« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER SIX: CONCLUSIONS AND
IMPLICATIONS?
In the time since its launch in 2001, the Scottish
Executive's Policy on Architecture has influenced a shift
in the role of design in the process of creating new
buildings in Scotland. The Policy itself is not necessarily
credited with this influence, with the various professions
granting more influence to the design and planning
documents that have set the regulatory framework within
their work.
Significant elements of the design professions do not
see themselves as central to the process of creating
buildings and among those who do, and most notably the
architects, there seems to be deep disquiet about what the
professions are creating. Across the built environment
professions as a whole there appears to be deep discomfort
that the sector is not living up to either its own
aspirations or its potential. Yet it seems not to be for
want of ambition or desire. There appears to be some sense
of frustration among architects that the Policy restates
their professional aspirations without challenging or
changing the context within which they practice. An
official statement that the Scottish Executive shares these
aspirations is welcomed but the documents that give them
leverage in improving design appear to be more welcomed and
more influential.
Among planners, the Policy and the documents derived
from it are much more influential. This is understandable
since of all the professions involved, the Policy has
enhanced the role and status of planning, placing design
higher up the agenda of planning decisions and, it seems,
allowing planners to ask for better design across the board
rather than restricting them to only rejecting the very
worst. While it is accepted that this role has created
challenges for the planning profession, we found very
little resentment or criticism of this among the other
professions, partly reflecting the way in which local
authorities have brought in design experience to enhance
the capacity of their planning departments.
While there is widespread support for the objectives of
the Policy there is some criticism of the emphasis of the
policy that there is:
- too much focus on buildings that represent a
one-off, bold design statement rather than an emphasis
on better design for the mass market;
- a focus on the exterior rather than the inner
workings of buildings and, in spite of
Designing Places too much emphasis on
individual buildings rather than places; and
- too much exhortation to be better and the creation
of regulatory mechanisms to enforce better design and
not enough emphasis on the market pressures and
procurement methods that undermine design
aspirations.
Indeed, it is in the role of market forces that the
greatest gaps in the policy are identified. While there is
agreement with the aspirations of the Policy, it gives
little acknowledgement to the forces working against good
design. Inflationary demand in the housing market waters
down the design component in two ways. First, there is
little incentive to innovate since there is a strong
perception that whatever gets built will sell. More
importantly, bold, creative design represents a risk for
developers, both in terms of materials and construction and
in terms of the market's perception of what will sell.
Unless there is a strong individual or corporate ego
demanding design or a strong indication from the market
that good design will command a premium price, there is a
market logic to appealing to the broadest market, which
also means creating minimal challenge to people's
expectations.
Public procurement exerts similar pressures - fixed
price contracting and the system of 'design and build' are
credited with shifting the balance away from design-led
construction to cost-led construction. Design, in effect,
becomes the budget contingency that is used to soak up cost
over-runs. There is a strong perception among the design
professions, backed up by those who develop buildings, that
design is being squeezed out of the built environment by
these combinations of market and procurement pressures.
Commissioning is too often perceived to be based on
minimising cost rather than on design. There is a
preference among many for a higher recognition of design
within the commissioning process, particularly where this
being carried out by local authorities or the Scottish
Executive. Many would like to see more competition for
design in new public spaces as is perceived to happen in
other countries.
Tables 4.1 and
5.5 provide important
information for the future direction of the Executive's
Policy on Architecture. There is clearly a strong belief in
the role of education in improving the standards of design.
Education and acknowledgement of good design is extremely
important to the profession and fundamental to generating a
cultural appreciation and demand for a better built
environment. While the survey highlights the importance of
raising public awareness and appreciation and closer
working with schools and young people, there is some
reluctance to actively involve local communities. The
Scottish Executive and local authorities can lead by
example in commissioning better building, raising the
importance of design within the planning process and
campaigning for a better built environment. There is also
strong support for changes to the planning system, building
regulations and public procurement rules. The creation of
Architecture and Design Scotland (A+DS) creates an
opportunity to re-launch the Policy, restate the
Executive's aims for the built environment and invigorate
debate about how the built environment in Scotland is to be
improved. We see two main objectives for this. First, to
bring into the debate those professions that currently see
themselves as peripheral - the structural and civil
engineers and surveyors who opted out of the survey, seeing
themselves as having no role in the design process. Second,
and depending on the remit of A+DS, to make an explicit
link between the Policy and the various documents that have
flowed from it, providing a new continuity and coherence to
this policy area. It might be enough that the Policy's
message is welcomed and appears to be getting through to
the professions. However, it seems likely that the
combination of policies would have greater effect if there
was a consistent labelling and branding of the documents,
establishing a clear link between the vision and
aspirations represented by the Policy and the practical
implementation of these through design and planning notes
and other forms of guidance.
« Previous | Contents | Next »