book of abstracts ARbD'14

Fourth International Conference on Architectural Research by Design: ARbD’14
Unifying Academia and Practice through Research
© Labart Editions
João Menezes de Sequeira
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
1
PRESENTATION AND SCOPE
Research by design is a broader concept that includes “practice-based research” and “practice-led research”
which means that we are talking about two kinds of methodologies of research: one involves research
through practice and the other involves research about practice. The difference is methodological, because
one is research where the inquiry is leading to new understandings about and within the processes of design
conception while the other is research about something that does not yet exist and which uses architectural
practice as the research method.
In terms of the general concept of architectural research, this conference adopts the definition given in the
EAAE Research Charter (2012), which we helped to develop: “Architectural research is original investigation
undertaken in order to generate knowledge, insights and understanding based on competences, methods
and tools proper to the discipline of architecture. It has its own particular knowledge base, mode, scope,
tactics and strategies.” And in turn, research by design is defined as “any kind of inquiry in which (…) the
architectural design process forms the pathway through which new insights, knowledge, practices or
products come into being. It generates critical inquiry through design work.”
The Fourth International Conference on Architectural Research by Design (ARbD’14) has invited
researchers and professionals to contribute their specific vision through scientific articles to be
presented in scheduled sessions in Lisbon on 8th May / 9th May 2014.
We consider that there are four main themes subject to discussion at this conference:
Theme I: Knowledge
Architectural knowledge: What kinds of knowledge are we talking about when we consider research
by design? Is it insight specific to architectural knowledge, or is it about method?
Theme II: Methods
Transparent processes of inquiry: What is the “process of inquiry” in architectural practice? In what
way can we talk about a research process that is based on the design process? And in what way can
we use the notion of transparency in relation to research by design? Is it possible to demonstrate the
value of research by design? How can we promote research by design as an important methodology
for spatial design and the creation of public space?
Theme III: Communication and notation.
What kind of modes of communication should be considered to be adequate to the scientific
community? Architectural practice uses different types of notation, mainly drawings and physical
models, and nowadays a range of digital media, for communicating to the various agents within the
architectural industry, whereas traditional academic research tends to use mainly verbal forms of
communication. What type of notations can be used, and what kind of weight should be given to each
type, in architectural research by design? How can we communicate the creative process? Is it even
possible to do so? Or should we assume that in research by design only the more descriptive part of
research can be explicitly communicated?

DARQ - ARENA - LabART - CCB
MAY 2014
Theme IV: Evaluation and assessment.
How can we evaluate data and outcomes in the context of research by design? Should originality,
significance and rigour be the same in architectural practice as it is within research? Who should make
the assessment? Should recognized practicing architects, with no academic positions, be appointed as
members in the assessment process? Should relevance for practice, theoretical and procedural
consistency, transparency of the processes and outcomes, inter-disciplinarity and trans-disciplinarity,
engagement with architectural competences and experiences, be included as part of the assessment?
It is in the nature of research by design that it should be useful and have more engagement with the
world outside academia; therefore should ‘impact’ on society be a measure? Also, what can we learn
about research by design from other fields where it is more developed, such as in industrial design?
Organizing Bodies
Architectural Lab. Research Centre LabART – Studies on Architecture and Media SAM
Architectural Department DARQ-ECATI-ULHT
Architectural Research in Europe Network Association ARENA.
Fundação Centro Cultural de Belém CCB /Garagem Sul
Organizing Committee
⌂ Professor João Menezes de Sequeira
Director of Architectural Lab. Research Centre LabART / Head of Architectural Department DARQ-
ECATI-UHT / Founding Member of Architectural Research in Europe Network Association ARENA.
⌂ Professor Patrícia Santos Pedrosa
Member of the Scientific Committee of Architectural Lab. Research Centre LabART / Pedagogical
Coordinator of the Architectural Department DARQ-ECATI-UHT
⌂ Professor Murray Fraser
Founding Member of Architectural Research in Europe Network Association ARENA; Vice-Dean of
Research at Bartlett Faculty of Built Environment; Professor of Architecture and Global Culture at
Bartlett Faculty of Built Environment.
⌂ Professor Dalila Rodrigues
Administrator of Fundação Centro Cultural de Belém CCB. /Garagem Sul
Secretary
Lurdes Oliveira
phone: (+351) 217 515 500 (ext. 2404)
email: researchbydesign@ulusofona.pt
SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE
Flora Samuel – School of Architecture / University of Sheffield
João M. B. Menezes de Sequeira – LabART / DARQ / Lusófona University
Johan De Walsche – Faculty of Design Sciences / University of Antwerp
Johan Verbeke – Aarhus School of Architecture and Faculty of Architecture Sint-Lucas
Murray Fraser – Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment / University College of London

© Labart Editions
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
3
Keynote Speaker
Theme I: Knowledge
JONATHAN MICHAEL HILL
Director, MPhil/PhD Architectural Design. Professor of Architecture and Visual Theory at Bartlett
School of Architecture
Abstract
In contemporary discourse and practice it is familiar to discuss design research as if it is new to
architecture. But this is to ignore the history of the architect. Combining a project and a text that
share a research theme and a productive relationship, the design PhD is a comparatively new
architectural qualification. But its methods and means are not. Indeed, they have been invaluable to
the architect for over 500 years.
Short Biography:
An architect and architectural historian, Jonathan Hill is Professor of Architecture and Visual Theory and Director
of the MPhil/PhD Architectural Design programme at the Bartlett School of Architecture, UCL. Jonathan is the
author of The Illegal Architect (1998), Actions of Architecture (2003), Immaterial Architecture (2006) and Weather
Architecture (2012), editor of Occupying Architecture (1998) and Architecture—the Subject is Matter (2001), and
co-editor of Critical Architecture (2007). He is also a series editor of the Ashgate ‘Design Research in Architecture’
books.

