Social Responsibility in Architectural Education

*Corresponding author (K.Kramer). Tel: +66-5394-2806. Fax: +66-5322-1448. E-mail address: [email protected]. 2012. American Transactions on Engineering & Applied Sciences. Volume 1 No.3. ISSN 2229-1652 eISSN 2229-1660 Online Available at http://TuEngr.com/ATEAS/V01/295-317.pdf

295

American Transactions on Engineering & Applied Sciences

http://TuEngr.com/ATEAS, http://Get.to/Research

Social Responsibility in Architectural Education Kimberly Kramera*

a Faculty of Architecture, Chiang Mai University, THAILAND

A R T I C L E I N F O

A B S T RA C T

Article history: Received April 02, 2012 Received in revised form July 10, 2012 Accepted July 26, 2012 Available online July 28, 2012 Keywords: Education in built environment; Human and social factors.

As designers of the built environment, architects have a tremendous opportunity to make a positive impact on the lives of the ‘bottom billion’. However, in order to be effective agents of change, these designers must understand and appreciate the concept of social responsibility in architecture, and learn to implement it in their own work. This study seeks to determine the current state of social responsibility training in architectural education by examining the curriculum requirements set by a number of national architectural education accrediting boards to determine whether they include training in the precepts of social responsibility in design. Because these curriculum requirements largely determine the topics and concepts that students will be exposed to in the course of their architectural education, improving this aspect of architectural education is an important step toward maximizing the profession’s contribution to the global effort to improve the lives of the ‘bottom billion’.

2012 American Transactions on Engineering & Applied Sciences.

1. Introduction ‘Architectural education should have two basic purposes: to produce competent, creative,

critically minded and ethical professional designers/builders; and to produce good world

2012 American Transactions on Engineering & Applied Sciences

296 Boonsap Witchayangkoon, and Paulo C.L. Segantine

citizens who are intellectually mature, ecologically sensitive and socially responsible.’

-International Union of Architects (UIA, 2008)

As designers of the built environment, architects have a tremendous opportunity to make a

positive impact on the lives of the ‘bottom billion’. However, in order to be effective agents of

change, these designers must understand and appreciate the concept of social responsibility in

architecture, and learn to implement it in their own work. Including this subject in the standard

architecture curriculum is an important step toward this goal. This study seeks to determine the

current state of social responsibility training in architectural education.

Social responsibility in architecture may be defined in a number of ways. According to Paul

Goldberger, an architecture critic for The New Yorker, ‘Social responsibility in architecture is, at

least in part, a matter of believing, passionately and absolutely, in the potential of architecture to

improve the quality of life.’ (Goldberger, 2002) This study will focus on four particular aspects of

socially responsible architectural practice.

Sustainability: A considerable amount of attention has been focused recently on sustainable

and environmentally responsible design. This is an important aspect of social responsibility in

architecture, and while substantial progress has been made in this area, there is still significant

room for improvement.

Responsibility to consider the needs of communities and the wider public: Architects have a

responsibility to consider the needs of local communities and the wider public as project

stakeholders and to reconcile the needs of these groups with those of a project’s client, owner and

user groups. By understanding and embracing this responsibility, architects have the opportunity,

within their professional roles, to become community advocates and agents of positive social

change.

Ethics: Architects have a duty to understand the ethical implications of their design decisions

in regard to social, political, environmental and cultural issues. Understanding these implications

empowers architects to make responsible decisions.

Civic engagement through public service: Although architects have a unique and useful skill


297

set that enables them to serve as important contributors and leaders within society, civic

engagement and public service in architecture is still significantly underdeveloped. By

integrating civic engagement and public service into the practice of architecture, architects can

apply their professional skills to the benefit of society.

While these issues certainly overlap in some respects, they also represent four distinct aspects

of the socially responsible practice of architecture. These four aspects describe significant ways

in which architects help to improve society’s quality of life through responsible practice and

educating future architects in these aspects of social responsibility will significantly affect the

profession’s ability to take up the moral challenge of addressing the needs of the ‘bottom billion’.

2. Approach The curriculum requirements set by architectural education accrediting boards around the

world largely determine the topics and concepts that students will be exposed to in the course of

their architectural education. This study examines the curriculum requirements set by a number of

national architectural education accrediting boards to determine whether they include training in

the precepts of social responsibility in design. The countries included in this study are those for

which English-language accreditation criteria documentation is readily available.

3. Results For each country, the relevant accrediting authority and specific accreditation criteria are

identified and examined below. The results are summarized in Table 10, at the end of the section.

