3678 - Assignment 1

M.
Sc SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT
Course: Environmental Ethics in the Built Environment (3678) Semester: Autumn, 2020
ASSIGNMENT - 1
STUDENT NAME: ADEEL HAIDER RAZI
ROLL NO. CA565459
Q.1 Define Environmental Ethics. How it is related to Islamic perspective. With
reference to the context of Pakistan, how built environment has contributed to the
environmental ethics?
1. Environmental Ethics
Environmental ethics is a branch of ethics that studies the relation of human beings and the
environment and how ethics play a role in this. Environmental ethics believe that humans are
a part of society as well as other living creatures, which includes plants and animals. These
items are a very important part of the world and are considered to be a functional part of human
life.
Figure 1: Environmental Ethics
“In environmental philosophy, environmental ethics is an established field of practical

philosophy “which reconstructs the essential types of argumentation that can be made for
protecting natural entities and the sustainable use of natural resources.” The main competing
paradigms are anthropocentrism, physiocentrism (called ecocentrism as well), and
theocentrism. Environmmental ethics exerts influence on a large range of disciplines including
environmental law, environmental sociology, ecotheology, ecological economics, ecology and
environmental geography.”
Global warming, global climate change, deforestation, pollution, resource degradation, the
threat of extinction are few of the issues from which our planet is suffering. Environmental
ethics are a key feature of environmental studies that establishes the relationship between
ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 1

M.Sc SUSTAINABLE ENVIRONMENT
humans and the earth. With environmental ethics, you can ensure that you are doing your part
to keep the environment safe and protected.
2. Islamic Perspective
In the final part of the Faiths in Creation series, Mohammad Shomali presents the Islamic texts
that teach of the value of the natural world and the importance of our respect for it. He gives
an Islamic perspective on how we should interact with the environment that surrounds us, and
looks at the vices that we are most likely to succumb to.
In the Name of God, the Beneficent, the Merciful
Prophet Muhammad: If Resurrection is starting and one of you has a sapling in his hand
which he can plant before he stands up he must do so. (d. 148/765)
Imam Sadiq: There is no joy in life unless three things are available: clean fresh air,
abundant pure water, and fertile land.
One of the most important problems in today’s world is the environmental crisis. It seems that
this problem started when modern man stopped understanding himself as the vicegerent and
trustee of the All-Merciful God who must channel divine mercy to everything at his disposal
or within his reach, and stopped understanding nature as a sacred sign and valuable trust from
God.
For the same reason, it seems that the best way to protect the environment from destruction
and, indeed, to improve its condition is to revive these forgotten understandings by referring
back to the teachings and instructions of divine religions and reviewing and readjusting our
policies regarding the application of modern technology and in using natural resources
appropriately. In this paper, I will try to briefly present some aspects of the Islamic perspective
on environmental ethics in the light of Qur’anic verses and Islamic narrations (hadiths). The
paper consists of four parts: nature; governing rules in Islamic environmental ethics; virtues
related to human treatment of the environment; and vices related to human treatment of the
environment.
a) Nature
Nature in general. There are more than 750 verses in the Qur’an that are related to nature.
Fourteen chapters of the Qur’an are named after certain animals and natural incidents, such as:
‘the Cow’, ‘the Cattle’, ‘the Thunder’, ‘the Bee’, ‘the Ant’, ‘the Daybreak’, ‘the Sun’, ‘the
Night’, ‘the Fig’ and ‘the Elephant’.
Moreover, there are many cases in which God takes an oath by some natural phenomena like:
‘the dawn’ (89:1) and ‘the fig and olive’ (95:1). In numerous verses, the Qur’an states that all
the natural phenomena have awareness of God and glorify God:
And We made the mountains and the birds to celebrate our praise along with David.
(21:79& 38:18)
And there is not a thing but that it glorifies Him with His praise, but you do not understand
their glorification. (17:44)
In many verses the natural phenomena are characterised as divine signs indicating the
knowledge, the wisdom and the power of God, such as:
Most surely in the creation of the heavens and the earth and the alternation of the night and
the day, and the ships that run in the sea with that which profits men and the water that God
sends down from the cloud, then gives life with it to the earth after its death and spreads in
it all (kinds of) animals, and the changing of the winds and the clouds that are made
subservient between the heaven and the earth, there are signs for a people who understand.
(2:164)

b) Earth
Every Muslim in his ritual prayer must prostrate to God several times on the earth (or an earthly
material like soil or sands). If water is not available or using water is harmful to one’s health
(e.g. because of injury), one needs to use earth or earthly materials in a special way to perform
ritual ablution.
In Islamic scriptures, the earth is introduced as an origin for the creation of human beings. The
Qur’an says:
From it (earth) We created you and into it We shall send you back and from it We will raise
you a second time. (20:55)
c) Plants.
Islam highly recommends planting trees and urges people to protect them to the extent that
planting a tree is considered as an act of worship, for which special prayer is recommended.
The Holy Prophet said: ‘Unless you are compelled, do not cut down a tree!’
Before battles, the Prophet always gave instruction to his soldiers not to harm women, children,
the elderly, and those who surrendered and not to destroy or burn farms and gardens.
In addition to protection of plants, there are many hadiths that recommend Muslims to plant
and farm.
Figure 2: Environmental ethics in Islam
For example, the Prophet said:

Whoever plants a tree and then a human or a creature of God eats its fruit, it will be
considered as an act of charity for him. Whoever waters a date or lote tree it is as if he has
given a drink to a thirsty believer.
Imam Sadiq said:
Farm and plant! By God, there is no occupation more lawful and pleasant than this. The
best occupation is farming. The greatest alchemy is farming.
3. Governing rules in Islamic environmental ethics

Some of the major instructions on how to treat the environment and natural resources can be
formulated as follows:
➢ Benefit from natural resources in a responsible way! The emphasis of the Qur’an
and hadiths on nature and natural phenomena does not imply that we cannot benefit from

them. Indeed, the Qur’an clearly suggests that God has created them such that that man can
dominate and benefit from them.
For example, the Qur’an says:
And the earth, He has set it for people. (55:10)
He it is who created for you all that is in the earth. (2:29; 45:13; 31:20; 16:10-14; 22:65;
14:32–34)
The benefits that we take from the environment are not limited to material or physical ones.
They also include mental and psychological benefits as well:
And He created the cattle for you, you have in them warm clothing and many (uses)
advantages, and of them you can eat. And there is beauty in them for you when you drive
them back home and when you send them forth to pasture. (16:5 &6)
➢ Behave towards nature as a guardian! Not only must man use natural resources in a
responsible way, but also, as the vicegerent of God on the earth (2:30; 6:165; 35:39), he
must feel responsible for their maintenance and improvement of their condition. The Holy
Qur’an says:
He is the one who created you from the earth and settled you upon it so that you might
cultivate it and construct towns. (11:61)
Failure to observe divine pleasure and carry out his responsibilities towards himself and the
world certainly leads to man’s dissatisfaction as well as the destruction of the world. To make
the case theologically clearer, I can briefly say that God is the True and the whole creation is
based on the Truth. Following the True leads to tranquillity of the heart and ultimate
satisfaction as well as an abundance of divine blessings including both material and spiritual
ones.
➢ Recognize your role as a trustee! The Holy Qur’an states: ‘We offered the trust unto the
heavens and the earth and the hills, but they shrank from bearing it and were afraid of it.
And man assumed it’ (33:72).
This means that human beings have been given the responsibility of stewardship and trust (al-
amaanah) by God to care for and serve as a channel for the blessings of God to all creation.
Humans are invested with special status and responsibility as trustees on earth and must fulfil
the requirements of that trust.
According to Islamic thought, nature is a divine trust and man is the trustee. It can also be
argued that since future generations also have rights to benefit from it, nature is also a trust for
them.
4. BUILT ENVIRONMENT
In social science, the term-built environment, or built world, refers to the human-made
surroundings that provide the setting for human activity, ranging in scale from buildings to
parks. It has been defined as "the human-made space in which people live, work, and recreate
on a day-to-day basis." The "built environment encompasses places and spaces created or
modified by people including buildings, parks, and transportation systems."
➢ ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN BUILD ENVIRONMENT:
Environmental ethics is the discipline in philosophy that studies the moral relationship of
human beings to, and also the value and moral status of, the environment and its nonhuman
contents. -Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

