Have attempts stalled to mainstream zero carbon knowledge and skills in the US architectural curriculum? Where is the impediment? Despite many bottom-up efforts, why are accrediation criteria lagging behind?
Architects Marsha Maytum and Bill Leddy report on recent attempts to change the US architectural curriculum and architectural practice in order to mainstream zero carbon and protect the planet. The latest critiera set by the independent accreditation board do not address the urgency that many in the profession (and higher education) are seeking.
After a year of consultation, in February 2020 the US National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB) released the new 2020 Conditions and Procedures for Accreditation for all architecture schools in the United States. This document defines the minimum standards that universities must meet for the professional education of US architects and is therefore highly influential in determining the curriculum and content in architecture schools. The NAAB is an independent agency that evaluates US architecture programmes to ensure that graduates have the technical and critical thinking skills required to have a rewarding career in the profession.
This update to the accreditation requirements occurs once every six years and this year’s update presented an important opportunity to revise the curriculum requirements in all architecture schools in the US to address the critical the role of architecture in the climate crisis. The year-long consultation process received recommendations from architects, educators, professional organizations and other stakeholders across the country urging mandatory curriculum changes. Many voices demanded that the curriculum requirements be changed to ensure that the next generation of architects (i.e. current students) have the knowledge and capabilities to address the climate crisis. Many advocated that the architectural curriculum must be clearly focused to create a carbon positive, healthy, resilient and regenerative built environment.
As 2019 Chair of the American Institute of Architects (AIA) Committee on the Environment (COTE), I (MM) submitted our recommendation for curriculum revisions and a pedagogical framework in alignment with the AIA focus on urgent climate action. Accredited architectural programs must address climate action and a broader integrated understanding of health, safety and welfare in every aspect of the education of future architects. It is our responsibility to educate and empower the next generation of professionals to be the leaders and innovators for an equitable, sustainable and just built environment.
In October 2019, my partner Bill Leddy and I also participated in the John Reynolds Symposium in Portland Oregon where a diverse group of over 100 educators and professionals from across the United States created the Portland Declaration in response to the NAAB process. The Declaration states:
Sustainability
should be a major component of the NAAB program accreditation criteria. We strongly recommend that the principles
underlying the AIA Framework for Design Excellence provide the basis for
defining sustainability in this context. Those graduating from an accredited
architecture program must be exposed to and demonstrate the ability to engage
in:
Design
integration
Design
synthesis
Building
integration
Sustainability
(as embodied by the AIA COTE Top Ten/Framework for Design Excellence)
Environmental
stewardship values
Sustainability, climate action, and environmental stewardship must move to the top of the mission statement of NAAB. Urgency! This is critical to the continuing relevance, influence, and value of architecture as a profession that serves society.
What was the result of the NAAB consultation process? The outcome of the NAAB criteria review incorporated only minor adjustments to the conditions and procedures language to include environmental considerations in the architectural curriculum – but not substantive revisions to address climate action in architectural accreditation requirements.
The NAAB’s 2020 Conditions and Procedures for Accreditation does not embrace the extreme sense of urgency required by the climate crisis. It fails to enact the necessary change for our next generation of architects. The AIA Committee on the Environment will continue to demand NAAB to integrate stronger requirements to incorporate sustainable design into all aspects of architectural education and studio culture; this is in alignment with the AIA’s focus on climate action and environmental stewardship.
As an institution representing US architects, the AIA defines what professionalism means particularly its members’ professional responsibilities to safeguard society and our planet. The last year has seen profound action by the AIA in addressing the climate crisis. In 2018 the AIA revised their Professional Code of Ethics to include Obligations to the Environment “…a built environment that equitably supports human health and well-being and is resistant to climate change, and restoring degraded or depleted natural resources.” In January 2019 the AIA Board voted to focus on environmental stewardship throughout the organization. A grassroots-lead Resolution for Urgent Climate Action was overwhelmingly passed by the membership at the AIA National Conference in June 2019 in Las Vegas. The Resolution demanded that commencing in 2019 and continuing until zero-net carbon practice is the accepted standard of its members, the AIA prioritize and support urgent climate action as a health, safety, and welfare issue, to exponentially accelerate the “decarbonization” of buildings, the building sector, and the built environment, and that the AIA:
In September 2019 the Resolution for Climate Action was ratified by the AIA Board and the Framework for Design Excellence adopted by the Institute with the goal to transform the day to day practice of architecture.As a result of the Resolution, the AIA has initiated the creation of a Climate Action Plan for the Institute which will be voted on by the AIA Board in April 2020 with formal adoption anticipated by the AIA ’20 National Conference in Los Angeles.The Climate Action Plan Goals are to:
The AIA has eloquently set forth the following Climate Imperative - AIA Blueprint for Better Campaign 2020:
One site.
Countless challenges.
A looming deadline.
Seven and a half billion clients.
This is the ultimate project.
It's time to show the world what design can do.
AIA and its members are dedicated to designing a healthy, sustainable, and equitable world, together. More information on the campaign here.
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
Latest Commentaries
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.