Professor Marcel Vellinga

Design and the Vernacular explores the intersection between vernacular architecture, local cultures, and modernity and globalization, focussing on the vast and diverse global region of Australasia and Oceania. The relevance and role of vernacular architecture in contemporary urban planning and architectural design are examined in the context of rapid political, economic, technological, social and environmental changes, including globalization, exchanges of people, finance, material culture, and digital technologies.

Sixteen chapters by architects designers and theorists, including Indigenous writers, explore key questions about the agency of vernacular architecture in shaping contemporary building and design practice. These questions include: How have Indigenous and First Nations building traditions shaped modern building practices? What can the study of vernacular architecture contribute to debates about sustainable development? And how has vernacular architecture been used to argue for postcolonial modernisation and nation-building and what has been the effect on heritage and conservation?

Such questions provide valuable case studies and lessons for architecture in other global regions -- and challenge assumptions about vernacular architecture being anachronistic and static, instead demonstrating how it can shape contemporary architecture, nation building and cultural identities.

Architectural Regeneration will address the different perspectives, scales and tools of architectural regeneration by means of detailed overviews of the current state of thinking and practice, with case studies from around the world used as examples to support the theoretical arguments.

This chapter explores the notion of vernacular architecture. Comprising an immense variety of diverse building traditions, vernacular architecture makes up a significant part of the built environment of the world. Because of its rootedness in place, culture and tradition, it often plays a central role in processes of cultural, national and political identification. Vernacular architecture has frequently served as an inspiration for contemporary design, while at the same it has found itself subject to processes of appropriation, folklorisation and commercialisation. In recent decades, many forms of vernacular architecture have been heavily impacted on by the combined forces of globalisation, conflict and environmental change.

Vernacular architecture has emerged as a significant area of architectural research during the twentieth century. This research has traditionally involved the documentation of the vernacular architecture of specific people, cultures or places. But in the last few decades in particular, in line with developments in cultural theory more generally, more dynamic and active approaches that engage with issues around the definition, analysis, representation, appropriation and sustainable development of vernacular architecture have also begun to emerge.

This chapter explores the history and development of the discourse on vernacular architecture. It will indicate the key authors, approaches, publications and debates that have helped shape the field of vernacular studies, using a variety of examples to illustrate key themes. A central argument of the chapter is that vernacular architecture is a residual concept that has served to define a category of architecture in opposition to ‘capital A’ architecture, in order to define and validate the architectural canon. Its continued use in architectural discourse raises important questions about the way in which the latter values and represents the architectural traditions of other peoples and cultures in a time of increased globalisation and multiculturalism.

The combined processes of globalisation, urbanisation, environmental change, population growth and rapid technological development have resulted in an increasingly complex, dynamic and interrelated world in which concerns about the meaning of cultural heritage and identity, the depletion of natural resources, the increasing gap between rural and urban areas, and the impacts of climate change are increasingly prominent in the global consciousness. As the need for culturally and environmentally sustainable design grows, the challenge for professionals involved in the management of inherited built environments is to respond to this rapidly evolving context in a critical, dynamic and creative way. In addition to by now well-established historic conservation practices, the active regeneration, rehabilitation or revitalisation of existing buildings has emerged in recent years as an important field of architectural practice.   

At a time when regeneration policy has shifted to the recognition that ‘heritage matters’ and that the historic environment and creative industries are a vital driver of regeneration, an increasing workload of architectural practices concerns the refurbishment, adaptive re-use or extension of existing buildings. Architectural regeneration, which we define as: the collective activities of reusing, adapting and evolving existing buildings within an urban or rural context in ways that recognise the impacts these decisions and interventions have on the regeneration of a place, and that are underpinned by the principles of environmental, social and cultural sustainability, has clearly claimed its place as a fertile and productive means to respond to the need for heritage management and sustainable built environments in a dynamic and creative way.
 
For many architectural practices working on existing buildings is a significant portion of their workload, averaging 50% across Europe, and reaching 70% in Italy (Van Clampoeel 2018). Maintaining and continuing to use already built buildings has become a component of policies focusing on meeting carbon emission reduction targets. Not only is work on existing buildings now an established component of architectural practice, it will also feature heavily in the future workload of many of today’s architecture graduates. This is why it is profoundly significant that training in the necessary skill set is a component of architectural education. So far, however, the study of architectural regeneration has lagged behind practice and our knowledge and understanding of the principles, approaches, methods and impacts of architectural regeneration remain poorly articulated.  
 
