Download pdf - STATUS REPORT ON Building Culture in Germanyarchinfo.fi/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Saksa.pdf · 2014-02-03 · STATUS REPORT ON Building Culture in Germany Initial Situation and Recommendations

Bundesministeriumfür Verkehr, Bau-und Wohnungswesen

InitiativeArchitekturund Baukultur

STATUS REPORT ON

Building Culture in Germany

Initial Situation and Recommendations

BMVBW A+B S U 1+4 E BELpdf 17.06.2002 14:16 Uhr Seite 2

STATUS REPORT ON

Building Culture in GermanyInitial Situation and Recommendations

Editor: Prof. Dr. Gert Kähler


InitiativeArchitekturund Baukultur

BMVBW A+B Status E BELpdf 17.06.2002 13:51 Uhr Seite 2

4

Partners in the Initiative for

Architecture and Building Culture:

German Ministry for Transport,

Building and Housing

in cooperation with the Commissioner of the Federal

Government for Cultural and

Media Affairs

and the

Federal Chamber of Architects (BAK)

Federal Chamber of Engineers (BIK)

Working Group of the German

Associations of Architects,

Engineers and Urban Planners:

• Federation of German Architects BDA

• Bund Deutscher Baumeister, Architekten und Ingenieure (BDB)

• Federation of German Landscape Architects (BDLA)

• Bund Deutscher Innenarchitekten(BDIA)

• Verband Deutscher Architekten und Ingenieurvereine (DAI)

• Vereinigung Freischaffender Architekten Deutschlands (VFA)

• Vereinigung für Stadt-, Regional- und Landesplanung (SRL)

• Verband Beratender Ingenieure (VBI)

• Verband unabhängig beratender Ingenieure und Consultants (VUBIC)

• Bundesverband der Freien Berufe (BFB)

Bundesverband Bildender

Künstlerinnen und Künstler (BBK)

Deutsche Stiftung

Denkmalschutz (DSD)

German Museum

of Architecture (DAM)

German Architecture Centre (DAZ)

Foundation Bauhaus Dessau

In addition the following organisationsare participants in the steering group:

Vertreter der Bauministerkonferenz

der Länder

Deutscher Städte- und

Gemeindebund

Deutscher Städtetag

Hauptverband Deutsche

Bauindustrie

Zentralverband Deutsches

Baugewerbe

Bundesverband Freier

Wohnungsunternehmen

GdW Bundesverband deutscher

Wohnungsunternehmen

Deutscher Sparkassen- und

Giroverband

Verband der Privaten

Bausparkassen

Verband deutscher

Hypothekenbanken

C O N T E N T S

Foreword Kurt Bodewig, Page

German Minister for Transport,

Building and Housing 6

Introduction The Architecture and

Building Culture Initiative 8

Summary and Positions 12

Initial Situation Analyses 1 | Defining Building Culture 18

2 | Social Tendencies 19

3 | Urban Developments 21

4 | Planning and the Building Process 24

5 | Owner-Developers and the Building Trade 26

6 | Planning-Related Professions 28

7 | Building Culture and the Public 37

8 | Heritage Conservation 38

9 | Supporting Building Culture 39

10 | Building Culture Policies in Europe 41

Masthead 4

Image Sources 58

Recommendations and Measures 46

| Closing Remarks 54

M A S T H E A D

Publisher: German Ministry for Transport,

Building and Housing (BMVBW),Berlin

Editor: Prof. Dr. Gert Kähler, Hamburg

Project Supervisor: Federal Office for Building

and Regional Planning (BBR), Bonn

Project Coordinator: urbanPR Gesellschaft für

Öffentlichkeitsarbeit, Projekt- und

Standortmarketing mbH, Berlin

Design & Layout: wieschendorf.design, Berlin

Photography:Martin Rosner, RegensburgAndreas Muhs, BerlinTom Peschel, KleinmachnowBildermann.de, K.-H. Schmidt, DresdenChristoph Petras, Berlin

Litho: Elch Graphics, BerlinPrinter: Druckerei Conrad, Berlin

Berlin, December 2001



F O R E W O R D

6

I consider everything that has beenachieved so far as an incentivefor continuing this joint effort byall of the stakeholders in buildingculture, which seeks to deepenpublic discussion on quality andfirmly establish the means for closecooperation between all of theparties responsible for planningand building.

Kurt Bodewig

German Minister for Transport, Building and Housing

I would also like to see consumers’daily needs prioritised and greaterdialogue between experts andowner-developers on good planningand building.

Apart from its role as client, it isthe federal government’s job tocreate appropriate terms andconditions. I refer to the existingFederal Building Code and RegionalPlanning Act, and the substantialfederal subsidies extended tothe states for, among other things,urban renewal.

The Ministry for Transport, Buildingand Housing is not ending itscommitment to architecture andbuilding culture with the publicationof this report. The analyses andrecommendations it contains,which I view as developable ratherthan definitive, will be reviewed tosee how far they can be realised.I also intend to present the findingsto the German parliament.

The initiative sees itself as animpetus and platform for dialoguethat requires the active involve-ment of its participants. Thisstock-taking report reflects theircontributions to that dialogue.I would like to thank everyonefor their contribution, in particularthe report’s author, Prof. Dr. Kähler.

It takes the active cooperationand individual contribution of allprotagonists in the planning andbuilding process to create buildingculture – small and major privatesector clients, investors and finan-ciers, companies and contractors,planners and finally city and localgovernments. There is as muchnecessity to encourage cooperationbetween planners, clients andbuilders as there is the need tofoster public awareness about thevalue of a well-built environment.It will be decisive to continuethe dialogue that has been startedhere and systematically promoteinvolvement on the state andcommunity level as well as amongcitizens and clients. That is whyI am especially pleased that stategovernments are increasinglyaddressing the issue through theirown initiatives.

The report documents theachievements but also consciouslyhighlights the shortcomings inGermany’s building culture.It also looks at the way ourneighbours are dealing with thesechallenges. We need to adopt acritical stance on where we standand how well we actually applyour own standards, because weare dealing with important goals:

■ We want to enhance our global competitiveness and be prepared to meet new requirements

■ We want to establish broad public appreciation of a well-built environment, thereby generating support for good planning and building

■ We want to preserve our cultural heritage and make use of the resources in our building stock

■ We want to safeguard high and future-oriented standards in the planning and building industries and exploit potential for innovation

As Europe grows together, marketsand requirements are changing.Germany has the largest con-struction output on the continent,a high density of architects anda highly developed infrastructure.In the building industry, structuralchange is of the essence. Com-petent service, innovative productsand sustainable quality on alllevels – including aesthetic appeal –are not just key factors for citiesand residents, they are also issuesvital to Germany’s future as anattractive place to do business.

The German Ministry for Transport,Building and Housing launchedthe “Architecture and BuildingCulture Initiative” to establisha focus in public debate on thequality of planning and buildingin Germany and the role playedby the services of architects,urban planners and engineers.In this way, the federal governmentis accepting suggestions fromthe experts and coordinating themwith corresponding proposals bythe German parliament.


I N T R O D U C T I O N

8

The report sees itself as a fact-based analysis that providesinformation on the problems andfuture challenges facing theprotagonists in the planning andbuilding trades with regard toarchitecture and building culturein Germany. In formulating anevaluation and recommendations,the author in his role as independentconsultant has been at liberty toemphasise certain features, placinggreater emphasis on future tasksrather than on the current situation.The ultimate goal of drafting a jointaction plan that’s sanctioned by allof the protagonists was, however,never forgotten.

The report is based on statementsfrom institutions, interviews withexperts from different building-related sectors, publicationanalyses, theme-related eventsover the past year, in particularthose staged in cooperation withthe Architecture and BuildingCulture Initiative, as well asstandardised surveys of expertsand the public.

The emphasis of this report lies inascertaining the status quo as wetake stock of our building culture,with the objective of familiarisingthe public with the issues. It con-cludes with recommendations andmeasures that show politicians,experts and the public what needsto be done and makes an urgentappeal to start.

Building culture always manifestsitself locally. In this way, it isglobalisation’s opposite number,providing (or failing to provide)people with a place to lay rootsand create a sense of home.A place and the people in it makeup a society – the “citoyen” asa term for the “involved citizen”derives from “cité”, the city!

The “citoyen” is the citizen ofthe “European city”, whose futurein a global economy is a crucialquestion that is of concern topoliticians and citizens alike.For our society, it’s virtually amatter of life and death.

These are the main tenets thatemerged from the discussion ledby the Architecture and BuildingCulture Initiative and from theprocess of compiling this report.There was a feeling that until now,issues concerning architectureand building culture have not beenadequately discussed in the publicdomain.

The Ministry for Transport, Buildingand Housing launched the Architec-ture and Building Culture Initiativein October 2000 to improve publicdiscussion on building culture.More than two dozen organisationscommitted to the cause of buildingculture joined as partners.

The chambers of architects andengineers inevitably take a leadingrole because as statutory bodies, fostering building culture is as muchtheir legal obligation as providingprofessional representation.

The steering group brought inthe additional involvement ofrepresentatives from state buildingcommittees, local governments,the building trade as well asthe housing and credit sectors.This is the first time in the historyof the Federal Republic that allbranches involved in building in thewidest sense have come togetheras partners with the common aimof raising the standard of buildingculture in the country. It reflectsconcerns that Germany couldfall behind its European partners,but at the same time testifies toa sense of joint responsibility forcreating a livable built environ-ment for all.

The initiative set out to take stockof building culture in Germany.This report contains a summary:it shows the scope of the evaluation.The aim is to illustrate the point ofdeparture, significant developmenttrends and future requirements, soas to gauge the need for action onthe part of the federal governmentand other protagonists.

The Architecture andBuilding Culture InitiativeBuilding culture concerns everyone, because the built environment affects and changes

every individual. While the experience of traditional culture – the visual arts, literature,

theatre, music – is only achieved by conscious exposure, the experience of building culture

is inescapable because it is quite simply everywhere.


A R C H I T E C T: F I N K + J O C H E R , M U N I C H

1 0

H O U S I N G P R O J E C T 19 9 8 • R E G E N S B U R G • R A I F F E I S E N S T R A S S E 7 – 3 9


There are concrete recommen-dations on action for all of theprotagonists shaping our builtenvironment. They aim to createan appreciation of quality in buil-ding culture. This above all affectsplanning professions, whichrequire commitment to qualityand to specialisation, competencein the area of service, an interna-tional orientation, interdisciplinarycooperation and greater conside-ration of users’ needs.

There are also recommendationsfor clients and investors. Above all,they are directed at public sectorowner-developers, who functionas role models. But private sectorclients and property owners mustalso be won over for buildingculture objectives. Engineering andarchitecture competitions on majorprojects can make an importantcontribution to this end.

Emphasis is placed on the impor-tance of an involved community –one that is committed to “innerdevelopment” in cities, that seeksto protect and create attractivepublic spaces and ensure land-scape-sensitive development onthe fringe. Communities are alsoadvised to set up building culturecounseling services.

Proposals that call for joint actionto safeguard and improve buildingculture quality and to attractpublic interest are of particularimportance. These include publiccampaigns and research, modelprojects that can be conveyed tothe public and integrated nation-wide, appropriate praise for goodexamples, a more widespreadinclusion of citizens in buildingand planning processes, the incor-poration of building culture issuesin consumer counseling, andplaques on buildings detailing thepeople and firms who built them.

Particularly important are therecommendations to add buildingculture topics to school and voca-tional training curricula. Dialogueand an appreciation of quality inthe built environment can only bebuilt on a previously laid foundationof knowledge.

Finally there are proposals forfederal policy – for example areview of tax regulations to boostsupport for inner-city development,or support for engineering andarchitectural services exports.Urgently needed jobs in the buildingtrade depend on such measuresbeing taken.

Implementation of these measureswould make Germany’s architectureand building policy more visible,and that in turn would promotean awareness of building cultureas a topic that affects everyone.The questions that need to beasked in the public domain aresimple precisely because thereis so little general awarenessabout the issue, despite its hugesignificance for every individual.

1 What is building culture?

The term building culturedescribes the process of develop-ing the built environment and ourapproach to it. It includes planning,building, refurbishment andmaintenance. Building culture isindivisible. Not limited to architec-ture, it embraces constructionengineering, urban and regionalplanning, landscape architectureas well as public art. The qualityof building culture results fromthe degree to which all of societyfeels responsible for the builtenvironment and its maintenance.

Other European countries havebeen quicker to recognise thevalue of public discussion. In some,building culture is consciouslypromoted as an integral part ofnational identity. Many countrieshave formulated a national “archi-tecture policy”, with correspondingbudgets and institutions, whichfosters public interest and appre-ciation, counsels school leavers intheir career choices, advises com-munities and clients and conductsa dialogue on quality. Over thepast few years, Germany has beenlagging behind on this front.

Despite the existence of numerousindividual measures, there is nofocused perception of the issue onthe national level. The fact that thefederal Architecture and BuildingCulture Initiative has led to similarinitiatives on the state level canbe credited as a major success.But there is still no permanentnational platform for communicationand representation that bringstogether all of those involved andinterested in the planning andbuilding process. The question ofhow this can be continued is anopen one, the answer to whichmust also consider a current needfor re-orientation in the planningprofessions and building trade.

One of the most vital recommen-dations, therefore, is the call onthe federal government to set upa viable way of continuing thedialogue on building culture to-gether with the states, communi-ties, chambers and associationsas well as industry, interestedsponsors and dedicated profes-sionals. The move would spotlightthe measures being taken in thisarea. There are examples inneighbouring countries that wecan learn from.

S U M M A R Y

1 2

Social developments over thecoming years will affect buildingculture. Demographic changes(an aging population, shrinkinghouseholds, an increasing pro-portion of foreigners and migrationwithin Germany) and economicdevelopments (globalisation,tertiarisation, growing pressureto maximise economic yield), aswell as the continuing processesof individual isolation and socialpolarisation in our society all posenew challenges for those involvedin the building and planning process.The challenges posed by the needto rebuild cities in the former EastGermany is one example.

In the cities, working with thebuilding stock will continue toassume greater importance:basically, the city for the comingdecades is already built. At thesame time building culture isthreatened by the increasingprivatisation of public space,suburban development, neglectedinner-city neighbourhoods anda general belief that low buildingcosts are best value for money.