MAY 2014
Keynote Speaker
Theme II – Methods
RICHARD BLYTHE
Dean of the School of Architecture and Design at RMIT University
Abstract:
Professor Richard Blythe is the primary author of the successful EC Marie Curie ITN grant ADAPTr which
brings together a network of European institutions in research training for creative practitioners from
the disciplines of architecture, design and art. Primarily the training model has been structured around
the practice based PhD developed by RMIT University in Melbourne, Australia and extends that model
in a European context. Unique aspects of this model include the ways in which this approach to PhD
training situates research in the studios of practitioners and brings practitioners together as a collective
research community. In some ways this move to re-centre research can be seen as a radical new model
for a ‘cloud’ like university or research entity.
This paper will draw on observations of both the RMIT and ADAPTr program and the research
conducted within them to identify key elements of this approach to doctoral training and to point to
key training techniques and research methods used. The lecture will move step by step through a
typical candidature and then use specific examples to illustrate the kinds of knowledge produced. The
lecture will conclude with some speculations about what happens beyond training in practice based
research and the possible value and implications of the approach outside the discipline of architecture.
Short Biography:
Dr Richard Blythe is Professor in Architecture and Dean, Architecture + Design at RMIT University,
Australia a position he has held since June 2007. In 2010 he led the establishment of the RMIT
University Creative Practice Research PhD program in Ghent, Belgium and was the primary author and
lead researcher for the 2013 €4M EU Marie Curie ITN grant ADAPT-r. In 2013 Richard led the
enlargement of this program to RMIT’s Barcelona campus. Richard was a founding director of the
architecture practice Terroir and Company Director until 2012 and continues to contribute to the
Terroir team. The work of Terroir has been recognized through exhibition and publication nationally
and internationally. Richard served as Chair of the Australian Institute of Architects National Education
Committee from 2005-2011 and his most important achievements in that role were: leading the
development and adoption of the AIA Research Policy and associated documents; implementing and
refining the AIA’s Education Medal, now known as the Neville Quarry Architectural Education Prize.
Richard’s academic passion is creative practice, developing approaches to creative practice research
and in building communities of creative practitioner researchers. Richard undertook a Velux visiting
professorship in Aarhus, Denmark in 2011. Prior to taking up his position at RMIT Richard lectured at
the University of Tasmania for 14yrs where he served as Deputy Head of the School of Architecture
and was the Vice Chancellor’s representative on the Tasmanian Government’s Building and
Construction Industries Council. Richard gained a B.EnvDes and B.Arch from the Tasmanian State
Institute of Technology and an M.Arch (research) specializing in twentieth century Australian
architectural history from the University of Melbourne. Richard received a PhD from RMIT in 2009.
During 2000-2001 Richard served as President of the Society of Architectural Historians Australia and
New Zealand.

© Labart Editions
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
5
Keynote Speaker
Theme III – Communication and notation
SUE-ANNE WARE FAILA
Associate Professor, RMIT University, Landscape Architecture Program
Abstract:
This lecture will explore various modes of communicating new knowledge within practice-based
research. It will present alternative modes of PhDs examinations and PhD theses which reflect the
nature of what is being examined.
Short Biography:
Professor Ware is an internationally recognised academic in design practice research. Her publications
are published by internationally recognised, high-quality outlets in the discipline such as Sun, Abrams,
SpaceMaker, Metropolis, Verlagshaus and A ranked Excellence in Research Australia (ERA) journals.
Her track record includes competitive international funding from: The Japan Foundation, The National
Endowment for the Arts (USA), the Graham Foundation, and the Sidney Myer Foundation. Her research
outputs as creative works have won international awards featured in IFLA and AILA (SIEV X memorial,
the Road as Shrine), ASLA (A Memorial to Gang Violence) as well as exhibited in the prestigious
Melbourne International Festival (The Anti-Memorial to Heroin Overdose Victims). Prof Leon van
Schaik and Prof. Ware were recently were awarded an ARC Discovery grant; (DP 110100939) Design
practice research: uncovering the role of spatial intelligence in designing the built environment for
$150,000 AUD. In 2013 she was awarded a $47,000 grant from the Office of Teaching and Learning to
develop a new Masters of Landscape Architecture program across 6 universities in New Zealand and
Australia.

MAY 2014
Keynote Speaker
Theme IV – Evaluation and assessment
FREDRIK NILSSON
Professor, Head of Department at Chalmers University
Abstract:
Immersed assessment:
Immanent and affirmative evaluation in architectural design research.
Evaluation of research and assessment criteria have come in focus, and been widely and increasingly
discussed during last decade, not least in relation to research in the creative fields of architecture,
design and art. Issues of quality have been debated in both PhD and senior research, where also
aspects of ‘impact’ on society, research communities and broader professional fields as well as
accurate levels of ‘doctorateness’ in PhDs have been brought into the discussion recently.
All this is highly relevant to articulate in practice-based and architectural design research, but it also
brings several challenges.
This paper discusses some approaches to evaluation and assessment of research in creative and
practice-based fields, and tries to bring some conceptual frameworks into play. Being immersed or
embedded in practice, as both researcher and evaluator, generates a specific and constant tension
between creation and criticism (Braidotti), and calls for frameworks for immanent, affirmative
evaluations (Deleuze) which also are made explicit. Both the connoisseur’s perception and ability to
appreciate subtle qualities as well as the critic’s ability to disclose and make vivid articulations seem to
be needed (Eisner). The future-oriented and creative characteristics of design research makes it evade
the positioning as dealing mainly with either the intensive compositions of art, the virtual immanence
of philosophy, or the actual references of science (Delanda). The development of specific frameworks
for evaluating architectural design research seems to be needed, integrating characteristics from both
creative practice and scholarly research.
Short Biography:
Fredrik Nilsson, is an architect SAR/MSA, PhD, Professor of Architectural Theory at Chalmers University
of Technology, and Partner and Chief Research Strategist at White Arkitekter, Sweden, where he was
Head of Research and Development 2007-2014. Nilsson is currently Head of Department of
Architecture at Chalmers, and director of the research program “Architecture in the Making:
Architecture as a Making Discipline and Material Practice”. He has taught and lectured at several
schools for architecture and design in the Nordic countries. Nilsson’s research is mainly directed to
contemporary architecture, architectural theory and philosophy. He has a special interest in the
epistemology of architecture, design theory and the interaction between conceptual thinking, practical
design work and production, aiming for contributions to reinforced exchange between research and
architectural practice. Nilsson has been engaged as opponent and external evaluator of PhD and senior
research internationally. He is author and editor of several books and frequently publishes articles,
architectural criticism and reviews of books.

© Labart Editions
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
7
Lectures
Theme I: Knowledge
SUSANA VENTURA, PhD
CEAU-FAUP, Centro de Estudos de Arquitectura e Urbanismo da Faculdade de Arquitectura da
Universidade do Porto.
Abstract
Material experimentation in Peter Zumthor’s creative process:
Research design through material inquiry
Material experimentation in Peter Zumthor’s creative process seeks to explain the different materials
experimentations present in the creative process of Peter Zumthor which lead him to the final work of
architecture, resulting in his atmospheres (or the “saturation of the atom”, as V. Wolf would say).
Experimentation processes are mainly characteristic of avant-gard architectures that develop new
forms of thought in architecture design, however mainly through form paradigms and models.
Nonetheless, Zumthor has been inquiring and creating experimental processes through material
composition, rooted in the work of land-artists such as Joseph Beuys or Mario Merz, that imply the
overall design of the final work of architecture. One of the several examples is how the lead floor of
the Bruder Klaus Kapelle was meticulously designed carefully combining not only several processes
involving the composition, amount and proportions of materials but also a peculiar way tested to the
very limit how the liquid was then spilled and crystallized. The present lecture will explain several
experimental processes present in a series of Peter Zumthor’s, with an important focus to the design
process of the Serpentine Summer Pavilion during 2011, one of the works the author has accompanied
Zumthor during its process of creation during her PhD research.
Keywords: Expressive Matter, Material experimentation, creative process, Peter Zumthor, Atmosphere, Joseph
Beuys, Land-Art.
Memorial in Vardo, Peter Zumthor. Photograph: Peter Zumthor’s Archive

