Missing Guardrails and Signposts
There has been a lot of talk about the guardrails that keep government in check and democracy intact. However, there is less discussion about the disorientation of the people after familiar guideposts and milestones disappeared overnight. Professionals are no exception. Their projects are guided through design and construction by rules, codes, and regulations based on science and societal values.
 |
| Firm in the center of turmoil: The North Star (Image: NASA) |
Whether we are architects, developers, engineers, or anyone involved in designing and shaping the built environment, we are accustomed to navigating a maze of laws and regulations, often with the optimistic assumption that, albeit cumbersome, most of these serve noble purposes. It turns out that much of what guides and funds our projects originates at the federal level.
The tectonic shifts in Washington have removed many markers that we professionals use to ensure we are on the right path. If objectives such as sustainability, carbon footprint, diversity, equity, and inclusion—just to name a few—are suddenly declared obsolete, it is as disorienting as disappearing highway signs, malfunctioning GPS, or gas stations along our route being suddenly shuttered.
Values Beyond Regulations
 |
| Missing signs: When sustainability becomes a bad word |
Of course, we are not only guided by rules and regulations but also by professional values and our creativity. Our professional organizations cultivate these values. How will they react to the upheaval?
I am a member of the American Institute of Architects (AIA), the Urban Land Institute (ULI), and Lambda Alpha International (LAI). These and other organizations represent hundreds of thousands of architects, engineers, developers, and land-use professionals who attend local, national, and international events, not only to obtain their continued education credits but also to sharpen their ability to place their projects in a larger societal context. Guidance from these organizations isn't as precise as "exit for downtown DC in 1/2 mile"; instead, it functions as a travel guide that provides information for selecting one’s destination in the first place.
Universities, with their academic reach and freedom, are even more important in shaping the values in which future professionals are trained. Will they remain independent enough to act as lighthouses for professionals?
It took our professional organizations half a century or so to mature from places of networking, marketing, and assisting with the nuts and bolts of cost, materials, and feasibility, to becoming broader resources that help us place our work in the context of social responsibility and performance standards that go beyond a classic pro forma.
As part of this slow-moving transformation, design professionals increasingly realized the hidden undercurrents of our society, from which professionals aren't inoculated either. Intentionally or not, our professions have, at times, assisted or enabled exclusion, contributing to and shaping an environment that is often inhumane, unhealthy, unsustainable, and not resilient. This realization has opened our eyes to the need for and utility of diversity, equity, and inclusion in our staffing, our actions, and the manner in which our projects relate to their societal and natural settings.
While teaching architecture and planning, I have observed how syllabi have expanded to address these many externalities of planning, engineering, and architecture.
Sustainability, Diversity, and Inclusion
Since buildings and transportation are the biggest emitters of carbon, how we design our buildings, towns, and cities is critical for the climate in which our children and grandchildren will live. Responsible action requires not only reducing emissions but also developing structures that can withstand increased weather and climate adversities, thus forming a viable environment for decades to come. Sustainability, therefore, cannot be a metric we toss aside. Without considering sustainability, our buildings, HVAC systems, elevators, glazing systems, vehicles, and trains would become internationally less competitive than they already are in many cases.
 |
| Floods like the one in Ashville become more frequent requiring different design approaches (Webpage) |
All professional organizations recognize the role of the built environment in global warming, human well-being, and the appropriate relationship between the man-made and nature. Cities have recognized that their most economically vital neighborhoods are those that accept and support artists, minorities, refugees, and the LGBTQ community, and only those diverse communities can attract the talent needed to maintain a well-trained workforce. Entrepreneurs and investors have found that only sustainable products can be sold abroad.
Starting in the 1970s, I practiced for ten years in Germany and England before coming to the U.S. Right away, I noticed how many more women were participating in leading roles in meetings and decision-making, how many colleagues and clients came from different cultures and races, and how this less homogeneous makeup enriched our projects. This culture fostered an environment where differing opinions were welcomed, contrasting with the "I am right, therefore you are wrong" approach I often encountered in German discussions surrounding historic preservation, urban renewal, or transportation. After a century in which homogeneous nation-states battled each other, the U.S. model of diversity has emerged as superior, just as nature has taught us that diversity increases resilience.
 |
| Ayn Rand's Howard Roark in the movies: Lone hero |
Along with the shift to collaboration, diversity, and participation, architects have come a long way from channeling Ayn Rand's "Fountainhead" lone hero imposing personal convictions against societal objections, to recognizing that architecture is more than just aesthetically pleasing buildings designed by a solitary artist. Architects have come to realize that bringing projects to fruition is a team sport, requiring consideration of a much larger context than just a building and its lot. AIA and many other professional organizations have recognized that to design projects comprehensively, they should have a membership that reflects their clientele and the demographics of the country itself.
