Ingersoll, R.- A Post-Apocalyptic View of Ecology and Design (Article-2003)

A Post-Apocalyptic Viewof Ecology and DesignThirteen Recent Books, by Richard Ingersoll

I DON’T KNOW exactly when I decid-ed—probably about 1991 during thedisenchanting activities of Earth Dayat Berkeley—that I had survived theApocalypse. It was such a relief. I hadbeen waiting since my youth in the1950s for the promised destruction ofthe planet, first by nuclear warfare,next by pesticides, and then a rapidsuccession of man-made Armageddonsthat would quicken the processes ofentropy and unleash the ultimateparoxysmal heat death. The chances,however, that environmental damagecould be significantly reversed, thatthe realm of sustainability could be ef-fectively installed, that nature could beregenerated, in short that the worldcould be saved, no longer seemedquite so strong, if the Apocalypse hadalready occurred. Yes, life will contin-ue, nature is still present, the sex drivetoo, but I became aware that duringthe late 20th century, as we inadver-tently consumed trace elements fromChernobyl and gained ultraviolet ex-posure through the gaping ozonehole(s), that something definitely hadcome to an end, not biologically butcosmologically. We could no longer

struggle against impending doom if ithad already occurred. From that mo-ment on, my ecological consciousnessceased to be a narrative steeped inguilt, and became merely a questionof maintaining dignity during an in-evitable decline.

This does not mean that I havestopped recycling or disconnected myphotovoltaic roof or stopped teachingabout environmental responsibility. Itis simply a shift in worldview, fromone that paralleled the Christian es-chatology of guilt for sins and fear ofdoom, to one of therapeutic resigna-tion. In this tranquility I would like toapproach some of the latest texts thatmight interest design professionalsconcerned about the environment.While I agree that a lot can and mustbe done to reduce the production ofgreenhouse gases, it seems to me thathow this is to be done is the compellingissue. Environmentalism has alreadyclaimed a significant role in politics(does anyone remember Ralph Nad-er?), yet the politics of environmental-ism is virtually ignored by its architectproselytizers, who either assume thatgreen technology will solve the prob-

H A R VA R D D E S I G N M A G A Z I N E 1

This article appeared in Harvard Design Magazine, Spring/Summer 2003, Number 18. To order this issue or asubscription, visit the HDM homepage at <http://www.gsd.harvard.edu/hdm>.

© 2003 by the President and Fellows of Harvard College. Not to be reproduced without the permission of thepublisher: [email protected].

lems through laissez faire mechanismsor that some pervasive change ofheart, some mass eco-fascism, will riseup and enforce it for everyone’s owngood.

Almost everything I have read onecology and design is an imperative,exhortatory tract. I can think of noother discourse quite so steeped polit-ical correctness. With varying degreesof historical and scientific evidence,the texts appeal to a consensus that asevere environmental crisis is signifi-cantly increasing because of architec-tural and urban practices. SustainableArchitecture White Papers, produced bythe Earth Pledge Foundation, canserve as a well-meaning example: fiftypep talks by leading environmentalistpamphleteers and practitioners, whoin four- to six-page mission state-ments either provide an ideologicalcatechism or describe their positiveexperiences in sustainable design.Their practical concerns range fromphotovoltaics to green roofs to morearcane subjects such as fat, oil, andgrease “remediators” for kitchenwastes. That such a collection can domuch to convince the unconvinced isdoubtful, and, for the already con-vinced, aside from promotional expo-sure for those working in the field, itwill only serve as a hearty pat on theback. In vaguely utopian terms, mostcontributors outline what can be donewith sustainable technologies, show-ing little consideration for the limitsof the political system. The commonconclusion that a “sustainable” archi-tecture—one that supplies its own wa-ter and energy needs, takes care of itsown waste, adapts to site and climate,and promotes health—will also bemore beautiful has rarely been sup-ported by evidence.

