This paper argues that a valid architectural expression needs to be found for the social issues of the twenty first century. It is axiomatic that in the UK at least, the profession of Architecture is in crisis. Pressured on all sides, many architects have become entrenched in a historicist self-view more appropriate to the creation of a Victorian monument than the sensitive design of appropriate environments for people at the millennium. Others however are searching for and developing new approaches, aimed at reflecting changing environmental and societal needs. As one of these new movements, ecological architecture has grown from radical beginnings to a kind of respectability and maturity. As the post-war architectural agenda has been changing, social concerns and the approach to their solution by social scientists have, largely unnoticed within mainstream architecture, also been shifting. Sociology in particular has moved away from micro-interactionist, or structural approaches, in favour of more anti-reductionist and post-structuralist perspectives, such as Giddens' structuration theory, which attempts to bind together the micro and the macro (Giddens, 1993). In the post-modern world, the central tenets of social policy have moved away from their predominant 'Fordist' focus on mass solutions to mass problems. Within the sociology of the built environment, this is reflected in the emergence of alternative approaches, such as 'universal design'. This approach to architecture seeks to inject a social and environmental philosophy, consistent with long-term sustainability and users' needs, into all design solutions. With the growth of the philosophy of ecological architecture, the aims of recent theoretical approaches to sociology and architecture are not, in reality, so far apart. We have yet to find a common expression however, for these coincident aims.