Seven Steps to Heaven

-The Gaborone North/Phakalane disaster and bureaucrazy!

It is not possible to talk about the past without giving some kind of historical overview – the “climate of the day”, so to say. Let me begin like this:

We are going to talk about the times from Independence to about mid-80-ies. The president, Sir Seretse Khama (SSK), studied Law and other things (e.g. John M Keynes macro-economic theories) in the 60-ies, well ahead of the later neo-conservative Chicago-school of old economical “axioms” from late 1800 and early 1900.

In fact – SSK was a social democrat and made a few study tours to Scandinavia to find out how this policy worked – the so called “middle way” - more sustainable to developing countries than later “hard core” neo-classical economics. He even made a deal with the Swedish government to have physical planners seconded to Botswana via SIDA.

As social democrats are inherently from the Keynesian side of the macro-economic border, a few planners arrived here in the late 70-ies, like myself (arriving in mid January - 79) to make physical plans for future Botswana the “middle way”, developmental, that is.

Now, remember, this is the time when Keynes was swapped as an economic/political conservative named Milton Friedman of the Chicago School of Economics became the economic hero of the day – waiving a diploma from the Nobel Prize Committee for his economic ideas! A paradox, so to say! But such things happen often in our modern “global” world.

Henceforth, a “re-born” old economic paradigm was bit by bit presented by “tamed” economists from IMF and World Bank (plus WTO) and become the basis for future planning of “new” macro-economics. Often called neo-liberal or neo-conservative, sometimes even neo-classical. Make your choice and remember that this happened in the late 70-ies and early 80-ies here.

SSK died in July 1980 and social planning was soon forgotten – then market planning (sellers market) became dominant (for BHC, too). As I know it, the SSK followers were educated in another era of neo-conservative economics with figure-heads like Reagan and Thatcher. 

Consequently, social planning was out and market planning was the new thing. Our Botswana social planning balloon burst all of a sudden.

Except for Sir Ketumile, no IMF and World Bank educated local economist in government had the slightest idea about the economic history of developing countries. How the developed countries reached their goals.

This was a sad time for Botswana, in my opinion – the old “develop-mentalist” (middle way) concept, very much designed for developing countries, was abandoned – a concept  that once worked so well for western countries (based on financial regulations, protected markets, and a piece of social welfare - still in use here and there, even in USA).

And here we are, today – the prevailing situation – a macro-economy that doesn’t work well for developing countries not then or now when we are facing a world of less abundance (i.e. limited growth and need of a steady state economy).

However, the many bursting economic (and real estate) global bubbles we have experienced are seemingly making some developing countries re-thinking. And as far as I can see, we are also giving now prevailing “axioms” a second thought. But how is the “free-market” responding? Well, it is still relying on eternal growth when we clearly see that resources are finite (oil, for instance).

To make a long story short, there is an upcoming disaster called Phakalane in the papers, now becoming a kind of myth – the above writings are part of the explanation to current predicament for this township, initially presented as an “an independent township” by the landowner.

However, we mustn’t forget that Phakalane was given an approval by the Minister of the time – consequently, the authorities must live up to this approval! When a Minister uses his veto against a decision of his Town & Country Planning Board, it implicitly means that the TCPB advice wasn’t correct in his mind! Land policy must include the landowners views – we have to try it, he implicated – remember SSK had before his depart accepted this – that must have been the Ministers thinking!

To be loyal and obedient to government decisions by the civil servants is basic in most countries. But here in Botswana it appears that we have “factions” even in the civil servants daily work – no impartiality! And the servant’s memory (probably also envy) is as long as the old road to Ghanzi.

Back to the old times – in May 1979 (not 1978 as the applicant for the change of land of his farm is indicating in his autobiography – let’s call him DM forthwith), I was told by my Director/DTRP (Mr York-Smith – YS) that DM had asked for an appointment and YS would, unfortunately, be very busy in a meeting with the Minister (and his deputy, principal planner Mr O Andersson, OA, unfortunately needed a sudden sick leave due to his Bell’s Paisy). So Mr Wareus (JW), after just a couple of months at DTRP (not even domesticated, then, see DM’s book) and not even allocated a proper office (JW had only a corner in the drawing office for laying out Gaborone West) had to meet DM and tell him that his case was OUT as the forefathers had deemed his land agricultural!

DM is telling us in his book that JW was an arrogant Swede. Maybe so, but a lot embarrassed also. My brief by YS and OA was just brief – “it’s against GoB policy to encourage private townships that doesn’t take into account the housing policy by GoB on agricultural land – DM is speculating!

