Architect Norman Foster on Why the West Struggles to Build Big

0:00OddLots is brought to you by VanEck. For years, investors basically forgot about real assets, energy, gold, and infrastructure. But look what's driving markets now. Central banks loading up on gold, massive capex cycles, currencies doing weird things. These assets are at the center of it. RACS, the VanEck Real Asset ETF, is an actively managed one-stop shop for real assets, spanning gold, commodities, natural resource equities, and more. Go to vaneg.com slash R-A-A-X pod to learn more. Fun disclosures later in this episode. So there's a lot of noise about AI, but time's too tight for more promises.

0:36So let's talk about results. At IBM, we work with our employees to integrate technology right into the systems they need. Now, a global workforce of 300 ,000 can use AI to fill their HR questions, resolving 94 % of common questions. Not noise, proof of how we can help companies get smarter by putting AI where it actually pays off, deep in the work that moves the business. Let's create smarter business. IBM. Find home wherever you roam at Sonesta ES and Simply Suites, where longer stays feel comfortable, flexible, and easy. Stretch out and enjoy spacious accommodations and home-like amenities designed to help you settle in and stay productive or relaxed for however long you need.

1:18And when you're a Sonesta Travel Pass member, staying at Sonesta ES and Simply Suites means earning points toward free nights, upgrades, and more with every eligible stay. Go to Sonesta.com to book your stay and unlock the best rates with Sonesta Travel Pass. Here today, roam tomorrow. Join now at Sonesta.com. Terms and conditions apply. Bloomberg Audio Studios. Podcasts. Radio. News.

1:57Hello and welcome to another episode of the Odd Thoughts podcast. I'm Tracy Alloway. And I'm Joe Weisendahl. Joe, you know I spend a lot of my time doing interior design. Yes. I've bored you, I'm sure, with a lot of thoughts on this topic. But then it struck me recently that actually what I'm doing is not really interior design. It's actually just interior decorating because I'm not really changing the structure of a particular house. I don't like doing that in part because I'm lazy and I hate construction mess, but also because it's a lot harder to change the particular design of a house than it is to just get new fabric for the windows or a new paint color.

2:34There are more real-world constraints. That's an interesting way to put it. I can confirm having looked over from time to time, you know, we sit next to each other. I can confirm having looked at you, say, like, looking out wallpaper and vintage wallpaper that you might be acquiring. But no, I have not heard of you sort of talk about, you know, knocking down big walls or whatever inside your home. Although I certainly, you know, in New York City, you know people who do that. And they hire an architect as part of, they'll buy two condos or something like that and conjoin them and hire an architect and so forth.

3:05That's a different level. It's a different level of constraints and obligations. Well, this is the other thing I've been thinking. Am I a product of my time? Because so much of the cultural emphasis nowadays seems to be on interior design and what the inside of a building looks like versus the exterior. And I think if I had been thinking about these things in like the 90s or the 80s, I would be much more into architecture. It's a really interesting thought. And I hadn't really thought of it that way. But that makes a lot of sense. And my, you know, my uninformed gut is like, oh, does social media make it so that people are just much more obsessed with the interior design of a building, the specific aesthetic choices that are made?

3:46But of course, on the other hand, you know, we work at Bloomberg. We have a big office in London. Many beautiful buildings. Many beautiful buildings. Lots of glass. A new London HQ. Absolutely gorgeous building, et cetera. And so we do live surrounded in this world that the world we live in is one that was built by architects or designed by architects. Absolutely. And this was the other thing I was thinking about architecture in relation to economics is when it's done well, a beautiful building ends up being a public good. It can boost an entire neighborhood. It can revive a particular city. It can improve the flow of traffic, improve energy efficiency, do all these things.

4:28But so many buildings are still designed by private developers, and I'm not sure they're always incentivized to do beautiful design in that way. How do you incentivize a private developer to do something that ends up being a public good? That's a fascinating question. I hadn't really thought of it framed in that way. But for example, again, the new J.P. Morgan building in New York City, I like it. I don't work there, but I think it's a cool addition to Skyline. It blinks, et cetera. There's a lot of cool things. But how do you design, how do you incentivize a public good as a good way to frame it?