Literature on architectural regeneration remains limited and is mainly focused on the description and evaluation of process and elaboration through multiple case studies. The purpose of this book is to address this lacuna by presenting a balanced overview of what is happening at the present time, and establish a theoretical standpoint for architectural regeneration and explore its disciplinary interconnectedness and multi-disciplinary perspectives. Although the starting point of the book is the UK and Europe, it has a global reach. The chapters have been convened in a way that they can be read independently, but altogether they form a framework that defines what makes up architectural regeneration. Each chapter addresses different perspectives, scales and tools of architectural regeneration by means of detailed overviews of the current state of thinking and practice, and all are supported with case studies from around the world. The chapters focus on different scales and types of regeneration (urban, rural, suburban, temporary); discuss the economic, planning, policy and social contexts of regeneration processes; and investigate the design process and the role of the architect.

Cycles of decline and rejuvenation, and the adaptation and re-use of buildings, have been common constants of the built environment throughout the history of human settlement. The more formalised practices of building conservation and regeneration on the other hand are an outcome of movements that emerged in the nineteenth century, which were informed by theoretical standpoints that were products of the post-Enlightenment positivist, rational and romantic outlooks (Gelernter 1995). Some of these theories and standpoints continue to inform interventions in the built environment, while others have been eclipsed by alternative worldviews and environmental realities. Architectural regeneration as a notion and as a distinct discipline emerges from a number of those concurrent, symbiotic, complementary and sometimes conflicting theories. The purpose of this chapter is to position architectural regeneration into its theoretical context and to demonstrate how it continues to be informed by a range of contemporary philosophies.  
 
Worldwide, laws, policy and guidance concerning the protection and conservation of historic buildings have come to be based on a set of principles that have emerged from an international conservation movement that can be traced back to Eurocentric philosophies of the nineteenth century (Jokilehto 1999). The design of the urban realm, buildings and interiors meanwhile are regularly discussed and critiqued in the context of prevalent design theories which in the latter half of the twentieth century were deliberately separated from theories pertaining to the conservation of historic buildings. The processes of adaptive re-use, which architectural regeneration encompasses, can be seen simultaneously as part of the collective theoretical frameworks of conservation and design, and also outside of them. Although ‘architects have led the conservation world in matters of principles and philosophy’ (Muñoz Viñas 2011: 71), they have also been instrumental in de-coupling conservation from design. Architectural regeneration has emerged in this middle ground between conservation and architectural design. 
 
At the same time, the broader realm of regeneration is often positioned in the domain of policy, spatial planning and economic development. Growing environmental concerns and climate change awareness are driving innovation in multiple arenas, including urban planning and building design. The current environmental crisis has become one of the key drivers for making better use of existing resources as well as for buildings to adapt to respond to new realities (Leatherbarrow and Wesley 2018).  
 
Starting from the latter part of the twentieth century there have been an increasing number of publications on the subject of adaptive re-use. Nonetheless, a shared and accepted vocabulary and definition of what adaptive reuse is, and what it involves, remains ambiguous, with various terminologies and definitions prevailing (Plevoets and Van Cleempoel 2013: 13). The same ambiguity applies to regeneration more generally. One of the earliest books on the subject of re-use is Sherban Cantacuzino’s New Uses for Old Buildings, published in 1975. The content, as that of many others that have been published since, is prescriptive and focuses on potential new uses linked to building typologies. Many of the volumes that have followed have remained technical (Eley and Worthington 1984; Highfield 1987) and heavily depend on case studies that are used to exemplify the processes, practicalities and design potential of re-use (Austin et al. 1988; Larkham 2000; Morrison and Waterson 2019). A new perspective was introduced by Stewart Brand in his book How Buildings Learn, published in 1997, where the value of built-in flexibility is upheld as a characteristic conducive to easy adaptability and a long use-span for buildings. There remains, however, a theoretical vacuum framing the subject, which this chapter intends to redress.
 
The chapter consists of two sections. In the first section we examine the various theories within which architectural regeneration is contextualised, and the second proposes a number of key principles that inform the processes of architectural regeneration.

Architectural regeneration tends to be an urban affair. Regeneration projects that focus on the adaptation, reuse or repurposing of buildings or places are commonly focused on needs, challenges and opportunities in urban settings. Regardless of the nature or scale of a regeneration project (i.e. whether it is government- or community-led, permanent or temporary, or on a neighbourhood or building scale), it is almost inevitably city based. The literature on architectural regeneration equally focuses almost exclusively on urban regeneration. Studies that look at the history, economics, planning or design of architectural regeneration projects nearly all deal with the situation in towns and cities, most often in a Western (i.e. European or North American) context (Roberts and Sykes 2000; Pierson and Smith 2001; Leary and McCarthy 2013). This urban and Western focus is understandable seeing that the origins of the practice may be found in early attempts by late nineteenth century social reformers to alleviate the poor, crowded and unhygienic living conditions in the rapidly growing industrial cities of Europe and North America (Roberts and Sykes 2000; Hall 2014). It is even more understandable in view of the unprecedented level of urbanisation today, not just in the West but all around the world, and the inevitable interest in urban issues that this has generated (Nel-lo and Mele 2016). Nonetheless, it does mean that the extent to which architectural regeneration projects are carried out in non-urban, rural settings, is much less known and understood. The aim of this chapter is to address this gap in knowledge. 

