Human Settlements Review - Parliamentary Monitoring Group

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Human Settlements Review, Volume 1, Number 1, 2010 vernacular architecture to teach lessons that are relevant to the future, a more problemorientated, comparative and integrative stage that leads to explanatory theory needs to be entered. The New Auditoria and Teaching Complex at the University of Fort Hare has become a precedent from which much may be birthed, traditions have allowed for creativity, innovation, and change; building traditions continue to evolve and transform while new ones will arguably keep emerging. Though such new “grassroots traditions” may not be as established as that of local earth construction, it may well represent the future of the sustainable and vernacular in industrialized urban societies. The patterns and principles of good practice from both the Greenshops Financial Services Centre and the New Auditoria and Teaching Complex at the University of Fort Hare were identified to sustain the human settlements for which they were designed. Building design and construction together with the layout of the buildings were explicitly account for: water cycles that collect and reuse rain water and grey water in buildings and adjoining open spaces; natural ventilation in contrast to mechanical systems of air-conditioning; reusable materials, such as wood, clay and brick, should be used instead of non-biodegradable synthetic products in new building construction and renovation projects. Innovative approaches of this kind not only help promoting the local architectural environment, but also protect the cultural heritage of human settlements (where applicable). In addition they have become a catalyst for a new kind of ecology-orientated tourism and economic investment (Lawrence, 2006, p. 124). Participatory approaches should become an integral component of the building culture, as well as development initiatives which aim to promote and establish sustainable supplies of locally available building materials (Marchand, 2006; Lawrence, 2006). Local appreciation for traditional Eastern Cape architecture and building methods must be bolstered, and it’s social, economic and ecological value recognized. The post-colonial dichotomy between tradition and modernity must be challenged along with the popular association of tradition with stasis and ‘backwardness’ and the conceptual affiliation of modernity with concrete, corrugated iron and all things Western must be debunked. Changing attitudes can only be achieved through educational processes that promote scholarly investigation, publications, public displays and open discussions (Marchand, 2006). Pressure (on architects to design contemporary, truthful, honest and socially acceptable buildings) comes primarily from the local market. In an urban setting of South Africa, contemporary, modern and “western” architecture command a considerably higher market price and social acceptance than do the traditional rammed earth or compressed earth blocks mixtures. As long as the South African elites continue to conceive of mud architecture as the property of their povertystricken rural brethren, the Xhosa-building tradition within the Eastern Cape, as well as the diversity of other building traditions and innovative designs throughout the county, will be progressively denigrated and may one day cease to exist (Marchand, 2006; Voss, 1992). 172
Human Settlements Review, Volume 1, Number 1, 2010 References Afshar, F. & Norden, J. 1997. Developmental. In: Oliver, P. (ed.). Encyclopedia of Vernacular Architecture of the World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. AlSayyad, N. 2006. Foreword (p. xviii). In: Asquith, L. & Vellinga, M. (ed.). Vernacular Architecture in the Twenty-First Century. Theory, education and practice. Milton Park, Abingdon: Taylor & Francis. Asquith, L . 2006. Introduction. In: Asquith, L. & Vellinga, M. (ed.). Vernacular Architecture in the Twenty-First Century. Theory, education and practice. Milton Park, Abingdon: Taylor & Francis. Booysen, D. 2003. An investigation to the cost of earth construction as an alternative building method. Unpublished thesis. Bloemfontein: University of the Free State, p. 43-44. Bronner, S. J. 2006. Building Tradition: Control and authority in vernacular architecture. In: Asquith, L. & Vellinga, M. (ed.). Vernacular Architecture in the Twenty-First Century. Theory, education and practice. Milton Park, Abingdon: Taylor & Francis. Cooke, J. 2009. Greenshops Financial Services Centre. Journal of the South African Institute of Architects, January/February 2009, p.22-26. January. Conway, G. 1985. Agroecosystem analysis. Agricultural Administration 20. Ezaguirre, P. 1992. Farmer Knowledge, World Science and the Organization of Agricultural Research Systems (p. 19-20). In: J. R. Lewinger Mook. Diversity, Farmer Knowledge and Sustainability. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. Fathy, H. 1973. Architecture for the Poor: An Experiment in Rural Egypt. Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. Foster, S. 1984. The folk environment: Some methodological considerations. In D. Ward. Personal Places: Perspectives on Informal Art Environments. Bowling Green, OH: Bowling Green State University Popular Press. Grillo, R. 1997. Discourses of development: The view from anthropology. In: Grillo, R.D., & Stirrat, R.L. (ed.). Discourses of Development: Anthropological Perspectives. Oxford: Berg. Hatfield Dodds, S. 2000. Pathways and paradigims for sustaining human communities - some throughts for community designers. In R. Lawrence. Sustaining Human Settlement: A Challenge for the New Millennium. Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Urban International Press. 173
Page 1 and 2:
Human Settlements Review VOLUME 1,
Page 3 and 4:
CONTENT Page FOREWORD i Design inst
Page 5 and 6:
Human Settlements Review, Volume 1,
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Dictionary.com. 2010. alternative t
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 65 and 66:
Page 67 and 68:
Page 69 and 70:
Page 71 and 72:
Page 73 and 74:
Page 75 and 76:
Page 77 and 78:
Page 79 and 80:
Table 4: Building technology - Soci
Page 81 and 82:
Page 83 and 84:
Page 85 and 86:
Page 87 and 88:
Page 89 and 90:
Page 91 and 92:
Page 93 and 94:
Page 95 and 96:
Page 97 and 98:
Page 99 and 100:
Page 101 and 102:
Page 103 and 104:
Page 105 and 106:
ABSTRACT Human Settlements Review,
Page 107 and 108:
Page 109 and 110:
Page 111 and 112:
Page 113 and 114:
Page 115 and 116:
Page 117 and 118:
Page 119 and 120:
Page 121 and 122:
Page 123 and 124:
Page 125 and 126: Human Settlements Review, Volume 1,
Page 175: Human Settlements Review, Volume 1,
Page 199 and 200: UNDP, 2005. Investing in Developmen
Page 221 and 222: Abstract Human Settlements Review,
Page 223 and 224: Figure 1 Per Capita energy use and
Page 227 and 228:
Page 229 and 230:
Figure 3 Model validation and resul
Page 231 and 232:
Page 233 and 234:
Page 235 and 236:
Page 237 and 238:
Page 239 and 240:
Page 241 and 242:
Page 243 and 244:
Page 245 and 246:
Page 247 and 248:
Page 249 and 250:
Page 251 and 252:
Page 253 and 254:
Page 255 and 256:
Page 257 and 258:
Page 259 and 260:
Page 261 and 262:
Page 263 and 264:
Page 265 and 266:
Page 267 and 268:
Page 269 and 270:
Page 271 and 272:
Page 273 and 274:
Page 275 and 276:
Page 277 and 278:
Page 279 and 280:
show all

Human Settlements Review - Parliamentary Monitoring Group

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?