The definition of environmental ethics rests on the principle that there is an ethical relationship
between human beings and the natural environment. Human beings are a part of the
environment and so are the other living beings. When we talk about the philosophical principle
that guides our life, we often ignore the fact that even plants and animals are a part of our lives.
They are an integral part of the environment and hence cannot be denied their right to live.
Since they are an inseparable part of nature and closely associated with our living, the guiding
principles of our life and our ethical values should include them. They need to be considered
as entities with the right to co-exist with human beings.
➢ Concept
The concept of environmental ethics brings out the fact that all the life forms on Earth have the
right to live. By destroying nature, we are denying the life forms this right. This act is unjust
and unethical. The food web clearly indicates that human beings, plants, animals, and other
natural resources are closely linked with each other. All of us are creations of nature and we
depend on one another and the environment. Respecting the existence of not just other humans
but also the non-human entities and recognizing their right to live is our primary duty. With
environmental ethics, morality extends to the non-human world.
➢ ISSUES IN ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS
o Consumption of Natural Resources
Our natural environment is not a storehouse to rob resources from. It is a reserve of resources
that are crucial to the existence of life. Their unscrupulous depletion is detrimental to our well-
being. We are cutting down forests for making our homes. Our excessive consumption of
natural resources continues. The undue use of resources is resulting in their depletion, risking
the life of our future generations. Is this ethical? This is an environmental ethics issue.
o Destruction of Forests
When industrial processes lead to destruction of resources, is it not the industry's responsibility
to restore the depleted resources? Moreover, can a restored environment make up for the
original one? Mining processes disrupt the ecological balance in certain areas. They harm the
plant and animal life in those regions. Slash-and-burn techniques are used for clearing land that
leads to the destruction of forests and woodland. The land is used for agriculture but is the loss
of so many trees compensated for.
o Environmental Pollution
Many human activities lead to environmental pollution. The rising human population is
increasing the demand for nature's resources. As the population is exceeding the carrying
capacity of our planet, animal and plant habitats are being destroyed to make space for human
habitation. Huge constructions (roads and buildings for residential and industrial use) are being
made at the cost of the environment. To allow space for these constructions, so many trees
must lose their lives. The animals that thrive in them lose their natural habitats and eventually
their lives. However, the cutting down of trees is seldom even considered as loss of lives. Isn't
this unethical?
o Harm to Animals
Due to habitat loss, animals may enter human settlements, thus posing a threat to the people
living there. In some cases, these animals are killed. Secondly, animals serve as food sources
of humans, for which they are killed. Also, animal studies cause harm to animals and even their
deaths. This destruction has led to the extinction of many animal species. The reduction in the
populations of several other animal species continues. How can we deny the animals their right
to live? How are we right in depriving them of their habitat and food? Who gave us the right
to harm them for our convenience? These are some of the ethical environmental issues that
need to be addressed.

➢ THE INHERENT VALUE OF NON-HUMAN ENTITIES

o Instrumental Value
An important point that the field of environmental ethics is concerned with, is whether non-
human beings only have an instrumental value or whether they also have an intrinsic value.
Aristotle said that "nature has made all things specifically for the sake of man", which means
non-human beings only have an instrumental value; they are meant to serve as 'instruments' for
human beings.
From an anthropocentric point of view (which lays emphasis on human beings), the use of
other living elements in nature by humans is only right. Causing them harm or destroying them
is wrong only because it eventually affects human life. With this view, cruelty to animals is
wrong because it develops insensitivity, and not because animals should not be harmed. Or the
felling of trees is wrong because it eventually causes loss of food sources for humans, and not
because it is simply unethical.
o Intrinsic Value
Historian Lynn White Jr. published an essay in 1967, in which he criticized Judeo-Christian
thinking as being a primary factor that led human beings to exploit the environment. According
to this line of thinking, man is supreme, and the nature has been created for him, which gives
him the right to exploit it. White also criticized the Church Fathers who maintained that God
created man in his own image and gave him the right to rule every being on Earth. According
to White, this view promotes the idea that man is separate from nature and not a part of it. This
thought leads human beings to exploit nature without realizing its intrinsic value.
o Our Moral Responsibility
Another important point in relation to environmental ethics is of our moral responsibility to
preserve nature for our future generations. By causing environmental degradation and depletion
of resources, we are risking the lives of future generations. Is it not our duty to leave a good
environment for them to live in? Non-renewable energy resources are fast-depleting and sadly,
it isn't possible to replenish them. This means, they may not be available for the future
generations. We need to strike a balance between our needs and the availability of resources,
so that the forthcoming generations are also able to benefit from their use.
We are morally obliged to consider the needs of even the other elements of our environment.
They include not just other human beings, but also plants and animals. It is only ethical to be
fair to these elements and make a responsible use of natural resources. Environmental ethics
try to answer the question of whether human beings have any moral obligation towards the
non-human entities in nature.
For the sake of development and convenience, is it morally right to burn fuels though pollution
is caused? Is it morally right to continue with technological advances at the cost of the
environment? Climate change is known to have a negative impact on plant diversity. It is a fact
that the increasing pollution levels are hazardous for not only humans but also for plants and
animals. Given this, isn't it our moral responsibility to protect the environment? We have
certain duties towards the environment. Our approach towards other living entities should be
based on strong ethical values.
Even if the human race is considered as the main constituent of the environment, animals and
plants are in no way less important. They have a right to get a fair share of resources and lead
a safe life.

Q.2 Discuss the following:

a) Islam and Environment goes hand in hand.
b) The self-interest of healing building.
a) Islam and Environment goes hand in hand

Islamic beliefs, traditions and values provide an effective and comprehensive solution to the
current environmental challenges faced by humans. Islam has a rich tradition of highlighting
the importance of environmental protection and conservation of natural resources. According
to Islamic law, the basic elements of nature – land, water, fire, forest, and light – belong to all
living things, not just human beings.
Figure 1: Environment Conservation Concept
The Holy Qur’an and Sunnah are a guiding light to promote sustainable development in Islamic
countries as well as around the world. Allah (Subhanahu Wa Ta’ala) commands human beings
to avoid doing mischief and wasting resources as these acts cause degradation of the
environment. The privilege to exploit natural resources was given to the mankind on a
guardianship basis, which implies the right to use another person’s property on the promise
that it will not be damaged or destroyed.
➢ The Holy Qur’an and Environment
The Holy Qur’an has a number of specific references to ecology and also contains some
important principles for environmental conservation. The first principle which guides Islamic
teaching on environmental sustainability is the concept of trusteeship. Being a khalifa (or
guardian), a man should take all necessary steps to ensure that the entrusted property is passed
on to the next generation in as pure a form as possible. According to Islam each man is the
custodian of nature, and must live with harmony with other creatures. It is the duty of all
Muslims to respect, nurture and care for the environment.
Corruption of all kinds, including environmental corruption, which includes industrial
pollution, environmental damage, and reckless exploitation and mismanagement of natural
resources are disliked by Allah (Subhanahu Wa Ta’ala). Allah (Subhanahu Wa Ta’ala) says in
the Holy Qur’an:
“And Allah loveth not those who do mischief” (Surat Al Ma’eda, verse 64)
“And do no mischief on the earth after it has been set in order: that will be best for you, if
ye have Faith” (Surat Al A’raf, ‘the Heights’, verse 85)

Eat and drink: But waste not by excess, for Allah loveth not the wasters (Surat Al-A’raf 7:
21).
“And do good as Allah has been good to you. And do not seek to cause corruption in the
earth. Allah does not love the corrupters”, (Surat Al Qasas 28:77)
“Children of Adam, dress well whenever you are at worship, and eat and drink (as we have
permitted) but do not be extravagant: God does not like extravagant people.” (Surat Al-A’raf
7:31)
According to the Holy Qur’an, environmental conservation is a religious duty as well as social
obligation, and not an optional matter. The exploitation of a particular natural resource is
directly related to accountability and maintenance of the resource.
➢ Hadiths and Environment
Hadiths or the traditions of Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) also deal
extensively with various aspects of environment including resource conservation, land
reclamation and environmental hygiene. Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam)
discouraged overconsumption, luxury and lavishness and encouraged moderation in all walks
of life.
The most popular Hadith on environment states “The earth is green and beautiful and Allah
has appointed you his stewards over it” which reiterates Quran teaching that human beings
have been given the responsibility of guardianship over the natural environment.
The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) clearly forbade destruction of trees and crops even
during war times as long as their existence remains advantageous to the enemy. The Prophet
(Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) gave high degree of importance towards sustainable cultivation
of land, waste minimization, humane treatment of animals, preservation of natural resources
and protection of wildlife. Some of the sayings of Prophet bless and Muhammad (Sallallahu
Alaihi Wasallam) on environmental sustainability are:
“The world is beautiful and verdant, and verily God, be He exalted, has made you His
stewards in it, and He sees how you acquit yourselves.” (Muslim)
“If a Muslim plant a tree or sows seeds, and then a bird, or a person or an animal eats from
it, it is regarded as a charitable gift (sadaqah) for him.” (Bukhari)
“Whoever plants a tree and diligently looks after it until it matures and bears fruit is
rewarded,” (Musnad)
The Prophet (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) recognized that natural resources should not be
overexploited or abused. In order to protect land, forests and wildlife, the Prophet created
inviolable zones, known as Haram and Hima, in which resources were to be left untouched.
Haram areas were drawn up around wells and water sources to protect the groundwater from
overpumping. Hima applied to wildlife and forestry and designated an area of land where
grazing and woodcutting was restricted, or where certain animal species (such as camels) were
protected.
Prophet Muhammed (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) established a hima to the south of Medina
and forbade hunting within a four-mile radius and destruction of trees or plants within a twelve-
mile radius. The creation of inviolable zones shows the importance placed by Prophet
Muhammad (Sallallahu Alaihi Wasallam) on sustainable use of natural resources and
protection of wildlife and agricultural land.
b) The self-interest of healing building

