Architecture, Capitalism, and Social Good

Abstract

This study aims to critically investigate the extent of meaningful contributions to social good through architecture given the political economic context within which it operates. It examines the capacity of architecture as a profession as well as the agency and ability of architects as individuals to make such contributions under the capitalist relations of producing space. These relations are defined within a theoretical framework comprised of four core concepts. Gramsci’s theory of hegemony, the notion of urbanization under capitalism, and Lefebvre’s concepts of the “lived space” and “the Right to the City” are the four theoretical foundations which along with a historical examination of the relationship between architecture and capitalism help the research establish its own four central organizing concepts of Agency, Aesthetics, Governance, and Activist Architecture. These four concepts are then used to form a thematic schema for research design. Adopting semi-structured interviews as the instrument of implementing its qualitative method, the process included the recruitment of thirty-six participants - thirty licensed architects based in Toronto, Canada and six key informants who are closely associated and intimately familiar with architecture. The participants’ responses were first subject to deductive thematic analysis before being further discussed and dissected using ‘suspicious interpretation’ method. The results illustrate the limited extent of contributions by architecture and architects to social good while revealing several paths to maximize such contributions within those limits. Architecture may not have a leading or central role in moving towards meaningful social reforms. Nonetheless, it could make meaningful contributions within its own domain of influence by adopting a purposeful social agenda, prioritizing social good over profit in its practices, distancing itself from exploitative labour processes within both creative and construction processes, reclaiming its political capacity, empowering end-users by allowing their active participation in the design process, and replacing entrenched professional privilege, elitism, and egoism with humility. This would allow architecture to contribute its fair share to the struggles for a socially, economically, and politically just future.