.aau.dk/10.4324/9781315210889
Trubiano, Franca. 2022. Building Theories - Architecture as the Art of Building.
Routledge, London.
Trubiano, F., Beim, A. & Meister, U., 2022. Radical Tectonics – a multi-scalar
approach to material circularity through community empowerment, building re-use,
and material regeneration. In Structures & Architecture: A viable urban perspective?
: Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Structures and Architecture. .
Hvejsel, M. F. & Cruz, P. J. S. (red.). CRC Press
Tzonis, A., 2007. Santiago Calatrava: Complete Works, Expanded Edition. Rizzoli
Unwin, S., 2019. Metaphor. Routlodege London
(UNDESAPD) United Nations Department of Economic and Social Affairs,
Population Division. 2022. World Population Prospects 2022: Summary of Results.
Epilogue
317
UN DESA/POP/2022/TR/NO. 3
(UNEP) United Nations Environment Programme 2022. 2022 Global Status Report
for Buildings and Construction: Towards a Zero‑emission, Efficient and Resilient
Buildings and Construction Sector. Nairobi.
Usto, K. 2019. Dialectical Tectonics – ontology and tectonic ecology of form, material
and form without material. In Structures and Architecture - Bridging the Gap and
Crossing Borders: Proceedings of the Fourth International Conference on Structures
and Architecture (ICSA 2019), July 24-26, 2019, Lisbon, Portugal (pp. 75-82). Taylor
& Francis. https://doi.org/10.1201/9781315229126-9
Usto, K., 2020. Real Architecture - the object (cause) of desire. In. Schultz, A.C (Ed.),
Real and Fake in Architecture: Close to the Original, Far from Authenticity? Edition
Axel Menges.
Usto, K., Hvejsel, M.F., Brunsgaard, C. 2022, An Urban Sink – Case Study of an
(Im)material Metabolism of Buildings. In Structures & Architecture: A viable urban
perspective? : Proceedings of the Fifth International Conference on Structures and
Architecture. . Hvejsel, M. F. & Cruz, P. J. S. (red.). CRC Press
Usto, K., Hvejsel, M.F., Brunsgaard, C. 2023, Towards a Metabolism of the
(Im)Material – Transformations of an Urban Sink. The Journal of Nordic Association
of Architectural Research. Proceedings Series. Special Issue on the Concept of
Transformations 2023-?, pages ?-?? (forthcoming)
Van Eck, C. 2010. Figuration, Tectonics and Animism in Semper’s Der Stil. In
History and theory of architecture. Theory of fetishism. Journal of Architecture, 153-
70
Van Eck, C., 2013. Semper’s Metaphor of the Living Building – It’s origins in 18th
century Fetishism Theories and its Function in his Architectural Theory. In Gerber,
A., Patterson, B., Eds. 2013. Metaphor s in Architecture and Urbanism- Transcript
Verlag, Bielefeld
Vrahimis, A. 2019. The "analytic"/"continental" divide and the question of
philosophy's relation to literature. Philosophy and Literature, 43(1), 253-269.
Retrieved from https://www.proquest.com/scholarly-journals/analytic-continental-
divide-question-philosophys/docview/2249729816/se-2
Wackernagel, M., Rees, W., 1996. Urban ecological footprints: Why cities cannot be
sustainable—And why they are a key to sustainability, Environmental Impact
318
Assessment Review, Volume 16, Issues 4–6, Pages 223-248, ISSN 0195-9255,
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0195-9255(96)00022-4.
Wang, Q., Li, R., & Kee, C. C., 2019. Shandong’s yintan town and China’s “Ghost
city” phenomenon. Sustainability, 11(17), 4584.
doi:https://doi.org/10.3390/su11174584
Weinstock, M., 2008. Metabolism and Morphology. Volume78, Issue 2 Special Issue:
Versatility and Vicissitude March/April 2008 Pages 26-33
Weinstock, M. Hensel, M. Menges, A. 2010. Emergent technologies 2nd design:
towards a biological paradigm, Routlegde London
Weizman, E. 2017. Hollow land – Israel’s Architecture of Occupation. Verso,
London.
Weston, R., 2008. Utzon: Inspiration, Vision, Architecture. Bløndal. Hellerup
Weidmann, T. 2023. Degrowth Critiques of the Circular Economy. Australian
Circular Economy Hub. (last Accessed) https://acehub.org.au/news/degrowth-
critiques-of-the-circular-economy#.ZAr4kOpM_xk.linkedin
Willis, J., Bofiliou, T., Manili, A., Reynolds, I., 2023. The Greenwashing Hydra.
