Europan - logo europan.no

Søk

close search

EVOLUTION 3: OBJECT VS. PROJECT (PROCESS)
With communication tools and social networks in the rising, our culture grows less object-based; and this phenomena affects architecture and urbanism. Many young architects are emerging though the implementation of projects presenting less physical objects, yet where the scope of the projects is as important as the objects involved. The objects can already partly exist and the project is about managing the existing, dealing with social constructions, developing a context and raising the question of “urbanism with less or without growth”.

a- Contexts and not only sites
The project can become one additional “layer” over a context, without a clear predefined outline for the intervention on the ground – a context that may also be social, cultural or economic and not only physical.
Consequences for Europan
The sites briefs must include maps of a context around questions of identity, proximity, production, social relations, generational conflicts… The questions must allow strategic projects, projects as a route map. Some sites can be small as long as their mutation is strategic on a larger context. Some sites can encourage opportunities for upcycling, not just recycling but rather taking them as they are, as raw material to integrate in a higher cycle of production.

b- Programmatic innovation
An open question may lead to an unexpected answer. There may be room for programmatic innovation, even redefining the relationship between programme and physical support – both the question and the answer may only be about reprogramming the existing.
Consequences for Europan
New agents in the production and management of space –other than the classic trio of promoter-designer-user– may be called for, both in the questions and in the answers. A project may be based more on the actors sitting around the table, on social construction and not only physical construction.

c- New implementation process
Focusing on the project in its level of appropriation rather than on the object may imply redefining the implementation process.
Consequences for Europan
Some sites can need more incremental projects, projects to develop step by step, with different scopes in time from short to long term, re-definable projects, able to change direction depending on the results of the first steps. Allowing for multiple small interventions –spread over time or over space– requires redefining procedures for a new kind of light urbanism.

d- Innovative representation
How can we describe a social context or a question of identity? What can we give as information to stimulate the research of opportunity areas? And unusual shapes of representation may arise in this context because a classical render of the project may not be very adapted to describe this kind of projects/processes.
Consequences for Europan
The sites briefs must give information on innovative ways. But we can also ask for new graphic languages to be developed in the answers. It may not be easy, misinterpretation is possible… but a flashy rendering can also lead to a wrong impression!