Sustainable Development, Architecture and Modernism: Aspects of an Ongoing Controversy

Abstract

In some discourses on sustainability, modernism in architecture is blamed for its technocratic beliefs that supposedly generated a lot of the social and environmental problems the world is facing today. At the same time, many architectural critics seem to be convinced that the present call for sustainability with its "green buildings", is but another screen behind which well-known old power structures hide. In this paper, we react to these viewpoints in different ways. First we clarify the issues that are haunting current architectural discourses by unraveling the logics behind the viewpoints of the critics of the "environmental doctrine" on the one hand and the technical environmentalists on the other hand. We will offer, secondly, a new framing to these debates by relying upon the modal sphere theory of the Dutch philosopher Herman Dooyeweerd. This new framing will allow us to reconnect, thirdly, with the discourse of modernism, which, we will argue, is all too often conflated with a technocratic paradigm-a partial, incomplete and even misleading representation. In conclusion, we present a different framing of modernism, which allows understanding of it as a multilayered and multifaceted response to the challenges of modernity, a response that formulated a series of ideals that are not so far removed from the ideals formulated today by many advocates of sustainability. We are, thus, suggesting that the sustainability discourse should be conceived as a more mature and revised version of the paradigm of modernism, rather than its absolute counterpoint.

We gain a lot…but what are we losing? A critical reflection on the implications of digital design technologies

“…This is well-aligned with the view that a stable, or bounded definition of sustainability in architecture, will reduce the process of design (i.e. sustainable design) to a series of managerial decisions around energy, water and feasibility (Cucuzzella and Goubran, 2020;Pyla, 2008;Vandevyvere and Heynen, 2014). Of course, a fuzzy definition always creates a more complex problem, which, in the context of digital tools, is harder to model, predict and compute.…”

Making the Invisible Visible: Eco-Art and Design against the Anthropocene

“…As new materials, technologies, and data are increasingly being considered staples of the future city, however, we are beginning to lose both our sight and sense of stewardship as to the primary causes of the planet's condition [2]. Artists, designers, and architects are realizing that sustainability is quickly moving towards a technocratic paradigm just as studies are showing that geoengineering our way out of the environmental crisis, as a method on its own, fails to show signs of real worldwide improvement [3,4].…”

The Sustainability of Egyptian Modern Architecture

“…Introduction In the sustainability discourse, modernist architecture is often blamed for the generation and perpetuation of irresponsible practices that negatively contribute to the environment. Vandevyere and Heynen argue that "the…discourse should be conceived as a…revised version of the paradigm of modernism" altogether, instead of pitting them against each other [1]. They recommend that modernism should not be conflated with technocratic paradigms and that sustainability avoid searching for a "singular optimal technological pathway" [1].…”

“…Vandevyere and Heynen argue that "the…discourse should be conceived as a…revised version of the paradigm of modernism" altogether, instead of pitting them against each other [1]. They recommend that modernism should not be conflated with technocratic paradigms and that sustainability avoid searching for a "singular optimal technological pathway" [1]. Despite ongoing efforts by academics and practitioners to deconstruct current notions of sustainability, sustainability is yet to integrate the rich contributions of modernism.…”