“Self-healing building techniques are like how we depend on our skin when it heals itself after
a cut,” said Mohamed Nagib AbouZeid (MSc ‘91), professor of construction engineering, on
this innovative concept. One of AbouZeid’s lifelong interest is sustainable construction, to

which he dedicated several research projects in collaboration with both undergraduate and
graduate students.
A study that he has previously conducted several times and later supervised looks at the of use
self-healing bacteria in minimizing cracks and ruptures in buildings. Working alongside his
student, AbouZeid has made some interesting discoveries that he believes reveal a promising
technique for future construction in Egypt.
➢ Self-Healing, Safety and Sustainability
“If the material has the ability to heal itself, we prevent large cracks – and more importantly,
the process itself shows us if something has been damaged,” AbouZeid said on the benefits of
using bacteria in construction. While Egypt is not geographically prone to many natural
disasters that create damages, there have been many incidents of construction failures,
demolition of old structures and deterioration in the quality of buildings. For both faculty and
students in construction engineering, the goal of preventing these occurrences and constructing
‘smart’ is one that will be taking over Egypt in the next few years.
The process began with an idea, AbouZeid recalled. “We went from putting some kind of
material that breaks and leaks and fills the cracks, and then we heard of Dutch and French
schools experimenting with bacteria, so we switched to that," he said. "We have the concept,
we question the concept and we experiment with it.”
In an interdisciplinary fashion, AbouZeid and students collaborated with the Department of
Biology, coming across bacteria called Bacillus Pseudofirmus. This specific type of bacteria is
one that can endure under dire conditions, but also reacts with materials, such as concrete and
limestone. “The bacteria feel the moisture in the air and react to it by forming a material that
fills the crack with a white color," explained AbouZeid. "When we see this color, we know
there must have been a crack here and is being dealt with."
This method can be extremely beneficial for construction in Egypt. “It’s definitely possible to
implement here," AbouZeid attested. "It reduces repair costs and is safer." When it comes to
adding quarters to existing buildings, such as extra rooms or floors, it may not be necessary,
but is strategic for large-scale construction. “In structures like bridges over the Suez Canal,
tunnels and huge water tanks, where water will leak and will cause damage, you want to relieve
the load where you know it is prone to damage.”
While many students under AbouZeid’s supervision have examined the concept of self-healing
construction over the years, their research has been hindered by the gap between academia and
the market. “If it’s academics talking to academics, we won’t go very far," said AbouZeid.
AbouZeid hopes AUC's Technology Transfer Office, which facilitates the growth and
development of new technology, can assist in that process and that their findings can make
their way into Egypt’s massive upcoming construction project for the New Administrative
Capital. “When political leadership talks about the New Administrative Capital, they say that
they want the buildings to be smart," said AbouZeid. "One of those characteristics is for the
buildings to have the ability to heal themselves."
Self-healing buildings are just one part of AbouZeid’s research interest. He is intensively
immersed in promoting durability, recycling and safety in construction. “People are moving in
a new direction for new buildings," he shared. "After a building has been in use, almost the
entire structure can be reused. Constructors can take out the glass, the wood, the concrete, the
aluminum and everything. Reconstructing it in another structure is a lot like Legos. This will
save time and cost.”
➢ Contributing to Engineering Research
AbouZeid is keen on supervising and nurturing his students' talent. He embraces research as
a practice that encompasses multiple experiments, and more importantly, one that paves the
road for future students at any level.

Other research projects he has been involved in revolve around the use of eco-friendly
alternatives and methods in construction. One such project aimed to cut the use of non-friendly
construction materials, such as Portland cement, which lessens the harmful effects of carbon
dioxide emissions. Other projects involve making use of waste and recycled materials,
refraining from the use of fresh water during construction, constructing with translucent
materials to allow daylight to pass through designated parts of the building, reducing energy
consumption and providing light and warmth.
AbouZeid praised AUC’s support of student research. University students have published in
the American Concrete Institute Journal and were represented in the Canadian Society for
Civil Engineers as publishers and conference attendees. At international events for engineers,
he has encountered former students who now contribute substantially to the engineering field.
“I am fortunate to be supervising a large number of undergraduate theses – those who gain
recognition, not only from us at AUC, but through international publications and at
conferences,” he said. “We are not a large University, but with our qualitative potential, I like
to think of ourselves as pioneers in the field of advanced construction material and repair. I
would like to acknowledge the University's support of graduate studies and research, as well
as the undergraduate division, for the fact that they opened pools of funds and support. Not all
universities do that.”

Q.3 With reference to “Values and Value Judgment in Buildings”, explain how these
principles and concepts can be used to evaluate and improve an existing building
structure in the context of Pakistan? Choose any building in your context/city.
1. Value Systems: The Conceptual Basis of Building Ethics

The nature of building(s) and people’s attitudes regarding them are determined by two main
types of factors: environmental and cultural. Among the latter, ethical predicates are probably
the most influential. This is so not only because they determine how buildings are evaluated
by people but also because they form the basic precepts through which professionals act in
designing and constructing them and through which resources are allocated to it in competition
with other socio-economic needs.
Ethical principles that dictate action have their origin in the values that people (professionals
and users) hold. Despite this importance of values in the formation of ethical precepts, there
appears to be no well-established, coherent and systematic framework for a discussion of value
related issues in the analysis of building(s). The problem of value has received much attention
in philosophy and in the behavioural sciences, where "numerous books have been written on
the subject, but [even there] often the reader comes away more confused than enlightened
because the author has not defined his terms and has used the concept so loosely and broadly
that his meaning cannot even be inferred" (Kilby, 31).
➢ A Process Model of the Building
In a manner similar to that of a majority of human activities, the life-cycle of building consists
a four stage process: problem formulation, problem solution, implementation and use. This
process is cyclic; most building reaches the end of its useful life due to some reason or other
and, thereby, leads to a repetition of the cycle in the form of renovation, remodelling, re-
adaptation of use or new building.
In formalized-professional (i.e. non-vernacular) building, the four stages correspond,
respectively, planning and programming; design; construction; and use. Here, a misfit is
recognized between the present state of building and some ideal conditions that are deemed to
be desirable for that environment. The former is described in terms of building descriptors; the
latter conditions express what kind or level of the pertinent building descriptors are acceptable
or ideal. These conditions are obviously bound to people’s conceptions of what is good and
ought to be preferred.
The misfit that underlies a problem may result, on the one hand, from an observed lack or
deterioration over time of the conditions defined by the building descriptors. Alternatively,
people's conception of the desirable conditions may change over time as would happen, for
example, with changes in fashion or the socio-economic status of the occupants. The definition
of the problem may take an explicit form or may be felt implicitly; in today's formalized
construction, the problem is made explicit through an architectural brief or program.
Construction involves a major transformation of materials, energy, finance and manpower into
the building product. Characterized by an intense concentration of economic resources,
construction necessarily reflects the interests of the parties concerned with it. What are now
considered to be good and desirable are likely to be quite different to those of both the owner
and the designer.
Use is that stage of the building life-cyle where the building’s impact extends not only to the
users but also to the social and built-environment at large; and this for long periods of time.
Very often the immediate users of and the people indirectly involved in building(s) have very
little say in its formation until this stage. It may even be the case that they remain unknown
until much later.

