Climate Emergency and Built Environment Education

Leonard Zhukovsky / Shutterstock.com
Leonard Zhukovsky / Shutterstock.com

Fionn Stevenson explains why rapid change is needed to redefine education and training. Students need to be able to access and understand existing principles, methods and solutions for carefully defined, problem and evidence-based learning. The built environment disciplines and their corresponding institutes / regulators must radically update their professional validation criteria for their education programmes now and more closely define the key competences that professionals must have.


The Challenge

The 2018 landmark report by the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC, 2018) warns there is now just 11 years for global warming to be kept to a maximum of 1.5 C, to avoid catastrophic drought, floods, extreme heat and poverty for hundreds of millions of people. The UK Committee on Climate Change Progress Report 2018 (CCC, 2018) shows that temperature adjusted annual direct emissions from UK buildings in 2017 rose for the second successive year, by around 1% relative to the previous year. Urgent and unprecedented changes are therefore needed in built environment education to reach zero carbon targets as well as reduce negative environmental impacts, which are both affordable and feasible.

At the same time technology-driven futures in education related to artificial intelligence, BIM (Building Information Modelling), robots and online learning need greater emphasis on inclusivity, BAME (Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic), gender and access issues. Technology innovations in built environment typically take 30 years to embed – we don’t have that time available in this climate emergency and the solutions are already available. Instead, we need to rapidly change educational approaches to help students to be able to access and understand existingprinciples, methods and solutions for carefully defined, problem and evidence-based learning.

Changing Values

Most professional institutions (based on 19th and 20th Century thinking) have an anthropocentric set of values, which is precisely what has got us into this climate and biodiversity emergency in the first place. Educational and professional values need to have a much stronger eco-centric focus, so that we co-steward our community, resources and planet together with other species that have already evolved to do this automatically as part of their sustainable ecosystems. Equally we need to move towards education that promotes citizen and species co-production of the built environment together with professionals as co-designers.

New Professionalism calls for professionals to do the right thing, develop trusting relationships, with open and honest collaboration, and reflect upon performance in use through feedback. It requires the humility to openly learn from mistakes, to challenge assumptions and standards, be honest about professional ignorance and understand contexts and constraints. It asks professionals to create lasting value and keep options open for the future (Bordass and Leaman, 2013; RIBA, 2019). Much of this has not been captured by most countries’ current built environment professional validation criteria which set out the curricula principles and standards that higher education programmes leading to a professional qualification must adhere to. Educators and professional training programmes need to respond to all of the above-mentioned principles and adopt a slow and inclusive design approach to ensure natural and social flourishing. The first step is having the appropriate understanding, knowledge and skills. It then becomes much easier to change professional work routines (contracts, responsibilities and duties) and take appropriate responsibilities for outcomes.

Beyond this, Howard Liddell and Sandy Halliday, from the international Gaia Group, famously applied a new Hippocratic Oath for the built environment professional: “Do No Harm” in the world’s first Sustainable Building Design Accreditation Scheme for the Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland (https://www.rias.org.uk/for-the-public/sustainability). This was pioneered in 2004 with individual designers evaluated on the actual performance of their built and occupied projects against six core principles:

  1. Designing for Effective Resource Use
  2. Minimising Pollution
  3. Supporting Communities
  4. Promoting Biodiversity
  5. Creating Healthy Environments
  6. Managing the Build Process

This excellent scheme provides a useful model for the rest of the world to consider and adapt in terms of genuinely evidencing sustainable design standards.

Where does the responsibility lie for redefining education and training in terms of these combined values? Is it with the built environment professional institutions, the licensing bodies for professionals (where they exist) or is it with the higher education programmes associated with these disciplines? In many countries, the built environment professional institutions must provide the leadership for this to happen and not stymie change. They can achieve this by radically updating their professional validation criteria for their education programmes now and more closely defining the key competences that professionals must have. This would be followed by significant changes to education programme curricula through a 1-year review followed by a 2-year implementation (develop changes, implement them). We have no time to wait. The risks by not acting presently not only endanger the planet but are likely to marginalise professionals as they will lack the necessary skills.

