Search results

This paper contributes to this special issue on the ethics and aesthetics of adaptive reuse with a reflection on the specific case of the reuse of those sites and buildings that can be regarded as “difficult”, “uncomfortable”, or “neglected” heritage (MacDonald, 2009; Logan and Keir, 2009; Pendlebury et al., 2018; Lanz, 2021). By doing so it is the author's intention to add to the most recent research-driven and theory-oriented strand of the contemporary architectural debate on adaptive reuse (Lanz and Pendlebury, 2022). They also intend to encourage increased research engagement within such a debate, both across disciplines and with methods and approaches that may be able to bring in greater critical consideration of the more-than-architectural aspects involved in adaptive reuse practices.

Building equally on a comprehensive literature review on the subject and extensive field work, the paper works through one paradigmatic example – the San Girolamo mental asylum in Volterra, Italy – and combines on-site observation, field notes, qualitative interviews and archival research with theory-driven reflections to discuss the ramifications of adaptive reuse processes in place-based memory and heritage practices.

The case of the former mental asylum San Girolamo in Volterra, today abandoned and decaying on the landscape, is discussed via the metaphor of the building as palimpsest to explore the significance of this built heritage in both its materiality and meanings. The San Girolamo asylum demonstrates the value, complexity and potential of this heritage site, and other alike, to act as a powerful place which connects the past and present that might serve as a platform to promote productive discourses about contemporary sensible topics, ethics of care and human rights. Drawing on these observations, the paper concludes by expanding on how the case of the San Girolamo former asylum both showcases and advocates the need for developing more creative, explorative, trans-disciplinary and collaborative approaches and methodologies to the study and implementation of adaptive reuse projects for these site “beyond intervention”.

This paper draws on and contributes to the more recent research-driven and theory-oriented corpus of studies focussing on adaptive reuse.

The paper introduces ethical and aesthetical implications emerging from participative forms of adaptive heritage reuse. Its aim is to depict the overall framework to contextualize the investigations explored in the Special Issue titled “Ethics and aesthetics of adaptive heritage reuse in Europe.” Therefore, the article confronts with potentialities and contradictions of “open” heritage processes, introducing key critical elements to recode heritage practices and planning in today’s conjuncture of global change.

The paper drawn on a literature review, which combines different bodies of studies: heritage, urban studies, care studies and recent policy documents. A photographic essay, moreover, serves to “augment” the presented argumentations through a visual apparatus resulting from one of Gaia Ginevra Giorgi’s artwork, which develops in the intersection between performative art, participation and territorial reuse.

The author argues that for adaptive heritage reuse to be really sustainable, ethical and aesthetical heritage codes need to be reassessed and reoriented toward the present socio-ecological priorities, multiplicating the ways cultural heritage is conceived, valued and reused. The paper suggests proceeding along the creative paths of uncertainty, providing the first elements to develop political projects of abundance and enjoyment for current urban settlements.

The presented argumentations can be used as a baseline by heritage managers and policymakers to experiment with participative processes of adaptive heritage reuse and to identify more environmentally and socially just trajectories of urban development.

The paper expands the concept of adaptive heritage reuse, considering the active participation of both human and non-human agents. Treating heritage in a laic way, namely free from absolute and preordered judgments of value, it deals with uncomfortable heritage materiality and contexts, illuminating the quality of unpleasant or odd forms of beauty.

Adaptive reuse processes aim to preserve heritage values while creating new values through the architectural interventions that have become necessary. This claim provokes a discussion about the meaning of values, how we can preserve them in practice and how we can translate them into architectural qualities that users experience. Riegl's understanding of the different perspectives of heritage values in the past and present opens up the possibility of identifying present values as a reflection of current social, material and political conditions in the architectural discourse.

This qualitative and practical study compares two Belgian projects to trace the use of values in adaptive reuse projects from an architectural design perspective. The Predikherenklooster, a 17th-century monastery in Mechelen that now houses the public library, and the C-Mine cultural centre in Genk, a former 20th-century coal mine, are compared. The starting point is Flemish legislation, which defines significance through values, distinguishing between 13 heritage values.

The study demonstrates the opportunities that axiological questions offer during the design process of an adaptive reuse project. They provide an overarching framework for tangible and intangible aspects that need to be discussed, particularly in terms of the link between what exists, the design strategy and their effect.

