LAST WEEK, JACK Chambers, Minister for Public Expenditure, stated that the government will prioritise “cost and efficiency over design standards and aesthetics” when it comes to future infrastructure spending.

On the face of it, if you’ve been exposed to the huge budgetary overruns that big infrastructure projects have had recently, pragmatically, that is soothing.

However, on closer inspection, it begs the question of capital infrastructure designers, planners and managers — why are they not better at their job of managing projects and budgets, and why should their shortcomings be at the expense of the quality of the built environment we have to live amongst for decades going forward?

Good design is pragmatic and answers to the needs of its environment, but it should also answer design standards and aesthetic needs as a basic requirement, not an optional add-on. What we build matters, not just as a fluffy, feel-good measurement. It impacts on behaviour, social cohesion, crime rates, emotional wellbeing and resilience and the health of people who interact with these surroundings.

Neuroarchitecture is a growing field of social psychological research that is interdisciplinary in nature and explores how the built environment affects human brain function and behaviour. It combines neuroscience, environmental psychology, and architecture to provide evidence-based architectural design principles for better buildings that positively influence well-being, cognition and emotions.

Cityscape of Poznan neuroarchitecture office buildings and skyscrapers among trees. Alamy Stock Photo Alamy Stock Photo

Focusing only on cost is simply not good practice; functionality and aesthetics need to walk side by side for a successful society. Building with design standards and aesthetics as primary principles isn’t just a-nice-to-do, it’s science!

Advertisement

In Philadelphia, Wharton University

© TheJournal