ZBORNIK RADOVA DECEMBA

AKADEMIJA TEHNIČKO-VASPITAČKIH STRUKOVNIH STUDIJA - NIŠ R,

2023.

UPROJEKTOVANJE ZGRADA UZ PRIMENU EKOLOŠKIH PRINCIPA

APPLICATION OF ECOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES IN BUILDING DESIGN
Marija Mihajlović, Ministarstvo građevinarstva, saobraćaja i infrastrukture Republike Srbije, Nemanjina 22-26
Ljiljana Stošić Mihajlović, Akademija tehničko-vaspitačkih strukovnih studija - Odsek Vranje,Filipa Filipovića 20,
Vranje.
Marko Mihajlović, Građevinski fakultet Univerziteta u Nišu.

Sadržaj - U ovom radu su analizirani razlozi primene ekoloških principa u kontekstu zgrada
tokom vremena. Naročito je istražena pozicija izgrađenih sistema u okvirima savremenih
koncepata održivosti, cirkularnosti, otpornosti i regeneracije. Utvrđene su i razmatrane aktuelne
projektantske barijere, i predočeni trenutno raspoloživi načini za njihovo prevazilaženje.
Zaključno je predloženo nekoliko opštih koraka ka budućoj široj primeni bioloških principa u
kontekstu projektovanja zgrada. Danas je poznato da su zgrade među najvećim potrošačima i
zagađivačima na planeti. Međutim, nastanak ekološki ispravne arhitekture u modernom smislu,
kako je to prikazano u ovom radu, manjim je delom podstaknut prvim zahtevima za smanjenje
negativnog pritiska na životno okruženje a većim delom težnjom da se obezbedi kontinuitet u
snabdevanju resursima. Tek kada je u drugoj polovini 20. veka svest o stanju životne sredine i o
negativnom ljudskom doprinosu dovoljno sazrela, ideja o projektovanju ekološki ispravnih zgrada
je počela da se razvija i usložnjava. Postepeno je projektovanje ekološki ispravnih zgrada
preraslo u skup različitih strategija i mera čiji je cilj smanjenje negativnog ekološkog uticaja, kroz
usklađivanje konvencionalnih projektantskih zahteva sa njihovim ekološkim značajem.
Uspostavljanjem veze između efikasnog korišćenja prirodnih resursa i smanjenja ekoloških
uticaja zgrada, ovaj rad se bavi pregledom sadašnjih trendova i izazova u pogledu upotrebe
energije, materijala, vode i zemljišta, te promišljanjem mogućih scenarija efikasne budućnosti u
kojoj bi šire socijalne i ekonomske sheme postale relevantnije za uspešno projektovanje ekološki
ispravnih zgrada.
Ključne reči: Projektovanje zgrada. Savremeni koncepti. Održivost. Izazovi.
Abstract - This paper analyzes the reasons for the application of ecological principles in the
context of buildings over time. In particular, the position of built systems within the framework of
modern concepts of sustainability, circularity, resistance and regeneration was investigated.
Current design barriers were identified and discussed, and currently available ways to overcome
them were presented. In conclusion, several general steps towards the future wider application of
biological principles in the context of building design are proposed. Today, it is known that
buildings are among the biggest consumers and polluters on the planet. However, the emergence
of ecologically correct architecture in the modern sense, as shown in this paper, was motivated to
a lesser extent by the first requirements to reduce the negative pressure on the living environment
and to a greater extent by the desire to ensure continuity in the supply of resources. Only in the
second half of the 20th century, when the awareness of the state of the environment and the
negative human contribution matured enough, the idea of designing environmentally sound
buildings began to develop and become more complex. Gradually, the design of environmentally
sound buildings grew into a set of different strategies and measures aimed at reducing the
negative environmental impact, through the harmonization of conventional design requirements
with their ecological importance. By establishing a link between the efficient use of natural
resources and the reduction of the environmental impacts of buildings, this paper reviews current
trends and challenges in the use of energy, materials, water and land, and considers possible
scenarios for an efficient future in which wider social and economic schemes become more
relevant to successful design of ecologically correct buildings.
Key words: Building design. Contemporary concepts. Sustainability. Challenges.

3.
