Expert Interview - Thomas Daniell

What does sustainable design mean to you?
To achieve true sustainability, that which is removed must be later replaced. Yet this doesn't imply stasis: situations evolve, balances shift, demands change, and a sustainable system may look entirely different as significant amounts of time pass. In architecture, sustainable design involves building for the future but not for eternity -architecture that is made with an awareness of its intended lifespan and necessary maintenance cycles. This requires realism about what can be achieved and pragmatism about how to implement it. Above all, it requires constant awareness of the wider implications of any design decision; the immediate, local ecological impact may be very different from the long-term, wider impact.

How does your work uniquely contribute to this effort?
It would take more nerve than I possess to describe my contribution as 'unique'! Nevertheless, together with an ongoing interest in the reuse of old building stock - whether in terms of renovating old buildings or the use of demolition materials in new buildings - certain technical and material choices are always non-negotiable when dealing with clients in my own architectural practice. These range from double-glazing and comprehensive insulation, to spatial organizations that enhance natural ventilation and formal arrangements that allow passive heating. The scale of my own contribution is negligible, statistically speaking, but all you can ever do is maintain a personal integrity in the hope that it will set an example, however modest and minor.

When you imagine a sustainable future what do you see? How do you feel?
I see denser patterns of human settlement and correspondingly greater areas of unpopulated nature. Living in concentrated areas allows us to combine and coordinate social infrastructure, public transportation, and material recycling. This entails the majority of people living in farms or cities, with suburbia all but eliminated. That is to say: urban living in an environment that is efficient, hygienic, rich in culture and opportunity, complemented by sparsely populated rural communities in a symbiotic relationship with abundant natural surroundings. And all of this interconnected with a web of invisible communication technology and clean long-distance transport systems.

What is your first impression of the CLEAR project?
Any initiative of this kind deserves unhesitating praise. The challenge is to maintain commitment and focus. For sustainability to be fashionable is great; the danger is that fashions may change. The ultimate aim for initiatives such as CLEAR is to gradually vanish as they saturate every other aspect of contemporary human culture, thereby becoming the essential and unquestioned basis for any development program.

Do any past case studies (successes or failures) come to mind that we might learn from?
For better or worse, one might look at: Jaime Lerner's Curitiba; Paolo Soleri's Arcosanti; Samuel Mockbee's Rural Studio; Ian Athfield's proposal for squatter housing in the Philippines; the work of Friedensreich Hundertwasser; the manifesto of the Metabolist architects; Kisho Kurokawa's Eco-Media City proposals; and the recent attempts in Japan to revive abandoned villages and reinvigorate satoyama landscapes.

Does scale matter? Are there distinctions when designing sustainable solutions for a village vs. a city, for example?
Scale is crucial. Large cities attract people not simply due to economic opportunity, but due to their vast arrays of cultural events and social choices. The smaller the village, the better it must be linked (transport and communication) to other villages and cities. In Japan, this is poignantly demonstrated by rural villages that are inhabited mostly by the very young and the very old, or else completely abandoned

If you were leading the design of a sustainable village, what would you prioritise, and why? Who would you want working with you?
The first priority is water management. Every historical human settlement has begun with access to a significant body of water, whether a lake, a river, or a seacoast. We must ensure adequate supply, cleanliness, and recycling.
A fully functioning team would require experts in water management, as well as the following disciplines:

• Transport infrastructure, both within the village and between the village and its neighbors. This must incorporate every scale and speed, from pedestrian and bicycle to automobile and light rail.
• Horticulture and landscaping, in the creation of a sustainable and beautiful local ecology. This will provide dedicated public space, enhance and maintain air quality, support local fauna and, to some extent, supply food.
• Architecture of every scale and function, produced by architects able to think beyond building aesthetics to more general and profound issues of organization and atmosphere.

Is it possible to replicate the design of one village across different contexts? If so, which design elements would remain consistent no matter what? What would need to change on a case-by-case basis?
Ancient Rome and modern America have proved that replicating a basic urban model across a wide territory is possible, if not necessarily desirable. At the most abstract level, principles certainly exist that may be applicable to all human settlements (as outlined in the preceding answer). At a more concrete level, any replication must take into account significant variations in topography and climate. The building techniques would inevitably change in accordance with locally available materials and techniques.

Does culture play a part in the design of a sustainable village?
While lifestyle is profoundly affected by cultural conditioning, the basic principles of sustainable design should not have to conflict with any local or historical tradition. The sustainable village should aim at becoming a set of principles that may be adapted to any cultural situation, yet should never be compromised by any reactionary or inhumane tendencies that are encountered.

And finally, business models. Are there any you know of that could inform a more robust outcome for this initiative?
It must become clear that sustainability is in everyone's interest, not simply a noble sacrifice by those who can afford it... or a program maintained by government subsidies that are themselves unsustainable. As a first step, attractive and efficient public transport - as exemplified by Manhattan and Curitiba - is a public investment that should ultimately pay for itself in terms of improved local business efficiency and wealth production. Top-down legislation and investment approaches are useful, but equally important are bottom-up shifts in social attitudes - just as smoking has gone from being celebrated to disparaged in a few decades, we can be cautiously optimistic that overtly unsustainable behavior by individuals will become increasingly unacceptable.

---

Thomas Daniell
Born in New Zealand, Thomas Daniell is a practicing architect, critic, and academic based in Kyoto, Japan. He holds a B.Arch from Victoria University, an M.Eng from Kyoto University, and a Ph.D from RMIT University. Currently an Associate Professor at Kyoto Seika University and a Visiting Fellow at the RMIT Spatial Information Architecture Lab, he is also an editorial advisor for the journals Archis and Mark, and was previously on the editorial board of the Architectural Institute of Japan Journal. His most recent book is After the Crash: Architecture in Post-Bubble Japan (Princeton Architectural Press, 2008).