3.1 Australia The accreditation of architectural academic programmes in Australia is jointly conducted by

the Architects Accreditation Council of Australia (AACA) and the Royal Australian Institute of

Architects (RAIA). (AACA and RAIA, 2006) According to the Australian Architecture Program

Accreditation and Recognition Procedure, published jointly by these organizations, ‘Review of

programs is undertaken with close reference to both the Architects Accreditation Council of

Australia National Competency Standards in Architecture (NCSA 01) and The Royal Australian


Institute of Architects Education Policy. Extracts from these documents jointly form the

Accreditation and Recognition Criteria.’ (AACA and RAIA, 2006)

The Accreditation and Recognition Criteria are organized into a list of numbered

‘Performance Criteria.’ Table 1 lists the Performance Criteria relevant to social responsibility in

architecture.

Table 1: Australia: Social Responsibility Education Requirements for Accreditation, Extracted

from the AACA National Competency Standards (AACA and RAIA, 2006). Performance

Criteria # Text of Performance Criteria

06 The concept is informed by an understanding of the history of architectural thought and traditions of buildings and construction and by relevant current social and environmental concerns

11 The impact of the design concept upon the environment and the community is assessed and heeded

13 Respect for the natural environment and awareness of the issues of sustainability are demonstrated in the conceptual design

21 The interests of building users, the community and other relevant groups are investigated and reconciled with the project brief

22 Human, social, environmental and contextual issues are researched and addressed

54 Interests of building users, the community and other relevant groups are reconfirmed

86 Cultural factors relating to the project are researched and their influence and implications reported

87 Community participation processes are understood and recommendations made

88 Relevant environmental issues relating to the site and its location are identified and reported

145 An understanding of professional ethics as they apply to the practice of architecture is demonstrated and ethical practice observed.

An additional section of the Accreditation and Recognition Criteria includes Performance

Criteria extracted from the Royal Australian Institute of Architects’ Education Policy. Table 2

lists the Performance Criteria relevant to social responsibility.

Together, the Performance Criteria outlined in Tables 1 and 2 constitute the required training

for Australian architecture students in the precepts of social responsibility in design. These

criteria require students to develop a significant awareness and understanding of the environmental

impacts of their designs. They also require a high level of awareness and understanding of


299

community interests, needs and participation processes, encouraging students to consider the larger

social impact of their designs and their responsibility as designers to acknowledge, assess and

address these issues and impacts. The criteria glance on the topic of professional ethics, but stop

short of encouraging students to understand and embrace the opportunity for civic engagement and

public service in architecture.

Table 2: Australia: Additional Social Responsibility Education Requirements for Accreditation,

Extracted from RAIA Education Policy (AACA and RAIA, 2006). Performance


2.3.i Ability to inform action through knowledge of natural systems and built environments

2.3.ii An understanding of issues of ecological sustainability and design for reduction of energy use and environmental impact

2.3.iv An understanding of passive systems for thermal comfort, lighting and acoustics and their relationship to active systems

2.4.1 An ability to inform action through knowledge of society, clients and users

2.4.iii An understanding of the social context in which built environments are procured and responsibilities to clients, the public and users

Table 3: Britain: Social Responsibility Education Requirements for Accreditation

(RIBA, 2010). Criteria # Text of Criteria

GC5 The graduate will have an understanding of the relationship between people and buildings, and between buildings and their environment, and the need to relate buildings and the spaces between them to human needs and scale

GC5.2 The graduate will have an understanding of the impact of buildings on the environment, and the precepts of sustainable design

GC5.3 The graduate will have an understanding of the way in which buildings fit into their local context

GC6 The graduate will have an understanding of the profession of architecture and the role of the architect in society, in particular in preparing briefs that take account of social factors

GC6.1 The graduate will have an understanding of the nature of professionalism and the duties and responsibilities of architects to clients, building users, constructors, co-professionals and the wider society

GC6.3 The graduate will have an understanding of the potential impact of building projects on existing and proposed communities


3.2 Britain The accreditation requirements for British architectural education programmes are published

as the Criteria for Validation by the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA). (RIBA, 2010)

Table 3 lists the Criteria relevant to social responsibility.

