Integral sustainable design – Reflections on the theory and practice from a case study

Abstract

The planet is in environmental crisis and the challenge is to live sustainably within the limits imposed by nature. The built environment has a massive impact on the environment: climate change, resource and water use, loss of biodiversity. Changing the way and what we build is fundamental. Integral sustainable design theory offers a chance to rethink our approach and to genuinely shift paradigms. The theory is challenging and to date has been largely ignored in architectural design. This paper describes research that has used the theory to evaluate the sustainability of an existing re-used building. The results indicate that the theory has potential to shift thinking from quantitative performance criteria to embrace qualitative and experiential aspects in a holistic way. The interconnections between the art and science of building are revealed. The research also reveals questions to be resolved if integral sustainable design theory is to be further adopted.

Introduction

Much has been written about the unsustainability of the built environment (Crawford, 2011, Hyder, 2011, IPCC, 2014, McKinney, 2002). Problems such as rising carbon dioxide levels, biodiversity loss, water shortages and natural resource depletion are now well-documented. Reducing the impact of the built environment on natural systems is critical because the ‘what’, ‘how’ and ‘where’ we construct is so large and far-reaching.

The limitations of previous approaches to sustainability, particularly with respect to the built environment, are that they fail to take a holistic view of the architectural design. Individual processes, elements and performance are evaluated, some in great detail, but the ‘bigger picture’ is often ignored. The need for a fresh look at the way we design buildings has prompted a new paradigm which could broadly categorized as the ‘regenerative design’ approach. Rather than seeing buildings as a net user of resources having a deleterious impact on the environment, this approach sees the potential and need for buildings to contribute positively to our environment i.e. to regenerate aspects of it. Hes and du Plessis (2015) provide a comprehensive overview of this trend in building design. New theories, practice and tools are explored in this book. New design tools are required to assist design thinking and making connections, rather that measuring and rating (Svec et al., 2012). Integral Sustainable Design (ISD), as described by DeKay and Bennett (2011), based on Integral Theory (Wilber, 2000) is an attempt of a more holistic approach to sustainability evaluation in the built environment. Wilber’s Integral Theory is in the first instance a philosophical approach, and DeKay and Bennett demonstrate how this approach can be made available to sustainable design in general. This paper aims to take ISD one step further towards practical applicability, by testing its usefulness when applied to a specific building.

Hes and du Plessis (2015) review two tools in detail – REGEN and LENSES. In the context of this paper, these tools are significant because they illustrate both similarities and distinct differences with ISD. Quadrants and levels are used in the REGEN conceptual framework, as in ISD. However, the four quadrants are defined differently as natural, social, economic and high-perfomance constructed systems. Levels are the components which the quadrants are deemed to contain. Hence, the prosperous economic system quadrant might be described by ‘progress’, ‘productivity’ and ‘capital’. The LENSES framework consists of three lenses – Foundation, Flows and Vitality. The Foundation lenses are ‘rooted in the nested tripe bottom line of Natural, Social and Economic Systems’ (LENSES, undated).

The exclusion of economics as a core component of the rating tool sets ISD apart from the above tools. In the opinion of these authors, any tool that includes economics is likely to distort design outcomes. Economics is a system based on rather short term monetary benefits, which do not always go hand in hand with long term environmental benefits. What is considered too costly and uneconomic at one time can change rapidly, as international exchange rates demonstrate. Economic growth includes all negative societal activities such as building prisons, which indicate a failure of our society, not its success.

Similar to the above mentioned approaches REGEN and LENSES, ISD aims to advance beyond current building energy rating schemes. Specifically it covers not only quantitatively measurable parameters but also qualitative aspects. As such ISD has potential to be closely aligned with the architectural design process.

This paper builds on and complements previous work by Roetzel, Fuller, Rajagopalan, Luther (2015) to apply ISD to a particular building and test the theory’s efficacy and use in evaluating real buildings. The paper begins with some background material tracing the origins of ISD and describes the key elements of the theory. The previous work by the authors is then described together with the key results so that the context of the current paper can be understood. New aspects of investigation are then described and discussed leading to further conclusions of the value of ISD theory as a framework to assess the sustainability of the built environment.