The Innovative Environmentalist

The Innovative Environmentalist An insight into Arkitrek’s sustainable practice model for a time of environmental crisis in Borneo.

Lewis Kelly s0934972 The University of Edinburgh

Preface I reflect on my first invitation into the world of the development architect. A steamy backdrop of nature in luxuriant abundance set the scene for what would be my introduction to the inconclusive debates and controversies present in the search for sustainable design.

I refer to an architectural internship with Arkitrek in Malaysian Borneo. Based between the urban modernity of Kota Kinabalu and the jungle-fringed village of Tinangol, I was given fascinating insight into Malaysia’s current social and environmental problems, myself a small part of one firm’s vision and response to the crisis.

I was involved in a project to construct a kindergarten for the local Rungus people - a small ethnic group with a rich heritage of elegant wooden longhouses, handicraft jewellery making and an indigenous language which has survived the spread of Malay.

It was a community bonded by close social relationships, and I felt honoured to be accepted as an outsider to lead a building project in their village. Thanks to those people I lived and worked with I gained great insight into local customs - from social traditions of music and dance to ancient longhouse construction techniques - all of which are threatened by the increasingly Westernised society of tropical Borneo.

So I ask, how does the development architect intervene on this scene, how can they guide the natural course of development to a more sustainable outcome?

I ask, what is the role of the architect in development projects?

Abstract This report reflects upon a 3-month internship with Arkitrek in Borneo, undertaken during the summer of 2012. Rooted in a passion for the natural world and experts in sustainable design, Arkitrek is an environmentally-responsible architecture firm whose primary aim is the conservation of natural resources through design and education.

Arkitrek’s alternative practice model has brought great benefit both to those involved in the projects and the local environment. This report investigates their model and its benefits before questioning traditional forms of practice and the role of the architect in sustainable design projects. It is based on independent reading and personal observations from working with Arkitrek.

The Innovative Environmentalist -

1

Front page fig.1 Arkitrek’s logo: the seed of a Dipterocarp tree, one of the most majestic and endangered in Borneo’s rainforests.

Cover Image fig. 2 Camps International volunteer accomodation; a wooden longhouse amidst jungle scenery makes for an atmospheric setting in the camp, a glimpse of a traditional past quickly disappearing in Borneo.

2

- The Innovative Environmentalist

Contents

4

Introduction

5

Report Aims

6-11

12- 16

17- 24

25- 27

1

Reflection on a Model of Innovation.

2

Reflection on a Model of Education for Young People.

3

Reflection on a Model of Participation.

4

Reflection on Other Alternative Models of Architecture Practice.

Times of social change and environmental crisis in Malaysia.

An innovative model of collaboration for sustainable experimentation.

Experimentation with sustainable contruction materials.

Education through doing - the architect’s experiential education.

Empowerment and awareness - the volunteer’s expanded horizons.

The autonomous architect The design facilitator Volunteer participation

Atelier 3/Rural Design Studio Design Corps USA

28

Conclusion

29

Bibliography

The Innovative Environmentalist -

3

Introduction Arkitrek and their Aims Arkitrek’s office is on the first floor of a 1970’s apartment building in inner city Kota Kinabalu, on the bustling tree-lined Jalan Gaya. The exterior has a shabby rustic charm, unassuming in its surroundings and almost concealed by the canopy of boulevard foliage above. Dark and hot inside, the open windows do their best to draw in a breeze from the South China Sea, bringing some relief from the unrelenting humidity of the Bornean coastal city. Inside, architectural drawings cover every area of desk, a plethora of experimental material prototypes every edge of floor, and a huge map of northern Borneo every inch of wall - showing the remote locations of Arkitrek’s building projects. Although based in the city, Arkitrek’s projects extend to the farthest reaches of the state of Sabah, most often situated in rural communities where education levels are low and the people are in need of new village facilities. Usually these communities are near the poverty line and do not have the funds to involve an architect, often resulting in the heavy use of cheap environmentally-damaging concrete.

Arkitrek’s aim is to help educate these people through design and construction, give them the knowledge and skills to help themselves in the future, and help them realise the value of sustainable design economically, socially and environmentally.

Arkitrek aim is to positively benefit the environment and help combat current ecological problems. Aware that short-life buildings are - due to their heavy resource usage - more damaging to the environment than beneficial, Arkitrek have strong beliefs about the longevity of their buildings. They believe that involving the community, giving them ownership to create architecture which meets their needs and desires, is the only way to ensure design is sustainable in the long term.