The RIBA accreditation criteria require students to understand the impacts of their projects on

the environment and communities as well as their duties and responsibilities as architects, not just

to traditional project stakeholders but to the wider society. However, like the Australian criteria,

the RIBA criteria stop short of encouraging students to understand and embrace the opportunity for

civic engagement and public service in architecture. While an understanding of the ethical

implications of design decisions is not required in the educational portion of the validation criteria,

it is discussed in the RIBA Professional Criteria required to sit the Professional Practice

Examination in Architecture.

3.3 Canada The Canadian Architectural Certification Board (CACB) assumes accreditation responsibility

for University Schools of Architecture in Canada that offer a professional degree in architecture.

(CACB, 2011) The accreditation criteria are published as the CACB Conditions and Procedures

for Accreditation. (CACB, 2005) For the purposes of accreditation, graduating students must

demonstrate awareness, understanding, or ability in a number of ‘Performance Criteria.’ Table 4

lists the Performance Criteria relevant to social responsibility in architecture.

Table 4: Canada: Social Responsibility Education Requirements for Accreditation (CACB, 2005).

Performance Criteria # Text of Performance Criteria

13 Environmental Conservation: Understanding of the basic principles of ecology and architects' responsibilities with respect to environmental and resource conservation in architecture and urban design

37 Ethics and Professional Judgment: Awareness of the ethical issues involved in the formation of professional judgments in architecture design and practice

When conducting accreditation reviews, the CACB also requires educational institutions to

address the perspectives of each of its constituencies. This includes public members, addressed

by the ‘Architecture Education and Society’ requirement:


301

‘The programme must demonstrate that it not only equips students with an informed

understanding of social and environmental problems but that it also develops their capacity to

help address these problems with sound architecture and urban design decisions. Given its

particular mission, the APR [Architecture Program Report] may cover such issues as: how

students gain an informed understanding of architecture as a social art, including the complex

processes carried out by the multiple stakeholders who shape built environments; the

emphasis given to generating the knowledge that can mitigate social and environmental

problems; how students gain an understanding of the ethical implications of built environment

decisions; and how a climate of civic engagement is nurtured, including a commitment to

professional and public service.’ (CACB, 2005).

The CACB accreditation criteria require students to develop an understanding of

environmental responsibility in design, as well as an awareness of the ethical issues involved in

design and practice decisions. The Canadian criteria take a strong stance in demanding a focus on

civic engagement opportunities and responsibilities for architects. Though implied, architects’

responsibility to consider the needs of the communities and the wider public is not specifically

addressed.

3.4 Hong Kong Because of its size, Hong Kong takes a different approach to architectural education

accreditation than most other countries. Rather than create a standard national set of criteria for

accreditation, the Hong Kong Institute of Architects (HKIA), which is responsible for accrediting

schools of architecture within Hong Kong, has simply made a list of schools whose architecture

programs are accredited. Within Hong Kong, this includes the Master of Architecture program at

The University of Hong Kong, and the Master of Architecture program at The Chinese University

of Hong Kong. (HKIA, n.d.) The list also specifies overseas accreditation schemes which are

recognised as equivalent by the HKIA: the U.S. National Architectural Accrediting Board

(NAAB), the Commonwealth Association of Architects (CAA), the Architects Accreditation

Council of Australia (AACA), and the People’s Republic of China National Board of Architectural

Accreditation (NBAA). (HKIA, n.d.)


A cursory examination of the two domestic masters programs accredited by the HKIA shows

that the University of Hong Kong Master of Architecture programme does not prioritise the topic

of social responsibility within their programme, though they do mention that ‘the design thesis is

an opportunity for students to conduct research in areas that overlap staff research activities,

including architecture’s relationship to the environment, its impact on community, and its potential

to enrich culture’. (UHK, 2011) The Chinese University of Hong Kong’s Master of Architecture

programme states that among the studios’ aims for its students in terms of professional competence

is that ‘the framework and outcomes of the studios should reflect the following aspects: awareness

of issues such as sustainability and economy’. However, this is the only mention of topics related

to social responsibility in architecture. (CUHK, 2011; CUHK, 2010)

3.5 India In India, the Council of Architecture (COA) prescribes the standards of architectural education

required for granting recognized qualifications. These standards are published as the Council of

Architecture – Minimum Standards of Architectural Education, which supplement the 1983 COA

Regulations. (COA, 2008) The Minimum Standards of Education were revised in 2008 to update

the original 1983 document, which had no requirements for social responsibility education in

architecture curricula. (COA, 2002) Within the Minimum Standards, the curriculum requirements

are organized into ‘Subjects for Examination’ in two stages. Table 5 lists the Subjects for

Examination relevant to social responsibility.

