Quality, complexity, sustainability: a contemporary trilemma

At a time of looming global economic and financial crisis, even of threatened default of sovereign funds, we assiduously watch with interest at any theory that try to prove us right by the present events and to suggest some plausible directions for the future. Sometimes these theories appear - just paraphrased - to provide unexpectedly the keys to our job as designers. A job that in the opinion of many seems today to be unable to meet the challenges posed by issues such as quality, complexity control, sustainability of architecture and of town reality. This, in a truly glocal perspective, played between local identity and global opportunities for design. This way, economy ends to form a metaphorical significance for the project activities, activities which, moreover, as we all know, have always been, if not conditioned, at least strongly interrelated with economic issues. Dani Rodrik is an Harvard economist, careful analyst of the present and author of “The Globalization Paradox”1. He argues that it is impossible, but perhaps even undesirable, anywhere and at the same time promoting the advancement of democratic institutions, of national identities and of the global opening of the markets. If we want globalization we have to waive or nation-state or political democracy, if we want democracy we have to choose between the nation-state and international economic integration, if we want to preserve self-determination of the nation-state we have to choose between strengthening democracy or globalization. Let us replace, in Rodrik’s paradox the terms democracy, self-determination of peoples and globalization, with other three current terms, popular and seemingly indispensable in the context of architectural design : quality, complexity and sustainability of the building. I think we are again in front of a trilemma. If we pursue architectural quality as a local value, we grasp the meaning of sustainability but we miss the opportunity of managing the complexity of the global context; if we care of complexity and of its control by design, we could produce sustainable projects but we must give up the local roots of architectural quality; if we place the center of our design on sustainability we must choose between pursuing global or local quality of the project. As with any dilemma or trilemma that it is, the solution lies in coming off the fence. Dani Rodrik , as economist, concludes having no doubt: between democracy, self determination and globalization he favors the first two. He takes sides with an intelligent globalization, able to keep this into account. We can do the same advocating a management of design complexity able to keep in mind the reasons of globalization but choosing for local quality and sustainability of architecture as indispensable values.