CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 25Sustainable Design and DevelopmentSustainable Building Design and AssessmentUrban Planning and Landscape Design

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Characterizing Regenerative Aspects of Living Root Bridges

Open access
Middleton, Wilfrid, Habibi, Amin, Shankar, Sanjeev, Ludwig, Ferdinand·2020·Sustainability
DOI 10.3390/su12083267
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

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.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/su12083267

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 39

  1. Nilaweera, 1999, Role of tree roots in slope stabilisation, Bull. Eng. Geol. Environ., 57, 337, 10.1007/s100640050056 · DOI
  2. Brundtland, G.H. (1987). Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development: “Our Common Future”, Oxford University Press.
  3. Kubba, S. (2015). LEED v4 Practices, Certification, and Accreditation Handbook, Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann. [2nd ed.].
  4. Yule, 1844, Notes on the Kasia Hills, and People, J. Asiat. Soc. Bengal, 13, 612
  5. Ludwig, 2019, Living bridges using aerial roots of ficus elastica–an interdisciplinary perspective, Sci. Rep., 9, 1, 10.1038/s41598-019-48652-w · DOI · Paper page
  6. Chaudhuri, 2016, Living Root Bridge: A potential no cost eco-technology for mitigating rural communication problems, Int. J. Exp. Res. Rev., 5, 33
  7. Shankar, 2015, Living Root Bridges: State of knowledge, fundamental research and future application, IABSE Symp. Rep. Struct. Eng. Provid. Solut. Glob. Chall., 1, 1974
  8. Middleton, 2019, Photogrammetry as a tool for living architecture, Int. Arch. Photogramm. Remote Sens. Spatial Inf. Sci., 42, 195, 10.5194/isprs-archives-XLII-2-W17-195-2019 · DOI
  9. Mawlong, B.S., and Mitri, M.B. (2015). Chapter 11 Modern developmental philosophy of nature and traditional Khasi ecology; thinking with Heidegger. Environment-Cultural Interaction and the Tribes of North-East India, Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
  10. Chakraborty, 2018, Khasi hills and Khasi culture: Reconnection in Kynpham Sing Nongkynrih’s The Yearning of Seeds, J. Commonw. Lit., 53, 1
  11. Tiwari, 2010, Forest management practices of the tribal people of Meghalaya, North-East India, J. Trop. For. Sci., 22, 329
  12. Cajee, 2010, Community participation in forest management in Meghalaya, NEHU J., 3, 89
  13. Ormsby, 2013, Analysis of local attitudes toward the sacred groves of Meghalaya and Karnataka, India, Conserv. Soc., 11, 187, 10.4103/0972-4923.115722 · DOI
  14. Roxburgh, W. (1874). Flora Indica: Or Descriptions of Indian Plants. Reprinted Literatim from Carey’s Edition of 1832, Thacker, Spink. · DOI
  15. Keiner, M. (2006). Sustainability is Not Enough. The Future of Sustainability, Springer. · DOI
  16. Keiner, M. (2006). Reflections on Sustainability, Population Growth, and the Environment—2006. The Future of Sustainability, Springer. · DOI
  17. Hurley, J. (2009, January 24–27). Sustainable or status-quo: Investigating sustainability assessment of residential estate development. Proceedings of the State of Australian Cities National Conference 2009, Perth, Australia.
  18. Rosser, 2002, Overexploitation and species extinctions, Conserv. Boil., 16, 584, 10.1046/j.1523-1739.2002.01635.x · DOI
  19. Lyle, J.T. (1996). Regenerative Design for Sustainable Development, John Wiley & Sons.
  20. Meyers, R.A. (2012). Regenerative Development regenerative development and Design. Encyclopedia of Sustainability Science and Technology, Springer. [1st ed.]. · DOI
  21. McHarg, I.L., and Mumford, L. (1969). Design with Nature, Natural History Press. [1st ed.].
  22. Cole, 2012, Regenerative design and development: Current theory and practice, Build. Res. Inf., 40, 1, 10.1080/09613218.2012.617516 · DOI
  23. Plaut, 2012, Regenerative design: The LENSES Framework for buildings and communities, Build. Res. Inf., 40, 112, 10.1080/09613218.2012.619685 · DOI
  24. Plaut, 2016, Regenerative Development through LENSES with a case study of Seacombe West, Environ. Des. Guide, 88, 1
  25. Nobe, 2016, Moving Operations and Maintenance Practices of Existing Buildings beyond Sustainability: A Case Study of the LENSES Framework during Post Occupancy, Int. J. Constr. Educ. Res., 12, 122
