Cooper, I (2012) Winning hearts and minds or evidence-driven: Which trajectory for regenerative design? Building Research & Information, 40(3), pp. 357-360. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
The Building Research & Information special issue titled 'Regenerative Design and Development' (2012, volume 40, number 1) describes the emerging theory and practices for this field. This commentary reflects on the types of argumentation that are used to promote the regenerative design approach. Predominantly the papers seek to 'win hearts and minds' by presenting regenerative design as a virtuous activity that society should do - either altruistically for the sake of the planet or more selfishly to ensure that it continues to be inhabitable for our species. The effort required by the regenerative approach as described in the papers is enormous: to remake both the nature of professional services and wider society through our work as designers and developers. While regenerative design is still in its infancy, its theoreticians and practitioners need to establish its evidence base as quickly as possible. Without clear and overwhelming evidence of its benefits, it is unlikely that regenerative design will prove any more influential for mainstream policy and practice than sustainability has over the last two decades.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | built environment; design framework; design practices; regenerative design; sustainable building; sustainable development |
| Index terms: | society, design framework, regenerative design, design practice, building research, designer, sustainable development, built environment, practitioner, evidence, professional service, sustainable building, heart |
| Subjects: | sustainability and energy, practitioner, profession, evaluation and assessment methods, organization, infrastructure and transport systems, communities and social development, research management, health safety and environment, sustainable construction, design process, design practice, medical science and clinical practice |
| Topics: | Sustainability, Stakeholder Management, Roles and Professions, Research Practice, Health and Safety, Organizational Design, Urban Studies, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 3 PCA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here