MAY 2014
Short Biography:
Architect, Writer, Curator & Post-Doc researcher. PhD in Philosophy - Aesthetics (May 2013), Faculty of Social
and Human Sciences of Nova University Lisbon (FCSH-UNL) with the thesis Architecture’s Body without Organs,
supervised by the renown Philosopher and Professor José Gil (Classification: Very Good by unanimity - the highest
classification) which included research residences at the architecture studios of Diller Scofidio + Renfro (New
York, March – May 2008), Lacaton & Vassal (Paris, April - June 2009) and Peter Zumthor (Haldenstein, December
2010 – February 2011). Attendance of the Master in Aesthetics (FCSH-UNL: 2005-2006). Architecture Graduate
from Coimbra University (darq-FCTUC, 2003), with the final graduation thesis I have a Crow in my head when I
lay down among the garden grass about the concept of happiness in the thought of Le Corbusier. Erasmus
student at the Superior Technique School of Architecture of Barcelona (ETSAB-UPC). Internship at the
architecture studios of Gonçalo Byrne (Lisboa, 2003) and João Mendes Ribeiro (Coimbra, 2004). Awarded with a
four years PhD scholarship provided by FCT – Foundation for Science and Technology (2007-2011). Shortlisted in
the international competition for Chief Curator of the 3rd edition of The Lisbon Architecture Triennial. In 2011-
2012, was an invited Professor at Vasco da Gama University School in Coimbra of “Philosophy and Architecture”,
“Aesthetics of Landscape I” and “Curatorship resources” and has been lecturing at other Portuguese and
International Universities (FAUP, DAAUM, Studio 3: Experimental Architectures among others). Collaborator and
co-editor of the section “Close-up” (with Pedro Leão Neto) of Scopio Magazine, for which has already interviewed
Hélène Binet, Philippe Ruault and Bas Princen. Has also been publishing in several magazines (Log, NADA, A21,
among others).
Currently, developing a post-doc research project untitled Toward an intensive architecture at The Faculty of
Architecture of the University of Porto (FAUP) and has also been invited by the curator Pedro Campos Costa to
be part of the Portuguese Representation at the 14th International Exhibition of the Venice Architecture Biennial,
from June to October 2014.
LUCY MONTAGUE, PhD
Bartlett Faculty of the Built Environment, School of Planning, University College London
Abstract
Designing the urban:
Reflections on the role of theory in the individual design process
Acting within the context of multiple constraints (site, budget, brief, clients, users, public policy and
regulation) the urban designer is required to respond to the various and sometimes conflicting
interests in an effort to express urban meaning through urban form (Castells, 1983). In this complex
situation some design decisions are determined by the inherited context however, when a decision
cannot be determined this way the designer must make a value judgment. These decisions may be
made arbitrarily but it is more likely that the individual prioritises objectives in the evaluation
alternatives.
Principles may be acquired from a variety of sources including experience, education, episodic
knowledge, currently accepted paradigms of the field, or from theories in urban design, and
subscription to them may be explicit or implicit.
Currently there appears to be little clarity in how theory influences the urban designer’s actions. This
paper will present the findings of PhD research that seeks to explore the ways in which theories in
urban design might influence the creative process of urban design. Its objectives are to study existing
theory related to design, examine the process of design and urban design, and relate knowledge of
urban design theory to the design process. Having reviewed possible research by design methodologies
and identified four approaches (quasi-scientific, speculation, reflection and creative practice), a
reflective one has been taken based upon Donald Schön’s ‘The Reflective Practitioner’ (1983). This is

© Labart Editions
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
9
executed through the generation of an urban design (site evaluation, framework (and masterplan for
a site in London) and accompanying commentary that records the design activity, followed by an
analysis of and reflection on the design and commentary offering insights into the use of theory within
the process.
Keywords: Reflection; urban; theory; design.
Excerpt from the framework design development
Short Biography:
Lucy recently completed her PhD at Edinburgh College of Art, The University of Edinburgh, and took up a position
at the Bartlett School of Planning as Teaching Fellow in Urban Design. She is Deputy Director of the Bartlett's
new MRes in Interdisciplinary Urban Design and coordinates and teaches a range of postgraduate urban design
modules across the school. Alongside this she continues her research, which focuses on the relationship between
theory and praxis in the built environment. She has previously tutored postgraduate urban design students at
Edinburgh College of Art and undergraduate architecture students at Edinburgh School of Architecture and
Landscape Architecture. An ARB Part II graduate, Lucy has worked for architectural firms in both London and
Melbourne, on a wide variety of projects in terms of scale and covering retail, residential, regeneration and
masterplanning.
JØRGEN HAUBERG, PhD
Head of Institute of Design and Communication at Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, School of
Architecture
Abstract
Research by Design:
Situating practice-based research as part of a tradition of knowledge production, exemplified
through the works of le Corbusier.
Research by design concerns the various ways in which design and research are generally
interconnected in the production of new knowledge through the act of designing. This paper discusses
the role and value of research by design in this context. Specifically through selected works of Le
Corbusier, it seeks to demonstrate, how the development of types and programs contributes to theory
building in architectural research.
The hypothesis is that from the Dom-ino houses (Le Corbusier 1914-15) to “The Five Point of a new
Architecture” (Le Corbusier, 1926), and then towards the design of a universal block of flats and an
actual skeleton frame, Le Corbusier’s work represents a series of models through which architectural
theory is developed through both direct engagement with practice and the basic media of architecture:
objects, sketches, diagrams, notations and texts.
Research is discrete from architectural design and practice – especially according to its degree of
generalization and contemplation: research explicitly seeks general and normative aspects. The paper