Similarly, developers have shifted from a project-based short-term focus to a longer-term view that considers operational costs, potential barriers for users, and their environmental footprint. Arriving in Baltimore, I had the good fortune of working for an up-and-coming developer who didn't just "do" a project because he could, but who also had a vision for the larger transformation of this post-industrial legacy city. He was not alone. Enlightened developers and planners can be found across America, from reviving the once desolate downtown of LA to repositioning Portland, Oregon, to revitalizing Detroit. ULI's events and materials reflect this shift, from the roving Advisory Service Panels to the "Urban Land" print publication and the online "Knowledge Finder," where materials regarding "green finance," "fair housing," "resilience," and "transit-oriented development" offer guidance for designers and investors alike.
 |
| AIA forum 2023: "Designing for a World in Flux" (Photo: Philipsen) |
Transportation engineers have likewise realized that a car-centric monoculture has many unintended consequences and have begun paying attention to modal diversity and the reality that not everyone is a driver, nor is global urbanization feasible without diverse mobility options. Today, the National Transportation Research Board publishes many documents on carbon emissions, public participation, mobility inclusion, and equity.
At universities, architecture, planning, and engineering departments have attracted more women and minorities, utilizing new drafting, modeling, and GIS technologies extensively to analyze the societal contexts of their fictional (or sometimes real) projects, testing designs for climate performance or for equity and access in their communities.
While progress in all these areas has been slow, growing segments of the professional community have become unhappy—not only older white males who lost influence over boards and leadership roles. Environmentalists complain that laws from the 1960s have evolved into a thicket of rules that require extensive professional teams to navigate, resulting in environmental impact statements thicker than old-style big city phone books, without significantly improving projects. Developers lament how local zoning has become so byzantine that they need special zoning lawyers and expediters to navigate the labyrinth, often seeing projects mired in lengthy litigation. Companies hiring recent graduates have expressed concern that their new hires are insufficiently versed in the basics of design. Creatives wonder if DEI initiatives would stifle creativity or replace it with consensus. The so-called “wokeness” began to grate on those weary of being reminded of their real or perceived privilege. In short, three-quarters of a century in relative peace have produced a society perceived as too complex, too bureaucratic, and too slow to respond to shifting needs and circumstances.
 |
| Increasing diversity in the profession: Students at Morgan State University in Baltimore (Photo: Philipsen) |
The sluggish pace of development has had real consequences: a nationwide housing crisis, with less and less housing available, and even green projects like wind turbines, power lines, solar farms, and transit getting tangled in environmental restrictions. The most innovative developments in the built environment have occurred abroad, including high-speed rail.
Our economic competitiveness has not been aided by a rapidly aging population, a lack of well-trained and low-skilled workers, a pandemic, and wars that until recently seemed unthinkable. Across party lines, many agree that structural reform in numerous areas is inevitable.
The November elections reflected some of this discontent, but only a few believed that entire sections of the government should be dismantled or that massive disorientation and further division would remedy the accumulated problems. In a time of rapid technological innovation, a profession that, by definition, designs the future is, for the most part, unwilling to seek answers in the past.
Division
As divided as the country is, there are certainly design professionals and developers who rejoice at strong hands slashing everything that burdened, threatened, or frightened them. They have long opposed professional organizations influencing the built environment far beyond their original mission, sometimes with activist leanings related to the environment or social inclusion. Critiquing "social engineering" has long been a conservative strategy. Many creatives view the current upheaval as an opportunity for innovation, believing that breaking things is part of the creative process.
Conversely, a substantial group includes DEI provisions in their policies when fashionable and discards them just as quickly when the trend fades. In some cases, one might argue, good riddance. DEI as a mere sticker is unproductive; however, fighting for actual diversity and inclusion is essential for maximizing the potential of our population, whether for competitiveness or for human and civil rights. In this matter, the fog is especially thick.
 |
| AIA CEO Lakisha Ann Wood: ongoing hostilities |
Take AIA: After the 2016 election, the longstanding white male executive director wrote a conciliatory note to the new President, signaling the Institute's collaboration. He faced heavy backlash from members but survived. In 2022, he was succeeded by a much younger Black female, who raised eyebrows for her management style and was even accused of mismanagement and corruption. Although cleared of wrongdoing by an independent investigation, she was so damaged by the efforts to discredit her that she resigned even before the re-elected President was sworn in. The ensuing discussion on the online forum of the "College of Fellows," a group representing less than 3% of the approximately 100,000 AIA architects, illuminates the discomfort with the expansion of traditional architectural responsibilities. Those elevated to this illustrious status are almost entirely older white males.
Building something may take a long time, but breaking it can occur in seconds. As hard as it has been to recognize or change centuries of white supremacy culture, sliding backward can happen in the blink of an eye.
