TECHNICAL

THE NEXT REGENERATION

DESIGN

STRATEGIES

FIGURE 1 GENERIC MODEL DESCRIBING THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEENDESIGN STRATEGIES AND COEVOLUTION

FIGURE 2 LAYERING AND THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN DESIGN STRATEGIESAND COEVOLUTION

"REGENERATIVE DESIGN" HAS BEEN GARNERINGINCREASING INTEREST AS A MEANS OF REFRAM-ING GREEN DESIGN. WHAT DOES IT MEAN FORPRACTICE? CAN BUILDINGS BE REGENERATIVE INA SIMILAR MANNER AS LIVING SYSTEMS?

TEXT RAYMOND J. COLE AND AMY OLIVER

I n t r o d u c t i o n

Over the past five years or so, the notion of "re-generation" has heen garnering increasing inter-est as a means of reframinggreen design.' Un-1 ike conventionaL green huiLding practices whichare directed at reducing environmental impact,regenerative design promotes a coevolutionary,partnered relationship between socioculturaland ecological systems rather than a managerialone and, in doing so, huilds, rather than dimin-ishes, social and natural capitals.

It is not the building that is "regenerated" inthe same sense as the seLf-healingand self-organizing attributes of a living system but, asPamela Mang and others in the Regenesis Groupéargue, hy the ways that the act of huilding can hea catalyst for positive change within the unique"place" it is situated. As Peter Clegg'̂ ofthe UK-hased Feilden Clegg Bradley Studios further sug-gests, this produces "huilt form and infrastruc-ture that hegins to 'heal the wounds' that havealready occurred." Within regenerative design

and development, huilt projects, stakeholderprocesses and inhahitation are together focusedon enhancing life in all its forms—human, otherspecies, and ecological systems—through anendurin^responsihility of stewardship. In short,regenerative design aims to rethink how huild-ings are designed, huilt and managed.

While having proven to he an enormously valu-able vehicle for mainstreaming green buildingpractice, LEED's checklist format that allowsusers to select what are deemed achievable creditsis considered by many as incapable of guidingdesign in a systems-approach manner and estah-lishing positive links hetween buildings andtheir context. Regenerative design uses greenhuilding technologies and strategies, hut comple-ments these hy facilitating positive connectionsto the social, economic and ecological context.Moreover, whereas green huilding solely focuseson reducing the environmental impacts of build-ings, regenerative design and development isviewed as a process that can accelerate the devel-opment ofthe systems-thinking, shared vision,shared ownership and shared responsibilitynecessary to transition to a sustainable future.Though many of its core tenets—systems-think-ing, community engagement, respect for place-also have Long individual histories in architec-tural discourse and practice, regenerative design

hegins to tie them together in a cogent manner.Broadly speaking, regenerative design seeks

ways in which sociocuLtural and ecological sys-tems can mutually henefit each other; in otherwords, its long-term aim is to support the har-monious coevolution of sociocultural and eco-logical systems. American environmental bio-logist John Cairns argues that "mutualisticcoevolution is the only path to success" and that"a 'partner' unahle to coevolve with the otherpartner is in serious, prohably fatal, trouble."Synergies between ecological and socioculturalsystems lead to designs that are much more thanthe sum of their parts and do not simply lookafter their own needs. To illustrate, regenerativebuildings may restore or even create naturalhahitats, purify water, sequester carhon, produceoxygen, generate energy, and enhance humanconnections with their environment.

Shifting ScaleWhile the ambition of regenerative design is bothpositive and inspiring in comparison to the"doing less harm" emphasis of green design, re-cent critiques emphasize some practical andoperational concerns—challenging its feasihilityin the urhan context and whether or not its coredesign tenets are scaleahle (huilding, neigh-hourhood, community and city). For example, re-

Oa/l 2 CANADIAN ARCHITECT 2 9

generation operates most effeetively at a largerspatial seale than that which most architecturalprojects are commissioned and so raises ques-tions about the ways and extent that individualbuildings can participate in the regenerative de-sign process. American anthropologist and his-torian Joseph Tainter raises several importantconcerns about scale. "If it is too small," he sug-gests, "the system will require constant humanintervention" and, "it is prudent to assume that asystem that requires endless suhsidies is notsustainahle." He eontinues, "[ujnfortunately, thisis likely to be the spatial scale (i.e., too small tobe self-sustaining) at whieh many regenerativedesigns are eommissioned. Thus, there may he ascalar contradiction hetween the aspirations ofregenerative designers and the realities of theirprofession."

Extending Time FrameCurrent green design practice and assessmenttools eoncentrate on descrihing the initial per-formance of a building prior to occupaney andcan, within the limits of simulation, do this withsome degree of certainty. However, it rarely ex-plicitly acknowledges that future performanceand changes in a building's context are alwaysunknowable. Regenerative design, hy contrast,accepts this future uncertainty. The notion thatthe successful performance of a building canneither be predicted nor guaranteed at the com-pletion of design clearly represents a major ehal-lenge for arehitects and other design eonsultants,particularly in the way that they convey their pro-posed strategies to clients. Sinee regenerativeperformanee cannot be known at the designstage, the measure of success in regenerative de-sign is represented in terms of the capacity in-vested in a huilding at the outset and stakeholderinput that will encourage the coevolution ofsociocultural and eeological systems. However,determining if and to what extent a capability hasbeen invested in a project will he hased on thecollective experience of the design team, con-tinued stakeholder engagement, feedback, re-flection and learning.

