Why Is It So Difficult?

This article is from the archive of Roca Gallery. It was first published in September, 2025.

We are living in unprecedented times. Over the past fifty years, the world’s population has nearly doubled. In the next fifty years, an additional two billion homes will need to be built. Against this backdrop, any notion of a decline in construction is pure fantasy. The challenge is immense: ensuring the sustainability of a sector that, to this day, remains the most polluting of all.

The picture is further complicated by the growing shortage of skilled labor, a problem that plays out differently across regions. The equation is straightforward: we need to build more—and faster, especially in places where housing systems are under pressure—yet the human resources to do so are simply not there. Therefore, there is an urgent need to radically rethink the way we design construction processes.

In this context, prefabrication emerges as a logical and pragmatic solution. The industrialization of components and the reduced reliance on manual labor make it possible to address both the pressing demand for quantity and the need for greater efficiency through more controlled solutions that lower resource consumption and significantly reduce waste.

This revolution, in fact, is already underway. Prefabrication is steadily replacing traditional methods. The mass production of industrialized building components is now a rapidly growing market, particularly in Europe and the Asia-Pacific region. For example, in Spain, the percentage of homes built using prefabrication is expected to rise from the current 2% to 10% within the next five years, according to an article published in El País last February.

Is architecture making the most of this paradigm shift? The answer is: not yet. There are several reasons why this mission is particularly complex. I would like to highlight three that I consider especially relevant.

1. As architects, we often invest a disproportionate amount of effort in developing construction systems that aim to draw parallels with other industries—such as the automotive sector—yet in most cases, we focus on design originality while overlooking applicability and commercial viability. Gilbert Herbert clearly recognized this mindset, calling it the “Henry Ford syndrome.” Industry can and should serve as a source of both production and knowledge, rather than merely a means of execution. The relationship between architecture and industry is not forged through disruption, but through the capacity to evolve together via incremental processes that reconfigure existing systems, endowing them with new functions and expressions.

2. Prefabrication requires a systematic approach that must be integrated from the design stage, well before construction begins. This entails two fundamental shifts compared to the traditional model of conceiving architecture. First, logistics become an integral part of the project. The dimensions and weight of the modules, crane turning radii, assembly systems, and existing obstacles between the factory and the construction site become decisive constraints in the design process.

Second, the design logic is reversed. In the traditional model, form is conceived first, and only afterwards is the construction process considered to make it possible. Prefabrication, however, requires the opposite approach. The process begins with the construction method and the components that make it feasible, taking into account all the factors mentioned above, and only then is the outcome defined. The finished form of the building is nothing more than the result of multiplying and combining these construction components. In this way, the building becomes a direct reflection of the systems that shape it.

3. The industrialization of systems, together with the current level of technology and knowledge, offers us the opportunity to tackle emerging issues related to new environmental demands. It enables the development of components that can be dismantled and reassembled in the future, extending the lifecycle of materials beyond the useful life of the buildings themselves. It also facilitates exploring the integration of prefabricated elements with bio-based materials, as demonstrated by the work of Anne Beim and her team at CINARK.

However, numerous barriers still hinder the full implementation of these opportunities. Certifying these unconventional components and construction processes is complex, if not impractical, placing the responsibility for the safety and durability of these solutions squarely on the architect. These limitations, which affect critical aspects such as structural performance, watertightness, and building maintenance costs, continue to keep such proposals outside the mainstream construction market.

These three challenges demand new efforts and responses from architecture that are capable of transferring knowledge from the prototype to the actual site, and from the laboratory to large-scale production. They also call for a stronger relationship with industry, based on cooperation rather than competition, as Walter Gropius already emphasized over a century ago. If architecture does not enter the factory, it risks being relegated to observing from the outside the very transformation that is already shaping our built environment.

Main image: 1000 m2 Prefabricated Housing, Vale de Cambra, Portugal, 2019, SUMMARY. Photo © Fernando Guerra FG+SG

1000 m2 Prefabricated Housing, Vale de Cambra, Portugal, SUMMARY. Film production: Building Pictures