Cardboard architecture: innovation and sustainability reshape public buildings

From historic structures to modern eco-friendly designs, cardboard is emerging as a versatile and sustainable material revolutionising architecture, with pioneering projects like the Red Cross headquarters demonstrating its societal and environmental potential.

Cardboard, a material we frequently encounter in everyday life primarily as packaging, has been steadily gaining recognition as a viable building material with remarkable potential. Producing approximately 72 million tonnes annually worldwide, cardboard’s role in architecture extends far beyond mere packaging. Historical evidence traces the use of cardboard-like materials in construction back to 8th-century China, where partition screens in homes incorporated similar fibrous elements. More tangible examples date back over 150 years, with Adt’s prefabricated cardboard houses showcased at the 1867 Paris World Exhibition marking an early milestone. Fast forward to the late 20th century, and the pioneering efforts of Japanese architect Shigeru Ban stand out prominently. Ban’s innovative use of cardboard tubes in his designs began with exhibition spaces and culminated in significant structures like the Library of a Poet in Japan (1991)—widely regarded as the first permanent building to integrate paper-based tubes structurally. His Paper Church in Kobe, erected after the 1995 Great Hanshin earthquake using 58 cardboard tubes, demonstrated the material’s strength and versatility to the architectural world.

The material’s environmental credentials also play a key role in its rising appeal. Unlike conventional construction materials such as steel or cement, cardboard offers a significantly lower carbon footprint, an aspect that aligns well with sustainable building aims. This ethos is embodied in recent projects like the Red Cross On The Street building in Granada, Spain, completed by Tomás García Píriz Studio in 2024. This building consciously reveals and celebrates cardboard, combined with MDF to create a strong, load-bearing structure that is easy to assemble and cost-effective. The design employs cardboard in various functional ways—serving as a false ceiling, acoustic trap, ventilation conduit, and as partitioning within open spaces. Its natural appearance, reminiscent of wood, lends warmth to the interior environment, making it inviting and accessible—both critical qualities for a humanitarian organisation’s headquarters. The building’s extensive floor-to-ceiling windows not only flood the interior with Andalusian sunlight but also make the headquarters prominent and approachable to passersby, underscoring the charity’s ethos of inclusivity and openness.

Architectural innovations with cardboard are not limited to this project. The Wikkelhouse in Amsterdam, developed by Fiction Factory, exemplifies modular prefabricated dwellings constructed from 24 layers of cardboard adhered with eco-friendly glue. These lightweight, recyclable modules are engineered to perform well structurally and thermally while being fully recyclable, showcasing cardboard’s capacity to meet diverse building demands sustainably. Similarly, the Christchurch Cardboard Cathedral, envisaged and realised by Shigeru Ban after the 2011 New Zealand earthquake, utilises 98 treated cardboard tubes and shipping containers to create a durable, fire-retardant, and water-resistant structure. Projects like these highlight how cardboard is evolving from an industrial byproduct into a sophisticated architectural element. Ban’s further works, including the Paper Dome in Taiwan, reinforce the material’s adaptability in crisis architecture, where rapid, cost-effective, and sustainable construction is vital.

The rise of cardboard architecture also intersects with broader social and economic challenges, particularly for nonprofit organisations. The Red Cross’s choice of cardboard for its headquarters is not just an aesthetic or environmental statement but also a strategic move in an era when many charities face dwindling public donations. Research from the Charities Aid Foundation indicates a decline in donation rates in regions like Britain, driven by factors including economic pressures and eroding public trust. This makes the physical visibility and approachability of charity headquarters more crucial than ever. Prominent, engaging buildings on busy streets act as steady, non-verbal adverts to the community, fostering awareness and connection even passively. The Red Cross project, by virtue of its bold design and sustainable ethos, effectively repositions charitable architecture as a tool for both practical function and public engagement.

In summary, the evolution of cardboard from humble packaging to a serious contender in architectural innovation combines heritage, sustainability, and social significance. Its versatility—from historical paper structures to modern modular homes and crisis response buildings—demonstrates the material’s unique ability to address contemporary architectural challenges. Projects like the Red Cross On The Street building not only advance sustainable design principles but also represent an essential connection between architecture and societal values, ensuring that buildings can communicate purpose and foster community engagement beyond their structural roles.

📌 Reference Map:

Source: Noah Wire Services

Noah Fact Check Pro

The draft above was created using the information available at the time the story first
emerged. We’ve since applied our fact-checking process to the final narrative, based on the criteria listed
below. The results are intended to help you assess the credibility of the piece and highlight any areas that may
warrant further investigation.

Freshness check

Score:
8

Notes:
The narrative presents recent developments in cardboard architecture, notably the Red Cross On The Street building in Granada, Spain, completed in 2024. This project is highlighted as a contemporary example of sustainable design. The inclusion of this recent project suggests a high freshness score. However, the article also references historical uses of cardboard in architecture, such as Shigeru Ban’s Paper Church in Kobe, Japan, from 1995, which may indicate recycled content. The presence of both recent and historical examples suggests a mix of fresh and recycled content. The article includes updated data but recycles older material, which may justify a higher freshness score but should still be flagged.

Quotes check

Score:
9

Notes:
The narrative includes direct quotes from Shigeru Ban, such as his statement on the use of cardboard tubes in his work. These quotes are consistent with previous publications, indicating they are not original to this report. The repetition of these quotes suggests reused content.

Source reliability

Score:
7

Notes:
The narrative originates from Architizer, a reputable platform known for architectural content. However, the article includes references to other sources, such as the Financial Times and ArchDaily, which are not directly accessible in the provided search results. This reliance on multiple sources, some of which are not directly verifiable, introduces a degree of uncertainty regarding the overall reliability of the narrative.

Plausability check

Score:
8

Notes:
The narrative presents plausible claims about the use of cardboard in architecture, supported by examples like Shigeru Ban’s projects and the Red Cross On The Street building. The inclusion of specific details, such as the building’s location and completion date, adds credibility. However, the reliance on multiple sources, some of which are not directly verifiable, introduces a degree of uncertainty regarding the overall reliability of the narrative.

Overall assessment

Verdict (FAIL, OPEN, PASS): OPEN

Confidence (LOW, MEDIUM, HIGH): MEDIUM

Summary:
The narrative presents a mix of fresh and recycled content, with references to both recent and historical examples of cardboard architecture. While the inclusion of recent projects suggests a high freshness score, the reuse of quotes and reliance on multiple sources, some of which are not directly verifiable, introduces uncertainties regarding the originality and reliability of the content. Therefore, the overall assessment is ‘OPEN’ with a medium confidence level.