The Internship Arkitrek sends out an intern to work full-time on each of their sites, acting as a communicative arm of the organisation. The intern’s duty is to manage the construction, while bringing the community and volunteers together as a coherent and involved project team. Arkitrek are co-pioneers of a successful collaboration with Camps International - who organise expeditions for young people in the UK to work on these community projects as volunteers - and based on one of these camps, my internship involved responsibilities in managing voluntary workers and guiding them through the construction process. A co-ordinator of the build process, other roles included calculating quantities and ordering materials, engaging the community and local builders in the project, and educating those involved in the sustainable responses of the building- with ongoing support from Arkitrek. There were five Arkitrek interns working on different construction projects during the summer period.

4

- The Innovative Environmentalist

Report Aims In this report I aim to explore Arktrek’s form of practice and how it responds to their environmental sustainability ethos. I will firstly look at how their model responds to the environmental crisis in Borneo, how collaborative practice has allowed sustainable material innovation. I will then examine their model of education for young people how it allows for the training of holistically-thinking architects and raises awareness of sustainability - before finally exploring Arkitrek’s phlosophy of community involvement and how this aids the long-term sustainability of their projects.

I will question the traditional role of the architect in sustainable development projects and explore the possibility of a revised role, in which design responsibility is shared with the community and the architect’s role is expanded to include a much wider array of activities. Throughout the report I will reflect on my own experiences throughout the internship, and draw on readings such as ‘Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture’ (Till 2011), ‘Architecture for Rapid Change and Scarce Resources’ (Sinha, 2012), ‘Occupying Architecture: Between the Architect and the User’ (Hill, 1998), ‘Workplace Bestplace’ (McLachlan, 2008), and other sources such as intervews with Ian Hall, the director of Arkitrek.

Summary - To explore the benefits of Arkitrek’s innovative collaborative practice model.

- To explore Arkitrek’s goal of architectural education for young people.

- To explore Arkitrek’s ethos of community involvement, and question the traditional role of the architect in sustainable development projects.

- To explore other practice models with a similar ethos to Arkitrek.

The Innovative Environmentalist -

5

1 Reflection on a Model of Innovation Times of social change and environmental crisis in Malaysia.

Arkitrek’s philosophy is a response to times of change in the country, social and environmental changes that are often discussed in UK publications, literature and news articles. However throughout my internship I became increasingly aware of the real evidence of changes to the local built environment. Concrete houses were being erected in a matter of weeks around the village of Tinangol, fitted with air-conditioning and driveways to accommodate the huge cars that most people seemed to own. Having widely read of the poverty in rural Borneo I was taken aback at the levels of material and technological wealth that many members of the community seemed to have. Talking with locals it seemed that everyone valued the carbon-heavy Western way of living over their traditional ways, that a sign of success for them was owning a concrete home with air-con and an SUV. Plus more and more locals seemed to be reaching this aim, but I asked, where was this increased financial wealth coming from?

Malaysia is a fast developing nation, and financial wealth is evident all over. With an increasingly urban population - 72.2% today compared to 26.6% in 1960 (Index Mundi, 2012), modern cities are gaining size and height and advanced transport systems, automobiles, technology and mobile/ internet coverage have spread even to remote areas of the countryside. This development has come at a significant cost to the environment, both through the high carbon emissions and embodied energy of the urban regions, and also through the damaging means of financially supporting this material growth.

One of the leading sources of national income and wealth accumulation is the growing and exporting of palm-oil, a profitable Nigerian plant which is the cause for huge amounts of lowland rainforest destruction through the country. Used in many products we buy in Britain (BBC, 2010), the market for palm-oil is enormous and for thousands of people in Borneo it is the ideal business (the plants are cheap to buy and 6-10 times more profitable than other plants) (Brown & Jacobson, 2005). The plantations have grown in number since arriving in Borneo in the late 1960s, and over the last 40 years huge swathes of tropical forest have been cleared to accomodate them. From 1995-2000, 86% of deforestation was due to palm oil, and now only around 50% of the island is covered by rainforest - comparable to 75% in the mid-80s (Rautner, 2005). Needless to say, the growth of palm-oil plantations is unsustainable and is causing serious detrimental effects to the natural environment. The green lungs of Borneo are being lost, and from conversing with locals everyone seems to be in agreement that the climate is significantly hotter and more uncomfortable that it used to be - a likely result of the forest fires and the loss of cooling affect that trees have on the atmosphere.

6

- The Innovative Environmentalist

chapter 1

chapter 1 Furthermore, due to the high profitability of the oil palm, communities are replacing diverse agriculture of coconut, banana, mango, rice, vegetables etc with just palm-oil. In these monocultures levels of plant and animal biodiversity is around 90% lower than a tropical rainforest habitat (Rautner 2005), and they are weak ecosystems susceptible to disease - often relying heavily on chemical fertilizer and pesticides. These pesticides are often toxic, and cause further serious damage to biodiversity, fresh water ecosystems, and the health of local people from polluted water supplies (Brown & Jacobson, 2005).