More importantly – after I had been appointed by YS and OA, I was called to a meeting with some very important directors for other government departments (Dir S&L and BHC – Mr Dickson, no x, DM, and Mr Richardson) and told that the entire housing policy of GoB would disintegrate and fall apart if the new town was approved (as cross-subsidies from high cost to low cost would not be possible - no high cost left in town). Consequently, I was very nervous when I met DM.

However, I tried my own way when I had the meeting and made it clear to DM that some kind of “deal” with Council and GoB was needed, as, in my experience from earlier work in Sweden, private initiatives were acceptable but must follow established policies. I “arrogantly” told DM this experience as an advice for the future of his new town concept.

But I realized, then, that I was the department’s sacrificial lamb! Last arrival, first to go, if something was not to the liking to YS or the Office of the President, who gave the orders regarding DM’s application.

I gave DM my best advice - he should negotiate with the authorities but he was adamant that he only needed an approval. His idea was an “independent” township, with its own water, sewer, power a s o. My “arrogant” question was – has that ever happened anywhere?

The difference between long-term loans for infrastructure and quick bucks for selling even fine plots is enormous, financially seen. So much I had learnt from the earlier introduction of neo-conservative economic in other countries (including US of A).

And I pointed to a book I had on the table ( The Suburban Dream – recently arrived to my office), indicating that not even in the US of A, suburban townships could be built on private money, only, too much upfront and too much interest to pay over long time. But DM was true to his “perseverance” attitude and cut the meeting short after I had advised him that a satellite town might, in my opinion, be possible in the Mmamashia area – he just had to negotiate with the Kgatleng Council (and Chris Fleetwood-Bird who had the same idea and had started to by some land in that area). But DM didn’t want a change the already expensive drawings. A sad story for me as a town planner, indeed.

However YS became furious due to my proposal to DM and I was about to be sent home for this – I could stay probably because of the urgency of Gab West and by time being “domesticated” according to DM.

I was, however, called to an interrogation, probably with the PS (can’t find any note about it in my diary) and told that I shouldn’t have given DM a finger about a “satellite town” – a finger I have been sucking ever since then.

So it goes when policy, politics and forward planning are misunderstood, neglected and not adhered to. Other farm owners in Mokolodi, Notwane, Gaborone North and Tlokweng South were/are more careful and are now making necessary deals with authorities. More of “let time be ripe”. That’s how it works in a steadfast bureaucrazy.

Now we have to support the Phakalane development as an approved fact – it has become an essential part of our City – SSK never noticed (in the 70-ies) that the upper classes in Sweden had already found their favourite “suburbs”, that government supported with trams and railways that never became economically “balanced”. But the well-to-do were very essential for the running of the country – so it is here, too, even if Marx might rotate in his grave.

Hence, we must accept this fact, although it’s still not too late for Phakalane to accept that we will, sooner or later, create a satellite to Gaborone City at the Mmamashia Junction. Phakalane has to become more than a sprawling suburb with bedrooms and sleeping places for people working in the City. It must be part of a satellite town, as independent as possible.

Discuss and negotiate, make a deal with the owners of Gaborone North, Ruretse and the Kgatleng Council and the City Council– my last advice in this matter! Just the same as my first advice in 1979, by the way.

And my firm belief in the future for Greater Gaborone – satellite towns – will be further discussed in this column.

Bureaucratic Stairs

M C Escher 1960

Jan Wareus

Too Many Cooks - Bad Cooking

For a start, I have to reply to a comment – How do I think that we, tied up by a SACU treaty, can produce our own construction material to competitive costs?

Well, I’m not a dormant politician but as far as I know, it is quite possible that Botswana exempt VAT from local products. That would be a good start, I think.

So, I’m still awaiting my sticker for the car from Boidus - BOTSWANA MUST SECURE A  PRODUCTION OF BUILDING MATERIALS OF ITS OWN!

There have been some articles in our papers about traffic chaos and lack of landmarks in the City. To this I will now dedicate this column and I do not separate the two issues, in fact, I think they are just two sides of the same coin.

Arriving here in January 1979, I became fascinated by the then small Garden City that had just taken a step over the Segoditsane River to Broadhurst and expected further growth to the west of the railway – the reason for my recruitment, actually.

I was so interested of the planning background for Gaborone that I went to the National Archives to find some early planning documents. The librarian was very astonished to see the first planner ever visiting him.