The protagonists developingthe built environment must becommitted to safeguarding publicinterests. Private sector clients,property owners and projectdevelopers need to assumeresponsibility during the planningand building phase to ensure ahigh standard of building culture.Planners must pursue a middleroad while balancing the justifiedinterests of the client and thepublic.

Planning and building remainmajor economic factors: more thanten percent of the gross nationalproduct is generated by the buil-ding sector, every 14th person inemployment works in the industry,more than half of all fixed assetinvestments are funnelled intothe building sector. For plannersthis means that the number ofcompetitions, viewed as a fairmethod of winning contracts,could be increased by extendingthe procedure to both the privatesector and areas beyond buildingdesign and construction. Thereare also opportunities to signifi-cantly increase services exportsin the international marketplace,which in turn would stimulateconstruction services exports.But that also will require improvedstandards of education forbuilders and planners. After all,the term “building culture”comprises “culture”, which canonly be guaranteed by a broadand general education.

Building culture is not somethingthat needs to be reinvented.But we must be more aware ofthe fact that the planning andbuilding trades involve processesand produce results that directlyaffect building culture. This heigh-tened awareness is necessary toensure that the quality of buildingculture is not inadvertently impac-ted. Germany not only has Europe’slargest construction output anda reputation for high quality con-struction technology, it also hassophisticated planning legislationand a highly developed compe-titions system, plus effectiveprogrammes to support heritageconservation and urban planning.As a result, the states and commu-nities within the federation pulltheir own weight. Chambers andassociations also make significantcontributions. Nevertheless,the interest of citizens, as those“affected” by building, and thecommitment of developers arealso crucial. It is the government’sjob to foster that commitmentand allow room for innovation.Which is not to say that buildingculture can be measured by themere quantity of projects or bythe volume of state subsidies.It rather must be anchored inpublic awareness through acontinuous dialogue betweenexperts and citizens, communitiesand owner-developers.

Summary and OpinionsBuilding culture is not just an issue for architects, engineers and urban planners,

it also concerns clients and citizens. Its quality results from the combination of usability,

commercial efficiency and design, from environmental, social and economic sustainability

as well as the equity of the processes that create it.


9 Why should we start paying attention to building culture?

Building culture is alwaystopical. But at the present momentit is of particular importancebecause it is at a crossroads wherevarious developments are posingnew questions and demanding newanswers. In our complex world,simple answers no longer suffice.What we need is cooperationbetween the various stakeholdersand a synopsis of all of theirconcerns and interests to achievegood results.

■ The question of the Europeancity’s future in a global economy is a challenge for government and citizens, one to which the standard of building culture in Germany must rise. In its role as client and legislator, which sets the terms and conditions, government – on the federal, state and local level – is a partner in this debate and must contribute its share to the discussion.

■ Agglomeration on defunct industrial sites, railway facilities, conversion sites or former harbours, as well as the safeguarding and improvement of public space – with its roads, squares and parks – are just two areas that demand greater attention when dealing with the concerns of building culture.

■ The upcoming enlargement of the European Union is placing new demands on cities and generating creative competitionbetween business centres.

■ Many EU countries already have the promotion of architecture and building culture written into law, or concrete development programmes. Germany can

profit from their experiences but first has to formulate its own objectives on the federal, state and local levels. Because building culture, the general built environment, concerns all citizens and therefore is of interest to most – a representative survey conducted by the Architecture and Building Culture Initiative showed the figure to be almost 3/4 of the population! The state needs to help ensure that everyone involved acts in a responsible manner.

10 What is needed to foster building culture?

Building culture is notsomething that can be achievedor botched by the implementationof an individual measure. Itsstandard is defined by the qualityof cooperation between thefederal, state and communitylevels, private sector clients andcitizens. But different measuresare needed to focus awarenesson the necessity for a highstandard of building culture.They must be applied to thegeneral public, public authoritiesand those who deal with planningand building on a professionalbasis. The recommendations andmeasures outlined here concernall of these groups. The scope ofthe recommendations will helpcreate a new awareness of thenecessity and quality of buildingculture – after all, more than80 percent of the populationwants building culture to assumea central role in the social lifeof the country.

7 What does building culture cost?

In the system of creatingour built environment, buildingculture is not a factor that can bemeasured by its cost. Spendingmore money on a particularbuilding measure does not neces-sarily guarantee a better result.The cumulative combination ofaesthetics, use, sustainabilityand a regulated commissioningprocedure ultimately contributesmore to the quality of the builtenvironment than the initial invest-ment sum. In this respect buildingculture is not a matter of cost,while sticking to its rules can be(eg. fee schedules). Buildingculture and profitability are notdiametrically opposed, they com-plement one another. In manycases, building culture adds valuethat improves economic efficiency.

8 How does building culture provide for the future?

Building culture alwaysmanifests itself locally, in a city,a village or cultural landscape.The standard of a state’s buildingculture makes an important contri-bution to its future in two ways:

■ a community is not an abstract assemblage of people and economic resources, it is tied to a place with which a society identifies. It is what enables a society to elevateindividuals and consumers to citizens.

■ providing for the future also requires a careful approach to finite resources and a model for sustainable building.

1 4

2 How can building culturebe measured?

Building culture is defined bythe qualities displayed

■ in the design of buildings and the built environment and their integration into public space

■ by their use■ in environmental, social and

economic sustainability and■ in the procedures and

regulations involving commissioning and production.

Building culture is achieved byintegrating and striking a balancebetween these different qualities,not by optimising just one of oneof them.

3 Why is building culture important?

Building culture concernseveryone who voluntarily or in-voluntarily comes into contact withthe built environment. In a denselypopulated country like Germanythe built environment inevitablyaffects all people, in a positive ornegative sense. Which is whythe quality of the built environment,from the individual housing unit topublic space, contributes to thephysical and psychological healthof an entire population. If oneaccepts that culture is an indis-pensible part of society that needsadequate financial support, thenbuilding culture, with its directaffect on each individual, mustbe viewed as equally importantand worth preserving.

It is precisely because we cannotescape from the built environmentlike we can a bad play or paintingthat makes the conscientiouseffort to maintain it so important.Both the public and private sectorsneed to strive to create a well-builtenvironment.

4 When is building culture achieved?

Building culture doesnot describe a goal that can beachieved in a single sweep.It is a continuous process of assi-milation with the built environment.It encompasses the most stunningfeats of architecture and construc-tion engineering, the achievementsof urban and open space planningas well as the more mundanerequirements of daily life and theapproach to our cultural heritage.

5 What aesthetic is associated with building culture?

It’s a mark of a democratic,pluralist society to embracedifferent aesthetic values. That isnot to say they should be random,but calls for a procedure by whichaesthetic decisions are grounded.The aim is not one new style orthe revival of old conventions. It israther to create a new diversity.The standard of building culturebenefits from the internationaldialogue within the EuropeanUnion and beyond and thisdialogue does not, as some mayfear, lead to a uniform aesthetic.Rather, it helps inform regionaldecision-making processes.

6 What are the effects of building culture?

Building and planning pro-fessions, which share professionalresponsibility for the built envi-ronment, make up an importantsegment of the economy:

■ A large portion of the national economy’s fixed capital investment lies in structures of all types, from the facilities of the transportation network to the single family home, from the town park to the town hall. It is the national economy’s responsibility to maintain them.

■ The quality of building culture ultimately generates demand for well-planned andwell-built cities, squares, bridges and buildings. Ultimately it affects the number of jobs in this sector.Quality is also a decisive factor in the chances to export planning services as well as related capital goods and construction services.

■ Work on the building stockinvolves a high number of contractors and sub-contractors and secures jobsand ensures the survival of mid-sized businesses at home.

■ The quality of building culture in cities and villages affects the well-being of a community, the readiness to invest in it as well as visitors’interest (tourism).

S U M M A R Y


A R C H I T E C T: A X E L S C H U LT E S C H A R L O T T E F R A N K , B E R L I NF E D E R A L C H A N C E L L E R Y O F F I C E 2 0 0 0 • B E R L I N


single households, particularly in densely populatedregions, has been on the rise for years. New typesof apartments and homes will have to be devised tocater to changing lifestyles. The increasing number ofsingle households and partnerships that may or maynot include children, as well as the number of peopleworking from home or telecommuting, all create newrequirements for the design of living spaces.

There are marked differences in demographicdevelopment between eastern and western Germany.While population figures in the western part of thecountry remain stable and in some regions are evengrowing, the states of the former East Germany aresuffering a population decline. That poses entirelynew questions on the future of eastern German cities,questions that in the midterm will also affect westerncities. At the same time the process of bringing theinfrastructure in the east up to western standardswill continue.

There is a growing trend towards individualisationin our society. Professional standing and income are nolonger the sole factors in determining living standards,the emphasis is on the pursuit of individual happinessrather than the well-being of society as a whole. Themajority of the population has numerous opportunitiesat its disposal to secure a specific type of lifestyle –a “generation of heirs” has provided many people withwealth they haven’t earned themselves. The amountof time devoted to adventure-seeking, shopping andrecreation is affecting the shape of the built environ-ment, as one can see from the surge in adventure parks,urban entertainment centres and recreation facilities.

The continuing trend towards ever bigger units intrade, manufacturing and financial markets is creating

and of interest to everyone: in what kind of city, in whatkind of environment, in what type of houses will wewant to be living in ten, twenty or thirty years time?What effects do certain built environments have onthe people in them? Which society builds its own town?What impact will future building and urban planninghave on the environment? Until now, only heritageconservation, an important aspect of building culture,has set an appropriate example.

Nevertheless, the enthusiastic response tobuilding culture-related activities in Germany confirmsthat there is keen interest among experts and thepublic. It shows a general willingness to play an activerole. To ensure a larger degree of success, however,individual activities have to be tied into a more focuseddrive. The federal government could play the part ofmediator and thereby help put building culture ona national and international agenda.

2 Social TendenciesChanges in our society, economy, technology

and government policies have direct consequencesfor planning and building.

Germany’s population is shrinking, wherebyimmigration will determine the degree to which thattrend continues. Estimates predict a population ofbetween 56.8 and 74.9 million in the year 2050,depending on whether no immigrants or an annual300,000 foreigners enter the country.

What’s certain is that the share of people movinghere from abroad – presently about 10 percent of thepopulation – will increase; it remains to be seen howthis will affect the social situation in cities, schools,kindergartens and work environments. Will culturaldiversity bring enrichment or social tension?

Germany has long been grappling with theproblem of an increasingly ageing population. Thepercentage of people over 60 will continue to growduring the first half of this century. The number ofelderly and persons needing care will also increasedramatically unless new drugs are found to halt theageing process. Meanwhile a low fertility rate meansfewer young people will be living here. Evidently therewill be more demand for old age facilities and less forkindergartens, schools and youth centres, which mayprompt decisions to convert the use of existing facilities.

At the same time the trend towards smallerfamilies and households continues. The number of

1 8

I N I T I A L S I T U AT I O N

In Britain the Prince of Wales has lobbied to changethe country’s architectural direction, building a “model”village and setting up an institute of architecture. TheCommission for Architecture and the Built Environment(CABE) is a government agency actively supportedby the British prime minister. And in Finland the “rightto a well-built environment” has even been written intothe constitution.

In Germany we find diverse activities on variouslevels that seek to promote building culture, but theyare mostly confined to specific regions. The spectrumranges from attractive exhibitions and “architectureand monument awareness days” to awards and com-petitions. While these events enjoy success there hasbeen no forum over the past years for an extensive,nationwide debate. And yet the questions are simple

1 Defining Building CultureBuilding culture is the creation of and interaction

with the built environment. In this sense it is not thesole domain of architects, planners or building tradeprofessionals, it is equally the concern of clients andall citizens. It is not just a matter of architecture, butof everything built. By singling out architecture oneoverlooks the fact that the built environment is madeup not only of buildings but also streets, squares, parksbridges and rubbish containers. The way a countryapproaches all of the elements in the built environmentis the yard stick by which to measure its building culture.Building culture is the built shape of human experience!

The quality of building culture is determinedby the degree to which all of society feels responsiblefor the built environment and its maintenance.A building culture’s standard is defined by the qualityof its design, use and functionality, its environmental,social and economic sustainability as well as by theprocedures and processes that lead to its creation.Quality does not depend on optimising one of theseelements, but rather on the balanced interplay of allcomponents. In this way, building culture does notdescribe a goal that can be achieved in one effort,but rather a continuous process of assimilation andinteraction with the built environment.

Other countries in the European Union have beenpromoting building culture for years now with differentemphases: The French Ministère de l’Equipement etdu Logement ordered a ban on certain building methodsas early as 1971 because they had proved inefficient.This amounted to massive state intervention in the builtenvironment’s production process. Major public projectslike the Centre Pompidou were attentively watched andbacked by incumbent presidents. These projectslaunched a new era of tourism in Paris. Despite theirhuge budgets they were extremely successful, boostingboth the national economy and the city’s attractiveness.

The Austrian government’s cultural departmentintroduced an extensive programme to promote archi-tecture in 1992. Sweden sponsored a Year of Architecturein 2001 that included a national architecture exhibition.

Analyses of the Initial Situation

Households-Forecast Abb 4

Conditions influencing building culture Abb.1

Arch

itekt

Fach-

Stadt-Landschafts- Bau-

Kunst

Handwerk-

Appr

entic

eship

Higher Technical College University /Technical UniversityCollege of Visual Arts

Individual and society

Prod

uctio

n of constructed environment

FinanceFunding Awarding

Building

Priva

tePu

blic

Individual

Social

Specialist

UrbanLandscape Construction

Trades

engineersplanners architects industry

industry

disposition

conventions

School

Profession

Vocational training

Handling of constructed enviro

nmen

t

Bui lding cul ture

Arch

itect

s

UpbringingSchool Environment Media

Cultu

re

City

Politics

Owne

r-dev

elop

er

tech

nolo

gyco

nditi

ons

Social structure conditionsconditions

Leve

l of

Econ

omic

Demographic factors TopographicalEnvironm

ental

legislationprograms regulations code regulatio

nsow

ner-d

evel

oper

sect

or

Public art

1

2

3

4

5 and more

Personsperhousehold

1900Germany

1950West Germany

1997 2015

100%

36%

32%

15%

12%

5%

37%

34%

14%

10%

5%

19%

25%

23%

16%

17%

7%

15%

17%

17%

44%


discount retailers that have sprung up on former farm-lands around them. But the preeminence of urbancentres in western states is also at risk. Residentialuse there can no longer be guaranteed due to highproperty prices and rental rates. The situation is com-pounded by the strain of increasing traffic. Many urbancentres have suffered a loss of appeal in recent years.Specialty consumer chains are difficult to integrate incentral areas. In many cases this creates widespreadvacancies and a general drop in the standard of shopsand services.