Building activity exists in interdependence with numerous environmental and cultural factors,
with technology, knowledge and value systems forming the basic components of the latter.
Neither environmental factors, nor knowledge and technology, however, determine on their
own or together to any fundamental extent the nature of a building design nor the quality
observed by the users. What do determine these are the beliefs that owners, users, professionals,
and other people hold as to what ought to be desired and preferred. It is these beliefs that shape
the ultimate perceptions related to building(s); and in this sense, people’s ethical beliefs are the
ultimate determinants of how buildings are appraised.
➢ Values and Value Judgements in Building
Whether building values are intrinsic or extrinsic in character, or are means or ends values is
not of great importance unless these values have been identified and denominated in the first
place. A convenient route for identification would be to consider the kind of human needs that
they are related to. From this viewpoint, values that affect the nature and outcome of human
activities may be classified under three general categories: technical, socio-cultural and
percepto-cognitional.
Technical values are related to the satisfaction of non-human requirements, as well as
biological and bio-social human needs. Three generic values in this context are reliability,
efficiency and compatibility. Reliability is associated with the probability that a problem
solution will perform its function satisfactorily. In the building context, reliability may be
interpreted, for example, to mean the probability that a building will provide the necessary
meso-environmental conditions. Efficiency concerns the ratio of the utility obtained to the
amount of the resources supplied. In building, efficiency measures may be such quantities as
amount of useful space or quality obtained per unit of investment, or the efficiency of the
heating system provided. Compatibility is a value related to the inverse of the degree of conflict
that the solution implemented will create with people, and other entities in the environment. A
foremost example of technical compatibility is safety.
Compatibility also falls under the general class of socio-cultural values. Social compatibility
comprises values of past and future continuity, suitability to the social and cultural context, and
conformity to good professional practices.
Also affecting the formation and perception of the built environment are percept-cognitional
values, among which may be mentioned the generic values of evocativeness, dishabituality and
mastery. Cf. Evocativeness is a measure of the extent to which the senses, emotions and
intellect of observers and users are invoked. For example, such evocation may consist in giving
an impression of magnanimity or historical continuity, or invoking feelings of homely coziness
or community. Dishabituality is a measure of the novelty and the unfamiliarity of the solution.
In building this might correspond to the provision of novel spaces, vistas that people are
unaccustomed to and novel uses of materials and other architectural elements. Mastery
comprises qualities that are conveyed by formal aesthetic characteristics such the unity of the
design, the refinement in details, the degree of perfection attained in design and construction.
In building, there are many values ranging from those related to structural parameters to
acoustic variables, from material costs to formal aesthetic measures. Several different values
would fall in the same category: for example, the safety of the building against collapse during
earthquakes; safety from household accidents or toxic emissions from the building materials;
and the degree to which a building blocks the sunlight of adjacent buildings are all instances
of compatibility values which exist simultaneously in building. This diversity in the range of
values is a major problem in studies of building values.
Another problem relates to the fact that it is not only building, the product, but the whole of the
building activity as described in Figure 1 that constitutes the subject area of building values.

Although it will not be possible to enumerate these values here, the short list below will serve
to illustrate their diverse nature:
a. The intrinsic values of the building product, such as compatibility with the physical and
mental health of the occupants (Cf. Day).
b. The means value of the social organization through which the planning has been achieved,
such as a participatory process.
c. The extent of the discourse that a building has generated in architectural circles.
d. The extrinsic value of compatibility with the topography and climate of the environment.
e. The innovatively of the techniques used in the construction.
f. The appropriateness of the spatial solution vis a vis the cultural value system of the occupants.
g. The means value of the attitudes of building professionals (Cf. Manheim).
Value judgements in building are formed mainly through the accretion of successful
professional examples and the practice of criticism. They are transferred throughout the
building professions through education, professional guidance and control, and through society
by enculturation. Parallel to cultural phenomena, value judgements vary through time and in
space. Whereas judgements related to technical values have a tendency to remain fairly
constant, other values judgements change more often and are variable from group to group,
and society to society.
Explicitly stated value judgements are encountered in the clauses of professional standards,
building codes and other codes of practice. Ordinarily, such clauses are not interpreted as value
judgements, but they are, nevertheless, totally consistent with the understanding of value
judgement provided above. Such value judgements rarely create much disagreement. Much
more controversial, however, are socio-cultural and percept-cognitional value judgements not
laid down in an explicit manner but rather carried implicitly by professionals in their individual
style of practice. Attention must also be drawn to the fact that many values in building, in
addition to not having clearly defined descriptors, have value judgements associated with them
implicitly. The designation of such values incorporates their goodness gradation, often in
binary form. Values commonly used in architectural criticism such as creativity, sensitivity,
perceptivity, boldness, and brilliance are examples of such values.
➢ Valuation and Worth
The discussion above has been general in that no reference was made to instances of building.
To bring the study of values to an operational level, we need to consider what is involved in
the evaluation of instances.
Establishing the goodness level of a particular instance (building) on the goodness gradation
of a value is a process that may be called valuation. The level established in this manner is the
worth of that instance for that value. For example, the structural analysis (valuation) of some
load carrying system of Building A (instance) establishes that its strength (value) is strong
(worth). Thus, a building descriptor, mediated through valuation, results in a worth for that
building. This example also illustrates some salient features of valuation:
a. Valuation may consist of a procedure varying from a simple one capable of being done by a
layman to a detailed professional study.
b. It may be done at different stages of the building process; predictively during design as in
the example above, selectively post design as in an architectural competition or in post
facto assessment.
c. Because the valuation of an actual building will involve many value judgements, some
procedure of composite valuation needs to be formulated using the premises of value systems
to determine composite worth.

Overall quality in a building is a typical example of composite worth, incorporating the worth
of all values pertaining to a building. Because it is mediated by value systems, it is continuous
and variable throughout the life cycle of the building and with respect to the groups that are
doing the valuation, emphasizing the essential subjectivity of building appraisals.
➢ Some Observations on Value-related Issues in Building
Many of the problems that generate debate may be re-formulated in the light of value systems.
One such issue concerns the conflict that is observed between different groups. For example,
there appears to be constant conflict in the needs and approaches of professionals versus users,
in the attitudes of architects versus engineers, in the interests of contractors versus owners. A
re-analysis of these problems in value-related terms may help in understanding but not
necessarily in resolving these differences.
Another occasion where problems associated with value systems become apparent is in design
competitions. Competition documents expressing the problem are prepared by a
planning/programming group that also sets performance criteria and acceptable standards. The
actual choice of the solution to be implemented, however, is governed by the value system of
the jury. It is very easy to foresee that different winners would emerge if different juries were
to judge the same entries. The perennial complaints by designers that documents are not clear,
or too restrictive, or have not been taken into consideration by the juries are likely to find clarity
when viewed in a value-related perspective.
A major portion of the energy that is devoted to building education goes to forming the value
system of the students. This effort would be better guided by a consciousness of value systems
through a study of the values involved and their formation, examining past and present value
systems held by different groups. Similarly, value-related analysis may also be used in the
studies of designer attitudes and behaviour.

Q.4 Climate change and global warming are two global phenomena impacting the
quality of life in all major parts of the world. How environmental ethics can be related to
these phenomena to address them?
1. Climate Change
Climate change includes both global warming driven by human emissions of greenhouse
gases, and the resulting large-scale shifts in weather patterns. Though there have been previous
periods of climatic change, since the mid-20th century, humans have had unprecedented impact
on Earth's climate system and caused change on a global scale.
The largest driver of warming is the emission of greenhouse gases, of which more than 90%
are carbon dioxide (CO2) and methane. Fossil fuel burning (coal, oil, and natural gas)
for energy consumption is the main source of these emissions, with additional contributions
from agriculture, deforestation, and manufacturing.[4] The human cause of climate change is
not disputed by any scientific body of national or international standing.[5] Temperature rise is
accelerated or tempered by climate feedbacks, such as loss of sunlight-reflecting snow and ice
cover, increased water vapor (a greenhouse gas itself), and changes to land and ocean carbon
sinks.
Figure 1: Impacts of Climate Change
2. Global Warming
Global warming, the phenomenon of increasing average air temperatures near the surface
of Earth over the past one to two centuries. Climate scientists have since the mid-20th century
gathered detailed observations of various weather phenomena (such as
temperatures, precipitation, and storms) and of related influences on climate (such as ocean
currents and the atmosphere’s chemical composition).