MAY 2014
suggests that Le Corbusier’s work reaches beyond single projects or unique works. By extracting rules
from the proposal – which in the end is based on an ethical argument – Le Corbusier moves between
the descriptive (the purely describing), the ideographic (the unique and exceptional), and the
nomothetic (the argued, rule setting). The process of creation or making precedes those of
examination and representation. The paper suggests that such work, though never intended as
research, demonstrates a hybrid practice between design and theory building, which contributes to
theory through research by design.
Short Biography:
2005- Head of Institute, Institute of Design and Communication
2000-12 Vice Dean
Chairman of board of Kunstnerkollegiet 2000-
Member of EAAEs Research Committee 2010-
Member of EAAEs Research by Design group 2010-
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENTWORK
The Modern Programme and the Linear City: to review architecture in the light of sustainable development.
About the Housing Question – Sustainable Building Types (working title).
Architecture and Sustainable Development
The Relative Autonomi of Architecture. Re-reading Modernism through Le Corbusier
PUBLICATIONS
The City as a Network. The Modern Programme and the Linear City. Research by Design – a Research Strategy.
Research by Design – a Research and Teaching Concept. Le Corbusier’s use of Color. About Artistic
Development Work. About the Modern House – and the Classical. Le Corbusier’s Villa Shodhan, preface. The
Relative Autonomi of Architecture. Closed Plan – Open Plan, the space of Adolf Loos and Le Corbusier.
EXHIBITIONS
1:1 Research by Design, kurator, Institut of Design and Communication (curator).
Digital Practice, research exhibition, Institute of Design and Communikation (curator).
MARTA SEQUEIRA, PhD
Centre for Art History and Artistic Research of the University of Évora
Abstract
For from design and through design and for design are all things
Research in architecture has mainly become a theoretical activity driven away from its subject’s core,
focusing in complementary fields. Analytical investigations are common – concerning historical
character, theoretical, constructive or technological – as well as propositional thesis – mainly regarding
construction and technology. Yet, you can find much instigation in this scientific area, which find its
significance in other domains – as for social sciences just as an example. However, project-based
theses, in which there are no antagonism or exclusion between theory and practice but rather promote
complementarity, are quite scarce. This paper aims to answer the question that seems natural and
consistent with the above scenario: how can we define a new paradigm, in which architecture would
be understood and portrayed as a system for producing and spreading knowledge? This seems to be
demanding: that the particular experience of architectural design – usually perceived as instinctive and
unique, therefore ineffable – becomes an instrument for universal knowledge. It is then proposed to
reevaluate two categories described by Bruce Archer “research for” and “through practice” attempting
to find a position for each at the academy’s agenda. In this way it is intended to demystify and clarify
the concept of project-based research and advanced education in architecture.

© Labart Editions
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
11
Case-study 1_MA project-based research _student Paulo Dias Case-study 2_PhD project-based
research_student José Maria Cumbre
Short Biography:
Marta Sequeira was born in Lisbon in 1977. She holds a professional degree in architecture from the Technical
University of Lisbon Faculty of Architecture (2001), has an Advanced Studies Diploma in Architectural Projects
(2005) and a PhD in Architectural Projects from the School of Architecture of Barcelona in the Barcelona Tech
(2008), with a thesis about Le Corbusier’s public spaces after World War II. Currently she is an assistant professor
at the Department of Architecture of the University of Évora.
She was Director of the Department of Architecture at the University of Évora (2011-2012), and Deputy Director
of the Doctoral Program in Architecture of the same university (2011-2013).
She has carried out research at the Le Corbusier Foundation in Paris (2006), and also at the Instituto Superior
Técnico and Faculty of Architecture at the Technical University of Lisbon (2007 and 2008 respectively) and at the
Centre for Art History and Artistic Research of the University of Évora (since 2008).
She has taught, as lecturer, in MSc and PhD studies both in Spain and Portugal. Presently, she teaches
Architectural Design I and II in the Master of Science in Architecture, and Architecture Lab I and II in the PhD in
Architecture in the University of Évora. She has a solid experience as an advisor in doctoral and master theses.
Her main research interests are Architectural Design of Le Corbusier – criticism and analysis. She has authored
several conference papers, journal article, book chapters and books on such topics and has been invited to speak
worldwide, including Portugal, Spain, England, Colombia, Germany and the United States. She was awarded the
University Texts in Human Sciences Competition 2009, organized by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and
Technology and by the Foundation Calouste Gulbenkian, and the ICAR-CORA Prize for the best doctoral thesis
2011, organized by the International Council for Research in Architecture.
She is presently preparing a postdoctoral research, financed by the Portuguese Foundation for Science and
Technology and supervised by Jean-Louis Cohen (New York University) and Jorge Spencer (Technical University
of Lisbon Faculty of Architecture) titled Le Corbusier and the immeuble-villas project of 1922. The modern housing
etymon.

MAY 2014
Lectures
Theme II: Methods
DIETER GEISSBÜHLER
Professor, Responsible Focus Material Master in Architecture and Head of the Research Group
Material Structure Energy in Architecture, Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts.
Abstract
Research by Design
The concept of combining theory and practice in the Master of Arts in Architecture course at the HSLU
– T&A forms the basis of the concept of Research by Design as applied by the Research Group Material
Structure Energy in Architecture. In the master thesis, students are obliged to hand in a practical design
work as well as a theory part ("thesis book"), which goes beyond a pure project documentation. A
theoretical thesis is proposed, developed and defended in the book by the respective student, while
the project tries to challenge the same thesis on a design task. The parallel presentation of both the
theoretical and practical in the book already leads to surprising insights. The parallel handling of both
theoretical and practical work reflects the special status of architectural knowledge and improves both
aspects.
These student works found a vast body of (raw) research material, out of which the research group,
which is in close interaction with the master education, already generated some research projects that
could be funded and executed subsequently.
The course, as well as the research work itself, deliberately incorporates a substantial part of "making".
While the students are guided to an experimental, open process in designing, many of the research
projects themselves include the hands-on experience of building prototypes or large-scale models. The
explicit knowledge that is only achievable through the physical making is made communicable and
reproducible through a process of reflection.
Short Biography
Prof Dieter Geissbühler is an architect and head of the Research Group Material Structure Energy in Architecture.
He is also a lecturer in the Master of Arts in Architecture course at the Lucerne School of Applied Sciences and
Arts.
After studies of architecture at the ETH Zurich he directed his own architectural practice with Alexander Galliker
from 1989 to 2005, and since 2006 with Gerlinde Venschott. From 1985 to 1994 he was leading assistant with
Prof Flora Ruchat-Roncati at the ETH Zurich. 1992 and 1993 he was lecturer at the ETH Zurich, since 2000 at the
Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts (HSLU – T&A). Since 2002 he is Professor and in charge of the
material focus in the Master of Arts in Architecture course.
ULI MATTHIAS HERRES
PhD candidate - Lucerne School of Applied Sciences and Arts and the ETH Zurich.
Abstract
Reverse Design
As a next stage to the Master Thesis the research group is currently establishing a path to allow the
execution of doctoral theses in collaboration with the ETH Zurich. In his thesis, Uli Herres examines the
role crafted production of buildings plays for architectural space. A crucial point is the question of