But what if the growing consensuson imminent environmental catastro-phe is wrong? Probably the most con-troversial book of the moment, TheSkeptical Environmentalist: Measuringthe Real State of the World, by BjørnLomborg, sets out to debunk “thelitany” of doomsday-ism at the core ofthe ecology movement. A Danish stat-

istician, Lomborg methodically arguesthat the projections made by World-watch Institute, World Wildlife Fund,Greenpeace, and other prime sourcesfor describing environmental imbal-ance are significantly in error in theirpresentations of diminishing naturalresources, health problems, reducedbiodiversity, overpopulation, andpoverty. Within the safety of the lib-eral tradition, Lomborg theorizes incost-benefits terms that during thepast century “mankind’s lot has actual-ly improved in terms of practicallyevery measurable indicator” (4). Obvi-ously his conclusions about the inef-fectiveness of the Kyoto Accords inaddressing greenhouse gases has beentaken very seriously by the Bush ad-ministration: while agreeing thatglobal warming is partly anthro-pogenic, he reasons that “it will be farmore expensive to cut CO2 emissionsradically than to pay the costs of adap-tation to the increased temperatures”(318). While I am not equipped toprove or disprove Lomborg’s position,many scientists have convincingly re-butted, and it is quite clear that heprivileges short-term benefits overlong-term effects. Needless to say,even if he is in error, the skepticism heexhibits must be kept in play. Thisneeds saying: ecologists are frequentlyfighting a battle against a mythicalGreen Apocalypse rather than seekingmore equitably distributed well-being.

The most earnest of the genre de-voted to architecture and ecology isLaura C. Zeiher’s The Ecology of Archi-tecture. After a fairly gratuitous historyof the use of the elements since thedawn of civilization (ecologists tend tohave a better grasp of natural than hu-man history), the author focuses ontechnical issues such as alternativeenergy sources, passive heating andcooling, insulation, daylighting, waterconservation, and hazardous materi-als. While the principles are clearlyexplained, the book could never helpanyone design buildings, and since thefeatured examples generally fall shortof what I would recognize as signifi-cant architecture, it runs the risk of

associating the good intentions ofecological design with ugliness. Thefinal chapter, “A Call to Action,” ispure propaganda. To make the bookappear indispensable, she includes anappendix of hazardous and toxic sub-stances—but without indicating thequantities that are dangerous.

Among the few interesting archi-tects featured in Zeiher’s book is JamesWines, a conceptual artist and founderof SITE (Sculpture in the Environ-ment), who in the 1970s concocted aseries of superbly ironic facades for theBEST company. One of these, the1979 “tropical rainforest showroom,”initiated a series of “green” projects,culminating with SITE’s “AvenueFive” planted spine, a cooling pedes-trian corridor for the 1992 Expo inSeville. His Green Architecture is writ-ten with much more verve but muchless research than Zeiher’s book.While reiterating the familiar environ-mental imbalances reported by theWorldwatch Institute and suggestingthat “eco-centricity” ought to replaceegocentricity in contemporary design,Wines quite clearly has no interest intechnical issues and presents “green”architecture primarily as a style thatmight further the battle against Mod-ernism. After some rumination on his-tory, mostly prehistoric history, Winesconcludes that Western anthropocen-trism is the problem and Zen the solu-tion. Packaged as a coffee-table book,Green Architecture features lots of un-derground buildings, buildings covered with vegetation, SITE proj-ects, projects by Wines’s friends, and afew works by famous architects such asRenzo Piano, Antoine Predock, andJean Nouvel. Nowhere is the environ-mental performance of these buildingsseriously explored; the obvious ther-mal problems of Nouvel’s fully glazedCartier Foundation in Paris tends totake the wind out of the sails of his ar-gument. The absence of Glenn Mur-cutt, Will Bruder, and Ralph Erskine,architects whose work is valued asmuch for aesthetics as environmentalperformance, suggests a partiality thatverges on ignorance. The “green”

Building Nature’s Ruin? A Post-Apocalyptic View of Ecology and Design

2 H A R VA R D D E S I G N M A G A Z I N E S P R I N G / S U M M E R 2 0 0 3

© 2

003 b

y th

e Pr

esid

ent

and

Fello

ws

of H

arva

rd C

olle

ge.

Not

to

be r

epro

duce

d w

ithou

t th

e pe

rmis

sion

of

the

publ

ishe

r

imagined by Wines appears to beabove all a color for marketing.

With the new moral imperative forsustainable architecture, professionalshave been quick to recognize the com-mercial value of a green label. HOK,among the ten largest corporate de-sign firms in the US, is not the firstname that comes to mind when I thinkof ecology and architecture, butnonetheless they have very convinc-ingly assembled a primer, The HOKGuidebook to Sustainable Design, illus-trated exclusively with work from theoffice. It begins with the Decalogue,“Ten simple things you can do,” andcontinues for over 150 pages to makepragmatic lists about construction andmaterials, indicating with each itemwhich players in the design processmust be present. It’s a bureaucrat’s fan-tasy come true. Suggestions includesensible, if often obvious, directives:

“Give preference to locally manufac-tured materials where cost and per-formance are equal,” “Fornon-pressure pipes and fittings fordrainage, seek those that have a 40-100 percent recycled content.” Theforty-page glossary ranging from ab-sorptance to zinc oxide is quite useful indefining materials and practices, andin explaining their perils and remedies.

