Argument on topic: Negotiations / Compromises

It is very hard to date bargaining correctly.

Human history reveals to us forms of exchange since ancient times.

By envisioning an almost prehistoric scenario of bargaining we can directly associate negotiation with it. This is why, even though it has not been given a precise name until modern history, bargaining is a very ancient occupation. It follows agreement.

In fact, negotiation is a focused and interactive form of human-to-human communication in which two or more disagreeing parties seek to reach an agreement. It either solves a common problem or achieves a common goal. The agreement takes various forms: a verbal agreement - reinforced by a handshake, a tacit consensus, a minute, a letter of intent or a signed protocol. The result of the negotiation may be a convention or contract, drawn up according to common procedures and customs, but it may also be a marriage, an armistice, a pact or an international treaty, drawn up according to particular procedures and customs.

An architectural design theme is the result of multiple negotiations: between client and architect, between city and building, between the design and the result, etc. An architectural project is thus a permanent negotiation - between author and client, but also between the phases of the project's development into the built reality. The minimum compromise is sought.

A contract for the execution of an architectural or urban intervention is the result of another negotiation - between builder and contractor or owner. An urban area goes through a multitude of negotiations before it is built, but also through use.

All over the world, compromises are made, contracts signed and renegotiated in the name of a common purpose.

In this issue we focus on highlighting relevant negotiations with as few compromises as possible, trying through this critical but constructive look to point out that

failure to negotiate in the area of buildability is a contract failure.

The thematic articles are opened by the last stopover, this year, inside the commented dossier Buzești - Berzei. The series of interviews presented will hopefully be relevant to understand this part of the city.

Then in the material entitled "Copromises - Negotiations" there is a lucid and assumedly ironic foray into the behavior of compromise. Conjectural statements are condemned which frequently, in order to disguise obvious refusal, hypocritically or amiably disguise themselves in the opposite tone. In the reading key of compromise and the search for convergence, Romania's efforts to synchronize itself with something greater, more powerful or more valuable are viewed and commented with extremely fine cultural nuances.

The Romanian pavilion at the Tokyo International Architecture Exhibition has an interesting composition. The design team reveals how negotiation plays a significant role in the process of participatory architecture - which underpins the intervention.

Continuing with international examples and trying to respond to how, in an age of consumption, cultural heritage can be 'instrumentalized' as a brand image, the following article looks at a few cases. The text discusses heritage buildings - industrial and non-industrial - whose communicative power is recharged.

An ecomuseum brilliantly demonstrates an architectural re-evaluation strategy.

Through the articles collected in this issue, we aimed to give a constructive dimension to the notion of concession. We believe that, in this way, the term compromise - as an agreement based on mutual give and take - privileges the balance that the parties manage to strike for mutual benefit.

It is our conviction that the constructive tone must gradually and gradually replace the lament in which any discourse on edification has been indulging for quite some time.