Table 5: India: Social Responsibility Education Requirements for Accreditation (COA, 2008). Subj. for

Examination Text of Subject for Examination

Stage 1 # 12

Understanding of Climate and its impact on architectural design, fundamentals of climatology and environmental studies

Stage 1 # 18 Group subjects of specialisation: B. Eco Architecture

Stage 2 # xv

Sustainability- Principles and methods, Energy conscious design ecological balance conservation of natural resources, Solar passive architecture, Re-cycling

Stage 2 # xvi

Use of energy in buildings, Conserving energy, Solar passive and solar active systems, wind energy, Biomass energy, Re-cycling

Stage 2 # xx

Environmental factors effecting human habitat such as climate, environmental pollutions, environmental degradation, green cover etc. at the micro and macro scales


303

The document also outlines a course of study for an Eco Architecture specialisation track at

Stage 2. While it is heartening to see the COA criteria updated to include the subject of

environmental responsibility in the standard architecture curriculum (this was lacking in the 1983

document), the criteria still do not mention civic engagement and public service in architecture, or

the architect’s responsibility to consider the needs of communities and the wider public in addition

to the traditional project stakeholders.

3.6 Korea The Korea Architectural Accrediting Board (KAAB) is responsible for accrediting

architectural education programs within the Republic of Korea. The criteria for accreditation are

published as the KAAB Conditions & Procedures for Professional Degree Programs in

Architecture. (KAAB, 2005) The KAAB accreditation conditions require each architectural

programme to demonstrate how it addresses a number of different perspectives. Table 6 lists

those relevant to social responsibility in architecture.

Table 6: Korea: Social Responsibility Education Requirements for Accreditation (KAAB, 2005).

Perspective Relevant conditions (for each condition, the following issues must be addressed)

Registration (2.1.3) Delivering issues of responsibility for the society and ethics

Profession (2.1.4)

Issues in reconciling the conflicts between architects’ obligation to their clients, the society, and private enterprise.

Society (2.1.5)

The program must promote student understanding in various social, environmental challenges and foster skills dealing with these issues through proper architectural and urban design resolution

Society (2.1.5) Importance of ethical implications of built environment determinations

Society (2.1.5)

Issues in promoting civic engagement through commitment to professional and public service

Additional KAAB accreditation requirements are listed in the Conditions & Procedures as

‘Student Performance Criteria’. Table 7 lists the Performance Criteria relevant to social

responsibility.


Table 7: Korea: Social Responsibility Education Requirements for Accreditation (KAAB, 2005).

Performance Criteria # Text of Performance Criteria

(2.2.2) 14 Understanding of principles and theories of sustainability in designing and making of architecture and urban design decisions

(2.2.3) 17 Ability of comprehensive architectural design based on collective pieces of information on natural, environmental factors and limitations with consideration for sustainability

(2.2.5) 41 Understanding of ethical issues and responsibility as an architectural professional serving client in the context of society as a whole

The KAAB Conditions & Procedures document begins with the same excerpt from the

UNESCO/UIA Charter for Architectural Education which is quoted at the beginning of this study:

‘Architectural education has two basic purposes: To produce competent, creative, critically minded

and ethical professionals and designers/builders; to produce good world citizens who are

intellectually mature, ecologically sensitive and socially responsible.’ (KAAB, 2005) This is a

strong statement of commitment to social responsibility in architectural education but it is an

appropriate one for the KAAB accreditation criteria, which take a serious stance on the issue of

social responsibility in architectural education. The KAAB criteria require students to understand

and address the issues of sustainability, ethical implications of design decisions, the architect’s

responsibility to society as a whole, and civic engagement through professional and public service.

3.7 Malaysia Architectural education accreditation in Malaysia is managed by the Board of Architects

Malaysia/Lembaga Arkitek Malaysia (LAM). The Malaysian criteria for accreditation, published

in the Policy and Procedure for Accreditation of Architectural Programmes, are adopted from the

2003 British Criteria for Validation jointly approved by the Royal Institute of British Architects

(RIBA) and the Architects Registration Board (ARB). (LAM, 2005 [Appendix A]; RIBA, 2003)

The criteria specify that all graduates must ‘have knowledge and ability in architectural design

including ecological balance,’ and that they ‘comprehend thoroughly the architects’ roles and

responsibilities in society.’ (LAM, 2005) The LAM accreditation requirements are further

clarified in Appendix A, organized as a list of learning outcomes. Table 8 lists the learning

outcomes relevant to social responsibility.