4:59Well, since you mentioned the J.P. Morgan building, that is a big clue. Purposely dropping breadcrumbs. Yes, a huge clue. So we do, in fact, have the perfect guest for today's show. We are going to be speaking to a very famous architect, Lord Norman Foster. He is, of course, the founder of Foster and Partners. And we are here with him in Madrid. In his studio, in his foundation. Thank you so much for coming on the show. Thank you. So how much of architecture is about dealing with real-world constraints? Because I always think there's not just physics and finance, but you're also dealing with things like zoning.

5:33And I guess in the UK, you're also dealing with listing requirements and things like that. How much does that constrain you? It's totally rooted in the process of design. So you cannot separate. Design is really a response to constraints and whether those constraints come from the codes, whether they come from the requirements for the building, because a building is a response to a need. It then takes on more layers. Yes, it's in the public domain, but it's shaped by constraints, by needs. It's a response so if you don't have those constraints if you don't have those demands if you don't have to meet certain requirements performance some of those are tangible you can measure them some less obvious more subconscious perhaps below the surface yeah but nonetheless so it's a design is a response to needs.

6:42We're in this gorgeous building of yours and we were just looking that, you know, over there on the shelf there for a series of wood samples. For example, different types of wood from different trees. Cherry wood, plum wood. At the highest levels of architecture to do a great building, how much do you, does the architect really need to know? I guess maybe material science or at least the true nature of specific materials? I think the more that you know about the issues around any assignment, the more you're empowered as a designer. So that has led me over decades to promote a particular way of designing, which is counterintuitive.

7:30It's against everything that we're taught in a school of architecture or engineering. And that is you bring all the disciplines together around a table and you work from the outset together. Now, a critic of that will say that sounds like a committee architecture. It's not. I mean, basically, the team is going to be involved in that project. So if the architect designs and then hands it over to the engineer to make it stand up, to make it hot when it's cold outside in the reverse, you lose the opportunity of the feedback. If you get that at the outset, the designers are more empowered and the designers are really a wider team.

8:19But that needs a process of re-education. because engineers have been taught, show me what you want, I'll make it work. Architects have been taught that they should design in isolation. It goes further. Architects are taught about doing a building in isolation. A city outside is a street. You could argue the street is the essence of the traditional city. Architects and urbanists are not taught about designing streets. so planners are taught in terms of zoning yeah in terms of the legalities architects have talked about individual buildings so in a way we have to reassess how we educate and in our terms we re-educate whether it's here in a foundation preparing civic leaders for the future enabling them to be able to tell the difference between fashion, prejudice, style, and data and evidence.

9:27And the same is true in terms of a building or a city plan. Joe brought up the wood samples. I can't help but notice that the majority of items in this room are related to transportation, so cars and jets and trains as well. I also read... The city. And the city. But I also read in an older interview, I think someone asked you your favorite building, and you replied, a jumbo jet. Do you have an interest in engineering? Should you have been an engineer instead of an architect? I love flight. I love automobiles. And I think that as designers, we get our inspirations from many different directions.

10:13I was deliberately being tongue-in-cheek in terms of the jumbo jet. But what I really wanted to do was to get the audience thinking in a different way about a jumbo. Because when you think about it, it's a restaurant, it's a cinema, it's a hotel, and all the while it's moving from one place to the other. and also to start to think about the miracle of flight. I mean, there's still an extraordinary magic that these machines, which are weighing tons, can somehow, by lumbering along the runway, suddenly levitate and then transport us vast distances. And I think there are also a lot of lessons in terms of the built world.

11:08In other words, how can we use, harness technology to improve the quality of life? I'm really fascinated by this idea of, okay, so one might think that an architect is someone who draws lines, draws sketches on a piece of paper, and then maybe there is an engineering firm, and then there's a construction firm, and then so forth. I'm fascinated by this idea, and it rings true with other discussions we have. We talk to traders, for example, and there's obviously a difference between thinking in your head on a good trade versus what it actually takes to execute. Literally this morning, I was sitting around a table with a group of us as architects here in the foundation on a project alongside the individual who will be going to build that building.

