Crowd-funding as "Cost of Sustainability"

I recently read an article on archdaily.com on the “Role of Crowd-funding in Architecture”. It was seeking reader responses regarding this query and this blog entry is an indirect response to that.

Crowd-funding is a novel yet contentious idea for Architecture projects. Government architecture projects are already funded from public money (taxes, duties etc.) so involving crowd-funding in those is a dishonest approach at the onset. It’s like asking for double taxes on a single commodity. Private projects on the other hand are most of the times profit oriented and the profits are meant for a private entity, so why public should fund for such projects.

So, while looking for crowd-funding options in architecture we are only left with an interface zone which includes, privately funded projects completely dedicated to public. Here too the scope of crowd-funding could be for part portion only.

But in my view, there is a relatively better candidate available in Architecture projects for use of crowd-funding, and that is “Cost of Sustainability”.

There is no denying that sustainable development is need of the time, and not only in architecture. But in Indian architecture fraternity there is a wide spread belief that sustainability is only a cosmetic term, which is largely an incorrect interpretation. Main reason behind this belief is peer reviews arising from the excess cost involved in executing sustainable projects. In present Indian scenario, achieving sustainability adds on to basic project cost, so project stakeholders are not much interested in taking up this burden.  And since clients are not ready to spend, so the architects too are not keen on investing their skills for it. Sustainable architecture do form part of buildings; majority of them incorporating it due to associated relaxations in FSI norms; while some do it as a building USP. But overall, this image of sustainability being an ornamental fixture in architecture is sticking.

So, in my view if we could standardize crowd-funding as Cost of Sustainability then this approach of various stakeholders towards sustainability in architecture could be changed. As mentioned above, the scope of doing this is very limited. Why would public pay for it, even if it is sustainability.

Well, this is where we should innovate. Architects have to redefine sustainability in architecture in way so that, a) The sustainable nature of the architectural product essentially gives back to society (or public) a return of investment, rather than just giving back to primary stakeholders, b) we convert sustainability from just being a building’s USP to a society’s USP.

This might be a far better approach than to cast it aside as a cosmetic term in architecture. Thence we have to consistently look for newer ideas and play our part in providing sustainability in Architecture its deserved place.