Fowlow, Loraine DearstyneBlanchard, David Lee2017-12-182017-12-182007http://hdl.handle.net/1880/103834Bibliography: p. 73Thesis is in colour.In the battle between science and environmental architecture, science has driven much of the design. The term sustainability currently refers to envi­ronmental sustainability . When applied to architecture, the concern for the en­vironment has rendered architectural discourse into a collection of technology and engineering breakthroughs that have at its heart attempted to define what is truly sustainable. While the goal of sustainable living can be strengthened by innovations in high efficient glass, photo voltaic cells, efficiency, and advanced technology, most of these methods highlight our capacity to defy the environ­ment around us from embracing the potential of what is already there. Much of the blame for this crisis, originates from the triumphs of the modern indus­trial age which initiated a dream of protecting ourselves from the elements. So much in fact that environmental architecture has become conditioned by our ability to defy nature with what is basically a collection of technological innova­tions; effectively constructing an environmental advocacy based on mechanical hardware and technical reports. Before architecture was defensive, it was resistant. The environment and its natural systems became the source of inspiration for traditional societ­ies which sought order and cooperation, rather than oppositional rigidity. The notion of a symbiotic partnership highlighted the necessity of building with the land, its structures, and processes. A symbiotic relationship between building and nature is only possible if the building fights entropy like a natural system, combining the man-made with the environment. If the built environment is ca­pable of cooperative flexibility rather than oppositional rigidity, then we sustain the environment, and the environment sustains us. The impetus of this MOP is the idea that much can be learned from the traditional relationship between architecture and ecology, between environment and response. And while our society is much different than that of the past, our built forms and infrastructure are as much as our environment today then what the natural expanses of land shaped for traditional societies of the past. What remains constant is the necessity for a cooperative relationship. If architecture is to once again establish a relationship with the environment, buildings need to be relevant and functional for the community that it serves. Energy efficient buildings alone that fail to interface with both the man-made and natural envi­ronment may suffer premature obsolescence and encourage major alteration or outright demolition and replacement.iii, 73 leaves : ill. ; 30 cm.engUniversity of Calgary graduate students retain copyright ownership and moral rights for their thesis. You may use this material in any way that is permitted by the Copyright Act or through licensing that has been assigned to the document. For uses that are not allowable under copyright legislation or licensing, you are required to seek permission.master thesis10.11575/PRISM/2833