From my experience in Malaysia the production of palm-oil seems to be the leading cause for environmental concern in Borneo. In the 3-months I stayed in Tinangol I witnessed the burning and removal of nearby forests for plantations, and it seems most plantation-growers are under-educated or ignorant to the negative effects of their actions. Something needs to be done to help prevent this continuing damage to the environment, and Arkitrek are committed to finding ways - through design innovation and education - of helping to reduce this problem.

fig. 3 Deforestation from the air; the loss of tropical rainforest for growing of palm-oil is a sad and serious problem.

The Innovative Environmentalist -

7

chapter 1

figs. 4 ,5 Concrete homes, satellite dishes and SUVs are indicators of the increasing wealth of rural areas.

fig. 6 Malaysia? USA? Borneo is undergoing a cultural transformation, with increased wealth drawing architectural and technological imports from the West.

8

- The Innovative Environmentalist

chapter 1

An Innovative Model of Collaboration for Sustainable Experimentation Committed to helping the environment through design & education, Arkitrek’s kindergarten project in Tinangol village was at once an experiment into sustainable material innovation and an education project for the community and young volunteers. This is a very difficult balance to reach with limited funds, and was only made possible by an unique collaborative partnership between Arkitrek and Camps International (a sustainable tourism organisation). The arrangement between the two organisations made what would have been an economically unviable build viable, and allowed explorations which would have been impossible in normal circumstances.

Arkitrek (with the community) was the architect - supplying the design drawings and interns to manage the build - and Camps International was the client and enabler, providing the funding, labour force and accommodation for the workers in a camp.

Camps International run expeditions for young volunteers and students, who spend a month or more giving their time and money to work on sustainable community projects and learn about the different culture and country. The costs of the build came directly from these paying volunteers, and with hundreds of them passing through Tinangol in the summer, Camps International had a continuous flow of financial support for the project. Unlike most standard building projects where the funding comes from selling or renting once building work is complete, the economic means for the construction was coming directly from the building process itself. Lack of reliance on a finishing date for financial security allowed for greater time flexibility, and Arkitrek made the most out of the time and volunteer engagement to try out some experimental sustainable construction ideas.

Experimentation with sustainable contruction materials One such research experiment was into bio-composite concrete. Lime/natural fibre composite concrete walls were trialled, using different mixes of coconut fibres or rice husk with lime, sand and cement. The fibres act like an aggregate, and are free and locally available. This ‘bio-crete’ is a highly sustainable concept, and would offer a solution to some existing problems in the area.

Arkitrek believe that bio-crete can help to counteract both the ecological problems of monoculture and the embodied carbon and high energy consumption of airconditioned concrete housing (Hall, 2012).

The Innovative Environmentalist -

9

chapter 1 The lime/natural fibre composite is a low carbon building material with good thermal insulation and hygroscopic properties (ability to absorb moisture), both of which help to passively regulate the internal environment of buildings and reduce reliance on air-conditioning. Using the waste fibres of the plants as part of the concrete mix, the bio-crete would also make more efficient use of existing plantation products, making them more profitable and hence more appealing to the farmers. The theory is that these plants would regain competition with the oil-palm, allowing variation to be maintained, helping to preserve biodiversity, and minimising the other dangers caused by the single-crop plantations (Hall, 2012).

The bio-crete has a much lower embodied energy than standard concrete due to the lack of processing and transportation of aggregates that comes from using locally available fibres. Plus the benefits are not only theoretical; local villagers of Tinangol also gave their support of the idea of using locally sourced natural products in concrete, saving them money on purchase and transportation of aggregate. Their enthusiasm demonstrates the growing understanding of the benefits this new local technology can have for them - a step towards a change in the ‘West is best’ mind-set.

Arkitrek’s collaborative practice model was ultimately responsible for the project; experimenting with an idea like this would be difficult under normal circumstances, particularly as a large workforce was needed for the research. Stripping the fibre from the coconuts was a very labour intensive task, perfect for groups of volunteers who would use hammers to break down the strong natural bonds inside the coconut shell. Such a workforce would have been expensive and impractical for experimentation were it not for the arrangement between Camps International and Arkitrek, where the volunteers have signed up for just such learning experience.

Here the alternative practise model has allowed for innovative research towards preservation of the natural environment.

Ultimately Arkitrek sourced pre-processed coconut coir fibres as a by-product of the copra industry which will make the process more sustainable for future uses of the technology.

10 - The Innovative Environmentalist

chapter 1

fig.7 Coconut fibres stripped from their shells and ready to be mixed to make ‘Coco-crete’.

fig. 8 Volunteer Jennifer with the ‘Cococrete’ test wall; with imperfections but a strong concrete wall nonetheless.