Changes in Public Space

It is vital to keep a close watch on the changestaking place in public space. While the state has aconstitutional obligation to provide equal living con-ditions for all its citizens, there is an apparent demandamong the affluent for “semi-public” urban spaces.If nothing is done to curb this, a social divide couldemerge whereby two-thirds of society reside in thecentre and as home-owners in the suburbs, whilea disadvantaged third is relegated to the dormitorycommunities of the 1960s and ‘70s or the run-downurban quarters of the late 19th century. Investing morein public spaces can be far better value for moneythan remedying the effects of a growing social divideat a later date.

Naturally new malls, amusement, recreation andshopping centres don’t just spring up by themselves,they come in response to an altered society, satisfyingdemands that have long been present.

But traditional public space can hardly competeagainst these new private-public spaces, no matterhow well designed or maintained it is, because of aninherent contradiction: a space is public because noone can be excluded from it. That is exactly whatlessens its appeal.

3 Urban Developments Over the years there’s been talk of the possible

“dissolution” of our cities. Until now the German citywas seen as a self-contained and mixed-use entitywith a clearly defined centre and a periphery gearedto that centre. Recently, however, we’ve seen inner-cities lose their preeminence as economic and culturalcentres. A new division of labour has evolved betweenthe centre and periphery as well as between individualcity districts. Even though centres continue to existand still serve as the identities of their regions, urbandevelopment today is marked by the emergence ofmore than one central region.

Growing Relevance of the Building Stock

The building stock is of major relevance to thefuture of urban development. More than 90 percentof the city of 2010 has already been built, primarily inconcentrated development, which makes more environ-mental sense than sprawl. This stock largely makes upa city’s identity, which is not defined by its biggest sub-urb or shopping mall, but rather by the attractivenessof its city centre, its buildings and monuments.

In this light, continued use of the building stockmakes both environmental and economic sense. Protec-tion of historic structures falls under the jurisdictionof heritage conservation, for individual structures aswell as entire ensembles. But it’s not just a questionof which structures are of “historic value,” it’s also amatter of offering residents as much permanence aspossible, so that they can feel “at home”.

Urban centres are boosted by the developmentof their stock. This particularly applies to the states ofthe former East Germany, where many town centres arefighting for their lives, unable to compete with malls and

2 0


as well as the resulting increase in pollution. Greaterhuman mobility also has far-reaching consequences forthe economy and people’s lifestyles. Political agendasare already being influenced by a heightened publicawareness of the environmental problems created byan industrial society. There is a strong trend towardsinner-city development and maximising use of thebuilding stock.

The German government’s transportation reportin 2000 predicted a 20 percent increase in passengertraffic and a 64 percent increase in freight traffic overthe next few years. It’s a scenario that not only callsfor more environmental protection measures but alsofor a high level of investment in the structures of thetransportation network. Greater emphasis must beplaced on their contribution to building culture, if oneworks on the premise that transportation structuresare as much a part of building culture as city buildings.

The high cost of building in Germany and down-turn in the construction market also demand a rethinkon the part of the construction industry. Demand willgrow for new, innovative and environmentally-friendlyproducts and production methods. The industry’ssurvival will depend on its ability to deliver.

Cost pressure is another challenge for planningprofessions and the construction industry – a resulton the one hand of markets opening up to Europe andbeyond, and on the other of consumers’ value-for-money attitude which defines quality only in terms oflowest cost. But what applies to the food industry,namely that good and healthy products come at a price,also applies to other sectors.

While this list of social and economic develop-ments is by no means complete, it clearly demonstratesthat much must change if things are to remain thesame. People have a basic desire for stability in theirenvironment. The task for architects, engineers, urbanplanners, landscape planners and the constructionindustry lies in balancing the necessary changes withthe desire for stability and identity.

an increasingly internationally oriented society and atthe same time eliminating people’s identification witha specific country, a place and its people. Globalisationwill continue and is not without consequences for socialand cultural relations. The free movement of investmentcapital is leading to a sense of detachment from theplace to which people themselves for the most partremain tied. Regional differences in building culturewill become increasingly hard to detect. It remains tobe seen whether this can be countered by the currentdemand for regionalism.

Parallel to individualisation and globalisation,we see an increase in the number of socially disad-vantaged. The gap is growing between rich and poor,between the employed and the jobless, between thewell and poorly trained, between the computer literateand those who have no experience of the necessarytechnology. Social polarisation is increasing. A polarisedjob market puts positions for the highly qualified onone end of the scale and low-income jobs for those withlittle or no training on the other – and little in between.The widening social rifts are also reflected in ourcities in the form of disadvantaged neighbourhoods;the differences that can already be determined betweencertain neighbourhoods will become more marked andlead to “reverse ghettoisation” in the form of gatedcommunities.

The economy and employment sector also faceconsiderable changes. Traditional industries and tradeshave declined or died out altogether. The employmentsector on the other hand has long been seeing aprocess of tertiarisation; the importance of the serviceindustry continues to grow. At the same time the totalnumber of people in employment is falling. Thesechanges affect companies’ location requirements aswell as their needs with regard to technical fittings,building design and infrastructure. The changes createa demand for more flexible building designs, whileabandoned facilities and spaces invite the considerationof new corporate building models inside the city insteadof outside its limits.

There have also been changes in recent yearsin social control mechanisms. New policy models thatbalance ideas of neo-liberal capitalism and welfarestate intervention are on the one hand forging closercooperation between political and business leaders(public-private partnership), and on the other giving riseto new, often informal ways for the public to articulateits concerns (eg. citizens action committees).

Our natural resources are threatened by thecontinued conversion of open or agricultural space forresidential, industrial, business and transportation uses,

Inner city problems in the mid-nineties(Abb.6)

Security / Social focal points

Competition from “green belt”

Design weaknesses

Mono structures(domination by commercial / tertiary uses)

Displacement of residential use (non-profitable uses)Poor accessibility for private motor traffic

Overburdening by stationary vehicles

Commercial weaknesses (lowering of standards,chain-store domination)

Competitive centers beyond city limits

Mainstation

➔

P

P

➔

➔

➔

➔

➔ ➔

➔

➔


fact that lowest cost is not the only value factor whenbuilding, that the quality of the work environment andenergy conservation in construction, operation andwaste disposal are all equally important. It remainsto be seen whether this hope is realistic. But perhapslocal governments can make a start by serving as models,also for commercial projects in the town center, withthe buildings they put up and rent out. All three measuresrequire a readiness to re-think standard practices.

Situation in Eastern German Cities

The situation in eastern German cities mustbe viewed separately. Some one million flats thereare vacant.

Since German unification the combination ofa labour drain, a dramatic drop in the fertility rateand insufficient land use policies has created urbancentres – with their historic building stock andcommunist-era housing complexes – which feel empty.Here too there is no single solution. Western Germancities will also face this dilemma in the mid-term.The magnitude of the task ahead – creating cities thatfunction despite a shrinking population – calls for afundamental re-think of planning strategies.

The German government is seeking solutionsto the problem by promoting urban development planswithin a competitive framework. These will then beused as a basis to foster urban redevelopment throughsubstantial state subsidies.

The problem lies in the fact that our society, oureconomy, our entire way of thinking has for the past50 years been geared to exponential growth. EasternGermany’s big chance lies in transcending this normand finding an exemplary way of using what it hasinherited while adapting to a drop in demand.

Government policy has begun to tackle thischallenge to stave off social disintegration. Several statesintroduced special programmes in the early 1990s, andthe federal government launched its own in 1999 aimedat assisting urban neighbourhoods with a particularneed for development. The programme takes an inte-grative approach that at once aims to achieve building,economic and social improvements.

Commercial Parks

On the outskirts, commercial parks present aspecial problem because they seldom adhere to anystandards of good design or building culture. Butcommunities need the corporate tax income, citizensthe jobs and shopping facilities. There is massive inter-community competition to secure developments fornew industrial or commercial estates. Since buildingculture is indivisible, this too is part of the equation.

To solve the problem it would be helpful if localgovernments agreed location and design standards forsuch developments. That would improve the quality ofthe buildings’ appearance as well as halt inter-commu-nity competition on this front. One can also hope thatthe corporate world will slowly grow more aware of the

2 2

Aspects of Furture-Oriented Planning

Evidence of cities’ dissolution can also be foundin the area of the social safety net, with a steady dropin the availability of cheap accommodation. Fewer flatsare tied in to the welfare system and there are virtuallyno new council housing projects.

The increasing polarisation of our society isalso reflected in the division of space in cities.It is being referred to as a development towardsa “tripartite city”, with:

1. the neighbourhoods inhabited by an integrated and affluent social group living in the type of comfort that can be found in other affluent district in cities across the world

2. the neighbourhoods for the German middle class and

3. the neighbourhoods for the long-term unemployed, foreigners and the poor, ie. the new urban lower class.

Residents of neighbourhoods plagued by socialills face isolation and exclusion from participation insocial life. Drug abuse, violent crime and vandalismcast their shadow on the community. Public spacesfall into neglect, entire districts feel inhospitable.These neighbourhoods are then stigmatised by theirnegative image.

Splintered Growth

There have long been complaints about theamount of space being claimed by commercial andresidential zones on the periphery. Urban expansioncan lead to land use segregation, creating an increas-ing number of units defined by single-use occupancy(“non-integrated locations”).

Sprawl and land use segregation all too oftenmake a private vehicle indispensible. Changing lifestylesand consumer habits, transformed production modelsand above all relatively low energy costs have all ledto an increase in traffic on the periphery, with all thedetrimental consequences. More choices in transpor-tation and cheaper mobility give rise to new regionalhubs of activity. The orientation towards a single urbancentre diminishes. A once clearly definable, urbanfabric becomes diffuse; often a motorway exit turns intoan orientation point. The periphery is marked by a lossof its sense of locality and by increasing conformitywhich in turn make it inter-changeable.

Further addition of residential and commercialzones on the periphery is neither environmentallysound nor necessary as long as cities and towns haveunused spaces (conversion sites, abandoned industrialfacilities, harbours or railway facilities) that can bedeveloped. One sensible way of encouraging this is byoffering financial assistance in the form of tax benefits(depreciation allowances) for inner-city redevelopmentprojects. But one will only be able to keep economicallyactive households in the city if

■ financial incentives are devised to offset higher inner-city property prices

■ an environment is created that is as comfortable for families as the suburbs

■ the buildings and properties offered for sale are as attractive as the terraced house in the suburbs, and finally

■ comprehensive plans are conceived together with neighbouring districts to prevent competition and poaching through special offers – such as low property prices and tax incentives.

Development of land use types Abb 8

Housing construction-public housing construction

City districts with particular need for renewal Abb11

Number of subsidized urban districts in the cities: 1 5 15

Kiel

Schwerin

Berlin

Magdeburg

Potsdam

Essen

DortmundLeipzig

ErfurtCologne

Nuremberg

Frankfurt / M.

Saarbrücken

Mannheim

Stuttgart

MunichFreiburg

Bremen

Düsseldorf

Rostock

Hamburg

Hanover

Cottbus

Dresden

ChemnitzBonn

Mainz

Wiesbaden

Halle /S.

Kassel

1950346

15

1997496

38

Settlement andtraffic spaceResidential space 100

1950 19951955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990

Dwellings (former West Germany )

Total

Type 1 Subsidy Program

Type 2 Subsidy Program

200

300

400

500

600thousands

Square meter per inhabitant (former West Germany)



Local governments, however, want to maintaintheir say in the shaping of the built environment.No one should be allowed to build where ever theywant. Protection of open spaces, integration into publictransport facilities and good design are among thepublic concerns that cities and local governmentswant to address in the planning process. On the otherhand, the success of private sector projects dependson a high degree of flexibility and the ability to quicklyrespond to changing market requirements. This callsfor solid urban planning strategies.

Local owner-developers are increasinglybeing replaced by anonymous developers or investorsand their capital investment interests. Because of theirfinancial muscle, they have a big say in the communityand the prescribed process of addressing its concerns.This has become particularly evident in recent yearsin the eastern states. Property owners based outsidethe region of their project identify less with its location.The built environment doesn't concern them if it doesn’tinterfere with their rental returns. These investorsdiffer in this regard with other major owner-developers,such as large public housing associations, who seetheir property as a long-term capital investment.To maintain the property’s value, considerationssuch as building quality, users’ long-term satisfactionwith their environment and social stability in theneighbourhood all play an important role. Propertyowners who live in the neighbourhood themselveshave an even greater stake in their environment andare more ready to commit themselves to mid or longterm investments in the neighbourhood.

There have also been changes in the relationshipbetween owner-developers and architects in recentyears. Space is put on the market even before a buil-ding’s completion. This is a disastrous development forbuilding culture, because there is a difference betweenplanning for an owner-developer who intends to usethe site once it’s finished and indifferent investors andtheir unknown end-users.

The investments of the federal, state and localgovernments will continue to be of major importancein the future. Another significant contribution toimproving Germany’s building culture could be madein the area of the transportation infrastructure.

Interest Groups in the Organisation of the Built Environment

Within the framework of the law, the organi-sation of the built environment involves businesses,local, state and federal governments and the public.These groups all pursue different interests.Businesses seek a return on their investments,local governments strive to secure the welfare oftheir communities (whereby there is a significantdifference between politicians and administrativeauthorities: political figures are geared to their voters,while administrative authorities follow their owncourse of logic.) Citizens seek to satisfy their ownneeds, though again one must differentiate betweencitizen action groups pursuing goals for the commongood and individuals aiming to make the most oftheir property rights.

Businesses and citizens must be integratedinto local governments’ plans for urban development.This is secured by a two-step process in the FederalBuilding Code. It is common practice for localgovernments to invite citizens to respond to theirplans without making use of possibilities for moreconstructive public participation. Often, public in-putis sought only after plans are completed. As thepublic becomes more confident in asserting its views,initiatives are formed by individual interest groups,resulting in long, drawn-out legal proceedings anddelays. The public should therefore be drawn intothe planning process at an early date. It is notconsensus on a measure contained in an alreadycompleted plan that is important, but rather thedevelopment and presentation of alternatives thattake address the public’s concerns. It is easier toawaken interest in the built environment if the publichas contributed to the decision-making process andis not just asked to respond to a done deal.