Promoting a new understanding

Built environment education operates within a nexus of humanities, technology and design. There is now an imperative to create professionals with breadth and sophisticated team-working capabilities as well as depth of specialist knowledge and skills (so-called T-shaped professionals). Pioneering joint or triple accredited programmes such as combined architecture and engineering already exist and provide some useful models. However, these are in the minority when arguably they should be in the majority.

Validation Criteria for professional education programmes must signal the need to demonstrate socio-environmental feedback skills and sound evidence-based understanding related to the critical building science principles and processes that inform any application of technology and design in the built environment. Equally, design studios need to re-orientate towards an eco-centric approach involving citizen/species co-design and co-production through the development of far more ‘live projects’. This approach would allow students to move away from current ego-centric, individualistic and unresponsive “imaginaries” towards problem-based learning and outcomes that work through collaboration and teamwork in the real world. This urgent need for radical change also requires educators to do some serious soul searching and to challenge the institutions that currently govern their curricula.


References

Bordass, B. and Leaman, A. (2013) A new professionalism: remedy or fantasy? Building Research & Information, 41(1), 1-7. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09613218.2012.750572

Committee on Climate Change (2018) Reducing UK Emissions: 2018 Progress Report to Parliament. London: Committee on Climate Change.
https://www.theccc.org.uk/publication/reducing-uk-emissions-2018-progress-report-to-parliament/

IPCC, 2018: Summary for Policymakers. In: Global Warming of 1.5°C. An IPCC Special Report on the impacts of global warming of 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels and related global greenhouse gas emission pathways, in the context of strengthening the global response to the threat of climate change, sustainable development, and efforts to eradicate poverty [Masson-Delmotte, V., P. Zhai, H.-O. Pörtner, D. Roberts, J. Skea, P.R. Shukla, A. Pirani, W. Moufouma-Okia, C. Péan, R. Pidcock, S. Connors, J.B.R. Matthews, Y. Chen, X. Zhou, M.I. Gomis, E. Lonnoy, Maycock, M. Tignor, and T. Waterfield (eds.)]. Geneva: World Meteorological Organization. https://www.ipcc.ch/

RIBA (2019) RIBA: Code of Professional Conduct. London: RIBA. https://www.architecture.com/-/media/gathercontent/work-with-us/additional-documents/code-of-professional-conduct--may-2019pdf.pdf


Latest Peer-Reviewed Journal Content

Journal Content

Health inequalities and indoor environments: research challenges and priorities [editorial]
M Ucci & A Mavrogianni

Operationalising energy sufficiency for low-carbon built environments in urbanising India
A B Lall & G Sethi

Promoting practices of sufficiency: reprogramming resource-intensive material arrangements
T H Christensen, L K Aagaard, A K Juvik, C Samson & K Gram-Hanssen

Culture change in the UK construction industry: an anthropological perspective
I Tellam

Are people willing to share living space? Household preferences in Finland
E Ruokamo, E Kylkilahti, M Lettenmeier & A Toppinen

Towards urban LCA: examining densification alternatives for a residential neighbourhood
M Moisio, E Salmio, T Kaasalainen, S Huuhka, A Räsänen, J Lahdensivu, M Leppänen & P Kuula

A population-level framework to estimate unequal exposure to indoor heat and air pollution
R Cole, C H Simpson, L Ferguson, P Symonds, J Taylor, C Heaviside, P Murage, H L Macintyre, S Hajat, A Mavrogianni & M Davies

Finnish glazed balconies: residents’ experience, wellbeing and use
L Jegard, R Castaño-Rosa, S Kilpeläinen & S Pelsmakers

Modelling Nigerian residential dwellings: bottom-up approach and scenario analysis
C C Nwagwu, S Akin & E G Hertwich

Mapping municipal land policies: applications of flexible zoning for densification
V Götze, J-D Gerber & M Jehling

Energy sufficiency and recognition justice: a study of household consumption
A Guilbert

Linking housing, socio-demographic, environmental and mental health data at scale
P Symonds, C H Simpson, G Petrou, L Ferguson, A Mavrogianni & M Davies