The Innovative Environmentalist -

11

2 Reflection on a Model of Education for Young People Arkitrek’s practice model also reflects their commitment to architectural education as a way of making a more sustainable world. They believe in education-throughdoing as a way of empowering people, giving them the opportunity to learn from the real world. One of their aims is to fill a large gap left by architectural education, to give architecture students the practical experience necessary for contextuallyengaged holistic thinking - a necessity for sustainable design.

Education through doing - the architect’s experiential education “Architects have to learn from practical situations and equip themselves with improved tools” (CAA,2007, p.4) As an architecture student on a building site, I was at first confronted with the realisation of how little knowledge I had about creating a building from architect’s drawings. Thrown into a role of responsibility in construction I realised that I had never before needed to consider the real implications of my decisions in architecture school. Suddenly required to manage workers, material quantities, orders, and the building construction itself, I was struggling to draw practical assistance from my architectural education so far.

However as my internship progressed I began to learn about essential processes of construction. I became acquainted with the physical attributes of building materials and their limits/opportunities, which I had only known in theory beforehand. The experience demystified many roles of the building process, such as that of Quantity Surveyor, which I can now relate to with improved knowledge. As I was exposed more and more to the reality of building I became more confident in translating the design into a built form, something that textbooks could never have given me.

In her paper ‘Workplace Bestplace’ (2007) Fiona McLachlan describes this type of understanding given by practical experience, in reference to Schön’s (1983) notion of ‘professional knowledge’; “If one accepts Schön’s premise that there is a type of knowledge, or an elementary development of judgement, which is essentially experiential and is different from that which can be learnt in conventional academic surroundings, it is possible to identify learning outcomes which are best learnt in practice, as opposed to those most effectively learnt in school.” (p.7)

12 - The Innovative Environmentalist

chapter 2

chapter 2 This development of experiential knowledge was not limited to construction processes alone, but I also began to make important connections between the design and construction stages of a building. Connections such as designing materiality for locally available material supplies, or the designing for ease of construction when labour is largely unskilled, only became obvious when I was confronted with these issues in reality. Connections between design and economics became clear when I designed a wooden staircase, confined by local manufacturers’ timber dimensions and costs, and a real budget imposed by Camps International. Connections between design and the natural environment became real when we were exposed to the extreme elements - namely a roasting sun and still humid air - and took refuge in the passive ventilation and vernacular responses to climate present in the building.

If anything, working on the construction stages showed me all of the connections design has with the real world. At architecture school it is easy to become immersed in concepts and the infinite possibilities of design, and forget about the intricacy, constraints and unpredictability of the real world; “The unpredictable experience of practice, where the student is immersed in authentic situations rather than hypothetical ones, exposes the student to this complexity and uncertainty.” - (McLachlan, 2007, p.8) Working with Arkitrek allowed me to realise that experience of construction practice is an extremely important part of architectural education. A holistic understanding comes from realising a design, an awareness of how contextual factors are intrinsically linked together and to the building itself. Being so involved in the build provides understanding of how particular design solutions work, why they have been chosen in the specific circumstances, and gives grounds for questioning and further improvement.

Here Arkitrek’s aim is in line with the aim of the placement year, to help students like myself reflect on their architectural education so far, using it in the real world and placing it in a wider context outside of the studio walls.

“No amount of rehearsal in the academic realm is able to fully replicate the complexity of practice.” - (McLachlan, 2007, p.8) Arkitrek’s aim is - through this practical education - to expose interns to the network of connections between context and building, and train a holistically-thinking designer who considers all these aspects of place. This contextual awareness makes a designer more sensitive and designs buildings appropriate to place, something of great importance for buildings to be long-lasting and sustainable.

The Innovative Environmentalist -

13

chapter 2

figs. 9, 10, 11 Making connections between context and building - sunlight angles analysis which dictate the material usage on different sides of the building. Biocrete has low density and so is good for thermal insulation - used in areas

Many explorations such as this were made which considered the important links between design and context.

14 - The Innovative Environmentalist

chapter 2

Empowerment and Awareness - the Volunteer’s Expanded Horizons It was not just the interns like myself who learnt from the experience. The schoolage volunteers did most of the construction work from laying concrete foundations to building a towering timber staircase. They learnt about these processes of construction and gained a deep insight into the design and construction industries, a vital first step to inspiring future architects and engineers. The experience helped to raise participants’ awareness of sustainability and the pressing environmental matters at hand. Working onsite they learnt a great deal about the sustainable responses used in the design and what problems they were intended to overcome. Many of the volunteers left with a sincere interest in sustainable design and construction. Whether or not they become involved with the field in the future, I’m sure the experience has made them more aware of the importance of considering a building’s impact on our planet.