© Labart Editions
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
13
specific forms of knowledge. On the one hand, both craftsmanship and architectural design rely heavily
on tacit forms of knowledge (skills, experience) in addition to communicable knowledge. Secondly, the
erection of built architecture can be seen as a system of distributed knowledge, where the transfer of
knowledge from the architect towards the craftspeople is crucial for the successful implementation of
an architectural concept into physical space.
The methodology includes the investigation of case study buildings. One aspect of the survey could be
named "Reverse Design", deriving from the term "Reverse Engineering" in IT and machine industry,
where knowledge is gained by re-constructing existing structures. Here, the process of the making of
a building is re-experienced to be able to consciously reflect upon design decisions and problem-
solving strategies. One aim is to try to make aspects of the tacit knowledge (experience) of the
construction process communicable. In trying to incorporate tacit knowledge (experience, skills) into
scientific work, this strategy has also parallels to experimental archaeology. The lecture will give an
insight into the state of the thesis work, focusing on the derivation of its specific methodology.
Short Biography
Uli Matthias Herres is an architect and a research associate and PhD student at the Lucerne School of Applied
Sciences and Arts and the ETH Zurich.
Following an apprenticeship as a draughtsman, he studied architecture in Kaiserslautern (D) and Trondheim (NO),
including internships at OMA and Luc Merx /gagat. After working in architectural practices he joined the Master
of Arts in Architecture course as a teaching assistant in 2009. In 2012 he started working as a research associate.
In his work he explores the subject of craftsmanship in architecture in practice and theory. The dissertation on
the topic, supervised by Prof. Annette Spiro (ETH Zurich) and Prof. Dieter Geissbühler (HSLU – T&A Lucerne), is
funded by the Swiss National Foundation.
HOLGER SCHURK
PhD candidate - School of Architecture, Design and Civil Engineering, Zurich University of Applied
Sciences
Abstract
Manipulations in the Abstract Space
Every design production within an architectural project simultaneously spawns architectural knowledge. Hence
every design process is also a research process. Architectural knowledge, though, knows different formats, at the
same time as it can be assigned to different levels: on one level as explicit knowledge accessible to all those
involved, attained by reflection in the analytical and synthetical processes of designing, and on another level as
implicit knowledge created by the dynamic entanglement between designer and design object during synthetic
production, which remains inherent in the media of the design production.
In order to extract this implicit knowledge researchers must liberate the existing design media from their fixed
condition and reveal the convertibility and dynamic they reflected during the design process. This does not refer
to a reconstruction of the actual historical processes, it much more pertains to the construction of a space of
possibilities that reflects the intense interactions between theory and form, or between thinking and designing,
in an abstract form.
Based on drawings for the project of the National Library in Paris created by OMA/Rem Koolhaas in 1989,
different series of manipulations are applied. These manipulations encompass reductions, variations or
extensions guided both by predefined rules and creative processes. The method for investigating the depictions
referred to above is thus directly analogous to the essence of the design process that spawned same depictions.
Just as every design project also entails a retrieval of insight, the graphic investigation practised here also
encompasses the design processes.

MAY 2014
Représentations of the Bibliothèque de France, Paris, OMA/Rem Koolhaas, 1989
Graphic investigation based on drawings of the Bibliothèque de France by OMA/Rem Koolhaas, Holger Schurk, 2013
Short Biography
born 1969; 1997 Diploma in Architecture at the University of Stuttgart, Germany; 1998-2001 Collaboration with
several architecture firms in Stuttgart, Rotterdam und Amsterdam; since 2001 Partner in dform, Zurich,
Switzerland; 2001-2004 Junior faculty member at the ETH Zurich, Switzerland; 2005-2008 Senior lecturer at the
Berne University of Appplied Sciences, Switzerland; since 2008 Senior lecturer at the Zurich University of Applied
Sciences, Switzerland; since 2012 PhD candidate at the Academy of Fine Arts Vienna, Prof. Dr. Angelika Schnell;
EAAE Prize 2011-12 for Writings in architectural education for the essay "Design Or Research in Doing."

© Labart Editions
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
15
SVEN VERBRUGGEN, PhD
Professor at University of Antwerp and University of Ghent
Abstract
Poiesis or Semiosis in Architectural Design Practice
Parametricist Patrik Schumacher argues to embrace the continuous drive for innovation in his recent
treatise The Autopoiesis of Architecture. New Classicists or New Traditionalists consider it wiser to
choose working concepts over untested ones when it concerns the built environment. Research by
Design protagonists such as Ranulph Glanville and Jeremy Till make a persuasive case for the academic
quality of design by discharging creativity’s crucial role. Although these are all respectable positions it
can be argued that to overcome the implied either-or-choices we need to be more precise in
terminology.
In the fall of 2013 I participated, in collaboration with MikeViktorViktor Architects, in an exhibition in
Knokke (Belgium) that showcased five design researches on future alternative development of Belgian
coastal area. In this paper I will show how the appropriation of knowledge from bio-semiotician
Victoria N. Alexander (Alexander, 2013) resulted in a sharper design(process). Appropriating her
definition of both poiesis and semiosis led to a better understanding of what to create. This leeds to
the hypothesis that a more explicit terminology can help to overcome the aforementioned
oppositions.
Deltaclusters - contribution to the ‘Wisselland’ exhibition

MAY 2014
Short Biography
Sven Verbruggen is an architect, researcher and educator. At the University of Antwerp he has been teaching in
the master program. He is also involved in a design teaching studio at the University of Ghent. At both Universities
he conducts a PhD research on contemporary design theories. He has a wide experience in middle and large size
projects, as he was leading several projects for Neutelings Riedijk Architects and SOM. He is partner in the private
practice MikeViktorViktor architects. Earlier design driven research, that was also the basis for several teaching
studio assignments, is: New Event Space Typologies: the Stadium Alternative - 2011 & 2012; Typologies of
Healthcare Infrastructure - 2010; New Prison Typologies - 2009; Designing Sustainable Strategies for Urban and
Architectural Development in Areas with High Risk of Flooding. The recurring focus in his research and teaching
is the invention convention equilibrium in design practice.

© Labart Editions
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
17
Lectures
Theme III: Communication and notation
ANTHONY BURKE, PhD
Head of the School of Architecture, Faculty of Design, Architecture and Building, University of
Technology, Sydney
Abstract
Considering the diagram as design research
Architecture makes use of many forms of graphic notation that are central to design practice. While
there has been much written on the role of the drawing in architecture as a form of re-presentation
and reflective practice (Evans, Pallasmaa etc.), this paper argues that the diagram as a specific graphic
type, is an essential generative component of design research and central to claims for innovation or
the production of new knowledge through contemporary design, but not yet understood in the context
of design research generally.
Diagrams are a form of practice based research used specifically by architecture and concerned with
methods of design leading to proposals for not yet existing projects precisely through their capacity to
integrate non-architectural domains of knowledge into the architectural design process. As a
consequence, through analysis of case studies this paper speculates on how diagrams communicate,
both internally to the discipline (even each other) and externally to new extra-disciplinary research
fields, and in this sense, what work in terms of design research they do.
As an abstract and highly idiosyncratic but non-representational form of notation, the diagram
uniquely situates innovation within visual forms of enquiry. The diagram in this sense can be
understood to constitute its own form of design research that emerged in the nineties as a
consequence of the incapacity of traditional drawing techniques to address new arenas of enquiry,
levels of multi-disciplinary complexity and speculation within the architectural design process.
Short Biography
Anthony Burke is a Professor of Architecture and Head of the School of Architecture at the University of
Technology, Sydney and director of Offshore Studio. A graduate of Columbia University and the University of
NSW, Anthony is recognised internationally for his work in architectural design, curation and commentary. In
2012 he was co-creative director for the Australian Pavilion at the Venice Architecture Biennale, and recently
was invited by the Danish Agency for Culture to curate an architecture and design symposium as part of the 40th
the Sydney Opera House. A regular contributor to architectural media and public forums as an animated
advocate for design and architecture, Anthony is also the chair of the board of the Australian Design Centre
(ADC), and consults to industry and advisory groups on architecture, urbanism, and the emerging role of
Australian design.

