Hans Ibelings
Architecture usually reacts in slow motion to economic developments. At the beginning of an economic downturn, numerous projects continue to be built and delivered; conversely, it always takes some time for an economic revival to be translated into a construction boom.
Now, too, some projects will continue to hobble along for a while, but the course of the current crisis has been so abrupt that even projects that were already under construction have ground to a halt. From Spain to Russia, the building cranes are coming to a standstill. Many new projects are being postponed and it is not inconceivable that in many cases postponement will turn into cancellation. A substantial number of architectural firms, large and small, famous and lesser known are having to lay off personnel.
The forecasts do not augur well: things will probably get worse. It is often said of an economic recession that its long-term effects can be quite salutary. According to this line of reasoning, there is no point in easing the current pain, because the economic crisis must be allowed to do its purifying work in removing the excesses that have contributed to that crisis. The fact that there is no longer any money for the hubristic mega-projects whose urgency was always dubious, can certainly be construed as salutary.
A crisis like the current one might also lead to a reassessment of hyper-consumption, something to which even architecture was not immune. Many economists believe that, thanks to all the cheap credit that was available, people in the richer parts of the world, which includes Europe, consumed more than they could really afford. The same applies to the consumption of space. In the Netherlands, for example, the percentage of built-up land increased by 75% over the past forty years, whereas the population grew by only 25%. And the Netherlands is certainly not the only country to have been so profligate with the available space in such a short space of time. We can only hope that, now that the lure of financial gain has become a less attractive motive for building, such mercenary development will stagnate. One beneficial effect of this could be a decrease in the number of buildings whose prime motivation is profit, rather than the creation of something desirable, let alone genuinely necessary.