This Paper looks at the importance of construction in Spain, which accounts for 11% of the country’s employment and its GVA (gross value added) is 10% of GDP (gross domestic product), also relate these figures to the values that Europe EU-27 offers and with the four most powerful economies of Europe: It also reflects that the Spanish construction companies are an important reference in the world. We compare the main indicators of the Spanish construction in 2007, when economic activity in this sector was frantic, with values of 2010, three years after the onset of the global financial crisis which started in USA. The obtained results allow to quantify the extent of the problem of the construction sector in Spain: Employment generated, production and other indicators show that the activity of this sector has fallen to levels of the second half of the 90′ of the past century; or, a decline of 12 to 15 years. Also add that the deterioration has not stopped and the analyzed variables have dropped even more in 2011. Then it analyzes the different areas of Spanish construction activity and, in light of their developments and its comparison with the European situation, the logical behaviour is predicted for the near future: Specifically, it appears that residential construction, which has built homes at a big rhytem during the last decade, should follow a similar production rate than the average of Western Europe and how the field of rehabilitation and maintenance of buildings will increase its role in the coming years, in line with that has happened in most developed countries of the EU. It collects also appropriate.strategies that have adopted the large Spanish construction companies to limit the risks of relying solely on a specific market economy: Internationalization and diversification of their activities, especially in the area of construction and operation of concessions in infrastructures of transports. Copyright©2012 IAHS.
Changes characterizing our society include an ageing population, urban migration towards big cities, our lifestyle and work. These changes often make traditional building approaches obsolete. The existing building stock cannot totally satisfy the changed needs and new projects ask for careful valuations and new operating tools. In order to face the change, a feasible solution could be obtained by introducing the requisite of flexibility within both the design process and the construction technology of a building. By adopting a computational design methodology and an industrialized construction technology is possible to realize adaptive buildings, or buildings that can modify their characteristics according to the changing boundary conditions. The paper summarizes the management of adaptive/flexible buildings through the use of customized design tools, paying special attention to structural, energetic and technological issues. In order to design a building as an active, adjustable evolving system, is possible to develop a parametric program analysis visualization that allows to deeply understand complex architectural programs in four dimensions. The constantly evolving social mix is visualized with diagrams that automatically solve adjacency requirements and suggest planimetric and sectional relationships, enabling the user to explore different options and configurations. The algorithm can be implemented with arbitrary design choices and the programmatic use of collective spaces in order to reach the best feasible solution from the architectural and social standpoint. This raises questions as to how form emerges and how it continually differentiates, transforms and performs in relation to its specific environment. Several case studies show how it’s possible to increase structural efficiency allowing a great flexibility in the interior transformation which could be obtained during the service life cycle of the building. Using internal lightweight walls, flexibility and transformation can be easily obtained without using too much energy for the necessary works. Prefabricated façade elements are designed and conceived with the same level of flexibility as the interior walls, by using innovative materials such as textiles. Outdoor spaces could be integrated in the interior spaces (e.g. balcony could change into loggia). A proper evaluation of changes in natural lighting, fire safety, noise reduction, solar gains, thermal insulation is needed in order to always guarantee high levels of comfort. Copyright©2012 IAHS.
Megacities are a nightmare for both their residents and planners. The sheer size, density, traffic jams, social problems, vulnerability of energy, food, and water supplies, waste disposal, and overall safety problems are features that are hardly controlled or not controlled at all. Nevertheless, a large city is a strong magnet, and large-scale immigration raises the question of housing. Although uncontrolled settlers and squatters must be dealt with by urban and social planners, the scope of this paper is the narrow but significant segment of urban dwelling design. This can be considered a further development of twentieth-century mass housing, but under different conditions. These include higher density, higher land costs, changes in social structure (smaller and nonstandard families), the globalization of living patterns, and dwelling culture in general. The old rules, norms, and algorithms are no longer appropriate. Several case-study examples show that changes are implemented in architects’ traditional attitude to dwelling design. In urban-planning zoning, a wellestablished method but a superposition of functions remains desired to achieve a proper urban life pattern. In the dwelling design as well, the principle of ‘one room, one function’ is in opposition to the trend toward the ‘open plan’ of multipurpose spaces. Copyright©2012 IAHS.