Planet Tracker: https://planet-tracker.org/wp-
content/uploads/2023/01/Greenwashing-Hydra-3.pdf
Wright, C. 2017, Revolution and Evolution: The Architectural Association. Archit.
Design, 87: 106-113. https://doi.org/10.1002/ad.2223
Yin, R.K., 2003. Case Study research: Design and Methods. Thousand
Oaks/London/New Dehli: Sage Publishers
Zaera-Polo, A., & Abascal G.F.,. 2016. “Architecture’s “Political Compass”: A
Taxonomy of EmergingArchitecture in One Diagram” 16 Dec 2016. ArchDaily.
Available at: <https://www.archdaily.com/801641/architectures-politicalcompass-a-
taxonomy-of-emerging-architecture-in-one-diagram> [Accessed date: 26 March
2021] ISSN 0719-8884
Zitouni, B., 2013. Organic metaphors and urban causalities. In: Andri Gerber & Brent
Patterson, Metaphors in Architecture and Urbanism. An Introduction., 2013, p. 147-
159 http://hdl.handle.net/2078.3/153019
Žižek, S. 2006. The Parallax View. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press
Epilogue
319
Žižek, S. 2012. Less than Nothing: Hegel and the shadow of dialectic materialism,
London, Verso.
Žižek, S. 2014. Absolute Recoil: Towards a new foundation of dialectical materialism,
London: Verso
Žižek, S. 2016. Disparities. Bloomsbury.
320
List of Figures
Frontpage. Image of Mine. Original modestly edited. (Creative Commons. Photo by
Staselnik. https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minedrift#/media/Fil:Mirny_in_Yakutia.jpg)
Figure 1. Principle diagram of material flows which increase the building stock in the
current “linear” fashion. ........................................................................................... 34
Figure 2. The growing urban stock due to urbanization, increased in population and
increase in floor area pr. Capita. .............................................................................. 34
Figure 3. The degradation of soils and biodiversity, and aggressive excavation of
hinterlands. ............................................................................................................... 34
Figure 4. Diagram showing that "circularity" is largely a metaphor, and a need safe
handling of end-of-life is still needed. ..................................................................... 34
Figure 5. Linear, despite re-strategies; thus needing a safe handling of materials. .. 34
Figure 6. Own redrawing of diagrammatic distribution of material flows from a
Danish national perspective (Affaldsrapporten 2019). ............................................. 34
Figure 7. The prospect of building more in wood is "strung-up”, or entangled with
many factors, and probably many more than listed here. ......................................... 34
Figure 8. An experience of a paradoxical "disconnection" between action/intention
and consequence (cause and effect) due to the complex nature of material flows? . 34
Figure 9. Different types of writings in architecture (own redrawing of Spence’s
diagram) (Spence 2017, pp.86). ............................................................................... 34
Figure 10. A redrawing of Nygaard’s 4 categories of architectural theory (Nygaard
2011). ....................................................................................................................... 34
Figure 11. A brief history of the evolution of architectural constructs (based on
Nygaard’s account) (Nygaard 2011) – with the inclusion of Ruskin. ...................... 34
Figure 12. An abstract diagram showing how one must simplify architecture within
the theory. ................................................................................................................ 34
Figure 13. A general example: few core constructs/elements, along with sub-
constructs - possibly with branching complexity expanding into relation? ............. 34
Figure 14. The material (pre)conditions provide the frame in which maneuvering is
possible. ................................................................................................................... 34
Figure 15. Constructs are the most "visible" elements of a theory. .......................... 34
Figure 16. Redrawing of illustration inspired by “From Cleaner Production to
Industrial Ecology”, Hanssen and Abrahamsen (2012). .......................................... 34
Figure 17. Juxtaposing of the key disciplines and their subsequent theoretical frames.
................................................................................................................................. 34
Figure 18. From metaphor to theoretical frame to methodology. ............................ 63
Figure 19. Planetary system boundary of the planet, air, soil, water in relation to each
other and the anthroposphere (society) (redrawn diagram) (Baccini, Brunner 2012).
