Still from Gravity, Alfonso Cuarón, 2013

With the opening of the UN COP26 climate summit this weekend, the eyes of the architectural world will be upon Glasgow to see what, if any, effective measures of memoranda will come out of the two-week conference. Past COP summits have resulted in monumental policy measures like the Paris Agreement and Kyoto Protocol. Recent conferences have been seen as less successful. The most recent meeting was dubbed “a major disappointment” after failing to produce a consensus on a number of different key climate issues. 

This year’s event is perhaps the most anticipated in the organization’s history. The Queen of England will not be attending. Other prominent figures will skip the conference as well. The architectural community will be well-represented, with contingents from the AIA, RIBA, and other institutions and practitioners who all have stakes in climate change policies and the built environment. 

Global voices, from Greta Thunberg to Prince Charles, have derided world leaders for their empty rhetoric surrounding climate change, even going as far as to express their concerns that the conference will be “just talk” and produce paltry anything in the way of policy changes and significant reforms. 

Archinect spoke with several architects working around the issue to see what their expectations are for the conference in terms of its output and the possible initiatives that might arise from it. 

Peter Exley, 2021 President of the American Institute of Architects and part of the organization’s contingent at the conference

Setting aside the sobering evidence of our environmental degradation, our collective success will be a matter of commitment and scale. One of the important ways we can think about architecture’s agency in the fight for equality is zero-carbon design, which is an ethical approach to human-centered design and planet-centered action.

Some architecture firms have wisely made climate action a success metric for every single project they complete. Many of them have signed the 2030 Commitment the American Institute of Architects maintains in partnership with Architecture 2030. The largest among them will join COP26 in Glasgow and their participation is a testament to their commitment to a healthier planet and an uncompromising design ethic. Beyond commitment, action is needed at all scales.

One of the important ways we can think about architecture’s agency in the fight for equality is zero-carbon design, which is an ethical approach to human-centered design and planet-centered action. — Peter Exley

Our focus at COP26 will be establishing new partnerships with world leaders and to share recommended resources that will assist both policymakers and practitioners with a better understanding of the built environment and its impact on our climate and its inhabitants.

It is imperative that world leaders meeting in Glasgow fully commit to adopting aggressive building policies, incentives, and codes to meet the COP26 Communiqué — a challenge to sovereign world governments to step up their commitments to reduce carbon emissions from the built environment to meet the Paris Agreement’s carbon budget.

We know the design community is committed to addressing climate change, and now we must take action at all scales to realize goals that are daunting but achievable. 

Signe Nielsen, RLA, FASLA, Founder of Mathews Nielsen Landscape Architects

Socio-political boundaries are an inevitable part of the Anthropocene epoch. Rarely coincident with ecological boundaries, political borders impose substantial costs on biodiversity and ecosystem restoration by fragmenting governance and management. Boundaries in nature are governed by biology, chemistry, and physics and function interdependently; natural systems do not operate in isolation, and their actions are both spatially and temporally dynamic.

My hope is that emergence of a political will to collaborate will not be suppressed by the perceived need to maintain sovereignty. — Signe Nielsen

Much of the global community’s actions thus far have focused on developing partnerships to reduce carbon emissions and directing funds towards global net-zero. COP26’s Goal #2, to protect and restore ecosystems and protect communities, needs to reframe the dialogue around transboundary natural resource management. Perhaps by quantifying mutual economic benefits of conservation across political boundaries or by defining measurement methods and metrics to evaluate ecosystem services, we can establish benchmarks for this goal as has been done for emissions reduction. This is not a new idea. The Society for  Ecological Restoration (SER) established International Standards for the Practice of Ecological Restoration (December 2016).

I urge the members of COP26 to adopt actionable policies such as these to advance Goal #2. My hope is that emergence of a political will to collaborate will not be suppressed by the perceived need to maintain sovereignty. 

Helen Lochhead, Dean of the Faculty of Built Environment at the University of New South Wales (UNSW) Sydney and the former President of the Australian Institute of Architects

With the release of the latest IPCC report in August, it was widely conceded that the climate crisis had escalated. It is an emergency that can no longer be ignored. In the lead up to COP26 in Glasgow, the world will focus on what we can do to immediately address this crisis, and there is an opportunity to lobby our political leaders to step up and be more ambitious. 

The target of a net-zero target by 2050 does not go far enough. It’s a minimum. We need stronger short and medium-term targets, policies, and a plan with clear steps for how to get there. To reduce emissions and accelerate transformation to zero-carbon, what we do in the next 10 years will be critical. With the built environment accounting for almost 40 per cent of all carbon emissions globally, there are low-hanging fruits for governments and industry to take up now, for some quick wins — incentives to use renewable energy, low-carbon products, and building upgrades for example, and regulation to decarbonize the industry with more stringent codes mandating energy-efficient buildings. 

The target of a net-zero target by 2050 does not go far enough. It’s a minimum. We need stronger short and medium-term targets, policies, and a plan with clear steps for how to get there. — Helen Lochhead

Architects have a pivotal role to play in the race to net-zero. We have a responsibility to engage in this challenge and, importantly, the skills to develop solutions that demonstrate the benefits. If we want to position architects as leaders in a zero-carbon future, we need to lead by example.

In Australia, working with colleagues across the sector, the Institute of Architects has made decarbonizing our construction industry by 2030 our focus. This includes a range of initiatives. We have introduced new national standards of competency for architects in zero-carbon design, secured architects commitment to go zero-carbon in their projects and practices, and our next task is a new Australian standard for zero-carbon buildings. 

The message is clear, if we act now, it will make the difference in the long run.  

Anna Lisa McSweeney, Architect at White Arkitekter and a Steering Committee member of UK Architects Declare

My hope is for government to comprehend that market forces alone cannot decarbonize our economy with the necessary urgency, nor deliver the systemic change requisite for it to happen. 