The obvious problem with theHOK book is that it proposes the solu-tion to the sustainability issue can beachieved with the same positivist logicthat is the source of the problem—as ifeliminating dubious materials and prac-tices will yield redeeming value. Whilethis may be true to some extent, mostother texts written from inside the ecol-ogy movement venture that sustainabledesign will require the proverbial para-digm shift. The short-term technicalsolutions to tangible environmental

problems may not have lasting value ifthey are not placed within a larger, cos-mological vision of cumulative balanceof consumption, resources, and wastemanagement. Sim Van der Ryn, who inthe 1970s shepherded California’s ener-gy-conscious State Office buildings intobeing, provides in Ecological Design(written with Stuart Cowan) a differentsort of list, juxtaposing the approachestaken by “conventional design” againstthose of “ecological design.” Some ofthe list might be in tune with the HOKlists as far as energy and materials areconcerned, but issues such as “Underly-ing metaphors: Machine, product part,versus Cell, organism, ecosystem”would probably separate the companymen from the self-appointed ecologists.Van der Ryn’s holistic approach ismapped out in five principles: grow so-lutions from place; inform design withecological accounting; design with na-

ture; realize that everyone is a designer;and make nature visible. Although hedraws upon three of his own works inthe attempt to illustrate his theory, hisprinciples seem so general that theycould not lead one to concrete architec-tural action. Again, aside from its eco-logical functionalism, I doubt that manypeople would find his Real Goods SolarLiving Center in Hopland, California,of transcendent value, at least aestheticvalue.

In his discussion of “design with na-ture,” Van der Ryn describes the sortof natural habitat essential for main-taining biodiversity: a core reserve,buffer zone, and wildlife corridor.These elementary principles, renamed“patch, edge, and corridor,” form thebasis of Dramstad, Olson, and For-man’s small tract Landscape EcologyPrinciples in Landscape Architecture andLand-Use Planning. Despite the redun-

dancy of the title, the book is the mostcharming and useful among those un-der review. Using a series of paired icondrawings, the authors explain how thedesign of the land contributes to or de-tracts from the viability of species. Theobservations range from the obvious—“a large patch is likely to have morehabitats present, and therefore containa greater number of species than a smallpatch”—to the more recondite, “amore convoluted patch will have ahigher proportion of edge habitat,thereby slightly increasing the numberof species, but sharply decreasing thenumber of interior species, includingthose of conservation importance”(31). To the three morphological cate-gories the authors add the syntheticterm mosaic to describe the necessaryconnectivity of fragmented landscapepatterns. The book concludes with afew case studies at different scalesdemonstrating “better” and “worse”development choices.

Not all the design and ecologybooks are green propaganda. One ofthe more adventuresome is SustainingArchitecture in the Anti-Machine Age, aseries of essays prepared for a Britishprofessional conference called “audaci-ty.org.” Although the book was partlyfunded by Norman Foster and con-tains a number of designs from his of-fice, it is more than a promotionalvehicle. The editors, generally adher-ing to Buckminster Fuller’s principle ofmaximizing technology to reducewaste, defend architectural progress inthe face of the knee-jerk “moral imper-ative” of ecology that they see as un-dermining the aesthetic and technicalnerve of designers. While the volumedoes not offer a concerted argumentbecause of its multiple authors, itnonetheless contains offerings of seri-ous polemical interest. The essay “Design Tokenism and GlobalWarming” lobs a sobering remindertoward the ambitions of sustainable ar-chitecture, claiming that even the bestand most universally applied energy-saving strategies in buildings would berelatively ineffectual in reversing thealready advanced processes of global



© 2

003 b

y th

e Pr

esid

ent

and

Fello

ws

of H

arva

rd C

olle

ge.