................................................................................................................................. 63
Figure 20. The four-leaf structure of tectonic discourses. ........................................ 63
Figure 21. The material-immaterial dualisms(though not the only ones) of tectonic
discourse. ................................................................................................................. 63
Epilogue
321
Figure 22. The scopes of Ecological Tectonics. ....................................................... 63
Figure 23. Coupling planetary boundaries with tectonic metabolism. ..................... 63
Figure 24. The potential links of industrial metabolism with tectonics. .................. 63
Figure 25. Metabolism in the middle. ...................................................................... 63
Figure 26. With reference to Figure. 17, there are corresponding "tectonics" to the
different ways of making /producing. ...................................................................... 63
Figure 27. Construct and boundaries........................................................................ 63
Figure 28. Overview of research endeavor. ........................................................... 110
Figure 29. Iterative loops of testing and building. ................................................. 110
Figure 30. Abductive research strategy - along with inductive (building) and deductive
(testing). ................................................................................................................. 110
Figure 31. The dual process of abductive approach; inductive and deductive. ...... 110
Figure 32. The IIS-model (Keestra, Menken 2016) for interdisciplinary research
provides the working structure for this doctoral study. .......................................... 110
Figure 33. Theory development is an iterative dialogue between building and testing-
often spanning long periods of time – sometimes decades (Spence 2017). ........... 110
Figure 34. Four elements of theory as two segments. ............................................ 110
Figure 35. Approach for logical argumentation for building of theory. ................. 110
Figure 36. Graham Harman's quadruple of objects (Harman 2011). ...................... 110
Figure 37. It is possible to connect on three key levels. (Redrawing of diagram
Keestra et al. 2016) ................................................................................................ 110
Figure 38. Showing the multiple cases embedded study and explore the relations
between the sub-units (not to be confused with correlation research).................... 110
Figure 39. The Iceberg Model (inspired by David James 2015) – where tools and
methods are “visible” and the ones below the surface are “withdrawn” yet present.
............................................................................................................................... 110
Figure 40. Approaching Metabolism and Tectonic from "above" and "below.” .... 110
Figure 41. Illustrating the interloping link between the field and traditions. ......... 110
Figure 42. The "inner" and "outer" layers of the hybrid metabolism. .................... 110
Figure 43. A "hybrid" metabolism: a social-natural hybrid. .................................. 110
Figure 44. Diagram showing the research strategy in the iceberg model. .............. 110
Figure 45. Partial research strategy and method: regarding interdisciplinarity;
Metaphor, add, adjust, connect. ............................................................................. 110
Figure 46. Partial research strategy and methods: regarding testing and building. 110
Figure 47. The iterative (hermeneutic) loops of theory development; testing and
building. ................................................................................................................. 110
Figure 48. The whole research strategy: a monadic diagram of the research strategy.
............................................................................................................................... 110
Figure 49. Theory Constituents. ............................................................................. 203
Figure 50. Four main components of industrial metabolism. ................................. 203
Figure 51. Sink; an object and/or activity. ............................................................. 203
Figure 52. Within Planetary boundaries; Soil, Air, Water and the Anthroposphere.
............................................................................................................................... 203
Figure 53. Logic: input-output (mass balance) ...................................................... 203
322
Figure 54. From growth to circulation (or preventions of waste) - still linear, but slow
and narrow. ............................................................................................................ 203
Figure 55. An overview of the industrial ecology metabolism. ............................. 203
Figure 56. Four main elements of Semper's theory; carpentry, textile, ceramics and
stereotomy. ............................................................................................................. 203
Figure 57. The four elements containing a certain "plasticity” in application. ...... 203
Figure 58. The process of relations as a monadic diagram. ................................... 203
Figure 59. A strong sense of “suspended” interiority constructed entirely from
inventory and furniture; hanging drapes in the ceiling, light fixture, furniture, carpets
etc. almost irrespective of structural function and its appearance. ......................... 203
Figure 60. Semper's Wreath (own redrawing) (Mallgrave 1997; pp.292) .............. 203
Figure 61. Semper's Wreath (own redrawing) and Lacan's “objet a” (desiring logic as
diagram). (Slavoj Žižek 2001. Enjoy Your Sympton, pp.56) ................................ 203
Figure 62. Substance vs. meta-physics; surface as interstitial mediator................ 203
Figure 63. A simplified narrative of progress. ....................................................... 203
Figure 64. An overview of the tectonic "metabolism" and its particular points within
each of the four theoretical categories. ................................................................... 203
Figure 65. Searching for the material-immaterial spectrum: Interpreting parallels of
the two metabolisms............................................................................................... 203
Figure 66. From safe sink to Urban Sink. .............................................................. 203
Figure 67. "Inserting" the key initial constructs from industrial metabolism. ....... 203
Figure 68. Further adding and connecting the tectonic “metabolic” components. . 203
Figure 69. Towards a new set for construct though a transformed hybrid metabolism.
