Breakfast on Black 2: It’s All About the People Stupid!

The latest in our Breakfast on Black events took place last Friday, attended by an invited group of industry leaders with a passion for sustainable development.  Our speaker this time was Miles Keeping, Head of Responsible Property Investment at Drivers Jonas Deloitte.  Miles’ presentation focused on where value is created in sustainable development, focusing on the human factors and the role that buildings have on the productivity of their inhabitants.



Miles Keeping
Head of Responsible Property Investment
Drivers Jonas Deloitte



Miles kicked of by reviewing the plethora of legislation that has been passed to encourage energy savings in pursuit of the government’s target of an 80% reduction in carbon dioxide emissions by 2050.  Buildings, both new and existing are a key sector as they currently account for about a third of the UK’s total emissions, but as Miles pointed out there have been some very mixed messages coming from the coalition government around encouraging sustainable development.  He highlighted the weakening of the stance taken by HM Treasury, including the heavy cuts made to feed-in tariff’s and blocking the roll-out of Display Energy Certificates(DEC’s).  If as promised this is to be the most sustainable government ever then they have a pretty strange way of showing it!

He went on to explore occupier’s attitudes to sustainability, identifying that most large companies report on sustainability and that this has historically been driven by a range of different motives including:

1                    Increased regulation

2                    Stakeholder pressure

3                    Brand strength

4                    Cost savings

5                    Reporting and disclosure

6                    Business continuity

In Miles’ opinion one of the most powerful drivers for occupiers to choose sustainable buildings is risk mitigation, whether that is from increasing energy cost, impact upon their brands from undesirable media coverage, or direct threats to continuity of trade caused by the impacts of climate change.

He also identified a perceived link between buildings that fall into this category and increased productivity, but acknowledged that the evidence required to substantiate this claim is not yet available.  I find this surprising, as there is research dating back to the 1990’s undertaken at Cardiff University which quantified a 16% reduction in absenteeism in low energy buildings when compared to air conditioned examples in similar locations.  This is an area where our industry needs to undertake urgent research if we are to be able to prove the business case for sustainable development.

Miles showed an interesting diagram showing the different factors of sustainable design, starting with location as the most important factor and moving out to water, waste and energy efficiency.  For me what was most telling about this diagram was that if you discount location as often being predetermined, then the most important factors are design quality, occupier satisfaction, spatial efficiency, flexibility and adaptability.  These are all architectural concerns and they have the largest impact on the sustainability of the completed building.  This highlights the critical importance of user centred design and the significant but often poorly addressed issues around the relationship between people who occupy buildings and the design philosophy that informs their creation.



Diagram of the factors that influence
 sustainable design



There is some strong evidence produced by the British Council of Offices (BCO) which demonstrates that occupiers see factors including energy performance and associated costs as factors which will be of growing importance over the next 10-20 years.  In reviewing this data, Miles also identified that this study showed that low or zero carbon buildings will be areas to experience significant growth.  What is most interesting is that there is no mention of the effects that building design has on the productivity of occupants.  Is this because occupiers do not see this as relevant, or as I would suggest, that they simply were not asked?

What is clear, is that if tenants prefer sustainable buildings, then these buildings are de-risked, making them safer investments and potentially worth more.  The perception in the market, is that sustainable buildings offer greater resilience, are more effective and can offer organisations a competitive advantage.  There is a growing belief that there may be a “green premium” and that this may also accelerate the rate of obsolescence of older, poorer performing stock.  In combination these two factors may have a dramatic affect as investors move away from the old towards the new.  Miles highlighted this trend with research from The Netherlands on the value of energy labels in the European office market that shows a rapid divergence between the value of green index and non-green index buildings.

In conclusion Miles stated that there is increasingly compelling evidence to support a value shift in favour of more sustainable buildings and that this is associated with a perceived increase in risk associated with older, poorly performing stock.  He posed the question “when will productivity become a valuation issue” and stated that there is still a lack of reliable data to prove the link between building design and productivity and that this is a real problem.  I was left with the feeling that so far the industry has delivered only minor energy improvements and that these have been achieved by increasing cost.  The crucial next phase is that we need to demonstrate how sustainability adds real and enduring value and this is all about the productivity of the people who occupy our buildings; or put another way, it is all about the people, stupid!

