Nature as Infrastructure, Before It Became Decoration

Chapter 3: Nature-Based Solutions in Historical Architecture

We often imagine infrastructure as something engineered, mechanical, and separate from nature. Pipes hidden underground, concrete barriers holding back rivers or steel systems operating independently of the land. But for much of human history, infrastructure was not imposed on nature. It emerged from it!

Long before the language of Nature-based Solutions (NbS) existed, cities were embedding natural systems directly into their survival strategies. Wetlands filtered water, terraces stabilised slopes, and gardens cooled courtyards. What we now call NbS was once embedded intelligence, shaped by necessity and observation. In this chapter, we will look at some historical examples that reveal how nature functioned not as background scenery, but as the very framework of urban infrastructure

DANIAL HOSSEINI (Researcher)

Danial is a researcher in sustainable development and climate change, driven by curiosity about how societies navigate transitions toward more resilient futures. His work highlights the role of collaboration and collective learning, moving beyond traditional methods to embrace perspectives shaped by complexity and lived experience. He sees research not just as analysis, but as a shared process of discovery that connects people, places, and possibilities.

Gardens That Fed Cities

In Tenochtitlan, capital of the Aztec Empire, agriculture was integrated into the city’s structure. Built within Lake Texcoco, the chinampas were artificial agricultural islands surrounded by canals, forming a highly productive and ecologically balanced system.

But chinampas were more than farms. They stabilized soils, absorbed excess water, reduced flood risks, and allowed continuous nutrient exchange between land and lake. The surrounding canals enabled transport and irrigation while maintaining hydrological circulation. Agriculture, water management, and urban form operated as one interconnected system.

In contemporary terms, chinampas represent multifunctional Nbs. They simultaneously addressed food security, water regulation, climate moderation, and biodiversity support. Instead of replacing wetlands with rigid infrastructure, the Aztecs enhanced wetland ecology to sustain urban life.

Water as Urban Framework

In Suzhou, China, water formed the structural backbone of the city. Its extensive canal network shaped neighborhoods, streets, commerce, and mobility. The waterways were not ornamental additions but the organizing framework of urban life.

The canals managed seasonal water fluctuations, supported irrigation, enabled transport, and moderated microclimates. Bridges and streets were aligned with hydrological flows, allowing the city to function as a continuous water-based circulation system.

From an NbS perspective, Suzhou demonstrates how natural water systems can operate as resilient infrastructure. Rather than confining water into purely technical channels, the city integrated it into daily life, reducing environmental stress while strengthening urban adaptability.

Architecture as Microclimate Infrastructure

In Granada, Spain, the Alhambra shows how architecture itself can operate as ecological infrastructure. Its courtyards, fountains, shaded arcades, and water channels were not merely aesthetic features but climate-regulating systems.

Water surfaces cooled the air through evaporation. Narrow passages guided airflow. Vegetation provided shade and humidity control. The spatial organization created thermal gradients that reduced heat without mechanical intervention.

Today, we describe such strategies as passive cooling and climate-responsive design. Yet in their time, they were simply practical responses rooted in environmental awareness. The Alhambra demonstrates that NbS can function at an architectural scale, integrating ecological processes directly into built form.

Harmony and Integration

Across these examples, one principle becomes clear. Infrastructure was not fragmented into isolated technical systems. Food production, water regulation, climate control, and mobility were interconnected through ecological processes.

Modern urbanization gradually separated these systems. Water was piped away. Food production was externalized. Cooling became mechanical. Infrastructure became energy-intensive and disconnected from its place.

NbS attempts to repair this fragmentation. They seek to reintegrate ecological functions into urban systems not as decoration, but as performance.

The lesson is not about romanticizing the past. It is about recognizing that resilience once depended on working with natural dynamics rather than overpowering them. Cities were designed as extensions of landscapes, not replacements for them.

If earlier societies could transform wetlands into food systems, canals into mobility networks, and courtyards into cooling infrastructure without fossil fuels or advanced machinery, then the question is not whether NbS are innovative. The question is why we forgot that infrastructure was once alive.

References:

Design with Nature – Ian L. McHarg (1969)

The Granite Garden: Urban Nature and Human Design – Anne Whiston Spirn (1984)

UNESCO – World Heritage Documentation

IUCN – Nature-based Solutions Framework (2016–2020)

The City Shaped: Urban Patterns and Meanings Through History – Spiro Kostof (1991)

Check out the previous article of this series

Water, Stone, and Sun: Nature as the First Urban Architect

Water, Stone, and Sun: Nature as the First Urban Architect Chapter 2: Nature-Based Solutions in Historical Architecture by Danial Hosseini – 26.01.26 From...