Angela —
You kick-started the International Bouwcentrum Research Network last year, a collaboration with researchers from TU Delft, ETH Zurich, and Princeton University. Simple question: What was the Bouwcentrum Rotterdam all about? Could you give us a quick idea of its history and goals?

Georg —
The centre, also known as Het Bouwcentrum, played a major role in both architecture and construction in the Netherlands after World War II. With our research network, we are exploring its history on several levels, including a book on its institutional history.

The Bouwcentrum was established in 1947/48, right after the war ended, to support the country’s reconstruction efforts and promote advancements in the building sector. The Netherlands had a big task on its hands: rebuilding damaged infrastructure and homes. The Bouwcentrum stepped in as a crucial institution that connected architects, urban planners, interior designers, and experts involved in the construction of the built environment. They shared knowledge and collaborated to tackle this massive challenge.

Efficiency in data sorting: A woman utilizing a Hollerith sorting machine to process punch cards for statistical research // © Stadsarchief Rotterdam, Stichting Artsencentrum Rotterdam, 994/4121.

During this time, the Bouwcentrum organised and curated architecture exhibitions and industry fairs for the public. These events provided an open platform for showcasing new design concepts, building technologies, and materials that could contribute to the country's reconstruction and modernization.

Additionally, the Bouwcentrum served as an innovation hub for research and education in the construction industry, serving as a kind of information centre for architects and planners, but also for the public. If you wanted to know something, like how to design a kitchen, or which new materials were suitable for which house, you could go to the Bouwcentrum and get the latest information.

The centre also offered a large library with many open resources on architecture, design, engineering, interior design, and related fields. This meant that professionals and students had access to valuable information about the built environment, which was scarce in the aftermath of the war. Later, the Bouwcentrum expanded and internationalised its knowledge production. It began organising seminars, conferences, and training programs that helped keep the architecture industry and the public up to date on the latest developments.

Angela —
What most fascinates you about the Bouwcentrum?

Georg —
The post-war period in the Netherlands and Europe was a time of crises, urgencies, and general uncertainty. But it was also a time of intense innovation. They had to repair, reuse, or even rebuild many cities from scratch. In a way, the post-war period was like Janus's head: one face scarred by the traumas of war, the other side looking more hopefully to the future and searching for ways society could quickly heal itself again.

Rotterdam was devastated during the bombing raids of 1940, with its city centre almost completely destroyed. The people had to reuse, renovate, and build new houses, apartments, schools, warehouses, streets, and entire neighbourhoods —everything that makes up a city. The Bouwcentrum’s mission was to curate this activity by informing architects, planners, and the public, using architectural and environmental statistics.

Personally, I find it fascinating that soon after the end of the war, the Dutch government decided to establish an architecture research institute for planning the built environment based on data and statistics. I am not aware of any other country that made similar attempts in post-war Europe. The founding of the Bouwcentrum is a powerful symbol of how important architecture is for society. I see the Bouwcentrum as a kind of blueprint for our future. In other words: The Bouwcentrum Rotterdam is a historical compass we can use to navigate the architectural challenges for our future data society.

Cover of the Bouwcentrum Journal, featuring an aerial view of the first building of the Bouwcentrum in Rotterdam, opened in 1949 as a post-war exhibition hub for the architecture and building industry. Source/Copyright: National Archive, The Hague.

Angela —
Can you tell us more about the early days of the Bouwcentrum?

Georg —
The idea of creating a new institution for the built environment came about through the collaboration of four Dutch architecture and construction foundations. First, there was the “Stichting Bureau Documentatie Bouwwezen” (BDB), founded in 1943. Its main goal was to gather all sorts of data related to building costs. They wanted a solid body of knowledge that could be useful for future construction endeavours. Then there was the "Stichting BOUW Weekblad," an architecture journal founded in 1945. Its mission was to publish comprehensive material covering everything you could think of regarding construction. They wanted to ensure people had access to all the relevant information in the building industry. The third one, the "Stichting Bouwcentrum." came into the picture in 1946. It had a clear objective: providing unbiased architecture and construction education and information that could support the public, architectural practice, and the industry—really, anybody who wanted to learn more about the built environment. Last, we have the "Stichting Ratiobouw", established in 1944. Its main objective was to function as a study and advisory body for the government. It was all about construction engineering and ensuring the government had the proper guidance when building projects.

Each foundation brought something unique to the table, whether it was data collection, information dissemination, education and research, or government advisory services. It was a collaborative effort to take architecture and design to the next level.

Angela —
Where did this idea — to set up the Bouwcentrum as an open knowledge platform — originate?

