The American Institute of Architects (AIA) has issued a rebuke of President Donald Trump's decision to formally withdraw from the Paris Climate Agreement.
Earlier this week, the American government initiated its withdrawal from the accord, with Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announcing that authorities would instead "continue to work with our global partners to enhance resilience to the impacts of climate change and prepare for and respond to natural disasters"
According to a statement issued by the AIA, America risks abdicating its leadership role on climate action by abandoning the international climate cooperation pact.
AIA 2019 President William Bates writes, “The AIA deplores the administration's shortsighted decision," adding, "The economic impact to the United States as a participant in the Paris Agreement is a fraction of the toll we will pay if we do not make climate action a top priority as a nation. The stakes couldn’t be higher—a reversal of this decision is critical.”
Gates continued, “As a large contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and as one of the most sophisticated countries in the world, we are capable of reducing these harmful effects on the environment. In order to move the needle on this global crisis, it will take the efforts of every industry, every company, and every citizen of the United States as well as the leadership of the United States government. The AIA will continue to prioritize climate action in an effort to support architects—and the entire design and construction field—in this critical role.”
The move comes as AIA attempts to embark on an ambitious plan to emphasize decarbonization efforts among its members and within the built environment. Internationally, architects from around the globe have begun to make the necessary changes to how buildings are designed to help achieve net-zero carbon goals, though there is much progress to be made.
This constant waffling by the AIA is a problem. First- a letter saying "we will work with you," now a statement saying "whoa there." This reflects an organization that is looking at the position and future of the profession based on short-term, reactionary optics - optics being the key word.
Somehow, someones need to sit down and ask some serious questions about the future of the environment and the role architecture plays in it to create a disciplined framework.
All 6 Comments
For convenience, here is a link to the statement: https://www.aia.org/press-releases/6227395-aia-calls-for-us-to-reverse-withdrawal-fro
Thanks, Donna! The statement has been added to the article.
Americans and architects are doing a lot to move us toward better sustainability. The building codes, local legislation and zoning codes are the key to a more sustainable future, not joining a big club. I am definitely disappointed that the USA will exit the agreement though.
#rickitect
Whew! Now that that's done, we can get on to more important things, like shilling for the NRA and hardening K-12!
This constant waffling by the AIA is a problem. First- a letter saying "we will work with you," now a statement saying "whoa there." This reflects an organization that is looking at the position and future of the profession based on short-term, reactionary optics - optics being the key word.
Somehow, someones need to sit down and ask some serious questions about the future of the environment and the role architecture plays in it to create a disciplined framework.
Somehow, someones need to sit down and ask some serious questions about the future of the environment and the role architecture plays in it to create a disciplined framework.
Well, that would mean asking for adults to lead, instead of the bootlicking pendants running the show.
Marc Miller for AIA President!
The AIA is a lobbying group focused on money.
I wish the AIA had the same passion over how much architects get paid and the volatility of the profession.
I fully support the AIA's statement, but shouldn't it also take concrete actions such as argue for fewer glass buildings or automobile dependent development? How about reducing the amount of petro-chemical products in the industry or advocating for re-developing brown fields rather than plowing up more open space? There are so many things in their control, but I'm afraid it would cut into their ad dollar stream. And this is the problem generally. Making the changes we need will always be stymied by someone's short term income. We need a government that can make the case that our descendants deserve a livable world.
Block this user
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?
Archinect
This is your first comment on Archinect. Your comment will be visible once approved.