Bjarke Ingels believes in “Yes is More”, which takes in consideration everyone’s needs in society.  Conflicts of society are the main ingredients in the analytical work of creating architecture. Instead of looking at the conflicts of a given project as limitations, Ingels presents the architect’s task as finding “a way to incorporate and integrate differences, not through compromise or by choosing sides, but by tying conflicting interests into a knot of new ideas. This results in a space where the users are able to enjoy the space together as one, creating a community and uniting people together. 

This approach to the site has many similarities to my design process, where I often put the users of the space in the forefront. Getting the users to tell you about how they feel and experience the space will tell you more than what primary research will get you in the early stages of the design. Getting a deeper understanding from the users, especially from multiple backgrounds or age groups will help tailor a truly universal design that can be appreciated and used by a pool of people. 

However, it is also important to have some sort of rejection in our lives, where we reject the norms and try to break boundaries. If as designers, we were to say “yes” to everything, our designs would start to become bland and repetitive. Instead of saying “yes” to everything, It is important to challenge and break the mold of what people’s preconceived thoughts are to the space. Finding the fine line of respecting one’s opinion while still value adding to the space will bring something new to the table, creating something truly “you” and which also belongs to society. 

​

Bjarke Ingels is known for proposing green, environmentally friendly concepts to his buildings. One example of this is the CopenHIll waste-burning Ski slope. He designed a two in one waste incinerator and a ski trail located on top of it. However, the design only acts as a temporary solution to a much serious issue, that is greenhouse gases filling up the atmosphere, degrading the biosphere. Even though The CopenHill waste-burning ski slope, featured in a recent car commercial for Ford, encapsulates in many ways the dynamic of well funded sustainable-minded architecture. 

While a plant that incinerates waste to produce electricity is certainly a better option to the alternative methods of disposal, it is only a temporary solution that allows one to sidestep the larger and more difficult issue of industrial waste generation that is rapidly degrading the biosphere. Attaching an expensive sports facility on top adds a secondary layer of distance from the serious scale of response required to address the climate crisis. The sustainable elements of these projects are an improvement, but the value is overwritten by their unwillingness to confront the deeper ecological issues of the architecture industry. The truth is that behind the facade of high-minded architectural theories of utopia or pragmatism or even sustainability, a more powerful cultural force is at work, the same force that prompted the emphasis on sustainability in the first place.