A2R+M Technological and Environmental Design of Architecture
Riccardo Pollo
SECTION I • Framework
Framework
Roberta Ingaramo, Maicol Negrello, Riccardo Pollo
FOUNDINGS
Regenerative Architecture � Roberta Ingaramo
Adapting by Nature � Maicol Negrello
Awareness And Change. From the Poly-crisis to the “Sustainable Project” � Riccardo Pollo
Deciphering the urban dimension of the EU green transition � Matteo Trane
Survival Through Design � Josep-Maria Garcia-Fuentes
Transformatory Practices: Adapting to Radical Change � Per-Johan Dahl
About time: Navigating temporalities in urban transformation � Caroline Dahl
ADAPTIVE SCIENTIFIC EMPIRICISMS
Experimenting with Adaptive Architecture: Tools for Climate-Responsive Design � Maicol Negrello, Anja Pejovic, Giuseppina Puglisi
Climate-proof facade. Research and innovation for designing future building skins � Matteo Giovanardi
Cities and urban extreme heat. How cities are tackling Heat Waves and Urban Heat Islands effects � Elisa Biolchini
ADAPTIVE ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN
Becoming the cultural shift: A collective of ‘synertects’ accelerating climate adaptation � Kristina Knauff
Landscape Architecture is our first line of defence � Michael Grove
Plants and the built environment � Antonio Girardi
Designing landscapes for our future � Andrea Balestrini, Marco Bellante
SECTION II • Face-to-face discussions
Face-to-face discussions. Dialogues between Theory and Practice
Maicol Negrello, Matteo Trane, Matteo Giovanardi
CARLO RATTI ASSOCIATI
SECTION III – Lessons Learned
A2R+M Lesson Learned from Architecture and Urban Design
Roberta Ingaramo, Maicol Negrello
A2R+M Lesson Learned from Technological and Environmental Design of Architecture
Riccardo Pollo
GENESIS
Roberta Ingaramo, Maicol Negrello, Riccardo Pollo
This volume is the outcome of an interdisciplinary research1 project started during the pandemic period, involving research groups from diverse disciplinary fields. The project integrated expertise from architectural and urban design, technological and environmental design of architecture, landscape architecture, urban planning, environmental sciences, and circular economy. This multidisciplinary approach enabled an investigation into architectural design at the urban district scale, expanding traditional perspectives to incorporate knowledge and methodologies from environmental sciences.
The Background
The research extended beyond purely theoretical inquiry to identify tools and design strategies that address the complexities of contemporary challenges. Bridging the gap between academic research and professional practice has been crucial for turning the scientific investigation into a genuine innovation catalyst. In this context, research is viewed as an ongoing interaction between theory and practice, shaped by innovation and enriched by experiences gained in both academic and professional settings. This approach has been progressively strengthened through a layering of experiences, where scientific and operational activities have influenced and reinforced one another.
1. The experience was shaped and enriched by two research groups from the DAD (Architecture and Design) and DIST (Regional and Urban Studies and Planning) departments at Politecnico di Torino, coordinated by professors Roberta Ingaramo and Riccardo Pollo.
Roberta Ingaramo, Maicol Negrello, Riccardo Pollo
It is, essential to promote a model of applied research that can effectively address global challenges such as climate change mitigation and urban regeneration. In this regard, active engagement with design practice has been crucial in our experience, facilitating an ongoing dialogue with internationally renowned professionals in architecture, urban planning, and landscape architecture. Through the seminars “Adaptive to Restist + Mitigate”, interviews and in-depth discussions conducted over more than four years, the research has benefited from the contributions of some of the world’s most prestigious architectural firms, including BIG, SLA, Henning Larsen, and GXN/3XN (Denmark); FELIXX and MVRDV (Netherlands); White Arkitekter (Sweden); Sasaki (USA and China), alongside prominent Italian firms such as Carlo Ratti Architetti, LAND, MCA – Mario Cucinella Architects, and Pininfarina. This direct engagement has allowed for the testing and refining of innovative design strategies, consolidating an interdisciplinary approach oriented towards field experimentation to address climate and urban challenges through adaptive and regenerative solutions. The conceptual framework of this volume has been further enhanced by the experience gained from the International Winter School “Regenerating European Rivers’ Territories” and the final international Seminar2. In Barcelona, collaboration with the Batlleiroig Arquitectura studio, known for its expertise in integrating landscape and urban infrastructure, provided innovative design insights, stimulating exchanges with other international entities, studios such as LAND and Mario Cucinella Architects, as well as national and regional institutions and the Municipality of Turin. One of the central themes of the research experimentation was the adaptation and resilient design along the Po River axis at the confluence with the Stura, an area undergoing significant urban transformation [1]. This site is set to host the new Metro Line 2 and the redevelopment of the Manifattura Tabacchi. In 2024, the project’s first phase has been selected following an international design competition3. The design scenarios realised focus on integrating disused or underused buildings, public spaces, urban ecology, and green infrastructure through adaptive reuse. This approach promotes a vision of the city as an evolving system that can adapt to environmental challenges. The research team from the DIST Department, coordinated by Riccardo Pollo, has investigated the role of design tools for mi-
2. This initiative was coordinated by Roberta Ingaramo and Maicol Negrello from the Politecnico di Torino, Enric Batlle and Javi Zaldivar from UPC, in collaboration with the Metropolitan Area of Barcelona (AMB), the Universitat Politècnica de Catalunya (UPC), and the European Master in Landscape Architecture (EMiLA) network.
The collection of contributions in this publication highlights how, in the current context of environmental and social crises, the design of the built environment is not merely tasked with introducing technical solutions to mitigate ecological impact but must also redefine the very culture and objectives of the design. The various research projects and experimental approaches presented and discussed outline a vision that transcends strictly disciplinary boundaries, fostering synergies among diverse fields of expertise to confront extreme climatic events, biodiversity loss, and rising urban inequalities.
In this framework, Ingaramo (Chapter 1) questions whether the issue is also one of language. The evolution of research within the discipline of design challenges some of the paradigms of the twentieth century, shifting the focus toward human-centred themes that prioritise wellbeing through ecological transition and the construction of a new approach to the design process, in which the human-nature interaction regains a central role. Within urban and architectural design, the green transition integrates notions of well-being, embracing an empathetic approach that becomes a foundational dimension of contemporary living and inhabiting. Architectural research now intersects with various disciplines, seeking adaptive and holistic strategies to reflect on emerging issues and propose viable solutions. In this evolving landscape, a renewed and dynamic language is essential to enrich the analytical depth and, more importantly, foster dialogue and innovation among professionals. Moreover, bridging the gap between specialists and external stakeholders is crucial, ensuring that design discourse remains accessible, inclusive, and impactful.