I’ve got the approved or accepted layout for Gaborone from him. And that’s more or less exactly what you can see in the old part of the City today. But also an early alternative that convinced me that the used “garden city” concept wasn’t just a mere idea amongst others. I have a copy of this early alternative below.

Pic 1 -  “alternative from Nat Archives” 

Here you find all the significant conceptual features for a classical garden city - neighbourhood units, curved streets/roads, schools and shops in the middle possible to reach by foot within acceptable distance (1/4 of a mile=ab. 400 m) and vehicular roads with roundabouts (for slow and easy moving traffic).

All this was accentuated in the final, implemented layout (plus more roundabouts). In 1979 all was still functioning well and actually the newly constructed Gaborone was a landmark in itself! Many visitors convinced me of that and I found no reason to change “planning attitude” for the Gab West planning. 

Consequently, Gab West can be characterized by the neighbourhood units and curved streets/roads and the first phases by the schools and shops centrally located and, naturally, a traffic system based on roundabouts (to keep up with the then admired landmark mage and proper function).

But for the schools, something happened during the detailed planning period.

It can probably be illustrated by the pictures below from Jwaneng (planned 1977-1979) and a phase of Gab West (planned late 1988). 

Pic 2 - Jwaneng and Pic 3 -Gab West

Looking at the Jwaneng neighbourhood portion we see that the Setswana Medium School is very central in the “hood”, not easily reached by car but within easy reach for walking children.

In Gaborone West the schools have moved closer to secondary roads to become more easily reached by cars. The reason – educational policy had changed and many school sites were allocated to private developers for English Medium Schools. 

There was no announced policy shift from the Ministry of Education but planners adapted to what had become the song of the day – and tried to save the “hood” from disturbing traffic. For Secondary Schools, even more attractive to private developers, the norm was to site them close to Primary Roads for easy access. However, such roads were often in the hands of Roads Department (being gazetted) and they were most often denied direct access e.g. Rainbow and Westwood schools.

But the traffic disaster is partly due to this privatization of schools that could not be foreseen at the planning stage. When their number became significant, and every second private car in mornings had to deliver children to their private schools, a kind of coupe de grace was given to the traffic situation in Gabs. Enhancing this was naturally the (to planners) unforeseen support by banks, council and government to private car ownership. So we now have a great number of bank-owned cars with children taken to schools every morning. So much that the Director of Roads, supported by Council and elected MP’s seems obliged to deconstruct the original roundabouts and create a small Los Angeles. That, as we all have experienced, works even worse than the now deconstructed previous system.

For more reading about this I recommend the interviews with Luc van der Casteele in Sunday Standards (two so far and more promised). Excellent analysis of the current, “improved” traffic system!

That, as well as the school concept, has become modern “planning disasters”. I’m mentioning this as I, in year 2000, was invited to UB to talk about “The Problems of Urban and Regional Planning in Botswana” and wrote a paper about “Planning Disasters in Botswana” instead. Basing this on the then acute Mogoditshane squatting  and subsequent “yellow monsters” as well as the so called Urban Standards (presented by DTRP totally void of any research and earlier standards). We are coming back to these historical events if you are interested.

So, I guess I’m back to “Planning Disasters in Botswana” with this column.

There are more of disasters, though. Next column will be dedicated to an ever ongoing bureaucratic belittle of a grand scheme of improving the environment of Gaborone. 

It ain't necessarily so (Miles Davis version)

This time I will touch upon a few different but in my view connected matters – first...

As we all know, imported goods are unnecessarily expensive here due to transport costs.            

And as I have argued so far in my writings, transport costs will escalate very much in the future.  This is due to the oil bubble bursting. The oil producing countries know very well that they have a finite product and the last drops will be expensive – and they want to keep the last barrels for themselves. Furthermore, it is confusing to see that the distributors (Exxon, Mobile, BP, Shell et al) seemingly have a deep stance in the crude oil production, too  – covering the whole line from extracting to the deliverance.  That’s obviously what happens on a free, unregulated market!  I don’t understand the record profits they have just now if this isn’t the explanation.

So the unregulated, free trade market is making record profits of the very basic necessity for the GDP growth, as we know it so far – in fact killing it. And consequently killing all kinds of fumbling small industrialization attempts for the developing countries – where we belong.

 Consequently, we have to do what the now industrialized countries once did. Start local production and protect it from unfair competition. That was actually the basis for the so called Bretton Woods Concept!

We must have a construction material production of our own and cut the ever escalating transport costs. As well as putting more people into production!   