We need leadership from our Government to help shift our current exploitative consumerist culture; vision to show how an alternative, regenerative, and equitable economy would improve quality of life; and a roadmap that sets out how we will get there.

I am hoping for transparent commitments to be set by both government and non-state actors, with targets against which progress can be measured and accountability held, and recognition that all sectors must rise to the challenge. 

In relation to the built environment, I have witnessed a uniquely uncompetitive and generous attitude amongst my industry peers who are developing tools, guidance, and policy recommendations to address the impact our industry has on the climate challenge. This work has been undertaken collaboratively and made open source, by climate concerned volunteers who understand the need to act now in order to mitigate greater challenges to come. I do not believe this responsibility should be left to individuals and the private sector. I am hoping that the demands that have been made by these various industry organisations in the lead up to COP26 will be considered by Government. Speaking as one of these volunteers, I hope that I haven’t wasted my time. 

This sentiment relates to a broader issue: the difficulty of engaging the public in climate activism and to participate in democratic decision making; the issue is one of not feeling heard.  

I hope that governing and economic structures will begin to recognize the consequences of short-termism and begin planning for our future generations and legacy. Industry innovators have shown that it is possible to create net-positive places that not only mitigate climate breakdown but also improve planetary wellbeing. These innovators are just that, because they have had to challenge systemic constraints in the way we plan for, procure, design, fund and construct buildings.

My hope is for government to comprehend that market forces alone cannot decarbonize our economy with the necessary urgency, nor deliver the systemic change requisite for it to happen. — Anna Lisa McSweeney

If we are to go beyond our ‘net-zero’ goals and restore the damage already done to the natural world, we need these kinds of pioneering projects to become the mainstream. This will only happen if our government gives support and raises the standards on what and how we build today, because in general, cost and time dictates that we don’t build above the baseline if we don’t have to.

Government must also understand that many of our challenges, low-carbon heating for example, are a design problem, and that design professionals must be engaged accordingly. Within the Government’s recently published Heat and building strategy, the word ‘engineer’ features just 25 times, and ‘architecture/architect’, not once. There is clear messaging in the media that we need to switch to low-carbon heat pumps but little understanding that we should first lower our energy demand through a more complex ‘fabric-first’ approach. We need more expert voices to be heard and a better-informed public. Improved lines of communication with the industry are needed in order to develop evidence-based policy, for example, learning from data collected through Post Occupancy Evaluation to close identified performance gaps.

Some key policy points I would like to see emerge:

• VAT reform, to incentivize retrofit of buildings over building new.

• Taxation on the use of resources, including the implementation of a carbon tax to incentivize a circular economy.

• Building regulations that regulate wellbeing metrics, indoor health, and energy in-use.

• Whole-life carbon assessment and post-occupancy evaluation to be made mandatory at planning.

There is a great mismatch between the funding offered by the government and the scale of what is needed. We need new jobs and upskilling of the workforce in order to deliver higher standards, and a national program for decarbonizing, that includes grants to homeowners, low carbon material innovators, and more funding to local authorities who can identify publicly owned assets for retrofit and support local initiatives.

I feel optimistic that there has been so much noise in the lead-up to COP, and this is thanks to the media dedicating air-time and column space to issues surrounding the event. The hype around the event feels reminiscent of when London hosted the Olympics in 2012. Much like how team GB inspired the nation to get cycling, I hope that the attention given to this COP will inspire a new wave of activism and that the media will help continue a public discourse and continue putting pressure on the government to address the climate and ecological crises with urgency.

Mike Davis, FAIA, President of Bergmeyer Associates and part of the AIA’s delegation at the conference

Climate change is the world’s biggest design challenge, and Architecture is a global design practice, so it makes perfect sense for the American Institute of Architects to be at the COP26 Climate Change Conference table. It’s about our global engagement and transforming the world we live in. 

With our presence, we hope to send a strong private market signal so the world’s governments will have the confidence to make specific greenhouse-gas emission reduction targets for the global building sector a part of every nation’s Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) under the terms of the COP21 Paris Agreement.

We will look for opportunities to reinforce our government advocacy message that both the Bipartisan Infrastructure Framework and the Build Back Better reconciliation bill must include funding to make America’s buildings more resilient, more energy-efficient, and less dependent on fossil fuels. — Mike Davis

Our primary goals are to magnify the AIA’s global impact in the battle against climate change and to amplify the Institute’s voice through creating new global connections and leveraging existing professional partnerships. 

But we are also in Glasgow to connect with other influential members of the US delegation. We will look for opportunities to reinforce our government advocacy message that both the Bipartisan Infrastructure Framework and the Build Back Better reconciliation bill must include funding to make America’s buildings more resilient, more energy-efficient, and less dependent on fossil fuels. Buildings are infrastructure, and better buildings must be part of America’s future decarbonized economy. This would be an important way for America to provide global climate action leadership.

Julie Hiromoto, FAIA, Principal and Director of Integration, HKS

To reverse the global climate emergency, we urgently need more ambitious goals and bold action. We must experiment to identify new collaborative models and innovative ways of working. 

Are we advising our clients as advocates for individual and societal health and wellbeing, while helping them steward natural resources and biodiversity necessary for humanity to thrive? Or are we simply delivering to code [...]? — Julie Hiromoto

Architects must ask ourselves: Are we advising our clients as advocates for individual and societal health and wellbeing, while helping them steward natural resources and biodiversity necessary for humanity to thrive? Or are we simply delivering to code — in other words, meeting the bare minimum and building the baseline of what we can legally construct? 

We must lead our clients and leverage capital and annual expenditures with an eye to long-term real estate value, considering future climate and societal risks.