305

Table 8: Malaysia: Social Responsibility Education Requirements for Accreditation (LAM, 2005, [Appendix A]).

Learning Outcome # Text of Learning Outcome

Part I - 2.1 Knowledge of the principles of building technologies, environmental design and construction methods, in relation to: human well-being; the welfare of future generations; the natural world; consideration of a sustainable environment

Part I - 3.1 An awareness of the influences on the contemporary built environment of individual buildings, the design of cities, past and present societies and wider global issues

Part II – 1.1 Knowledge of the social, political, economic and professional context that guides building construction

Part II – 1.2 An understanding of briefs and how to critically appraise them to ensure that the design response is appropriate to site and context, and for reasons such as sustainability and budget

Part II – 2.2 Knowledge of climatic design and the relationship between climate, built form, construction, life style, energy consumption and human well-being

Part II – 2.3 Understanding of building technologies, environmental design and construction methods in relation to: human well-being; the welfare of future generations; the natural world; consideration of a sustainable environment

Part II – 3.1 Understanding of the influence on the contemporary built environment of individual buildings, the design of cities, past and present societies and wider global issues

Part II – 3.3 Understanding of the inter-relationship between people, buildings and the environment and an understanding of the need to relate buildings and the spaces between them to human needs and scale

The LAM accreditation criteria require students to develop an understanding and knowledge

of sustainability but the other aspects of social responsibility in design are not addressed by these

criteria.

3.8 New Zealand New Zealand uses the Australian National Competency Standards in Architecture under

license. (McRae, 2011) Please refer to the ‘Australia’ section above for details of accreditation

criteria.

3.9 Pakistan The Pakistan Council of Architects & Town Planners’ (PCATP) accreditation criteria, as

published in the Accreditation Guide provide only very general, loose guidance in terms of

expected educational outcomes. (PCATP, 2008) According to Arif Balgaumi, principal architect


at a Pakistani architecture firm and honorary treasurer of the Institute of Architects Pakistan, this is

because:

‘After remaining in the doldrums for many years, the profession of architecture in Pakistan is

showing signs of staging a revival. Unfortunately, decades of neglect and apathy have meant

that there has been no significant growth in the quality or capacity of architectural education in

Pakistan. The need to establish new institutions of architectural education and to improve the

quality of the existing ones has put tremendous pressure on the regulating agencies... to

develop and enforce criteria that are realistic and yet provide the impetus to improve the

quality of architectural education in the county.’ (Belgaumi, 2008)

The only element of the PCATP Accreditation Guide which touches on social responsibility is

the following general guideline for External Interaction: ‘The institution should provide the

environment, which fosters the personality of the students and provide them opportunities through

co-curricular and extracurricular activities and student services. These opportunities are to enable

the students to become responsible members of the society and should be readily accessible to the

students.’ (PCATP, 2008)

3.10 Singapore Singapore’s approach to architectural education accreditation is similar to that taken by Hong

Kong. Rather than create a full set of accreditation criteria, the Board of Architects (BOA) has

identified two local programmes recognised by BOA for the purpose of registration. These

programmes are the Bachelor of Architecture and Master of Architecture programmes at the

National University of Singapore. The Board has also identified a list of overseas programmes in

architecture with accredited courses recognised for the purposes of professional registration in

Singapore. (BOA, 2010)

A cursory review of the curriculums of the two accredited domestic programmes shows that in

the Bachelor of Architecture programme, all students are required to take courses in Climatic

Responsive Architecture and Strategies for Sustainable Architecture. The programme also offers

students the choice pursuing a concurrent degree program in Design Technology and

Sustainability. (NUS, 2008) The Master of Architecture Programme Information does not specify

any particular curriculum requirements related to social responsibility in design. (NUS, n.d.)


307

3.11 South Africa South Africa’s architectural education programmes are validated by The South African

Council for the Architectural Profession (SACAP), according to their Guidelines for the Validation

of Courses in Architecture. Rather than provide a specific list of learning outcomes and criteria

required for validation, this document references the general criteria for higher education quality

assurance in South Africa (as outlined by the Higher Education Quality Committee (HEQC)) and

provides guidelines based on international architectural accreditation standards:

‘In an international context criteria for validation should at least take account of the UIA/UNESCO Charter for Architectural Education, June 1996. For credibility in the international sphere within which architects from the Republic of South Africa operate (mainly Africa, the Middle East and Europe), broad conformity should also be sought with the RIBA Procedures, Criteria and Policies for the International Validation of Courses, Programs and Examinations in Architecture (February 2001) and the CAA Procedures and Criteria, Qualifications in Architecture Recommended for Recognition by CAA.’ (SACAP, 2007) The referenced validation criteria cover a range of approaches to social responsibility training

in architectural education. RIBA validation criteria are examined in the ‘Britain’ section above.