Not

to

be r

epro

duce

d w

ithou

t th

e pe

rmis

sion

of

the

publ

ishe

rWhile it is difficult for me to claim whether “green” coderequirements lead to bad architecture, the general impressiongiven by the examples provided in the green manuals certainlydo not promise strong aesthetics—but let us not forget WillBruder, Ralph Erskine, and Glenn Murcutt.

warming. The authors call for com-mon sense rather than excessive legis-lation, fearing an insufferable “green”bureaucracy based on environmentalnorms of the sort that would appeal tothe libido of HOK but that in generalare already making it difficult to getbeyond the requirements to somethingapproximating architectural expres-sion. While it is difficult for me toclaim whether “green” code require-ments lead to bad architecture, thegeneral impression given by the exam-ples provided in the green manualscertainly do not promise strong aes-thetics—but let us not forget WillBruder, Ralph Erskine, and GlennMurcutt.

The most contentious polemic isvoiced by Martin Pawley, an obstreper-ous critic who has been engaged withecology since the 1970s, in his “Sand-Heap Urbanism of the Twenty-FirstCentury.” Going against the conven-tional ecological wisdom that tradition-al urban patterns are the solution for asustainable future, he asks, “If all theproblems are urban problems, whyshould we expect the answers to be ur-ban answers?” (152). In a futurist vein,he reasons that cell phones and the in-ternet already have made the virtualcity a reality. While center cities havebeen struggling with antiquated trans-portation systems and unable to build aminimum of new urban spaces for con-temporary needs, millions of squaremeters have been successfully producedalong trade routes as “abstract urban-ism,” carrying out most of the functionsof cities on the nebulous outskirts ofmetropolitan districts. Without ac-knowledging Frank Lloyd Wright’sBroadacre City, he advocates “specialrural dwellings” on plots that are mini-mum 0.404 hectares (a little over anacre), well equipped for information-related occupations, and accessed bynon-polluting vehicles (hydrogen-fu-eled cars like the ones made by Toyotaand Honda that can already be leased inCalifornia).

While Pawley’s hypothesis of a “de-materialized metropolis, ephemeral-ized, entropic, evenly distributed” may

indeed be the destiny of an affluent,technocratic society, I fail to see how itwill eliminate the environmental prob-lems of cities in general. After all, paperuse has increased substantially since theadvent of PCs was supposed to createthe paperless office, and cities will nodoubt continue to expand during theprocess of digitalization, as will thechallenges of sustainable managementof resources and waste. What is certainis that any theory of design and ecologymust acknowledge that the bottom lineof sustainability is not the individualbuilding but urbanism. Achieving sus-tainability through the design of a sin-gle building is somewhat like recyclingat home—one feels one has done some-thing right, but the environmental im-pact is negligible. Cities, on the otherhand—those like Mexico City, wherethe air is so thick you can cut it with aknife, or Cairo, where the water is solurid it seems suitable only for flush-ing—display the tip of an environmen-tal problem that worsens by theminute. Estimates vary, but currently atleast half of the world’s population livesin urban areas and of those the majoritylives in poverty and squalor.

For many theorists and practition-ers, the answer to the urban problem issuburban. Eco-urbanism, edited byMiguel Ruano, is the first book I’vefound that attempts to survey sustain-able urbanism, and I was struck by howmany of his examples were suburban.Using sixty case studies from all overthe planet, Ruano presents seven cate-gories in which significant changes arebeing made: mobility, resource conser-vation, participation, community, eco-resorts, revitalization, and tele-villages.The selection of projects is well-bal-anced between high-tech, such as Nor-man Foster’s Solar City in Linz,Austria, Neo-Traditional, such as Cele-bration, Florida, and naturalistic, suchas Lucien Kroll’s Ecolonia neighbor-hood in Holland. That most of theprojects are in suburban situations simply reflects the social class that of-fers the most sympathetic patronage forsuch an agenda. Excepting Curitiba,Brazil, and a plan for Bucharest, Ruma-

nia, almost all of the schemes are forbourgeois inhabitants. The urbaniza-tions are generally proposed within theliberal mindset of a trickle-down econ-omy, and even though they might com-prehend low energy transportation,solutions are inevitably for the highestenergy consumers, who drive, fly, andconsume resources with impunity.