Renzo and His Piano

Razia and Renzo at RIBA

The evening at the RIBA began well last night as Angela Brady the President making a slip of the tongue and introducing him as “Renzo and his Piano”!  What followed was the first in a series of interviews conducted by Razia Iqbal to be broadcast on the BBC World Service under the title of Dream Builders.  The extended interview format was split into sections with questions from the audience after each section.  This led to a rather fragmented event lasting almost two hours, which never really got to the heart of what makes Renzo Piano tick.

The first section and recurrent theme of the evening was The Shard, with a short film exploring the building and interview with the buildings developer client Irvine Sellar. He told us that when first approached to design a tower, Piano was reticent about undertaking the commission as he thinks that they are usually “phallic and undemocratic”!

The interview that followed set the tone for the evening, with Razia asking a series of not too taxing questions and then allowing Renzo to provide long, poetic, but rather thin answers.  We learned that he thinks natural light is good, lightness a virtue, machines are sexy and transparency essential.  A lot was made of The Shard being a “vertical village” incorporating retail, office, restaurants, hotel and residential uses, along with a public viewing gallery and topped with London’s highest meditation space, which can also cater for up to forty well heeled private function guests.

Piano described the scheme with lyrical prose, as being highly democratic, making a significant contribution to the urban environment and how the words “civic” and “civilised” are virtually the same in Italian.  I am not sure how democratic luxury shops, restaurants and hotels really are, but swanky flats and offices definitely are not!  Sure, it is great to get elevated views over a city from a public viewing gallery, but this can often be experienced by the punter as a long, segregated queue in uninviting left over spaces that are kept out of sight of the beautiful people who the building is really designed for.

Typicl office plan with north point

Sustainability was briefly touched on, with the justification of the all glass façade being that it is triple glazed, with interstitial blinds that automatically close when the sun hits the various splinters that form the envelope.  Piano talked about lightness of the construction but this was really about the visual lightness of the façade than the actual weight and related embodied energy of the structure, made with an enormous amount of concrete.  He claimed that The Shard is the most sustainable tower in the world but did not back up this audacious claim with any evidence.  I was left with the impression that, as with so much in architecture at present, you must tick the sustainability box, but there is no need to let it interfere with how the building is designed.

Following on from The Shard the discussions became more philosophical, with Renzo talking about the size of his organisation and the way they approach their work.  Interestingly he does not see big as beautiful and has imposed a limit of one hundred people so that he can oversee, but not control the output of his office. 

Images of his breathtaking studio, situated on a cliff overlooking the sea outside Genoa appeared on the big screen, along with pictures showing the great man at the helm of his luxury yacht Kirribilli, creating a picture of someone with a very pleasant, if rather suburban lifestyle. 

Richard Rogers was in the audience and it occurred to me that in both his work and the way he organises his practice he is much more engaged with the urban realm.  Rogers work in cities has built upon the ideas behind The Pompidou Centre or as Piano and Rogers refer to it Beaubourg, while Piano’s later works are more aloof, read as objects rather than integrated pieces of the city. When asked if they were to collaborate on another project in the future, what they would like to do, Piano suggested a tower, which Rogers discounted, instead suggesting a Piazza.

After the event I was left thinking that The Shard was a bit of a missed opportunity.  In theory the mix of uses, the context of the site and its adjacency to a major transport hub and the size of the budget should have delivered something remarkable, but this opportunity is I believe frustrated by the tyranny of the image and iconography of the shard as an idea.



Menil Collection

I am left with many questions.  Why are all of the different uses treated with the same elevational response?  What richness would have been created if the programme had been made apparent on the exterior?  How could solar aspect and orientation have informed the design of each of the surfaces?  Is a narrow tapering form really the most appropriate shape to try to fit such a wide range of different user groups and activities within?



Jean Marie Tjibaou Cultural Centre

I have always had a great respect for the work of The Renzo Piano Workshop and their approach, creating intelligent, beautifully crafted, simple elegant modern architecture.  Their Menil Collection and Jean Marie Tjibaou Cultural Centre are highlights, shaped to respond to and manipulate the external environment to condition and regulate the interior, adopting bio-climatic design principles that directly govern the appearance of the completed buildings.  It would have been great if this approach had been taken in London, then we really would have had a relevant, provocative addition to our city. 