Information about CAA and UIA criteria is presented in the ‘Future Directions – International

Collaboration’ section below.

3.12 United States In the United States, the architectural education accreditation process is administered by the

National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB). (NAAB, 2009) The 2009 NAAB Conditions

for Accreditation require that:

‘students enrolled in the accredited degree program are prepared: to be active, engaged

citizens; to be responsive to the needs of a changing world; to acquire the knowledge needed to

address pressing environmental, social, and economic challenges through design, conservation

and responsible professional practice; to understand the ethical implications of their decisions;

to reconcile differences between the architect’s obligation to his/her client and the public; and

to nurture a climate of civic engagement, including a commitment to professional and public

service and leadership’ (NAAB, 2009)


Additional NAAB accreditation requirements are published in the Conditions for

Accreditation as Student Performance Criteria. Table 9 lists the Performance Criteria relevant to

social responsibility in design.

Table 9: United States: Social Responsibility Education Requirements for Accreditation

(NAAB, 2009). Performance


C

Leadership and Practice: Architects need to manage, advocate, and act legally, ethically and critically for the good of the client, society and the public. Student learning aspirations include: Knowing societal and professional responsibilities; Integrating community service into the practice of architecture

C.2 Human Behavior: Understanding of the relationship between human behavior, the natural environment and the design of the built environment.

C.3 Client Role in Architecture: Understanding of the responsibility of the architect to elicit, understand, and reconcile the needs of the client, owner, user groups, and the public and community domains

C.6 Leadership: Understanding of the techniques and skills architects use to work collaboratively in the building design and construction process and on environmental, social, and aesthetic issues in their communities

C.7

Legal Responsibilities: Understanding of the architect’s responsibility to the public and the client as determined by registration law, building codes and regulations, professional service contracts, zoning and subdivision ordinances, environmental regulation, and historic preservation and accessibility laws

C.8 Ethics and Professional Judgment: Understanding of the ethical issues involved in the formation of professional judgment regarding social, political and cultural issues in architectural design and practice

C.9 Community and Social Responsibility: Understanding of the architect’s responsibility to work in the public interest, to respect historic resources, and to improve the quality of life for local and global neighbors

In preparation for the 2009 update of the Conditions for Accreditation, NAAB convened an

International/Global Task Group which created a prioritized list of issues to be considered in

developing the 2009 Conditions. This task group identified ‘social responsibility’ as the number

one priority. (NAAB, 2008) This focus on the importance of introducing issues of social

responsibility in architectural education is apparent in the final Conditions document. While the

2004 NAAB Conditions already showed a strong commitment to issues of social responsibility in

architectural education (NAAB, 2004), the 2009 document goes even further. The 2009 NAAB

accreditation criteria require that students learn to understand and address the issues of

environmental responsibility in design, architects’ responsibilities to communities and the wider


309

public, and the ethical implications of design decisions, and that accredited educational institutions

nurture a climate of civic engagement, including a commitment to professional and public service

and leadership.

3.13 Summary Table 10 presents a summary of the country-specific accreditation information presented

above.

Table 10: Environmental and Social Responsibility Education Requirements

for Accreditation, by Country

Country Accreditation Organization Sustainability

Responsibility to Community/ Wider Public

Ethics Civic Engagement/ Public Service

Australia AACA/RAIA ---

Britain RIBA --- ---

Canada CACB ---

Hong Kong* HKIA

India COA --- --- ---

Korea KAAB

Malaysia LAM --- --- ---

New Zealand NZIA ---

Pakistan PCATP --- --- --- ---

Singapore* BOA

South Africa* SACAP

United States NAAB

* Because Hong Kong, Singapore and South Africa do not use a published set of defined accreditation criteria, their requirements are not evaluated in this matrix

4. Conclusion The examination of individual country accreditation criteria shows that most countries (8 of

the 9 examined in the matrix above) have now embraced environmental responsibility as a required

element of architectural education. This is an important issue for all of the world’s inhabitants,


but may be particularly important for the ‘bottom billions’, who are likely to be disproportionately

affected by climate change, resource shortages, and other environmental problems. Adoption of

strict standards of environmental responsibility in design is a significant way for the architecture

profession to address the current and future challenges faced by the ‘bottom billion’, and it is

heartening to see that this aspect of social responsibility is being almost universally acknowledged

and embraced.