Figure 2: Effects of Global Warming
These data indicate that Earth’s climate has changed over almost every conceivable timescale
since the beginning of geologic time and that the influence of human activities since at least
the beginning of the Industrial Revolution has been deeply woven into the very fabric
of climate change.
3. The Ethics of Climate Change
A world in which all human beings were equal, rational, and perfectly governed, when
confronted with the prospect of global warming, might reach an optimal decision based on
compelling climate science. That ideal world would then find effective international
agreements to restrict greenhouse gas emissions and avoid harmful climate change.
We do not live in such a world. In reality, the science of climate change, no matter how
advanced, will never be sufficient to tell humanity what to do. Science may be able to inform
policy by forecasting how severe climate change will be, given different greenhouse gas levels.
However, experience teaches that science alone is never enough. When confronting
environmental challenges, considerations of fairness, equity, and justice must also inform any
successful international agreement.
This is certainly true of three major ethical dilemmas now complicating the climate change
debate: how to balance the rights and responsibilities of the developed and developing world;
how to evaluate geo-engineering schemes designed to reverse or slow climate change; and how
to assess our responsibility to future generations who must live with a climate we are shaping
today.
The 1987 Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, together with
subsequent agreements, is often hailed as a model environmental treaty. Although replacing
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) clearly is much easier than weaning the world off fossil fuels, the
ethical dimension of the ozone treaty holds lessons for tackling global warming. In dealing
with CFCs, governments, industry, and science — realizing that CFCs and related manmade
chemicals caused ozone depletion — quickly developed ozone-safe substitutes. And
recognizing that developed and developing countries had differing legitimate concerns, the
international ozone agreements called for developed countries to take the lead in addressing
the issue, because these nations had produced most of the substances implicated in destroying
stratospheric ozone. A fund was established to help developing countries phase out ozone-
destroying chemicals. Technology transfer was addressed.
Many different segments of society now recognize that an effective climate agreement must
also have such an ethical dimension. Religious organizations have contributed to the dialogue,
addressing such fundamental questions as the rights of poor people and developing nations.
“Action to mitigate global climate change,” the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops
has declared in a statement, “must be built upon a foundation of social and economic justice
that does not put the poor at greater risk or place disproportionate and unfair burdens on
developing nations.”
Nearly all the nations of the world now agree that atmospheric greenhouse gases should be kept
below a level that would produce dangerous human-caused climate change. However, exactly
what level is “dangerous”?
The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) is required by its mandate to be
policy-neutral. As one of the authors of its 2007 Fourth Assessment Report, I can testify that
IPCC scrupulously avoided all forms of policy advocacy. Its task was simply to assess the
scientific research literature in a way that was policy-relevant but not policy-prescriptive.
In any case, dangerous climate change is a subjective concept, depending on one’s values and
risk tolerance, among other factors. Science cannot say that a given atmospheric level of
greenhouse gases is safe, and another slightly higher one is not. Expecting that degree of
precision from climate science is as unrealistic as expecting medical science to declare that one
level of cholesterol is surely tolerable, and any higher level is certain to lead to a heart attack.
Climate is complex. Einstein once remarked that everything should be made as simple as
possible, but not more simple than that.
However, science, speaking through the IPCC, can provide guidance by suggesting what
degree of severity of climate change is likely to be associated with any specific amount of
greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. This information is found in great detail in the IPCC
reports. Mainstream climate scientists like me regard these reports as the gold standard in our
field. We use IPCC reports as textbooks for our graduate students, and they have been
recognized as authoritative by national academies of science, by scientific professional
societies, and most recently by the award of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize. The IPCC reports
have guided the European Union in formally adopting a specific goal of holding global
warming to no more than 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 degrees Fahrenheit) above the average pre-
industrial temperature of the mid-19th century.
In December 2007, at a major United Nations-sponsored climate conference in Bali, I joined
other climate scientists to help publicize a statement signed by more than 200 climate scientists
from more than 20 countries. Many of these scientists were also IPCC authors, but all of us
signed the statement strictly as individuals. Our statement declared that by 2050 global
greenhouse gas emissions should be cut by at least 50 percent below 1990 levels. The goal, we
scientists said, should be to stabilize greenhouse gas concentrations at a CO2-equivalent level
well below 450 parts per million.
Not surprisingly, the Bali negotiators failed to reach an agreement in which nations accepted
binding commitments with firm timetables and quantitative targets for greenhouse gas
reductions. The problem was not that the science was unreliable or that the negotiators were
incompetent. The major obstacle was that nations, like individuals, do not take major decisions
solely on the basis of scientific results. This realization may seem obvious, but we scientists
are often politically naïve.
It is now increasingly clear that meaningful international action to limit climate change not
only requires compelling scientific evidence and recognition of legitimate national interests,
but also must focus on considerations of equity and ethics. The climate system is a global
commons. Yet the consequences and costs of climate change do not fall equally on all nations
and all parts of the globe. And with fossil fuels now supplying 80 percent of global energy, and
thus enabling much of modern economic progress, nations will accept constraints on their

freedom to emit greenhouse gases only when they are satisfied they are being treated fairly as
part of a global response.
The differing perspectives of developed and developing nations — and the contrast between
past and future actions — remain a key issue. Today, more than one out of every four molecules
of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere has been put there by human actions, chiefly burning coal,
oil, and natural gas. If we ask which nations are responsible for this dramatic increase in
greenhouse gases, the answer is obvious — the developed nations. The United States, currently
with about 5 percent of global population, has produced about a quarter of all the carbon
dioxide that humankind has added to the atmosphere.
On the other hand, if we ask where the future growth in carbon dioxide emissions will originate,
the answer is that the developing nations will largely be responsible. The developing nations
with large populations — China foremost, followed by India, Brazil, Russia and others — are
rapidly exploiting fossil fuels to power economic development. China, which now builds a new
large coal-fired power plant every week or so, has already passed the United States as the nation
that emits the most carbon dioxide. Is this fair? Ethical concerns demand a principled
understanding of the differing rights and obligations of both developed and developing
countries.
Figure 3: Climate change presents a perfect moral storm because of the mutually reinforcing challenges it
poses.
The sobering prospect of using geo-engineering to counter human-caused climate change also
raises profound ethical issues. Many geo-engineering approaches are conceivable. For
example, it is relatively easy to propose ways to make the Earth more reflective, in the hope
that reduced absorption of sunlight might compensate for a strengthened greenhouse effect.
Large mirrors might be placed in space. Sulfate particles or their chemical predecessors might
be launched into the stratosphere. As the consequences of human-caused climate change
become more severe and apparent, the temptation to seek a relatively simple technological
remedy will surely increase.
I believe this temptation should be resisted. At best, if it worked well, geo-engineering would
be addictive, committing future generations to continue it and encouraging further reliance on
fossil fuels. More probably, geo-engineering would create additional problems while
exacerbating existing ones. Artificially increasing the Earth’s reflectivity, for example, does
nothing about the ongoing acidification of the oceans resulting from carbon dioxide being
added to the atmosphere.
Figure 4: Environmental Ethics
Research is far preferable to ignorance, and I feel about geo-engineering exactly as I do about
nuclear war: Study it, by all means, but never try it. It would be highly irresponsible to conduct
a massive international intervention on our planet without being virtually certain there would
be no side effects making the cure worse than the disease. Such certainty is highly unlikely.
Even relatively simple, small-scale plans can go wrong. If geo-engineering is the last resort in
a worst-case scenario, let us do all we can to avoid that scenario. Who has the moral — and
legal — right, on behalf of all nations, to tinker with the entire global environment?
Finally, the issue of intergenerational equity requires agreement on how decisions taken now
may affect people not yet born. The climate system has several built-in delaying mechanisms.
The consequences of a heightened greenhouse effect appear after a time lag, often decades or
more. Oceans, as well as ice and snow, react slowly to the increasing burden of greenhouse
gases. We have already committed our descendants to many centuries of sea-level rise. We
benefit now from using cheap and abundant fossil fuels, and we use the atmosphere as a free
dump for the waste products. In doing so, however, we sentence our children and grandchildren
to cope with the resulting climate change.
I am convinced that a scientific community that aspires to be helpful to society must include
ethics and equity as an integral part of its research agenda. We should place greater emphasis
on providing quantitative information relevant to the ethical consequences of different policy
options. For example, policymakers urgently need to know how climate change will affect
different regions of the world and different economic sectors. The coming temperature change
labeled “global warming” is simply a symptom of climate disruption. Research is required to
generate specific forecasts of effects on water supply, on hurricanes and other storms, and on
droughts, floods, and many other phenomena. Consequences for ecosystems and biodiversity
worldwide are among the unknowns. Options and costs of adaptation to climate change will
vary greatly around the globe and among developed and developing nations, and science has
much to contribute to understanding these factors.
Figure 5: Climate change raises serious questions about how we should relate to nonhuman animals and the
rest of nature.
Incorporating such considerations into international negotiations on climate change is not

fanciful or unrealistic. Indeed, experience in other domains teaches us that an ethical basis is
essential in order to reach effective solutions. The historical development of the Montreal
Protocol and follow-on agreements to deal with human-caused damage to stratospheric ozone
illustrates clearly the benefits of taking ethics into account.