The experience of taking part in such a project, learning so much about construction, and being an active member in helping others seemed to inspire many of the young volunteers. They gained great confidence in using the skills they learnt, and they thrived on the knowledge that they could use those skills in further development projects. They had gained awareness and were inspired to do more. The following quote mentions a similar effect, from ‘Volunteering and Social Activism’ (CIVICUS et al, 2008) “By participating in volunteering or social activism, or both, people can be empowered with the confidence, skills and knowledge necessary to effect change in their world”. (p.1) Such opportunity for educating and empowering so many young people is uncommon in the field of construction, yet it was made possible through this alternative practice model of Arkitrek. Interactive physical learning tends to settle deeper in the mind than information from a book, and although I can’t speak for everyone who took part I can say that what I learnt as an intern will certainly stay with me for a long time.

The Innovative Environmentalist -

15

chapter 2

fig.12 Experiential learning in action! After concrete began pouring out of holes in the formwork while building stair columns, we had to fiercely tie it together with tensioned ropes.

Formwork for the next three columns was built much more successfully.

fig.13 School-age volunteers learning about the processes of making bio-concrete through doing it themselves.

16 - The Innovative Environmentalist

chapter 3

3 Reflection on a Model of Participation “Participation encourages a collaborative process that can be more complex and slow but enriches the end product which then has more significance to the users” (Sinha, 2012, p.175).

Participation from the users of a building in the design process is an important part of Arkitrek’s practice model. It is viewed by them as a vital stage in creating a building appropriate to their needs, and in educating the community so they can continue sustainable design once the architect is gone.

Arkitrek’s model for environmental sustainability acknowledges that buildings must be long-lasting to minimise use of resources, that the construction of short-life buildings can do more damage to the environment than good (through resource usage and waste). To achieve long-term sustainability the building must respond to the needs and desires of the community rather than those of the architect, and the community need to feel a sense of authorship and control over the process if they are to love and use the building as their own. Arkitrek hold participation sessions to aid the community to think about what they really want from the building. Although sometimes difficult to draw ideas from members of the community who are not accustomed to designing, Arkitrek facilitate the process through visual tools, model and drawing materials for the people to experiment with. These sessions draw ideas essential to the evolving of Arkitrek’s brief.

However this then brings into question the role of the architect, if the users are to have such authorship over the design ideas. Is the architect then - in the words of Jeremy Till (2011) - just a “technical facilitator with decisions effectively made by others”? (p.29). This question prompted me to look into this question of user involvement in the design process, and what role the architect plays in sustainable building projects. The work of Till (2011) was used as the basis for this section, as a volume which clearly explores this question and proposes alternative ways of thinking for the architect of sustainable practice.

The Innovative Environmentalist -

17

chapter 3

The Autonomous Architect “Social space acknowledges the contribution of others, and with this dismisses the notion of expert authorship that the professions still cling to”. (Till, 2011, p.29) Throughout the Western world today the notion of an architect seems to be widely regarded as a professional with expert knowledge and authority. This idea has carried forward from the past when the architect had unquestioned authority to dictate the form and appearance of buildings, regardless of user desires. Till (2011) writes, “standard histories of architecture focus almost exclusively on the guiding hand of the individual architect, and in this exclude the multiple voices and actions of others”.

From personal experience of work with conventional architects in Edinburgh, it is clear that the architect is still viewed by many as an autonomous agent, with free will to design as s/he chooses, designing based on personal preferences and with an attitude of ownership over the building. Often in practice the client would have no involvement, leaving the architect to dictate the form, layout, size, spatial attributes and materiality. Furthermore often the client was not the user, and so the user had no part to play whatsoever in the design of the building being placed into their life.

It seems wrong to suggest that the architect should have complete creative control, the space should also be made those who work in it, those whose lives and actions are defined by it. Till (2011) describes the makers of a space as ‘spatial agents’ and according to him they are “not just architects but also users, artists, politicians, builders and more, with a diverse range of skills and intents” (p.28).

This notion of expert authorship is the antithesis of what is needed for sustainable building projects, so why does that image still prevail throughout architecture practises, in times when sustainability is of great importance?

One argument is that the notion of the expert architect helps preserve the credibility of architecture as a profession. If the user is involved in the design process - and their contributions are considered equally as valid as the architect’s- then there is a threat to the architect’s authority and their legitimacy in their role. According to Hill (1998), the architectural profession clings to the notion of autonomy of architects “for the purpose of economic and social self-protection” (p37), ignoring the user and their rightful role in the design of places they inhabit and use. The present ignorance creates a void between architect and user, and this separation must be broken down if buildings are to reflect user needs and desires and allow for longterm sustainability.