Negrello’s perspective (Chapter 2) underscores the imperative of embedding resilience as a foundational principle within adaptive architecture and regenerative urban design. The author advocates for a departure from static design paradigms, emphasising the necessity for dynamic and responsive systems that can adeptly accommodate climatic and societal transformations through integrating nature-based strategies, a concept long embedded in vernacular architecture. This paradigm shift, intensified by the escalating urgency of environmental crises, repositions architectural and urban design as proactive agents of ecological regeneration rather than instruments of unchecked expansion. Consequently, the contemporary design discourse must prioritise the interweaving of ecological networks and resilient infrastructures,
REGENERATIVE ARCHITECTURE
Roberta Ingaramo
Associate Professor, DAD, Politecnico di Torino
Iconic words
Different terms have been employed in architectural debate to emphasise the necessity for innovation and the redefinition of new priorities within the realm of architecture: theory and practice. Sustainability is one of them, serving as a central issue evidenced by numerous policies and metrics, including the U.S. Green Building Council’s (USGBC) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) rating system, the International Green Construction Code, the Green Building Initiative’s Green Globes, and the Living Building Challenge (Plowright & Adhija, 2015). While these protocols ensure the attainment of certifications – often supported by corresponding tax incentives or financial contributions for the project implementation – they do not guarantee the formal outcomes of projects. Instead, they guide decisions regarding materials, consumption, and efficient construction processes. The topic of sustainability extends beyond mere energy efficiency, the preservation of raw materials, and the encouragement of material reuse; it encompasses the holistic manner in which human beings live, inhabit spaces, and engage with environments, whether they be urban areas or more natural landscapes. This is not merely a disciplinary issue but one that permeates the entire research community, which must grapple with health, well-being, and ethics concerns. The disciplines within architecture, including landscape architecture, urban planning, and various branches of engineering, adopt different approaches and priorities in researching and discussing these common themes. They do not necessarily ascribe identical
meanings to specific terms, and they certainly offer diverse perspectives and solutions grounded in distinct methodologies and interpretative frameworks. This variation stems from disciplinary languages rooted in values, principles, and tools with historically divergent narratives and proposals. Nevertheless, some principles may be transferable and help bridge specificities that require integration and collaboration.
Hybridisations
Neuroscience, alongside sociology and philosophy, has opened new frontiers in design’s analytical and cognitive dimension, which cannot overlook a deep understanding of human dynamics to innovate thought and design action. Numerous studies, both in Italy and internationally, attest to this, such as the work of Davide Ruzzon1, director of the Master of Science in Neuroscience Applied to Architectural Design (NAAD) and founder of TUNED, within the Italian architectural firm Lombardini22. His research focuses on applying scientific knowledge in design, supported by neuroscientist Giacomo Rizzolatti, who discovered mirror neurons stemming from recent debates among architecture, philosophy, and sciences. “We do not perceive architecture as a photograph; it is not an instant visual perception. Rather, this dynamic navigation of space, in which we are immersed, influences us. It is a profound interaction within architecture” (Maccaferri, 2023).
The discourse on empathic architecture, as discussed by Paola Gregory (2024), is fascinating as it intersects theory and practice to create a multisensory, multidimensional, interactive, and synesthetic architecture. This approach enhances the relational essence of architecture itself. It emphasises our “involved body,” reflecting the poetic way we engage and attune ourselves with one another and the surrounding world (Bianchetti, 2020). Paola proposes four coordinates that frame the discussion within architecture: emotion –the foundation of empathetic relationships; affordance – interaction between agent and environment; embodiment – the body’s imprint that influences environmental perception; atmosphere – a medium between pre-categorical/reflexive experiences of interacting with the world. The empathic dimension aims to transcend individualism in favour of immersion in the subjective world of others in a dynamic
1. Davide Ruzzon, architect and director of the Master of Science Neuroscience Applied to Architectural Design, NAAD at the University of Architecture Iuav in Venice. He also founded TUNED, within the Italian architectural firm Lombardini22, a branch devoted to applying scientific knowledge to design. He is the editor of the magazine “Intertwining”, born in Italy to nourish the debate among architecture, philosophy, and sciences.
1-3. Biotope, designed by Henning Larsen, KeurK Architecture, Lille, picture by J. Callejas Sevilla, 2020 (courtesy of Henning Larsen).
process that seeks to transpose, interpret, and integrate otherness while overcoming self-referentiality and aesthetics.
Dario Costi (2023) echoes a previously explored idea of relational architecture through his concepts of “air, wind, light, atmospheres,” which invoke the welcoming and nurturing aspect of human interaction within shared spaces and public places (Marcus, 2015; Sherwood, 2019) with the mission of understanding, reconciling, and alleviating specific issues. Also Gardella and Culotta, Siza (2008), and Portoghesi (Alini, Portoghesi 2022) in their researches have defined an anthropocentric approach, discussing atmosphere, relational architecture, and poetic dwelling – ideas that have informed the studies on architecture in nature conducted by the Team at the Politecnico di Torino, led by Aimaro Oreglia d’Isola, in the early 2000s and beyond (I was involved with the Team).
An important reference in this field is the concept of “sensitive design,” which refers to designing environments that stimulate sensory perception, comfort, and emotional harmony. Authors such as Norman (2004) and Pallasmaa (1996, 2012) have contributed to the development of empathic design theory, emphasising the multisensory perception of spaces. Environmental psychology is one of the leading research areas related to empathic architecture. Studies like those by Gifford (2013), through the lens of environmental psychology, and Kaplan & Kaplan (1989), with their theory of environmental behaviour, explore how environments influence emotions through behaviour and well-being. These studies demonstrate that specific architectural designs can reduce stress, enhance productivity, and promote feelings of safety and belonging. This approach has now been included in the design of care spaces, where various research underscores the need for user-centred design and a relationship with nature, fostering environments that elicit positive emotional responses and promote tranquillity and security. The psychological and physiological benefits of an environment where patients can establish even only a visual connection with nature have been evidenced, as underlined by Ulrich, one of the leading experts in evidence-based healthcare design (Ulrich, 1984; 1999; 2006; Parsons, Hartig, 2000). The inter-relationship with a natural landscape for hospitalised patients can significantly expedite healing processes and reduce discharge times compared to patients in rooms with blank walls or lacking views of natural environments (Ulrich, 2004; 2008).
