Tags: definition

A sustainable human society has been imagined in many ways. One of these is the definition of sustainable development in the Bruntland Report, Our Common Future (1987) as “development that meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.”
While the Bruntland definition provides a high-level vision, more is needed to apply the concept. Basic principles for social and ecological sustainability, based on physics, have been articulated by the science community and are captured in a framework known as The Natural Step The Natural Step principles are the “system conditions” that society must embrace to be sustainable.
In the sustainable society, nature is not subject to the systematic increase of:
1. concentrations of substances extracted from the Earth’s crust
2. concentrations of substances produced by society
3. degradation by physical means
4. in that society, people are not subject to conditions that systematically undermine their capacity to meet their needs.
Together, the Bruntland definition and The Natural Step Framework system conditions provide the sustainable development goal that buildings must strive to reach. Other decision-making tools for sustainable community development include “Smart Growth” and the “One Planet Living” frameworks. Reviewed by Guiseppe Strazzeri.

3 Apr 2009, Comments Off

CFC Reviews CMHC Design Report: IDP — What is it?

Author: admin

Integrated Design Process (IDP) was used in the early 1990s, by Canada’s C-20001 program and IDEAS Challenge2 competition to describe a more holistic approach to building design. This design process has been shown to produce more significant results than did investment in capital equipment3. There is now no single “right” definition for IDP. Rather, IDP describes a different, intentional way of approaching sustainable building and community design that offers a much higher likelihood of success than any other approach.
There are an increasing number of practitioners of IDP. Each has a different, and valid, perspective on how to do it, based on their experiences and practices. Most would agree that there are common elements to every definition.
• Goal-driven with the primary goal being sustainability, but with explicit subsidiary goals, objectives and targets set as a means to get there.
• Facilitated by someone whose primary role is not to produce the building design or parts of it, but to be accountable for the process of design.
• Structured to deal with issues and decisions in the right order, to avoid locking in bad performance by making non-reversible decisions with incomplete input or information.
• Clear decision-making for a clearly understood methodology for making decisions and resolving critical conflicts
• Inclusive—everyone, from the owner to the operator, has something critical to contribute to the design and everyone must be heard.
• Collaborative so that the architect is not simply the form-giver, but more the leader of a broader team collaboration with additional active roles earlier in the process.
• Holistic or systemic thinking with the intent of producing something where the whole is greater than the sum of the parts, and which may even be more economic.
• Whole-building budget setting—allows financial trade-offs, so money is spent where it is most beneficial when a holistic solution is found.
• Iterative—to allow for new information to inform or refine previous decisions.
• Non-traditional expertise—on the team, as needed, or brought in at non-traditional times to contribute to the process.
Sustainability is one of the most important issues facing human society today. The challenges as they relate to buildings are complex and the solutions are not simple.
Framing the challenge in terms of motivation and means is one way of clarifying our thinking. Motivation proceeds from a source or ground, towards a goal. The means require some tools and a direction to apply them. Reviewed by Jan Luistermans.