Adaptive reuse can draw on approaches from both heritage conservation and contemporary architecture and explore values as a tool for “re-designing” built heritage.

Heritage reuse, in which the aesthetics of heritage play a leading role, often leads to extreme commodification of heritage, place branding, gentrification and the exclusion of many narratives and voices. In order to understand how such processes of erosion and estrangement between heritage and local communities can be countered, while still redeveloping heritage buildings for contemporary urban needs, this paper explores with what kind of practices and heritage approaches these tensions can be mitigated, learning from recent experiences in Praga district.

Based on qualitative semi-structured interviews in a case study of a living lab of ongoing heritage reuse practice in Praga district in the city of Warsaw, Poland, the authors identify practices and approaches that can help to overcome tensions between the ethics and aesthetics of heritage reuse.

In rapidly changing district like Praga, local communities and others are struggling to compete process of change that impact their heritage, and the engagement with it. Although the local community is quite active in addressing various urban challenges and preserving the character of Praga including heritage elements, the conditions under which these community-led heritage reuse practices operate are quite impactful, as it appears that cooperation with local institutions is vital in order to embed community-led heritage reuse practices to overcome the tensions between ethics and aesthetics of heritage reuse.

This paper presents an in-depth analysis of a living lab of community-led heritage reuse. As such, the paper highlights various practices of community organizations and citizen initiatives that address heritage reuse, as well as the conditions under which these initiatives operate.

The paper discusses ethical issues related to the adaptive reuse of ruin heritage on the example of the so-called ruin bars in Budapest's District VII. It explores how heritage discourse can contribute to the sustainable development of urban neighborhoods. The authors address the question by focusing on how a processual approach can be instrumental in identifying responsible and socially sustainable ways to reuse dilapidated heritage in a residential area.

The problem is analyzed through a case study based on field observation, participant observation, stakeholder interviews, policy analysis and media and social media content analysis.

The authors argue that ethical reuse of ruin heritage must take into consideration the values and interests of multiple stakeholders and the broadest range of consequences at the level of neighborhood and city. An integrated heritage and planning policy should consider and involve as active participants all the heritage communities concerned. Importantly, these groups, comprising both new and longtime residents, must include the vulnerable and marginalized.

The findings can be used by heritage managers for identifying and addressing ethical issues in their adaptive heritage reuse practices and by policymakers for integrating heritage management in urban development and making cities more inclusive (SDG #11).

The paper explores how ethical it is for business enterprises to build on the ruin esthetics in a residential district and what the ethical implications of this reuse process are for various stakeholders.

The purpose of this paper is to map the process of (social) valuing by people encountering built heritage in their daily environments. Value-based approaches are not well researched and formalized in Flemish policy context. New questions and issues are emerging in relation to values-based heritage management and the (adaptive) reuse of heritage within a context of spatial development and urban renewal practices. This paper firstly focus on what factors influence the process of (social) valuing, secondly on the hybrid character of the process and finally at the conflicts between the values frames of the different actors. This way it also inquires the potentials of participatory design supporting alternative regimes of care.

Within the research trajectory, the authors approached built heritage as a social construction and a social product, where there are as many stories as users. What heritage is and how heritage is dealt with, forms the basis of negotiation and valuation processes. An ethnographic approach was embarked on to get a grip on the socio-cultural significance of immovable property heritage in Flanders.

This paper describes the process of (social) valuing of by people encountering built heritage in their daily environments and offers an integrated conceptual framework for this kind of dynamic processes.

New questions and issues are emerging in relation to values-based heritage management and the (adaptive) reuse of heritage within a context of spatial development and urban renewal practices. This paper firstly focuses on what factors influence the process of (social) valuing, secondly on the hybrid character of the process and finally at the conflicts between the values frames of the different actors.

The reuse of timber building parts, when designing new buildings, has become a topic of increasing discussion as a proposed circular solution in support of sustainable development goals. Designers face the difficulty of identifying and applying different design strategies for reuse due to multiple definitions, which are used interchangeably. The purpose of this study is to propose a taxonomy to define the relationships between various concepts and practices that comprise the relevant strategies for reuse, notably design for disassembly (DfD) and design for adaptability (DfA).

Literature reviews were conducted based on research publications over the previous 12 years and located through the Web of Science and Scopus.

A taxonomy for the design process grounded on two strategies for reuse is presented: DfD and DfA. Based on previous work, the taxonomy aims to build a vocabulary of definitions in DfD and DfA to support other researchers and practitioners working in the field.