Given the eoneerns raised above, how ean in-dividual buildings participate in the positiveeoevolution of sociocultural and ecological sys-tems? Can regenerative design offer positivedireetion to the day-to-day praetiee of designingbuildings amidst a host of time, cost and regula-tory constraints?

There are currently very few recent examplesof huilding projects that exemplify regenerativedesign and, given the ahsence of evidence thatdemonstrates that claimed benefits and out-eomes can and have been delivered, it remainslargely an aspiration. The University of BritishColumhia's Centre for Interactive Research onSustainability (see C<4, March 301?) is important

in this regard in that its unfolding performanceand consequenees will he fully monitored anddocumented. CIRS is a elear manifestation ofcore regenerative strategies. It will provide "net-positive " henefits to the environment—creatingdrinking water from fallen rain collected on site,treating more than its own wastewater on site,and powering itself and a neighbouring buildingwith renewable and waste energy. The combina-tion of an on-site photovoltaic system andcreative energy exchange with the neighhouringEarth and Ocean Sciences Building greatly re-duces the university's overall earhon emissions.By heing constructed primarily of certified woodand pine beetle-killed wood (that would other-wise lead to earbon emissions as it decays), itswood structure loeks in more than 500 tonnes ofearhon. This offsets the GHG emissions thatresulted from the other non-renewable construc-tion materials—cement, steel and aluminum-used in the huilding. CIRS can thus claimcarbon-negative performance (hoth embodiedand operational). While a university campus per-mits opportunities not often permissible in mostcontexts in which architects operate, CIRS none-theless is illustrative of the potential implica-tions associated with the coevolution of socio-eultural and ecological systems—that is, howdesign strategies offer multiple henefits beyondthe boundaries of an individual building.

The use of on-site renewahle energy and otherfortuitous energy supply options, sueh as thoseused in CIRS, hecome an important strategicchoice after all possible energy-efficiency andpassive strategies have heen pursued. Onsiterenewahle energy options are place-specific—dictated hy the seasonal climatic variations andany modifying effects resulting from the sur-rounding physical context. Fortuitous energysourees and exchange opportunities are alsoplace-specific and dependent on the ways and ex-tent that the energy profiles of adjacent or nearhyhuildings and systems match that of one beingdesigned. CIRS does exactly this—capturing wasteheat exhausted from the Oceans and Scienees(EOS) Building, satisfying its thermal needs andthen returning excess back to EOS. Set against thetechnical potential offered hy such synergisticlinks are a host of sociocultural factors such as awillingness to accommodate renewable energy,matching of energy quality to operation use,enahling inhahitants to understand energy pro-cesses and to adjust the systems to meet theirehanging needs, etc. More broadly, social or in-dustrial metabolism—the soeially organized ex-change of materials and energy between societiesand their environments—represents a criticallink between the built environment and the co-evolution of ecological and sociocultural systems.While nuclear energy is gaining increasing sup-port as a neeessary and seemingly attainable and

expedient response to climate change, clean, re-newahle energy sourees are reeognized as key to asustainahle future. Renewahle energy optionshave the potential to contribute to long-termenergy security and the withstanding of short-term disruptions, and enable huilding inhabit-ants to understand energy processes and adjustsystems to meet changing needs.

Figure 1 illustrates the expanded questioning ofthe role and responsibility of design strategiessimilar to that embedded in CIRS. It highlightsthe potential link hetween huilding design andthe coevolution of sociocultural and ecologicalsystems resulting from the use of renewableenergy. Building design (situated in the upperhalf) can be hoth informed by ecological systemsand/or socioeultural systems that may be place-specific or more universal. Resulting strategiescan lead to a huilding offering positive socio-cultural and ecological benefits for its local siteeontext. This place-specific approach to design-drawing on and relating to context—invests abuilding with the potential for improved per-formance and contrihutes to its wider social, cul-tural, ecological and economic eontext as shownin the lower half, in the end having benefits thatextend heyond its property lines.

In summary, green design is directed at re-ducing environmental impacts—doing less harm,and regenerative design aspires to restore lostcapacities—eeological, social and economic—when they are missing or disrupted and estab-lishing new ones. Both are neeessary and com-plementary in transitioning to a sustainablefuture. While the performance of individualbuildings remains of central importance-depending on the proeess of engaging all rel-evant stakeholders, understanding and engagingthe opportunities afforded by context, andcreatively forging synergistic links betweenthese same strategies—these buildings can offera great deal more. CA

Dr. Ray Cole is Professor at and past Director of theUniversity of British Columbia's School of Architec-ture and Landscape Architecture. He holds thedesignation of Distinguished University Scholar.Amy Oliver holds a Master of Architecture degreefrom the University of British Columbia and works atan architectural firm in Vancouver.

'Cole, R.J. Regenerative Design and Development; Cur-rent Theory and Practice. Building Research & Informa-tion 40.1 (2012): 1-6.

^www.regenesisgroup.com

''Clegg, P. Commentary: A Practitioner's View of the"Regenerative Paradigm." Buiitiing fieseorc/i &/îiformatioa40.3 (2012): 365-368.Cairns, J. Sustainable Co-evolution. International Journalof Sustainable Development and World Ecology 14 (2007):

103-108.^Tainter, J.A. Regenerative Design in Science and Society.

Building Research & Information ^o.2 (2012): 369-372.

3 0 CANADIAN ARCHITECT 08/12

Copyright of Canadian Architect is the property of Business Information Group and its content may not be

copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written

permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.