A Natural Balance: Interior Design, Humans, and Sustainability

P E R S P E C T I V EThe living systems ’ecological’ worldview is a different way of thinking about, seeing, andengaging with the world than those that have dominated green building eco-efficiencyapproaches to sustainability.The living systems ‘‘ecological’’ worldview is a different way of thinking about, seeing, and engaging withthe world than those that have dominated green building eco-efficiency approaches to sustainability (Mang& Reed, 2012). Adopting it will require a higher level of interrelationships between natural, human, andbuilt systems, and the disciplines within them. Boecher et al. (2009, p xiii) describe the achievement of abroader integration of systems within the sustainability movement as an ‘‘integrative design process (IDP) 8 ’’.IDP is emerging as a natural companion to green building practice because it stimulates collaboration amonga diversity of practitioners with different disciplinary backgrounds and viewpoints to make human- andnatural-systems-based connections and interrelationships. The term integration means identifying the varietyand uniqueness of systems and connects them into a whole—including human, biotic, and earth systems.Boecher et al. (2009) believe that to achieve the health of the whole, we must ask ourselves how the process ofbuilding can be a catalyst for a discovery path that addresses the interrelationships of all living and technicalsystems in the service of sustaining the health of all life (p. xiii).Figure 3 conceptually depicts the trajectory of integrative thinking from technical systems design to livingsystems design (Reed, 2012). As the figure indicates, energy reduction is today’s main target of sustainability.However, this target is not simply a mathematic equation with an x/y coordinate system, but a conceptualdepiction with a human/earth responsibility. Some believe the concept in Figure 3 provides the path to truesustainability. The key in the upper left of Figure 3 shows that the ‘‘Environment,’’ ‘‘Behavioral,’’ and ‘‘Social’’bubbles are shown in color symbolizing active engaged status for all three mechanisms impacting humans.Researchers find that the data-driven technical systems of conventional and green/high-performance designrequire more energy with less occupant engagement for comfort. In contrast, the pattern-driven living systemsof restorative and regenerative design require less energy with more human engagement, understanding, andcapacity. Realizing this, some of the leaders in sustainability are using the gift of nature to overtake the‘‘machine as a metaphor’’ thinking for sustainability. This is not to say that technology and efficiency are notimportant, but it is the understanding of the role of technology that is important. The target in Figure 3 isenergy reduction without loss of the human factor. Today’s ‘‘mechanistic’’ view may see buildings as machineswithout feelings. In contrast are the ‘‘ecological’’ interrelationships acquainted with human and earth systems.Once we realize that technology is not intended to be used as ‘‘man’s dominion over nature,’’ then we canmove our understanding of technology toward a fusion of nature and human spirit. This philosophy canbecome the driving change. The future trajectory is important, but it is even more important that the interiordesigner as user-advocate be in the center of this ‘‘ecological’’ interrelationship bubble, which is decisive fordeeper engagement of humans and what is defined as the deepest level of green as we know it.Stories from Practice: United States Green Building HeadquartersEnergy efficiency or human factors alone are not determinates of project success; rather, it is theinterdependence in which each part affects and needs each other. When the United States Green BuildingCouncil (USGBC) needed a new headquarters in 2008, slated as one of the first projects to use the latestversion of LEED® for Commercial Interiors, the new requirements demanded the greatest opportunitiesof interdependence for our multidiscipline team to create something that was more than the sum of itsparts, pushing the limits of each profession. At the same time, we hoped to avoid problems of unintendedconsequences, tradeoffs, and a single solution by one profession, which could lead to a bigger problem forthe whole. In our project, we discovered that our ideas, inspirations, and innovations connected all our teammembers in ways we did not expect.Journal of Interior Design xv Volume 37 Number 2 2012