User Centred Design: Towards a New Sustainable Architecture

Dieter Rams, the designer behind some of Braun’s most successful products and a major influence on Apple’s Jonathon Ive, powerfully stated in a speech in 1976,



Dieter Rams



“A designer who wants to achieve good design must not regard himself as an artist who, according to taste and aesthetics, is merely dressing up products with a last-minute garment. The designer must be the “gestaltingenieur” or creative engineer.  They synthesize the completed product from the various elements that make up its design. Their work is largely rational, meaning that aesthetic decisions are justified by an understanding of the product’s purpose”.

He went on to articulate his ethos of user-centred design and his now famous 10 commandments of what constitutes good design:

Innovative	Honest
Useful	Long lasting
Aesthetic	Thorough to the last detail
Understandable	Environmentally friendly
Unobtrusive	As little design as possible!



Rams designed hi fi



You have to say that this is still a pretty compelling list, which is hard to argue with.  What is interesting is that while there are products, including I would argue, many designed by Apple, that follow this philosophy, architectural design from 1976 to today has, in the main, tried to satisfy as few of these principles as possible, making a virtue out of the irrational and on occasions the down right perverse!  You only need consider the latest iconic London tower or many of the Olympic buildings to see that what grabs the attention of the media is often the triumph of style over substance.

However, we have found that there are some notable exceptions to this trend, that I would argue signal the beginning of what will become a paradigm shift.  We have been fortunate to work for a number of owner occupier organisations, who having not been able to find buildings that satisfy their criteria have taken the courageous decision to build for themselves.  One of their key requirements is to create spaces specifically designed around the needs of their users, which reinforce the cultural and philosophical values that they hold.  They are not interested initially in what the building will look like, but how it works and what benefits it will bring in terms of reinforcing their values and how it will deliver measurable improvements in the way they conduct their core activities.

Central to their thinking is the way building design can facilitate team working, communication and knowledge sharing.  Ultimately, they demand solutions that will enhance the value created by the people who use them.  To achieve this objective requires a reappraisal of the nature of the workplace, challenging assumptions regarding occupation density, open plan to cellular ratios, break out space organisation and the provision of congregational facilities where all members can be brought together.  The architecture is developed from the user outward, rather than trying to force them into a pre-defined container.

This approach challenges the traditional Venn diagram that defines sustainability as being located at the intersection of the social, economic and environmental aspects of a project.  To articulate this approach we have developed the Black Target Diagram that places social issues at the centre of the process.  Economic factors form the outer frame to ensure that what is proposed is as innovative as possible while being deliverable within the available budget.  Environmental impacts must be minimised without impacting on the needs of the user or the economic sustainability of the overall project.

I believe that this approach will deliver the paradigm shift that is required if we are to address the challenges of our age, delivering buildings that are intrinsically sustainable.  They will no longer be designed simply to reinforce the house style of their architects, but will instead deliver a radical new sustainable architecture, moulded and shaped to satisfy the needs of its intended users.  It will be rational, logical and inherently beautiful and most importantly, capable of responding to the massive challenges that our society faces.

I believe that the future is already here, but it is just that we have not noticed yet.  We urgently need to design buildings that are relevant and this can only be achieved if we apply a user centred design process, focused on social sustainability and adopt the rigor set out in Dieter’s 10 commandments. 

Greenbuild Expo 2012

I am writing this blog on the train back from Manchester after presenting at Greenbuild Expo 2012 struggling to decide whether or not it was worth the long trip north.  This was my first time at this show and I have to say it did make a pleasant alternative to the monster that EcoBuild has become.  On the positive side the presentations take place within the exhibition hall, so it is easy to catch those that are of most interest and catch-up on the trade stalls in between.



Greenbuild Expo at Manchester Central

I had a good look around the show first and found that although there were less manufacturers represented than EcoBuild, there was the now familiar range of PV, low energy lighting and solar water heating solutions, along with a smaller number of consulting companies and media organisations.  The product with the largest range of options was definitely biomass heating systems, ranging in scale from the domestic right up to the industrial.  I was left wondering if we are increasing the amount of fuel we grow at the same rate that different technologies for its consumption are being brought to market? 