Well-being in common spaces and public areas is associated with social impact, recognised as an ultimate goal through specific awards, such as The ArchitectureAU Award for Social Impact in Australia, which aims to enhance and encourage projects with
positive effects on the community. An architectural project in “harmony with nature, as a common good” (Settis, 2010) that fosters emotional empathic reactions leads to a reduction in stress levels and facilitates personal interrelations (Ulrich et others 1991; Ulrich, 1983), resulting in increased uses of shared spaces.
The theme of well-being also reappears in the writings of Jeremy Till, who associates it with environmental conditions, addressing it from a holistic perspective through regenerative architectural and urban design. This approach aims to systematise intangible qualities such as legacy, social equity, and diverse cultures without neglecting the perceptions of inhabitants and city users.
“However, the risk of greenwashing is significant, manifested in a prevalent stylistic exercise that places trees on buildings of various sizes, often at the expense of an intentional and conscious spatial redefinition of our cities. This redefinition requires a deep understanding of the climate emergency to promote solutions that reconstruct ecological ties and relationships by designing new relational spaces” (Till, 2023).
The design of buildings prioritising adaptive reuse demands integration within the system, fostering continuity in courtyards, between buildings and structures through roof areas and in-between spaces. In this context, nature should not merely serve as a rhetorical justification for new constructions but as a tool that addresses needs, requirements, and expectations. This calls for tools that align scientific data and demand technical responses from experienced designers supported by multiple disciplinary foundations.
Biotope by Henning Larsen and KeurK Architecture (2020) is a significant 30,000-square-meter office project in Lille [1-3]; the “place of life” is integrated into a ring of gardens, parks, and forests
SURVIVAL THROUGH ARCHITECTURE FOUNDINGS
Josep-Maria Garcia-Fuentes
Associate Professor, Department of Architecture and Urban Studies, Politecnico di Milano; BMBR (@ bmbr.eu)
The history of architecture is the history of the cultural and technological mediation between human beings and their ecosystems. However, it is only with modernity and the abrupt disruptions created by humans and their greater needs that an endless shortage of certain living and non-living elements has unleashed the existing climate change as we currently understand it. This fact poses the main challenge that we are facing as humankind: to address this disruption as a matter of urgency to preserve biodiversity and ecological balance on planet Earth. Most importantly, to preserve human life is at stake in this threat. Despite the urgency of the situation, well-defined proposals on how to address it are yet to be agreed upon and, most importantly, implemented. The discussion on addressing this crisis is complex as it raises contradictory and encountered passions across multiple actors worldwide. Nevertheless, while it is undeniable that architecture alone cannot be the way to address this crisis, could architectural explorations help us to clarify some ideas and find proposals to deal with the current ecological crisis to forge a way forward? Indeed, the study of architectural history through the analysis of the architect’s concerns about the ideas of nature, the environment, and ecology is a key line of investigation in OE (Office of Enlightenment), the research studio of our professional architectural office BMBR. This innovative approach to the history of architecture is grounded upon extensive archival research aimed at revealing the copious evidence that architects have been aware of – and taking inspiration from – the contemporary debates in natural
sciences whilst shaping their architectural agenda. This connection is particularly important throughout modernity, though it has been mostly ignored in architectural histories. The evidence reveals that modern architecture’s history is the history of an ecological search for architecture. In OE we are interested in exploring these ideas within the current debates on architecture and ecology, researching the history of modern architecture as a great source of reference to think of architectural ways to address our current ecological crisis. How shall we approach this rigorous historical review? How shall we study the entangled connections across architectural and scientific debates on the idea of nature, the environment, and ecology? In which way could we analyse architecture as a component of its ecosystem? Still, and most importantly, what of these learnings can we mobilise within architecture today?
A Small Pond
In his Fundamentals of Ecology, the ecologist Eugene P. Odum states the best way to begin the study of an ecosystem is in a small pond (Odum, 1953). We must comprehend all the bonds between all living and non-living matter in the perfect circular process found within the world of the small pond. We can then increase the complexity of the exercise and expand our view to embrace the broader ecosystems containing the pond within them. If we advance further with this research, we will get closer to understanding the world of ecology as made up of many different entangled ecosystems of different scales, from the vastness of the planet and the universe to the small pond (Scalbert, 2014). All of them are entangled in an infinite sequence of full circles that bond together all lives and matters within them. Thus, ecology becomes rather an ecological thinking, as well as an ecological view of the world. It is enlightening that one of the most famous buildings in the history of modern architecture is a small pond –this is the best way to begin the study of an ecosystem, after all. The Penguin’s Pond was designed and built by Berthold Lubetkin, the Tecton Company, and the engineer Ove Arup for London’s Royal Zoological Society in the early 1930s. Yet this little building has been largely misunderstood in architectural historiography, as revealed by the constant reference to it as “the Penguin Pool”, despite the original name which we can see clearly in the early building photographs and in Lubetkin’s plans and drawings. The name ‘The Penguin’s Pond’ refers clearly to the ecological ideas underpinning Lubetkin’s research agenda in close collaboration with the scientist leading the Zoo ––including innovative medical, zoological, and biological scientists such as Chalmers Mitchell, Solly Zuckerman, and
servants. The prison is thus an artificial oasis, as is the case for all human-created oases’ in deserts. The role of interns cultivating the oasis is essential in their re-education to be inserted back in society at the end of their imprisonment. This duty teaches interns values of group work, job responsibility, and social cooperation while raising awareness of ecology, sustainability, and climate emergency, as it makes interns closer to understanding and appreciating their small immediate ecosystem. This educational role of the building is shared with the revolutionary panopticon as defined by Jeremy Bentham in the 18th century, but it adds an ecological perspective to it and updates all expected learning outcomes to fit the present society. Yet the building is designed in close connection to the panopticon, as combined with its contemporary and Romantic amusement counterpart: the panorama. In this way, rather than always feeling scrutinised as in Bentham’s model, in the Panopticon Oasis, interns are forced to always delve into their souls through the introspection fostered by the contemplation of a landscape. To this aim, individual cells are open completely to both the view of the desert’s outdoor landscape and the oasis’s inner view. Interns are forced to always contemplate both landscapes as a metaphor for their re-education and the goals they must achieve during their time in prison.