As a matter of fact – the same goes for food production and electricity. We have realized this, now, and hopefully we will soon have the house in order.  Outstanding  examples  are  diamond sorting and polishing, glass manufacturing and more. We have a brick factory that cannot compete with our neighbour in the south, so some kind of protection is needed (as it is for eggs, chicken and poultry and now and then, tomatoes, too).

Obviously our government is aware of the modern economical follies as some kind of anti-neoliberal concepts are in use despite the propaganda from World Bank, IMF and WTO with its “tamed” economists from the Chicago School of Economics. 

In this situation we have to strongly convince ourselves and possible investors that we locally have to secure a construction industry of our own as I indicated in last column.

I leave the rest of arguing to the new generation of “dissident” economists that now and then are writing intelligible in our papers or you can find on the Web.  GS Mantowe mentioned some in his latest column that I know you read.   On my part I recommend you to read Herman Daly (professor in environmental science and former World Bank expert – see Daly News on Google). He knows a great deal about our future!

Now another topic that will lead to a third one and I find them being connected.

In my bookshelf I have “Ralph Erskine – Architect” (Byggforlaget, Stockholm 1990), and I want to quote some lines in the following:

Erskine often spoke to guests at international congresses as well to students and fellow architects. In such a company his role was to warn of the risks of following trends and temporary whims – in his view, “postmodernism is a harlot touting flashy packaging for capitalism”. He also often spoke of the need to create mixed-use communities of buildings in harmony with one another.

For him beauty was not necessarily what was elegant – he said that “God created not just the speedy elegant gazelle but also the pig. Just like the pig, slightly clumsy, thick buildings can be beautiful provided they terminate with a neat flourish”.

And now, how to illustrate some of the more than 200 projects in RE’s diary? And suddenly it has become obvious how to do it...

Mmegi  02 March 2012 has an article by Gothataone Moeng about the often mentioned “lack of landmarks” in Gaborone. A few professional architects are mentioned and quoted, among them Leta Mosienyane and Nick Njarange. They complain, bitterly!

But neither of them is pointing the finger to where it should be pointing – to the architects! They seem to be missing some organization outside the architectural field that should be responsible. But there is no other than the architects that should be accused of the ignorance for the missing beauty of our capital, in my opinion.

They are the ones designing new buildings with no connection to other buildings. Facing different directions, being high, medium or low, according to Killion Mokwete, also interviewed.

Are these “prominent” architects asking for help by DTRP, Town Councils or what?

Why can’t the architectural profession come up with an “aesthetical and concurrence board” similar to what they have in Paris, London and New York (even Stockholm, by the way)? Why do they ask to be spoon fed with regulations? Haven’t they the professional background to solve the problem they are complaining about? Isn’t it a fight on “home grounds”?

Well, I’m pessimistic. I don’t think they are willing to take the responsibility to come up with a city of some kind of coherent beauty. They prefer the masquerade – the fancy dress party and then point the finger somewhere else! They all tried their own “landmark” and failed due to lack of co-operation.

So, finally, let me introduce to you an Erskine landmark project (done in collaboration with his old architect friends – a normal working condition for him) now built in Stockholm - the Wasa Terminal.

In brief, it is a covering a large part of the Central Station and opening up an enormous amount of bus, office, and commercial space on what was earlier supposed to be an impediment, a “fault line” in the City, like the one we have. The commercial success was enormous and something similar can be made in Gaborone, I’m sure.

In earlier articles and in other papers, I have mentioned this to no avail. The double spur from New Naledi to Segoditshane Valley must be dug down. No problem! The goods yard moved outside the immediate urban area.  And all of a sudden we have an enormous area that could be opened for development! As well as connecting Gab West with Gab East – what a relief for pedestrians! And we will have a prestigious terminal for our long haul busses and spur based commuting, too. (Fortunately, we already have a terminal for the hundreds of kombi’s we have to live with for years, if I understand the situation right.)

Furthermore, it is obvious to me that Botswana Railways, the major landowner in the area, nowadays is very much interested in making money from real estate.

And, with collaboration between the architects, the possible “landmark” that is wanted, will hopefully be possible.  But organize yourself and work together.  Maybe you should ask for a competition among selected consortiums (it’s a too big project for any existing firm of today). Maybe it could result in something as impressive as the proposal by SHoP Architects for the Innovation Hub.

And act while it is still money around for this kind of projects. I wish you luck! Below I will give you an idea how RE and his friends made it in Stockholm (see pic). And note, the necessary glass-covered, indoor concept, there,  could here become a carbon-friendly shaded area, here.