The research is limited to the design phase of timber-based buildings. It does not take into account the other phases of the construction process, neither other kind of construction methods.

The application of the taxonomy can facilitate communication between different actors and provide a way for building product manufacturers to demonstrate their reuse credentials, enabling them to produce and promote compliant products and thereby support design for reuse strategies.

This paper could contribute to a closer collaboration of all stakeholders involved in the building process since the very early phases of the conceptual design.

This paper contributes a comprehensive taxonomy to support the deployment of circular reuse strategies and assist designers and other stakeholders from the earliest of phases in the building’s life cycle. The proposed definition framework provided by the taxonomy resolves the longstanding lack of a supporting vocabulary for reuse and can be used as a reference for researchers and practitioners working with the DfD and DfA.

Adaptive reuse entails the physical modification of abandoned architectural structures, with the activation of processes and practices leading to the re-incorporation of heritage into the contemporary life of communities. This transformation entails an affective adaptation, a re-modulation of how citizens attune to a built environment that has been returned to urban, shared forms of use. By observing the emotional ties that are established between subjects and the spaces they inhabit, affecting forms of dwelling, attachments and corporeal responses, the author can clarify how adaptation purports this affective modification, where the original ambiance is not necessarily altogether overwritten, but may rather merge with the supervening situation to give life to unique assemblages of spatialized feelings.

Drawing from contemporary phenomenological theories, with their specific focus on the affective and embodied dimension of lived experience, this paper describes and discusses two instances of adaptive reuse, one in Brussels, the second in Rome, highlighting their different processes and spatial outcomes.

The paper implements recent literature on spatial experience to bring to light conditions found in cases of adaptive reuse. By describing the generators of shared emotions – objects, movements, expressions, materialities, textures – it highlights how the layering of the physical world can lead to both the domestication of affects and to discrepancies and discontinuities in the fabric of experienced space.

There is only a limited literature dedicated to the description of adaptive reuse processes from the contemporary phenomenological perspective. This kind of description can clarify the dynamics unfolding between citizens and experienced space in cases of heritage reuse.

The adaptive reuse of heritage has the potential to socially and culturally re-signify dilapidated or suspended structures in the urban landscape. However, the scope of adaptive reuse could be broadened to include the constellation of infrastructure such as water and sewerage system, waste disposal facilities, power and communication plants and networks that support urban life but whose access – and maintenance patterns – remain the preserve of specialized technicians.

A conversation with some of the architects from the raumlabor collective involved in the Floating University Berlin project, about the stormwater detention basin of the former Berlin Tempelhof airport, provides an insight into the mechanisms by which adaptive reuse can also concern the infrastructural world in operation.

In Tempelhof's change of function from an international airport to a large abandoned urban space and then to a park, the detention basin has never ceased to function. But the subsequent process of reuse has reshaped the patterns of maintenance of the reservoir, leaving room for first non-human and then unskilled human action.

From this still overlooked reading perspective, it becomes clear how precisely flexible reuse, consisting of a constantly renegotiated interweaving of violated protocols and backward steps, allows the scope of adaptive reuse to be extended to infrastructures in operation. From secret domains of nature's transformation, they become places of openness in which to experience and better understand the entanglement of contemporary socio-ecological relations that underlie the urban condition.

This paper aims to explore the topic of adaptive reuse referring to urban open spaces into a more-than-human perspective. It underlines that dealing with heritage means being part of an inherent and ongoing process of transformation and so that reuse is inextricably an adaptive practice, constantly facing mutations, and that adaptation is a coral practice that involves different kinds of users and makers, inclusive of human and not human livings.

This paper looks at the lexicon of abandonment, in search of the more essential and intense meanings of words, and at some pioneering practices in Europe to comprehend the aesthetic and ethical implications of adaptive reuse of neglected landscapes.

Processes of reuse involve many different communities of users who in turn continuously redesign the site, into a comprehensive, coral and conflicting collaboration, whose results are never given once for all and are both uncanny and beautiful, scaring and marvellous, like a monster.

Accepting the idea that humans are not the only users and makers of urban sites can widen the range of tools, methods and values involved in heritage adaptive reuse.

This paper tries to widen the meanings of adaptation into a multispecies perspective. It intends to broaden the range of agents that can be involved as users and makers, assuming a more-than-human point of view that is not yet commonly applied.