Plastic Rockery
From the oasis in the desert to the oasis in the city. This research through design has been explored in other projects by BMBR, such as in a design for a Temple in the historic centre of Rome. The building is conceived as a rockery folly in relation to both the urban space and the gardens opposite the street in Via Giulia – a
3. The interior oasis within the prison. Design Team: BMBR-OE, Aldric Rodríguez Iborra.
walled garden designed by Diener & Diener. Indeed, the proposed rockery hangs over the street to create a rockery within the existing garden. This is a unique rockery made up of melting all plastic waste generated in the city by the tourism industry. The plastic is melted to cast a hollowed brick, allowing light and air to pass through in selected spots. In contrast, the outdoor surface of the brick can be cast in a raw finish to allow the growth of vegetation, mould, and even small insects, as would be the case for a naturally formed rock. In this way, the ecosystem of the building, which develops many of the themes from the previous project –on the Panoramic Oasis– regarding, for example, its radical interior space and climatic management, is linked to other wider city and regional scale ecosystems. The disposal and recycling of plastic waste is a major challenge for current urban ecosystems, and the Plastic Rockery proposal can turn a vast quantity of waste into a truly architectural asset for the historic city –inspired by other projects, like Berlin’s The Berg by Jakob Tigges. It pushes the boundaries of what it means to recycle plastic and creates a type of intervention which could be replicated in other areas across Rome and elsewhere. Furthermore, the proposal achieves its ecological goals since the very first moment of its construction process, as it can create and host multiple ecosystems throughout the construction sequence. The structural integrity of the building is thus assured through the recycled plastic brick itself. Both the construction and
4. Section and plan of the Panopticon Oasis. Design Team: BMBR-OE, Aldric Rodríguez Iborra. (BMBR-OE)
ADAPTIVE SCIENTIFIC EMPIRICISMS
EXPERIMENTING WITH ADAPTIVE ARCHITECTURE: TOOLS FOR CLIMATE-RESPONSIVE DESIGN
Maicol Negrello
DAD, Politecnico di Torino
Anja Pejovic
DIST, Politecnico di Torino
Giuseppina Puglisi
CALOS- Campus Management, Logistics and Sustainability, Politecnico di Torino
Introduction
Climate change, marked by escalating global temperatures, increasingly frequent and severe weather events, and accelerating biodiversity loss, has emerged as one of the most pressing challenges of our time (IPCC, 2021). The built environment – which encompasses cities, towns, and infrastructures – is a significant contributor to environmental degradation and a primary victim of its adverse effects (United Nations, 2019). Indeed, urban areas, which house most of the global population, are particularly vulnerable to climate-related risks, including the intensification of urban heat islands, heightened flood susceptibility, and growing water scarcity (Grimm et al., 2018). These phenomena threaten the physical infrastructure, exacerbate social inequalities, and undermine public health and well-being (WHO, 2020).
In this context, architecture and urban planning must undergo a profound transformation. Traditional design paradigms, which are mostly anthropocentric, need to evolve towards a “more-than-human” approach that recognises the interconnectedness of human and non-human systems (Sterling et al., 2020). This perspective seeks to create environments that are not only sustainable but also regenerative, aiming at restoring ecosystems, enhancing biodiversity, and developing synergies between natural and built environments (Reed, 2007; Mang and Reed, 2012). Rather than focusing solely on mitigating negative impacts, this shift requires actively contributing to ecosystem health and fostering the well-being of all life forms. A promising approach to implementing these principles
Maicol Negrello, Anja Pejovic, Giuseppina Puglisi
lies in integrating nature-based solutions (NbS) into architectural and urban design. NbS leverages natural processes to address societal challenges and climate resilience while providing co-benefits such as improved air quality, environmental livability, perceived comfort and well-being, enhanced biodiversity, and strengthened social cohesion (IUCN, 2020; Kabisch et al., 2017). By incorporating green roofs, urban forests, permeable surfaces, and other ecological interventions, NbS offer pathways to mitigate climate impacts, reduce carbon footprints, and promote healthier coexistence between humans and their environment (Basu et al., 2020; Frantzeskaki et al., 2019). Indeed, the built environment’s contribution to climate change is substantial, accounting for a large share of energy consumption and related emissions (GlobalABC, 2019). Urbanisation processes frequently replace permeable natural landscapes with impermeable surfaces, intensifying urban heat island effects and amplifying flood risks (Santamouris, 2015; Oke et al., 2017). Urban heat islands can elevate city temperatures several degrees above nearby rural areas, increasing energy use for cooling and adversely affecting human health.
Meanwhile, impervious surfaces limit natural water infiltration, contributing to stormwater runoff, flash flooding, and diminished groundwater recharge (Shuster et al., 2008). Adopting a more-thanhuman approach in urban design entails acknowledging the agency and value of non-human entities in shaping urban ecosystems (Houston et al., 2018). Such an approach aligns with regenerative design principles, which seek not merely to do “less harm” but to improve environmental conditions actively (Cole, 2012; Du Plessis and Brandon, 2015). This regenerative ethos is essential for creating built environments that can adapt and thrive amid evolving climatic conditions. Nature-based solutions put into practice operationalise this regenerative paradigm. Green infrastructure elements – such as vegetated roofs, bioswales, and green corridors – help mitigate urban heat islands by providing shading and promoting evapotranspiration (Gill et al., 2007). Urban forests and green spaces enhance biodiversity, offer recreational opportunities, and contribute to physical and mental health benefits (Tzoulas et al., 2007). Permeable surfaces and vegetated areas reduce surface runoff, thus decreasing flood risk while supporting local hydrological cycles (Shuster et al., 2008).
This chapter examines these principles through the case study of the main campus of Politecnico di Torino, the so-called Cittadella. This urban campus provides a valuable opportunity to explore how NbS can be implemented to improve the urban microclimate, enhance the built environment’s ecological performance, and elevate
critical areas of the campus where immediate intervention was most needed, providing a foundation for strategically implementing targeted solutions. To address these vulnerabilities, the project proposes a suite of nature-based solutions designed to improve environmental performance and urban habitability simultaneously. Among the key interventions it is possible to include:
- extensive green roofs and green spaces, which provide enhanced thermal insulation for buildings, reducing energy demands for cooling while contributing to biodiversity by creating habitats for pollinators and other species;
- tree planting, where the strategic placement of shade trees reduces heat absorption by hardscapes such as sidewalks and plazas while improving air quality and acoustic comfort and providing aesthetic value;
- green facades, where vertical greening systems not only improve thermal performance by acting as natural insulators but also as biofilters for urban pollutants.