Figure 6: Climate change will likely have harmful unavoidable impacts.
Let us recognize the damage we have already done to the climate system and resolve to
minimize the additional damage we threaten to cause in the future. That is our moral and ethical
responsibility to our neighbours on this small planet, to our descendants, and to all life on Earth.

Q.5 Discuss with reference to the Ethical dimensions in the Built Environment how
healthy buildings may contribute to the wellness of the community and society as a whole?
1. Ethics
Ethics is very hard to define and it should have a definition understandable or relevant to more
than a few, as in philosophical ethics. In the context of the built environment, professional
ethics are often quoted in the form of professional codes of practice, but there is some criticism
as to the effectiveness of these codes and some public suspicion that they might be self-serving.
The discipline of business ethics has many overlaps, though not exclusively so. The context of
business is understood ‘to include all systems involved in the exchange of goods and services’,
which is relevant also to the supplier–customer relationship in many of the transactions that
take place to create and maintain the built environment.
2. The built environment
The built environment describes the man-made environment in which we live, and in recent
years there have been particular ethical and moral issues that are connected with the
development and maintenance of the built environment, which includes buildings, engineering
structures and the spaces, mix and juxtaposition of such structures. The development life cycle
of an asset can be described as the urban planning, inception, design, development control,
construction, occupation/use and deconstruction of development, when the cycle might then
restart. During this period many different professionals are involved in making decisions which
have a long-term effect on the well-being of all of our lives, whether we are involved as clients,
suppliers or as bystanders affected by the development of the built environment. Sustainability
of built assets is just one example of where choices have to be made. Decisions in this area
might affect the use and quantity of the asset and its components, the design, the planning
constraints, the best construction method and the way in which the building is operated.
➢ Health, Wellness, and Experience in the Built Environment: From Green Buildings
to Conscious Cities
The concept of Conscious Cities has been defined as a new field that proposes to replace the
focus on efficiency in the built environment with a focus on human health and well-being. It is
a concept that “arose in reaction to the widening gap between our potential to design with the
human experience in mind, and its lack of application in practice.”1 Although by no means
substituting efficiency, there has recently emerged within the green building industry a
complementary focus on human health, wellness, and experience.
This refocusing of priorities stems from the recognition of a failure of humanism in the way
we design, building and operate the built environment. Modern humans have essentially
become an indoor species, with people in the industrialized world spending almost 90 percent
of their time inside buildings2. Many of modern society’s chronic health issues related to lack
of physical activity, stress, and poor diet, can be directly or indirectly linked to the architecture
of buildings and cities
And yet, the humanistic element has been systematically overlooked by many in the industry.
This is not to say that those in the industry have completely ignored it. Building codes, for
example, have dictated performance requirements related to indoor air quality, ventilation
rates, and thermal comfort. And while health and wellness considerations have also been
integral to various green building rating systems, it has often taken a backseat compared to
other environmental criteria such as energy performance, water management and material
selection.

Consideration of the human dimension in green buildings has gained momentum in recent
years. The World Green Building Council noted in 2015 that “a new market demand is
emerging within the building industry: to more intentionally address human experience, health,
and wellness as core elements of green building practice”3. Similarly, the American Institute
of Architects predicted that “by facilitating greater collaboration with the public health
community, there is an opportunity for green buildings to move past the premise of “do no
harm” to a focus on holistic health promotion.”4
This development partly arises from economic considerations. On average, 90 percent of
typical business operating costs are employee related (salaries and benefits), while nine percent
goes to rent, and only one percent to energy. Therefore, even a modest reduction in sickness or
absenteeism can lead to a meaningful reduction in overall operating costs
a) Green building rating systems, standards, and guidelines

In conjunction with (or perhaps due to) this renewed focus on the relationship between health
and the built environment, various rating systems, standards, and guidelines have emerged.
➢ LEED
The LEED green building rating system developed by the U.S. Green Building Council
(USGBC), is the most popular and widely adopted third-party green building rating system in
North America. It contains different requirements for the design and construction of new
buildings, interiors and communities, as well as for the operation and maintenance of existing
buildings. While LEED has always included many strategies related to human health and
wellness — for example thermal comfort, indoor air quality, and daylighting — it has been
only a minor component of the overall scoring system.
Luckily, revisions to the rating system – most recently the update to the LEED Version 4 –
continuously raise the bar for metrics and criteria related to health. One such example are the
requirements for daylighting. Whereas previously the daylighting requirements simply dictated
a minimum illuminance level in order to demonstrate compliance, the updated LEED v4
requirements dictate that projects must meet a tighter, more specific range of illuminance
levels, use more sophisticated and nuanced daylighting modeling techniques such as spatial
daylight autonomy, and be modelled or measured at different times of the year and under
different sky conditions. LEED v4 also has more nuanced requirements for improving daylight
quality by minimizing glare.
Furthermore, additional “pilot” credits have also been introduced to LEED. Pilot credits
provide projects with the opportunity to test more innovative strategies that aren’t included in
the base rating system. Some of the LEED pilot credits available related to health and well-
being include: Integrative Process for Health Promotion, Enhanced acoustical comfort and
performance, Learning controls for thermal comfort, and Design for active occupants, among
others.
➢ Arc
The USGBC and the Green Business Certification Institute (GBCI) recently launched Arc, a
software platform that allows individual buildings, communities, and even entire cities, to
measure and benchmark sustainability performance on an ongoing basis. Arc users are given a
performance score based on five categories: Energy, Water, Waste, Transportation, and Human
Experience. For buildings, the Human Experience performance score is based on indoor air
quality and post-occupancy surveys used to gauge occupant satisfaction on an ongoing basis.
The Arc platform is integrated with building sub-systems, using the LEED Dynamic Plaque to
provide building occupants with a visualization of the building’s score.

For larger communities and cities, the Human Experience category is based on data and
indicators related to education, prosperity, equitability, and health & safety, using such metrics
as median air quality, green space per capita, and average noise levels.
➢ Living Building Challenge
Developed by the International Living Future Institute (ILFI), the Living Building Challenge
is the most advanced measure of sustainability in the built environment that exists today.
Criteria required to achieve certification include those related not only to stringent quantitative
building performance metrics, such as net-zero energy and net-zero water, but also more
qualitative human-centric criteria related to beauty, equity, health and happiness. Projects must
incorporate strategies that emphasize civilized and humane spatial environments that are
intended solely for human delight. While similar to LEED and other green building rating
systems that require projects to demonstrate specific sustainability performance, it is unlike
them in that in order for a building to be certified as “Living”, buildings are required to
demonstrate achievement of each requirement — there are no optional strategies or criteria.
The overall mission of ILFI is to create buildings and communities that are “socially just,
culturally rich, and ecologically restorative.” Certified living buildings, therefore, are healthy,
beautiful, and regenerative spaces that connect people to light, air, food, nature, and community
and create a positive impact on human and natural systems. The Living Building Challenge is
as much a philosophy as it is a design tool and certification system.
➢ WELL
The WELL Building Standard, launched in 2014, is the first rating system that focuses
exclusively on human health and wellness in the built environment. WELL is structured
similarly to LEED in that it allows new and existing buildings, interiors, and communities to
implement specific mandatory requirements as well as additional optional strategies towards
certification. It is based on various mandatory requirements (Preconditions) and optional
strategies (Optimizations) divided into seven concept areas (some examples of the
Preconditions and Optimizations are provided in parentheses):
• Air (e.g. ventilation, air filtration, humidity control, advanced air purification, toxic
material reduction)
• Water (e.g. advanced water quality standards, drinking water promotion)
• Nourishment (e.g. access to healthy foods, reduction in food advertising, food
production and preparation)
• Light (e.g. circadian lighting design, glare control, colour quality, daylighting)
• Fitness (e.g. interior fitness circulation, exterior active design, fitness equipment,
active furnishings)
• Comfort (e.g. accessibility, ergonomics, acoustic comfort, thermal comfort, olfactory
comfort)
• Mind (e.g. post-occupancy surveys, beauty and design, biophilic design, health and
wellness awareness, self-monitoring)
WELL is also moving beyond the individual building: the world’s first WELL-certified city
district is now being planned as part of a 40-acre urban mixed-use development in Tampa,
Florida.
➢ Biophilic Design
“Biophilia”, a term first coined by the preeminent Harvard biologist E.O. Wilson in 1984, is a
concept that describes our innate biological and evolutionary connection with nature, natural
processes, and living systems. Biophilic design supports this innate human-nature connection
by integrating multi-sensory experiences and design elements into the built environment.
Biophilic design has been shown to provide many health benefits — such as improved