The interaction between local administrativeauthorities and policy-makers, owner-developers andcitizens has changed in recent years. Creation ofthe built environment follows numerous complicatednegotiations between financiers and the partiesrepresenting the interests of the public in Germany.There is now a new interaction between owner-developers, property owners, project developers,local authorities and politicians, and state and federaladministrative authorities.

2 4


In some cases local authorities are ableto assert their own development objectives overthose of the owner-developer during the processof reviewing building code compliance for buildingpermission. This means there is some scope forauthorities to influence the respective buildings’design.

Since the early 1970s, a special instrumenthas been in place to aid urban restoration. Existing,historic buildings are preserved and maintained andnot torn down to make room for new developments,as used to be the case. The approach is moreresidence use oriented and pays heed to the urbansynergy that has developed over the course of time.Special federal and state investment aid programmesare set aside for the rejuvenation and developmentof cities and local communities.

Apart from these direct ways of shapingthe urban matrix through spatial planning, the statealso influences the quality of building culture throughits tax laws and opportunities for tax write-offs.Capital flow is guided in an indirect way, stronglyinfluencing construction – as investments in theeastern German states have shown. Excess capacityin new housing developments, sprawling commercialparks and shopping centres in non-integratedlocations could have been at least partly preventedthrough different legislatorial measures.

4 Planning and the Building ProcessThe German constitution guarantees the right to

property and the freedom to build on it as one wishesto the extent that plans are compatible with the respon-sibility towards society that comes with the ownershipof property. The physical shape of the built environmentin Germany is the result of a play of forces between thepolitical and administrative levels, associations andparties, citizens and private business. In Germany’sfederal system, the different levels of government paytheir respective contributions.

Legal Terms and Conditions

The process of shaping the built environmentfollows legal rules addressing both public and privatesector interests. On the national level the FederalBuilding Code sets the terms and conditions for regu-lated urban development in cities and towns. Buildingon the state level is regulated by state by laws. On thelocal government level, shaping the built environment inall of some 14,000 communities in Germany is ultimatelycarried out individually, with institutionalised citizenparticipation. In particular it is zoning and building lawsthat regulate and direct the spatial and structural devel-opment of a town, neighbourhood or specific project site.

Planning levels in Germany Abb12

Federal Government General responsibilityGuiding concepts • basic principlesRegional planning law • political regional planning guidelinesUrban and rural planning code • Federal land utilization ordinance

States Principles and objectives of the Statese.g. central locations • development axes • area categories • suitable areasRegional planning laws • Regional planning and development programs and schemesRegional building ordinances

Municipalities Municipal development planning and urban land-use planningBasics of land use for entire municipal areas in land-use plans (preparatory urban land-use planning)Legally binding decisions for urban development ordinance in land-use plans (binding urban land-use planning)

Private and public investors for individual projectsPlanning of actual construction projects (construction plan) • building construction

Coordination with the partly integrated planning (landscape planning) and sectional planning(e.g. transport and traffic, agriculture, water resourcemanagement) at the respective level

Cooperation between the Federal Government and the Federal States

➔ ➔

➔

➔

Standards Check Potential / aims of the municipalities

➔ ➔

Standards Check Überprüfen Approval Potential / aims of the regions

➔ ➔

➔

➔

➔

➔

➔

➔

➔

➔

➔

➔

Standards Check Approval Potential / aims of the regions➔➔

➔

➔➔

Planning regions – Regional planning(detailed) aims for the regions in regional development plans


If the public sector fails to express itself in theshape of buildings it loses a key feature of its imageas a state that looks after its citizens. In a democracy,a state that commissions a building is not indulgingan absolutism; it is fulfilling a duty to its citizens,who are the state!

Economic Slowdown:A Chance for the Building Sector

The building boom that came in the wake ofGerman unification has steadily declined. This develop-ment is reflected in the construction industry’s salesslump. In view of the unfavourable demographicconditions it is unlikely that building will ever regainits former position in the national economy.

The slowdown in the building sector does, however,present the chance to give greater thought to the qualityof building products and procedures. Higher qualitystandards are the way out of the crisis. This at the sametime will foster the building sector’s awareness of itsresponsibility towards building culture.

Today more than half of all expenditure onbuilding is funnelled into the stock. This share canand will be increased. Work on the stock is employ-ment-intensive and contributes to the preservationand maintenance of the built environment. Thebuilding trade generates large amounts of waste,consumes a lot of energy and emits carbon dioxide.There is considerable potential for saving andrecycling measures that would provide the chanceto make sustainability an integral feature of thebuilding sector. A new energy conservation ordinancemakes allowance for this.

In the interest of promoting building culture,federal, state and local authorities are called on toset an example and act as role models. It is their dutyperform in the best public interest. That is why publicowner-developers are obliged to pursue cost andenergy effectiveness at the same time as they workto ensure good design, efficient procedures, use andsustainability of the built environment.

This responsibility has always rested in thehands of the public sector – the “town hall” or“parliament” have always been part of a country’s orcommunity’s identity. Berlin’s new government buildingshave been largely received with national and inter-national acclaim. The federal government furthermorehas sought to lead by example in pledging to carryout competitions for all appropriate developments,and by defining standards for its own projects in a“Guide to Sustainable Building”.

Nevertheless, the public sector faces newcomplexities. For one, commitment to a comprehensiveapproach to building culture maintenance must bedemonstrated across the board, not just in the appli-cation of measures in the public eye. In addition,budget cuts mean public clients must ensure efficientplanning by their building authorities. They must safe-guard public interests and act as a contact point forprivate developers and planners. The role of owner-developer, particularly in the public sector, comes witha high degree of responsibility.

2 6


ground it is in the public interest to make sure thatprivate projects are developed in adherence to general,binding regulations and in transparent proceduresthat the public can follow. After all, privately developedprojects affect the people around them as much asany other, and are therefore of interest to the public.

Hence it is in the interest of private sectorowner-developers themselves to conduct competitionsfor the planning of major projects according to Germancompetitions regulations. Apart from generating ahigher standard of planning, this will also improvesocial acceptance, the economic viability and long-term usability of building measures.

In any case, more attention must be paid tothe potential for synergy between building quality andcost effectiveness. It is wrong to take a short-termview and value initial capital cost as more importantthan whole-life cost. What’s needed is a view of thelarger picture that includes the whole-life costs andperformance of a building.

Public Sector Owner-Developers

The lion’s share of public sector expenditureon building is claimed by local governments.That means most public projects are developed inpeople’s direct, daily realm of experience. Federaland state projects, on the other hand, (eg. the buildingsto house parliament and government in Berlin) domore to grab national and international attention.Thus the decisions of public owner-developers at alllevels are of great importance.

5 Owner-Developers and the Building Trade The production of the built environment is a

significant factor in the economy, employment sectorand in the creation of value. More than 10 percent ofthe gross national product is generated by building-related industries. About one in 14 workers is employedin the building sector, more than half of all fixedinvestments are funnelled into building measures.While building culture is judged by the quality ofbuilding and not the sums invested in it, this quantitiveevaluation is a clear indication of the influence owner-developers and building companies have and the highdegree of responsibility this bestows on them.

Private Sector Owner-Developers

About eight times as much money is investedby the private sector as by the public sector in con-struction. In this light, private owner-developerscontribute significantly in both a positive and negativesense to the production of the built environment.

While private owner-developers have the freedomto build as they like, they hold a social responsibilitywith regard to building culture. But one can not speakof “the” owner-developer per se. Against this back-

No. of people employed by construction authorities 16

Gross fixed investments in prices from 1995 Abb13

100

200

300

400

500

1991 20001992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999

Totalbillion DM

Construction engineering

Civil engineering

Residential buildings

1991 1999

thousand

10

40

60

80

1995

70

50

30

20

Federal GovernmentStatesSpecial purposelocal authority associationsMunicipalities /Local government associationsTotal

billion DM 100 200 300 400 500

2000

1995

1991

FederalGovernmentStatesLocalauthoritiesSocial securityPrivateTotal

Investment total of private and

public owner-developers Abb14

Construction trade turnover

in main construction industry Abb17

billionDM

50

100

150

200

1995 20011996 1997 1998 1999 2000


planners registered in Germany’s chambers. Thatmarks a record. Almost two thirds of the architectsand planners starting out are university graduates.Compared to other freelance professions women makeup a relatively small proportion, with 19.6 percent.But the number of women working as architects andtown planners is steadily rising; today women make upalmost half the total number of students and graduates.

On the other hand some 8,000 architects, land-scapers, interior designers and urban and regionalplanners are registered as unemployed. This too is arecord. There will be no relief on the job market aslong as the slowdown in the building trade continues .

The difficult economic situation has com-pounded the problems faced by architecture practices.A steady and at times even growing number ofarchitects are competing for fewer projects whilebuilding prices drop. The relatively high density ofarchitects compared to other EU countries makesthe situation more acute. At the same time thepressure on the entire sector is mounting becauseEuropean regulations for architectural work are notuniform. As Europe unites there is increasing pressureto devise a state-regulated fee table.

Architecture remains a popular subject despitethe poor career outlook. The number of graduatesreached a highpoint in 1999. There are twice as manyrecent architecture graduates looking for work as thejob market can absorb.

The career perspectives are mostly the same forthe disciplines of interior design, landscape architectureand urban planning. Despite the key role these pro-fessions play in the process of evaluating bids andawarding contracts, the fall in construction output –compounded by a drop in public sector demand – meansthat a sufficient number of jobs can only be madeavailable if new fields of specialisation are developed.

2 8


6 Planning-Related ProfessionsContrary to other European countries, the job

descriptions ‘“architect”,’‘interior designer”, “gardenand landscape architect”, “urban architect/townplanner” as well as “consulting engineer” are protectedby state laws governing the activities of architectsand engineers and can only be used by professionalsregistered in the respective state chambers. Proof ofa degree in the fields of architecture, interior design,landscaping, regional planning or civil engineer froma German university or polytechnic is a requirement.Two to three years practical experience are alsonecessary. Under European Union guidelines that pro-vide for the mutual recognition of architecture degreesfrom universities in the EU, architects from any EUcountry can register in a state chamber in Germanyunder the same conditions as their German colleagues.

State laws describe the architect’s job as“design, technical, economic, social and environmentalplanning”. Engineers are aiming to adopt an “engineers’oath” modeled on the Hippocratic oath taken bystudents receiving a medical degree that sets forthan ethical code for the profession.

In all building and planning-related disciplines,professionals see themselves as trustees of theclient who guarantee the greatest possible degreeof expertise and technical, economic and sustainablequality in construction – be it a building, a work ofengineering, a transport facility, an interior design,a planning measure or open space plan.

This role remains viable today even if problemscrop up in some areas for various reasons: the imageof a profession which has an obligation both to thegeneral public and the client is mirrored in the endresult of a building, a plan, a piece of landscape archi-tecture, a work of civil engineering. All of these havean impact on the individual’s immediate environment.

Because their work has an impact on society,planners’ fees are legally laid down in a fee schedulefor architects and engineers (HOAI). It aims to ensurepayment for independent consultations and is thusalso a way of ensuring quality.

Architects, Interior Designers, Town and Regional Planners, Landscape Architects

In early 2001, there were 109,461 architects,interior designers, landscape architects and town

The spectrum of the building sector’s contributionto higher quality standards stretches from the develop-ment, production and implementation of environmentallysound materials and designs to innovative constructionmethods and improvements in trade workers’ skills allthe way to closer cooperation.

In the triangle made up of owner-developer,construction industry and planner, each group isdependent on the other. And each should see thatit can achieve more as part of an integrated team.The object is not to reduce individual accountabilityor encourage nepotism, it is to coordinate specificareas of expertise in the interest of a product thatsatisfies everyone, including the general public.

Membership of the

Federal Chamber of Architects Abb 19

thousand

20

60

80

100

1989 20011991 1993 1995 1997 1999

40

The public has the sense that the increasingnumber of architects is contributing to rising costs andplanning delays because architects are “seeking tobuild monuments”, and major companies and investorsmaintain that architects understand too little aboutconstruction and facility management, cost and timescheduling. Investors and major developers who com-plain about architects’ alleged lack of competence tendto buy the services of a general contractor becausethey often don’t trust architects to get the work done.This affects architects’ image. But generally the assess-ment improves after individual parties actually workwith architects.

The need for review and innovation is frequentlyvoiced in the discussion about the quality of planningand its services. Currently the problems lie in theinability of small practices to compete in a greaterregional and international arena, in insufficient marke-ting and in university courses that are too geared toproducing “artistic architects”.

It is likely that further specialisations willemerge from the all-inclusive professional profile of“architect” – general planners, project managers,consultants for investors, project developers, generalcontractors and owner-occupants, energy consul-tants, heritage facility consultants, web designersor business consultants.

Civil engineers and architects need to widentheir skills to keep up with technological developments.Complex technical master plans for buildings requirefacility management tasks which can also be carriedout by architects.

Beyond technical specialisation it would alsobe conceivable and desirable to introduce positionsthat reflect the public nature of the built environment;the federal, state and local governments could appoint

Professions within the

Federal Chamber of Architects Abb20

Urban planners 2,6%Interior designers 4,5%

Landscape architects 5%

Construction engineering architects 87,9%


A R C H I T E C T: S O M M E R L A D – H A A S E – K U H L I , G I E S S E NG E R M A N G A R D E N S H O W 2 0 0 1 • P O T S D A M • P Y R A M I D G A R D E N


Competitions System

The competitions system as a means ofselecting the most suitable plan for a buildingmeasure has proved effective in Germany for manyyears; for architects it has been standard proceduresince the first competition rules were devised(and subsequently criticised) in 1867. The systemhas changed since 1993 to be brought into com-pliance with EU regulations.

Despite all the problems resulting from thenew European-wide guidelines and regulations,competitive tendering is still the fairest procedure forawarding a planning or construction contract becauseit is based on a comparison of qualitative solutions,not costs. It’s the product that is chosen, not theperson behind it.

One cannot however generalise and say thatthis procedure is better because it guarantees archi-tectural quality. Examples from abroad and the entireprivate sector in Germany, which largely avoids thesystem, show that the quality of architecture is notcontingent on the bidding procedure. The highlypraised Netherlands, for example, only seldom carriesout competitions, and while far more are held inFrance than in Germany, there is nothing to indicatethat they lead to a better standard of architecture.