MAY 2014
MARTA MATEUS FRAZÃO
PhD Candidate – CHAIA - Centro de História da Arte e Investigação Artística, Évora University.
Abstract
The Project as a key for understanding, a pretext for action, a synthesis of
knowledge
The paper will consider research that has been developed under the context of a PhD thesis on architecture.
The research theme focuses on Rural Territory, epicentre of a widespread desertification process and the
general loss of collective, social, economic and cultural value. From the perspective of a "singular object", an
anthropological and cultural appropriation and informal use of waters with therapeutic properties --- baths – it
is proposed a resurgence of the concept of recovery and renewal of the Rural Place.
Through the concept of landscape, understood as a cultural object and place of deposit of local expressions and
identity, the idea of creating a network of bathing places will be sustained, enhancing the human experience
over these places and therefore rethink its meaning and visibility nowadays.
Committed to explore and consider the connection and complementarity between theoretical and operational
field, discourse and project, thought and possible action, the objectives of this paper are:
--- Identify, at first, the demanding scope of articulation and integration between the different expertise fields
(anthropology, geography, geology, hydrogeology, landscape theory) that are essential to the research;
--- Promoting, secondly, the handling of the idea of the project, as a key of reading and interpretation process,
as a pretext for action and finally, as a possibility of effective production of knowledge;
--- And finally, as a synthesis (linking the first and second phases), identify some of the mechanisms and
working methods that have been adopted.
Identification of minerals sources and corresponding places of popular bathing in the study area

© Labart Editions
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
19
Água Santa da Herdade. São João dos Caldeireiros, Mértola Municipality. Ritual: capture, transport and heating water bath
(approximate duration of 20mn), temporary accommodation, support structures
Short Biography
Born in Covilhã in 1978. Lives and works in Lisbon. Currently engaged in the Architecture PHD from Évora
University since 2012 with Scholarship from FCT - Portuguese national funding agency for science, research and
technology. Master in Collective Housing - Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura, Polytechnic University of
Madrid in 2007, with a Scholarship from the Housing Department of Madrid. Graduated in Architecture from the
Faculdade de Arquitectura, Technical University of Lisbon in 2002. Collaboration with Atelier Actar Arquitectura
in Barcelona, in the project and research field, for a period of 2 years. Collaboration with Atelier CVDB Arquitectos
for a period of 3 years. Co-founder of Atelier Data in 2005. Among several competitions Atelier Data has been
distinguished with the 1st Prize of the International Competition “Re:Vision Dallas” with the project “Forwarding
Dallas”, United States; 1st Prize in the 1st Edition of the International Lisbon Ideas Challenge, with the project
“Power Fold”; 1st Prize in the “3000 viviendas” Competition in Vallecas, Madrid, Spain (Master’s Collective
Housing); 1st Prize in the “VECTOR E – Entrepreneurship and Innovation”, with the “Power Fold” project -
competition organized by the Innovation, Technology and Development Politics Center IN+.
MÁRIO MONTEIRO BENJAMIM
PhD Candidate - CHAIA – Centro de História da Arte e Investigação Artística, Évora University.
Abstract
From the interpretation of the place to the Project: A proposal for the rupestrial
complex of Vale do Tejo
An artificial intervention in the landscape, like the immersion of a large area by a reservoir, not only
implies the obvious change in the usefulness of a resource, it can also dramatically affect the site, by
concealing the history, human legacy, landscape and patrimonial heritage, however important to the
understanding of its historical make up.
The research we developed purports to conceive strategies to expose the rupestrial art of Vale do Tejo,
which has been immersed by the construction of the Fratel dam on 1974, and the subsequent filling of

MAY 2014
the reservoir. These strategies pertain to a more extensive scope of intervention, where the engravings
become a cohesive part of the current landscape, creating new usages for the premises and new
opportunities for regional development.
The approach selected by our investigation aims at exploring the various historical, social, landscape
and technological layers to assess the correct boundaries for an architectural intervention. The project
will emerge as a unifying element of those layers, with the capacity to formulate and implement other
viewpoints. This multi-dimensional approach to the inception of a new identity for an existing site will
take in consideration a model for future adaptation to other sites with similar characteristics.
In the framework of this approach, an architectural intervention posits certain important questions, at
various levels, as to the meaningful exercise of the profession itself: the inherent relationship
methodology/concept as well as the fundamental principles of connection and heterogeneity must
validate the preferred options.
Model: Foz de Enxarrique Archaeological site : Cachão de Algarve
Short Biography
Mário Monteiro Benjamim, Architect, Lusíada University (1995), completed his Master degree in History and
Theory of Architecture at Lusíada University in 1999. Is a director of MB Architects Studio, since 2003 in Castelo
Branco. Their architectural work has been recognized and published in individual title and partnerships across
categories including single and multiple residential design, small public works and rehabilitation of existing
buildings. Currently is PhD Candidate in Évora University under Prof. Aurora Carapinha, Prof. Jorge Rivera and
António Baptista (Côa Valley Archaeological Park), on the theme “From the project to the (re)interpretation of
the place. The rupestrial complex of Vale do Tejo.”
JACOB SEBASTIAN BANG
Assistant Professor - Design and Communication, Royal Danish Academy of Fine Arts, School of
Architecture
Abstract
‘O u t s i d e t h e C a t e g o r y’
It is a recurring theme in my research to establish collections of study models and then find ways to
decode, transform and represent them: in drawings and as new models. The 1001 plaster models are
‘outside the category’ - pure form and architectural potential. The models are before an idea: to
become architectural ideas they must be decoded in drawings in order to be dissolved into

© Labart Editions
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
21
architectural signs and rules. I'm not trying to solve a problem and have no hypothesis - there is only
the work with the drawings. They are accurate and reflective. The drawing analyzes and thinks in order
to create. The drawing is not only a representation of something - it is something in itself, in its own
right. Based on the models I can make drawings and enter into a special world. I achieve craft skills and
a kind of logistic overview in the routine of working with many characters at once - to work in a series,
both in drawing and in the model-making: being good at making molds, casting in plaster and at
drawing them afterwards in different representations. The experience obtained from the drawings
must be passed on in the next drawing. When I know what I do - when the routine is there, it is time
for me to move on in my search of new drawings and models. It's about being in a ‘special condition
of drawing’ in order to compose, extend, amplify, clarify, crop, scale and to suggest a structure in
search of more precise architectural characters and potentials. An abstract thought is strengthened
when it is backed up by something tangible.
‘1001 Models’
Representations. Scan, negative and template overview

