Ecological Design & Economic Fallacy

So how do we move forward with the objective of green building? We can begin with viewing building from the perspective of ecological design.




















Ecological design is defined as, “any form of design that minimizes environmentally destructive impacts;” or in other words working with the environment. David Arkin, a noted green architect lays out five main goals of ecological design:

1. Harmonize with the site by understanding the topography, eco systems, micro climate, vegetation and put those into action.

2. Build as little as possible - i.e. be as space efficient as you can.

3. Operate with the goal that buildings should be able to heat and cool themselves and generate their own electricity.

4. Maximize resource efficiency. Take into consideration where materials come from, their efficiency in production and using natural resources such as straw bales, rammed earth, adobe, etcetera when possible.

5. Show ecological design is beautiful and make it main stream.

While at first these may seem like lofty goals, they give us a good outline and way of thinking to start from in considering what is possible and economical in our quest to go green. I would like to discuss the fallacy of not considering secondary consequences. To quote Economics in One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt, “[There] is the persistent tendency of men to see only the immediate effects of a given policy, or its effects only on a special group, and to neglect to inquire what the long-run effects of that policy will be not only on that special group but on all groups. It is the fallacy of overlooking secondary consequences. In this lies the whole difference between good economics and bad.”

It is my belief in this day and age we fail to consider the secondary consequences of our actions, whether it be in building, social programs or saving our children from the natural consequences of their actions. With that statement in mind, I am not advocating becoming extreme nature activists, forcing public policy or supporting special interest groups to the detriment of all other groups. Rather I purpose to look beyond the initial consequences of our decisions and make informed decisions. Therefore I would purpose this new perspective to building, to ask ourselves, "What are the secondary consequences of my actions and the policy I am backing?"