Georg —
Understanding the societal conditions of Dutch post-war modernism is essential to contextualise the development of the Bouwcentrum. Architects like Jaap Bakema and Jo van den Broek significantly shaped the country's architectural discourse and vision. Particularly, Bakema believed in the concept of an "open society" that could create inclusive and democratic environments to foster social interaction and a sense of community. This idea responded to the challenges the Netherlands faced following the war, where reconstruction and social cohesion were critical.

Their vision of architecture as a tool for social progress emphasised the importance of flexible and adaptable spaces that could accommodate evolving societal needs. The open society concept became an integral part of the Dutch architectural identity. It influenced urban planning, housing design, and the development of public spaces, promoting principles of accessibility, transparency, and citizen participation.

Angela —
How did Bakema’s ideology of the open society manifest in the Bouwcentrum?

Georg —
We can link the vision of the open society to the Bouwcentrum through the field of statistics, among other areas. One needs to create the appropriate cultural foundations to shape an open society. Instead of giving the architects aesthetic or stylistic guidelines about form, they preferred offering them the best possible conditions for designing and planning. The Bouwcentrum wanted to inform architects, not lecture them, which meant open knowledge production based on empirical data. Therefore, statistics played a crucial role in Bouwcentrum's foundation.

Het bouwbedrijf in Nederland (The Construction Industry in the Netherlands), published in 1943 as part of the Boeiende Statistiek series. Edited and authored by Jan van Ettinger, the first director of the Bouwcentrum, the book presents statistical data on Dutch industries through visual diagrams inspired by Otto Neurath’s method of pictorial statistics. Source: Private Collection.

Jan van Ettinger, the Bouwcentrum’s first director, was an expert in statistics. He had joined the Central Bureau of Statistics in 1939. During that time, he worked alongside some important graphic designers, artists, and researchers like Philip Idenburg, Jan Tinbergen, Otto Neurath, and Gerd Arntz. They all shared his enthusiasm for statistics and finding creative ways to represent data visually. Together, they made significant contributions, especially in developing the so-called ISOTYPE (International System of Typographic Picture Education), a method for bringing statistical data to life through visuals. Here, too, I see certain parallels to our discussion about design data literacy today. Then as now, the question is: How can we visually communicate unbiased data to the public in the most accessible way possible?

Angela —
So, the focus was not directly on data visualisation per se. Instead, it was about developing trustworthy and openly accessible knowledge for designing, planning, and constructing the built environment based on indexed and disseminated information. How did statistical thinking impact the institutional goals of the Bouwcentrum?

Georg —
That is an interesting question. Without the culture of statistics, the Bouwcentrum would have been very different. I believe statistics were crucial to its institutional success; they were not seen merely as a historical form of assured survey knowledge but, rather, they formed the methodological basis on which the Bouwcentrum could develop as a project of the Enlightenment.
Bouwcentrum had three main objectives that formed its mission and guided its activities. First, they were all about providing “impartial information” to architects and members of the construction industry. They aimed to be a reliable source of knowledge, ensuring that individuals and companies had access to accurate and unbiased information they could use to make informed design decisions. Secondly, Bouwcentrum wanted to establish “efficient contact between theory and practice”. They recognised the importance of bridging the gap between academic knowledge and practical implementation. The Bouwcentrum aimed to foster design innovation, improve construction methods, and enhance overall industry performance by facilitating effective communication and collaboration between theoreticians and practitioners. Lastly, “international cooperation” was a key aspect of Bouwcentrum's mission. They understood the value of connecting with experts and organisations worldwide to exchange knowledge, share best practices, and stay updated on global advancements in the construction industry. By promoting international collaboration, Bouwcentrum aimed to contribute to the development and progress of the construction sector, not just in the Netherlands but on a broader international scale.

These three objectives — providing impartial information, bridging theory and practice, and promoting international cooperation—drove Bouwcentrum. They guided its initiatives, ensuring its relevance and impact in the Netherlands’ ever-changing world of post-war architecture.

Urbanoscoope: An innovative control mechanism enabling the movement of a mini-periscope equipped with a television camera, 1971. This system allows for viewing larger-scale models at eye level. Captured images are displayed through a closed-circuit television system © BOUW no. 27/28, 30 June, 1971, S. 1074

Angela —
I can imagine that the advent of the first computers saw a significant advancement in statistical thinking. This digital and technological movement was a global phenomenon. Did what was happening at the Bouwcentrum mirror other centres for research and digital innovation for design practice in other parts of the world?