MAY 2014
Representations. ”Site-plan”, repetition, inscribed in a geometric frame.
Representations. Inscribed in a grid structure, folio experiment, relief in brass
Short Biography
Born 1965 in Charlottenlund, Denmark. Architect and artist, assistant professor at the Royal academy of Fine
Arts, School of Architecture, Department 4, Copenhagen, Denmark. Member of the Danish Society of Artists since
2003.
Keywords: Artistic Development Work, Graphic works and Architectural-models.
Grants and Scholarships from: The Danish Arts Foundation 2011, 2005, 1999, 1997· The Danish Nationalbank,
Anniversary Foundation 2007 1999 ·The Dreyer Foundation 2006 · The Danish Art Workshops in 2003, 1997 · The
Art Council 2003, The Academy in 2003 ·
Exhibitions: "In the Memory of Space", Holmen, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2013 · "1001 MODEL", Holmen,
Copenhagen, Denmark, 2012 · Charlottenborg's Spring Exhibition, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2007, 2006, 2003,
1999, 1997 · Capital of Culture '98 - Stockholm, Sweden. 1998 ·

© Labart Editions
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
23
Lectures
Theme IV: Evaluation and Assessment
DIONY KYPRAIOU
PhD candidate - Bartlett School of Architecture at University College of London UCL
Abstract
‘TransReal’ Topographies_Manifesting the ‘Unconscious’.
Negotiating ‘Τοπογραφία,
Drawing largely upon a study of the ‘transreal’1
topographies of the late 19th
century, with a focus on
the Freudian topographic constructions through drawings and critical reviews of Freud’s own writings,
this paper examines the role of the unconscious as a drive in the creative design process and its impact
on the conception, perception and experience of space.
But, what is the role of the unconscious in the creative design process?
How can this process be communicated?
Can the process be the architecture itself?
For Sigmund Freud creativity wells up from the unconscious and its drives, for ‘unsatisfied wishes are
the driving power behind fantasies; every fantasy contains the fulfilment of a wish, and improves an
unsatisfactory reality’ (Freud, 1908). Through his spatial metaphors of the human ‘psyche’, the
unconscious is depicted as part of an abstract, diagrammatic topography of the mental landscape.
1
A term coined in the short essay entitled ‘A Transrealist Manifesto’ by Rudy Rucker in
1983

MAY 2014
In an attempt to examine the relation between the Freudian unconscious and the space, this paper
presents a set of topographic constructions, including the actual psychoanalytical setting and, a design
recreation of Freud’s desk, as the manifested topography of his own unconscious. Acting as an
analogical act of ‘unearthing’ that ‘brought to light’ a multiplicity of layers where unconscious appears
analogous to physical space; I am aiming at a negotiation of a pastiche of constructed topographies as
extended projections of instincts, desires, fantasies and fears; a site of mutation that -‘as an expanse
of ruins’-demands a disruption to reveal the depth of its spatiality.
Recreation of Freud’s study
Short Biography
Diony Kypraiou studied in the School of Architecture of the University of Patras, Greece and, the Universita Degli
Study di Firence, in Italy. She graduated in 2009 with a Diploma in Architectural Engineering. Since then she has
been a member of TGA of Greece as a chartered architect. In 2010 she was awarded a scholarship by the
‘Panayiotis and Effie Michelis’ institution to proceed on her Master of Architectural Design (March GAD) studies
in Bartlett School of Architecture UCL, where she was awarded a Distinction. Her work has been shortlisted and
exhibited in London and New York and, she has been part of collective exhibitions in curating, research and
communication roles, while working both on architecture and art projects. She is a regular critic in schools of
architecture in the UK (Bartlett (UCL), Westmister University, Greenwich University). Since September 2013 she
is doing her PhD by design in Bartlett School of Architecture, focusing on the space in art and architecture as a
psychoanalytical experience, through an examination of the role of the unconscious in the conception,
perception and experience of space.
PEDRO GUILHERME
PhD Candidate - CHAIA (Centre for Art History and Artistic Research), Universidade de Évora, Portugal
Abstract
“Competitions serve a larger purpose in architectural knowledge.”
Since 1648, with the birth of the ‘École Nationale Supérieure des Beaux-Arts’ in Paris, the education of
an artist, and later of an architect, has been based on the transmission of symbolic capital by masters
to pupils under an organized system of implicit professional knowledge, with a continuous use of
competitions (Kostof, 1995, 2000; Malacrida, 2010).
The Beaux-Arts programme was structured around a series of anonymous competitions that
culminated in the grand prix de ‘l'Académie Royale’, more well known as the ‘Grand Prix de Rome’, for
its winner was awarded a scholarship and a place at the French Academy in Rome. During the stay in
Rome, the ‘pensionnaire’ would be expected to regularly send his work in progress back to Paris.

© Labart Editions
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
25
Contestants for the Prix were assigned a theme from the literature of Classical Antiquity; their
individual identities were kept secret to avoid any suspicion of favour.
These competitions ensured that the fundamental hierarchy of the members of the academia (the
teachers and juries: who defined what good art and architecture was) and those that would ascend to
it (the students: who were prized and hence were the good artists and architects) and perpetuated a
secular way to ascend to stardom (Deamer, 2013; Lo Ricco & Micheli, 2003; Tenreiro, 2010).
The use of competitions in the traditional ‘studio’ class is still a current practice in universities. The
class is provided with a ‘live’ project or a model case study problem, a site and a context, a fixed
timetable, and each student is expected to research in architecture in order to present (using
predetermined models and mediums) his final conclusions (statements). Each personal architectural
research is in fact subjected to an ‘informal’ (unstated) merit competition (were the teachers take the
part of clients, sponsors and juries), to a peer evaluation, in order to prove its author’s right to, step
by step, become a graduated architect. The research is validated by the competition and assures the
originality of the research, its significance and rigour.
There are of course mixed feelings towards competitions by different parts - architects; clients; juries
or sponsors – and in face of personal past experience. Yet, it is undeniable the role and value of
competitions in the process of generating a qualitative built environment. In general, competitions
(Collyer, 2004; Lipstadt, 1989, 2010; Nasar, 2006; Spreiregen, 1979; Strong, 1976, 1996; Tostrup, 1999,
2010) can bring out the best in people and are a way to achieve excellence in design. It can be stated
that a large majority of competitions is experienced daily either as users or as passers-by since most
public buildings in Europe are subjected to competitions procedures.
Therefore, along their professional practice, licenced architects outside the academia and in praxis,
seem to continue a personal architectural research within professional architectural competitions.
There are evidences that, besides the investment in deliberate or improvised practice’s business
strategies, architects use competitions as fundamental research opportunities (Guilherme & Rocha,
2013).
So I intend to put forward that competitions served once (and still do) as a specific way of peer
evaluating the architectural research in academia. Architectural competitions are in fact a time and a
space were academia and praxis connect and may, to certain extent, constitute prove of Schon’s
(Schön, 2003) research-in-action and Till’s (Till, 2005, 2011, 2012) evidence of “architecture [as] a form
of knowledge that can [, is] and should be developed through research”.
Short Biography
Graduated in Architecture by the “Faculdade de Arquitectura da Universidade Técnica de Lisboa (FAUTL | FAUL,
1991)”. Master Thesis in Urban Engineering by the “Faculdade de Ciências e Tecnologia da Universidade de
Coimbra (FCTUC, 1996)” with a thesis in “URBAN QUALITY”. Currently undergoing PhD studies in architectural
theory with a thesis on “International architectural competitions” at FAUL, as researcher at CHAIA.
Since 2007 is a technical adviser at the “Comissão de Coordenação e Desenvolvimento Regional do Alentejo
(CCDRA)” within regional planning, transports, energy and SIG. From 1997 to 2007 worked in “Gabinete de Apoio
Técnico de Évora” (GAT Évora / CCDRA).
Since 1991 has a private office with Sofia Salema and has developed rehabilitation projects, some of them in
Heritage Classified buildings, in Évora, Moura, Lisbon and Cascais. Some of the works have been published and
been part of national and international exhibitions and listed in architectural guides.
From 2008 to 2010 taught architecture at the Universidade Lusófona de Arquitectura e Humanidades.
From 2003 to 2007 took part of the National Council of the Order of the Portuguese Architects and was
responsible for International Relations (UIA |ACE | UMAR | CIALP). Coordinated the Portuguese participation in
the International Union of Architects (UIA) World Congress of Berlin (2003) and Istanbul (2005). Was member of
the Executive Board of the Architects' Council of Europe (ACE) between 2007 and 2008. Coordinated the Heritage
Work Group of the Union of Mediterranean Architects (UMAR) from 2004 to 2007. From 2003 to 2007 was

