International Call to Action 1
Non-Engineered 2.0:
Rethinking traditional construction
Building with traditional techniques and natural materials, such as stone, earth, and timber, remains the predominant method of construction in many earthquake-prone regions around the world. These buildings are often classified as “non-engineered”, meaning they are “constructed using informal, vernacular techniques with little or no input from trained architects or engineers.” [1]
However, in-depth reviews show that the available information on these methods — whether in national codes or practical manuals — is largely outdated, incomplete, contradictory, and confusing. [2]
Our goal is to address these knowledge gaps by generating and sharing scientific evidence. We aim to validate non-engineered vernacular techniques so they can be reintroduced into national seismic and building codes — not as outdated traditions, but as scientifically supported, sustainable alternatives.
SMARTnet provides the framework for this work: a structured, collaborative, and open-source platform for testing, modeling, and improving traditional methods. All validated findings are made accessible — clear, practical, and ready to apply — so more communities around the world can build safely, affordably, and sustainably.
[1] Arya, A.S. (2000). Non-engineered construction in developing countries – An approach toward earthquake risk reduction. Proceedings 12WCEE, Lisbon.
[2] Schildkamp, M. (2021). PhD dissertation, Nagoya University.
International Call to Action 2
Introducing a 4th masonry category:
Horizontally Reinforced Masonry
Currently, only three main masonry categories are generally recognized:
Unreinforced Masonry (URM)
Reinforced Masonry (RM)
Confined Masonry (CM)
URM, by definition, lacks any reinforcement and due to its poor earthquake performance, it is banned in all seismic building codes worldwide.
However, the specific typology using horizontal reinforcing bands (often found in rubble stone or earth construction) performs fundamentally and structurally differently from URM. Despite this, it is currently categorized as “unreinforced masonry with reinforcements.” [3]
This contradicting terminology is not only confusing — it is stigmatizing. It fails to acknowledge that this technique, when properly applied, can withstand major seismic events and protect lives.
[3] Brzev, S. et al (2013). GEM Building Taxonomy version 2.0, GEM Foundation, Pavia, Italy.
Be part of the change
How you can help.
Join the movement
Experts and professionals.
We invite experts, professionals, academics, students, policymakers — and anyone across earthquake engineering, vernacular architecture, and building code development — to join our global collaboration in advancing non-engineered construction in seismic regions.
Areas of collaboration
Low-tech earthquake engineering
Low-strength material testing
Seismic modeling of structures
Rubble stone masonry
Natural building materials
Non-engineered techniques
Reuse and recycling in construction