Before making my presentation I had just enough time to catch a session by Rachael Mellows of M&S and Ed Dixon of Simons Construction on M&S’s Plan A, Sustainable Learning Store at Cheshire Oaks.  They build two of these projects each year and then undertake post occupancy evaluation before incorporating the most successful initiatives into their mainstream development programme.  What is surprising is that as a repeat client there is still this separation between learning and development.  I think it would be cheaper and easier to redesign their standard store model in such a way that it is economically sustainable and able to be rolled out everywhere.





What was most noticeable about the presentation was the emphasis placed on community consultation and engagement during both the planning and construction phases.  There was some interesting ideas about local procurement with the majority of packages drawn from companies within 25 miles of the site and then 50 miles if no suitable companies are available locally.  It was stated that for each package about 60% is spent on labour with the remaining 40% on materials and that the majority of expenditure on labour is spent locally, whereas materials need to be sourced from much further away.  I am old enough to remember when the majority of M&S products were “made in Britian” and this got me thinking that it would be great if their buildings were specifically designed to be made with building products and materials from the UK.



Institution of
Civil Engineers
8 Storeys Gate Building

In the afternoon I spoke about our project for The Institution of Civil Engineers at 8 Storeys Gate, as part of the session on commercial refurb.   I ran though our approach to the refurbishment of this grade 2 listed building in Westminster, explaining how user centred design and social sustainability were at the heart of our design process.  There was significant interest in research that Professor Doug King has carried out that begins to challenge measurement of CO² emissions not on a per square meter basis but instead uses a per workstation measurement. 

This analysis suggests that mixed mode buildings are more sustainable than passively conditioned exemplars as they do not rely on low occupation densities.  This also offers the benefit of larger teams being able to work in closer proximity improving communication and user efficiency.  We have used these higher densities to create a wider range of social spaces throughout the building.  These provide venues for colleagues to meet and share knowledge on an informal basis, helping to break down barriers to communication created in multi storey buildings.

I concluded by making a challenge to the traditional, three ring, Venn diagram that places sustainability in the region where the rings intercept; arguing instead that social sustainability should be at the centre of a target diagram, constrained by economics and with environmental design that meets the needs of both users and the budget with the least impact on the planet.



Renault Twizy Electric Quadracycle

As I was leaving the Manchester Centre I had the chance to take a first look at Renault’s new Twizy electric quadracycle with a 70 mile range on a full charge that only costs £1.  Even better, it is road tax exempt.  If only building technology products could be so well resolved and so cheap to run.

Green Architecture or Sustainable Development?

At the Building Centre this afternoon for their session,

“What Does Green Architecture Mean to You”?

Hosted by Ellis Woodman, Editor of Building Design and the architectural correspondent for The Telegraph, Ellis introduced presentations from four emerging practitioners, Tom Coward of AOC, Justin Bere of Bere Architects, Dan Jones of Civic and Adam Khan of Adam Khan Architects who briefly introduced their work.

Ellis opened the session by referring to a Tweet that he had received this morning questioning how the line-up of speakers had been selected.  A good question, was this more to do with promoting emerging new practices and less to do with their approach to sustainable architecture?  His criterion was to find panelists who approach sustainability from a broad perspective, going beyond simply considering technical issues.  I would argue that it is impossible to consider sustainability without going beyond the technical, but then I have no idea what constitutes green architecture either.  Maybe all would become clear? 



Gaylingay Eco Hub



First up was Dan Jones of Civic who illustrated his approach with a case study of the Gamlingay Eco Hub, a refurbishment and extension of an existing 1960’s community centre.  The low population of the village location, along with its lack of cultural diversity, made the project ineligible for grant funding and this led to a slow funding and development process over a seven year period with the client community leading the process.  He claimed that the building was “dark green” as it features an enviable array of low energy technologies including PV’s, solar thermal water heating and a ground source heat pump.  These were included not simply because they were “the right thing to do” but because, he claimed, they made the project economically sustainable by helping to secure funding and reducing running costs.  It was not clear what measures had been undertaken to improve the thermal insulation and airtightness of the 80% of the existing building that was retained.  Similarly, it would have been good if the claimed benefits of the renewables had been backed up by some number.  He concluded by saying that for him green architecture was not simply about buildings but had more to do with working closely with the community that occupies them.



