No. 28 (2024): Public works, common value
Essays and Viewpoint

Beyond the Euro-Western Model: Public Work as a Boundary between Mending and Innovation

Filippo Angelucci
Dipartimento di Architettura, Università degli Studi “G. d’Annunzio” di Chieti-Pescara
Bio
Armen Shatvoryan
Facoltà di Architettura, National University of Architecture and Construction of Armenia
Bio
Andrea Di Cinzio
Dipartimento di Architettura, Università degli Studi “G. d’Annunzio” di Chieti-Pescara
Bio

Published 2024-10-29

Keywords

  • Differentiated integration,
  • Boundary,
  • Open Work,
  • Meta-Design,
  • Interdisciplinarity

How to Cite

Angelucci, F., Shatvoryan, A., & Di Cinzio, A. (2024). Beyond the Euro-Western Model: Public Work as a Boundary between Mending and Innovation. TECHNE - Journal of Technology for Architecture and Environment, (28), 49–59. https://doi.org/10.36253/techne-15861

Abstract

In post-Soviet non-European cities, the opposition between the negation of signs of the past and the exaltation of new national identities often generates a dichotomy in the value production of public works. It oscillates between the Euro-Western models of intensive building that privatise the public dimension and the re-propositions of pre-modern public space typologies. Conversely, research in Yerevan, Armenia, reveals a possible third way oscillating between mending and innovation public works. Through a process of differentiated integration to build, stabilise, and reconstruct variable contextual relationships, the building/open-space system takes on value as a boundary organism, becoming an artefact that co-evolves with social and environmental changes.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

  1. Boym, S. (1994), Common Places: Mythologies of Everyday Life in Russia, Harvard University Press, Cambridge/London.
  2. Darieva, T. and Kaschuba, W. (Eds.) (2007), Representations on the Margins of Europe: Politics and Identities in the Baltic and South Caucasus States, Campus Verlag, New York.
  3. Di Battista, V. (2014), “La tecnologia dell’architettura nell’intervento sul costruito”, in AA.VV., La cultura tecnologica nella scuola milanese, Maggioli Editore, Sant’Arcangelo di Romagna, I, pp. 45-54.
  4. Ferrari, A. (2018), “L’Armenia moderna: rinascita nazionale e risorgimento mancato”, Studi irlandesi. A Journal of Irish Studies, Vol. 8(8), pp. 69-103. Available at: http://dx.doi.org/10.13128/SIJIS-2239-3978-23314.
  5. Geldof, G.D. (2005), Coping with Complexity in Integrated Water Management. On the Road to Interactive Implementation, Tauw, Deventer.
  6. Giaccardi, E. and Fischer, G. (2008), “Creativity and Evolution: A Metadesign Perspective”, Digital Creativity, Vol. 19(1), pp. 19-32. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/14626260701847456.
  7. Heiko, C. and Fehlings, S.C. (2023), “The Transformation of Green Zones in Yerevan, Armenia: Domestication of Nature, Times of Ruination and the Idea of ‘New Hanging Gardens’”, Global Environment, Vol. 16(2), pp. 291-324. Available at: https://doi.org/10.3197/ge.2023.160205.
  8. Losasso, M. (2022), “Interconnected Crises and Design Complexity”, Techne – Journal of Technology for Architecture and Environment, Vol. 23, pp.7-9. Available at: https://doi.org/10.36253/techne-12913.
  9. Mussinelli, E., Tartaglia, A. and Castaldo, G. (2020), “The Time of the City between Nature and Artifice”, Techne – Journal of Technology for Architecture and Environment, Vol. 20, pp.131-139. Available at: https://doi.org/10.13128/techne-8243.
  10. Roe, J. and McCay, L. (2021), Restorative Cities. Urban design for mental health and wellbeing, Bloomsbury Publishing, London/New York.
  11. Secchi, B. (2002), “Diary 10. Projects, Visions, Scenarios”, Planum. Available at: http://www.planum.net/diario-10-progetti-visions-scenari-bernardo-secchi (Accessed on 29/12/2023).
  12. Sennett, R. (2022), “La politica della città nascosta/Forme aperte”, in Sendra, P. and Sennett, R., Progettare il disordine. Idee per la città del XXI secolo, Treccani, Roma, pp. 17-51.
  13. Settis, S. (2017), Architettura e democrazia. Paesaggio, città, diritti civili. Giulio Einaudi Editore, Torino.
  14. Spita, L. (2018), “Imperi-Stati-Nazioni e il pensiero dello spazio”, in Secchi R. and Spita, L. (Eds.), Architettura tra due mari, Quodlibet, Macerata, I, pp. 35-120.
  15. Zejnilović, E., Husukić, E., Ðuho, N., Astrouskaya, T. and Manahasa, E. (2024), “Memory and Placemaking: Competing Memory, Forgetting and Distorted Rediscovery in Eastern European Cities”, in Smaniotto Costa, C., Fathi, M. and García-Esparza, J.A. (Eds.), Dynamics of Placemaking, Vol. 1, Brill, Leiden, NL, pp. 79-98.
  16. Zenobi, V. (2019), “Le trasformazioni urbane nella Yerevan post-sovietica. Note su élite, economia e retorica della continuità”, in Comai, G., Frappi, C., Pedrini, G. and Rova, E. (Eds.), Armenia, Caucaso e Asia Centrale. Ricerche 2019, Edizioni Cà Foscari, Venezia, I, pp. 305-324. Available at: https://doi.org/10.30687%2F978-88-6969-340-3%2F015.