It is all but certain that the 21st century will see more and larger mega cities as magnets for population and economic activities in developed and developing countries around the world. It is similarly certain that the problems associated with the growth of mega cities would only deepen, persist and prolong, unless a new approach is taken to the development and re-development/revitalization of mega cities. Much work has been done to better understand the integrative nature and the interconnectivity of prevalent issues in mega cities – from housing to transportation, electricity and water and sewer infrastructure, and from service industries to government and policy issues. Nonetheless, and despite a full understanding of the need for systems engineering approach, there seems to be two major hurdles in developing workable solutions for mega cities. One is to find a common objective for linking the system of systems in mega cities, and second is to find a community-based approach to adapt the systems engineering concept to different mega cities around the world. In this paper, these two issues are addressed and -new ideas are offered for the community of scholars that work on these deep rooted issues. Copyright©2012 IAHS.
The built environment is the most critical element in any society to ensure the quality of life of its people, its growth and evolution, and ultimately, its survival. Within this context, the provision of high quality and performance, sustainable, and affordable housing for every socio-economic stratum of a society continues to be a critical need, and still remains an elusive goal. This paper offers an integrative framework to effectively face this need and achieve this goal. Envisioned as a public-private partnership among academia, industry, and government, three main cornerstones – a collaboratory, a cyberinfrastructure, and a set of new paradigms, provide a solid foundation to this framework. Copyright©2012 IAHS.
‘Population growth and immigration from rural areas to cities have created an enormous housing demand, which has been one of the major problems of Turkey since the 1950s. National governments, local authorities and even universities were not prepared when faced with such a rapid urbanization process. As a result of this uncontrolled process, our big cities, and especially Istanbul, underwent big structural changes. According to Zeynep Çelik, Istanbul has had to face two major transformations in its history because of its unique location. The first of these took place after the conquest of the city by Mehmet II in 1453, and the second took place in the nineteenth century. In this second, government-sponsored transformation, modernization efforts recast traditional urban policies based on Islamic law, and replaced the urban administration, institutions and organizations with new ones.’ (Z. Çelik, 1991, pi6) The third and perhaps the most radical transformation started in the 1960s, when Istanbul started to attract migrants from all over the country. This third transformation can be analysed in different phases: In the 1950s and 1960s public housing, mass housing production and housing cooperatives were the main developments, but these mainly government-funded projects did not meet the demand, especially in big cities like Istanbul when it started to attract an extraordinary number of migrants. As a result of massive migration, illegal housing developments started to emerge in the 1950s on green areas or empty lands near the centre and then spread to the outskirts of the city as the number of migrants kept growing. SquatterizationGecekondulasma became the main pattern to meet the housing demands of newcomers. Parallel to these developments, the existing city structure started to be transformed by new city plans where the municipality changed the land use patterns. The density of these areas was increased and existing low-rise housing units were developed into 5- or 6-storey apartment buildings at the initiative of the private sector. The Kocaeli earthquake in 1999 had a serious impact on new developments and not only the central government but the inhabitants themselves started to question whether their environment, the communal facilities, and the houses and flats themselves were earthquake resistant. This new phenomenon, together with the emerging economic dynamism, gave birth to a new transformation process. This process, which has come about only in recent years, may be classified as the fourth phase. Since the year 2000, Istanbul has been involved in a new transformation process with new urban transformation projects, transportation systems, new international investments, new land policies and Grand Projects. Since the year 2000, housing demand and provision in Turkey have been re-shaped, and both the public and private sectors have started to realise urban transformation projects based on new legal developments by the government and municipalities. Condominium projects have started to be large in scale and gated communities have become a reality. In this paper, the transformations that Istanbul has undergone since the beginning of the 20th century will be outlined and analysed. Future developments will be discussed in the conclusion. Copyright©2012 IAHS.
