4
The opportunity for upstream practice

Exactly what form upstream practice takes, is slightly harder to define. If upstream practice is concerned with enacting systemic change, it is relevant to understand the nature of the problems we are dealing with today.
                       The pursuit of knowledge in the 20th century namely involved the construction of isolated and specialised disciplinary silos to ‘own’ problems. However, in the 21st century today, many of the problems that exist are so complex that no single disciplinary silo can take ownership of them. Helsinki Design Lab best describes this predicament,

“While we have become better at defining and tackling issues within individual ‘dots,’ the gaps between them—those spaces between deep silos of expertise—are where the challenges of the 21st century lie. We are barely able to name this area without resorting to metaphors, let alone describe the territory richly or deliver replicable results on the challenges that lurk there.”
This is where the positioning of architecture as a Third Culture of knowledge may offer some assistance. Broadly speaking, between the discipline of science and the discipline of humanities, sits architecture  — the product of many disciplines. Given that architects take the middle path between these two disciplines in everyday design practice, why could they not apply this same approach to systemic challenges upstream?
                       The space between the silos is where I believe the opportunity lies for architects looking for more impactful, responsible and resilient ways of practice. How this practice manifests beyond the bounds of the studio or the building site remains a question this research seeks to answer.

---

←4

→