- Rain garden to collect water and improve the natural draining service of the soil, promoting water management in case of extreme cloudbust events.
To understand which solution or solutions could be implemented at Cittadella, a preliminary stage has been conducted to map the actual microclimatic conditions within the campus. Then, a second study stage consisted of modelling via ENVImet the possible solutions to obtain measurable environmental and energy benefits. Increasing vegetation cover fostered a more vibrant urban ecosystem that stimulated biodiversity. Beyond environmental metrics, the project also prioritised the social dimension of urban sustainability. Creating shared green spaces within Cittadella encourages social interaction, promotes physical activity, and enhances psychological well-being among its users, demonstrating the multifaceted value of integrating nature-based solutions in urban design.
Case study description
The main campus of Politecnico di Torino is composed of two parts – the main historical buildings located in Corso Duca degli Abruzzi and the more recently developed area of Cittadella Politecnica [2].
The main buildings, built in the 1950s and further expanded in the 1980s and 1990s, reflect a compact urban campus design. Such an area is characterised by long, narrow building segments separated by internal courtyards. These courtyards, while providing light and ventilation to the inside, contain minimal vegetation and are enclosed by low albedo surfaces, creating potential hotspots for heat
Maicol Negrello, Anja Pejovic, Giuseppina Puglisi
stress. Furthermore, not all the courtyards are accessible by all the Politecnico communities, but the departments’ staff mainly use them.
The expansion of the campus began in 1997, reconstructing and transforming part of the industrial complex into university spaces of Cittadella Politecnica. This area comprises more significant individual buildings and extensive open spaces, with a greater integration of greenery. Parts of this area are still under construction or renovation.
Microclimate simulation
Microclimatic conditions of the Politecnico di Torino central campus were analysed using the software ENVI-met 5.1. ENVI-met is a computational fluid dynamics (CFD) 3D microclimate simulation software based on the fundamental laws of fluid dynamics and thermodynamics (Sharmin et al., 2017). The software simulates different atmospheric processes, including airflow, air temperature, humidity, radiative fluxes, surface temperature, and turbulence, based on which it calculates different indices and factors of thermal comfort in the urban area (Lobacarro et al., 2021). ENVI-met is a widely used and verified tool in research on microclimate phenomena in urban areas.
The site area of 810 m x 810 m x 40 m was modelled in ENVI-met (Figure 3.a), with a grid size of 3 m x 3 m x 4 m. The microclimatic conditions were simulated for the hottest day of 2022, July 25, to capture peak thermal stress conditions. Hourly meteorological
2. Politecnico di Torino main campus.
CITIES AND URBAN EXTREME HEAT HOW CITIES ARE TACKLING HEAT WAVES AND URBAN HEAT ISLANDS EFFECTS
Extreme heat and health consequences
Climate change, combined with the growing drive for urbanisation, is changing people’s quality of life significantly, especially in terms of health and well-being. The context in which people live is one of the main factors that affect well-being and health. In recent decades, especially those living in cities, have been exposed to and have to face adverse and sometimes extreme weather conditions on a daily basis. Exposure to extreme heat events, for example, affects in a negative way both people’s physical and mental health as well as their behaviour (Tuholske et al., 2021). The most immediate and obvious manifestation of this problem, as numerous researchers recognise, is the increase in both mortality and morbidity due to extreme temperatures (Paravantis et al., 2017). It is important to stress that, as mentioned above, both the exposure to these events and their influence on people are not equal in the city and outside. Numerous studies have found that the increased health risks related to heat are higher for urban populations than those living outside the city (Heaviside et al., 2017).
The risks associated with extreme heat are becoming increasingly important as the phenomena that cause them are expected to become progressively long-lasting, severe and frequent. Urban Heat Islands (UHIs) and Heat Waves (HWs) are two important examples of these phenomena and mainly characterise cities (Zhu and Yuan, 2023).
UHI is the phenomenon by which the temperatures of the urban area are higher than the surrounding rural ones, which is intensified
Elisa Biolchini
DIST, Politecnico di Torino
by heat waves and urbanisation. This phenomenon is, in fact, exacerbated by some characteristics of the urban environment that differentiate it from suburban and rural areas, such as land surface materials and building geometries. As these factors contribute to higher urban temperatures, the health risks associated with extreme heat become more pronounced (Heaviside et al., 2017).
Heat Waves are events closely linked to the regional context in which they occur because various local factors play a significant role in determining their severity and duration. Two of the most widely used definitions identify Heat Waves as the summer periods of at least three consecutive days with maximum temperatures (Tmax) higher than or equal to 30° C or with deviations of the daily maximum temperature from the seasonal cycle higher or equal to 6° C. These extreme events, which occur more frequently and are of increasing duration and intensity, lead to increased mortality and morbidity, especially in vulnerable people such as those with previous health problems or the elderly (Kysely, 2004).
As reported in the literature, health risks related to heat are manifested through a worsening of existing fragility conditions, an increase in diseases, hospitalisations and mortality. Heat-related mortality occurs mainly due to stroke and severe respiratory problems. However, a wide range of other health problems commonly occur during extreme heat. The most common symptoms or conditions associated with extreme heat include dehydration, hyperthermia, heat cramps, heatstroke, fatigue and respiratory or cardiovascular diseases. Other chronic diseases, such as kidney disease, are also exacerbated during periods of extreme heat (Richardson et al., 2009; Zhu and Yuan, 2023).
Factors influencing heat-related risks
Numerous factors can influence and amplify the effect that extreme heat may have on the health and well-being of delete individuals or groups of people, making them more vulnerable. Research is working hard to understand these factors, by analysing personal characteristics and those of the environment (Lulla et al., 2015). Many physical, social and economic variables can greatly vary its effects. Inequalities may be caused by environmental factors, or they may be linked to the individual characteristics of people (Tomlinson et al., 2011).
Environmental conditions and characteristics, both indoor and outdoor, can influence vulnerability (Lulla et al., 2015) and determine a variation in heat exposure (Bernetti et al., 2020). There are normally considerable differences between the incidence and effect that extreme heat can have on different cities with different
2-3. Typology of the vulnerability of inhabitants to the UHI in Amsterdam: elderly and infants (Van Der Hoeven and Wandl, 2015).