1. INTRODUCTION
 Humans possess the innate tendency to focus on life and between architects, engineers and biologists in research and
lifelike processes [1]. Complex human relation with life and experimentation [11], [12]. With that, the connections
nature is based on biological, cultural, psychological and between golden ratio, Fibonacci sequence and architecture
ethical bonds [2]. An essential need to worship nature [3] were strengthened, although proportions based on inorganic,
stretches back to the early examples of human creativity. geometric rules have been applied since ancient times.
Architectural artifacts of different historical periods Following progress in biological science, geometry of nature
repeatedly demonstrate the imitation of natural shapes and the analogy with art and architecture were explored by
applied to ornamental surfaces or the three-dimensional Zeising, G.L. Raymond, S. Colman, T.A. Cook, B. Fuller, G.
elements. First notable examples involving biological Doczi, I. Ševelev, Z. Pađan, and others. Over the last decades
principles in the function of achieving both the innovation of the 20th century, experiments on natural models [13] were
and the usefulness [4] belong to the sphere of invention. surpassed by digitization and experimentation with the new
Pioneering biologically inspired and deliberated design design media [14] such as animations of morphological
solutions emerged as a result of the research of living transformations, deformations, or movement through time
species’ abilities and their translation to designed objects. [15].
Leonardo da Vinci, for example, examined biomechanics of Together with parametric modelling and generative
flying animals, muscle forces and the functions of joints, and techniques for design and manufacture of building products
attempted to apply biological features in his technical [16], including 3D printing, these tools allowed for the
inventions. Matthew Baker studied the flow-optimized form development of very complex design concepts like the
of fishes to enhance the performance of his new galleon-type pattern design. At the same time, the bond between design
ship [5]. The use of biological principles in various fields and and ecology was becoming firmer, and the role of biological
in a reasoned way was largely made possible during the 19th systems in building context was again redefined (e.g. the
century. At that time, natural sciences became more mature, works of Hundertwasser). In 1997, Janine Benyus introduced
and communicated fund of knowledge from newly emerged the term ‘biomimicry revolution’ to describe new “era based
disciplines enlarged significantly. In the 19th century not on what we can extract from nature, but on what we can
architecture, however, the application of biological principles learn from her” [17]. In the 21st century, the application of
was rather a topic for debate than a design inspiration or a biological principles in the building context is seen as a
research subject. While some notable representatives of this contribution to the universally relevant frameworks:
period believed that the ultimate beauty of nature should sustainability, circularity, resilience and regeneration.
simply continue to be imitated, others, like Viollet-le-Duc,
2. BIOLOGICAL PRINCIPLES IN
argued for the architecture that does not copy the nature, but
CONTEMPORARY FRAMEWORKS
instead emulates its laws [6]. The later design approach was a
stimulus for more thoughtful analogies with biological
systems that aimed to derive technically usable solutions In 2016, the European Commission has included nature-
based on natural abstraction [5]. based solutions among focus areas for research and
The works of Antonio Gaudi show that such approach innovation on environment, and provided the following
also leads to a unique aesthetic result. Particular scarcity of definition: Nature-based solutions are “solutions that are
biology-inspired architectural design concepts in the second inspired and supported by nature, which are cost-effective,
half of the 19th century [7] represents a consequence of the simultaneously provide environmental, social and economic
emergence of new technical knowledge and technical benefits and help build resilience. Such solutions bring more,
experimentation. During the first half of the 20th century, and more diverse, nature and natural features and processes
technological and industrial progress and the overall societal into cities, landscapes and seascapes, through locally adapted,
shifts were used as a base of modern design philosophy, and resource-efficient and systemic interventions” [18]. Nature-
the ideas of past were neglected together with the relation to based solutions addressing social, economic and
nature and its forms, due to “conceptual barrier erected environmental challenges have also been promoted in the
between nature and culture” [8]. Nevertheless, some global policy contexts, by science-based organizations, the
theoretical discourses from this time, such as those written by World Bank, and the United Nations [19]. However, nature-
Honzik or Keisler [9], aimed to draw analogy between based solutions at the building scale have not been
technology and nature. By the middle of the past century, particularly emphasized in policy frameworks.