In Germany the procedure is regulated bythe contracting rules for freelance services (VOF).In addition, the Ministry for Transportation, Buildingand Housing has committed itself to public biddingfor the execution of all of its building projects.

entirely responsible for these facilities, includingtheir design aspects. So it is not a division of respon-sibilities between design and statics that differentiatesarchitects and engineers: building is an indivisibleart and both sides are fully responsible for ensuringholistic quality.

It is this holistic approach to building culturethat is lacking – particularly in the awareness of thoseinvolved in creating it. It is not a failure to recognisethe enormous effort on the part of the federal, stateand local governments – from the construction of newroads and facilities in the former East German statesto the preservation of the historic stock – or that withtheir proposed “engineers’ oath” they are committingthemselves in a very special way. The challenge forthem lies in finding a creative way of using the majorinnovations in materials and constructions.

The German Ministry for Transportation, Buildingand Housing and the consulting engineers’ associationswant their technical projects to contribute to animprovement in building culture. For proof of theirsignificant contribution to building culture one needonly look to the major road work undertaken in theeastern states to find a series of good examples;from good design of road space and related structuresand facilities, to the successful integration of thetransportation network into the human environmentand landscape (unfortunately the same largely doesnot apply to the new rail routes). Integrated projectteam work between road planners, town planners,landscape architects, construction engineers,soil experts and architects is par for the course.This can only be further improved on by fosteringcreative competition. That can be done by increasingcompetitive tendering or similar procedures on alllevels of government, though naturally purely cost-driven competition should be avoided.

Construction engineers exert a considerableinfluence on technical developments, because theyare the ones who plan and construct buildings, civilengineering works and transport facilities and conductquality and safety controls.

Since most of the major infrastructure workin Germany will soon be completed, infrastructuremaintenance will become increasingly important in thefuture. The approach to old buildings and stock main-tenance contribute significantly to building culture andtestifies to the desire to shape the urban environment.Public sector owner-developers have a particularlyimportant role to play here, though devising a carefulway of dealing with the stock is as difficult and complexas the construction of new buildings on empty land.

3 2


The number of students enrolling in the subjectis dropping. Civil engineering lacks the appeal ofarchitecture – despite excellent career and incomeopportunities. University entrants are put off by thewidely held view that the field dull and involves“too much maths”. But these are unjustified biases.To be attractive to the youth of today, a practical careerhas to have one of two qualities – it needs to be eithercreative or high-tech-oriented. Civil engineering offerswhat few professions can, namely both. The creativepowers required of an architect are no less than thoseneeded by an engineer drawing on a backgroundof natural science and technology. Knowledge andintuition are equally required in civil engineering.

Until now the profession’s creative potential hasnot been fully recognised, and yet is exactly whatmakes it relevant to building culture. Civil engineerswill be unable to view themselves as part of the buildingculture equation as long as the jobs they perform aredismissed as merely “calculating measurements” etc.Clients – particularly in the public sector, which com-missions nearly all transportation network structures –share the responsibility of ensuring that engineers’work is understood as part of the built environmentand a valued component of building culture.

Works of engineering make up a much biggerpart of our built environment than the public normallyrealises, spanning the entire transportation network,including bridges, but also to a large extent thetechnical structures of industry, and utility and wastemanagement facilities. Civil engineers are alone and

commissioners for building culture whose job itwould be to review all decisions pertaining to the builtenvironment. Experienced architects could also workin the realm of consumer protection and thus contributeto an improvement in overall quality, particularly withregard to small commercial and housing projects.

But the question as to whether architects will stillbe able to view themselves as generalists or whetherthe profession will be divided up into specialists will notbe clearly answered in the future either, because it'sthe best “generalist” who makes the best “specialist”.

Civil Engineers

Civil engineers today operate in a wide profes-sional spectrum ranging from the construction industryto consulting engineering firms; the job description isextremely complex and versatile. It goes far beyond thestill widely held view of a mere partner to the architect.Thus the number of people registered with the chamberof engineers represents just a portion of those actuallyworking in the field.

Both the professional situation and the diffi-culties with regard to building culture are different forengineers than the situation faced by architects andassociated disciplines. For one, engineering graduatesdon’t just have any problems finding a job, it’s quitethe opposite – professional organisations and consul-ting engineers are actually concerned about a lackof fresh talent.

Contract awarding procedures Abb 23

Areas of responsibility for consultant engineers Abb

Membership of Federal Chambers of Engineers Abb

1991 2000

thousand

5

15

25

35

1995

Existing members

Voluntary members

Obligatory members

Total members

30

20

10

40

European

Economic AreaService directive 92 / 50 EEC

Federal Republic

of GermanyPrinciples and guidelines for competitions in the area ofspatial planning, urban development, and construction GRW 1995

Professional

agreementContracting regulation forprofessional services, VOF

open procedure

non-open procedure

negotiatio

n procedure

competition

Info

rmat

ion

syste

msthe construction process management consultancyCo

mm

unic

atio

nte

chnology

Systems management in

Technical/comm

ercial

Technical equipment

Work safety Water Waste-water RefuseGeo-te

chnol

ogy

Self-

resp

onsibility Independence

High

level of profession al qualificat

ion

Trus

tees

Core responsibilitiesConsultant engineers

Proj

ect p

lann

ing

Stru

ctu

ral engineering Project management Construction physics

SurveyingTraffic and transport Urban land-use planning Fire protectio

n

Thermal

insu

latio

nS

ound

insu

latio

n

Eco audit facility management

Riskm

anag

emen

t


orders in the building and fixtures industry, whichgreatly exceed the initial planner’s fee and securejobs in the construction and equipment industries.That is why there is great interest in this issue inGermany’s building sector, whose share in constructionservices in the European market doubled between1990 and 2000 to 4.8 billion marks (2.4 billion euros).These companies are seeking to use their subsidiariesto expand in southern and eastern Europe and beyond,so that similar interests apply there.

Because German technical standards areacknowledged as high, German companies havegood chances in the expanding markets of East andSoutheast Asia, such as China, where huge turnoveris expected for the construction industry in thecoming years. If a given country is unable to procurea particular product or service at home, it almost al-ways turns to the country from which it commissionedthe planner of the respective project.

It’s the same principal that moves the Germangovernment to promote and subsidise projects like thehigh-speed Transrapid magnetic railway abroad, orspend several hundred million marks on research in theGerman automobile industry – in both cases the goal isto secure investments and jobs at home. Only when theconstruction industry re-thinks its strategies will therebe some chance of expanding the exports of servicesbrought by architects, planners and engineers.

Arguments in favour of political support apartfrom subsidies or study contracts could be backed byan analysis of foreign building and planning contractswhich determined the percentage of investment thatfalls to German contractors.

Germany can learn from the examples set byBritain and the Netherlands. By promoting itself as acountry whose creativity and competence are reflectedin excellent planning and construction services, it iscontributing to an image that benefits far more thanjust the building sector.

Education

All planning professions require a degree inarchitecture, interior design, landscape architecture,urban planning or civil engineering from a university,polytechnic or academy of arts. Normally studentsare expected to gain practical work experience beforeor during their studies.

The number of students enrolled in planning-related disciplines remains high, as an overview offive-year periods shows.

Services Exports

There is no question that those European Unionmembers pursuing an active policy on architecture areseeking to promote exports and boost their economicpower. A comparative study by the German Chamberof Architects shows that they are evidently enjoyingsuccess.

Given the predictions for future constructionoutput and the current difficulties German architectsface in procuring contracts, it is only understandablethat large practices in particular are looking to theinternational market. Two areas can be distinguishedhere, the European domestic market and and themarkets of large, expanding countries, above all inSouth and East Asia.

On the European level, international offers forplanning and building contracts are published in theEU Official Journal according to contract-awardingguidelines. But only between 0.68 and 2 percent go tonon-German companies. That appears minimal, but it’srelativised by the weight of such deals: when thedesign for the German parliament (Reichstag) waswon by a British architect in competition, the valuein terms of its public impact was far greater thanpercentages can express.

German architects’ complaints about theexport market pertain primarily to Europe and aperceived discrimination in favour of national com-petitors. That is by nature difficult to verify. In any caseone must keep in mind that there are big differencesin the methods of competitions preferred by individualnations: something is not necessarily discriminationjust because it’s different.

With regard to services exports outside Europe,German architects and planners complain of a lack ofgovernment support. The economic importance of servicesexports in this sector should not be ignored. Planningand building contracts normally generate follow-up

3 4


and therefore also unfair, counteracting the wholeintention in the first place.

The general question should also be askedwhether the private sector should make more use ofthe competitions system, until now merely a voluntaryoption. An owner-developer’s right to the architect ofhis or her choice is in line with the public interest tobe presented with a choice of solutions for buildingsin the public realm. Even investors reject the frequentlyvoiced concern that competitions delay the procedureand are expensive. A more detailed study on this andmaybe even the development of new competitive pro-cedures for private investors would be useful.

It would be worth investigating whether thesector incorporating road, railway and bridge con-struction should also be made to submit to comparablecriteria. It is an open question whether “open” com-petition is the most suitable procedure for every projector whether there are other appropriate competitiveprocedures. A comprehensive understanding ofbuilding culture calls for the highest possible standardof planning on all public sector projects and theappropriate procedure.

Competitions are still the way most plannerswin their contracts. But the fairness of competitionshas been affected by two related developments.First of all, opening them up to European-wide com-petition often results in a huge number of participantswhich makes it impossible to give adequate consi-deration to each entry. In some cases the practiceof lot-drawing is used to reduce the number of candi-dates to a manageable size. Either way, a jury’sdecision often cannot do justice to the creativity ofthe plans submitted.

The spectacular triumphs over the subtle.We should at least discuss whether European-widebidding does not contravene the motivation for a unitedEurope because it inevitably promotes architecture’sinternationalisation instead of regionalism. We’re notseeking nationalisation, but European regionalism.

A second problem lies in the fact that whilethe number of architects increases, the number ofcompetitions they can enter is dropping. The numberof applicants can be so large as to be “unwieldy”

Export of architectural services

in the year 2000* Abb 26

* Federal Chamber of Architects estimate

Europe-wide calls for tenders according to awarding procedureAbb 24

700

1400

Austria

BelgiumGerm

anyDenmark

Spain

Finland

France

Britain

Greece

Ireland

Iceland

Italy

LuxembourgNeth

erlands

Norway

Portugal

Sweden

1300

1200

1100

1000

900

800

600

500

400

300

200

100

1500

Architectural competition

Public procedure

Non-open procedure

Negotiations procedure

thousand

20

120

1990 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000

100

300

400

600

200

1991 1992 1993 1994 1995

Introduction 92 / 50 EEC

100

80

60

40

500

Number of Competitions

Number of membersChamber of Architects

20% 10% 7% 2%

AustriaBritain France Germany

➔ ➔ ➔ ➔

Export quota for architectural services

Competitions in relation to number

of chamber members Abb 25


winter semester92 / 93

thousand

10

20

30

40

50

Architecture

Civil engineering

Interior design

Landscape design

Spatial planning



60

point of view it is a Frankfurt museum, not a “German”one . While the city pays for its 23 employees, exhibitionsmust be financed entirely by outside resources.The standard implied by the museum’s name cannotbe met under these circumstances, even though thecurrent directors are serious about their responsibilities,particularly with regard to awakening the interest ofchildren and young people.

Nor does the Bauhaus Foundation in Dessaufulfill the function of a national “collection, exhibitionand information centre”. The Danish Institute ofArchitecture, supported by three ministries, is a goodexample of what a federal agency can achieve.It incorporates:

■ the National Centre for Building Documentation

■ the National Collection of Architectural Drawings

■ the Danish Centre for Architecture

■ the Danish Town Planning Institute

■ Danish architecture magazines

It’s not the details that are important in thisexample, which are partly based on other preconditions(central government). It is the integrated, complexapproach. Germany’s chance – reflected in theArchitecture and Building Culture Initiative – lies inincorporating the engineering sector to span theentire sphere of the built environment.

Media

Professional architectural criticism mediatesbetween the public and the built environment anddetermines the extent to which issues of buildingculture are covered by the press, radio and television.All national dailies and weeklies have devoted spaceto architecture topics in the past decades, a fewregional papers also cover the issue. The difficulty intrying to generate a conscious approach to dealingwith the built environment lies in the fact that few ofthe protagonists are interested in a critical publicdebate – neither owner-developers nor planningauthorities, architects or engineers like to be targetsof criticism. Furthermore, it is a reciprocal process;regular, qualified criticism that is a respectedelement of the cultural establishment fuels its demand.But only demand will anchor it into the culturalestablishment.

Generally one can say that the institutions’meagre budgets and minimal media coverage testifyto building culture’s low standing in our society.This situation can only be improved by an integrated,comprehensive approach on all levels.

7 Building Culture and the PublicThe previous chapters have repeatedly pointed

out the necessity of boosting public interest in buildingculture to fulfill society’s demand for a well-built environ-ment. This task is partly carried out by the chambersand associations. The public sector also plays a role,both as builder as well as legislator responsible for therules (see chapter 9). A third partner are the institutionswho mediate between the public and the experts.

Museums and Institutions

A number of different institutions are involvedin improving and raising awareness of building culture.But unlike other European neighbours, Germany hasno umbrella institution on the federal level.

The following institutes are devoted to 20th centuryarchitecture.

■ the German Museum of Architecturein Frankfurt /Main

■ the Bauhaus Archive Museum of Design in Berlin (limited to the historical significance of work created in the Bauhaus workshop)

■ the Foundation Bauhaus in Dessau (not a museum per se, but an exhibition of the buildings themselves)

■ the Hohenhof, Museum of the Hagen Impulse, also limited in focus to the historical context

■ the Museum of Architecture at Munich’s Technical University with the Schwaben Architecture Museum in Augsburg

In addition there are several local architecture centres,most of them set up on the initiative of architects’ asso-ciations, which see themselves as centres for discussionof architecture-related questions:

■ the German Architecture Centre (DAZ) in Berlin,

■ the Architecture Centre in Kassel’s KulturBahnhof

■ the Architektur Centrum (AC) in Hamburg.

These are all places for discussion and show smallcompetitions or other exhibitions but do not havetheir own collections and do not define themselvesas museums.