Measuring health inequities due to housing characteristics
K Govertsen & M Kane

Provide or prevent? Exploring sufficiency imaginaries within Danish systems of provision
L K Aagaard & T H Christensen

Imagining sufficiency through collective changes as satisfiers
O Moynat & M Sahakian

US urban land-use reform: a strategy for energy sufficiency
Z M Subin, J Lombardi, R Muralidharan, J Korn, J Malik, T Pullen, M Wei & T Hong

Mapping supply chains for energy retrofit
F Wade & Y Han

Operationalising building-related energy sufficiency measures in SMEs
I Fouiteh, J D Cabrera Santelices, A Susini & M K Patel

Promoting neighbourhood sharing: infrastructures of convenience and community
A Huber, H Heinrichs & M Jaeger-Erben

New insights into thermal comfort sufficiency in dwellings
G van Moeseke, D de Grave, A Anciaux, J Sobczak & G Wallenborn

‘Rightsize’: a housing design game for spatial and energy sufficiency
P Graham, P Nourian, E Warwick & M Gath-Morad

Implementing housing policies for a sufficient lifestyle
M Bagheri, L Roth, L Siebke, C Rohde & H-J Linke

The jobs of climate adaptation
T Denham, L Rickards & O Ajulo

Structural barriers to sufficiency: the contribution of research on elites
M Koch, K Emilsson, J Lee & H Johansson

Life-cycle GHG emissions of standard houses in Thailand
B Viriyaroj, M Kuittinen & S H Gheewala

IAQ and environmental health literacy: lived experiences of vulnerable people
C Smith, A Drinkwater, M Modlich, D van der Horst & R Doherty

Living smaller: acceptance, effects and structural factors in the EU
M Lehner, J L Richter, H Kreinin, P Mamut, E Vadovics, J Henman, O Mont & D Fuchs

Disrupting the imaginaries of urban action to deliver just adaptation [editorial]
V Castán-Broto, M Olazabal & G Ziervogel

Building energy use in COVID-19 lockdowns: did much change?
F Hollick, D Humphrey, T Oreszczyn, C Elwell & G Huebner

Evaluating past and future building operational emissions: improved method
S Huuhka, M Moisio & M Arnould

Normative future visioning: a critical pedagogy for transformative adaptation
T Comelli, M Pelling, M Hope, J Ensor, M E Filippi, E Y Menteşe & J McCloskey

Nature for resilience reconfigured: global- to-local translation of frames in Africa
K Rochell, H Bulkeley & H Runhaar

How hegemonic discourses of sustainability influence urban climate action
V Castán Broto, L Westman & P Huang

Fabric first: is it still the right approach?
N Eyre, T Fawcett, M Topouzi, G Killip, T Oreszczyn, K Jenkinson & J Rosenow

Social value of the built environment [editorial]
F Samuel & K Watson

Understanding demolition [editorial]
S Huuhka

Data politics in the built environment [editorial]
A Karvonen & T Hargreaves

See all

Latest Commentaries

5th Anniversary Essays

5th Anniversary Essays

These commissioned essays from Buildings & Cities' authors and readers explore how the research landscape is changing. New essays are continuously being added to the collection during 2024 as part of B&C's anniversary.

Collectively, these essays offer fresh insights into the processes and issues that are currently inadequate or missing in the built environment research landscape. A wide perspective from different disciplines and geographies creates a positive, collective vision for shaping the research agenda. Recommendations are made for what needs to change.

We hope this will provoke and inspire research funders, researchers and other stakeholders to discuss, reflect and act. Ideas range from systemic change to key research questions to improving engagement to change of focus.

The Challenges of Evidence-Based Design

While some progress has been made, particularly in areas like healing architecture where the impact of design on human well-being is more directly observable, much work remains to be done to extend evidence-based design to broader fields of architecture, urban planning and design. Meta Berghauser Pont (Chalmers University of Technology) explains the challenges and pathways needed for a shift toward evidence-based design in urban planning and urban design.

Join Our Community