concentration, comfort, satisfaction, creativity, healing and overall well-being.5 Strategies can
be roughly divided into three themes:
• Nature in the space: Addresses the direct, physical and ephemeral presence of nature
in a space or place. (e.g. visual and non-visual connections with nature, thermal and
airflow variability, dynamic and diffuse lighting, presence of water)
• Nature of the space: Addresses spatial configurations of the space (e.g. refuge,
mystery, and risk)
• Natural analogues: Addresses organic, non-living and indirect evocations of nature
(e.g. material connections with nature, complexity and order, and biomorphic forms
and patterns)
The International Living Future Institute, creators of the Living Building Challenge, recognized
that while there has been much theory published about biophilic design, very few resources
exist to help project teams develop biophilic design implementation plans. That is why ILFI
recently launched the Biophilic Design Initiative, a collaborative network that aims to distribute
relevant resources that can take the practice from theory to reality.
➢ Active Design Guidelines
Created by the Center for Active Design in New York City and based on the latest research and
best practices in the field, these guidelines identify strategies that create opportunities for daily
physical activity for building designers and urban planners to incorporate into their projects.
The Guidelines focus on four key areas:
• Circulation systems (i.e. connecting interior spaces, corridors, stairs, and lobbies to a
building’s programmed spaces)
• Individual elements (i.e. incorporating appealing, accessible, and comfortable
elements, such as stairs, exercise rooms, and drinking fountains, while de-emphasizing
elements that deter physical activity, such as elevators, poorly-lit corridors, and non-
ergonomic designs)
• Programming (i.e. organizing the building program in a way that encourages walking
between destinations)
• Activity Spaces (i.e. providing spaces designated as venues for physical activity, such
as exercise rooms and multipurpose rooms).
The Active Design Guidelines can even contribute to LEED projects through the “Design for
active occupants” LEED pilot credit.
➢ GRESB
The Global Real Estate Sustainability Benchmark (GRESB) is the global standard for assessing
the environmental, social and governance (ESG) sustainability performance of real estate
portfolios and infrastructure assets. GRESB launched a new Health & Well-being Module as
part of the 2016 GRESB Real Estate Assessment. GRESB notes that “the module is predicated
on the recognition that health and well-being is emerging as an important source of both risk
and opportunity for property investors and companies.”
The module assesses and benchmarks the actions that property companies and funds have
implemented to promote health and well-being through both internal (i.e. policies and actions
by companies focused directly on their own workforce) and external mechanisms (i.e.
intentional actions taken to improve the health and well-being of tenants, customers and
surrounding communities). It focuses on the portfolio-scale – not individual buildings or
projects. GRESB’s long-term goal is to provide property investors with new indicators that
help understand how real estate companies and funds are promoting health and well-being
throughout their portfolio.

➢ The psychology of well-being

Adaptive comfort, for example, is a model or hypothesis of human comfort which posits that a
person’s expectations and preferences for indoor comfort are greatly influenced by other more
contextual behavioural, psychological, and meteorological factors. Outdoor climate conditions
in the preceding days, or even weeks, can influence a person’s level of indoor comfort at any
given moment. Providing building occupants with more “adaptive opportunities” — the ability
to adjust the position of a window blind, change clothing, or providing access to personal
environmental controls, for example — can also greatly influence a person’s psychological
evaluation of comfort. These considerations could be better acknowledged or addressed in
health and wellness rating systems and protocols.
Furthermore, there is the psychological condition known as “hedonic adaptation” (or

“happiness setpoint”). This condition explains the tendency for people to return to a baseline
level of satisfaction (or happiness) despite positive (or negative) changes in external conditions.
This area of study has typically focused on a wide variety of topics outside the realm of
engineering, planning and architecture — for example in relation to career success, personal
financial wealth, and social status. Researchers have only just recently explored how it can
influence occupant satisfaction in green office buildings. For example, researchers have shown
that occupant satisfaction in LEED-certified office buildings is at its greatest in the first year
of occupancy, but then declines over time. The authors speculate, however, that this decline in
satisfaction could be avoided through better occupant feedback mechanisms and continuous
assessment of building performance — areas that the green building industry has specifically
identified as a priority in recent years.
➢ “Bottom-up” approaches to well-being
But rather than try to increase wellbeing and happiness through “top-down” approaches applied
through the design interventions recommended in the rating systems and guidelines discussed
here, perhaps “bottom-up” approaches — cognitive techniques applied by individuals
themselves — could be employed. Many philosophies and schools of thought over the centuries
have attempted to achieve just that. Mindfulness, for example, or Stoicism — schools of
philosophical thought which have both experienced somewhat of a rise in popularity in recent
years — give individuals the cognitive tools necessary to better adapt and increase resilience
in the face of adversity, leading to improved mental health and wellbeing, regardless of external
conditions. Could “bottom-up” philosophies like these be adopted by citizens to complement
the “top-down” design interventions employed by practitioners in our industries? Could a more
integrated approach like this lead to better to health and wellbeing outcomes in the built
environment?
➢ The science of well-being
Another consideration, perhaps one that is even more fundamental, is our definition of words
like “health”, “wellbeing”, and “comfort”. The World Health Organisation (WHO) defines
health as “a state of complete physical, mental and social well-being”, while the American
Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineering (ASHRAE) defines
thermal comfort as “that condition of mind which expresses satisfaction with the thermal
environment and is assessed by subjective evaluation”.
What these definitions reveal is that while it is influenced by external physical factors and
conditions, fundamentally, our well-being is predicated on subjective experience; well-being,
in other words is ultimately related at least on some level to the human brain. The fact that
these words are notoriously vague and can be open to revision does not mean that they are
vacuous, nor should it undermine objective standards of health and wellbeing that can be used
by practitioners in the industry.

This means that the gap between normative claims about values (i.e. philosophical claims about
what we ought to do) and facts (i.e. scientific claims about the way the world is) isn’t as wide
as many assume. Our failure to recognize the relationship between values and facts has wider
implications for public policy in fields beyond just health and wellness in the built environment.
The risks posed by many emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and autonomous
vehicles, for example, will require a response that is philosophical in nature, yet scientific in
application. It’s important to note that in this context “science” isn’t merely synonymous with
data, models, and experiments; these are merely its tools. Science is actually more
comprehensive than this. The boundaries between science, philosophy, and the rest of rational
thought cannot be easily distinguished. When considered in this way, science can be used to
answer questions about well-being, at least in principle8. Simply recognizing this will change
the way we talk about well-being and will change our expectations for how it can be fostered
throughout the built environment.
➢ Conclusion
Many of these questions will need to be addressed as the building industry’s focus on health
and wellness evolves. One way to address these unresolved issues may be to incorporate a
wider range of both quantitative and qualitative considerations, rather than single or narrowly-
defined criteria, striving for a “good enough” approach that is user-cantered and allows for
flexibility, diversity, and adaptability.
Just as the green building rating systems, standards, and guidelines discussed here have brought
environmental sustainability considerations into the mainstream and created a “green building”
market, so too could they play an important role in bringing health and wellness considerations
into the mainstream. While questions remain, and more philosophical debate is needed, these
strategies can and should be used today. Together, they can help move “Conscious Cities” from
metaphor to reality.