No 1 Low Carbon Drive



Tom Coward of AOC was next up and presented not a piece of architecture, but as he described them, a series of conversations that they had produced to encourage the retrofitting of existing homes.  These included their No 1 Low Carbon Drive project, a full size, two storey exhibition pavilion, first installed in Trafalgar Square, that showed a range of interventions home owners can make to improve energy efficiency, a low energy dolls house, currently on display at The building Centre and their current proposal to reconfigure part of the exhibition space at The Building Centre into a full scale walk through installation of a house, where low energy products are displayed in the relevant parts of the home.  The most interesting aspect of AOC’s projects was the clear simple methods that they have developed to engage the home owner.  He illustrated the urgent need for action by making the point that only 12% of our existing housing stock was built since 1990 and therefore the remaining 88% is in urgent need of significant retrofitting if we are to achieve our carbon emission commitments.    He concluded with some observations of how our priorities are skewed to favour property speculation over investment in improving our homes and illustrated the point with the fact that to recoup the investment in retrofitting a house would take 25 years but most owners move every 6 to 12 years.  In theory, the Green Deal should help to overcome this issue.  Interestingly, he discussed the idea of “energy descent” where lower consumption is seen as synonymous with reduced choice and ultimately a less desirable future.  This to me is the real challenge, we have to develop an architecture that is demonstrably better to inhabit while using significantly less energy and this can only be achieved by placing people’s needs and social sustainability at the heart of the design process.



Brockholes Visitor Centre

Adam Khan began by challenging the term “green Architecture”, stating that it is a tautology like humane, civilised or beautiful architecture and is unhelpful.  I would put it more strongly; it is actually meaningless.  He characterised the current architectural debate as a battle between those in denial of the need for change and a group of new green functionalists who measure everything but are unable to value what is important.  It strikes me that a healthy dose of sustainable functionalism is a good thing, helping to break the stranglehold of the current obsession of the media who extol the virtues of the iconic with no real interest in the relevance of the work.  Adam described his personal journey of discovery during the course of their Brockholes Visitor Centre project, driven by their client who was passionately committed to sustainable development, illustrating the point with reference to the learning that he had made through following the BREEAM process.  He talked of his surprise at being challenged by other team members about the inclusion of large amounts of glass at low level in the original concept and acknowledged that effective teamworking is central to the environmental performance of the finished building.  He concluded by praising FAT’s scheme for New Islington as a good example of green architecture because it only uses expensive details on the front elevation and was conceived to allow occupants to customise and adapt behind the fancy if thin front facade.  I found this argument about as convincing as the stage set architecture that it credits!



Mayville Community Centre



The final presentation was by Justin Bere of Bere Architects who championed the Passivhaus process as the best method of achieving affordable green architecture, illustrating his claim with evidence of actual delivered energy savings of completed buildings; including their Mayville Community Centre, in use.  The facts and figures were compelling and helped to differentiate his approach to those of the other speakers.  This is a crucial issue if we as a profession are to build a body of evidence to convince sceptics of the urgent need for change.  He talked compellingly about how comfortable Passivhaus buildings are, citing constant internal temperatures during both winter and summer, with regulated internal humidity helping to improve indoor air quality and even reducing house mite numbers.  Justin spoke from a position of knowledge and expertise that was both intelligent and engaging.  He identified the importance of exceeding the expectations of buildings users and powerfully illustrated the point with an anecdote about a group of elderly users who report that their new community centre is a more comfortable environment than their homes.  However, this may tell us as much about their homes as it does about the finished building

Ellis concluded the session identifying how user groups and bottom up action had shaped a number of the projects presented and posed the question if this would result in a redefinition of the role of the architect, before inviting questions from the audience.  These ranged from specific issues around green specification to more strategic questions including the role of the planning system and the conflict between existing Conservation Area policies and the need to retrofit external insulation.  I posed the question of whether a paradigm shift in thinking is required if we are to effectively address the issues of our age.  Interestingly, this was interpreted by most of the panelists as advocating a “technofix” rather than adopting the core principles of bioclimatic architectural design and a return to the basic principles that have guided the architectural development for centuries.