Requirements to teach architecture students about their responsibility to consider the needs of

communities and the wider public in design decisions and the ethical implications of design

decisions have not been as widely implemented (requirements for each of these aspects of socially

responsible design have been adopted by only 5 of the 9 countries examined in the matrix above).

However, these aspects of social responsibility in design will also be very important as the

profession moves forward to address the needs of the ‘bottom billion’. By understanding and

embracing their responsibility to community and public stakeholders, architects become

community advocates and agents of positive social change. By understanding the ethical

implications of their decisions in regard to social, political, environmental and cultural issues,

architects become empowered to make responsible, well-reasoned design and professional

decisions. Both of these aspects of well-informed social responsibility will be critical as the

profession moves forward to address the challenges faced by the ‘bottom billion’.

Requirements to teach students about the importance of civic engagement and public service

in architectural practice are lagging even further behind, with adoption by only about 30% of the

countries examined in the matrix above (3 of the 9). This is particularly disheartening as this is

perhaps the most crucial aspect in the effort to get a new generation of architects involved in the

global struggle to address the needs and challenges of the ‘bottom billion’. Architectural

education gives its graduates a unique and useful skill set which will allow them to be leading

contributors to this effort. However, in order to take full advantage of this tremendous potential, a

culture of civic engagement and public service must be created within the academic institutions and

the profession to educate, inspire and empower new generations of leaders.

5. Limitations It is important to note that this is an examination of the accreditation criteria of only those


311

countries for which English-language documentation is readily available. Ideally, it would be

expanded to create a more comprehensive picture of the state of social responsibility training in

architectural education.

It is also important to acknowledge that this is an examination of official accreditation criteria

only, and not of the actual content of courses currently being offered within the accredited programs. Individual architecture schools and academic staff may emphasise or de-emphasise aspects of the accreditation criteria within their individual programs, and lack of inclusion of a certain aspect in official accreditation criteria does not necessarily imply that it is not being included as part of the curriculum. However, including these issues as a required part of the standard architecture programme is an important step to formalise the importance of social responsibility within the profession of architecture and to train an active, engaged, well-informed and socially responsible new generation of architects.

6. Future Directions – International Collaboration There is another, concurrent trend which will also have a significant effect on the pace and

effectiveness of these changes in architectural education. International collaboration in architecture has been increasing (NAAB, 2008), and accreditation authorities have been responding by creating a number of international agreements, accords and organizations intended to promote the international mobility of architects and other design professionals.

6.1 Bilateral and multilateral mutual recognition agreements As explained above, the accreditation organizations of some countries such as Singapore and

Hong Kong have established the equivalency of other national architectural education accreditation standards to their own in order to ease international mobility for architecture students and professionals. Other countries have also recognized the value of the inverse approach. Korea’s accrediting board (KAAB) has noted that ‘it is also the interest of the KAAB for KAAB accredited degrees to hold comparable accrediting or validating status for accrediting / validating agencies abroad which promote corresponding values’, and South Africa’s SACAP notes that “for credibility in the international sphere within which architects from the Republic of South Africa operate,’ broad conformity should be sought with RIBA and CAA criteria. (KAAB, 2005; SACAP, 2007)


Many countries have also gone beyond this unilateral approach to join bilateral or multilateral

mutual recognition arrangements, which establish equivalency between national accreditation

criteria for the purpose of professional registration. For example, in 2010 the Hong Kong Institute

of Architects (HKIA) and the Architects Accreditation Council of Australia (AACA) signed an

agreement establishing the mutual recognition of their accreditation systems of architectural

programs. (HKIA, 2011) Many of the countries discussed in this study are also signatories of the

multilateral Canberra Accord, which establishes recognition of substantial equivalency between

accreditation systems in the architectural education of its signatories. (Canberra Accord, 2008)

Such arrangements will likely become even more widespread as international collaboration in

architecture increases. As this process continues, it will be important to ensure that these

agreements serve to maintain or raise the requirements for training in social responsibility, rather

than reducing them to the lowest common denominator.

