A garden may be understood as a place where the ‘geography of the mind meets that of the earth’,making it entirely apropos that the vertical garden finds its origins in the monumentally horizontal prairies and farmlands of the American Middle West, where the topography of Professor Stanley Hart White’s creative intellect meets a seemingly endless geography of flatness. White patented the first known green wall in 1938, prototyping the technology in the backyard of his Urbana residence, yet the concept emerges in his writings and drawings as far back as 1931 as a response to the problem of modern garden design. The significance of this invention has ‘still unrealized provocations’ on the history of gardens and designed landscapes, having been conceived during a trajectory towards modernism in the same geographic region as the Prairie School and American Skyscraper. Although the provenance of this new technological garden is topographically uncanny, the invention itself is pure genius, synthesizing ideas from modern landscape and architectural theory, building sciences, horticulture, and industrial arts alike. White’s vertical garden finds its legal origins in 1937–38, albeit the technological and material precursors to the invention extend back to early horticultural experiments and industrialization of modern building materials. Stanley Hart White, Professor of Landscape Architecture at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign from 1922 to 1959, was granted US Patent 2,113,523 on 5th April 1938 for the Vegetation-Bearing Architectonic Structure and System in which he describes the method for creating an ‘architectonic structure of any buildable size, shape or height, whose visible or exposed surfaces may present a permanently growing covering of vegetation’.In six beautifully illustrated pages, Professor White reveals the new art of growing plants within/on a vertical,commercial greenhouse supplies architectonic, substrate-holding frame, and in the process describes a new vertical garden type not fully realized till after his death in 1979.
All that remains of White’s invention are his careful diaries, a series of patents, and his brother E. B. White’s correspondences about Stan’s new invention. Stanley Hart White is best known as an educator who modernized landscape pedagogy at the University of Illinois, influencing the work of Hideo Sasaki, Peter Walker, Richard Haag, and others, through his innovative teaching style and creativity.With the discovery of his patent for the first known green wall, or Botanical Bricks, he may also be credited as an inventor and technological innovator, conceptualizing the vertical garden and pioneering green modernism . White’s thoughts on vegetation-bearing architecture crystallize in his patent of 1938, yet notions of a green wall emerge as early as 1931 in his lectures and writings on the modern garden. Although the intended audiences for White’s early writings on vertical greenery are not yet apparent, the idea of a vegetation bearing garden enclosure preoccupies him for several years as documented in his personal journals, or Commonplace Books, in the University of Illinois Library Archives. Technical aspects of White’s green wall find their clearest articulation in US Patent 2,113,523, filed on 18th August 1937, yet the theoretical dimensions developed as a treatise on modernism and garden design, in which the vertical surfaces of the garden create a backdrop for modern living. In an essay titled ‘What is Modern’, White discusses the green wall as a design solution for the modern garden, allowing for the preservation of a free plan and composition of a garden in the vertical dimension. His references to Walter Gropius, Le Corbusier, Frank Lloyd Wright, Louis Sullivan, Walt Whitman, Charlie Chaplin, Norman Bel Geddes, Adolph Appia, Sheldon Cheney, Walt Disney, and others, situates the work among a group of ‘moderns’ concerned with changing lives through art and architecture.The Vegetation-Bearing Architectonic Structure and System evolved as a response to the problem of modernism in garden design, and is a unique contribution of landscape architecture to this effort, representing a clear translation of garden theory into garden form and legalese.
The prescience of this work is astounding, predicting not only the emergence of the vertical garden in the contemporary built environment, but a method of scholarship in patent development not widely accepted by US universities until the 1970s.The first drawings of a green wall appear in White’s Commonplace Books in 1932 as two humble sketches of a wall section and elevation. White’s elevation sketch shows a wall composed of vertical greenery, decorative insets, lights, fishes, and birds occupying the inset voids. His section sketch reveals a soil filled wall structured with interior irrigation and voids for compositional elements. Annotations in the Commonplace Books Index identify the sketch as an idea for the Century of Progress Exhibition in Chicago, and as his first sketches of Botanical Bricks.White’s inchoate drawings and description of a green wall in 1931–32 mature until his application for the Vegetation-Bearing Architectonic Structure and System on 18th August 1937, where he artfully translates garden theory into United States Patent and Trademark Office legalese with the help of his attorney, Elmer Hovenden Gates of Arlington, Virginia.The new art of vegetation bearing architecture was entirely novel at the time of application, and no citations of prior art are associated with White’s invention. Currently, thirty four international patents cite US Patent 2,113,523 as prior art, encoding an array of inventions from grass cube chairs, to vegetation-bearing gabion walls.Interestingly, White’s lawyer, Elmer Hovenden Gates, and proposed business partner, William M. McPherson, patented related vegetation-bearing technologies within weeks of his submission. More than 50 patents cite the Vegetation Bearing Cellular Structure and System, Vegetation-Bearing Display Surface, and the Vegetation-Bearing Architectonic Structure and System, collectively encoding a diverse ensemble of environmental technologies. The legalese defining this new field offers valuable insights into the founding principles of vegetation-bearing architecture as a chimera of architectonic structure and vegetated system. According to White, architectonics relates to ‘the art of landscaping structure as well as to buildings, but distinguished from the art of plant culture’.Within this architectonic structure, plant growth is supported through a layering of horticultural substrates and reticular materials. In this configuration, the ‘vegetation in its final positions has its roots within the compost while the tops of the vegetation would extend through the reticular surfaces of the units or compounds into the open air where their normal development occurs’.