While it was an interesting session, I was left feeling that we have a long way to go if we are to address the urgent challenges of our age.  The fact that we are still talking about green architecture is depressing; let’s face it even the RIBA are belatedly embracing the idea that sustainable architecture is the way forward and are consulting members on embracing a definition of sustainability based on the Bruntland definition, dating back to 1987, incorporating social, economic and environmental components.  I had hoped for the emerging young guns to offer some radical new perspectives but I was ultimately left a little disappointed.

Eco Porn!

Today we hosted the first of our Breakfast on Black sustainability briefings.  The purpose of the event was to expose the misleading claims that dominate the debate and to identify routes that we as an industry can adopt to address the real issues that we face.  As it said in the invite:

“Slapping a trendy buzz word on the end of your latest project name, or dripping a thinly veiled layer of “green jewellery” over it in an attempt to make it appear more attractive, is not the answer to sustainable development.  It’s a quick fix.  A one night stand.  It only highlights the cheap and dirty side of susta-inability”!

An exclusive group of carefully selected guests enjoyed a good breakfast before hearing Professor Doug King give a passionate and incisive critique of the state of sustainable design with the UK construction industry.



Professor Doug King



Doug pulled no punches as he set out the scale of the challenge that we face; illustrating how the widely predicted increase of 4 degrees centigrade in global temperatures, will render vast areas of the planet from southern Argentina to the south of France uninhabitable.

He compared the improvements in energy efficiency that have been achieved in the car industry, where the most inefficient car is five time less efficient than the best in class; and then made a similar comparison with buildings, identifying a factor of seven difference.  When this is considered alongside the fact that buildings account for almost half of the UK’s CO² emissions, while transportation in total only accounts for just over a quarter, the need for the construction industry to make a step change in the products that we deliver to society becomes dramatically apparent.

He then went on to explore the commitments that our government have made to cut UK emissions, first by 34% of 1990 levels by 2020 and then by 80% by 2050.  To achieve these goals he argued that we either need to completely rethink the way we design buildings to achieve a step change improvement in performance, or accept recession levels of economic activity and associated energy use, for the next 38 years.

Doug concluded his dynamic and challenging presentation by busting some of the myths, lies and frankly bullshit that have been used by our industry to apply eco-bling to projects that otherwise represent a business as usual approach, while making exaggerated claims to the contrary.  He took great delight in exposing the lies used to justify wind turbines in inappropriate urban ares, PV installations that are overshadowed by surrounding buildings and air conditioning units that have been rebranded as air source heat pumps.

Doug concluded with a good kicking for architects, who specify solar shading on north facing elevations where it is not only pointless, but actually increase energy consumption by reducing daylighting, before concluding his talk with an image of The Palestra Building, with its over glazed façade and token windmills; a perfect example of eco-bling?  He ended his presentation by making the point that over the last 15 years the most economic buildings, both in terms of construction and operational cost have ultimately proved to be the most sustainable.

There followed a wide ranging and intelligent series of questions from the audience:

Does slavishly following environmental performance benchmarking procedures like BREEAM, LEED and SKA increase the chances of an over-emphasis on active system above more effective and economically sustainable passive envelope measures?

Does intrinsic value emanate from the economic and social aspects of a project, rather than more subjective, emotional environmental arguments?

The session concluded with an acknowledgement of the urgent need for expert, repeat clients, to up their game and make commissioning selections based on performance characteristic rather than simply buying a sexy but ultimately vacuous iconic image.

All in all a thoroughly provocative event that provided much food for thought; along with a full English; what better way to start a Friday morning?

Norwegian Beauty is More Than Skin Deep



The National Tourist Route
Trollstigen, Norway
by Reiulf Ramstad Architects


I was at the RIBA on Tuesday night for the New Norwegian Architecture Lecture and the launch of an exhibition, Contemporary Norwegian architecture: Landscapes and interventions.  There were two speakers from Reiulf Ramstad Architects and Jensen & Skodvin.  Both presented a series of projects in rather rushed twenty minutes sessions which focused on the relationship between physical context and built form; particularly evident in a series of government funded commissions for small projects that populate the more remote parts of the National Tourist Routes.

Liasanden Rasteplass
Verdalen, Norway
by Jensen & Skodvin 

These interventions vary in scale from a lay-by in a forest through to elevated viewing platforms that provide unprecedented views of the dramatically beautiful Norwegian landscape.  What was particularly interesting about these projects was the way that they have been procured; no PQQ’s here, but instead a strong desire on the part of the government to provide opportunities for smaller, emerging practices to gain experience designing buildings for people to use and enjoy.

