An Innovative and Sustainable Design Approach in Contemporary Architectural Education: Parasitic Architecture

Abstract

This paper investigates parasitic architecture as an innovative and sustainable approach in contemporary architectural education. Parasitic architecture, which establishes symbiotic relationships with existing structures, is explored as a design strategy for creating new spaces within constrained urban environments. The study's methodology includes a multi-phase process beginning with a literature review and discussions on parasitic architecture, sustainability, flexibility, and innovation. Students then proposed structures based on their urban experiences and developed scenarios linked to architectural programs. The final phase involved a design studio at Bingöl University, where students applied parasitic architecture principles to real-world scenarios. The results demonstrate that this approach significantly fosters creative problem-solving skills, refunctionalizes spaces, and enhances environmental awareness. The study highlights the potential of parasitic architecture in addressing post-disaster challenges in urban environments like Bingöl, contributing to the reactivation of underutilized spaces and enhancing the social and cultural vitality of urban areas. This positions parasitic architecture as an effective strategy in both architectural education and practice.

Keywords

• Contemporary architectural education
• Environmental impact and sustainability
• Urban context
• Adaptive reuse of existing structures
• Parasitic architecture

References

1. Alborghetti P., & Erioli A. (2015). Stigmergy-Based Parasitic Strategies in Architectural Design for the Transformation of Existing Heritage. Systema, 3(2), 80-90. doi: 332-1590-1-PB.pdf
2. Arabulan S., & Lank M. (2023). Evaluation Criteria of Parasitic Architecture. A+Arch Design International Journal of Architecture and Design 9: 37-51.
3. Bardzinska-Bonenberg T. (2018). Parasitic Architecture: Theory and Practice of the Postmodern Era. Advances in Human Factors, Sustainable Urban Planning and Infrastructure: Proceedings of The AHFE 2017 International Conference on Human Factors, Sustainable Urban Planning and Infrastructure, July 17− 21, 2017, The Westin Bonaventure Hotel, Los Angeles, California, USA 8. Springer, 3-12.
4. Baroš T., & Katunský D. (2020). Parasitic Architecture. Selected Scientific Papers, Journal of Civil Engineering, 15(1), 19-28.
5. Baroš T., & Katunský D. (2021). Parasitic Architectural Forms (PAF) S01. E02 “Methodology and Ontology”. IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering. IOP Publishing, 012029.
6. Caglar, N., & Uludag, Z. (2006). Architectural Design Education: Designing a Library, Public Communication and Information Center in the Manufacturing Zone of Central Eskisehir Turkey, A Case Study. International Journal of Art & Design Education, 25(2), 231-240.
7. Casakin H., & Wodehouse A. (2021). A Systematic Review of Design Creativity in the Architectural Design Studio. Buildings, 11(1),31.
8. Christenson M. (2014). Comprehensive Parasites. 19th International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia-Rethinking Comprehensive Design: Speculative Counterculture, CAADRIA 2014. The Association for Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia, 771-780.

9. Given D. (2021). Developing Parasitic Architecture as a Tool for Propagation within Cities. Journal of Architecture and Urbanism, 45(2), 164-170.
10. Gültekin A.A., & Birer E. (2019). Kamusal Alanda Özgürleştirici Müdahaleler, Parazit Mekânlar (Emancipating Urban Interventions: Parasitic Spaces). Kent Akademisi, 12(4), 729-738.
11. Kachri Z., & Hanna S. (2014). Parasitic Ecologies Algorithmic Space through Diffusion-Limited Aggregation of Truncated Octahedrons. Fusion: Data Integration at its Best, Vol 2. Ecaade-Education & Research Computer Aided Architectural Design Europe, 539-546.
12. Karacalı A.O., & Polat T.E. (2022). Considering Sidewalls as an Architectural Ground: Parasitic Architecture Approaches in Design Studio. Journal of Design Studio, 4(1), 81-92.
13. Kavut İ.E. & Selçuk H.E. (2022). Using Parasitic Architecture to Refunctionalized Historical Industrial Buildings: Santral Istanbul and Müze Gazhane. MSGSÜ Sosyal Bilimler, 1(25), 198-220.
14. Letzter J. (2023). Additions to Historic Buildings: Between Parasite and Prosthetic Architecture. Journal of Architectural Conservation, 29(1), 63-83.
15. Lökçe S. (2002). Mimarlık Eğitim Programları: Mimari Tasarım ve Teknoloji ile Bütünleşme (Integrating Technology into the Architectural Curriculum). Gazi Üniversitesi Mühendislik Mimarlık Fakültesi Dergisi, 17(3), 1-16.
16. Mehan A., & Mostafavi S. (2023). Portcityscapes as Liminal Spaces: Building Resilient Communities through Parasitic Architecture In Port Cities.
17. Özdemir, D.A., & Varolgüneş, F.K. (2024). The Role of Analogy and Metaphor in Enhancing Creativity in Architectural Design. Innovation in Design: Methods and Technology for Progressive Practice and Research, 145.
18. Pratama P.P., Hayati A., & Dinapradipta A. (2023) Parasitic Architecture and the Conversion of Abandoned Buildings into Green Open Space. Ruang-Space 10(1):117
19. Roberts, A. (2004). Problem Based Learning and the Design Studio. CEBE Transactions, 1(2), 1-3.
20. Sara M. (2007). Parasite Architecture. Recycling Strategies for the Contemporary City. Università degli Studi di Camerino.
21. Šijaković M., & Perić A. (2018). Symbiotic Architecture: Redefinition of Recycling Design Principles. Frontiers of Architectural Research, 7(1), 67-79.
22. Speck, O., Möller, M., Grießhammer, R., & Speck, T. (2022). Biological Concepts as a Source of Inspiration for Efficiency, Consistency, and Sufficiency. Sustainability, 14(14), 8892.
23. Şensoy G., & Üstün B. (2018). Traces of the Past Utopias in Contemporary Architecture: Parasitic Architecture. Iconarp International Journal of Architecture and Planning, 6 (1).
24. Watanabe, S., Erhan, H., Haeusler, M. H., Huang, W., & Sosa, R. (2014). Comprehensive Parasites. In Rethinking Comprehensive Design: Speculative Counterculture. [Proceedings] 19th International Conference on Computer-Aided Architectural Design Research in Asia CAADRIA (Vol. 14, pp. 781-790).
25. Varolgüneş, F.K., İpek, S., & Aras, S. (2024). Enhancing Student Learning in Architectural Design Studios: A Pentagon and DEMATEL-Based Study on New Learning Components and Interaction Dynamics. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 1-29.
26. Yorgancıoğlu D., & Güray T.S. (2018). Mimari Tasarım Eğitiminde Alternatif Yaklaşımlar: Bir Mekân Tasarımı Stratejisi Olarak “Parazit Mimari” (Alternative Approaches in Architectural Design Education: "Parasitic Architecture" as a Space Design Strategy). Megaron, 13(1), 144-155. https://doi.org/10.5505/megaron.2017.74946