Designed Living Environment: A New Policy for Architecture, Form and Design
Who will you meet?
Cities are innovating, companies are pivoting, and start-ups are growing. Like you, every urban practitioner has a remarkable story of insight and challenge from the past year.
Meet these peers and discuss the future of cities in the new Meeting of the Minds Executive Cohort Program. Replace boring virtual summits with facilitated, online, small-group discussions where you can make real connections with extraordinary, like-minded people.
A paradigm shift in the national architecture programme
What is modern architecture policy, and why is it being reviewed now? The increased importance of cities, continued urbanisation, new lifestyles, changes in working life and globalisation, are the concepts in focus when the Government issues new guidelines for architecture policy. The term paradigm shift indicates that the Government is announcing a new approach to and new conditions for architecture.
It is good that the Government is initiating a review based on new conditions. The starting point for the previous architecture programme fifteen years ago has changed. A value-based reference framework is now being highlighted. This value framework naturally includes democratic aspects as important elements. The work on a new architecture programme will be broad-based, with a bottom-up perspective in which citizens and human capital are seen as resources in the city of the future.
It was the previous Government that took the initiative to develop a new policy for architecture, form and design. In the Government’s working title, ‘Designed living environment’, the focus is on people – recognising that all construction is rooted in people’s desire to have a good life. However, the words ‘living environment’ also indicate a broader approach. Apart from focusing on beauty and aesthetics, which are, of course, important parameters, the aim is also to create sustainable structures. This strikes a chord in Malmö, which has 15 years of experience of sustainable construction (Västra hamnen, Ekostaden, Sege Park, Hyllie and most recently the Malmö Commission’s work to create a living environment that can counteract the rise in ill-health).
A holistic approach is also present throughout. From the point of view of society, this means, for example, that we cannot just talk about cheap building and cheap homes, despite the acute shortage of homes. We must also focus on quality and ensure that investments are long-term sustainable initiatives. What we must aim to build is a socially, economically and environmentally sustainable city. This has also been Malmö’s guiding principle over the past 10-15 years. The work on environmental issues is what creates the framework for our future.
Designed living environment also entails a broader approach. In addition to the built environment, it must also comprise form and design in a broader context.
When the previous national architecture programme was developed, Malmö drew up its own action programme in parallel. This was entitled Urban Planning and Architecture. It was developed jointly by the city’s administrations to serve as a practical tool and demonstrate the city’s ambitions, while also being a source of inspiration for everyone involved in the urban planning process. This time too, Malmö is in the process of presenting a new action programme. It is entitled Malmö, City of Architecture and will be part of the City’s General Plan. Malmö is a committed city with a strong will. The General Plan is a future-oriented document that the city worked on via a bottom-up concept, and the Malmö, City of Architecture action programme has been developed with similar working methods.
Malmö’s plan for the future is based partly on the necessity of developing the city we have. Instead of talking about special municipal requirements, we want to see cities’ distinctive features as an asset. I see Malmö’s efforts as important experience and a source of inspiration in the national work and I want to share that experience.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
Housing that is affordable to low-income residents is often substandard and suffering from deferred maintenance, exposing residents to poor air quality and high energy bills. This situation can exacerbate asthma and other respiratory health issues, and siphon scarce dollars from higher value items like more nutritious food, health care, or education. Providing safe, decent, affordable, and healthy housing is one way to address historic inequities in community investment. Engaging with affordable housing and other types of community benefit projects is an important first step toward fully integrating equity into the green building process. In creating a framework for going deeper on equity, our new book, the Blueprint for Affordable Housing (Island Press 2020), starts with the Convention on Human Rights and the fundamental right to housing.
Since the Great Recession of 2008, the housing wealth gap has expanded to include not just Black and Brown Americans, but younger White Americans as well. Millennials and Generation Z Whites are now joining their Black and Brown peers in facing untenable housing precarity and blocked access to wealth. With wages stuck at 1980 levels and housing prices at least double (in inflation adjusted terms) what they were 40 years ago, many younger Americans, most with college degrees, are giving up on buying a home and even struggle to rent apartments suitable for raising a family.
What makes it hard for policy people and citizens to accept this truth is that we have not seen this problem in a very long time. Back in the 1920s of course, but not really since then. But this is actually an old problem that has come back to haunt us; a problem first articulated by Adam Smith in the 1700s.
More than ever, urban transit services are in need of sustainable and affordable solutions to better serve all members of our diverse communities, not least among them, those that are traditionally car-dependent. New mobility technologies can be a potential resource for local transit agencies to augment multi-modal connectivity across existing transit infrastructures.
We envision a new decentralized and distributed model that provides multi-modal access through nimble and flexible multi-modal Transit Districts, rather than through traditional, centralized, and often too expensive Multi-modal Transit Hubs. Working in collaboration with existing agencies, new micro-mobility technologies could provide greater and seamless access to existing transit infrastructure, while maximizing the potential of the public realm, creating an experience that many could enjoy beyond just catching the next bus or finding a scooter. So how would we go about it?