AIMS AND OBJECTIVES
2015
AIM AND AMBITION
The overall ambition of this research is to construct a theory of why there is a disconnection between sustainable architecture theory, and practice and to understand how this disconnection may be improved by the critical examination of existing theories of sustainable architecture. Within this, sub-aims have been set, which relate more specifically to each phase. They are as follows:
Phase 1.
To form a holistic contextual grounding of modern sustainable architecture in order to form an educated hypothesis/red thread.
Phase 2.
To understand the ‘values’ of the ‘red thread’ in terms of its relationship to sustainable architecture practice.
Phase 3.
Opportunities for a positive influence on the disconnection between sustainable architecture theory and practice will become apparent by critically re-examining the ‘red thread’.
Phase 4.
To articulate understandings of sustainable architecture which are accessible for sustainable architecture practitioners in order to bridge the gap with sustainable architecture theory.
INITIATING QUESTIONS
Similar to the aim, I have set an overall research question followed by subquestions for each phase of my research. The overall tentative question is then, how can the gap between sustainable architecture theory and practice be improved and what are the different ways in which to do this, utilizing the vast amount of existing knowledge of sustainable architecture?
Phase 1.
What variables are there within existing knowledge of sustainable architecture and how are they interconnected and related to sustainable architecture practice?
-
A) Sustainable architecture (‘theory’) is described as being fragmented and ambiguous, what are the reasons for this and how is it a problem for sustainable architecture practice?
-
B) What are the factors that influence the relationship between sustainable architecture theory and practice and how does that impact the overall context of sustainable architecture practice?
Phase 2.
How can the findings and experience from re-examining and restructuring different variables of the ‘red thread’ using a secondary conceptual framework enlighten the connection to practice?
Phase 3.
How can the experience of introducing the re-examined ‘red thread’ to sustainable architecture practice enlighten aspects of the relationship between theory and practice?
Phase 4.
What is the most accessible form of dissemination and articulation for sustainable architecture practitioners and is it within my research means?