Most current research and development projects deployed at university level are fully embedded within a historical grown academic culture. Core and fundamental research, free from any ‘outside’ influences and driven by inspired and ambitious researchers or research programs is well-known and methods of conduct, analysis of results and the results themselves are solidly engrained in peer-reviews, financial systems and academic award systems.

However, we see a growing need for innovation within the built environment industry. Traditionally a craftsmanship world with seemingly many obstacles for this industry to radical developments due to relatively limited budgets (almost non-existent innovation dedicated budgets), project driven in combination with severe competition regulations and a generally short term financial outlook. Simultaneously the industry needs radical changes: energy transition, climate change and raw material demands are just a few of the global challenges that need to be addressed. And especially these issues are currently addressed within various academic research contexts.

There is a need for a better, more efficient and effective collaboration between industry and academia. In terms of content this is evident. Just as clear are the cultural gaps; different economies, time schedules, hierarchies and management models, even though ambitions and tasks are aligned. There is a need for ‘moderating’; how to bridge academic knowledge and industry expertise, how to facilitate building industry in the transition from craftsmanship to high-tech, how to produce effective ‘deliverables’ by academic researchers, and even how to describe and structure research assignments and processes, too name just the obvious ones.

Were in other disciplines like ‘IT’ and ‘energy’ a completely different culture of innovation, finance of research and facilitating start-ups and ‘good ideas’ exists, in the built environment industry and the related university world innovations and research seems fully dependent on government driven financial programs and formats. One can state that ‘other disciplines’ can truly operate globally supported by global multinational industries and interests and the built environment while developing ‘global knowledge’ is per definition local and depending on regional industries and economies. However, it seems clear that one can learn from other experiences and formats. Not to ‘copy – paste’ directly, but to borrow elements, adapt and implement those that can improve an ‘eco-system’ for developing and applying built environment innovations. Ranging form crowd-funding to venture capitalist funding formats, including the associated ‘business-side’ and from improving a facilitating role for culture change in industry to optimizing and expanding the academic world of research characteristics: fundamental and applied.

Most of the more persistent man-made structural assets that surround us in everyday life as well as their reliable structural services are normally taken ‘as a law of nature’ by the general public. Compared to consumer products the service levels of structural assets are extremely high. Bridges with a structural failure rate comparable to that of normal office printers would be considered completely unacceptable, while a tunnel would never be built if they had a service life expectancy comparable to the most long-lasting functional products such as (certain) washing machines or Hi-Fi-systems. The same holds for all built structures, including houses, public and commercial buildings.

Meanwhile, these structural assets together exceed in financial terms the balance of any global financial institution or the yearly budget of e.g. the Dutch government many times. Thus, the importance and impact of the broad field of science and engineering related to the built environment - which includes architecture, architectural engineering, civil engineering, process management, and policy - is not be underestimated, both economically and socially.

Notwithstanding the evident importance of the Built Environment sector, the public perception of this sector is not that positive, a trend that has been developing in the past few decades. The public perception of the sector often leans towards non-innovative, somewhat clumsy, disorganised and conservative.

It is often forgotten that inventions and innovations from any field of science and engineering are finally applied in the context of the built environment. Developments with respect to e.g. energy comfort, new building materials, and systems are spectacular. For instance, no other innovation has increased the life expectancy of people as much as the broad application of developments in sanitary engineering. It is even so, that the difference between developed an developing countries can be largely attributed to the quality of public sanitation systems. Apparently, the development of an adequate and efficient sanitation system requires the effective collaboration within the so-called ‘Golden Triangle’, i.e. stable and facilitating governments, trained people and innovation originating from educational and scientific institutions and energetic application by these innovations by the market.

Moreover, the environmental impact of the ‘building sector’ is huge, given the enormous usage of raw materials. Together with the energy sector, the building sector is at the forefront of addressing great societal challenges related to sustainability, scarcity, and availability of raw materials as well as the transition towards a circular economic model, based on recycling and upcycling of waste materials and structures.

Another development is the need for true multidisciplinary and cross-disciplinary collaboration on these challenges. Almost every field of science and engineering has found its application in the built environment. Developments within quantum mechanics have led to diverse developments like energy efficient lighting (LED), precise positioning and cutting (laser technologies) and of course to the revolutionary introduction of ICT in the built environment. Developments in (micro-) biology have led to the aforementioned sanitation revolution, whereas new insights into the mathematics of planning and operations research allowed building processes at scales that would have never been possible before.

An effective and multidisciplinary approach faces grand challenges ahead, requiring dedication and collaboration. Therefore, the four technical universities decided to collaborate – amongst others – as 4TU.Bouw Center of Excellence for the Built Environment. The 4TU.Bouw Center of Excellence consists of the faculties of Architecture and Civil Engineering and Geosciences at Delft University of Technology, the Department of the Built Environment at Eindhoven University of Technology, the faculty of Engineering Technology at Twente University and Wageningen University & Research. The overall goal of this 4TU initiative is to promote close collaboration between Dutch universities in order to increase competitiveness in international research and education and to concentrate research and education efforts to improve efficiency and scientific excellence.

Led by scientific director Ulrich Knaack during a four-year period from 2014 till 2017, 4TU.Bouw focused on activating and developing the abovementioned collaborative ambitions. Specifically, by means of three programs, supported with a communication strategy directed towards a broader audience than the academic world alone. The Lighthouse Project initiative that actively pursued imaginary research proposals following a funding setup that resembled an ‘angel capital’ approach; reasonable ‘easy’ money for intensive and short-term ‘proof of concept’ or ‘proof of failure’ proposals. Not all had to succeed in a traditional way, which was made up by the number of projects and their ambitious goals. Secondly, 4TU.Bouw supported the dedicated PDEng-training program contributing to the future availability of well-trained specialists while bridging the gap between academia and the market. Lastly, there were various collaborations with other knowledge institutes and market branch organisations to collectively inform politicians and policy decisionmakers on the relevance and urgency of built environment research and education in order effectively face the nation-wide social and cultural challenges lying ahead.