alternative theories and concepts started to emerge. In Analogies with living organisms, applied to the system of
Metabolism, a building was compared to an organism, and, an environmentally sustainable building and possibly
therefore, it had to be adaptive and able to grow. In the connected with intelligence component as well as underlying
1950ies, Peter Collins discussed the idea of ‘Biological design concept, aim to support efficient use of natural
Analogies’, and Otto Schmitt coined the term ‘Biomimetics’, resources and the reduction of negative environmental
referring to the mix of biology and technology. Since its first impact. Biological principles may be applied to achieve
introduction, different definitions and the contexts of use of energy efficiency of a building, i.e. to reduce energy demand
biomimetics have been emerging. According to Dollens [10], (e.g. through the adoption of methods for wise energy use by
for example, biomimetics represents a “design where living organisms) and to generate energy (e.g. by introducing
properties, elements and systems from nature are viewed, solar panels based on photosynthesis). Some bio-based
researched and extrapolated from in order to apply natural measures are multi-beneficial: facades with integrated algae,
functions and attributes to architectural structures, materials, for example, capture carbon, produce oxygen and generate
systems, spaces and aesthetics.” In the 1960ies, Frei Otto and renewable energy [20]. A particular contribution of living
Johann-Gerhard Helmcke together founded the ‘Biology and systems to water efficiency is recognized in the domains of
Building’ research group that promoted collaboration water harvesting and wastewater recycling (e.g. living
machine installations). Similarly, living organisms can building envelopes should be developed further. Possible
contribute to organic waste decomposition in situ. directions include diversification of applied biological
Nevertheless, the greatest progress in the application of characteristics, accomplishment of multifunctionality [25],
biological principles in contemporary building context has so development of systemic solutions [26] and, in that regard,
far been achieved in the field of materials. The experimental development of building skins that perform well under the
and research work of Frei Otto in the field of minimal impact of climate change manifestations. “The pursuit of
surfaces and their analogies with natural principles could resilience adds another dimension to design projects, gives
today be compared with the optimal use of building materials additional challenges to architects, and redefines the
encompassed by sustainability and circularity concepts. Next complexity of the design process and methodology, by
to that, there is a wide range of bioinspired building materials requiring transdisciplinary and a systemic approach, as well
whose modified features ultimately result in bettered as the inclusion of various correlating agents that determine
ecological quality, from improved durability (e.g. self-healing the future behavior of a building subjected to climate change”
materials [21]), to enhanced interaction with surroundings [27].
(e.g. color changing surfaces, or intelligent glass that reacts to The application of principles of the living world in the
temperature or light changes), to carbon storing, e.g. [22], etc. context of building resilience is yet to be studied. At the root
Green movements that were emerging from the 1970ies shed of current scarcity of building design theories and examples
a new light on materials of plant and animal origin, and lies the so far modest body of work dealing with the effects
raised awareness about their ecological advantages, of climate change on living organisms and their responses to
including: abundance, renewability, low embodied energy gradual (long-term) changes and sudden surprises. According
and CO2, low ecotoxicity and toxicity, provision of good to some authors, the notion of climate resilience in the built
indoor air quality, biodegradability, recyclability, etc. In the environment extends beyond the boundaries of individual
21st century, the application of bio-based solutions became buildings. In such a conceptual approach, a building is not
an integral part of sustainability and circularity schemes, and only an independent object, but also part of an ecosystem in
the matter of biological origin an optimal raw material. which diversity and redundancy are present, which results in
Particularly interesting nowadays are the materials made of a greater ability for adaptation. The introduction of biological
agricultural waste, such as wheat straw, hemp shiv, flax shiv, entities into design is believed to represent a significant agent
or corn pith, and active bio-based materials with integrated in the integration process”. [28]
living organisms – the ‘living materials’ – such as bricks,
3. CHALLENGES AND CURRENT RESPONSES
concrete and textiles with living bacteria. State-of-the-art
research focuses on optimization of performance of biobased In spite of recent progress, the implementation of
materials (e.g. increased resistance to molds, and fire, or biological principles in building design is still under
improved durability), reduction of negative ecological impact development [29]. Exceptional complexity of living systems
of composite materials representing a mix of natural and and their possible analogies, variety of baselines from which
artificial ingredients (e.g. bio-plastics), and the development analogy definitions can be derived, present flexible use of
of bio-based insulation materials that contribute to both umbrella terms, and, consequently, overlaps in their meaning,
material and energy efficiency. In addition to material jointly impede the accuracy of potential typologies. Simple
features alone, functional circularity schemes emphasize their systematizations of application of biological principles in the
bonds within building components and systems, altogether building context can be made according to: • Type of living
known as design-for-disassembly approach. It is being organisms; • Characteristics of individual living organisms or
foreseen that the analogies supporting circularity and whole ecosystems, e.g. regarding contents, structures, forms,
sustainability concepts could in future be extended from functions, or processes; • Analogy scope: from mono-
individual organisms to ecosystems, their cycles of matter characteristics to systemic solutions; • Analogy type:
and energy transfer [22], [23]. reasoned transfer of biological characteristics or actual
One of the basic functions of a building is to protect its introduction of living organisms into the building context; •
users from variable external conditions such as climate. Analogy hierarchy: materials, components, or structures; and
Examples from different historical periods point at the other.
