Trans-Co-Design: Time-Based Eco-Systemic Performance

Image 1: Community GIGA-mapping of the COLridor project to support the local eco-system in a local restaurant (photo: Davidová 2017)

We are in a period of significant social changes where the environment and the related democracy are on thin ice. Society globally is divided into two camps: one calling for greater participation and sustainability, the other leaning towards dictatorship and the exploitation of natural resources. Their crystallization leads to subsequent migration of populations, further dividing these groups. In the complexity of this contemporary world, it is inevitable for architects to reassess their roles. Transdisciplinary collaborative practices are increasingly turning to a broader spectrum of stakeholders, particularly the public. This transforms these processes into co-design. This means co-designing with interested parties, primarily end users (Sanders & Stappers, 2008). If we look at these stakeholders in architecture from a non-anthropocentric perspective (Hensel, 2013), we must also include other biotic and abiotic members of the ecosystem, such as plants, animals, or climatic factors. Design is no longer about form, but about their performance (Leatherbarrow, 2013), or interaction (Davidová, 2009). It thus concerns what is called time-based design, defined at the turn of the millennium by Sevaldson (Sevaldson, 2004). Time-based design, or design in time, is an ever-evolving process with no final result, where partial outcomes are actually full-scale prototypes or in their primary content, modified over time. In public space, more significant positive social change can be triggered by urban prototypical interventions (Davidová, 2004; Doherty, 2005), which allow their surroundings to participate in their development and realization, rather than a top-down defined master plan. These can also have their foundation in co-design. Co-design, unlike participation, allows active designing by participants rather than just expressing opinions on proposed solutions (Sanders & Stappers, 2008).
My colleagues and I use GIGA-mapping (Davidová, 2014; Sevaldson, 2011, 2015) as a tool for such processes, which is interdisciplinary, visual diagramming of the complexity of relationships between discussion subjects (see Image 1). Following this are prototypical interventions. They behave, shape, develop, and evaluate themselves and are redesigned over time. Their aim is a shared coexistence among species and physical agents within the ecosystem. For example, the wooden, responsive wall Ray, through its colonization by algae, co-designs and co-creates both the prototype itself and its performance (see Image 2).

Image 2: Prototype Ray2, a climatically responsive wall venting in dry conditions and closing in humidity through buckling, which is colonized by algae that modify its performance by absorbing moisture from the wood. Note the distribution of algae colonization according to the wettest parts of the formal aspect of the prototype. This creates an interaction between the performance of the form, the living colonization, and the micro-climate (photo: Davidová 2017)

We are now applying this wall to the insect hotels TreeHugger in the center of Prague (see Image 3) to support the bio-top on Nusle stairs in the COLridor project (Davidová, 2017). By creating a climate comfort for insects, we will create an edible landscape (Davidová, Zatloukal, & Zímová, 2017) for local bats and birds. The project is collaboratively and transdisciplinarily designed with the community and other interested parties. However, it is the end users who will develop the project through their habitation and social interaction. This will be supported by the EnviroCity festival (Davidová & Kernová, 2016), where multi-genre performers must express themselves regarding the COLridor project through their performance, whether they are dancers, ecologists, or politicians. The collected data will then be used for its further development.
This project aims to prevent development in the area while fostering community understanding that even the urban environment is an integral part of the ecosystem. It exemplifies how policy and community society can be built through plant and animal species and the physical climate environment from the ground up.

Image 3: TreeHugger, insect hotel for the COLridor project utilizing the performance of responsive wood (photo: Davidová 2017)

The fusion of such time-based systemic processes, where the outputs are prototypes developed and enacted by both biotic and abiotic actors, has led me to the ratification of a new field of design: Systemic Approach to Architectural Performance.

References:
Davidová, M. (2004). Gary Doherty: On Spatial Dialogues. Stavba, 5(6), 18.
Davidová, M. (2009). Exploring Environmental Dimensions: On Sustainability as an Architectural Problem: Why It Is Not Enough To Discuss Space and Time Only. In B. Sevaldson (Ed.), Nordes 2009 - Engaging Artifacts (pp. 1–4). Oslo: Oslo School of Architecture and Design. Retrieved from www.researchgate.net
Davidová, M. (2014). Generating the Design Process with GIGA-map: The Development of the Loop Pavilion. In B. Sevaldson & P. Jones (Eds.), Relating Systems Thinking and Design 2014 Symposium Proceedings (pp. 1–11). Oslo: AHO. Retrieved from http://systemic-design.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/MD_RSD3_GeneratingtheDesignProcesswithGIGA-map.pdf
Davidová, M. (2017). COLridor. Retrieved March 31, 2017, from https://www.facebook.com/COLridor/
Davidová, M., & Kernová, M. (2016). EnviroCity - Facebook. Retrieved April 1, 2016, from https://www.facebook.com/envirocity/
Davidová, M., Zatloukal, J., & Zímová, K. (2017). Responsive Transformer: The Bio-Robotic Adaptive Architecture. In F. Mahbub, S. Uddin, & M. A. Khan (Eds.), International Design Conference: DESIGN EVOLUTION [Education and Practice] (pp. 1–8). Karachi: Indus Valley School of Art and Architecture. Retrieved from https://www.researchgate.net/publication/313759423_Responsive_Transformer_The_Bio-Robotic_Adaptive_Architecture
Doherty, G. (2005). Prototypes in Pinkenba. In Nordes 2005 - In the Making (Vol. 0, pp. 1–5). Copenhagen: Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, School of Architecture. Retrieved from http://www.nordes.org/opj/index.php/n13/article/view/262/245
Hensel, M. (2013). Performance-Oriented Architecture: Rethinking Architectural Design and the Built Environment (1st ed.). West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Leatherbarrow, D. (2013). Foreword. In M. Hensel (Ed.), Performance Oriented Architecture: Rethinking Architectural Design and the Built Environment (1st ed., pp. 9–11). West Sussex: Wiley.
Sanders, E. B.-N., & Stappers, P. J. (2008). Co-creation and the new landscapes of design. CoDesign, 4(1), 5–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15710880701875068
Sevaldson, B. (2004). Designing Time: A Laboratory for Time Based Design. In Future Ground (pp. 1–13). Melbourne: Monash University. Retrieved from http://www.futureground.monash.edu.au/.
Sevaldson, B. (2011). GIGA-mapping: Visualisation for complexity and systems thinking in design. Nordes ’11: The 4th Nordic Design Research Conference, 137–156. Retrieved from www.nordes.org
Sevaldson, B. (2015). Gigamaps: Their role as bridging artefacts and a new Sense Sharing Model. In Relating Systems Thinking and Design 4 (pp. 1–11). Banff: Systemic Design Research Network. Retrieved from app.box.com

Marie Davidová, founding Member and Chair of Collaborative Collective, z.s.; PhD Research Fellow at the Faculty of Art and Architecture at the Technical University of Liberec and the Faculty of Architecture at the Czech Technical University in Prague; Guest Studio Course Leading Teacher at the Faculty of Art and Architecture at the Technical University of Liberec, Czechia