ADAPTIVE ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE IS OUR FIRST LINE OF DEFENCE
Michael Grove
Senior partner and Chair of Landscape Architecture, Civil Engineering, and Ecology at SASAKI
The design community’s response to COVID-19, much like our reactisustainability issuesbility, tends to gravitate toward silver bullet solutions rather than the necessary incremental change. At the onset of the pandemic, our hubris and desire to manage mother nature guided us to focus on human-centric solutions to our predicament: advancing sensor technology to limit our need to touch door handles and elevator buttons; designing buildings to be flexible such that they can serve as temporary triage centers or hospitals; expanding our urban parks so city dwellers have more recreational opportunities post-quarantine because of our renewed appreciation of the outdoors. These were all interesting ideas, but they are bandaids on a gaping wound. Until we stop disrupting ecosystems and thus reducing biodiversity, our efforts are superficial. Instead, there are four fundamental areas that the collective design professions should be focusing on, and which landscape architects have the unique skillset to lead. These include 1) championing habitat conservation; 2) fighting climate change; 3) advocating for responsible urbanization and limiting sprawl; and 4) supporting advanced agriculture. To be clear, I am not suggesting that landscape architects are going to single-handedly solve climate change or prevent the emergence of new viruses. But if we, as a species, aim to limit our potential future exposure, landscape architecture plays a vital role.
Championing Habitat Conservation
By the end of the 21st century, the Center for Biological Diversity estimates that more than 50% of the planet’s species will be extinct.
A recent report by the United Nations calculates that over 1 million distinct species are already at the brink of extinction. What all this means is that the Earth is currently losing animal species at 1,000 to 10,000 times the natural rate. Unlike the mass extinctions of the past which can be traced to external disturbances like a giant asteroid striking the planet, our current extinction crisis is entirely caused by our actions as humans. Disturbances are ubiquitous in nature, and changes are critical to many vital biogeochemical processes. Most ecosystems can withstand disturbances until a certain threshold is reached, whereby irreversible changes may lead the ecosystem to a fundamentally different state or even collapse. The theory that nature is permanently in balance has been largely discredited in the late 20th century. What becomes difficult to predict with perfect accuracy, however, is exactly how ecosystems will respond. Habitat destruction and biodiversity loss doesn’t only occur when we cut down tropical rainforests, though preserving rainforests is one of the most important things we can do at this moment in time. Also, COVID-19 is not the first disease to crossover from animal to human populations, but is likely a harbinger of more mass pandemics and further disruptions to the global economy. In fact, the World Health Organization notes that approximately 75% of emerging infectious diseases in humans are zoonotic, meaning that they are transmitted to us through contact with animals.
The initial emergence of many of these zoonotic diseases have been tracked to the parts of the world with the greatest biodiversity, both in the traditional and man-made sense. Traditional locations include tropical rainforests where biodiversity naturally occurs. Human-influenced conditions include places like bushmeat markets in Africa or the wet markets of Asia, where we are unnaturally mixing trapped exotic animals with humans, often in astonishingly unsanitary conditions. When we assault the wild places that harbor so much biodiversity, we are disregarding a significant aspect of this biodiversity – the unseen domain of undocumented viruses and pathogens. These microbes are not naturally human pathogens. They become human pathogens because we offer them that opportunity. Natural ecosystems are not what pose the threat – the human activity that disrupts these systems is the real culprit. By teaming up with ecologists, conservation scientists, and citizen action groups, landscape architects and allied designers have a pivotal role to play in promoting conservation as unequivocally the most important pillar of the design professions, far above the artistry or craftsmanship that we promote in our professional photographs and design magazines.
Fighting Climate Change
Humanity’s purposeful destruction of the planet’s biodiversity is even more devastating to planetary balance in the era of rapid climate change. What were once stable ecosystems for millennia are transforming quicker than the species that live in them can adapt, leading to displacement and increased contact with humans. The impact is shockingly simple and linear. Droughts, floods, glacial melting, and forest fires each contribute to the accelerated displacement of millions of species. This shift leads to closer contacts between humans and wildlife, often inflicting trauma on the animal populations. Stressed animals, just like humans, become immunocompromised and thus more susceptible to disease, and more likely to shed higher viral loads. This increases the risk of spreading new diseases to the livestock or humans with which they come into contact. The result is well-documented. Recent outbreaks of Ebola are linked to deforestation and encroaching human settlement throughout West Africa. The emergence of various avian influenzas have been traced to intensive chicken farming where crowded, unhygienic conditions elevated stress levels in the associated poultry population. Preliminary research into COVID-19 has led scientists to hypothesize that this latest coronavirus may have emerged from bats or pangolins due to a resemblance in its molecular structure to related viruses found in those species. This risk of pathogens emerging due to climate change isn’t limited only to the tropics, or to unsanitary markets in developing
1. Chengdu Panda Reserve, SASAKI.
countries. Recently, researchers announced the discovery of 28 previously unknown viruses entombed for 15,000 years within a melting glacier in Tibet. As the planet continues to warm, it is conceivable that even more pathogens like these could be released into the environment, with unpredictable consequences. Unfortunately, the image of an emaciated polar bear no longer tugs at our collective heartstrings. And why would it? Humans, just like any other species, are focused on our own survival first. Now is the time to shift the climate and environmental advocacy narrative from one of compassion to one of fear. You may not be able to imagine how your grandchildren’s lives will be impacted by a six-foot rise in sea levels, but when your own existence (and economic stability) is challenged by a deadly virus, you demand action – and fast. Humans are the ultimate umbrella species. If we can convince ourselves that saving the planet’s biodiversity will prevent the next outbreak, we may have a chance.
As a profession, landscape architecture has already demonstrated our value through resiliency plans to accommodate urban flooding and sea level rise. What comes next is a shift of our focus from protecting the built urban realm to a more holistic, reparative approach – a shift from adaptation towards mitigation. For the sake of the survival of our own species, landscape architects and allied designers must use our collective professional voice and commit to no longer working on greenfield sites, and instead focus on restoring our rural and peri-urban environments to pre-development conditions.
2. Wuhan Yangtze Riverfront Park, SASAKI. The promenade is designed to rise and fall with the river where floodable plazas reveal themselves to accommodate a variety of uses when water levels are low.