Pic of Wasa Terminal in Central Stockholm

Blues for Pablo (Miles Davis)

I must start by welcome Mr G S Manowe (GSM) to Boidus and his column “Going Green”.

I felt a bit uneasy with the thought that I had to go into “the Green Fields”, as I have difficulties to differ from wizard-ism and plain-talk pragmatism. But I’m sure that that GSM doesn’t have this problem, being a senior architect with many years experience.

As he mentioned in his writing in the February issue, 40 % of the world’s total energy demand and close to 70 % of the total electricity consumption goes to the building sector, as well as 65 % of the worlds waste. 

These are figures that should make us in the architectural and planning fields a bit uneasy, to say the least. The situation is precarious:

We all in the development professions have without much intelligence (but it has been warnings), been picking the easy reached, low hanging fruits for more than two centuries of industrialization. And, gee, what a boom – for a few! But now we have to face a situation when the fruits are not so easy to reach and we have to pay a price we never considered before. That’s the energy or peak oil bubble! There is still energy/oil there but to a price we never could imagine (if we didn’t read the warnings). If we are careful in the use of the remaining resources, we might have time to adjust peacefully. But time is slipping and soon it’s too late to adjust in some kind of order. In principle, that’s what I have been saying so far in my Boidus columns.

We here in Botswana have, in my opinion, a quite unique situation. Most of our building material used today is imported and we must pay heavily for transportation. So it has been for many years and no one has said with emphasis – BOTSWANA MUST SECURE A PRODUCTION OF BUILDING MATERIALS OF ITS OWN!  

We have all the needed resources and hopefully an energy situation that other countries will envy within short (based on our own recourses, too). The problem, as far as I can see, is that we have not created a local and modern self-sufficient building tradition – we are thoughtlessly copying the so called developed countries that are soon in the gutter. Sky-scrapers, glass, aluminium, steel and more of highly embodied energy stuff, as I indicated in a previous blog, are the theme of the day – imitating the western model.

Consequently, I think we architects and town planners have to study design and building against the situation of less energy abundance.

And how to handle such a situation of “less abundance” was the reason for me to mention Alvar Aalto and the situation in Finland after WW2. Amazing what kind of art can come out from such conditions, isn’t it?

I guess there is more to say about Alvar Aalto - interviewed, he was always sparing his words – the quiet creator of art that talked its own language! However, in an inspired situation, he spoke. For instance:

“Architecture has often in these days been compared to science and its methods have been endeavoured to become more “scientific”. Even to become a science by itself by including more of complex mathematics.  But it is no science – it is a synthetic process, a conglomeration of thousands of important human functions and will be so to the end of humans” (Nov 1940).

Further – “If architecture will have a deeper human value, it must primarily sort out the economical side of it” – and this gives me a point in this discussion.

This “economical side of it” is changing rapidly just now. All imported goods, are excessively expensive due to escalating transport costs. This is not a good basis for a sustainable construction industry in Botswana.

As we have most of the needed raw materials available, and soon a self sufficient power/electricity production, we have to localize the production of building materials. And use less of high embodied energy materials – more of traditional building materials.

It was interesting to read Mr Mokwete’s presentation of his project in Maitengwe in the latest issue of Boidus Focus, although I don’t think that vernacular design is the only concept for the future. But the project clearly shows that simple, traditional materials still are in use and there are skilled builders that can handle them, still.

The Maitengwe project also indicates that traditional thatching grass still is available and will guarantee a healthy indoor climate. But it is a material that is hard to find to decent prices these days as it must be collected from nature.

Now I happen to know that thatching grass can be commercially grown and harvested like in SA and we currently have to buy our thatch from there to a high price.  But this is not necessary. A few hundred small farmers here could plant and grow it and provide for a growing market here. Maybe, we should start with some small project like Maitengwe and then go on with more substantial, long lasting and reusable building materials?

But there is obviously a long way to go for the use of traditional materials and constructions. To me, it looks like the regulations we have are deliberately cutting out the use of traditional materials, today. I need help from practising architects and designers to clear this issue – please, let me know the situation with all kinds of examples you can pinpoint!

I know that the Lobatse Clay Works haven’t become a success – but I haven’t seen the real reasons why, yet. A thorough analysis of this project must be made – maybe it needed some kind of protected market as most of industrial projects in smaller countries need. But this is nowadays totally ignored by the neo-liberal economy preached by IMT, World Bank and other Washington Consensus organisations. As if the protected market wasn’t the prerogative for western development, once upon a time!