  26. 2012, Towards a regenerative paradigm for the built environment, Build. Res. Inf., 40, 7, 10.1080/09613218.2012.628548 · DOI
  27. Kashkooli, S., Ali, M., Mahya, P., Habibi, A., and Hamid, R.S. (July, January 30). Developing of evolution analysis algorithms in regenerative design and decision-making; Demonstrated through a case study in Shiraz, Iran. Proceedings of the Creative Construction Conference, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
  28. Löschke, S.K. (2016). Baubotanik: Designing with Living Material. Materiality and Architecture, Routledge. [1st ed.]. · DOI
  29. Harrison, 2017, Pollination of Ficus elastica: India rubber re-establishes sexual reproduction in Singapore, Sci. Rep., 7, 11616, 10.1038/s41598-017-09873-z · DOI
  30. Guevara, 2004, Rain forest regeneration beneath the canopy of fig trees isolated in pastures of Los Tuxtlas, Mexico, Biotropica, 36, 99
  31. Upadhaya, 2013, Priority areas for conservation in northeast India: A case study in Meghalaya based on plant species diversity and endemism, Int. J. Ecol. Environ. Sci., 39, 125
  32. Sarma, 2010, Land ownership, administration and status of forests of Khasi Hills autonomous district council of Meghalaya, NeBIO, 1, 8
  33. Sharma, A. (2010, January 8–10). Rethinking greenways design in context of sustainable development: Towards landscape synergism. Proceedings of the Fábos Conference on Landscape and Greenway Planning, Budapest, Hungary.
  34. Little, C.E. (1995). Greenways for America, JHU Press.
  35. Sharma, 2015, Urban greenways: Operationalizing design syntax and integrating mathematics and science in design, Front. Archit. Res., 4, 24, 10.1016/j.foar.2014.11.002 · DOI
  36. Colding, 2007, Ecological land-use complementation’for building resilience in urban ecosystems, Landsc. Urban Plan., 81, 46, 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2006.10.016 · DOI
  37. Hansen, 2014, From multifunctionality to multiple ecosystem services? A conceptual framework for multifunctionality in green infrastructure planning for urban areas, Ambio, 43, 516, 10.1007/s13280-014-0510-2 · DOI
  38. Hathaway, 2016, Agroecology and permaculture: Addressing key ecological problems by rethinking and redesigning agricultural systems, J. Environ. Stud. Sci., 6, 239, 10.1007/s13412-015-0254-8 · DOI
  39. Ferreira, D., Luso, E., Fernandes, S., Vaz, A.J.F., Moreno, C., and Correia, R. (November, January 30). Bioclimatic solutions existing in vernacular architecture. Rehabilitation techniques. Proceedings of the PORTUGAL SB13-Contribution of Sustainable Building to Meet EU 20-20-20 Targets, Guimarães, Portugal.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Middleton, W., Habibi, A., Shankar, S., & Ludwig, F.
Affiliations
  • Technical University of Munich (DE)
  • Shiraz University (IR)
  • Studio Sanjeev Shankar, House No. 4/4, Second Floor, Sweet Abode, Wheelers Road Extension Cross, Cooke Town, Bengaluru, Karnataka 560084, India
Corresponding author
Middleton, Wilfrid
ORCID
Venue
Sustainability
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2020-04-17
Volume
12
Issue
8
Pages
3267
ISSN
2071-1050 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.3390/su12083267
OpenAlex
W3016287955
Cited by
25
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4
FWCI
1.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Sustainability (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • mediaTUM (Technical University of Munich) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
Ministerium für Wissenschaft, Forschung und Kunst Baden-Württemberg (Preis für mutige WIssenschaft)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Sustainable Design and Development
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Building and Construction › Sustainable Building Design and Assessment
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Urban Planning and Landscape Design
Keywords
Ficus elastica, regenerative design, vernacular architecture, whole systems thinking, Meghalaya, indigenous knowledge, resilience, sustainable architecture, user perspective

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review