multitude of measures applied for this purpose as well as the Biological studies of living organisms are encompassed
shifting character of barrier separating indoor from outdoor by several interrelated biological branches: external
space. These variations – ranging from isolation and morphology or bionomy that studies external appearance of
independence to responsiveness and adjustment – are well living beings; anatomy (internal morphology); and
observable in the 20th-century building design. The designers physiology. Anatomic studies are divided on microscopic
who took later approach were in particular interested in anatomic research of structural units small enough to be seen
exploring the potential for dynamic response to climate only with a microscope, and macro-anatomic studies of those
patterns, and biological principles were often used as role body structures (forms) that are large enough to be examined
models. In 1964, Andrija Mutnjaković developed the without the help of magnifying devices [30]. Physiology, on
Homobil – a vision of the house behaving as an organism- the other hand, is the study of functions in living organisms
machine thanks to its flowerlike form that opens and closes and their constituent parts – tissues and cells. These functions
depending on external circumstances [24]. By changing include: metabolism, transport, information transfer, and
functions, properties and behavior over time, adaptive regulation [31]. Therefore, studies of forms and functions can
building skins are aimed at improving the overall be carried out at different scales of living organisms.
sustainability-related building performance [25]. In spite of Therefore, the application of biological principles in
increasing number of examples, however, the use of contemporary building context requests “a transfer of
biological principles in design and construction of adaptive knowledge from biology and ecology into architectural
design in a way that transcends poorly understood and [9] W.W. Braham and J.A. Hale, Rethinking technology. A
applied analogies or metaphors” [32]. Establishment of cross- reader in architectural theory. New York: 2007.
disciplinary design and research teams. [10] D. Dollens, Architecture as nature: A Biodigital
Hypothesis. Leonardo, vol. 42(5), pp. 412-420, 2009.
4. DIRECTIONS
[11] P. Steadman, The evolution of designs. Biological
Lack of classifications, differing interpretations of key analogy in architecture and the applied arts. A revised
terms, insufficient knowledge from biological science, and edition. London and New York: Routledge, 2008.
scarce evidence concerning sustainability-, circularity-, [12] D. Kozlov, Architectural bionics: From living nature to
resilience-, and regeneration-related advantages aggravate the architecture, in Conference Proceedings Kine[SYS]tem
designer’s perception of possibilities for the application of From Nature to Architectural Matter, June 19-20, 2017,
biological principles in building design. Likewise, there is a Lisbon, Portugal, 2017, pp. 102-110.
need to develop evidence-based databases that could confirm [13] Lj. Folić, Formiranje prostora prirodnim oblicima,
the concrete benefits of applied biology-related measures in Gradjevinar, vol. 9, pp. 355-363, 1986.
building context. When the benefits of biological principles [14] A.J. Nocek, Biomedia and the pragmatics of life in
application are justified by sufficient number of realized architectural design, Inflexions, vol. 8(7), pp. 8-58,
cases, pre- and post-build assessment systems can be 2014.
developed, and their criteria and indicators established. [15] G. Lynn, Animate Form. New York: Architectural Press,
Having on mind the level of specialization involving biology 1999.
and building science, there is a need to promote the [16] M. Zbašnik-Senegačnik and Lj. Koprivec, Biomimetika
development of cross-disciplinary research units, to enhance v arhitekturi prihodnosti, Architecture, Research, vol.
experimental work, and to connect these labs both with 2009(1), pp. 40-49, 2009.
education and practice. [17] J.M. Benyus, Biomimicry: Innovation Inspired by
Nature. Harper Perennial, 2002.