............................................................................................................................... 203
Figure 70. Each Construct is its own Thing according to Harman’s quadruple structure
(Harman 2011) ....................................................................................................... 203
Figure 71. As if a chemistry-like periodic table of founding compounds of
architecture. ............................................................................................................ 203
Figure 72. Structural systems as structuring principles. ......................................... 203
Figure 73. HVAC as a structuring principle; while the HVAC system provide a
utilitarian performance of indoor atmosphere in the literal sense (air quality,
temperature etc..) - it likewise provides prime opportunity to manifest the interiority
and its immaterial atmosphere. .............................................................................. 203
Figure 74. Use in the middle; a hybrid of both material performance, everyday utility,
and fleeing of home................................................................................................ 203
Figure 75. Aspects of “use” kept general, as particular affordance between
“ambiguous” notions allow for a multiplicity of uses. ........................................... 203
Figure 76. Urban Sink in relation to planetary boundaries. ................................... 203
Figure 77. Key constructs and first set of sub-constructs which constitute relations.
............................................................................................................................... 203
Figure 78. Key constructs and first set of relations depicted in “circular” interrelations
fashion – pointing towards other sub-constituents. ................................................ 203
Figure 79. Three (plus zero) rings of the metabolism. ........................................... 203
Epilogue
323
Figure 80. “Narrative” is the representative of the “mythical” core, and “Material
flows” is the representative of the materials (pre)conditions and planetary boundaries.
............................................................................................................................... 203
Figure 81. A particular manifestation of a chosen construct can act as design driver.
............................................................................................................................... 203
Figure 82. In a simplified way; we may acknowledge that the external relates, but
also emphasize the inherent internal relations. ....................................................... 203
Figure 83. Philotechne: almost as a sixth construct central to the edifice, yet
“invisible”. ............................................................................................................. 203
Figure 84. Towards a slowing of material flows. ................................................... 203
Figure 85. Diagram showing the principle of slowing and narrowing, thus minimizing
need for materials by “disconnection” and “interconnection”. .............................. 203
Figure 86. Disconnecting by interconnecting; in material and immaterial terms. .. 203
Figure 87. Slowing as the all-encompassing strategy (with narrowing and closing as
sub-strategies) since flows are ultimately always linear. ....................................... 203
Figure 88. Do Things exist, or are relational processes all there is? ...................... 203
Figure 89. Object-oriented Ontology nevertheless acknowledged the potentials of
constituting objects/things. ..................................................................................... 203
Figure 90. An overview of the (im)material metabolism. ...................................... 203
Figure 91. Placing the theory. ................................................................................ 203
Figure 92. Three cases; A. Sjølundsparken (left), B. FlexiBo (middle), C. ConBox
(right). Courtesy of “Styrelsen for Dataforsyning og Effektivisering” (SDFE)). ... 239
Figure 93.Geographical locations of cases in Denmark. ........................................ 239
Figure 94. The three cases and their assumed "design-drivers." ............................ 239
Figure 95. Case A. Sjølund (top), Case B. FlexiBo (middle), Case C.ConBox (bottom)
Courtesy of “Styrelsen for Dataforsyning og Effektivisering” (SDFE)). ............... 239
Figure 96. Case A; the shear walls are subject to a shifting principle in relation to site
conditions. .............................................................................................................. 239
Figure 97. The three cases (respectively A,B,C) and their characteristic expressions.