The German Museum of Architecture (DAM) inFrankfurt was established in 1984 and is the best knowninstitution in Germany, even though from a financing

3 6


to a better qualification of architects are only super-ficially taught at the country’s universities, if at all.A specification linked to an occupational title, as isthe practice of physicians, is another suggestion.With view to the increasing importance of buildingin the stock, this could include specialisations pertinentto heritage conservation.

The key complaints, particularly from architects,that have been voiced for years with regard touniversity studies are:

■ the courses take too long

■ the courses do not adequately qualify students for the practical aspects of the job

■ the balance between “generalists” and “specialists” is not right.

There is no definitive answer to the questionsthese points raise. But generally it is clear that achange is required in the method here, to movebeyond the cultivation of “artists” working by andfor themselves. The ability to work within a team isessential in the professional world and could betrained far more during university than is currentlythe case. That in turn would also foster respect forother professions and diminish architects’ sense ofsuperiority. Integrated team projects and the intro-duction of professorial chairs for specific specialisedfields, such as construction management, wouldalso help.

Another area is further education for establishedarchitects and civil engineers. Because only fewuniversities offer such programmes, the chambershave stepped in to provide them. A research projectcommissioned by the Ministry for Transportation,Building and Housing on “Education and furthereducation for architects, engineers and urban plannerson economic and environmentally-friendly building”also points out that many findings which could lead

Students according to subject Abb 27


9 Supporting Building CultureBuilding culture is not something that was inven-

ted by the Architecture and Building Culture Intitiativein the year 2000. The architects’ chambers, forexample, have its promotion enshrined in their statues.But one should not view “support” as it is defined herein terms solely of subsidies, prizes or public events:the quality of a country’s building culture is the combinedresult of the production of the built environment andthe approach taken towards it. There are today anumber of groups contributing to heightened publicawareness and an improvement in the building process,from private foundations and individual citizens,professional organisations and voluntary trade asso-ciations, to local, state and the federal governments.But there are shortcomings, and it is this report’s jobto point them out.

A mere list of the factors making up “supportfor building culture” would be of little use becausebuilding culture it is hard to measure – it includes acompetition prize, a journalistic criticism, a rule ofprocedure, a citizens’ action group to save a building,a competition or a law. The following points seek tohighlight the singular efforts being made to promotebuilding culture in the public awareness.

One thing worth noting first: through its FederalBuilding Code and Regional Planning Act, town planningassistance programmes and assistance in the field ofheritage conservation, the federal government has setthe terms and conditions by which – in combinationwith state regulations and assistance programmes,concrete local planning measures and private initiative(eg. by foundations) – Germany has achieved a compa-ratively high standard of planning and construction.The quality of construction, urban design, works ofengineering and design and execution of individualbuildings should not be belittled. But the spectrum ofnational support is not evident to the public. This becomesparticularly clear through international comparisons.This may be why complaints are arising from manyquarters. Greater coordination in this area is needed todefine the goals, promote cooperation and define inter-national aims (such as expanding exports). There is noequivalent post for the area of building culture to that ofthe federal commissioner for cultural and media affairs.

The Ministry for Transportation, Building andHousing has recognised this shortcoming. Which iswhy, and this appears to be the most important measurewith regard to the promotion of building culture,

It is becoming increasingly important to back up statemeasures with private initiatives that involve the publicand various associations.

While both the population and capacity for publicinvestment is shrinking, the size of the building stockis growing – and with it, so too are the tasks involvedin maintenance. It is therefore no coincidence thatthere is debate on which facilities should be protectedand listed as heritage sites.

In the interest of maintaining public support forheritage conservation, the quality of a facility must berepeatedly reviewed. It’s about inner-city developmentand striking a balance between the old and the new,between conservation and rejuvenation. This too isan important feature of building culture.

3 8


8 Heritage ConservationHeritage conservation is certainly the one aspect

of building culture that is most recognised by the public.Historic buildings are the pride of every community.It is not just the part they play in creating an emotionalsense of “home” that makes them so important – theyare increasingly regarded as stable factors in anever-changing and uncertain world. Historic structuresare a unique and essential part of a community'sidentity and attractiveness. Diverse measures arein place to ensure they are adequately protected.

Heritage conservation and maintenance area state responsibility regulated by state laws.Protecting and maintaining Germany’s cultural heritagehas always been a focal point of federal cultural policy.From 1991 to 2000, various federal programmesfunnelled about 3.2 billion marks (3 billion marks forthe eastern states) into the preservation of heritagefacilities. In the programme “Nationale wertvolleKulturdenkmäler” (“Nationally Valuable HeritageFacilities”) between 1950 and 2000, for example,438 heritage facilities were subsidised to the tune of374 million marks. Under the special programme“Dach und Fach” for facilities of local or regionalsignificance, a total of 855 facilities were safeguardedwith investments worth some 53.6 million marksbetween 1996 and 2000.

Another programme that seeks to maintain anddevelop historic city centres is entitled “Städtebau-licher Denkmalschutz”. It is particularly directed atthe eastern states, where some 30 towns are listed ashaving medieval centres of international importanceand 200 towns contain facilities deemed to be nationalheritage facilities. The federal government has investedsome 2.2 billion marks for urban heritage conservationsince 1991. Together with the subsidies provided bystates and local governments, the total investmentsince 1991 comes to about 5.5 billion marks, benefittingone in four eastern German towns.

In view of the fact that the tasks associated withheritage conservation will grow increasingly difficult,the question must be addressed as to how, in additionto state means, other private foundations and organi-sations can contribute to maintaining the buildingculture heritage in a sustainable way. There are alreadynumerous events helping to make professionals moreaware of the tasks at hand: these include designated“architecture awareness” and “open-air monument”days, as well as the European Trade Fair for HeritageConservationists “Denkmal” in Leipzig, which hasintroduced a day that caters to children and young people.

Building Culture and Education

Individual interests, family upbringing, the builtenvironment encountered during childhood andadolescence and social surroundings are all factorsthat determine how far an individual approachesthe built environment in a conscious way. A builtenvironment that is perceived as pleasant andharmonious can be as determining as one that hasfallen into neglect.

Children in kindergartens and schools canbe educated in a direct way. Aspects of buildingculture can be communicated in two ways – via theactual school buildings, and through the curriculum.The effects cannot be directly measured. All of thoseinterviewed in a representative survey supportedincorporating the topic into education, while just aquarter of those questioned said they had encounteredthe topic in the course of their own education.

Art lessons are the most obvious place toincorporate discussions of design and the builtenvironment and further an education on the valueof the built environment. But geography, sociologyand maybe even German are also subjects that couldbe considered. Building culture is also relevant toenvironment-related subjects, because it is not justabout aesthetic concerns but also about the qualityof the built environment, our approach and contributionto its organisation.

An incomplete survey conducted by the federalstates notably showed that all – particularly sixth form(12th grade US) – syllabuses include topics related toarchitecture and the built environment. School teachersmust be directly addressed, their lack of knowledgeon the subject, their insecurities and maybe evenreluctance must be overcome if the topic of buildingculture is to be made a permanent fixture of education.This goal appears to be of particular importance if oneconsiders that there are people who work as owner-builders in companies or within autonomous localauthorities who, while lacking the knowledge of architects,nonetheless have the power to make decisions aboutbuildings. The things they learned in school would beinvaluable in their later professional life.


practices. The state sees it as its responsibility to fosteran international orientation among young architects,and judging from its services exports and the goodreputation of its architects abroad, this is proving asuccess. The foreign ministry publicises this in lectureseries and exhibitions abroad.

Austria has an architecture foundation which issupported by regional forums and institutions as well asthe federal association of architects. It too cooperatesinternationally.

Switzerland

Swiss architecture currently enjoys an excep-tional reputation, which can largely be attributed to theachievements of Herzog & de Meuron or Peter Zumthor.The modern tradition was alive throughout the20th century and made the country, particularly inthe eyes of German architects, a guarantor of quality.That view is not necessarily shared by Swiss critics –something that perhaps can be attributed to thefact that these architects see their work as an attemptdestroy the clichés of architecture.

The second aspect of interest in Switzerland isthe cantons’ ability to put winning entries or the publicfunding needed for their construction to vote. This kindof direct democracy is not feasible in Germany, but it isworth noting as an extreme case of public involvement.Because contrary to what one might expect in a countrywith such a strong sense of tradition, the results ofsuch referenda often come out in support for the typeof unusual architecture we have come to associatewith Switzerland. Evidently there is a tendency tounderestimate the public.

Switzerland’s decentralised system makes itdifficult to implement any type of federal policy onarchitecture; there is no institution comparable to theGerman Ministry for Transportation, Building and Housing,though there is a federal office of culture which insome ways corresponds to the job description forGermany’s commissioner of cultural and media affairs.But this does not promote policies on architectural orbuilding culture the way Austria does. The fact thatthe above mentioned architects and many others haveachieved international recognition is therefore nota result of encouragement by the state, but rather ofthe standard of architects’ education in Switzerland,which still enjoys an excellent reputation.

Sweden

In Sweden, where the building sector is domina-ted by large construction companies and architecture

10 Building Culture Policies in EuropeThe Council of Europe passed a resolution on

February 12, 2001 on architectural quality in the urbanand rural environment (2001 / C73104). It underlinesits importance to the environment and culture and urgesmember states to boost efforts to raise awarenessamong owner-developers and the public, acknowledgethe special value of architectural services (as economicand cultural services), promote good architecturethrough exemplary measures in public projects, andintensify discussions where experiences can be swap-ped. It also calls on the EU Commission to find waysto place more emphasis on architectural quality withinthe framework of structural aid.

The “European Forum for Architectural Policy”has been in place for several years now. It’s an informalgroup of cultural institutions, trade organisations andgovernment representatives who come together atthe invitation of the country that holds the rotating EUpresidency to discuss and exchange experiences.

Since the beginning of the 1990s a number ofEuropean countries have formulated a national policyon architecture.

Austria

There are about 2,100 practicing architects,a chamber of architects, and six university level trainingfacilities, as well as several polytechnics that are beingset up. The federal government has devised an inter-nationally acclaimed policy on architecture which hasthe backing of a network of dedicated professionals.

In 1992 the government installed a departmentfor architecture and design in its “Kunstsektion”,comparable to Germany’s Commissioner for Culturaland Media Affairs (created in 1998). It has an advisoryboard consisting of three respected architects.

Austria’s architecture budget currently stands at1.6 million euros a year, that’s about 20 cents per capitawhich the department spends on modern (!) architecture.If Germany were to do likewise, it would cost 16 millioneuros. Most of the budget goes to institutions which in-form the public about architecture. Its funds are also usedto sponsor individual architect's projects, as well asexhibitions, catalogues and architects' work trips abroad.

There are also so-called “Tische” with grantsto place young architects in internationally renowned

4 0


■ North Rhine Westphalia has introduced a stateprogramme “StadtBauKultur NRW”. It seeks to crys-talise the aims of projects and subsidies in the area ofurban planning, housing and culture and is set to runfor several years. It includes events, seminars andsymposiums, excursions, individual and pilot projects,competitions, lecture series and subsidy programmes.The spectrum of topics encompasses solar architecture,design advisory groups, ways of boosting competition,art and construction, legal terms and conditions,public relations, the built environment in schools,international exchange, own-home construction,urban planning subsidies, a programme for publicspaces, lighting designs, sports facilities, heritageconservation, town marketing, and discussion ofproposals for a “European House for Urban Culture”.

■ In Bavaria, the Bavarian Chamber of Architectsis calling on the state to adopt an official architecturepolicy which among other things would determine that“recognition of architecture, interior design, urban plan-ning and landscape architecture are decisive elementsin the design of a healthy and intact environment”.

On the local level, where most state subsidisedconstruction takes place, there are also a large numberof focused measures that aim to improve the qualityof the built environment. It is impossible to list them all,especially because no one is keeping track of allthe activities.

In any case, the Architecture and Building CultureInitiative cannot issue any binding recommendations,let alone regulations – not just because there would beserious legal misgivings but also because it wouldsimply be wrong in the interest of a well thought-outstrategy for building culture. On the federal level theinitiative only works if corresponding steps are takenon all of the other levels. The right to make independentdecisions and implement specific measures must beinherent in any policy on building culture, becauseregional self-determination is a defining aspect ofbuilding culture.

it launched the Architecture and Building CultureInitiative. The initiative has encouraged a nationwidepublic debate on the quality of architecture and buildingculture, it has conducted studies, expert and publicopinion surveys, some 90 in-depth interviews, as wellas more than 30 professional trade events to take thepulse of the current situation. The federal initiative,however, can only serve as an impetus for furtheraction on the state and community levels. It is up tothem to implement local, concrete measures.

Although the intiative has yet to make concreterecommendations and implement specific measures,it has already achieved two significant accomplishments.For one, its partners are not limited to a circle of archi-tects. From the beginning the initiative has embracedthe important contributions of engineers, artists andindustry. Secondly, the mere existence of the initiativehas stimulated action on other public sector levels.Most noteworthy here is the constructive dialoguebetween the federal, state and local levels of government.Working together in pursuit of a common objective isalso a part of “building culture”. Some examples:

■ The premier of the state of Saxony-Anhalt hasassumed the patronage of a state-wide initiative thatwas launched in 2001 to highlight the state’s tasksregarding building culture. The aim is to heightenthe awareness of the public, politicians and businessleaders through meetings with parliamentary committees,events, exhibitions, and media coverage. State ministries,associations and regional corporations are partners inthe project. Its themes include architecture in schools,architecture as an economic factor, public commissioningprocedures and clients, heritage conservation, housingdevelopments and architecture as a tourist attraction.

■ A “Round Table on Building Culture” was set upin the state of Rhineland-Pfalz as part of a coalitionagreement. It aims to facilitate a broad discussionbetween representatives from the fields of politics,industry, science and administration and develop aprogramme for building culture based on holistic andsustainable construction in the state.

■ The state construction minister in Mecklenburg-Vorpommern has presented an evaluation of architec-ture and building culture to the state government,the chamber of architects, all parliamentary partiesand trade organisation leaders. His white paper aimsto fuel a wide-reaching public discussion on buildingculture and raise awareness on the importance ofarchitecture and building culture to a location’s abilityto attract investment. There is also discussion aboutwhether the “right to a well-built environment” shouldbe adopted as state goal.


environment” is enshrined in the constitution as astate goal. Secondly, much value is placed on publicinvolvement. Finally and perhaps most importantly,citizens do not just have the right to a well-builtenvironment, they have a duty to take part in itscreation and maintenance. But they can only do thatif they are informed on the topic!

