City and regional planners have recently started exploring a circular approach to urban development. Meanwhile, industrial ecologists have been designing and refining methodologies to quantify and locate material flows and stocks within systems. This Perspective explores to which extent material stock studies can contribute to urban circularity, focusing on the built environment. We conducted a critical literature review of material stock studies that claim they contribute to circular cities. We classified each article according to a matrix we developed leveraging existing circular built environment frameworks of urban planning, architecture, and civil engineering and included the terminology of material stock studies. We found that, out of 271 studies, only 132 provided information that could be relevant to the implementation of circular cities, albeit to vastly different degrees of effectiveness. Of these 132, only 26 reported their results in a spatially explicit manner, which is fundamental to the effective actuation of circular city strategies. We argue that future research should strive to provide spatial data, avoid being siloed, and increase engagement with other sociopolitical fields to address the different needs of the relevant stakeholders for urban circularity.

We replicate a design ideation experiment (Goucher-Lambert et al., 2019) with and without inspirational stimuli and extend data collection sources to eye-tracking and a think aloud protocol to provide new insights into generated ideas. Preliminary results corroborate original findings: inspirational stimuli have an effect on idea output and questionnaire ratings. Near and far inspirational stimuli increased participants’ idea fluency over time and were rated more useful than control. We further enable experiment reproducibility and provide publicly available data.

No abstract

A design and build workshop is increasingly utilised at the Faculty of Architecture and Fine Arts, NTNU Trondheim as an integral part of the architectural education. Beginning in 2000, the first year students still start their education with a full-scale built assignment, resulting in 20-30 built structures in the university area each fall. Since 2005, this mentality has resulted in both award winning student-driven projects (e.g. Basulto 2010, Trestykker 2013, Studio Beta 2014, a national recognition for its pedagogy (NOKUT 2015) and the use of workshops as a pedagogic framework in masters level courses in architecture. This study concentrates on the latter.The design and build workshops in masters level courses evolve around a building task undertaken by the students and tutors, usually for an external client. While the courses last for a semester, the actual project can be organised in different ways. A long design period can be followed by a prefabrication period and finally assembly on-site, spanning the entire course. This study examines a short, dynamic variety, where students are required to both design and build the entire structure in the matter of 7-14 days, depending on the project. The workshop format is very intensive, often taking place in a remote location, requiring the students to set aside all other considerations and focus on the project. As an example, the Heggmoen Wilderness Shelter (Figure 1) was a 14-day workshop taking place at the Heggmoen, near Sjunkhatten National Park, Nordland, Norway. Finished in the fall of 2014, the students were required to live and build in the wilderness for the duration of the project, making their own food over a bonfire and sleeping first in tents, and as the shelter progressed, inside their own project. With no infrastructure on site, solving the basic living aspects of sheltering, cooking, drinking water, washing, bathing and recycling, based on their own experience and need, was the core issue informing the resulting architecture. The experience was understandably described as immersive by the students, but also a good learning experience, both professionally and personally.

Purpose Doctoral candidates possess specialized knowledge that could support sustainability transitions. Doctoral education, however, often focusses on discipline-specific topics and working methods, making it difficult to “see the bigger picture”. This summer school on wood construction gathered doctoral candidates from different fields to explore how solutions to complex sustainability issues could be found by working together across disciplines and by engaging multiple stakeholders. The purpose of this study is to report the pedagogical approaches taken and to understand whether these fostered the candidates’ ability to develop systemic solutions and professional competency. Design/methodology/approach Twenty doctoral candidates from various backgrounds participated in a two-week summer school organized by a consortium of four universities. Interdisciplinary groups worked on real-life challenges using a systemic approach to co-create tangible solutions. To support the creation of socio-technical innovations, stakeholders and experts from different fields were involved. The participants completed two questionnaires during the summer school to help elucidate their learning experiences. Findings The doctoral candidates showed strong willingness to cooperate across disciplines, though they found it important to connect this learning experience to their research. The candidates reported that the experience enhanced their ability to work in a multidisciplinary capacity. The experience identified a solid basis for interdisciplinary learning principles that could be replicated. Originality/value The summer school focussed on an innovative learning experience based on a systems thinking approach and the development of interdisciplinary capacity in the research-business ecosystem.