11:57And we're saying, well, the next stage is to do this. We really have to have the environmental engineer. engineer. We have to have the structural engineer. And that will be the next meeting. So that was the first meeting. Now we were able to go so far, but only so far. And we recognize the need to have those other skills on board. Now we could have, and it would have been absolutely traditional, we could have just collectively designed that building and then just passed it on. But there would be so many lost opportunities. Because if you think of a building as an integration of systems, I mean, if I tried to bring this back to the world of automotive design, and I found myself trying to communicate that, this principle to a group of automotive engineers, not just the engineers, but those who are making the cars.

12:56And the example that I took was a point in time in the 1930s when pretty well all of the cars, any production car, followed a certain pattern. It was a chassis and then a body on top of that, which was a shell, to enclose and protect the occupants from the rain, the elements from nature. And then at one point, a car emerged. It was the Chrysler Airflow. And the body became not just the shell. It became an integral part of the structure. So the car was lighter and the car was immensely stronger. The promotional video of that time, they pushed the car off the top of the mountain. and it kind of rolled and rolled and landed four square.

13:57Somebody comes out of the bushes, demonstrates that the, you know, opens the door, gets in and drives away. The point is then that the two separate systems of the shell and the chassis have merged into one element which is doing both jobs better. So it's doing more with less. Now, imagine that we're talking about the exterior of a building, heating and cooling it. If you think of integrated design, then you're going to end up, if all those skills are working together, you can really do a system approach to design. you can start to get things doing double duty, performing more, less components, higher performance, more quality and better quality of life.

14:50That principle, whether it's in a city or a building, is all of that is to a social end.

15:33Thank you. pod to learn more. And investors should consider the investment objective, risks, charges, and expenses of the fund carefully before investing to obtain a prospectus and summary prospectus, which contain this and other information. Visit VanEck.com. Please read the prospectus and summary prospectus carefully before investing. Rax is distributed by VanEck Securities Corporation Distributor. So there's a lot of noise about AI, but time's too tight for more promises. So let's talk about results. At IBM, we work with our employees to integrate technology right into the systems they need.

16:08Now, a global workforce of 300 ,000 can use AI to fill their HR questions, resolving 94 % of common questions. Not noise. Proof of how we can help companies get smarter by putting AI where it actually pays off. Deep in the work that moves the business. Let's create smarter business. IBM. Being a small business owner isn't just a career. It's a calling. Chase for Business knows how much heart and effort go into building something of your own. That's why they make business growth their priority. The Chase team takes the time to understand your mission, where you are now, and where you want to go.

16:43Their broad range of solutions is designed with you in mind so you can bring your ideas to life. From banking to payment acceptance to credit cards, you can conveniently manage all your business finances all in one place with their digital tools. Looking for tips and advice? Their online resources are always available to give you the solutions you need to help your business thrive. See how your business can get stronger and go farther with Chase for Business. Learn more at chase.com slash business. Chase for Business. Make more of what's yours. The Chase mobile app is available for select mobile devices.

17:17Message and data rates may apply. JPMorgan Chase Bank N.A. Member FDIC. Copyright 2026. JPMorgan Chase and Company. How do you think about the social end of buildings when you're given a particular project? So I know that you often do public buildings, and I imagine that you are in dialogue with cities and states around the world when you're doing those. But when you're given a private assignment, such as a J.P. Morgan building or a Bloomberg office, how do you think about the public good aspect of design? you're thinking simultaneously of how that building works from the inside out and you're also thinking simultaneously from the outside in because arguably they're two completely separate groups of people private inside public outside but the building is in the public domain so if i took the headquarters of Bloomberg, then an early decision was to intersect the building with Wattling Street.

18:27Wattling Street was the old Roman road opposite. If you acknowledge that and you continue that and it became an arcade through the building and you had connectivity over that arcade, then simultaneously you were breaking down the scale of the building. It was then more human. And the public spaces bringing in an artist to create water, benches, that was also double duty, the systems approach, providing security. But it wasn't an ugly bollard. You didn't know it was providing security. It was also bringing people together. that, then the arcade is an opportunity to introduce shops and so on. That is working with the Bloomberg philosophy of encouraging the neighborhood to benefit from this private entity coming into the community, rather than it being an island and killing off the traders.