The programme focuses on this point; Resolution12 puts architecture on the general school curriculum,Resolution 13 says,

“The Education Ministry reviews ways of developing education on architecture within the framework of adult further education to improve citizens’ ability to take part in the decision-making processes that affect their environment”.

And Resolution 14 states, “Legislators and elected representatives of local governments will be offered further education on architecture and environment topics”.

Finland’s resolutions are therefore not far-reachingbecause they take special measures, but becausethey systematically think through what must be doneto achieve the objective.

Conclusion

Three common denominators emerge from thisbrief country-by-country analysis:

Firstly, all national architecture policies arisefrom a sense of dissatisfaction with the state ofthe built environment. In particular it is the housingcomplexes of the 1960s and 1970s, once hailed as asocial triumph, that are criticised and used to justifydemands for different architecture.

Secondly, the traditional role of the architectas artist and creator who holds responsibility for allaspects of the building process is in a state of flux,threatened by various developments that are under-mining the architect’s authority.

Thirdly, with the exception of Finland, all ofthe examined countries have made it a political goalto increase public awareness about architectureand improve architectural quality. And except forFinland, which explicitly talks about the “built environ-ment”, most countries’ policies do not take intoaccount the activities of local and regional planning,landscape planning and engineering. This providesGermany with a unique chance to develop an in-dependent, integrated policy on building culturethat embraces all of the planning professions andthe entire infrastructure.

Today France has comprehensive legislation oncompetition and quality for public buildings, as well asa highly developed network of institutions promotingsophisticated architectural objectives. But the privatesector has remained largely unaffected by this andthe tendency of government leaders to take up thearchitecture cause has lent certain architects a starstatus that has a detrimental effect on regular building.

Nevertheless there are several exemplary insti-tutions and procedures that Germany can learn from.For a start, an inter-ministerial work group was set upthat can exert considerable influence on legislationas it seeks to promote an improvement in architecturalquality. It serves not only as an advisory board butalso organises exhibitions.

Ever since the introduction of the law in 1977the “Centres d’Architecture, d’Urbanisme et del’Environment” (CAUE) have acted as de-centralisedarchitecture centres. They provide information andadvice on the regional and local levels and are thusa link to the general public. Consultations for localgovernments and private owner-developers are free.These centres – and this is a particularly interestingpoint – are financed through a percentage of the feepaid to obtain a building permit. The “Architects etMâitrise d’Ouvrage” (AMO) follows similar objectives.

German architects who build abroad have muchpraise for the support their French colleagues receivethrough the “Architects français à l’export” (AFEX).This is an association of all building professionals(including the construction industry!) which providessupport and advice in all areas for members abroad.French diplomatic representation abroad also doesmuch in this respect.

Finally, work is underway to build a “City ofArchitecture” (“Cité de l’Architecture et du Patrimoine”)in a wing of the Palais de Chaillot in Paris on a spaceof 23,000 square metres. The special feature of thismixture of museum and archive, public library anddocumentation centre will be its juxtaposition of historicand modern architecture, which can help to contradicta notion that the French public also holds, namely thathistoric architecture is beautiful while modern is ugly.

Finland

A 24-point state policy on architecture has beenin place in Finland since 1998.

As can be seen from the fact that the educationministry is a co-initiator, Finland has several uniquecharacteristics; for one, the “right to a well-built

4 2


The “Stimuleringsfonds voor Architectur”is a state-financed agency that deals with the entirearea of architecture and architecture subsidies.It is complemented by the “Fonds voor BeeldendeKunst, Bouwkunst en Vormgeving”, which aims tosupport young architects in particular through studygrants, scholarships or subsidies for presentationsand publications.

On the local level there are the “ArchitectuurLokaal” centres for architecture (35 nationwide) which,apart from presenting local architecture, also seek tointeract with developers.

The “Weltstandstoezicht” has replaced thetraditional “Commission for Beauty” but remainsa body concerned with the aesthetics of architecture.The National Housing Act specifies that every projectmust be reviewed for its aesthetic quality. In addition,communities have their own design advisory boards(“welstand commissies”).

The sum of all of these measures is the highlyacclaimed standard of building culture in theNetherlands, which places a large amount of trustin the individuality and creativity of young architects,and maintains control through strict regulations,particularly in the fields of construction and procedure.Realising the importance of public acceptance ofplanning measures, the Netherlands are seekingto spend about 1 euro per capita on promotingarchitecture and regional planning. Another pointis worth noting: only few anonymous competitionsare carried out in the Netherlands. Workshops ornon-anonymous commissions of several architects,who often cooperate with the building sector, arethe normal modes of procedure. So this too is aviable method.

France

“Architecture is an expression of culture.Architectural creativity, the quality of buildings,their harmonious integration into the environment,their respect for the natural and urban landscapeas well as the architectural legacy are all in the publicinterest”. So says the French law on architecturepassed in 1977. The motivation to draft such a bill(among the first in Europe) arose partly from criticismof post-war urban planning and architecture, andpartly from the desire of presidents Georges Pompidou,Giscard d’Estaing and François Mitterand in particularto erect buildings that pay tribute to the state’s“grandeur”. A third motivating factor was the bidto export architecture as an expression of Frenchculture and thereby stimulate the economy.

practices, a policy on architecture has been formulated tocounteract the building methods of the 1960s and 1970s.

Clauses have been added to the buildingcode and to legislation on planning, road and railwayconstruction that make respect for aesthetic consider-ations mandatory in all building measures. The all-inclusiveness of this approach appears to be key,because by incorporating roads, bridges and rail-ways, it establishes the “right to beauty” in the builtenvironment.

In 1998 the government approved a 6 millioncrown budget until 2001 for the Swedish Museumof Architecture, enabling it to organise a “Year ofArchitecture” and an architecture exhibition in Malmöin 2001, with all the necessary publicity.

So by integrating a multitude of institutions –including schools and universities – into a sweepingcampaign (an easier undertaking in a centralised state),Sweden has managed to anchor the issue of “qualityin the built environment” into public awareness withoutexcessive expenditure. The differences between thetwo states notwithstanding, Germany could adoptseveral basic measures: promoting awareness throughlegislation and a nationwide architecture exhibition(or similar events). Another special measure is a com-petition to choose the top national monuments ofthe last 50 years.

The Netherlands

In Germany, Dutch architecture is associatedwith an almost unending stream of young, creative,new trends and names.

For several years now the government has issuedso-called “notas”, memoranda which address the mainproblems in the fields of architecture and regionalplanning. These lay down policy principals. The “Rijks-bouwmeester”, the honourary position of Chief Govern-ment Architect, acts as a supervisor of developmentacross the country.

As the world’s biggest museum of architecture,the NAi in Rotterdam provides the cultural context forgovernment policies. It is set up as a private foundation,but is dependent on state funding (it has about 170employees, as opposed to a staff of 23 at the Germanequivalent!). It features archives, major exhibitions,educational tours for some 1,500 children and teenagersa month (a new wing is being built to cater exclusivelyto children) and acts as a forum for discussions. It isat the museum director’s discretion where to place theemphasis.


G Ö R L I T Z , U N T E R M A R K T A N D T O W N H A L L S TA I R C A S E ( 1537 / 38) A N D S C H Ö N H O F ( 1526)


Support

Research

Young Talent

Publicity

creativity and competence is reflected in its outstanding planning andconstruction trades is an image that has a positive impact on far morethan just the building sector.

The German government should only grant tax breaks for constructionprojects if their quality can be guaranteed.

In addition, it should review a revenue neutral taxation programmewhich encourages longer-term investment by private owner-developers,and support measures for heritage conservation and the maintenance ofthe aging building stock.

It should also check whether, in the shape of modified depreciationallowances, it can promote inner-city development and thus halt theexpansion of housing settlements.

Future social changes will have far-reaching effects on thebuilding sector. It is not possible to make precise predictions aboutthe impact, which is why it is the state’s responsibility to monitor trendsand sponsor research into the relationship between the social andspatial sciences.

Research projects in such fields as experimental housing and urbanplanning should be more directly geared to questions concerning the futureof building culture.

The Ministry for Education and Research is advised to adopt“building culture” as one of its focal points.

Generally the aim should be to directly sponsor research projectsfor young architects, engineers, planners and artists. The resultingwork should be presented to the public (support for publications orpresentations).

Support for young architects and planners should be increasedto harness their creative potential for shaping the built environment.Early moves by young planners to start up their own businessescreate jobs for others. Support does not just come in the shape ofalready established prizes, but also through travel and work experiencegrants, the awarding of which must aim to achieve certain, previouslyspecified results. EUROPAN competitions should also be used inthis context.

A certain percentage of the federal government’s investments inbuilding should be set aside specifically for young architect and engineeringpractices, commissioned through restricted public competitions.

A series of postal stamps featuring award-winning achievements inthe fields of building and planning should be issued each year in cooperationwith the Ministry for Transportation, Building and Housing, the Departmentfor Cultural and Media Affairs, the Finance Ministry and the German postalservice (Deutsche Post).

The government is urged to present to parliament the findings andrecommendations contained in this Status Report on Building Culturein Germany so that it can examine and discuss the issues.

R E C O M M E N D AT I O N S

4 6

Europe

Export

What the state should doOn the European level, the German government should actively

support the EU’s resolution on architectural quality of the urban and ruralenvironment, passed on February 12, 2001. It should intensify efforts topromote trade and foster a dialogue in which international experiences canbe shared. By inviting the trade associations of architects, engineers andthe building trade to take part, the federal government can highlight newfeatures and illustrate the importance of European policies.

Germany should not only continue but increase its participation invarious European forums (European Architecture Forum, Biennial of Townsand Town Planners in Europe, Venice Biennale, EUROPAN competitions etc).By implementing the measures proposed here for a building culture policy,Germany will be able to present itself with new confidence and ideas.It is especially important on the European level to counteract tendenciesto base judgements of design competitions on costs.

Since the export of planning services has a considerable bearing onthe domestic job market, the German government should increase effortsto promote these services in the international marketplace. To this end,the involvement should be sought of German diplomatic representations andchambers of commerce abroad, as well as the network of Goethe Institutes,Germany’s agency for cultural representation abroad. The aim here is notto export building culture, but to transfer Germany’s high environmentaland service sector standards to other countries. Cooperation betweenthe ministries concerned is crucial. Portraying Germany as a nation whose

Recommendationsand MeasuresThe analysis presented by this report shows numerous positive factors in Germany’s building sector and

the general approach to it, but also highlights a series of threats and shortcomings. Generally speaking

there is a need to increase public awareness on the quality and importance of the built environment.

The parties involved in the Architecture and Built Environment Initiative are committed to creating

a built environment that can be more directly experienced by each citizen everywhere, an environment

with which the public can identify. The initiative partners believe the best way to do this is by addressing

the issue on a national level, where public attention can best be drawn to the issues at hand.

Much can also be done on the levels of the individual participants. The following recommendations

have been developed to that end, with an aim to placing all participants in a better position to improve

the situation in their respective disciplines. But the discussion must be continued!


Plaques

Art

Design

Public space

Inner-city development

Commercial parks

Public involvement

Developers’ and planners’ sense of responsibility for the quality ofthe built environment needs to be increased and made more visible.To this end, plaques could be installed that list a project’s owner-developer,designer, construction company and year of completion.

A former regulation that obligated owner-developers to spend2 percent of total building costs on public art was highly successful.This 2 percent regulation should be re-introduced, but applied to thefederal government’s total expenditure on construction. A review wouldbe necessary to see how this approach could be adapted to meet currentrequirements, for example by staging temporary art shows in public space.An art advisory board should be consulted on how to include the visual arts.Here too competitions would be the preferred commissioning method.

What local governments should doIndependent of the size or population of a city or town, the community

remains the place to debate the res publica. That includes its design, whichreflects the way a community sees and experiences itself. In today’s society,which is increasingly marked by particularist interests, it is vital to conducta debate about the aesthetic shape of a community and its design as anexpression of building culture.

It is vital to keep a close watch on the changes taking place inpublic space. While the state has a constitutional obligation to provideequal living conditions for all its citizens, there is an apparent demandamong the affluent for “semi-public” urban spaces. A spatial separationbetween the affluent and the poor must be avoided, as must any attemptsto restrict access to public spaces.

In the interest of the environment, development of the last remainingfree spaces must be avoided. Communities are called on to team up withowners and potential investors to find new use for abandoned inner-cityfacilities (military, industrial, harbour, railway etc).

On the outskirts, commercial parks present a special problem becausethey seldom adhere to any standards of good design or building culture.But building culture is a holistic issue that must also be applied tocommercial developments. Communities therefore should review whichregulations to apply to these and whether a large number of commercialusers couldn’t be better accommodated in converted inner-city facilities,where their presence would promote mixed use.

The autonomy of local government is anchored in the constitution.But in a society where private interests are playing an increasinglyimportant role, the scope for public participation in planning decisionsneeds to be reviewed. To this end, planners, politicians and administratorsare called on present their ideas in a language everyone can understandand be prepared to contribute to a discussion.

All important planning and building projects should be opened upto public debate and presented in a way that is understandable for allinterested parties.


4 8

Role Model

Rights and Responsibilities

Competitions

If there is then consensus that the shape of the built environment andthe quality of building culture is of primary importance to every individual,then consideration should be given as to whether and how far the right toa well-built environment should be formulated as a national policy objective.

What public sector owner-developers should doThe public sector – federal, state and local governments – have

a special obligation to set an example and act as role models in theirapproach to building culture. It is their duty to act in the best public interest.That is why public owner-developers are obliged to pursue cost and energyeffectiveness at the same time as ensuring good design, efficient proce-dures, use and sustainability of the built environment.

Building culture is as much a concern of the states and localauthorities as the federal government. In view of their different approachesto a common goal, the Ministry for Transportation, Building and Housingshould deepen cooperation with the state and local levels.

Public sector building authorities must maintain their right to makeindependent, efficient plans both with regard to new projects and stockmaintenance. It is not about securing the jobs of bureaucrats, but aboutfulfilling the state's duties as a builder for the benefit of its citizens.Private sector developers, investors and planners need partners in thepublic sector who can mediate between private interests and the interestsof the community. When major private investors work together with localcommunities, the latter must demand that the requirements of buildingculture be respected.

It is particularly critical to safeguard the public owner-developer’s dutyto the community and building culture when it awards contracts to privateinvestors that include subsequent leasing or rental rights. Projects involvingpublic-private partnership should not only be measured by the total costsincurred during building, they should also be assessed for a possibleimpact on public space or financial resources that could pose a burdento future generations.