............................................................................................................................... 239
Figure 98. Plans of three cases – red lines indicate flexibility as possibility of partition
walls. ...................................................................................................................... 239
Figure 99. Façade system of Case A, and ceiling system (and detail) of Case B. .. 239
Figure 100. Images of two major renovations of case C: the hitherto appearance
(middle) and its current ongoing transformation (right). (First image of original
facade (left): courtesy by Aalborg Stadsarkiv. Photo 1966 by J. Brems)............... 239
Figure 101. Images of chosen cluster. Courtesy of “Styrelsen for Dataforsyning og
Effektivisering” (SDFE)). ...................................................................................... 239
Figure 102. The surplus volume is a metric which is to be viewed as volume pr. floor
area. But in this case, floor area is constant in the two versions. ......................... 239
Figure 103. Abstract example: each construct can have multiple empirical
counterparts. ........................................................................................................... 239
Figure 104. Starting from Narrative, through the middle, and relating all to material
consequences. ......................................................................................................... 239
324
Figure 105. Principle of Open Building Concept; support (structure) and infill (light
walls etc.). .............................................................................................................. 239
Figure 106. Internal variety and composition permitting flexibility and adaptability
(own redrawing based on (Alexander (1977)). ...................................................... 239
Figure 107. An additive logic of simple (“refined”) elements. .............................. 239
Figure 108. Own diagrammatic redrawing the Utzon Center (by Kim and Jørn Utzon)
- showing the "openness" of the plan (red lines indicates possible walls). ............ 239
Figure 109. Georgian housing turned architectural studios (Photo: creative common)
............................................................................................................................... 239
Figure 110. The Schröder House by Gerrit Rietveld (Photo: creative common) ... 239
Figure 111. Nakagin Capsule Tower by Kisho Kurokawa (Japanese Metabolist)
(Photo: creative common) ...................................................................................... 239
Figure 112. The original plan from 1961, and the house with the later extension in
1998. (Own redrawing) .......................................................................................... 239
Figure 113. A contemporary example of the open building concept - large portions of
the plan are simply open to large variety of uses and infills (own redrawing). Solid11
by Tony Fretton Architects (Kruit 2022). .............................................................. 239
Figure 114. The Urban Sink spectrum of furniture/element/building scale. .......... 239
Figure 115. Waste materials - from a building volume to an urban space (storage
site)? ....................................................................................................................... 275
Figure 116. Urban Sink: the storage site as an important Detail. ........................... 275
Figure 117. Aalborg and Nørresundby provide the spatial footprint for the design
scenario (vol.2). ..................................................................................................... 275
Figure 118. The design initiator: the design agenda starts from the material conditions
and the narrative of material flows. ........................................................................ 275
Figure 119. All addresses approved for demolition (blue dots) by Aalborg
Municipality (an abstracted conceptual version). ................................................... 275
Figure 120.Cutting and applying principles. .......................................................... 275
Figure 121. The city of Aalborg (and Nørresundby) with a conceptual overlay of
storage sites (white dots) - and addresses approved for demolition/renovation (blue
dots.) ...................................................................................................................... 275
Figure 122. Diagrammatic principle for allocation of materials (blue dots) to available
sites (white dots). ................................................................................................... 275
Figure 123. From demolition to construction, through the storage sites. In extension
of Figure 36, the yellow dots are the mappings of addresses approved for building
new structures. ....................................................................................................... 275
Figure 124. A bus stop made from the same waste materials. The wooden elements
are used for canopy, while the folded brick walls are stabilized via the seating
elements. ................................................................................................................ 275
Figure 125. Waste materials used as noise barrier on highways. ........................... 275
Figure 126. Small, human scale spatial enclosure with seating and wind protection.
............................................................................................................................... 275
Figure 127. Partial image of the city. An everyday cycle of living in area A, shopping
in area B and working in areas C. .......................................................................... 275
Epilogue
325
Figure 128. A prescriptive monadic diagram which ends in well-known and familiar
circular strategies (Cheshire 2021). ........................................................................ 275
Figure 129. The process was initiated by with a joint priority of “narrative” and
“material flows”. .................................................................................................... 275
Figure 130. Urban Symbiosis; city as an interrelated network of sharing economies
of facilities, tools, books, products, walls, energy, heat etc. .................................. 275
Figure 131. There can be different variants of the Urban Sink; Surplus, detail,
furniture, elements, support, urban symbiosis, storage sites, city web, law and norms.