There are many aspects to discuss on this issue of “securing a production of our own” and I will be back on these aspects in later blogs.

To conclude this one, I will be quoting Ralph Erskine from his lecture at the Royal Society of Arts in 1982:

“Energy is a valuable but not inexhaustible and often much polluting resource. Buildings consequently must be simple and well insulated in both hot and cold climates. The size of windows must be restricted. Glass architecture, often considered to be beautiful, must be regarded as a symbol for a naive, lavish and irresponsible culture. A new and well thought-out, responsible architecture must be worked out.”

And this has very much to do with “Going Green”, I assume.

May I suggest that Boidus Focus put a small sum into the printing of a car-sticker for me and my friends? If you read this, you know what it should say!

Pablo Casals once said : "Situation is hopeless- lets take another step."

As it has been noted by some readers, my “homepage” on the Web isn’t known to all of you. If you google  <janwareus.blogspot.com>  you find the start of it with some essays on Sowa Town (now close to a 20 year celebration) and background to this project. More will come if the Web server functiosn more than every second day and the power cuts will be for more places than Gabane, just.

Now’s the Time -(Charlie Parker song from 1952)

What I have indicated so far about the future is well known for most planners and architects but we seem to have some “commercial” blinders on. We must ask ourselves – Are we advising clients and decision-makers the right things?

Clearly not - so where do we go from here?

Well – let’s have a look at some tables from the Canadian Architects blog. We start with “Measures of Sustainability – embodied energy” – the basis for trying to be energy sufficient – the “embodied energy” in the building materials used and recommended by architects is important.  Follows here:

As can be seen – architects here are mostly preferring steel, aluminium, glass and other materials that are on the top/bottom of the “embodied energy” list. Why? Is it just that the well-known “icons” used it frequently in the past? Should it be the same today – they would certainly not have done that (remember Alvar Aalto).


And those materials, by necessity seemingly, give us high-rise buildings in need air-cons, lifts etc - in a country that already is on her back because of power breaks and badly planned supply – and as we know, power will be severely more expensive in the future if even a bit more reliable some doesn’t think so, by the way!


It should also be noted that the table is “Canadian” – the transport factor is consequently less than for Botswana!


How do we handle this knowledge in a world of less abundance of cheap energy?


Firstly, we have to encourage local production of building materials – we have all raw materials needed for that! Secondly, we have to design buildings that are not inherently in need of excessive energy for longevity – including normal maintenance. The former resident architect Ian Marshall once indicated that for us. (And Boidus has an interesting article by IM that I hope they will print one day.)


He made some ground clearing designs for UB and Government in the 80-ies that are in good shape (and good looking) still!


Now we have to look into the next important design issue for architects – Measures of Sustainability (incl. operating energy). These are highly important factors for sustainable design but unfortunately impossible to make an abridged presentation of here – we have to advice the interested architect to go to the sources – http://www.canadianarchitect.com/asf/perspectives_sustainability.


The conclusion of that paper reads as follows:

“Although both energy use and greenhouse gas emissions increased in Canada between 1990 and 1999, the increase would have been much greater if not for improvements in energy efficiency. As a result of this progress, Canadians are saving about $5 billion per year in energy costs, and greenhouse gas emissions are five percent below what they would otherwise have been.

Viewed from the perspective of national debt, operating energy is a vital indicator of sustainability.”

Yes – so much for architectural design and sustainability! Let’s go to town planning.

For you to understand – I must confess the following:

I’m an architect from Sweden (exam from 1965) – totally against the bureaucratic dictatorship of planning regulations! Town planning was in my learning time quite subordinate to the art of architecture and building. In my mind, so it should be – putting a lot of responsibility upon architects.

And here we are – a situation when “town planners” are making up plans for 2025 and more, extrapolating 1995 trends into 2025!

In my answer book, I have the concepts we used we used in Stockholm City Planning Department - we made “provisional plans” and started a discussion with the architects appointed for the jobs. Not until an agreement was reached, the plan was taken for approval!

The plans were indicative until the architects were in agreement. And this attitude goes well with a future of “less abundance” and more or less zero growth.

So I see so called specialized town planners unnecessary – a revival of the old academic teaching concept of architects will do. The “technical and rational” town planning concept is a part of the site planning for the architect – as it has been for centuries prior to the neo-liberal concept of putting harness onto architects. Seems hard as an opinion but nevertheless true! The economical pundits never liked the “jack-of-all-trades” - the architects. Or any intellectuals, by the way!