SECTION II
Face-to-face discussions. Dialogues between Theory and Practice
Maicol Negrello
Matteo Trane
Matteo Giovanardi
A distinctive feature of this work lies in its intention to bridge theory and practice through a multidisciplinary approach to inform design for landscapes, cities, and districts. The approach is further enriched by in-depth interviews with leading experts. Architects, urban planners, engineers, and internationally recognized sustainability and climate change researchers share their experiences, shedding light on some of our most urgent global challenges. Their accounts reflect the theoretical principles guiding their design decisions, the real-world complexities they face in practice, and the innovative solutions they devise to navigate those complexities. Incorporating interviews provides a lighter yet vivid narrative beyond standard practice. In hearing directly from practitioners, readers gain a sense of the daily realities of design work, the pressing deadlines, the opportunities and constraints by evolving policies, and the creative ways teams address unanticipated obstacles. These first-hand testimonies reveal how theory and practice converge, highlighting the many forms of collaboration that shape contemporary architecture and urban design. Focusing on conceptual foundations and actual implementation, the text underscores how each project is an ongoing negotiation between visionary ideas and tangible constraints. The following interviews are structured around three thematic questions posed directly to the experts. The first examines the complexity of global warming, arguing that it is a multifaceted phenomenon that requires systemic strategies combining climate change mitigation and adaptation. What contributions could architectural and landscape design make in confronting and resisting climate change, especially in contexts where sea levels are rising, heat waves are intensifying, and extreme weather events are becoming more frequent? The second question explores the effects of the current poly-crisis, where environmental, social, and economic stresses occur simultaneously, forcing professionals to rethink traditional design paradigms. How do designers adapt their methods when facing overlapping challenges such as housing shortages, social inequality, and environmental degradation? Finally, the third question invites professionals to share examples of best practices that, in their view, stand as manifestos or guiding principles for integrating adaptation, mitigation, and resilience into the core of design processes. These interviews clarify that architecture and urban design can no longer be confined to a single discipline or a narrow set of technical competencies. Successful responses to climate change are inherently collaborative, cross-scale and multi-actors. They demand knowledge from
CARLO RATTI ASSOCIATI
Carlo Ratti
Global warming is a multifaceted issue requiring a systemic approach that combines climate adaptation and mitigation. What role can architectural and landscape design play in addressing and resisting climate change?
The building sector accounts for around 50% of global energy consumption, which means that architects and designers are in the driving seat for controlling emissions –and hence for mitigation. The materials we use, the technological systems we deploy, the behaviours we incentivize – all of this will greatly impact the sustainability of tomorrow’s cities. Given that the refurbishment of the built stock progresses very slowly (around 2% a year) no time should be lost; design decisions today will have an impact over many decades to come.
Furthermore, architects and designers can play a significant role in terms of adaptation. This includes protection against flooding, adjustment for rising sea levels and in the alleviation of extreme temperatures. For the latter, there is a very simple strategy based on better integrating green and permeable surfaces in our cities – with their effect both on the shading of incoming radiation and on air cooling through evapotranspiration.
What are the main impacts of the current polycrisis condition, in which environmental, social, and economic domains are under constant stress, on your practice?
Speaking of the contemporary challenges we are facing, they not only affect different
aspects of our society but also manifest themselves at different scales – local, national, and global – demanding specific solutions from various communities. For this reason, I would say we need to move beyond the 20th-century myth of the “Promethean” architect. The misplaced assumption that designers are allknowing is a key roadblock, often preventing meaningful innovations from materializing in cities.
What I think we need instead is what we could call “choral architects” – i.e. professionals who can assemble and mobilize stakeholders from a wide range of social backgrounds and disciplines, making them work together (or “sing”) harmoniously in initiatives tailored for particular urban conditions. This means today’s architects should also be conversant in many topics and understand what new tools they have at their disposal to realize innovative ideas. We describe this concept in more detail in our book “Open-Source Architecture”.
Could you provide the best practices you consider to be a manifesto for addressing climate adaptation, mitigation, and resilience through design?
First of all, I believe that the urgency of the climate crisis requires radical interventions. That often means that we need to explore experimental ideas that have no precedent or reference points. In other terms, projects should be developed less as “best practice” to become templates for risk minimization than as “moonshots” to imagine and inspire new solutions with the potential to better address climate problems than pre-existing strategies.
Regarding our projects, I would mention Hot Heart, our winning design for the Helsinki Energy Challenge launched by the municipality of Helsinki. It consists of ten giant basins storing heat offshore. The water stores thermal energy converted from renewable sources such as wind power – notoriously intermittent and, in case of overproduction available at low or even hostile prices – and then releases it into the system when needed. In addition, the project uses a small portion of the heat stored in the thermal basins to heat the structures above it. Under a thin, semitransparent geodesic dome, a recreational zone will be created, heated and lit all year
round, making it a tropical archipelago in the middle of the Baltic Sea, accessible by boat to locals and tourists.
By organising the contest, former Helsinki mayor Jan Vapaavuori showed the international community – with distinctively Finnish discretion – how to set an innovative goal and craft an innovative process to get there. It is not unlikely that more and more metropolises would adopt the “moonshot” approach and if that is the case, the world might have unlocked a valuable resource in the battle to mitigate or even eradicate the effects of climate change.
Credit: CRA- Carlo Ratti Associati
SLA
Mette Skjold Partner and CEO
Global warming is a multifaceted issue requiring a systemic approach that combines climate adaptation and mitigation. What role can architectural and landscape design play in addressing and resisting climate change?
“In SLA, we have a saying that our projects should never be seen as isolated masterpieces. Instead, we see them as a continuous ambition to solve some of the biggest challenges facing our Earth today: From climate crisis and biological mass extinction to social inequality and the growing gap between humans and nature. These are the issues we constantly try to address. Regarding climate adaptation, we aim our nature-based design solutions to provide mitigation and relief for as many issues as possible. In cities and residential areas, they range from stormwater management, heat-island mitigation, droughts, and flooding prevention (when in coastal or river areas) to micro-climate optimization for people, biodiversity improvements for trees and plants, and fauna passages and habitats for animals, bees, and insects. All these issues will work together to provide future-proof cities and cities that add livability, life quality, and meaning today.”
What are the main impacts of the current polycrisis condition, in which environmental, social, and economic domains are under constant stress, on your practice?
“In SLA, we try to simultaneously combat and mitigate the effects of the ongoing crises that are facing our societies. Both by using
(and not-using!), recycling, and upcycling materials that provide as small a carbon footprint as possible – and that optimally create projects that are regenerative and climate and biodiversity-positive. But also by mitigating the effects we undoubtedly will see and feel as result of the new climate – and these effects are both environmental, social, and economic.
