Characterizing sustainability aesthetics of buildings and environments: methodological frame and pilot application to the hybrid environments

Aurelija Daugelaite; Huriye Armagan Dogan; Indre Grazuleviciute-Vileniske

doi:10.22616/j.landarchart.2021.19.06

Authors

Aurelija Daugelaite Kaunas University of Technology
Huriye Armagan Dogan Kaunas University of Technology
Indre Grazuleviciute-Vileniske Kaunas University of Technology

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22616/j.landarchart.2021.19.06

Keywords:

sustainability aesthetics, hybrid environments, biophilic design, regenerative design, genius loci

Abstract

Growing environmental awareness and emerging design and performance requirements related with the implementation of sustainability goals inevitably have an influence on construction, architecture, urban design and the development of our built environment in general. This influence is reflected both in the increasingly efficient ecological performance of built structures and the growing array of related technologies, and in the aesthetic expression of these environmentally conscious designs. The aesthetic expression of sustainability concept and values is sometimes referred to as sustainability aesthetics. The aim of this research is to develop and test a methodological framework for characterizing the sustainability aesthetics of the built environments. The elaborated methodological framework integrates biophilic design, sustainability aesthetics, regenerative design and genius loci as the most promising approaches, allowing the integration of human and environmental concerns. To test the framework, we selected historic built environments that reflect long-lasting sustainable co-existence between humans and their environment and represent hybrid characteristics of both architectural and urban space. One of the purposes selecting these environments for the case study was to determine the features of an organically evolved sustainability aesthetics that could become a valuable source of inspiration for architectural design and management of the built environments.

Author Biographies

Aurelija Daugelaite, Kaunas University of Technology

PhD student; Kaunas University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Studentu st. 48, LT-51367 Kaunas, Lithuania. E–mail: aurelijai@gmail.com

Huriye Armagan Dogan, Kaunas University of Technology

Dr.; scientific researcher; Kaunas University of Technology, Institute of Architecture and Construction, Tunelio st. 60, LT-44405 Kaunas, Lithuania; huriye.dogan@ktu.edu

Indre Grazuleviciute-Vileniske, Kaunas University of Technology

dr.; associated professor; Kaunas University of Technology, Faculty of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Studentu st. 48, LT-51367 Kaunas, Lithuania. E–mail: indre.grazuleviciute@ktu.lt

References

Almhafdy, A., Ibrahim, N., Ahmad, S, S., Yahya, J. Analysis of the courtyard functions and its design variants in the Malaysian hospitals. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences. 2013, 105, p. 171 – 182.

Berardi, U. Clarifying the new interpretations of the concept of sustainable building. Sustainable Cities and Society. 2013, 8, p. 72–78.

Bond, M. The hidden ways that architecture affects how you feel. BBC Futures. 2017. [online 07.07.2021] https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20170605-the-psychology-behind-your-citys-design

Browning, W., Ryan, C. and Clancy, J. 14 patterns of biophilic design: Improving health & well-being in the built environment. 2014. [online 07.07.2021] https://www.terrapinbrightgreen.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/14-Patterns-of-Biophilic-Design-Terrapin-2014p.pdf

Cambridge Online Dictionary. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press. [online 07.07.2021] https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/courtyard

Coburn, A., Vartanian, O., Kenett, Y., Nadal, M., Hartung, F., Hayn-Leichsenring, G., Navarrete, G., González-Mora, J., Chatterjee, A. Psychological and neural responses to architectural interiors. Cortex. 2020, 126. [online 07.07.2021] DOI:10.1016/j.cortex.2020.01.009.

Cole, R. J. Building Environmental Assessment Methods: Clarifying Intentions. Building Research & Information. 1999, vol. 27, No. 4-5, p. 230-246. [online 07.07.2021] DOI:10.1080/096132199369354

Cucuzzella C. Is Sustainability Reorienting the Visual Expression of Architecture? RACAR: revue d'art canadienne / Canadian Art Review Vol. 40, No. 2, Design Studies in Canada (and beyond) / Les études du design au Canada (et au-delà). 2015, p. 86-100.

Culture: the Fourth Pillar of Sustainable Development. United Cities and Local Govermenets. 2010.

Delancey, C. Architecture can save the world: building and environmental ethics. The Philosophical Forum. 2004, 35, 147–159. [online 07.07.2021] DOI:10.1111/j.0031-806X.2004.00167.x.

Di Carlo, I. The aesthetic of sustainability: systemic thinking in the evolution of cities. WIT Transactions on Ecology and The Environment. 2014, 191, p. 27–38.

Duarte Dias B. Regenerative Design - new role for the built environment. CITAD - Research Centrefor Territory Architecture and Design, Lisbon, Portugal. 2013.

Du Plessis, Ch. Towards a regenerative paradigm for the built environment. Building Research & Information 1(40). 2012. p. 7-22. [online 07.07.2021] DOI:10.1080/09613218.2012.628548.

Dekay, M. Five levels of sustainable design aesthetics. Perceiving and appreciating developmental complexity. In: 28th International PLEA Conference on Sustainable Architecture + Urban Design: Opportunities, Limits and Needs - Towards an Environmentally Responsible Architecture proceeding. 2012, p. 7–12.