However, here we are, we so called town planners, for some time, still.

What can we do in a situation of no economical growth and less energy?

Well, let’s be happy we are not in the US! For more than 50 yrs the so called “suburban concept” has been implemented and now looks like a dead end. No way out except by turning around 180 degrees, and money will not be available for such a turn. So, they must find a way of getting services and jobs within walking distance for the people with no choice!

The suburb will be there for generations as the infrastructure was expensive and there are very few dollars in the future. US planners have serious problems when trying to “recycle” their suburbs, indeed. But it is possible, I think.

For them and us the problem will be Public Transport. And finding a changed school system as – no private schools scattered all over town – local schools, instead – a challenge for the authorities!  Schools and services within walking distances!

As I understand, it is possible here in our towns and settlements, but, as I said – a revised (esp. educational planning policy) is needed. We must plan what we can implement in the near future.  And leave some pointers, arrows, whatever for the long term unknown future. The days of the 25 yr planning period are gone – totally unknown to us (as it has been for many yrs to the ones who read reports from various energy authorities).

I have been writing about the importance of a change in the transport and road system for yrs, now. And finally I find a learned friend, Jayson Sechele – listen to his advice, if you don’t believe me! That’s how things should be handled. 

Let’s start the discussion, now. It’s soon too late!

 (Continuation > click HERE to read 

Future Ain’t What It Used to Be

It is interesting to note that, historically, empires are born, grow and contract , almost disappear, except for some ruins. But mostly leaving some cultural achievements, even writings, to us some steps behind.

For instance, Babylon (the Eufrat, Tigris empire - what’s now Iraq), ancient Egypt (the pharaoh land), old Greece and Rome collapsed. Caused by some kind of hubris or ignorance of environmental restrictions and consequent destruction of the basis for their sustainability. They depleted their resources and civilizations built on limited resources could/cannot survive.

But they left a tremendous cultural inheritance to us.

What are we leaving behind for future generations – that’s something to think about but I leave the question for now. However, it will hardly be our architecture and organization of communities – our town planning! We seriously have to look into more sustainable alternatives!

How do we adopt to a decrease in energy supply and consequent drop in economy growth? How do we keep the “necessities” we are used to in the post-industrial years – our current “lifestyle”? Our SUV’s, limousines, and weekend trips to the village and weekend houses? How do we get to our jobs and schools when fuel is scarce and expensive?

Well, in a way we are lucky! We haven’t yet totally adopted and mimicked the western countries, the so called “developed” ones. This will be one of my points in following writings.

I will also try and pose a few questions and hints with regards to our profession as architects and town planners. It’s based on my experience from our 3^rd world country – Botswana – and I am happy I am here in the days to come. But first some recap of the current situation: 

ExxonMobil presents its outlooks until 2030 on website <exxonmobil.com/ energyoutlook> and some of the findings regarding future fuel deficit are:

·         One of the most important “fuels” of all is energy efficiency;

·         Technology is essential on all fronts.

T The seriousness of ExxonMobil’s comments is underpinned by following graph from Roy E Anderson’s article in <Energy Bulletin.net> “When Oil and Gas Are Depleted” (2011/08/02):

When reading this graph, it should be noted that Roy Anderson is one of the more “optimistic” forecasters. The depletion of energy resources is steady but spread over a 75 yr period. Many writers think the period is shorter and might be very violent as for Iraq and Libya.

The “ever growing need” of 1.5% a year is indicated and the completely new energy situation and the end of our small children’s life is evident. It is back to 1850 in fact! But it gives us some time to come up with Plan B, the plan we neglected to come up with 50 yrs ago when the situation now was clearly foreseen. But surely it means a different lifestyle – however, some writers think this might become an increase of life quality instead.

What will be the major problems we have to resolve?

According to Roy E Anderson some problems for the 10 billion people at end of the century will be: (quote)

·         Feed them without nitrogen fertilizers and bulk transport

·         Cloth them with only natural fibres

·         House them without oil or gas heat

·         Sustain and satisfy millions of unemployed

·         Provide water in a changed environment

·         Build structures without oil and gas to harvest energy from renewable sources

·         Provide adequate information re. recording, processing and distribution of what we know today

And these problems and others must be solved within the lifetime of a person born today. (end quote)

The last problem he mentions is very interesting. Information today is often in computers and networks based on chips and cell phones.

The manufacture of computers and cell phones as well as the running of them is also very energy and resource consuming, unfortunately, apart from being a thorn in the flesh for many rulers.

