Architecture, Reconstruction and Model Houses

Around the World:

Alejandro Aravena is a famous name in the field of architecture, especially with someone who is closely interested in reconstruction after a disaster. In recent times, the most prestigious award of architecture: The Pritzker Architecture Prize was awarded to two architects who have significantly contributed to the field of reconstruction: Shigeru Ban (Japanese) and Alejandro Aravena (Chilean). It must be the first time in the history of architecture society that architecture for underprivileged people is recognized with the highest orders. The trend continues with emerging robin hoods with the rise of humanitarian architecture.

In recent disasters around the globe, architects have emerged with their heroic effort in the reconstruction process with a participatory design approach unlike the architecture’s core of individual expression. Out of many, Alejandro Aravena’s approach of reconstruction in Chile after 2010 earthquake is praiseworthy. The cognitive design approach adopted in Chile’s reconstruction has not only addressed the physical damages but successfully addressed the social emotions of the settlement in Constitución. Unlike Shigeru Ban’s industrial approach of reconstruction which is possible in industrial nations like Japan, the basic understanding of reconstruction as ‘Bottom Up’ philosophy is the must, to address the larger vicious circle of rehabilitation. Albeit reconstruction, West Africa’s Francis Kéré brands architecture as a social tool as a platform for local expression and empowerment, and a catalyst for social, economic, and ecological progress. 

Where are we?

The reconstruction process of the Ministry of Urban Development led by DUDBC, with coordination of different national and international development agencies along with engineering association came up with the 17 model houses under “Design Catalogue for Reconstruction of Earthquake Resistant Houses” for the reconstruction of rural houses. In summary, it is presented as the fundamental “guide for earthquake resistant house construction with the flexibility of design providing …a variety of options in terms of cost, size, layout, and typology”. There is no doubt that the designs prepared by architects, structure engineer, and civil engineer is superior in all its engineering ritual. In addition, the recently appointed CEO has asked Society of Nepalese Architects (SONA) to submit a few more models to address the reconstruction process. Furthermore, NRA in coordination with DUDBC has already recruited more than 1400 engineers to aid the technocratic process of reconstruction.  

Argument:

For the larger communities of architects and engineers, it might be the matter of laugh to lonely oppose the reconstruction process aided by picturesque and durable building models. But, isn’t it preposterous that the government is trying to address more than 8 lakh collapsed/ damaged buildings with few prototypes? And the real question is, how many prototypes is enough to address the ground problem? We’ve presented the catalog in many different seminars, discussed with doyens from all the technocratic sectors and we’ve also reviewed the catalog with all the financial boundaries, but are those buildings acceptable for millions of displaced families? Do these models address the social need of Sunuwar from hilly Okhaldhunga to Tamang of Kavre or Shrestha of Sankhu to Gurung of Gorkha? It’s not only about the district that the settlement pattern or housing typology differs, but it also differs from each ethnic group to each social class and it differs from every family size to the socio-cultural perception of each household. Let’s agree that we come up with as many as prototypes that can address the solution for every affected family, does that resolve the riddle of social reconstruction?

Housing structures can be rebuilt with a technocratic solution, but it is worthy to review the reconstructed image with such a solution. Imagine, when you walk up the streets of Barpak or Chautara and all you see is identical model houses. The first question is, “Is that the reconstruction we all are looking for?”.

Sheds but not houses, a stack of sheds but not settlements.

In another aspect, it is most possible that such owner-driven houses in rural settlement won’t be as disastrous (complete abandonment) as the contractor driven houses of our neighbors’ reconstruction after the Bhuj Earthquake 2001. But it is equally important that we understand the local need and guide for a locally sustainable approach.

Then What?

Personally I strongly believe that reconstruction is more a social issue than physical or financial. As to quote Aravena’s experience from Chile, “The scarcest resource by far in cities is not money, it’s coordination.”. It is well accepted that 10 billion US$ as mentioned in PDRF is not the bigger problem for reconstruction but a well-accepted approach and established coordination. In the process of identifying financial and technical losses during a disaster, we never evaluated our social and cultural capital as the asset for reconstruction. Our social structures, cultural settings and indigenous knowledge were never integrated in the reconstruction plan. Yes, definitely we need architects for the reconstruction process, but not to build few prototype model. Architecture is not only about 4 walls and a roof, it must reflect the social values and cultural dogmas of individual residing in that house. We don’t need best methodological architect who can design fancy buildings, we need a modest social architect who can work with the community. We don’t need prototypes of houses, evaluated and approved by technocrats, rather we need an individual action plan for each settlement evaluated and approved by few experts and more dwellers of that settlement. Role of an architect is imperative in the reconstruction process but not only as a designer of individual houses but as a listener of the community, not only as a technical expert but a friend in the community, who can address their social need, understand their culture and respond with effective solution. Recently, another master architect Renzo Piano (Pritzker Winner) was asked to lead the reconstruction of the towns of Amatrice, Accumoli and Pescara del Tronto. Let’s remember again, he is not there to design an individual buildings but to work as a leader to prepare reconstruction plans at policy level and in action plan, which can address the cultural and social demand of Italians, learning the gravity of the situation.

Apil K.C. (Architect/Urban Planner)