Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Articles

Vol. 5 No. 1 (2025)

Speculating a swarm-based symbiotic architecture in the era of Mothering Nature

DOI
https://doi.org/10.7454/arsnet.v5i1.146
Published
2025-04-30
Article downloads
41
Submitted
2025-03-17
Accepted
2025-04-27

Abstract

This experimental design study explores forms of adaptive architecture that reflect the symbiotic connection between humans and nature. Responding to the growing ecological between human and nature, this paper speculates how architecture can be an entity that coexists and co-evolves with nature. Instead of positioning architecture as a static entity, this symbiotic architecture introduces the conceptual figure of Homo botanicus as human species that grows and regenerates nature as its imperative, initiating the era of Mothering Nature. The study starts by investigating the adaptive strategy of plants that grow symbiotically within their natural biomes. The biological growth mechanism of plants across three biomes—tropical, savannah, and coastal wetland—was examined, mapped, and translated into computational scripts. Such scripts serve as the basis of H. botanicus' living world: Verdantia, Aridstepia, and Aqualandis, exhibiting a close intertwine between species and their living system. The design envisions an architecture as a symbiont that regenerates nature together with its natural ecosystem. This study demonstrates the understanding of architecture not as exploitative but co-evolving, growing with nature's innate logic and contributing to its ecological resilience.

References

  1. Anker, P. (2005). The closed world of ecological architecture. The Journal of Architecture, 10(5), 527–552. https://doi.org/10.1080/13602360500463230

  2. Barragan-Jason, G., de Mazancourt, C., Parmesan, M. C., Singer, M. C., & Loreau, M. (2021). Human–nature connectedness as a pathway to sustainability: A global meta-analysis. Conservation Letters, 15(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/CONL.12852

  3. Bulatović, K., Bunjak, K., & Persiani, S. (2016). Symbiotic architecture between science and utopia [Paper Presentation]. Going Digital:
    Innovation in Art, Architecture, Science and Technology Conference, Belgrade, Serbia.

  4. Bulatović, K., & Bunjak, K. (2013). Symbiosis – a response on contemporary organic architecture [Paper Presentation]. International Conference and Exhibition on Architecture, Belgrade, Serbia.

  5. Coray, D. Q. (2020). Symbiotic urbanism: An eco-systemic perspective on social and environmental repair for urban development initiatives in Medellín, Colombia. Arkitekturax, 2(2), 55–73. https://doi.org/10.29097/26191709.269

  6. Delaux, P.-M., & Schornack, S. (2021). Plant evolution driven by interactions with symbiotic and pathogenic microbes. Science, 371(6531). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aba6605

  7. Faegri, K., & van der Pijl, L. (1979). Principles of pollination ecology (3rd ed.). Elsevier Science.

  8. Harrison, A. L. (Ed.). ( 2013 ). Architectural theories of the environment: Posthuman territory. Routledge.

  9. Harari, Y. N. (2015). Sapiens: A brief history of humankind. Harper.

  10. Jackson, H. (2002). Toward a symbiotic coevolutionary approach to architecture. In P. J. Bentley & D. W. Corne (Eds.), Creative evolutionary systems: The Morgan Kaufmann series in Artificial Intelligence (pp. 299–313). Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-155860673-9/50049-5

  11. Kurokawa, K. (1977). Metabolism in architecture. Westview Press.

  12. Kurokawa, K. (1994). The philosophy of symbiosis. Academy Editions.

  13. Kurle, C. M., Cadotte, M. W., Seo, M., Dooner P., & Jones H. P. (2023). Considering humans as integral components of “nature.” Ecological Solutions and Evidence, 4(1). https://doi.org/10.1002/2688-8319.12220

  14. Margulis, L. (1992). Symbiosis in cell evolution: Microbial communities in the Archean and Proterozoic Eons (2nd ed.). Freeman. (Original work published 1981)

  15. O’Donnell, C. (2015). Niche tactics: Generative relationships between architecture and site. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group.

  16. Paramita, K. D., Yatmo, Y. A., Atmodiwirjo, P., & Suryantini, R. (2023). Multispecies contact zones: The entangled interior grounds of domestic livestock keeping. Interiors, 13(1), 82–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/20419112.2024.2335022

  17. Parisi, L. (2017). Symbiotic architecture: Prehending digitality. Theory, Culture & Society, 26(2–3), 346–374. https://doi.org/10.1177/0263276409103121

  18. Riechers, M., Balázsi, Á., García-Llorente, M., & Loos, J. (2021). Human-nature connectedness as leverage point. Ecosystems and People, 17(1), 215–221. https://doi.org/10.1080/26395916.2021.1912830

  19. Šijaković, M., & Perić, A. (2018). Symbiotic architecture: Redefinition of recycling design principles. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 7(1), 67–79. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foar.2017.12.002

  20. Smith, S. E., & Read, D. J. (2008). Mycorrhizal symbiosis (3rd ed.). Academic Press.

  21. Steffen, W., Crutzen, P. J., & McNeill, J. R. (2007). The Anthropocene: Are humans now overwhelming the great forces of nature. AMBIO: A Journal of the Human Environment, 36(8), 614–621. https://doi.org/10.1579/0044-7447(2007)36[614:TAAHNO]2.0.CO;2

  22. Szövényi, P., Waller, M., & Kirbis, A. (2019). Evolution of the plant body plan. Current Topics in Developmental Biology, 131, 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.ctdb.2018.11.005

  23. Zelenski, J., Warber, S., Robinson, J. M., Logan, A. C., & Prescott, S. L. (2023). Nature connection: Providing a pathway from personal to planetary health. Challenges14(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.3390/challe14010016

  24. Zylstra, M. J., Knight, A. T., Esler, K. J., & Le Grange, L. L. L. (2014). Connectedness as a core conservation concern: An interdisciplinary review of theory and a call for practice. Springer Science Reviews, 2, 119–143. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40362-014-0021-3

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.