The diversity of retrofit practices across time and space warrants decolonizing the concept of “theory” and democratizing consideration of its formation. We invite authors to thought leadership, by illuminating the ideas and projects of underrepresented practitioners or by exploring how and why certain works of design and development have become sites of disciplinary adoration and/or discursive attention. Together, these case studies of retrofit will shed light on the archive of preservation that motivates and mobilizes individuals, institutions and industries to invest, both financially and culturally, in smart growth and degrowth.

We seek papers that fall into three categories - Retrofit’s Roots, How “Other” Retrofits Measure Up, and Retrofitting Conservation, each described below. We are interested not only in research-based texts appropriate for academic peer review in multiple disciplines (historic preservation, conservation, architecture, landscape architecture, urban and regional planning, real estate development, community/economic development), but also project, policy, and program evaluations appropriate for peer review by practitioners in these fields. Scholarly texts of no more than 4000 words (including references and footnotes) will undergo double-blind, peer review. Although authors are invited to submit papers on people, places, and projects across the globe, all submissions must be written in (or translated into) English for consideration. Only papers submitted to Future.Anterior.Journal@gmail.com by the deadline–06/01/20–in the formatting described below will be reviewed for publication.

Retrofit’s Roots
The first category anticipates reflection of past development and preservation practices for future models of energy efficient, low-carbon modes of habitation – the ‘retro’ in retrofit. Rigorous retrospectives on how mitigation and conservation periods and places of energy scarcity and environmental crisis may help designers, planners, and policymakers envision the preservation of these built spaces as they encounter an unanticipated future. Fresh takes on historically valued projects (e.g. Bauhaus Dessau, Germany; UN Building, NY, USA; Pedregulho, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) whose renovation has presented energy challenges or propelled conversations about preservationists’ response to climate instability and its effects are welcomed. Grounding contemporary climate actions – from policy and planning to design and development – in histories of conservation and preservation are the aim of papers in this category.

How “Other” Retrofits Measure Up
A second category highlights “othering” in retrofit theory and practice. Papers in this category explore metrics of mitigation and conservation - how and by whom they are developed and what purpose and publics they serve. Paper submissions may explore a particular firm’s design methods or industry’s development models for saving energy, such as LEED prescriptions for “retrofitting suburbia.” However, authors are expected to address how and to what extent the sponsors and/or practitioners of these preservation paradigms differentiate or distance their work from the ways in which other public, philanthropic, and nonprofit sector actors evaluate solutions to energy and climate concerns of the present and the future. Also of interest is how climate measures developed outside the building professions and industries - amongst environmental justice organizers and resilience strategy organizations, for instance - develop independently of architects, planners, and engineers of retrofit,. Ultimately, the papers in this category contribute to our understanding of consensus, contestation, regulation, and resistance amongst diverse proponents and practitioners of architectural renovation, community revitalization, and landscape rehabilitation.

Retrofitting Conservation
A third category invites reflection on and redirection of preservation theory and training on retrofitting, aware that questions of energy have been essential to the theory and practice of conservation since the immediate post-war work of James Marston Fitch. Authors are encouraged to place academic, professional, bureaucratic, corporate, and grassroots ‘schools of thought’ about climate and energy challenges in the context of wide-ranging conservation advocacy and environmental activism. Especially of interest are papers that examine how conservation movements and motives (re)shaped pedagogies and professional development of design, planning, and preservation before the Green New Deal entered the lexicon of their schools of thought and education. We welcome papers that push scholars, educators, and professional membership organizations to rethink their own knowledge of climates and retrofit their approaches to variable, low- and no-energy conditions as distinct as the affluent Napa Valley and debt-burdened Puerto Rico.