It is hardly conceivable that the means to read information on chips will survive for many future generations – where are the necessary batteries, for instance?  We’ve already loosed the skill to design “by hand” – all architects/town planners today are in some kind of CAD computer programme. My old professor said – you lose your “handwriting” and you’ve lost your skill!

But it is our obligation to insure that the knowledge we gain of our situation is preserved and available for our followers just as was done by past civilizations.

Something to think about until next time!

(Continuation > click HERE to read  Now’s the Time)

What can we learn from our predecessors?

Many worried people today are hoping for alternative energy sources. But a traditionalist like me is pessimistic about the future and optimistic about the past.

Right now we are exploring wind power in large so called “farms” around shores and islands all over Europe, mainly. There are also so called bio-fuel but we know that this is merely food deficiency at the other end. Today we know that these alternatives are just marginal to the old “free flowing oil” and coal. The technology behind is extremely expensive and can cover for just between 1- 2 % of current demand and will need a lot of our conventional energy (oil and coal) for maintenance and function.

So – is the party over? Maybe not quite but let’s start brain-storming about a world of less abundance and its impact on construction and planning here in Botswana.

We start with finding out what architects were forced to consider in time of crisis e.g. reconstruction after WW2 in Europe.

Finland comes to my mind – a country that came out from the WW2 on the wrong side and was boycotted from the various aids at the time. Thus completely void of steel for reinforcement of concrete, plastics and the like and other materials on the “right” and supported side (West).

Architects in Finland had to use the local materials – brick and wood predominantly.

And became masters in using it in new configurations. And had to keep buildings to a scale and height that was possible. Hence an architectural marvel happened – Alvar Aalto and his designs! He is the modern master of building in bricks and using wooden structures together with it!

This became his “functionalism” but is called “organic building” by the adoring pundits of today. We must learn from his example in a world of less abundance!

Another famous architect of a more voluntary “less abundant” kind is Ralph Erskine. His buildings (and town plans) are also “organic” – as grown out of the ground. For him, his attitude was not unavailability of modern materials. Rather a self imposed restriction due to his Quaker background – a kind of environmental attitude – he managed for instance to build a large student facility with library, dining hall, sports centre in a beautiful meadow full of century old oak trees without knocking down a single one (Stockholm University)! Hope I can show you some pics one day.

As architects and planners you are familiar with these icons and I don’t have to be long-winded. They both bow to nature and teach us to live and build with nature. Believe me – we have first class examples for our future dealing with a world of less abundance!

Our problems will most certainly be not so much possible design principles as convincing our clients what must be done. And the number of clients will also be less abundant – a situation we must learn to live with for the future, unfortunately.

This will mean a lot for the university and architect’s studios. We better prepare for a widening of our responsibility with more concentration on environmental issues, I guess. We will have a lot of problems created by the economy and industrialization that have been running without harness for long. But the “Jack of all trades” label we have might be useful for us.

I will go on with this issue of the architects and townplanners in the future in coming writing, if you don’t mind.

I will end with a memory of my first meeting with Alvar Aalto:

At a study tour to Finland in 1993, some students (me included) were invited to meet the icon AA at his office outside Helsinki. Our prof Gunnar Hoving, was schoolmate to AA in the early 20-ies. We met AA dressed in pyjama and gown at 11oo in the morning after he, as usual, had spent his night with a project.

“Hoho–Gunnar, some more Arrrkkitects to be?”

“Well, my boys (looking sternly at our oldest one – 42yrs old) and little Lady (looking at a scared 19 yrs old girl among us) – you are going to be Arrrkkitects? 

But times are wrong! Gunnar and I were lucky – the party’s over now! You might be fine draftsmen for some time but the INDUSTRIALISM you are working for is committing suicide!”

He didn’t mention oil and resources, then – but he meant that “development” was outside reach from governments and commoners/voters. In the hand of a few feudal “kings”! This we heard from AA who was known as being conservative!!

Of course he asked some trusted staff to show us his latest “organic” designs, meanwhile himself and Gunnar had a quick glass of some kind.

He never discussed his own creations – “you see what you see and nothing is hidden, but maybe, implicit – if you see what I mean”!

As I said- this was in 1963! But the future was already evident by then.

So “implicitism” was born to me and the only -ism among architects I accept but, naturally, never understand fully. The same you see in Erskine’s and F L Wright’s works or any other fine Architect’s creations – art and metaphysics in holy merger!






(Continuation > click HERE to read Future Ain’t What It Used to Be)