Only a few projects in Eco-Urbanism,such as Yuichiro Kodoma’s TokyoEcoRenewal, attempt a radical revisionof a dense urban environment, concoct-ing a luxuriantly planted hillside from afive-story mixed-use structure. Conspic-uously missing from the examples isFreiburg in southern Germany, a citythat has pursued a coordinated strategyof photovoltaics installed on publicbuildings, bus lanes, and bike paths, toemerge as a “solar region.” There is nouniversal Eco-urban approach: someuse narrow streets, others have nostreets at all. Clustering, solar orienta-tion, and greenbelts are usually present,but many of the ecological aspects ofthese projects, such as gray water recy-cling, are listed but not shown. PeterCalthorpe’s conversion of a large shop-ping mall into a dense suburban neigh-borhood in Mountain View, California,is featured in the “mobility” section ofthe book and demonstrates the applica-tion of his Transit Oriented Develop-ment proposals presented in The NextAmerican Metropolis. How differentAmerica would be if, as in Paris, onewere always within a ten-minute walk ofa transit stop! Calthorpe’s major inspira-tion, in which he seeks to achieve a bal-ance between urban and rural, isEbenezer Howard’s Garden Cities of Tomorrow, first published in 1898.

Likewise Peter Hall and Colin Wardchoose the Garden City ideal as the ba-sis of a sustainable urbanism in SociableCities: The Legacy of Ebenezer Howard.The first half of the book provides anexcellent historical analysis of Howard’slife and work and the effect that thefirst two garden cities of Letchworthand Welwyn had on later planningpolicies. The authors stress Howard’sdemand for a network of “social” (in-terdependent and socialist) cities



© 2

003 b

y th

e Pr

esid

ent

and

Fello

ws

of H

arva

rd C

olle

ge.

Not

to

be r

epro

duce

d w

ithou

t th

e pe

rmis

sion

of

the

publ

ishe

r

arranged as satellites around a core city,with protected greenswards in between,to obtain a critical mass of 250,000 in-habitants without upsetting the naturaland agricultural surroundings. Thetransformation of these experiencesinto government policy in the PostwarNew Towns movement, during whichtwenty-eight new settlements success-fully housed 2,254,300 people, effec-tively drew off some developmentpressure from London’s core (53).

The second half of Sociable Citiesconsiders a contemporary revival of theGarden City. The “abstract urbanism”mentioned above attests to how muchhas been conceived outside the well-meaning plans of new towns andplanned neighborhoods. “Plotlands,” asthe authors call them, make up the ma-jority of new urbanization by small de-velopers speculating on suburban land.Unlike the New Towns and GardenCities, most of these developments arenot coordinated for transportation orservices. Meanwhile in England andother advanced countries, certain urbantrends have started to reverse: morepeople and jobs are leaving the city thanmigrating to it, more households aremade of singles than of nuclear families,and the automobile is an indispensablefor these situations. Hall and Ward of-

fer twelve suggestions for creating “sus-tainable social cities” in light of the newhistorical circumstances. They prefer alinear sequence of urban clusters alongpublic transportation corridors withhigh-speed connections, and they hopethat alternative agriculture will replacethe current agribusiness to help adjustthe landscape to the town. LikeHoward, they infer that the existingmetropolis will reshape itself in emula-tion of the Garden City, but such pro-

posals seem to presume the sort of uni-versal well-being and concerted plan-ning and development practices thatrarely exist.

How can a transition to sustainabili-ty occur? Legislation is only a partialsolution. Until it becomes a question ofeconomic viability, ecological designwill only appeal to the righteous, thefrightened, or the enlightened. One ofthe most influential books of the mo-ment, Natural Capitalism by PaulHawken, Amory Lovins, and L. HunterLovins, offers a compendium of prag-matic and strategic advice for infiltrat-ing the system. The Lovinses, foundersof the Rocky Mountain Institute andco-designers of its building (1984), awork that is illustrated in almost everysurvey of ecological design, believe inlearning by doing. Their optimistic ap-peal to a “green” industrial revolutionproposes a four-pronged method forremodeling production and consump-tion more sustainably. 1) Radical Re-source Productivity: Rather than forbidthings, as ecologists often prefer, theyargue that economic motivations willchange industrial methods. Thischange hinges partly on the recognitionthat resources are finite and that basicingredients such as water and energywill eventually be more profitable if

they are considered renewable. 2) Bio-mimicry: If industrial processes moreclosely resembled natural organisms,they could eliminate most waste. 3)Service and Flow Economy: If con-sumer goods were considered services(like rental cars), they could be moreefficiently managed. 4) Investing inNatural Capital: Nature needs com-pensation; just as the bourgeoisie wasforced to house and educate the work-ing class in order to have industrial pro-

duction, so the sources of water, arableland, and air will need replenishing forour survival. The notable financial suc-cesses of the NMB (now ING) bank inAmsterdam and the Village Homes de-velopment in Davis, California, are of-fered as case studies for gainingeconomic advantage through sustain-able resource management and wastereduction. The remarkable case of Cu-ritiba, in which transport, waste man-agement, and human services evolvedinto a coordinated strategy, demon-strates how with a little public guidanceeconomic incentives for taking publictransport and recycling make sustain-ability seem to be in one’s own best in-terest.

