IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v12y2020i8p3267-d346727.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Characterizing Regenerative Aspects of Living Root Bridges

Author

Listed:
  • Wilfrid Middleton

    (Professorship for Green Technologies in Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Technical University of Munich, Arcisstraße 21, 80333 München, Germany)

  • Amin Habibi

    (Faculty of Arts and Architecture, Shiraz University, Moaliabad, Shiraz 7188637911, Iran)

  • Sanjeev Shankar

    (Studio Sanjeev Shankar, House No. 4/4, Second Floor, Sweet Abode, Wheelers Road Extension Cross, Cooke Town, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560084, India)

  • Ferdinand Ludwig

    (Professorship for Green Technologies in Landscape Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Technical University of Munich, Arcisstraße 21, 80333 München, Germany)

Abstract

Living root bridges (LRBs) are functional load-bearing structures grown from Ficus elastica by rural Khasi and Jaintia communities in Meghalaya (India). Formed without contemporary engineering design tools, they are a unique example of vernacular living architecture. The main objective of this study is to investigate to what extent LRBs can be seen as an example of regenerative design. The term "regenerative" describes processes that renew the resources necessary for their function. Whole systems thinking underpins regenerative design, in which the integration of human and non-human systems improves resilience. We adapted the living environments in natural, social, and economic systems (LENSES) framework (living environments in natural, social, and economic systems) to reflect the holistic, integrated systems present in LRBs. The regenerative / sustainable / degenerative scale provided by LENSES Rubrics is applied to 27 focal points in nine flow groups. Twenty-two of these points come from LENSES directly, while five were created by the authors, as advised by the LENSES framework. Our results show 10 focal points in which LRBs are unambiguously regenerative. One focal point is unambiguously sustainable, while 16 are ambiguous, showing regenerative, sustainable, and degenerative aspects. User perspective determines how some focal points are evaluated. The contrast between a local, indigenous perspective and a global, tourism-focused perspective is demonstrated by the results.

Suggested Citation

  • Wilfrid Middleton & Amin Habibi & Sanjeev Shankar & Ferdinand Ludwig, 2020. "Characterizing Regenerative Aspects of Living Root Bridges," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(8), pages 1-25, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:8:p:3267-:d:346727
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/8/3267/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/12/8/3267/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Lisa Höpfl & Defne Sunguroğlu Hensel & Michael Hensel & Ferdinand Ludwig, 2021. "Initiating Research into Adapting Rural Hedging Techniques, Hedge Types, and Hedgerow Networks as Novel Urban Green Systems," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(5), pages 1-24, May.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:12:y:2020:i:8:p:3267-:d:346727. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.