Q.6 a) What are the major issues in addressing the ethical problems in the
Architectural domain?
b) Select one public building in Pakistan to elaborate the relationship.
1. Architectural Ethics
For any follower of architectural debate – whether in print or online – it would be hard
not to be conscious of the crescendo of articles over recent months and years dealing with
the question of architecture’s political and social role, and, more broadly the ‘agency’ of
architects. The conventional narrative sees the architectural profession essentially under
attack, constantly being eroded by the ever-increasing specialisation of roles within
building design and construction.
The architect is but one more small, and but no means, integral cog, in the building
industry’s vast and complex development machine. Driven by the imperative to ‘de-risk’,
the space for chance and the unexpected – surely fundamental to any creative process –
is shrinking in favour of the tried-and-tested and commercial expediency. Architecture –
and the public that many still feel it is ultimately here to serve – is being sidelined by the
inherent conservatism of much of the building industry, whether large-scale city
developers putting up yet another city tower block or the volume house-builders, many
of whom barely involve an architect at all. Architects are useful only when their name or
signature style can be used to create ‘value’.
Thus while the ‘star-architect’ system is, on the one hand, a production of the architectural
world and media, it is heavily bolstered – made possible even – by the needs of commerce.
The result of all this, as many have observed, is a gradual hollowing out of the architectural
profession, with architects merely players in someone else’s game. Yet, despite this, it’s the
architect who is still held up as culpable, sometimes wholly responsible, when something goes
wrong, aesthetically, structurally, even commercially. We could certainly add morally too.
When there are questions over workers’ rights, for example, it’s the architect who very often
has to answer them, and, in the case of Zaha Hadid Architects’ work in Qatar, repeatedly. When
another luxury residential development pops up with flats for sale at millions of pounds, it’s
the architect who takes the criticism, not the building’s owner, even if the architect’s design
succeeds on its own terms as an impeccable response to the brief.
Figure 1: Ethical failure of Modern Architecture

While the activities of developers are allowed to be led by the market (and certain regulatory
parameters, of course) architects are somehow seen to be different, subject to a quite different
set of standards of ‘morality’, the ‘public interest’ and of ‘ethics’. In short, architecture is seen
as ‘exceptional’.
There are, of course, important historical reasons for architecture’s ‘exceptionalism’. Looking
back to the late 19th century, we can see how the moralism of figures like John Ruskin and
William Morris helped to pave the way for Modernism’s social agenda. While much of the
19th-century moralism arose, on one level, as a reaction to the social upheavals brought about
by the Industrial Revolution, Modernism, in contrast, actively embraced the new possibilities
of modernity.
For many Modernists, architecture was an agent of social progress, while after the Second
World War, now aligned to the ideals of the welfare state, it became an actual instrument of
social emancipation. Even after Postmodernism and the triumph of neoliberal capitalism, which
largely stripped architecture of moral force, the legacy remains, leaving many architects with
a powerful sense that architecture has a purpose beyond a client’s brief, if not, it must be said,
the opportunities to realise it.
All this is why ‘ethics’ – which we might define as the application or practice of a moral
position – has become such an important and recurring issue for architects. And at the
‘Architectural Ethics’ debate at the Royal Academy, part of a season on ‘Architecture and
Freedom’, it was pretty clear that the architects in the audience wanted some answers.
The writer and broadcaster, Jonathan Meades, kicked off proceedings by claiming that ‘Ethics
and architecture should not inhabit the same sentence’, taking aim, essentially, at the claims
for architecture’s exceptionalism. Why, he asked, should architecture be different from other
professions or creative pursuits that are apparently unconcerned with questions of ethics? It is
a reductive argument, perhaps, but one with some validity.
Figure 2: Architecture's Ethics Moment

Having ethics implies architects have a power that extends well beyond the confines of their
brief. What, Meades’ argument goes, gives architects the right to say that their concern or
influence should extend beyond that which they are contracted to do? The answer is to do with
architecture’s ‘public-ness’. And it was along those lines that the writer and researcher, Anna
Minton, cleverly reframed the question and spoke very convincingly about how the ‘public
interest’ has disappeared from the lexicon of planning and policy in favour of the broader
‘economic interest’, as if the latter is automatically coterminous with the former.
Approaching a project from the question of its public interest offers, Minton argued, far greater
focus and more positive results than testing it against some kind of inevitably abstract and
potentially nebulous ethical code.
The agency of the architect was the subject for Francesco Sebregondi of Forensic Architecture,
a group which explores the use of architectural tools and strategies to document the spatial
implications of human rights abuses. As Sebregondi explained, this re-conceiving and
extending of the architect’s traditional role and remit into societal, moral and legal issues was
in part a response to its aforementioned curtailment.
If, as a question from the floor pointed out, there is a clear distinction between architecture –
the few buildings which have the involvement of architects – and the built environment – the
vast majority of buildings that don’t – then one can see the model of Forensic Architecture as
offering a very clear way for architects to reclaim agency over the urban condition.
So where does this leave us? A clue, I think, was in the contribution of Jane Hall of
Assemble, the 18-person collective who have made a name for themselves for their
collaborative and interdependent practice that sees them work in close dialogue with
client and public in both the designing and making of their projects.
In Assemble’s work, it is the ‘process’ that emerges as the architectural object, rather than
the building. Similarly, what, I would argue, is important in the ethics debate is not the
end product – perhaps a set of regulated ethical codes that an architect must abide by or
risk being struck off the register – but the debate itself. Why, despite Meades’
protestations, are architecture and ethics discussed together? Because architects think
they should be.
There is no more compelling reason. The question now is how to keep the debate moving
forward and ensure that architects are equipped to make ethical judgements that they
feel they can defend and hold to. There is usually no right answer to an ethical dilemma,
but there are certainly right ways of dealing with them.
2. Building Up: Modern Architecture in Pakistan
Pakistani architecture is defined by multiplicity. Both following tradition and breaking from it,
contemporary projects contend with multiple histories. Informed by the coexistence and
juxtaposition of conditions like regulated development and informal settlements
in Karachi and Islamabad, modern designs are being shaped by broader contexts. In turn, these
public and private projects are exploring new spaces and forms.
Located along the Arabian Sea in South Asia’s Indian subcontinent, Pakistan shares many
borders: Afghanistan and Iran to the west, India to the east, and both China and the Wakhan
Corridor to the north. It is the world’s sixth-most populous country, and its recent urban
development is informed by a property boom tied to overpopulation and past political
interventions. It's also seen in army projects, including expansive housing estates across all
major cities. Today, the new architecture of Pakistan tiptoes between physical and social
dimensions as it reflects the ethnically and linguistically diverse Islamic republic.

Figure 3: Ethically View in Karachi
While Pakistan has a long history of Indo-Saracenic and Mughal buildings, there are many
examples of Islamic architecture and modern projects. More contemporary work is readily seen
after the country moved the capital city to Islamabad in 1958. Architects and designers were
influenced by international trends, building both skyscrapers and new low-rise developments
alike. The following projects showcase a few of the country’s more recent buildings and
structures that were designed and built over the last decade.
➢ IBA Student Center
The Student Center was conceived as complete facility for recreation and to create a space
which encourages social interaction. In addition to the student lounges, computer lab, offices,
indoor play areas, gym, badminton courts, a dining hall and coffee shop and various open
spaces for students to gather, the most notable feature that determined the form of the structure
is the amphitheater.
The challenge of locating an amphitheater within the limited available area of the campus was
resolved by placing it on the roof of the Student Center.
Two tapered triangular masses intersect at a point that accommodates the geometry of the
amphitheater section.

Figure 4: IBA Centre - Karachi

➢ E7-2 House
E7-2 in Islamabad was made to embody the traditional values of a typical Pakistani family in
a new way, resulting in a modern arrangement of spaces and forms.
It is in an area adjacent to the Margalla hills with views looking out from the upper terraces.
The house was made as one solid shell where boundaries are minimal and where spaces flows
into each other.
By creating a fourteen feet high ceiling for the living room, different levels connect to one
another, creating a link between the living spaces and the bedrooms on the upper floors. The
link of this shell to the outside world is through a bridge that passes over a pool of water, which
acts like a reflection pool at night.

Figure 5: E 7-2 House, Islamabad

3678 - Assignment 1

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

3678 - Assignment 1

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

M.

Figure 1: Environmental Ethics

“In environmental philosophy, environmental ethics is an established field of practical

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 1

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 2

Figure 2: Environmental ethics in Islam

For example, the Prophet said:

3. Governing rules in Islamic environmental ethics

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 3

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 4

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 5

➢ THE INHERENT VALUE OF NON-HUMAN ENTITIES

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 6

Q.2 Discuss the following:

a) Islam and Environment goes hand in hand

Figure 1: Environment Conservation Concept

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 7

b) The self-interest of healing building

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 8

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 9

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 10

1. Value Systems: The Conceptual Basis of Building Ethics

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 11

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 12

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 13

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 14

Figure 1: Impacts of Climate Change

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 15

Figure 2: Effects of Global Warming

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 17

Figure 4: Environmental Ethics

Incorporating such considerations into international negotiations on climate change is not

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 20

Figure 6: Climate change will likely have harmful unavoidable impacts.

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 21

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 22

a) Green building rating systems, standards, and guidelines

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 23

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 24

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 25

➢ The psychology of well-being

Furthermore, there is the psychological condition known as “hedonic adaptation” (or

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 26

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 27

Figure 1: Ethical failure of Modern Architecture

Figure 2: Architecture's Ethics Moment

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 29

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 30

Figure 3: Ethically View in Karachi

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 31

Figure 4: IBA Centre - Karachi

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 32

Figure 5: E 7-2 House, Islamabad

ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS IN THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT - 3678 33

You might also like