ARCHITECT OBLIGATION TOWARD SOCIETY
- Syuhadah Hamdan
- Jun 18, 2020
- 6 min read
Architects are often expected to serve society and obligated to have society best interest in mind. It is fairly logical thinking as architecture is created for human, hence have power to shaped society. It is commonly known that a piece of architecture can have a great influence on the community. However, the definition of social responsibility is hotly debated. Does the architect have a social responsibility beyond the limit of their practice? How far is that social obligation should fall under the responsibility of an architect? This essay will discuss the arguments that both against and support the notion.
Architecture first and foremost is the profession of business and ensuring one survival in the field is deemed more important than serving the public. Hence the focus toward profitable project is inevitable while the social centred project is well known to be not profitable. Besides, it is hard to balance commercial interest and social responsibility. Even though one may argue that good architecture design can benefits both the client interest as well as the public, the final decision regarding the design intension is still in the hand of the paying client. So, this show that client and investor of the project should be more aware of the social impact of the project, thus, have a more social obligation as to compare with the appointed architect.
Chilean architect, Alejandro Aravena, once said, complex architecture issue requires professional quality, not professional charity. The global problem should serve as opportunities to challenge their capabilities, not a social obligation. It needs more than an ethical approach to solve social issues with architecture. In some cases, the best solution for the issue faced in the architect opinion and social view may not be aligned and not conventional to the public belief. Therefore, in these cases, the obligation to keep society happy may hinder the creativity of the architect. As an architect, one needs to trust their judgement and professional skill to do what best for solving the issue at hand rather than following the public wishes.
Another point is, the burden and responsibility shouldered by an architect are out of proposition with the power they are given. For example, the architect often takes the blame for the ill practice of construction industry even when the actual involvement of the architect in the construction is only about 10 per cent of the built. However, other parties and consultant that are directly involved and working on-site did not shoulder the same pressure and obligation as what architect have. Granted that architect is the professional in this field, but with so little direct involvement on construction, it is hard for them to keep everything in proper order on their own. Instead, the professional bodies need to assist the architect to change client’s behaviour and built construction culture in order to improve the work culture in the industry by providing a strict guideline and raised awareness among all parties involved. Unless architects are given more critical roles in the construction, the architect should not be obligated on how the site is operated, thus should not be completely held responsible for site issue and practice.
Architecture is not as effective as a social catalyst compares to, for example, ending homelessness, stimulating the healthy economy or finding the AIDS cure.it is well known that the important of built environment quality and aesthetic come after all the other basic needs are fulfilled. The intricate and grand architecture are once used to show that a certain area is prospering enough, thus have extra funding and time to spend on designing and building a great building. Architecture is not as essential as farmers harvesting foods or teachers who educated. Built environment and architecture is a mere aiding tool to help the better social life rather than the fundamental tools for them to work.
On the other hand, an architect, especially the star and famous architect have a big influence on setting the trend in the built environment. The project that they are involved in can bring a significant impact on the direction and trend of the industry, as their project normally will garner significant interest from the fellow architect and the public alike. Like how Bjarke Ingels seems to revolutionize the ways architect design and look at the sustainable design. He became the catalyst for the architect to rethink about how a building works and connect to society. This proved that an architect does, in fact, have a certain degree of power to influence and change the built environment to better suit the society needs. In short, an architect can be held responsible and have an obligation to society to use this influence for the public interest.
A good design architecture goes beyond the aesthetics and focus on utility. The built environment generally will last for a long time, hence if the building or space is poorly designed it will not only be a waste of resources but also can be a hindrance to the general public that used the said space. Moreover, it was proven that good architecture also will give positive impact toward economies. Several successful architecture projects show that quality architecture can help boost the economics. Garden by the Bay in Singapore, for example, has become the iconic symbol of the country that it is now a tourist must-visit landmark. So as an architect have the knowledge and mean to help build a better sense of place and community which can be beneficial toward society, it is only right for the architect to hold a certain obligation to make sure the space they designing will not give a negative impact to the user but instead will help nourish the place be more liveable.
While it true architect do need to follow brief by the client they can use their expertise to advise the client to go toward sustainable design. As a professional, an architect should know how to mediate between the client need and society and environmental needs. They also are the one with the knowledge and skills to design a building that is sustainable and have a minimum impact on the environment. In the world where raw resources are quickly depleting, the architect roles in assigning the sustainable and low impact materials have become significantly more important. The design that responds well to the environment will help lower the lower of environmental impact, which, in return will give a positive change to the public.
As the housing issue has become more pressing in the later years, architects are looked as the profession that has the mean and skill to curb and overcome the problem. United nation has estimated that the world homeless population have reached 100 million people while many more lived in inadequate housing in 2005. This figure shows how dire the housing issue is around the world. It is more important than ever for the architect to help formulate a practical and sustainable housing scheme to help lessen the problem. Hence, some argue that architect should be given the same standing as those in the public health and public laws as a way to aid the slum crisis caused by the over-population.
Discussion and Conclusion:
The argument shows that both sides of the debate have a legit standing on the issue. It can be deduced that an architect does have a social obligation, to a certain extend. As the power held by an architect in the industry is limited it is not fair to burden them beyond their profession capabilities. On the other hand, as a professional, an architect should be equipped with a skill to make judgement and decision as to where their social obligation line lies. Architecture is a profession that has close contact with the community and public, hence when designing a space architect should consider the goodwill of the user and the immediate society. On the contrary, the built environment and architecture are not only involved architect, but there are also other industry players that are equally vital as the architect. Therefore, it can be concluded that collective effort form all the built environment disciplines are needed for the built environment to bring positive change to the society. In addition, in term of social obligation, instead of an architect, policies maker and higher authority are the ones that have the real power of making a significant change in the society. As per said before, an architect is mere aiding factors to this cause.
References
Comments