Edwards, B., Sibley, M., Hakmi, M., Land, P. Courtyard housing: past, present and future. Spon Press. 2006.

Fisher, J. C., Bicknell, J.E., Irvine, K.N., Fernandes, D., Mistry, J., Davies, Z.G. Exploring how urban nature is associated with human wellbeing in a neotropical city. Journal of Landscape and Urban Planning. 2021, p. 212.

Hes, D., Rose, N. Shifting from farming to tending the earth: A discussion paper. Journal of Organics. 2019, 6(1), p. 3-21.

Grazuleviciute-Vileniske, I., Viliunas, G., Daugelaite, A. The Role of Aesthetics in Building Sustainability Assessment. Spatium. 2021.

Iqbal, T., Rani, W.N.M.W.M. and Wahab M.H. Regenerating the Identity in Historic Waterfront: A Case Study of Central Market Waterfront, Kuala Lumpur. 1st International Conference on Urban Design and Planning IOP science, Indonesia. 2019, р. 1-11. [online 07.07.2021] DOI: 10.1088/1755-1315/409/1/012001

Istiadji, A.D., Hardiman, G., Satwiko, P. What is the sustainable method enough for our built environment? IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science. 2018, p. 213. [online 07.07.2021] DOI:012016. 10.1088/1755-1315/213/1/012016.

Kagan S. Aesthetics of sustainability: a transdisciplinary sensibility for transformative practices. Transdisciplinary Journal of Engineering & Science. 2011, vol. 2, p. 65-73.

Kellert S., Heerwagen J.H., Mador, M.L. Biophilic Design: the theory, science, and practice of bringing buildings to life. Wiley. 2013, p. 432.

Kernan, W.D., Basch, C. H., Cadorett, V. 2017. Using Mind Mapping to Identify Research Topics: A Lesson for Teaching Research Methods. Pedagogy in Health Promotion. 2(4) https://doi.org/10.1177/2373379917719729

Krčmářová, J. The biophilia hypothesis can be perceived as an interesting manifestation of the greening of science. Klaudyán: Internet Journal of Historical Geography and Environmental History. 2009, vol. 6/2009, No. 1–2, p. 4–17.

Lindal, P. J., Hartig, T. Architectural variation, building height, and the restorative quality of urban residential streetscapes. Journal of Environmental Psychology. 2013, 33, p. 26–36. [online 07.07.2021] DOI: 10.1016/j.jenvp.2012.09.003

Ode, A., M.S. Tveit, G. Fry. Capturing landscape visual character using indicators: touching base with landscape aesthetic theory. Landscape Research. 2008, 33:1, p. 89 – 117.

Owen C., K. Dovey. Fields of Sustainable Architecture. The Journal of Architecture, 2008, 13,1, p. 9–21.

Ramzy, N. Sustainable spaces with psychological connotation: Historical architecture as reference book for biomimetic models with biophilic qualities. International Journal of Architectural Research. 2015, p. 248–267.

Robinson, J., Cole, R.J. Theoretical underpinnings of regenerative sustainability. Building Research & Information. 2015, p. 43, 133–143. [online 07.07.2021] DOI: 10.1080/09613218.2014.979082

Stauskas, V. Kai kurie šiuolaikinės architektūrologijos aspektai. Town Planning and Architecture. 2009, 33, p. 270-278.

Stepanchuk, A., Gafurova, S., Latypova M. Genius Loci as a resource for the development of historical areas of the city. IOP Conf. Series: Materials Science and Engineering 890. IOP Publishing. 2020, 012013. [online 07.07.2021] DOI:10.1088/1757-899X/890/1/012013

Shrivastava, P. Enterprise Sustainability 2.0: Aesthetics of Sustainability. Pratima Bansal and Andrew J. Hoffman (Eds.) The Oxford Handbook of Business and the Natural Environment, 2012. [online 07.07.2021] https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199584451.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780199584451-e-35

Tattersall, C. Watts, A., Vernon, S. Mind mapping as a tool in qualitative research. Nursingtimes, 2007, vol. 103, issue: 26, p. 32-33

Vecco M. Genius loci as a meta-concept. Journal of Cultural Heritage, Volume 41, 2020, p.225-231. [online 07.07.2021] DOI:10.1016/j.culher.2019.07.001.

Viliūnas G., Gražulevičiūtė-Vileniškė, I. Darni architektūra: tarp paveldo ir inovacijų. Student scientific conference, 2021.

Al Waer, H., Sibley, M. Building Sustainability Assessment Methods: Indicators, Applications, Limitations and Development Trends. Proceedings of Conference on Sustainable Building South East Asia, 11-13 April 2005, Malaysia, pp. 530 - 543.

Wilson E. O. Biophilia and conservation ethics. In: Kellert S. and Wilson E. O. (eds.) The Biophilia hypothesis. Shearwater Books, Washington, 1993, p. 31.

Wines, J. Green Architecture. Taschen, Koln, 2002, p. 40.

Zafarmand, S. J., Sugiyama, K., Watanabe, M. Aesthetic and Sustainability: The Aesthetic Attributes Promoting Product Sustainability. The Journal of Sustainable Product Design, 2003. [online 07.07.2021]. DOI: 173-186. 10.1007/s10970-005-6157-0.