Or can it? Once it is known that the earth is round, there is no going back—at least not for long. Some things are simply not a matter of opinion. This is especially true in our professions. In the fields of buildings, transportation, and land planning, the distinction between fact and fiction is not trivial. It is certainly bigger than gender-neutral bathrooms, paper versus plastic, or filament bulbs versus LED. The built environment we create today will affect generations to come, far beyond the four-year election cycle. It should be possible to find agreement on what is needed to create an environment that will provide value for many years. It should also be possible to eliminate costly distractions or misguided dead ends without throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Unfortunately, that is exactly what is happening in Washington right now.
 |
| Chart of global temps 1940-2024 |
Many values are ingrained in federal, state, and local regulations. They do not change quickly. The last time climate change denial and "woke" policies appeared in the crosshairs of the federal administration, local and state governments doubled down on implementing these policies. This time, however, the administration is using a sledgehammer that reaches down to the local level—particularly effective in cutting off funds for everything that doesn't fit within the new paradigm. The missives, edicts, and cuts affect states, local jurisdictions, and even private projects dependent on grants, subsidies, or any federal support. This approach seems unlikely to yield creative new solutions.
Regardless of our positions, a wide range of our projects will be deeply affected, from transportation to school construction, healthcare, and housing. From "reconnecting communities grants" to "green infrastructure" projects, "alternative transportation" to resilience programs aimed at fortifying buildings against storms, floods, or fire. Even projects with no public funding at all will be influenced by tariffs and trade policies. Much of what we do relies on international trade. Universities often depend on federal grants and research, which could be subject to forced curriculum changes. Much of this is outside our control, adding to the sense of powerlessness amid disorientation. But must we adopt the new paradigm in the areas we can influence? After all, we will still design the future as long as there are projects to execute. We remain part of one of the driving forces of the economy: building and construction. We still possess our creative power.
Will our professional organizations follow social media moguls and strike their DEI policies? Will they resort to a "pure" technocratic response, attempting to isolate the design and production of buildings, transport systems, and land use plans from their "messy" political and societal implications? Will we change our understanding of what constitutes good design?
Atom bombs and eugenics have taught us that there is no "pure" science, let alone purity in building the environment. The realm of science and, even less, design and construction are inseparable from politics, values, and ethics. Practicing design, engineering, construction, development, or even transportation cannot occur in an "ivory tower" free of prejudice, opinion, emotion, or ideology. This insight has taken decades to mature. Hopefully, it cannot be easily unlearned. This insight strikes both ways: politics can enhance or destroy values.
The North Star
When the wayfinders are removed, it helps to have a compass or North Star for guidance. For sea-farers, guidance came from the sky; for professionals tossed into political turmoil, the North Star must come from within: guidance from information, knowledge, and ethics.
 |
| Ethics, Natural Law and a North Star |
In troubled times, it helps to take the long view. Western thinkers often look to antiquity for answers. Architects tend to quote Vitruvius and his "Ten Books on Architecture," typically summarized in just one sentence: A building must be useful, solid, and beautiful. A slightly different version also attributed to Vitruvius lists a series of nouns:
Architecture depends on order, arrangement, eurythmy, symmetry, propriety, and economy (Vitruvius, *de architectura*).
Aristotle is often referenced for guidance on values, stating that all action is futile without moral virtue. Aquinas further developed this ethic, proposing that humans possess an innate understanding of basic, invariable moral principles independent of the current powers in charge. Before and during WWII, Hannah Arendt developed many insightful ideas about the origins of totalitarianism, emphasizing the vital link between an authoritarian figure and the actions of the people. The two cannot be considered separately—an insight that Plato elaborated on in his dialogue The Republic. In other words, real autocracy requires people to enable it.
 |
| Urban wind-power: Antwerp, Belgium (Photo: Philipsen) |
Information, reason, and knowledge are the foundations of enlightenment. While quantum physics has introduced the hypothesis of alternative universes, in practical reality, we must account for what we know to be true. Even if we can agree that some regulations need simplification and bureaucracy requires thinning, the North Star will not point backward toward unfettered use of fossil fuels, combustion engine-driven cars, high water usage toilets, or filament light bulbs, just as we won’t see tube radios or horse-drawn public transit again. It will also not point to the ideology that some races are superior to others, or that absolute greed or exclusion are acceptable.
The facts guiding us to this point are not only undeniable but essential for any long-term survival strategy:
- The changes in climate are already severe enough to require new building designs.
- Even the seemingly local built environment is increasingly an international affair.
- Global migration will not cease, and the modern world requires mingling.
- The global population will increase by another 1–2 billion before it shrinks.
- More people will need more energy, more mobility, more homes, and more food.
- Fossil fuels, space, and many other commodities are finite.
- The diversity of flora and fauna has already reached perilous levels.
No ideology or party affiliation can change these truths. The responsibility of professionals for creating an environment designed to last for decades requires acknowledgment of these realities. Professionals active in the built environment—whether we teach about it, finance it, develop it, build it, or regulate it—must continue to gather information, apply the facts, develop perspective, and use our values as a North Star. This way, we can still chart a responsible course for our projects on the right side of history, regardless of the surrounding confusion. It will take information, courage, and persistence.
Klaus Philipsen, FAIA
No comments:
Post a Comment