19:33It's encouraging local traders. Now, everything I've described then is working to the benefit of the interior of the building. And the facades are starting to be able to breathe and pour lots of fresh air into the building. So it's making the building a healthier building. But it's also, on the exterior, not another glass box. It's a combination of bronze and the local stone. local stone, the stone of the adjoining buildings. So it's working environmentally in terms of sustainability, it's reducing energy, it's creating a healthier building for the occupants, and then because it's deep and low, it's not pushing into the sky.

20:20So it is reverential to the historic buildings around it of a same mass, but at the same time, it's creating horizontality. And horizontality is good for communication. And Bloomberg is about communication. Now, I could describe another kind of building for a completely different kind of, how can I say, client body, also in the high-tech business. So if I go to So Beijing, if I talk about a building there, the company ethos is totally different. It's about competition between groups. So it's the polar opposite. And I could describe that in detail. The point that I'm making is that as I take you through these decisions, the way that they overlap and interact, You start to realize that the process of design is about balancing, it's about reconciling, it's about creating something which is simultaneously working in the public domain, working for a visitor, working for those inside when they come outside.

21:37Well, since you alluded to it, and now I'm particularly curious about it, I imagine that in the decades ahead, there will still be new JP Morgan headquarters, new Bloomberg headquarters, etc. But there's probably going to be a lot more mega projects still coming out of Asia or Beijing or China specifically. And so when you describe that environment as different, what should the architects of the future know about working in these markets? First of all, I mean, I took the example of the building in China. That same need could be anywhere. It just happened to be in China. So you could have in China exactly the same requirements as a building like J.P.

22:26Morgan or Bloomberg. Although, of course, no two buildings are alike. I mean, each is specific to its own organization, the values of those organizations, the aspirations of those who've created them, whether they're an individual like Mike Bloomberg in Bloomberg, whether it's Steve Jobs with Apple, or whether it's much more corporate, more anonymous. But nonetheless, there are those values. I would say that common to any building anywhere is how do you anticipate the future? So if I go back to an early building which recently celebrated its half century, and that was the Willis-Faber building in Ipswich, an insurance headquarters.

23:18and in the life of that building, that building had a high degree of flexibility and nobody in their wildest dreams anticipated that that flexibility would be used. But in no time at all after it opened, it opened with typewriters and in no time that building, and it was the only building in the insurance industry which was, as a headquarters, able to adapt. It adapted to the digital revolution, to screens. And the same was true of the Hong Kong Bank. The Hong Kong Bank, which I also recently went to their 40th anniversary, as opposed to Willis Faber and their 50th anniversary. So literally a few weeks ago, I was there at that celebration.

24:10And the same thing there. That building, quite radical at the time, and still in many ways radical, took the traditional central core of a tower, which contained the structure, the vertical circulation, the bathrooms, mechanical plant, took all that, fragmented it, put it at the sides of big, open, loft things. Nobody anticipated that in the life of that building, the early life, there would be something known as a trading floor. where you need clear line of sight. That wasn't a need in the late 1970s when the competition for that building, but it was able to absorb that. So I think that the whole thing about the future is that by design, you can, if I say that you create a building for the needs of today with an awareness of the past, but to as far as you're able to anticipate a future which is largely unknown.

25:16But perhaps in terms of infrastructure, having been backwards and forwards to Asia, and if I say China more specifically, over the last 30 years, I mean the changes that I've seen, which interestingly I was communicating earlier this week to the Bloomberg event audience here and sharing that experience with them and showing them the China when I first went there. And it's foggy. It's misty. You can't see. The city's now unbelievable. I mean, clean air, 90 % of the vehicles electric, and an extraordinary amount of green. I mean, Shanghai is 50%, Beijing, 50 % green. That's happened over the last few decades.