Georg —
Absolutely. When we examine the global history of digital culture, the 1970s and ‘80s emerge as a transformative period, bridging the gap between the rise and decline of cybernetics in the mid-20th century and the popularisation of personal computers. During this time, early critical debates on artificial intelligence and surveillance gained momentum, transitioning from the experimental playfulness of the post-war era to the application-driven mindset of the emerging post-industrial society.

On the Bouwcentrum computer, featured in Computer Informatie, No. 11/20, January 1972. National Archives, The Hague.

One remarkable example of this shift is the Architecture Machine Group, founded at MIT in the 1960s. The group ventured into uncharted territory, experimenting with using computers in architecture to visualise buildings and cities—an innovative concept that paved the way for computer-aided architectural design as we know it today.

While the Architecture Machine Group focused on inventing digital tools, the Bouwcentrum took a different approach, emphasising the compilation, processing, interpretation, communication, and sharing of statistics concerning the built environment. The Bouwcentrum's mission was to provide architects, planners, and the general public with comprehensive statistical insights into the built environment. In addition to its major exhibitions, the centre spearheaded the development of innovative techniques for visualising statistics, maintained its own architecture research department, and even expanded its influence through international design education programs, reaching as far as Latin America. Rather than solely equipping architects with an increasing array of tools, they aimed to foster a new data culture accessible to all. The data collected and researched, including information on new materials, products, and typologies, was available to everyone. In this sense, the Bouwcentrum can be seen as an early forerunner of the open data movement in architecture, as a platform that aimed to democratise access to knowledge.

The Bouwcentrum complex at Kruisplein, Rotterdam, completed in 1970. Designed by architect Joost Willemsen Cornelis Bok and built by JP van Eesteren, Source: National Archive, The Hague.

1:1 scale models on display in the new exhibition hall of the Bouwcentrum at Kruisplein, Rotterdam. Designed as a life-size testing ground for housing innovations, the hall showcased full-scale domestic environments for public and professional audiences. Source: National Archive, The Hague.

Angela —
This history of the Bouwcentrum over five decades is a fascinating story of the rebuilding of Rotterdam and the many cultural processes of information and design over the second half of the 20th century.

Georg —
During the 1990s, the Bouwcentrum experienced significant changes in its structure, direction, and finances. As a publicly funded institution, it relied heavily on state funding during its early years. However, as the country's reconstruction efforts were completed by the ‘70s, the need for government support diminished. One of the major factors contributing to the Bouwcentrum's decline in public support was the shift in housing programs from state intervention to market-based approaches. This change reduced the necessity for a centralised institution like the Bouwcentrum to provide guidance and support for housing projects. As a result, the centre gradually began to lose its public funding.

Another significant development was the growing popularity of the software industry and personal computers. This technological advancement allowed architects and urban planners to adopt digital tools, enabling them to work more efficiently and independently. The reliance on the Bouwcentrum as a resource for architectural and construction information and expertise decreased as professionals could access similar resources digitally.

Furthermore, the increasing popularity of do-it-yourself (DIY) stores played a role in diminishing the relevance of the Bouwcentrum. DIY stores provided convenient access to construction materials, tools, and information, making the idea of a centralised centre for architecture and construction less necessary for individuals and professionals alike. The Bouwcentrum was finally closed in 1995, although isolated units, such as the Department of Exhibitions, survived for some time. However, the prime time was over. Much remains to be seen, and there are unanswered questions.

Angela —
So, what would you say is the conclusion? Where does the Bouwcentrum stand today?

Georg —
That's a great question. The Bouwcentrum, which began as a statistical office documenting war damage in Rotterdam, evolved into a prominent institution that seamlessly combined design, data, and society. Through meticulous collection and classification of open data, architects, civil engineers, and statisticians collaborated to pioneer innovative methodologies for future planning, industrialised housing, material standards, urban design strategies, and building optimisation. However, challenges emerged due to the decentralised nature of building information data, hindering privatisation and ownership. Nevertheless, the Bouwcentrum foresaw the importance of architectural data as a public good.

As a pioneering model of interdisciplinary knowledge production in service to society, the Bouwcentrum helped establish a global network of Building Information Centres during the postwar era. These centres aimed to facilitate the sharing of expertise, exchange of data, and collaboration on a global scale. In the face of modern challenges such as datafication and the climate crisis, it is crucial to revisit and reflect upon the Bouwcentrum's collaborative ideals, concepts, and methods. By embracing open data practices in twenty-first-century architectural production, we can derive societal and sustainable solutions for our living environment.

Understanding the historical significance of the Bouwcentrum Rotterdam offers valuable insights into the transformative potential of integrating open data, fostering transparency, collaboration, and innovation within contemporary architectural endeavours. By embracing this approach, we can effectively address the pressing challenges of our time and create a sustainable future for our built environment.