In a way, you can almost say that our work is about getting the most out of the current crisis situation: To prevent and mitigate the worst effects of the poly-crisis condition while trying to increase the overall livability and urban quality of our future cities in this new climatic, social, and economic reality. While we, of course, aim to minimize climate change as much as possible.
To address this polycrisis condition, we have developed a design approach that is distinctly interdisciplinary. We combine deep anthropological knowledge and rigorous biological research with design expertise and high artistic ambitions. As such, our design process is a continuing exploration of science and art, of research and creativity, of strong business cases and generous social commitment, of functional problem-solving and livable and enjoyable everyday life. It’s a complementary approach that drives everything we do. Our ambition is to create poetic and sensuous projects that solve today’s biggest urban challenges, provide value for our clients, create genuine life quality for all, and put all things living – people, cities, animals, and plants – first.”
Could you provide the best practices you consider to be a manifesto for addressing climate adaptation,
mitigation, and resilience through design?
“A recent project worth highlighting is our Al Fay Park, a new type of urban forest park in Abu Dhabi. Through extensive research in the region’s flora and fauna, we have created a new paradigm for how to think and design the public realm in the Middle East. Al Fay Park is a celebration of Abu Dhabi’s native nature and culture and a prime example of how to maximize climate action, increase life quality, and radically improve the biodiversity of a city – all on a former barren sand site.
We have planted more than 2,000 native trees and bushes in Al Fay Park – including the national Ghaf trees that have been replanted
from desert nurseries into the park – all specifically chosen to strengthen biodiversity for both plants and wildlife and to maximize natural cooling throughout the park. The resulting microclimate reduces traffic noise and temperature and creates a distinct forest-like environment. The specifically designed sloping park entrances funnel the cooler southern breeze down into the park while local grasses and bushes reduce sand infiltration.
As such, Al Fay Park is specifically designed to provide both biological, environmental, and social benefits. The density of the trees, the soil design, the irrigation using solely recirculated water, and the sole use of native species not only ensure that the park has radically reduced its irrigation by 40 percent compared to conventional parks. The planting has also attracted bees, pollinators, birds, and animals, providing a lush and lively atmosphere in the middle of Abu Dhabi. Lastly, the microclimate design provides the best possible social ecosystem for play, sports and leisure – making Al Fay Park both socially and climatically ‘the coolest place in town’. Also worth highlighting is our combined climate adaptation and public space project ‘Sankt Kjelds Square and Bryggervangen,’ which is Copenhagen’s largest and greenest cloudburst adaption project to date. Here we have enhanced biodiversity, increased the health and the quality of life for the local citizens, reduced air pollution, and reduced the urban heat island effect – all the while future-proofing the area from torrential rainfall.
The project secures the neighborhood from flooding by containing and delaying rainwater in numerous specially designed green urban
LESSONS LEARNED FROM ARCHITECTURE AND URBAN DESIGN
Roberta Ingaramo, Maicol Negrello
Regenerative architecture and urban design are shaping new paradigms within the architectural discipline beyond merely mitigating human transformation’s impact on the environment, they seek to actively contribute to, reinforce, and support our built environment’s ecological and social regeneration through an interspecies design perspective (Reed, 2017; Camrass, 2021; Du Plessis, 2012; Ingaramo cap.1). This evolving approach is supported by expanding paths of research of research, with scholars continuously developing new methodologies, techniques, and tools to advance this mission. The field is constantly evolving, with new strategies emerging daily to facilitate the integration of regenerative principles into architecture and urban design research and practice.
One example is the LAND office, which enhances the technical dimension of design through its Landscape Information Modeling® (LIM). This innovative tool quantifies the environmental and economic benefits of green infrastructure, positioning itself as more than just a design instrument – it acts as a strategic framework that aligns ecological advantages with measurable social and economic impacts. By incorporating models such as Natural Capital Accounting, LAND underscores that integrating nature into urban planning is a moral imperative and a strategic investment in a sustainable future. These data-driven methodologies serve as a crucial interface between policy, economics, and design, making the value of nature both tangible and actionable.
Technology emerges as a key catalyst for urban transformation. The Urban Lounge project by Pininfarina exemplifies how design innovation and circular economy principles can improve urban
Roberta Ingaramo, Maicol Negrello
microclimates without significantly increasing costs. By blending passive and active climate strategies with advanced manufacturing techniques, Urban Lounge demonstrates how site-specific and sustainable interventions can effectively address global environmental challenges. The integration of recycled materials, such as repurposed car bumpers transformed into structural components, highlights the potential of circular design processes to redefine material uses in urban contexts.
Similarly, Ratti’s Hot Heart project in Helsinki showcases the transformative role of technology in bridging environmental sustainability with community engagement. The project challenges conventional urban planning paradigms by reimagining energy storage infrastructure as an opportunity for public interaction and social cohesion. It integrates renewable energy systems with multifunctional public spaces, demonstrating the potential of “moonshots” – radical, visionary interventions – to address pressing climate challenges while fostering new urban living models. The dual-purpose nature of Hot Heart, serving both as an energy hub and a recreational space, illustrates how infrastructure can be redefined as a cultural and ecological asset, positioning multifunctionality at the core of sustainable urban development.
However, MVRDV argues that climate resilience is beyond merely a technical challenge; it signifies a profound cultural transformation. Projects such as Sea2City in Vancouver illustrate how design can reshape collective perceptions, fostering a vision in which nature and urbanity are seamlessly integrated. MVRDV transforms design into a catalyst for awareness and collective action by engaging local communities in participatory decision-making. The project’s integration of Indigenous knowledge systems further underscores the importance of incorporating diverse epistemologies and traditions in formulating adaptive urban strategies.
The application of Nature-Based Solutions (NBS) emerges as a proactive tool for spatial regeneration (Negrello, 2024), as demonstrated in the work of Felixx. Their approach transforms passive and inert spaces into productive landscapes, not only as a climate mitigation strategy but as a manifesto for the synergy between design and nature, as discussed in the chapter Adapting by Nature (Negrello). The Icelandic reforestation project serves as a compelling call to action, encouraging cities to integrate blue-green infrastructure within their urban frameworks while influencing public policy. This methodology transcends aesthetics and functionality, redefining the perception and valuation of nature within urban contexts and fostering coexistence and regeneration at multiple levels. The behavioural shifts induced by such interventions – such as increased