............................................................................................................................... 275
Figure 132. A proposal of including Urban Sink into legislation; the Urban Sink scale
are covered differently by existing legislation, and possibly missing something in
between (Inter-Building Law). ............................................................................... 275
Figure 133. Future Scenario S(f). ........................................................................... 275
Figure 134. future scenarios; 0,1,2,3. ..................................................................... 275
Figure 135. Building volume at a given time, is influenced by the needs of people and
the accompanying building practice. ...................................................................... 275
Figure 136. Different variants of the Urban Sink at different scales. ..................... 275
Figure 137. The Metabolism, not total and universal, but societal and planetary via
matter. .................................................................................................................... 289
Figure 138. The Urban Sink is a spectrum from Object to Process: a single object
(house, storage site), to the network of objects and finally the very relational process
which allows the circulation and storage of materials. All are the Urban Sink
simultaneously if they have the capacity to store materials through material and
immaterial aspects. ................................................................................................. 289
Figure 139. Urban Sink specified across variants/scales and constructs. ............... 289
Figure 140. Five constructs - two overlapping sets of threes, providing crucial
juxtapositions – towards a horizon of the metabolic designer. .............................. 289
Figure 141. The metabolic dialectic. ...................................................................... 289
Figure 142. The approaches (arrows) of analysis (from top) and design (from bottom).
............................................................................................................................... 289
Figure 143. The (im)material metabolism (grey ring) as platform for future metabolic
interdisciplinarity both for collaboration and integration. ...................................... 289
Figure 144. Possible future research trajectories. ................................................... 289
Figure 145. A proposal of the different possible types of "labor" - whether machine,
human or natural. ................................................................................................... 289
Figure 146. A hypothetical (fictive) overview of different scales and their construct-
values - (speculation for future research possibilities). ......................................... 289
Figure 147. Overview of Theory, Concepts and Methods of the two disciplines. ... 10
Figure 148. Although the two seem "disconnected", they nevertheless interlink. ... 10
Figure 149. Mind Map for the purpose of locating a central problem field or topic. 10
Figure 150. A Concept Map of gaining a preliminary overview of the perspectives of
the chosen disciplines. .............................................................................................. 10
Figure 151. The impetus building cluster volume. ................................................... 10
Figure 152. Total are of ground floor and first floor of the cluster of three units. ... 10
326
Figure 153. Areas of the existing units, ground and first floor. ............................... 10
Figure 154. Six measured width across the footprint. .............................................. 10
Figure 155. The new footprint of 10m * 20m (first floor having the same) equals the
total of 400 square meters. ....................................................................................... 10
Figure 156. The resulting volume; a "rationalized" cluster. ..................................... 10
Figure 157. Figure showing the difference in plans between first and second version.
There is difference is composition and proportions of spaces, while functionality
remain comparable. .................................................................................................. 10
Figure 158. finding the difference volume between the two versions. ..................... 10
Epilogue
327
Table of Appendices
A. Appendix A. Mind Map………………………………………………...311
B. Appendix B. Data Management Table for the two disciplines………....315
C. Appendix C. The (im)material surplus…………………………………318
Appendix A. Mind Map
This is a supplementary text which give some insight in the background dynamics of
the literary research and review of literature (as done in the chapter 1) which would
lay the grounds for later State-of-the-art chapter. This appendix elaborates the use of
the Mind-map method which allows to structure ones thinking while delving into a
complex problem.
In the very early phase of the doctoral study, the challenge was to work with materials,
and gain different insight into material concerns with regard to the built environment.
There were many challenges, many partial considerations and many problems to
consider. And as such it can quickly become difficult and even confusing on how to
focus on the essential or core concerns of material consumption challenges. As an
very easy attempt to map a very general problem field (or fields) and a potential means
to find a different discipline which may hold significant insight relevant for
architecture, design and engineering the method of mind map (Keestra et al 2016) was
used. This allowed to formulate a problem field or topic from a kind of overview
irrespective of disciplines, which is the poor quality of the building stock which is
ever more increasing materials flows into societal infrastructure.
Figure 148. Mind Map for the purpose of locating a central problem field or topic.
This very step did not automatically provide the need to delve into chemical
engineering (industrial ecology in particular) but such a mapping permitted the
possibility to systemize ones thinking while reading different literature, exploring
2
different practices, mapping out different challenges and problems etc..
Such a map implicates anthropology, sociology, geography due to population growth
and urbanization, along with architecture and planning due to lack of designed quality
and cultural significance and finally the disciplines of chemistry, biology and ecology
due to the immense impacts on natural environment in terms of increase CO2,
disappearance of biodiversity and the degradation of soils and carbon sinks like forest
etc., and as such necessitates a constant reflection to be able to limit the scope and
focusing on a few core disciplines which are connected to the topic/problem. Overall,
the topic of interest was limited to that of material flows (material consumption)
within the built environment. And while the mind map was being used a “thinking”
tool for mapping of topics and problems, literature was being read on said topics and
problems. The reading of said literature started to indicate that a large portion of much
of the most pertinent findings (which actualized in the content of chapter 1) were
contribution from either environmental engineering or chemical engineering
metabolic studies. Likewise, the architectural materialist approach where material and
immaterial aspects were considered together also indicates potential for the
problem/topic at hand.
