We live in the age of climate and biodiversity crises. Hope is simmering in the architecture community of an imminent and necessary disruption set in motion by these crises. The whole construction industry will be radically overhauled and we must redefine what we consider the best architecture.

Essay by Vapaa Collective.

The most pressing issue of our time is ecological reconstruction to create a future that our planet can sustain. The role of architecture, urban planning, and the whole built environment in this process is apparent and literal. But is architecture just the neutral physical manifestation of prevailing politics, or can architecture change the world?

Essay by Aleksi Lohtaja.

Like most crises, the climate crisis hits those in vulnerable and marginalized positions the hardest. On the other hand, societal change creates momentum for re-examining the distribution of power. In the best case, the crisis could help us become more conscious of who currently exercises power and who the power ultimately belongs to. In this article, the example of market-driven urban development is used to examine power relations in the built environment.

Essay by Efe Ogbeide.

The climate and biodiversity crises are quantifiable problems – carbon emissions are soaring, natural populations are dwindling, and species are becoming extinct. This has meant that we now also have quantitative metrics, such as carbon emission calculation tools, in addition to the traditional qualitative indicators for successful architecture. The definition of good architecture can and should change with the times, but how can architects assure quality remains relevant in a discussion that threatens to become just an exercise in number crunching?

Essay by Kimmo Lylykangas.

People are taking over land areas on Earth at increasing speed. When we encroach on new land, we build it up or harness it for processes needed to sustain human settlements. Due to climate change, even the last untouched areas are now subject to human influence. This has made natural nature into a declining phenomenon. When land use threatens nature, it is sometimes proposed that nature can instead be protected “somewhere else”, beyond the areas utilized by people. This is no longer sufficient. Simultaneously, there is a need to bring about a more profound societal understanding of how we relate to non-human nature. This idea can be promoted by promoting biodiversity in people’s everyday environments. In this text, the paradigm shift required to view flora as an active part in interaction with nature is contextualized through the example of herbaceous natural vegetation in urban areas.

Essay by Jere Nieminen.

The dual crisis of climate and biodiversity is intrinsically bound to the overconsumption of natural resources. Our finite planet, and according to recent research even the entire universe are based on closed loops in which energy and matter move and shift, but do not disappear. Paradoxically, our contemporary economic model assumes it can detach from this universal order by churning out products that are used and then “removed” from circulation. By reverting to a circular economy, we can begin to unravel the crises by reducing waste production and the need for virgin raw materials. What does it mean for architecture and its processes, when materials designed for a linear lifespan can no longer be used in construction?

Essay by Ninni Westerholm.

Already now, most of the work done by architects is tied to existing buildings. Reducing the consumption of raw virgin materials and transitioning to a circular economy makes renovating the existing building stock an even more attractive option to new construction. But what do we mean by renovation? Can moving from a societal model of disposability to one of repairing generate new forms of expression and a reshaping of the architectural profession?

Essay by Mira Kyllönen.

According to one definition, the purpose of architecture is to shelter people from nature. Conventional futuristic utopias are also often based on the idea of freeing humankind from nature’s quirks and demands. This thinking is still evident in the grand visions of our time, such as the attempt to colonize other planets. We are spending an increasing amount of time and resources to separate ourselves from nature rather than caring for the natural cycles that sustain all life. For now, the attempts to liberate humans from nature are far from realistic, but in the meantime, the Earth’s carrying capacity is on the brink of collapse. Should architecture’s mission instead be to protect nature from us humans?

Essay by Antti Majava.

As creativity is considered synonymous with the production of something new, architects are primed since university to pursue making their mark on the cityscape. Simultaneously, the definition of ambitious architecture has shrunk over the past decades to refer mainly to new construction. This kind of design work will inevitably become rare in the future, which poses the question of what the best architecture of our time should be. Do we give up the modernist ideal of the creative genius or will an architect that questions the whole prevailing paradigm of construction become our contemporary hero?

Essay by Panu Savolainen.

We are used to hearing that the climate potential of architecture lies in technical improvements that reduce emissions or require less natural resources to produce. These are, however, construction-related innovations that can be carried out even without the involvement of architects. As the collective guilt mounts over mankind’s destruction of the planet, various fields of the arts are turning to posthumanism. Architecture has been slow to follow suit but is coming around to this way of thinking as well. Can environmentally conscious posthumanist architecture rebuild the connection between the cultural significance of construction and its physical manifestation?

Essay by Maiju Suomi.