Europan Croatia

Re-sourcing
The fragility of the Earth’s ecosystem and social crises lead to the imagination of alternative practices to harmful extraction of resources, overconsumption and pollution of living milieus. Regenerating projects embracing nature and culture are to be though and implemented. It is about weaving synergies between biogeophysical data with socio-spatial justice and health ones. Three main directions for designing forms of resilience and resourcing of inhabited milieus make possible to reactivate other forms of dynamics and narratives around the ecologies of living and caring.

1 – Re-sourcing through natural elements / risks
The natural and vital elements of water, air, earth and fire are today linked to risks and disasters which affect places, and the entire ecosystem of milieus from the moment that are triggered cataclysms, resulting from deleterious developments. In order to enable a new alliance with inhabited milieus, it is time to rethink these vital elements, by finding logics of adaptation with the built environment, and by combining them together in projects.

2 – Re-sourcing through ways of life and inclusivity
The reconsideration of living conditions also requires sustained attention to changes in lifestyles in a hyper-connected digital world. Arrangements capable of simultaneously preserving intimacy, commonality and solidarity are at stake, correlated with bioclimatic and permacultural strategies in which humans and non-humans can cooperate.

3 – Re-sourcing through materiality
The already built now constituting a phenomenal source of materials, it is important to design devices for transforming existing buildings driven by the strategy of the 3 R’s (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle): Reduce new construction. Reuse in the sense of reusing already constructed spaces and materials. Recycle by using bio-geo sourced materials (earth, stone, fiber), anticipating deconstruction and becoming local again (mobilizing know-how and materials present on the sites). This is to promote the preservation of natural resources.
Each site will be presented at two scales:
– The territorial scale of the “reflection site” (red limit) which will reveal the geographical and ecological elements (topography, geology, natural elements, etc.), the logic of mobility and large-scale lifestyles – using maximum mapping – and which impact the project site today and, potentially, in the future.
– The proximity scale, that of the “project site”, where the existing situation (physical space, nature, lifestyles) and the city’s intentions for its development in the future will be presented in a clear and precise manner.

Questions to the competitors
The challenge for competitors, in their project-processes, will be to converge the three types of resources because it is their intersection which will generate a promising spectrum of resilient projects in the face of the scarcity of resources and the vulnerability of sites.
The questions asked are:
.What are the new ways of designing to adapt to climate change: rising water levels, air pollution, drought, etc.?

.How to introduce into projects the regeneration and remediation of soils making them more porous and alive, increasing the biodiversity in the built spaces, in order to make them more livable?

.How can we imagine new dynamic and productive use scenarios to revitalize communities of humans and other than humans?

.How can we invent a new materiality of the spaces that can result from the use of bio- materials originating mainly from local resources and falling within the logic of a circular economy?

.How can we hybridize inside the teams the different skills necessary for these projects which combine the consideration of natural elements, new lifestyles and the use of bio- materials?

.Which scales should be mixed to make the proposed answers relevant? Can a project on a proximity site be combined with reflection on the larger scale of the territory? Should an urban project also be available on a proximity scale to illustrate its impact?