This doctoral study considers it crucial to proceed in an interdisciplinary manor with
the two key disciplines which are the overarching disciplines as categorized in
interdisciplinary literature (Keestra et al 2016, pp:29) ; Chemistry (Chemical
Engineering), Geography and Urban planning (Architecture). While this is an overall
categorization and definition of the disciplines involved, more specifically this
doctoral study aims at exploring the potential interdisciplinary insights from tectonic
theory (architecture), and industrial ecology (chemical engineering).
Figure 149. A Concept Map of gaining a preliminary overview of the
perspectives of the chosen disciplines.
The reason to proceed with these two key disciplines is due to them having an impetus
Appendix A. Mind Map
3
in “matter” although from very different epistemological and ontological positions –
some of which are explicit and some of which are more implicit. Another crucial
aspect, is that, given the complexity of issues of material flows in society in relation
to nature, an approach in required which does not discriminate scales, from small scale
to larger societal scale which position themselves critical in relation to materials and
how they flow in relation to their ideological justification. The predominant
perspectives onto the problem field (topic) of the two disciplines is thus; Tectonic
acknowledges the need for more inclusion of a critical awareness of material
application towards a more quality-oriented and appreciative built environment;
industrial ecology (metabolism) while providing a crucial overview of material flows
also acknowledges the need for an understanding of societal and cultural aspects.
While this appendix only shows one image of the mind-map, it has in reality
undergone may iterations during the actual process of reading literature as to adjust
for new findings of practices and theories.
References.
Keestra, M., Rutting, L., Post, G., de Roo, M., Blad, S., & de Greef, L. 2016. An
Introduction to Interdisciplinary Research: Theory and Practice (S. Menken & M.
Keestra, Eds.). Amsterdam University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1bc540s
4
Appendix B. Data Management Table for the
two disciplines
This is a supplementary text which give some insight in the background dynamics of
the data management table method (Keestra et al 2016) which was used a way to gain
an overview of the inherent conditions and potentials of the two pertinent disciplines
and their frameworks. This was utilized both in chapter 2 (state-of-the-art) and in
chapter 4 (theory building, though further elaborated as well in chapter 4).
After having a general overview of the topic (problems and challenges of material
flows in the built environment and their relations to experiential architectural
conditions) which was elaborated in chapter 1, a hypothesis is developed. The
hypothesis considers the potential of developing an interdisciplinary theory by
juxtaposing tectonic theory and industrial ecology theory could be hold pertinent
value for the application of materials within the built environment. But if such a theory
were to be built, an appropriate state-of-the-art of the two pertinent disciplines has to
be elaborated as to get a better understanding of the potentials of the disciplines for
the topic.
Following method of “data managemental table” (Keestra et al 2016), the state-of-
the-art refines how the two disciplines hold potential to each other but also contain
challenges and antagonism both in relationship to each other, but also inherently
within themselves as perceived from critical analytic perspective. Thus, following the
logic of categories for “data management table” (Theory, Concept, Methodology
(ontology and epistemology), and insight into problem) this doctoral study
hypothesizes that a pertinent insight could potentially be gained regarding the
challenges of material flows via an interdisciplinary approach by realigning tectonic
theory in the spirit of critical metabolic (industrial ecology) thinking towards a
tectonic theory.
Figure 150. Data Management Table: Overview of Theory, Concepts and Methods and
insight into problem of the two disciplines.
Appendix B. Data Management Table for the two disciplines
5
It is also the case that these two disciplines are in fact not totally foreign to each other
(elaborated in chapter 3 and 4) and that the challenge is to integrate them at both a
theoretical level. Furthermore, the challenge is to reify and build upon the reciprocal
traditions of these disciplines towards a more critical understanding of material flows.
References.
Keestra, M., Rutting, L., Post, G., de Roo, M., Blad, S., & de Greef, L. 2016. An
Introduction to Interdisciplinary Research: Theory and Practice (S. Menken & M.