CONCLUSION
[18] European Commission, Policy topics: Nature-Based
Awareness of the outcomes of human activities is the Solutions.
basis for reduction environmental pollution and degradation. https://ec.europa.eu/research/environment/index.cfm?pg
Type and scope of reduction actions harmful environmental [19] N. Faivre, M. Fritz, T. Freitas, B. de Boissezon and S.
effects depend on the field of action. In architectural design, Vandewoestijne, Nature-Based Solutions in the EU:
knowledge of the ecological dimension is fundamental for Innovating with nature to address social, economic and
defining technical, social and economic measures. In this environmental challenges, Environmental Research,
respect, this paper establishes a platform of facts needed for vol. 159, pp. 509-518, 2017.
understanding progressive anthropogenic impact on the [20] KH. Kim, “A feasibility study of an algae façade
environment, he explains the genesis and development of system”, in Conference SB13 Seoul. Sustainable
ecologically correct buildings in wider social conditions and Building Telegram toward Global Society, 2013, pp. 7-
takes a detailed look at the segments that are currently the 10.
most developed. The work continues deals with the main [21] S. van der Zwaag, Self-Healing Materials. An
challenges in contemporary architectural design from the Alternative Approach to 20 Centuries of Materials
aspect of consumption of natural resources: water, land, Science. Dordrecht: Springer, 2007.
energy and material, and at the same time elaborates possible [22] M. Pedersen Zari, Biomimetic design for climate change
scenarios for resource efficient future. adaptation and mitigation, Architectural Science
Review, vol 53(2), pp. 172-183, 2010.
LITERATURE [23] C.J. Kibert, J. Sendzimir and G.B. Guy, Defining an
ecology of construction, in Construction Ecology.
[1] E.O. Wilson, Biophilia: The human bond with other Nature as the basis for green buildings, London and
species. Harvard University Press, 1984. New York: Spon Press, 2002, pp. 7-28.
[2] S.R. Kellert “Introduction” in The biophilia hypothesis. [24] R. Margaretić Urlić, Arhitektonski nestašluci u
Eds. Island Press, 1993, pp. 20-29. enformelističkom društvu ‒ razgovor s Andrijom
[3] I. Mazzoleni, Architecture follows nature: biomimetic Mutnjakovićem, Život umjetnosti, vol. 82(1), str. 52-65,
principles for innovative design. CRC Press, 2013. 2008.
[4] P. Sarkar and A. Chakrabarti, Assessing design creativity, [25] A. Kuru, P. Oldfield, S. Bonser and F. Fiorito,
Design studies, vol. 32(4), pp. 348-383, 2011. Biomimetic adaptive building skins, Energy and
[5] W. Nachtigall and A. Wisser, Bionics by examples: Buildings, vol. 205, 109554, 2019.
scenarios from classical to modern times. Springer, [26] K.M. Al-Obaidi, M.A. Ismail, H. Hussein and A.M.A.
2015. Rahman, Biomimetic building skins, Renewable and
[6] M. Zbašnik-Senegačnik and M. Kitek-Kuzman, Sustainable Energy Reviews, vol. 79, pp. 1472, 2017.
Interpretations of organic architecture, Prostor, vol. [27] S. Kosanović, B. Folić and A. Radivojević, Approach to
22(2), pp. 291-302, 2014. design for resilience to climate change, in Sustainable
[7] A. Zakharchuk, Bionics in Architecture, Challenges of and Resilient Building Design: Approaches, Methods
Modern Technology, vol. 3(2), pp. 50-53, 2012. and Tools Eds. Delft: TU Delft Open, 2008, pp. 37-48.
[8] Rubedo: L.P. Robert and V. Petresin Robert, [28] A. Johnson, S. Zheng, A. Nakano, G. Schierle and J-H.
Distructuring utopias. Architectural Design, vol. 79(5) Choi, Adaptive kinetic architecture and collective
(Special Issue: Architectures of the Near Future), pp. behavior: A dynamic analysis for emergency
42-49, 2009. evacuation, Buildings, vol. 9(2), 44, 2019.
[29] E.O. Wilson, Biophilia and the conservation ethics in
The biophilia hypothesis., Eds. Island Press, 1993, pp.
31-41.
[30] M. Padersten Zari, Regenerative Urban Design and
Ecosystem Biomimicry. Oxon and New York:
Routledge, 2018.
[31] A. Roetzel, R. Fuller and P. Rajagopalan, Integral
sustainable design - Reflections on the theory and
practice from a case study. Sustainable Cities and
Society, 28, pp. 225-232, 2017.
[32] M. Stamenković, C. Zappulla and S. Kosanović,
Biological entities and regeneration by design, in
Sustainable and Resilient Building Design: Approaches,
Methods and Tools. Eds. Delft: TU Delft Open, 2008,
pp. 249-271.