18 - The Innovative Environmentalist

chapter 3

fig.14 Myself and some young members of the local community.

fig.15 People from the community. Their involvement in the project was key for a building design which met their needs and aspirations.

The Innovative Environmentalist -

19

chapter 3

The Design Facilitator “I have always argued that nothing will work if the people do not embrace the ideas themselves”. (Sinha, 2012, p85) As explained earlier Arkitrek have a very different outlook, treating the designing of spaces not solely the role of an architect but as a collaborative effort with the users, leading to a more appropriate architecture of the community. A building more appropriate for people and place allows long-term usage and sustainability - Arkitrek’s key aim. But then what role does this leave for the architect? Do they, with their wealth of experience and spatial design intelligence become just a facilitator for others’ ideas?

Arguably the architect’s position is neither one of complete control nor just facilitation but somewhere in-between; a role in which they can use their skills to work with the ideas and needs of others as part of a complex fabric of contextual design factors - to work with a “much richer set of activities that give new scope, and hope, for architectural activity.” (Till, 2011,p.29) In this we draw the distinction between ‘the autonomous architect’ and professional knowledge, the latter which is extremely useful in development projects. This would mean using their skills not to dictate their own desires, but to carefully synthesize others’ ideas and contextual factors to open up new opportunities, new social, political and economic possibilities for users. Till’s book (2011) dismisses the idea that the architect becomes just a facilitator; “[The] intention is not one of abandoning architectural intelligence. Quite the opposite. The book is meant as an aspiration as to how that intelligence can be exercised in a much broader spatial field, one that acknowledges the social, global, ecological and virtual networks.” (Till, 2011, p.29) So in this participation model there is still a role of great importance for the architect.

Their skills prove vital for the successful synthesis of user ideas and contextual factors into an intelligent building. The architect needs to use their architectural skills to help make an architecture rooted in place and which responds to its users’ needs.

20 - The Innovative Environmentalist

chapter 3 Furthermore, the architect has a duty is to share this extensive knowledge about sustainable design with the users and community, to teach them through participation the skills needed to continue building sustainably when s/he is no longer there. The presence of a skilled architect in the process is essential for the sharing of design knowledge with the community, leaving the people more empowered to design and build sustainably for themselves. The education of others for the purpose of empowerment is therefore a vital aspect to the role of an architect.

“Knowing becomes a tool for empowerment since it allows everyone to evaluate and critically judge the position within which they find themselves in the world, allowing them to question, to interrogate, to intervene, to challenge, and to propose other ways.” (Till, 2011, p.65)

Volunteer Participation We have discussed the participation of the users, and the importance of their involvement, but what about the role of the volunteer onsite? Do development projects need to depend on labour from local and international volunteers? As described by CIVICUS, IAVE & UNV in the paper ‘Volunteering and Social Activism’ (2008), there is much more to voluntary engagement than just providing a free workforce or funding - although these are great benefits in themselves - and in fact volunteerism as a way of working also has great beneficial effects on the social aspect of the development; “Volunteerism benefits both society at large and the individual volunteer by strengthening trust, solidarity and reciprocity among citizens”. (CIVICUS et al, 2008, preface) Volunteers choose to take part with free-will, committed to making positive change and to help as they can. They often have great enthusiasm and dedication, and treating the work not as a job but as a worthwhile challenge they often bring fun and a positive spirit to the project. A worker with this attitude is an asset to any building project, and often that attitude spreads to others and creates a general positive group driving force. Volunteers work together with a common desire to help the community, and this joins people together from the international volunteering groups and the local communities in need, and can strengthen bonds between and within these groups. As quoted above, volunteering in a group can strengthen relationships between those people involved. This team spirit of altruistic effort can also inspire further involvement from volunteers;

The Innovative Environmentalist -

21

chapter 3

22 - The Innovative Environmentalist

chapter 3

The Innovative Environmentalist -

23

chapter 3 “Participation through volunteering can foster social cohesion and put individuals on a path to longer-term engagement in development activities” (CIVICUS et al, 2008, p.10) So is it necessary to engage volunteers in architectural development projects? It would be a missed opportunity to engage workers committed to effect positive change in the community in need1. The attitude and enthusiasm of voluntary workers, combined with the social cohesion created by the team environment can “transform the pace and nature of development” (CIVICUS et al, 2008, p.1) and result in a much more successful final product, the product of a positive, engaged and committed workforce. By engaging volunteers in such projects the architect has the opportunity to inspire these young people, inspire them to continue helping people of the world and to make future projects like that at Tinangol possible.

