Should we just start designing, planning and participating?

Magdalena Milert

22 of November '24

Magdalena Milert

photo: private archives

How to achieve circularity in design?

Circularity in architectural design seems somehow abstract to me. Circularity in architecture is the concept of designing and building structures that minimize waste and conserve resources; a way to create sustainable and innovative solutions; a process that involves minimizing the negative impact of buildings and infrastructure on the environment.

Meanwhile, a report released during the COP27 climate summit in Sharm el-Sheikh indicated that in 2021_CO2 emissions fromconstruction amounted to 10 gigatons (10,000,000,000 tons; the estimated mass of the Palace of Culture and Science in Warsaw is about 800,000 tons).

In Poland, the construction sector is responsible for as much as 38 percent of carbon dioxide^emissions1. According to the Colliers report "ESG on Construction Sites," more than half of the sector's workers are not fully aware of ESG issues, and 60 percent of construction managers have not received adequate environmental ^training2.

The question of how to achieve circularity is the formulation of a huge challenge. Perhaps so big that the human mind cannot comprehend it. So I asked ChatGPT. Here the matter seemed simple. The AI suggested several steps "that can help achieve this goal."

Sustainable design: start with sustainable design, taking into account concepts such as energy efficiency, use of renewable energy sources and materials with low environmental impact.
Materials: choose materials with low environmental impact, such as recycled or renewable materials. Avoid toxic and hard-to-recycle materials. Design buildings with the ability to be dismantled and recycled later. Use materials that can be easily reused or recycled.
Integrated water systems: design rainwater collection and recovery systems, and other innovative ways to manage water to reduce drinking water consumption and water pollution.
Green spaces: design green spaces around buildings to increase water retention, provide natural air filters and create a welcoming environment for people and wildlife.
Long-term planning: design for long-term effects, ensuring buildings are flexible and adaptive to future climate change and social needs.
Community engagement: involve the local community in the design process to incorporate their needs and perspectives and build a relationship with building users.
Monitor and evaluate: regularly monitor and evaluate building performance in terms of its environmental impact and the effectiveness of the sustainable solutions used, adjusting the design as necessary.

A plan laid out this way seems feasible. So should we just start designing, planning and participating? Probably yes, but we are unlikely to wake up tomorrow with a desire to change our habits, including trying to implement them in such a complicated process. I myself have come quite a long way from learning about the data (very uncomfortable, difficult data, by the way) on the state of our climate, the impact of the industry, through radicalization, to the art of letting go and some rationalization. Each time, of course, the data is impressive, unfortunately negative. I believe that only realistically combined measures, including legal requirements and inspections, facilitation of pro-environmental procedures and extension of design procedures that have nothing to do with green building, can be the answer. The European Union has introduced a taxonomy that calls for 70 percent of waste to go to reuse, recycling or other recovery. Tightening energy requirements for buildings are also moving us closer to that path. However, we need some economic incentives so that it will be easier to adapt a building rather than tear it down and build from scratch.

Finally, there is the question of how this process will affect the user. New construction is more expensive because a square meter consists of thicker insulation, extra glass or RES. When housing prices seem abstract, the buyer is somehow disadvantaged, because pure calculation suggests that it is better to buy a less environmentally friendly building, perhaps to put up one's own home, than to pay inflated prices. Circularity is also noticeable in everyday choices, which should also be designed. Instead of a sprawling city, generating environmental damage, consuming time, it should be easier and cheaper to live in a city that creates a compact fabric, but filled with basic needs. Circularity in urbanism thus also puts a premium on housing and spatial policy, on accessible housing, public transportation, greenery, roads for bicycles.

In conclusion, it's best to again go back to what ChatGPT answered. Although these are circular sentences that look beautiful on the homepage of training companies, supplemented with an insert of everyday life they take on a different meaning: achieving circularity in design requires a holistic approach that takes into account a variety of environmental, social and economic aspects. This requires the cooperation of multiple stakeholders and the involvement of holistic design thinking in the process.

the most important challenge for the near future, in the context of landscape design

The most important challenge in the context of landscape design for the near term seems to me to be convincing preservationists that the façade of a historic building is no more important than the fact that without trees to obscure the building, there will simply be no one to see the architecture, as cities without greenery will cook us in a climate crisis.

In second place (if I may), I would put the fight against the creation of patch urbanism, which kills landscape and biodiversity.

Third place would be to deconstruct markets, avenues, squares that have been stripped of greenery in a wave of "revitalization." This ranks only third, not because I consider this problem less important, but because of the fact that, however, something is already happening in this area and some cities are reversing these decisions.