The federal government has formulated guidelines for the biddingprocess together with the states, chambers and trade associations(GRW 95). The federal government is obligated to put work for buildingdesign and construction out to tender. States and communities shouldfollow this example if they haven’t already. There should also be a reviewof whether and to what degree citizens, as those affected by buildingmeasures, should be involved in competition decisions.

In general, inter-disciplinary competitions or similar competitiveprocedures should be chosen for all of the public sector planning andbuilding measures in which this is possible – building design and cons-truction, civil engineering and landscaping. Decisions must not be based oncost-effectiveness alone, they must also weigh the planning, engineering,environmental and design aspects.


Sustainability

Plaques

Professional image

Good building culture and economic efficiency go hand in hand.Value for money is not measured by the initial capital cost of a building,but rather by its whole-life cost. Private developers should use whole-lifecosting in the value-for-money assessment of buildings in the same way thatthe Ministry for Transportation, Building and Housing has made it a publicsector goal to base its decisions on the whole-life impact and performanceof a project.

Like the public sector, private owner-developers should acknowledgetheir sense of responsibility for the quality of the built environment byinstalling plaques on their buildings that list the project’s owner-developer,designer, construction company and year of completion. If necessary thisshould be made an official requirement.

What planners and their associations should doThe German chambers’ professional conduct code, a legally set table

of fees, as well as the planners’ role as mediator between the developerand building trade have all proved their worth. However, the conduct codemakes no mention of standards for building culture in a state, the qualityof planning, or the reputation of planners abroad.

A building culture oath modeled on the Hippocratic oath taken bymedical students is viewed as a good way to make sure all planners live upto their responsibilities to society. Professional organisations are advisedto form working groups to formulate the wording and procedure of suchan ethical code.

Planners should increasingly view themselves as members of theservice sector, ie. experts who can explain things to the layman in clearterms. There’s much room to expand planners’ consultative capacities,the solution to a problem is not always a house!

The ability to consider oneself an equal in integrated project teamsis vital, particularly for architects, and must be learned. The image ofthe architect as a lonely artist that is often still propagated by universitiesis passé. Much can be learned from the Netherlands in this respect.

The Federal Chamber of Architects and the Federal Chamber ofEngineers should work together not only to boost the competitions systemper se, the participation in which creates substantial outlays for planners.They should also encourage more inter-disciplinary and design competitionsfor projects involving roads, bridges and other works of engineering,because a responsible approach to these types of structures also benefitsbuilding culture. In the search for energy, material and cost-effectivesolutions, competitors often come up with technical innovations.

While the chambers and associations offer a range of further educationprogrammes, these should be reviewed regularly to adapt to current require-ments, for example with regard to building in the stock. Special qualificationsshould be understandable to the layman, for example through certification.


5 0

Advice

Responsibility

Competitions

Public opinion surveys on planning projects should be broadened toinclude citizens’ views on the objectives. Scientific model experiments arethe most suitable way of finding the best solution.

Planning projects that seek to find broad public acceptance need toinvolve all of the concerned parties in the community, and require the willto reach a consensus. Process-oriented forms of cooperation, however,are only successful if they are open to suggestions.

Local governments are advised to set up an independent committeeof architects, engineers, heritage conservationists, town planners and land-scape architects working in an honourary capacity. At the very least,communities should appoint a chief town or regional architect to act asa consultant and review plans for every larger-scale building or landscapingmeasure.

An architecture counselling service, comparable to consumercounselling services, should be established for citizens and private owner-developers. The same could be done for the areas of engineering, townand open space planning and heritage conservation.

An internet portal should be set up on which all community or regionalinstitutions concerned with building can be accessed and provide a forumfor a broad public discussion.

What private-sector owner-developersshould doPrivate investment is vital to local economies and in many cases

testifies to a private developer’s links to his or her city. The importanceof creative freedom in building is not to be underestimated. But privatedevelopers should always keep in mind that their investments also affectpublic interests, particularly when it comes to design and use.

That is why private developers are generally advised to get detailedinformation and expert counselling on all of the options open to them.Greater sensitivity for the built environment is particularly required of thoseworking with existing buildings and historic structures.

Private developers of smaller projects (eg. single family homes) alsohave a responsibility towards building culture – their buildings too are partof public space. Anyone who admires the harmonious blend of historic citydistricts should strive to meet the same standards.

Private developers should use competitive procedures (competitions)as often as possible – particularly for projects that will impact the urbanlandscape and for those in high-visibility locations. Developers shouldrealise that competitions normally neither delay nor increase the costsof their projects. Quite the contrary, competitions can help ensure thatwhat ultimately gets built is both of a high standard and cost-effective.The selection procedure itself can enhance the public's readiness to acceptnew buildings.


Integration

A Building Culture Study Group

■ the specialisation and further education in advanced technologies and special skills (especially in the area of heritage conservation and building in the stock)

■ closer cooperation in integrated teams of planners, builders and developers to maximise design quality by developing effective cost and technical solutions.

The chambers and associations should collaborate with a workgroupto promote the export of services and construction services.

What schools and education facilities should doA high standard of building culture, which is open to the new and

unexpected, requires better public understanding of the opportunitiesand problems presented by the built environment. Building culture shouldbe viewed as an integral part of life – just like a common language.And so it has as much right to a place in the education system as language.But before any thought can be given to specific changes, there needs tobe more awareness on all levels – from politicians, planners and developersto the public – that the built environment affects everyone in it.

A subject entitled “the built environment” or “environmental design”should be introduced in the education system. This would enable questionsabout the built environment to be addressed at an early stage, giving peoplea foundation on which to base their opinions later on in life.

Architecture is already on the curriculum in many German states.But experience has shown that little substance is actually conveyed duringlessons. That is why it is important to ensure that teachers have adequateknowledge themselves. In addition it is necessary to underline that the topicis not limited to architectural design, it is a comprehensive subject on theshape of the built environment. Professional organisations could activelycontribute to the promotion of building culture as a subject in schools andother education facilities.

Adult education is another area where courses could be offeredto explain the complexities of planning and decision-making processesin urban development and create understanding for the built environment.Planners’ empirical knowledge could be put to much use here.

What all parties should doAfter the initial phase of discussion on building culture, the next step

will be to find ways of continuing the dialogue, implementing the variousrecommendations and measures and initiating further activities.

Building culture is a multi-faceted cultural field that has ramificationsfor different disciplines. For this reason, there is a recommendation for


5 2

Export

The Public

Innovation

Planners are justified to expect political help to improve their positionon the international market. But they also need to show initiative anddevelop clear acquisition strategies. That includes:

■ a better understanding of qualification and experience requirements abroad

■ the formation of integrated project teams to present themselves as all-round providers

■ the formation of an agency similar to France’s AFEX which includes the construction industry as a partner.

Because the effort to foster citizens’ appreciation of the builtenvironment through the education system is a long-term undertaking,additional measures should be adopted to promote public awareness.An annual “Building Culture Awareness Day” jointly organised by profes-sional organisations could highlight building culture's diversity and drivehome the importance of good design, procedure, use and sustainability.

An effort should be made to consolidate the numerous prizes handedout by various associations and organisations. They could be awarded ata special ceremony (along the lines of the Oscars) designed to generatemedia attention. The goal is not to limit the scope of the honours, it’s toconduct a sophisticated event that does more to awaken public interest.

This event should introduce new categories, such as“Building/Plan/Engineering Achievement of the Year” (which could thenbe incorporated in the postal stamp series mentioned earlier).

The associations should jointly establish a valuable media prize orupgrade existing ones to encourage coverage of building culture in themedia. An independent workgroup could be set up to raise building culture’sprofile in the media and advise journalists. The chambers and associationscan offer ways of helping journalists specialise in the field.

The associations could take a first step in the direction of garneringmedia attention by introducing a nationwide competition (modelled ona similar event in Sweden) to select the top ten buildings of the past 50 years.

What the construction industry should doThe construction industry is currently experiencing shrinking pains.

It is unlikely that building will ever reach its former output. The only wayout of the dilemma is to improve quality that is distinguished by

■ the development, production and implementation of environmentally friendly materials and designs

■ innovation in construction methods

■ a willingness to undergo further education in one’s own field to maintain awareness of building culture


of demonstrators’ complaints since early in 1989. That shows that “buildingculture” does indeed have a political dimension – it just can’t be dealt withby a single measure. But what would happen if the residents of dormitorycommunities built in the 1960s and 1970s took to the streets in angry protestsbecause they felt neglected – as they did in France and Britain? This isneither a warning nor a prediction – but it clearly illustrates the significanceof the built environment for everyone!

We began by asking simple questions: In what kind of city, in whatkind of environment, in what type of houses will we want to be living in ten,twenty or thirty years time? What effects do certain built environments haveon the people in them? Which society builds its own town? What impact willfuture building and urban planning have on the environment? And the verytopical question as to whether the dangerous decline of the buildingindustry, which is taking the architecture sector along with it, can be haltedby improving the production and sustainability of buildings and buildingproducts through higher technical and design quality. This could achievetwo goals at once: it could stop the decline through focused support –also of services exports. And create a built environment that satisfiesmore people.

The questions are very simple. The answers are not. They can onlybe found through a joint effort.


5 4

A National Foundation for Building Culture

an inter-ministerial study group to implement and follow through onthe federal government’s measures. It would comprise the Ministry forTransportation, Building and Housing; the Commissioner for Cultural andMedia Affairs; the Ministry of Economics and Technology; the Ministryfor Education and Research; the Finance Ministry and the Foreign Office.

The institutions participating in the Architecture and Building CultureInitiative are called on to continue meeting at regular intervals and discussthe problems facing building culture in a study group. This “Building CultureStudy Group” should also be open to other social groups. Among its variousobjectives, the study group should promote public discussion on buildingculture, follow the measures through and make further recommendations.

In addition, a National Foundation for Building Culture should beset up by the federal government, trade associations, partners in industryand private individuals. The foundation’s primary task would be to promotean awareness of building culture in the public. The foundation should:

■ assume a communicative function to help increase public awareness of the relevance of the built environment

■ serve as a partner to the existing collections, museums and architecture centres, who coordinates various efforts and represents their common goals. Together they form a "transmission belt" to mediate between planning, building and the public.

■ generally play the part of an informative agency. It should be a contactpoint that relays the significance of the topic to the outside world. This should help to anchor the issue of building culture into public awareness.

Editor’s Closing RemarksIt was a sense of discomfort about the condition of the built environ-

ment that gave rise to the Architecture and Building Culture Initiative.And yet after a year-long period of analysis it is clear that very manypeople are committed to improving it. It would be nice if it were this easy:in a communal effort, all graffiti is erased, all ugly buildings given newfacades (if not torn down altogether), and all public spaces brought“in order”. The project isn’t impossible because there’s no money to fund it,it’s impossible because this “community” doesn’t exist and as a result,there’s no way to reach consensus on what makes a building “ugly”.

That is the strenuous nature of democracy: one must constantlydebate an issue knowing that one’s partner in the discussion is neitherright nor wrong, just of a different opinion. But that is the essence ofbuilding culture: it’s not about defining the one right approach for all time,it’s a continuous process of identifying what the right approach can be.

And that’s what makes the issue so difficult. When dealing withbuilding culture, there is no one measure that could solve the problem.Building culture has nothing to do with legislative periods and votes –at least not on the surface. But one should keep in mind that Germany’sonly revolution, in the autumn of 1989, was sparked not least by a lack ofbuilding culture: the deterioration of Leipzig’s city centre had been one


A R C H I T E C T: P R O F. A X E L O E S T R E I C H , W I S S R O D T E N G I N E E R S , B E R L I N P E D E S T R I A N B R I D G E 19 9 9 • S C H W E D T E R S T E G • B E R L I N - W E D D I N G


I M A G E S O U R C E S

5 8

Graphics:

Design: wieschendorf.design

Conditions influencing building culture, Source: Gert Kähler 2001

Households-Forecast

Source: Globus /I. Flagge (Hrsg.): Geschichte des Wohnens, Bd. 5. Stuttgart 1999

Inner city problems in the mid-nineties

Source: BBR: Stadtentwicklung und Städtebau in Deutschland, S. 57

Development of land use types

Source: BBR: Informationen zur Raumentwicklung Heft 8, 1999

Housing construction-public housing construction, Source: Statistisches Bundesamt

City districts with particular need for renewal, Source: www.sozialestadt.de

Planning levels in Germany, Source: Raumordnung in Deutschland,Bundesministerium für Raumordnung, Bauwesen und Städtebau, Bonn 1996

Gross fixed investments in prices from 1995, Source: Statistisches Bundesamt

Investment total of private and public owner-developers, Source: Statistisches Bundesamt

No. of people employed by construction authorities, Source: Statistisches Bundesamt

Construction trade turnover in main construction industry

Source: Hauptverband der Deutschen Bauindustrie

Membership of the Federal Chamber of Architects, Source: Bundesarchitektenkammer

Professions within the Federal Chamber of Architects, Source: Bundesarchitektenkammer

Membership of Federal Chambers of Engineers, Source: Bundesingenieurkammer

Areas of responsibility for consultant engineers, Source: www.bundesingenieurkammer.de

Contract awarding procedures, Source: raumbureau, A-Wettbewerbe in den Staaten des Europäischen Wirtschaftsraumes

Europe-wide calls for tenders according to awarding procedure, Source: raumbureau, A-Wettbewerbe in den Staaten des Europäischen Wirtschaftsraumes

Competitions in relation to number of chamber members

Source: Statistics of the Bundesarchitektenkammer

Export of architectural services in the year 2000

Source: Estimation of the Bundesarchitektenkammer

Students according to subject, Source: Statistisches Bundesamt

Photography:

Housing Project, Regensburg: Martin Rosner, Regensburg

Federal Chancellery, Berlin: Andreas Muhs, Berlin

German Garden Show Potsdam: Tom Peschel, Kleinmachnow

Görlitz Historic City Centre: Bildermann.de, Karl-Heinz Schmidt, Dresden

Schwedter Steg, Berlin-Wedding: Christoph Petras, Berlin

Page

18

19

21

22

23

24

26

27

29

32

33

34

35

36

10

16

30

44

56


vekturukultur

BMVBW A+B S U 1+4 E BELpdf 17.06.2002 14:16 Uhr Seite 1