1 However we must also be aware that voluntary labour arrangements must be handled in a careful way for two reasons. Firstly, a wealth of free workers could undermine the creation of paid jobs for local workers, which would do more damage than good for the local people and economies. It is perhaps necessary to establish a balance between paid local workers and voluntary labour, or in another way ensure that the voluntary involvement is not threatening jobs for locals. Camps International ensured that this balance existed, but also created many other jobs for the community (people to work on camp as mangers/cooks/cleaners, and jobs for local builders such as building new accomodation and facilities for volunteers).

Secondly, it must also be ensured that volunteers are not being exploited, that they have fair working hours and they are aware of the beneficiaries of their work, i.e. not working for free for the monetary profit of an individual.

24 - The Innovative Environmentalist

fig.16 Previous spread: Myself, two Camps International employees and the volunteer teams as the Tinangol kindergarten construction team.

chapter 4

4 Reflection on Other Alternative Models of Architecture Practice There are many others who like Arkitrek have begun to explore the possibilities and opportunities of a revised practice model. The few below show aspects similar to those of Arkitrek.

Atelier 3/Rural Architecture studio Based in Taiwan, Atelier 3 began working in the field of disaster-relief architecture following a large earthquake there in 1999. However there was a need for something more than standard post-disaster shelters, as many rural communities were in ecologically sensitive areas and had a threatened cultural heritage, (Spatial Agency, 2012). The aim of the firm was to design long-lasting buildings which were environmentally sustainable, helped preserve the culture of the area, and which were very cheap to build - a necessity for post-disaster housing. They developed a collaborative form of practice where the communities became involved - much like Arkitrek - in the design and construction, meaning more appropriate design and fostering a community spirit in the wake of a disaster. Architects from Rural Architecture Studio- who collaborate with Atelier 3- demonstrate their concern for the users and the process of construction through the way they design construction details. They re-design common details to make them easier to use and cheaper to buy/construct, such as making all joints mechanical and easily replaceable, and re-designing joints to remove expensive branded parts. This allows opportunity for areas where skilled-labour and funds are minimal, as explained by architect Hsieh Ying-Chun (2012); “This enables a DIY, ‘open-architecture’ which does not require the need for specialised tools or knowledge, making it possible for those with little or no prior knowledge to participate fully” .

The Innovative Environmentalist -

25

chapter 4

fig.17 Design for the community is a key philosophy of Atelier 3/Rural Architecture Studio.

fig.18 Alternative housing proposals by Design Corps, using waste materials.

26 - The Innovative Environmentalist

chapter 4 Design Corps USA Another firm who have an alternative approach to their form of practice is Design Corps, a not-for -profit organisation based in the USA. Their aim is to provide architectural services to poorer communities and create positive changes through design. Placing great importance on the participatory approach, they say that their “vision is realized when people are involved in the decisions that shape their lives, including the built environment”(Hsieh Ying Chun, 2012). However the most innovative aspect of their approach- particularly in their earlier work of the 1990s - is that the firm source their own projects. Upon founding their organisation they didn’t wait for a commission but instead approached a situation of need and proposed ways to make it better (Spatial Agency, 2012). This proactive approach as ‘design activists’ was at its most potent when the firm approached farms with poor conditions for immigrant workers, making deals with the farmers to create better facilities and securing ongoing funding from the government which subsidized up to 100% of the buildings’ construction costs. They engaged the workers in the design process and so the buildings responded to their needs and were culturally appropriate. This example shows a practice model which expands the role of the architect far beyond the traditional idea; here the architect also finds people in need and proposes a project, secures funding to realise it, and successfully improves their living conditions through design. The architect here could be thought of as a ‘development activist’, a term coined by Sinha (2012) in the book Architecture for Rapid Change and Scarce Resources. She believes that this type of alternative, versatile and expansive practice is the way forward, that “architecture practice today is a complex curve ever changing and ever expanding” (Sinha, 2012, p.4) These two architecture firms show practice models that - like Arkitrek - extend beyond that of a traditional architect. In different ways they consider the users, the processes and practicalities of construction, and take on roles beyond the norm while sharing their traditional responsibilities amongst the people they are designing for. Their innovative practice models allow them to work towards more sensitive architecture, which responds to the needs of its users and local context and has long-term sustainability. This quote from the CAA’s conference book reflects perfectly the need for a more appropriate, fluid and expansive role for architects if we are to achieve sustainable design for our changing world.