The interest in rural architecture has commonly lagged behind that in urban architecture. Apart from its sustained interest in country estates and village churches, architectural history has been predominantly a history of urban buildings (Fleming, Honour and Pevsner 1999; Sennott 2001; Curl 2006). Other disciplines like anthropology, ethnology or geography have similarly shown relatively little interest in rural architecture. The study of rural architecture has commonly been subsumed under the study of vernacular architecture, a field that itself has been consistently marginalised in architectural discourse (Oliver 1997; Asquith and Vellinga 2006; Brown and Maudlin 2012). The architectural design profession has similarly tended to prioritise work done in urban contexts. Nonetheless, the turn of the twenty-first century has seen a slowly increasing interest in rural architectural design. A large number of successful practices that expressly specialise in design in rural contexts have been established around the world. At the same time, various publications that deal with the specificities, challenges and opportunities of architectural design in rural contexts have begun to appear (Thorbeck 2012; Arendt 2017). However, much of this new interest is focused on new design in rural contexts and is thus not concerned with the regeneration of existing rural architecture, or rural regions; even if the new designs often draw on vernacular rural precedents. In some instances professional and academic interest has focused on the conversion of existing agricultural buildings, particularly barns, or the adaptation of rural housing for tourism purposes (e.g. Corbett-Winder and Parmiter 1990). Architectural regeneration projects that focus on the reuse and repurposing of rural architecture with the specific aim of revitalising not just the buildings, but the local communities, economies and places of which they form a part have received much less attention - other than as the focus of educational projects (see Orbasli, Vellinga, Wedel and Randell, this volume).  

This academic and professional lack of interest in rural architectural regeneration is remarkable for two reasons. First of all, despite consistent popular conceptualisations of the rural countryside as an idyllic counterpart to the city, rural areas all around the world face serious social, economic and environmental challenges that are not dissimilar to those faced by urban communities. Problems like economic decline, environmental pollution, social division, substandard housing or poor healthcare facilities are not the prerogative of cities and urban conglomerations, but are equally prominent in rural towns and villages across the globe (Cloke, Marsden and Mooney 2006). Indeed, in some instances, especially in the developing world, they may be seen to be more acute than they are in urban areas. Of course the underlying causes of such issues and the specific ways in which they manifest themselves will be different in rural areas. One key distinction in this regard is that, whereas in urban areas problems are often caused by rapid and sometimes uncontrolled population growth, in rural places it is often the decline of population that creates and exacerbates difficulties. Although the literature on the social, demographic, economic and environmental challenges faced by rural areas and the ways in which they may be overcome by means of rural development programmes is extensive (Shepherd 1998; Moseley 2003), it hardly ever takes into account the role that architectural regeneration can play in such projects. 

The second reason why the lack of interest in rural regeneration is remarkable is that in many parts of the world, rural architectural heritage is in a state of dilapidation and decline. In many countries, rural houses have often been abandoned by their owners or are now only inhabited by (often elderly) family members who do not have the resources to leave the area or maintain the buildings. In many cases, especially in the developing world, the inhabitants may have simply left the region and moved to the city, leaving behind buildings that they no longer need. In other instances, old buildings have been replaced by new houses that have been built alongside them and that incorporate more up-to-date facilities and conveniences, and better meet contemporary expectations of what a ‘modern’ house should look like. In yet other instances, rural housing remains inhabited, but the owners lack the means to properly maintain it or to adapt it to current requirements and standards. This may also be the fate of rural community buildings, such as parish churches, schools or village halls. In rural areas in the developed world that still maintain their agricultural function, it is not uncommon to come across abandoned farm buildings (barns, stables, sheds) that are no longer needed because they have been replaced by more modern facilities that better suit more intensive and industrialised contemporary farming practices. In those rural areas characterised by the presence of industrial buildings (for example in Eastern Europe), abandoned factories and high-rise housing blocks may dominate the rural landscape. 

This chapter aims to provide an introduction to the topic of rural regeneration. It will argue that rural areas all around the world are environmentally, socially, economically and architecturally varied, dynamic and complex, and constitute what, in a European context, has been called a ‘differentiated countryside’ (Marsden et al. 1993). Rather than the bucolic backwaters of popular imagination, defined as ‘timeless’, ‘slow’ and ‘unchanging’ in direct and exclusive opposition to the ‘fast’ and dynamic city, rural areas are integral, productive and ever-changing parts of the modern world that face a complex myriad of demographic, environmental, social and economic challenges. Although unique in their specific manifestations, those challenges are not unlike those faced by urban areas. The chapter will show that, despite a common recognition of the challenges faced by rural areas all around the world, work in the field of rural regeneration has lagged behind that in urban contexts. It will argue that architectural regeneration projects that build on existing local opportunities, take into account place-specific cultural characteristics and use the transformative potential of architecture may nonetheless help to enhance and develop rural economies, places and communities in the same way that their urban counterparts do so in cities. 