Both speakers emphasised the importance of the Norwegian social democratic tradition, citing social concerns as key influences that directly inform their design process.  What was particularly satisfying was the lack of overt iconography, which resulted in architectural responses that were simple and humble.  I was left with the distinct impression that these are buildings that would be best experienced in use.

What was really striking about all of the work presented was the quality of materials, the refinement of the details and craftsmanship of the delivery. This is not work that has been molested by the dead hand of “value engineering" that seems to cripple so many of our smaller, local public projects.  The architecture reflects the confidence of a nation with abundant natural resources, one of the highest earnings per capita on the planet and some of the most beautiful scenery.  In many ways Norway is blessed and must be a great place to work as an architect!

After the lecture the Norwegian Ambassador officially opened the exhibition which runs until 15^th June 2012 at the RIBA.  I cannot remember another event where the audience were so attractive; due to the large number of statuesque Norwegians in attendance!

Redefining Sustainability and the Decline of Ecobuild

So, it is that EcoBuild time of the year again!  I gave a presentation in the session “Changing behaviour for the energy efficient operation of buildings” about how buildings can be designed to improve occupant behaviour and energy consumption.  The session was very well attended, standing room only, with over eighty people in the room.  Not bad for the last session of the day.

John Connaughton of Davis Langdon who opened and chaired the session provided a good overview of the issues encountered when trying to encourage more energy conscious occupation.  John explained how we have become a “powered up nation”; in love with our gadgets.  This has led to a dramatic rise in small power consumption that has negated much of the savings made by more efficient systems and higher performing building envelopes.  In his office John has used thermal imaging to show occupants the energy wasted by transformers and adaptors.  He also identified that as energy performance improves occupants tend to increase their comfort levels by turning up the heating or air conditioning.

Following John, Joanna Eley of AMA Alexi Marmot Associates explored her research work with the Cabinet Office that demonstrated how difficult it is to use traditional methods to change occupant behaviour.  She described a number of initiatives that have been developed to address this issue, including CoolBiz, a Japanese Government backed scheme that encourages employees to change the way they dress for work to suit the climate, rather than simply relying on heating and cooling systems.  Joanna also presented the work of Dan Lockton, who designs products specifically to affect user behaviour, including a light switch that looks messy when it is on; and is tidied up by switching it off!

Peter Fisher of Bennetts Associates introduced his talk with a comparison of the work of Dieter Rams and Jonathon Ive, using the Braun Razor and the Iphone to illustrate that both the simple razor and the complex phone have been designed with an obsessive focus on simplicity and ease of use.  He drew the analogy with the work of his practice, who strive to achieve buildings that occupants can understand and are intuitive to use.  To illustrate this philosophical approach he presented their recently completed project for the refurbishment of Hampshire County Council Headquarters in Winchester.  This is a great scheme that I have had the pleasure to visit.

For my presentation I focused on user centred design and the need to redefine the way we think about the interrelation between the social, economic and environmental aspects that make up sustainable development.  I proposed that the traditional Venn diagram composed of three equal overlapping circles was no longer appropriate and proposed that we should move to a target model that places social and user needs at the centre of the design process, with the economic constraints defining the outer edge of the target with the environmental responses developed to satisfy the needs of both.

I also described work that we have been developing with Doug King of King Shaw where we challenge the metrics that we measure to assess the performance of buildings.  We believe that considering energy use per square meter is irrelevant and that we should as an industry move to measuring it on a per occupant basis!  When this approach is applied it produces some very interesting results, including higher levels of energy use in passively conditioned offices when compared with mixed mode solutions due to the higher densities of occupation that can be sustained in the latter.

While the presentations at EcoBuild continue to offer a broad range of both subjects and speakers, I am not sure that the trade show element has managed to stay relevant.  In many ways the use of the “eco” prefix that is applied to the show and all products on display, from toilets to solar panels, regardless of their actual performance characteristics, reflects a wider malaise in the construction industry, namely its failure to holistically embrace the social, economic and environmental aspects that must be addressed in the quest for more sustainable outcomes.  It feels to me that now is the time for a new forum to be developed, where smaller more innovative companies can afford to display their products.  Any thoughts on what we should call it?