Keestra, Eds.). Amsterdam University Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/j.ctt1bc540s
6
Appendix C. The (im)material surplus
This appendix document provides the background and delineations of the (im)material
surplus as was elaborated in chapter 5 (paragraph 5.2.3.).
The reification of the (im)material surplus is based on a exercise which is grounded
on a set of assumption and margin of errors. This was due to several aspect, one of the
main margins of error was the non-availability of comprehensive technical drawing
material especially on the slightly complex geometry of the roof and its inner anatomy.
Likewise, the foundation is not included.
The impetus of this exercise was to take the original cluster and model a hypothetical
“rationalization” as to reify the surplus (extra) material used which were the
foundation for the phenomenological embeddedness into site conditions as well as
provide meaningful spaces for the single unit as well.
Figure 151. The impetus building cluster volume.
The initial building volume o the cluster unit names Is, Ns, Ls of consideration was
modelled in 3d environment based on the existing drawing accessible in the municipal
archives and the architects own project booklet (Aude, Lundgaard 1975).
And while the purpose was to model a fictive hypothetical version of the original
design, there are several aspects to consider to minimally make it realistic and
comparable. The overall goal is to maintain total area of the cluster while
“rationalizing” the building volume. In doing so a set of procedures need to be
considered.
The total area is 400 m2, the ground floor having 215 and the first floor having 185.
In the rationalized version both would be 200. Firstly, the original footprint was
modelled as to find an average width of the footprint which would equal the 200
square meter footprint of the floor area.
Appendix C. The (im)material surplus
7
Figure 152. Total area of ground floor and first floor of the cluster of three units.
And while the total floor area is accounted for, it is likewise relevant to consider the
sizes of the original units, as to later be able to compare the change is sizes, though
the average area of each unit is maintained.
Figure 153. Areas of the existing units, ground and first floor.
8
Next, as to find the average width of the whole cluster, six different widths were
measured, and followingly divided arriving at the value of 10,19 meters.
Figure 154. Six measured width across the footprint.
The next step entails the finding of the total (new) length of the cluster based on the
average width. If the area is to be 200, then we divide the total area with new width
to get the new length, which equals 20,2 meters. While the initial averages had
decimals, for the purpose of this exercise the width and length were simplified to 10m
and 20m (figure 155).
Figure 155. The new footprint of 10m * 20m (first floor having the same) equals the total of
400 square meters.
Appendix C. The (im)material surplus
9
Figure 156. The resulting volume; a "rationalized" cluster.
The resulting cluster volume obviously appears differently and functions differently,
as certain rooms have become slightly bigger, and some have become slight smaller.
while still remaining similarly functional. The focus is the material surplus which
exactly facilitates this difference.
Figure 157. Figure showing the difference in plans between first and second version. There is
difference is composition and proportions of spaces, while functionality remain comparable.
10
The last step is thus calculating the total volume. This is as well done in the 3d
environment. The assumption was that the first volume was greater than the second
(hence its designation of being “rational” in quotation marks). Therefore, the first
cluster total volume was subtracted from the second cluster’s total volume.
Figure 158. finding the difference volume between the two versions.
By using the native plugin of Grasshopper in the 3d modelling environment Rhino7,
through a simple mechanism of marking of the first buildings total volume and
subtracting the second total volume, the result arrives at 1,3 cubic meters.
This volume is an average volume which does not differentiate between wall, floor,
brick, concrete, wood etc., but it is an average volume which contains all of these. As
mentioned earlier, given the lack drawing materials, the roof geometries was not
included (only surfaces and not volume, and thus not included in calculation).
Likewise, the walls are not differentiated to the point of including where the solid wall
is and where the window is, and the general width of the wall is used of the envelope.
If a more precise calculation of this kind were to be made with a higher resolution, the
surplus volume of 1,3 cubic meter would most probably be higher. Though it is a
simple volume of matter, at the same time it is the surplus which permits experiential
gestures in relation to the interior and exterior.
References.
Aude B., Lundgaard B., 1975. Sjølund – en bebyggelse I Hellebæk. Last accessed:
20-10-2021: https://xn--sjlundsparken-cnb.dk/wp-
content/uploads/2020/12/Projektbogen.pdf
KEMO USTO
SAFE SINK TECTONICS
ISSN (online): 2446-1628
ISBN (online): 978-87-7573-701-7