26:16And in terms of connectivity, just over 54 ,000 kilometers of high-speed train. 220 miles an hour, 350 kilometers an hour. Connecting by this 97 % of Chinese cities. on a pig day 13 million travelers achieved in 16 years and in the UK they gave up on the London to Manchester it goes as far as Birmingham short termism they have a department for leveling up the ultimate leveling up is connectivity they just didn't get it and that 54 ,000 kilometers is more than the rest of the world put together by a huge margin. Why do you think certain countries, and you brought up the UK there, but you could possibly say the same for the US as well.

27:20Why do you think certain countries struggle with big infrastructure? Because at every stage in the emergence, the emergence of a nation, whether that is the United Kingdom in its empire days, the Industrial Revolution. It led the world. We're still trading right now on that. I mean, the Thames Embankment was a response to cholera. It created, if you like, systems thinking and doing more with less. It also introduced below ground high-speed public transport. It cleaned up the Thames. So that period, you had the expression of that civic pride. I started work at the age of 16 in Manchester Town Hall, which was the ultimate statement of civic pride.

28:21And it was a competition. And Waterhouse won that competition. That was my first experience of architecture. It took me a little longer to eventually discover that I could study architecture. So I was a late starter at the age of 21. But I can remember vividly right now details of that building. I mean, that really lifted my spirit. So whether it was the great train stations, and of course, today it's the great airports. So if you really want to see the most advanced airports in the world, where do you go? I mean, it's obvious. We know where you go. Right. There's a mock-up right behind you. There's a huge model immediately behind us here.

29:05We're looking at a Beijing airport. Beijing airport was built in five years. Now, at the same time, I drew a parallel with Terminal 5, which I think took 20 years and was a fraction of the size and is really a sort of Band-Aid on top of Heathrow, which is still embedded in the heart of, you know, you overfly metropolis together. So there are a lot of messages perhaps mixed up in these analogies and comparisons. No, it makes sense. And I didn't necessarily expect the interview to go in this direction. But I'm actually just going to press you further on this specific point, which is, what is your diagnosis of why certain countries do seem to have given up?

29:50Was there a moment when you felt it, for example, okay, in the UK? Was there a moment where you felt the ambition is not the same as it once was to do great things? It's interesting. I'm working on a project right now. And so I'm with a team of relatively young architects. And so I'm saying, well, in terms of domes, of course, it would be interesting to make a comparison with a particular dome in the Festival of Britain, 1951. And everybody looked at me quizzically. And I said, but you've never heard of it. Because nobody ever heard of it. So I said, well, check it out, and the next meeting, we'll talk about it.

30:40The next meeting, they came back and said, why didn't we know about that? This was 1951. It was the biggest dome in the world. It was demolished for political reasons, interestingly. So they were in awe, and the images, I mean, are extraordinary. So 1951 was more or less hard on the heels of World War II. And Britain was in true austerity mode. You still had rationing. So you had a little book. And when you went to buy food or clothes, then you could only buy, depending on the number of coupons, like postage stamps, that you'd got left. But that period was the first nuclear power station, was the first commercial jet.

31:31It was the de Havilland Comet, was, in terms of cars, created the R-Type Bentley, 120 miles an hour, hour on hour. It cost twice, two houses at that time, the semi-detached. So this was an extraordinary era. Now, since then, for a whole variety of reasons, many of them political, it's no longer the leading at that level of innovation, manufacturing, and so on. And the factors are quite complex. Some of them are political and others are social. So you do have this cyclical, and you can look at the rise and fall of empires and the relationship between the way in which that might be celebrated, either through the technology or the architecture of the time.

32:33And the architecture of the Festival of Britain at that time was absolutely extraordinary. and that was the achievement of one administration, but literally when the next administration came down, for whatever reason, I would surmise that it was seen as a threat. So it was demolished. The only element which is still standing on the South Bank, and you know there is the Festival Hall, of course, but that was part of that creation. I had no idea. Yeah. That's fascinating. Since you brought up rationing, how do budgets work for buildings? If I'm a client of Foster & Partners, one can dream, and I come to you and I say, I want to build a building, do I present you with a particular figure or a range, or do you study my needs and then you come back with a suggested budget?