This book could be called The Prize School. The Prize School promotes a culture of assessment, discussion, accountability and merit; it values environmental and building quality and takes a complete multidisciplinary and multi-sector approach. At this school, satisfaction of the resident is an indispensable part of architectural quality. The Prize School was born with the INH Prize, which unlike many others, was not an image-based award.
Architects would have everything to gain by taking notice of this book. Reading it refers us to fundamental questions of architecture: what is quality housing? How can one learn to make quality housing? The author tells us that the “best way to learn is through good practices and good examples”… and that, indeed, sets the tone of this book.
The book is essentially authored by António Baptista Coelho, head of the Architecture and Urbanism Nucleus at the National Civil Engineering Laboratory (LNEC). He was a member of the multidisciplinary jury for the INH [National Housing Institute] Prize between 1990 and 2007 and has studied around 30 per cent of the social interest housing produced in Portugal in that period. In other words, some 576 housing complexes or 50,000 dwellings, from a universe of more than 100,000. Pedro Baptista Coelho is credited as co-author, a role I dare say was most important in terms of organisation and management of the information and image and design.
The book is an overview of the 18 years in which the prize was awarded, before it became known as the IHRU Construction and Renovation Prize in 2008. More than 200 housing complexes were selected by the authors and presented in the book in the form of texts, photos and drawings. To borrow from Nuno Teotónio Pereira, this book will be a decisive chapter in the history of housing in Portugal. Nevertheless, the authors do not consider their book a history, nor a report or technical guide, and much less a systematised study; they see it as nothing more than a “developed register”. They wanted the material in the book to be of use to those “interested in the history, the histories and the themes of Portuguese social interest housing”: architects, engineers, developers, local government and students of architecture, engineering and the social sciences. The wide-ranging target public is not only a measure of the enormous ambition of the authors, but also of their conviction that the subject matter is indeed important to all.
But regardless of what the authors want their book to be, just what precisely is it? It is certainly a little bit of what it did not set out to be, and is also indubitably that which it aspires to be: a developed register of the most important cost-controlled and State-financed housing projects from 1989 to 2006. But it is also the demonstration of a methodology and a sensibility that they have termed The Prize School. The book is organised into three essential parts: the first part (the prefaces and chapters 1 and 2) contextualises the subject matter; the second (chapter 3) makes up the core of the book and contains a chronological analysis and presentation of the housing complexes that “won prizes, honorary mentions or were highlighted”; the final part (chapters 4 and 5) are an overall reflection on the meaning and future of approach developed in the INH Prize process.
The book tells us that the INH Prize has given rise to a unique experience in the universe of quality analysis methodologies. Continuity for processes and people has been its touchstone, leading to the development of an analysis framework that was applied and perfected over the 18 years of the prize. With that basis, and proceeding from a comparison of knowledge and information, the authors registered the qualitative aspects of housing complexes that manifested themselves over time. They chose to highlight: the importance of the relationship between the dwelling’s interior and exterior; the small urban scale; typological diversity; adaptation to the specificities of the residents; quality of architectural design; and, finally, adaptation of the city to the landscape.
As far as the methodological aspects of the prize are concerned, which are described in chapter 4, one retains the establishment of assessment and accountability values: documental analyses; visits to the sites; presentation sessions with designers and builders; and more study, debate and dissemination sessions. Basing themselves on objective parameters defined in the Technical Recommendations for Social Housing (RTHS), the quality of development, architectural quality and quality of construction were analysed. Criteria to do with integration into and enhancement of the landscape were added in 2004.
It is important to note that the prize is exclusively non-monetary. The developers of the winning complexes receive a plaque. In other words, the prize promotes professional honour and the pride in doing things well. In the opinion of the author it is also a practical tool for improving housing quality: learning from the examples makes it easier to avoid errors and adopt good practices.
Of the questions raised in the final part, one of the most pertinent is that of the relationship between quality of architectural design and satisfaction of the residents. “Is it possible to appreciate a housing solution only on the basis of the architectural design?” the authors ask. Here too they propose that studies be carried out on the basis of the experiences gathered; multi-criteria analyses from the designed to post-occupation phase; identification of the requirements of current society; renovation of existing complexes. And they seem to indicate a specific approach to the theme of solutions “based on fundamental innovation” is coming soon.
This book can also be seen as a complement to the large number of publications that are referenced in its pages. The prize’s catalogue, the “Reference case” files and the book INH 20 anos de Promoção de Habitação Social [INH 20 Years of Promoting Social Housing] are some of those mentioned. At the end, the book provides a bibliography “contextualising Portuguese social interest housing and architectural quality”, which includes the works selected by the authors.
So who is this book of interest to? Firstly, to all who design, develop and build social interest housing. It will also be of use to those involved in common housing (the two areas have come closer together). It will be equally interesting for sociologists and anthropologists who study habitation and for architects seeking alternatives to the “star system” logic. There is also a potential benefit for the schools of architectures: one can predict exercises in which the object of analysis by the students could be one or more of residential complexes and the method chosen is inspired in The Prize School. In this respect, this book would be an excellent “tour guide”.
Finally, I think one could make more out of The Prize School. Why not use this exceptional experience as a means of fostering a culture of assessment and merit? If evaluation worked of the built works in the context of the INH Prize, why would it not work for the designs submitted to public competitions? Why not promote, develop and validate this modality, which today seems to be being defeated on almost all fronts?
It may not be very obvious at the outset, but this book really could have been called The Prize School. I think the authors may seriously have considered that possibility.|