The patents legalese describes not only the technical specifications of White’s new invention, but also the proposed scope of vegetation-bearing architecture as a new art. This scope is of particular interest with the emergence of the vertical garden and green wall in the contemporary built environment, as the language that defines the new art also encodes innovations in related technologies today.White’s vision of rapidly assembled and scalable plant-bearing architectonic structures adopts principles from modular building and construction techniques, situating his invention among the array of building products developed during the early decades of the twentieth century. The common name Botanical Bricks further reveals White’s notion that his modular building units be integrated into the building arts as commonly as bricks in gardens and architecture. Potential application listed in the patent range from camouflage, concealment, decoration, backgrounds, and screens for use in architectural project . Contrasts between White’s proposed applications, and contemporary notion of vegetated architecture as a sustainable technology is especially salient,vertical grow as language to describe sustainability or environmental performance had not yet been established. The field of vegetation-bearing architecture was rapidly expanded by two contingent patents filed on 4th April and 28th May 1938 by William M. MacPherson and Elmer Hovendon Gates, respectively. These patents reinterpret the structural system proposed by White in which the vegetation bearing units assemble like masonry or bricks, and are essentially self supporting through stacking and repetition . Consecutive to this, patents by Gates and MacPherson envision vegetation-bearing units supported within a structural and load-bearing framework, and vegetation bearing units secured to a self-supporting wall as a veneer or surface system. Although the structural iterations presented by each patent alter the load bearing relationship of the vegetation to the structural element, the new art, as described by White, remains remarkably resilient to these adaptations and contemporary permutations.Although the structural modifications proposed by Gates and MacPherson reorient the relation of the vegetation-bearing unit to the underlying structural system, the basic technology and principles remains intact. The resilience of White’s new art is found in its aptitude for reinterpretation, as he defines a relationship between plants and structure that elucidates their interdependence and interstices. Triangulations between the building sciences, horticultural arts, and landscape theory are seminal to White’s conception of the Vegetation Bearing Architectonic Structure and System. White received a Bachelor of Science in agriculture from Cornell in 1912, his Master of Landscape Architecture from Harvard in 1915.His background in science and design undoubtedly contributed to a synthetic approach to plants, structure, and garden form, yet it is a convergence of material innovations and new scientific discoveries that make the vertical garden possible, and timely, in the 1930s. Innovation in building materials occurred rapidly in early years of the twentieth century, as industrialization and wartime research fueled experiments in architecture and the sciences alike. Material Sciences flourished during World War I and material product lines expanded through the roaring twenties, radically impacting architecture and the production of buildings.New building materials were readily tested, and exhaustive volumes of literature were published to disseminate information in an ever-changing marketplace for architects and designers. Building material bibliographies from the era document rapid integration and research on materials such as armorphy, clay tile, plywood, glass block, masonite, rostone, vinylite, celotex, porcelain, zonolite, to name just a few.Concurrent to the expansion of new materials in architecture, was an expansion of the role of popular science and a belief that technology would improve modern living. In agriculture, new technologies such as hydroponics, popularized in the 1930s, promised to create new productive systems that would increase yields and feed a growing population with increased efficiency.
White’s invention exists at the intersection of these spheres of innovation, where the differentiation between horticultural system and building system begins to blur. As human impact increases in marine and coastal ecosystems , rules, regulations, and policies have struggled to keep up with the need for adequate environmental management . There has long been an emphasis on biodiversity conservation in environmental decision-making , but biodiversity for biodiversity’s sake is not always enough in the face of industry and economic development. However, biodiversity is often considered the source of most ecosystem services , which are the direct and indirect benefits derived from the environment. The concept of ecosystem services was made popular by the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment , and has since gone through many iterations . I adopt the following framework: ecosystems have physical, chemical, and biological structures that support ecological functions , which can be combined with a human perspective to produce ecosystem services. They are divided into four categories: provisioning , regulating , cultural , and supporting . Ecosystem services provide a direct link between natural systems and human well-being, contributing to a tangible rationale for sustainable development, management, and protection of the environment. As a result, they can be a useful tool in environmental decision-making. This dissertation aimed to explore approaches for characterizing ecosystem services in two types of systems subject to human impact: deep-sea habitats and natural storm water treatment systems . The broad scope of systems highlights the context dependence of ecosystem services as well as overarching themes among them. I employed an interdisciplinary approach that was heavily influenced by the ecology and economic disciplines, which facilitated application of results to real questions in environmental management. In the deep sea, there is increasing demand for natural resources , but environmental rules, regulations, and policies are only now being developed for some parts of it . The emerging industry of deep-seabed mining presents a novel opportunity to incorporate ecosystem services into environmental management prior to commercial exploitation. Chapter 2 reviews ecosystem services associated with deep-sea habitats targeted for mining , and the structures and functions that support them. Known examples include fisheries landings , genetic resources , carbon sequestration and storage , and element cycling , but there are likely to be ecosystem services yet discovered. Chapter 2 also discusses how and where ecosystem services can be incorporated into existing deep-seabed mining regulations. Overall, the second chapter of this dissertation creates a framework for studying ecosystem services and for applying them to environmental decision-making.