Considering the oppressive controlpracticed in the name of communism, Idoubt that many will seek out KarlMarx on ecology: John Bellamy Foster’sMarx’s Ecology: Materialism, and Natureis thus worth a read and will help meconclude. If most of the books reviewedhere are short on humanism and sorelyundernourished in historical and philo-sophical perspective, they might benefitfrom this study, which traces the theo-retical connections between the greatestsocial thinker of the 19th century andDarwin. Who would have imaginedthat Marx wrote his thesis on Epicurus,arguably the intellectual source of ecol-ogism—the study of how everything innature is linked to everything else.“Nothing comes from nothing” is theEpicurean invitation to experience na-ture through materialism. Marx focusedon the ancient idea of entropy, calledmors immortalis, as the essence of theworld process. His awareness of Darwinand all of the consequences the idea ofentropy will have on the theory of di-alectical materialism could help rehabil-itate Marx’s intellectual position to oneof political consequence in a world in-creasingly concerned with environmen-tal issues. The emergence of a“dialectical ecologist” capable of dis-mantling the burden of determinism,both that causes environmental prob-lems but also that inheres in authoritar-ian scenarios for obtainingsustainability, seems more valuable to



© 2

003 b

y th

e Pr

esid

ent

and

Fello

ws

of H

arva

rd C

olle

ge.

Not

to

be r

epro

duce

d w

ithou

t th

e pe

rmis

sion

of

the

publ

ishe

r

What is certain is that any theory of design and ecology must acknowledge that the bottom line of sustainability is not the individual building but urbanism. Achieving sustainability through the design of a single building is somewhat like recycling at home—one feels one has donesomething right, but the environmental impact is negligible.

the ecology movement than all its goodintentions.

Books reviewedEcological Design, Sim Van der Ryn, Stuart Cow-an, Washington, D.C.: Island Press, 1996The Ecology of Architecture: A Complete Guide toCreating the Environmentally Conscious Building,Laura C. Zeiher, New York: Whitney Libraryof Design, 1996Eco-Urbanism: Sustainable Human Settlements, 60Case Studies, Miguel Ruano, Barcelona: EditorialGustavo Gili, 1999Green Architecture, James Wines, Cologne:Taschen, 2000The HOK Guidebook to Sustainable Design, SandraF. Mendler, William Odell, New York: John Wi-ley & Sons, 2000Landscape Ecology Principles in Landscape Architectureand Land-Use Planning, Wenche E. Dramstad,James D. Olson, Richard T.T. Forman, Washing-ton, D.C.: Island Press, 1996Marx’s Ecology: Materialism and Nature, JohnBellamy Foster, New York: Monthly ReviewPress, 2000Natural Capitalism: Creating the Next IndustrialRevolution, Paul Hawken, Amory Lovins, L.Hunter Lovins, Boston: Little, Brown andCompany, 1999The Next American Metropolis: Ecology, Communi-ty and the American Dream, Peter Calthorpe,New York: Princeton Architectural Press, 1993The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring theReal State of the World, Bjorn Lomborg, Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001Sociable Cities: The Legacy of Ebenezer Howard,Peter Hall and Colin Ward, Chichester: JohnWiley & Sons, 1998Sustainable Architecture White Papers, David E.Brown, ed., New York: Earth Pledge Founda-tion, 2000Sustaining Architecture in the Anti-Machine Age,Ian Abley & James Heartfield, Chichester: JohnWiley & Sons, 2001

Richard Ingersoll teaches architectural histo-ry at Syracuse University in Florence andurban design at the University of Ferrara,Italy. His most recent books include WorldArchitecture 1900–2000: A CriticalMosaic, Vol. I: Canada and the UnitedStates (General Editor, Kenneth Frampton)and La Perifieria Italiana (with LorenzoBellicini).



© 2

003 b

y th

e Pr

esid

ent

and

Fello

ws

of H

arva

rd C

olle

ge.

Not

to

be r

epro

duce

d w

ithou

t th

e pe

rmis

sion

of

the

publ

ishe

r

Documents

Ingersoll, R.- A Post-Apocalyptic View of Ecology and Design (Article-2003)