“The profession is facing a weakening of the boundaries that defined its traditional role, and simultaneously facing the challenges of defining a new identity for itself in a more globalised setting”. (CAA, 2007, p.153)

The Innovative Environmentalist -

27

Conclusion Arkitrek have shown themselves to be a hugely successful architecture practice in implementing their sustainable philosophy, of conserving natural resources through design and education. As has been investigated in this report, Arkitrek’s practice model brings great benefits to the local environment, through allowing explorations into innovative ecologically beneficial materials. The learn-by-doing education that they support through their collaboration with Camps International raises awareness of sustainable design, and trains holistically-thinking architects more attuned to environmentally sustainable design. Their encouragement of user and community involvement makes a design more appropriate to community needs, longer lasting and hence with a lighter footprint on the planet. Educating the community through sharing knowledge and through involvement in the whole process empowers them to think sustainably for themselves, resulting in fewer carbon-heavy concrete houses and more intelligent community designs in the future. The kindergarten at Tinangol is the synthesis of all of these philosophies, and is a building thoroughly rooted to its place, its environment, and its people. Its social and environmental success is a product of Arkitrek’s innovative alternative form of practice, their willingness to step outside the norms and seek opportunity and innovation.

Through questioning the role of the architect on sustainable projects it has become clearer that the traditional role of sole authorship is part of an outdated model of architecture practice, and that dispersing the design role amongst the users is key for long-term sustainability. No longer can the architect hold the design power, but the people must be involved in order to create architecture that meets their needs.

At the same time the role of the architect is not reduced to a facilitator, but instead he has the important position of synthesising ideas and contextual factors into a working design, and the duty to share skills and knowledge; raising the community’s awareness of the need for sustainable design and giving the people the ability to design sustainably for themselves.

It is also clear from Arkitrek’s practice model and those of other sustainable architecture firms, that the role of the architect is no longer constrained by a traditional notion of what they should do, but instead has a broader scope of proactive involvement in a multitude of different areas. From educating young architects to innovating construction technologies, playing participation games to securing project funding, architects in the field of sustainable design have a thorough involvement in the every aspect of the process, engaging wherever is needed to create an architecture rooted in its local people and place and that is sustainable in the long-term.

The identity of the architect is changing with our changing world, and instead of resisting architects must adapt and innovate, and re-establish for themselves a more appropriate role on our endangered planet.

28 - The Innovative Environmentalist

Bibliography

BBC Panorama, (2010). Palm oil products and the weekly shop [WWW Document]. Panorama, BBC. URL http://news.bbc.co.uk/panorama/hi/front_page/ newsid_8517000/8517093.stm Brown, E., Jacobson, M., (2005). Cruel Oil. Center for Science in the Public Interest.

CAA, 2007. Society, Architects, and Emerging Issues. Institute of Architects, Bangladesh, Dhaka.

CIVICUS, IAVE, UNV, 2008. Volunteering and Social Activism - Pathways for participation in human development. UNV. Design Corps [WWW Document], (2012). . Design Corps - about. URL https:// designcorps.org/about/ Hall, I. (2012) The aims and practise model of Arkitrek. Interviewed by: Kelly, L., Kota Kinabalu, Malaysia, 15 August 2012 Hill, J., 1998. Occupying Architecture: Between the Architect and the User, 1st ed.

Routledge, London.

Hsieh Ying Chun Architects and Associates, (2012). Sustainable Developments in Practise [WWW Document]. URL http://www.livingsteel.org/sustainabledevelopments-in-practice Malaysia country statistics [WWW Document], (2012). . Index Mundi. URL http:// www.indexmundi.com/facts/malaysia Mclachlan, F., 2007. Workplace Bestplace. University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh.

Rautner, M., (2005). Borneo: Treasure Island at Risk.

Schรถn, D.A., 1983. The Reflective Practitioner - how professionals think in action.

Maurice Temple Smith, London.

Sinha, S., 2012. Architecture for Rapid Change and Scarce Resources, 1st ed.

Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon, UK. Spatial Agency [WWW Document], (2012). . Spatial Agency. URL http://www. spatialagency.net/database/

The Innovative Environmentalist -

29

Till, J., Awan, N., Schneider, T., 2011. Spatial Agency: Other Ways of Doing Architecture, 1st ed. Routledge, Abingdon, Oxon, UK. WRM, 2012. WRM Bulletin - Issue Number 158 - September 2010 [WWW Document].

World Rainforest Movement. URL http://www.wrm.org.uy/

Images fig. 1 - ‘Arkitrek logo’, [Online image], accessed 08/01/13, http://arkitrek.com fig. 2-8, 12, 13, 15 - photographs taken by author fig. 14 - photograph taken by community member fig. 16 - photograph taken by a Camps International employee fig. 9-11, 19 - All diagrams and sketches drawn by author as part of internship role. fig. 17 - ‘Restrooms, SiChuan’, [Online image], accessed 20/01/13, http://archrecord. construction.com/news/2011/10/Curry-Stone-Prize-slideshow.asp?slide=2 fig. 18 - ‘Alternative housing’, [Online image], accessed 20/01/13, http://www. domusweb.it/en/architecture/into-the-open-us-at-the-venice-biennale/

fig. 19 30 - The Innovative Environmentalist