MAY 2014
member of the Portuguese Consulting Commission of the National Commission of UNESCO (CNU). Took part in
the revision of the 2006 Portuguese Tentative List to the World Heritage List of UNESCO.
Has published articles in Architecture, has been nominated Jury of national and international architectural prizes
and has been invited to give lectures about his work at UMAR, UIA and CNU UNESCO.
Academia.edu - http://independent.academia.edu/PedroGuilherme
Curriculum DeGois / FCT - http://www.degois.pt/visualizador/curriculum.jsp?key=3245879211483689
Researcher at CHAIA - http://www.chaia.uevora.pt/en/member/show/pedro-guilherme.html
Professional work - http://www.evora.net/sspg/
SIMON BRADBURY, PhD
School of Architecture Design and the Environment, Plymouth University.
Abstract
Learning from Actor Network Theory
Bridging the gap between research in science and research by design.
This paper explores how alternative understandings of the development of scientific knowledge
through Actor Network Theory can help to bridge the gap between knowledge produced through
practice-based research and conventional research outputs.
The paper reviews the history of the debate of what constitutes practice-based research outputs
drawing from the work of Frayling (1993) and Archer (1995). An understanding of practice-based
research is developed that goes beyond a simplistic view of a building or artefact as a research output
or “mute object” (Till 2012).
This is considered in the context of the work of Bruno Latour (1987, 2005) and others who have tried
to show how the construction of scientific facts is produced as a function of both the objects
(immutable mobiles) and social context of science.
Through reviewing practice-based research submissions from RAE 2008 the paper explores how we
may re-conceive both the normative models of research outputs (peer reviewed academic papers) and
the products of architecture practice (buildings and artefacts) and conceive them both as part of the
same network of knowledge production. This is then discussed in the practical context of a practice-
based research project into low energy housing.
In doing so the paper suggest this new understanding will elevate the importance of rigorous practice-
based research while overcoming the challenges faced in conventional research in the constant desire
to show impact from research projects.
Short Biography
Simon is a Lecturer in Architecture at Plymouth University and on the management group of the Institute of
Sustainable Solutions Research. He runs the Master of Architecture 1st year course, co-ordinates sustainable
design across the department.
He has a background in both industry and Government. In Government he worked at the Commission for
Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE) where he was responsible for the commissioning of research to
influence changes in policy on issues including sustainable masterplanning, housing and the value of good design.
He also was instrumental in developing CABE’s policy and strategy on housing standards and has given numerous
lectures across the UK on the issue.
He is a registered Architect with over 10 years’ experience and has worked for internationally recognised
Architecture and Urban Design practices. He was responsible for the design of a number of award winning
projects ranging in scale from large masterplanning projects to individual houses for government, third sector
and private clients.
His research interests include low energy housing, design process and regulation.

© Labart Editions
BOOK OF ABSTRACTS
27
SOFIA SALEMA, PhD
Head of Architecture Department at University of Évora
Researcher at CHAIA-UE (Research Center of Art and Artistic Research - University of Évora)
Abstract
The Experience of a pioneer research program in architecture in Évora
Three years ago the University of Évora implemented a research PhD program in architecture.
Generally a doctorate of architecture has been an academic title awarded to architects who present a
theoretical dissertation; however, for us as a young but promising school of architecture it was just
natural that a project (as a methodology, a process of knowledge or simulation of a hypothesis) could
be part of an advance research in architecture. Thus, we started with this doctoral program seeking to
question the current model of PhD programs and established a new pioneering paradigm syllabus in
the national context with the intention to reach the international arena
During the course syllabus the project lab integrates the formulation of a theoretical hypothesis (a
conjecture), that becomes an architectural design, which is unique, but simultaneously an universal
knowledge.
The program has already two editions were PhD students have been encouraged to develop advance
research and fostered interaction between the theoretical and architecture production. No research
is yet finished. Students, although much interested in this type of research, are divided in their
approach to architecture as a theoretical, speculative and critical field, and architecture as a field of
research. Students and teacher are interested in research that develops their architecture design skills,
as a relevant process of advancement knowledge in architecture.
We believe that PhD syllabus will contribute to demystify and implement the concept of advanced
studies in architecture based on architectural research. This paper will share some of the ideas, doubts,
and results of our PhD program.
Short Biography
Sofia Salema, is graduate in Architecture by the Faculty of Architecture at the Technical University of Lisbon
(FA-UTL), in 1994. Has a M.Sc. (Master in Science degree) in Preservation of the Architectonic Property by the
University of Évora, in 2006, and a PhD in Architecture by the Faculty of Architecture (FA-UTL) in 2012.
From 1995 to 2007, she worked as an architect at Évora in the Portuguese Institute of Architectonic Heritage
(IPPAR), where she was responsible for designing, surveying and supervising several works of preservation and
restoration of Monuments in Alentejo, as well as coordinated and managed some projects under the Culture
Operational Program.
As a freelancer architect, she authored or co-authored a large number of projects among which the Preservation
of the “Forte do Guincho” (Cascais), the rehabilitation of the “Igreja and Convento das Maltesas, em Estremoz”,
the rehabititation of a Convent in Évora to a hotel (Mar d´ar Aqueduto). Some of her projects were published in
magazines and scientific journals.
Teacher at the University of Évora, Degree Course in Architecture of the University of Évora, since 2004, and
from the end of 2012 she is also the Head of the Department of Architecture.
Contacts: ssalema@uevora.pt

book of abstracts ARbD'14

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Destaque

Destaque (9)

Semelhante a book of abstracts ARbD'14

Semelhante a book of abstracts ARbD'14 (20)

Último

Último (20)

book of abstracts ARbD'14