The chapter is based on a literature review that covers several topics of importance to our understanding of rural areas, including the definition and perception of rurality, rural-urban relationships, the transformation of rural space and architecture, and current economic and social trends. It further includes several case studies from a number of European countries (Croatia, Slovenia, Italy and Poland) that present examples of the different contexts in which architectural regeneration can appear.

The absence of an adequate understanding of historic buildings and their conservation within the core curriculum of architectural or interiors education has long been noted internationally (Erder 1983; Orbaşlı and Whitbourn 2002; Santana and Settles 2014). For many years the typical design studio project took on the prospect of an empty plot and the construction of a new building. In the UK, the Royal Institute of Architects’ Plan of Work (RIBA 2013) typically follows the process of a new build, and this focus is also reflected in the Part II and Part III professional practice components of teaching. Although a conservation guide to the Plan of Work now exists (Feilden 2018), the emphasis remains on the conservation of listed buildings and monuments.  
 
There has, however, been a steady growth in Architecture Schools of students being set projects that consider existing buildings as a starting point.1 Some of these are short design assignments, others are linked into longer masters level programmes that combine design studio skills with teaching in the subject area. There are likely to be a range of reasons for a growing interest in reusing and repurposing existing buildings. Amongst them is a growing breadth of what is now valued as ‘heritage’, an increasing awareness in sustainability, a proliferation of high profile and award-winning projects that involve existing buildings and a demand from students who recognise that they are more than likely to encounter work in existing buildings in their careers as practicing architects.
 
Oxford Brookes University’s School of Architecture has been a pioneer in this respect, teaching re-use and adaptation of existing buildings to Part II architecture students as a specialisation since the 1980s under the title Built Resource Management and later Built Resource Studies. At the time, teaching the conservation of what was considered the ‘ordinary end’ of the built environment was something new. Many early student projects focused on the regeneration of former industrial buildings, at a time when authorities across Europe were beginning to recognise the value of their industrial legacy and seek solutions to afford them a viable future.  
 
Built Resource Studies, in combination with a parallel programme in International Vernacular Architecture Studies, formed the foundations of the International Architectural Regeneration and Development programme (hereafter referred to as Architectural Regeneration). Established in 2006, the programme builds on an understanding in the fields of anthropology of architecture, area-based conservation, development studies and cultural sustainability. The masters programme has been attracting graduates with degrees in architecture, planning, interior design, law, arts, cultural heritage management as well as craftsmen. It also continues to be offered as a design specialism for Part II architecture students. As the programme has evolved to become more theoretically grounded and internationally expansive, the challenges of teaching design through the existing built environment remain as relevant as ever. Over time, the influence of the programme is evident in a growing focus on existing buildings as a subject matter in design studios across all levels of the school.
 
As already discussed in this volume, architectural regeneration is more than simply considering the mechanics of adaptive re-use. In Chapter 10, Bassindale emphasises the need not only to understand the building, but also the set of values that characterise it. This process has to incorporate an understanding of ‘how the traditional buildings and morphology make up the character of the place, how they have come to be used, and how they relate to current economic, social, cultural and environmental needs’ (Orbaşlı and Vellinga 2008: 162).
 
Whilst most programmes in the field of regeneration are focused on policy and planning issues, those centred around building conservation tend to be concerned with the preservation and restoration of monuments, historic buildings and places, with either a material conservation, or a heritage management focus. The revitalisation of historic quarters and traditional settlements with their vernacular traditions often requires an approach that simultaneously recognises conservation principles, but also delivers on the regeneration objectives of economic, social and cultural sustainability (Orbaşlı and Vellinga 2008). 
 
The purpose of this chapter is to reflect on our combined experiences of teaching architectural regeneration over the past thirty years. In doing so, we will discuss how within a time-bound programme we strive to achieve a balance between the practical, theoretical and research-based aspects of architectural regeneration. We particularly consider how an appreciation of the existing built environment in all its forms can be actively integrated into the architecture curriculum; how design teaching (and learning) can incorporate an understanding and appreciation of the theories that underpin decisions and the broader and far reaching social, environmental and economic implications that design decisions can have. A number of student projects are presented as case studies throughout the chapter.

What do we mean by ‘architecture’, and what does the term cover when we use it? Does it refer only to buildings designed by architects, or does it extend to all buildings? What explains the enormous diversity of architectural traditions around the world? And how can today’s architects learn from and respond to this diversity of architectural form, material, space and decoration?