6.2 Commonwealth Association of Arhitects (CAA) Since 1968, the CAA has published a List of academic architectural programmes that it

considered to be of a sufficient standard to recommend recognition by national authorities. The

List was intended to provide a means of recognition of courses in countries which did not have their

own accreditation system. However, the CAA has identified a growing need for mutual recognition

of qualifications between countries both within and outside the Commonwealth. The future

formal purpose of the List is, therefore, twofold: a) to continue to provide the means of

recommending recognition of a course to a national authority in a country which does not have its

own validation procedure, and b) to provide a list of qualifications which can be recommended for

recognition by all the constituent national authorities. (CAA, 2007)

The CAA procedures and criteria are adapted from and compatible with the aims and

objectives of architectural education set out in the Charter for Architectural Education created by

the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) and the

International Union of Architects (UIA). (CAA, 2007) (For more information about the

UNESCO/UIA Charter, see ‘UNESCO/UIA’ below.)


313

Table 11: UNESCO/UIA: Social Responsibility Education Requirements for Accreditation (UNESCO/UIA, 2005).

General Considerations Text of General Considerations

# 0

That the educators must prepare architects to formulate new solutions for the present and the future as the new era will bring with it grave and complex challenges with respect to social and functional degradation of many human settlements. These challenges may include global urbanisation and the consequent depletion of existing environments, a severe shortage of housing, urban services and social infrastructure, and the increasing exclusion of architects from built environment projects.

# 2

That it is in the public interest to ensure that architects are able to understand regional characteristics and to give practical expression to the needs, expectations and improvement to the quality of life of individuals, social groups, communities and human settlements

# 7

That the vision of the future world, cultivated in architecture schools, should include the following goals : a decent quality of life for all the inhabitants of human settlements; a technological application which respects the social, cultural and aesthetic needs of people and is aware of the appropriate use of materials in architecture and their initial and future maintenance costs; an ecologically balanced and sustainable development of the built and natural environment including the rational utilisation of available resources; an architecture which is valued as the property and responsibility of everyone

Objectives of Arch. Education Text of Objectives of Architectural Education

# 4

That the following special points be considered in the development of the curriculum: Awareness of responsibilities toward human, social, cultural, urban, architectural, and environmental values, as well as architectural heritage; Adequate knowledge of the means of achieving ecologically sustainable design and environmental conservation and rehabilitation; Development of a creative competence in building techniques, founded on a comprehensive understanding of the disciplines and construction methods related to architecture; Adequate knowledge of project financing, project management, cost control and methods of project delivery; Training in research techniques as an inherent part of architectural learning, for both students and teachers

# 5.B2 Social Studies: Ability to act with knowledge of society, and to work with clients and users that represent society’s needs

# 5.B3

Environmental Studies: Ability to act with knowledge of natural systems and built environments; Understanding of conservation and waste management issues; Understanding of the life cycle of materials, issues of ecological sustainability, environmental impact, design for reduced use of energy, as well as passive systems and their management; Awareness of the history and practice of landscape architecture, urban design, as well as territorial and national planning and their relationship to local and global demography and resources; Awareness of the management of natural systems taking into account natural disaster risks


6.3 UNESCO/UIA The UNESCO/UIA Charter for Architectural Education is the international benchmark for

architectural education accreditation, referenced in most international accreditation agreements

and accords, as well as some national accreditation criteria. As the standard for architectural

education within the international community the Charter is an important medium for advocating

social responsibility in architectural education around the world.

The 2005 UNESCO/UIA Charter for Architectural Education opens with some stirring

language on the subject of social responsibility in architecture:

‘There is no doubt that the architect's capacity to solve problems, can greatly contribute to

tasks such as community development, self-help programmes, educational facilities, etc., and

thus make a significant contribution to the improvement of the quality of life of those who are

not accepted as citizens in their full right and who cannot be counted among the architect's

usual clients...Beyond all aesthetic, technical and financial aspects of the professional

responsibilities, the major concerns, expressed by the Charter, are the social commitment of

the profession, i.e. the awareness of the role and responsibility of the architect in his or her

respective society, as well as the improvement of the quality of life through sustainable human

settlements’. (UNESCO/UIA, 2005)

The Charter also sets forth a number of ‘General Considerations’ and ‘Objectives of

Architectural Education’ which take a similarly strong stance on the role of social responsibility in

the architectural profession. Table 11 lists those most relevant to this discussion of social

responsibility in architectural education.

The UNESCO/UIA Charter sets forth an inspiring vision of the role of architectural education

and the architectural profession in addressing society’s challenges and needs. It provides a

suitably ambitious set of criteria to serve as a benchmark for national and international architectural

education accreditation criteria, and will hopefully serve to guide the profession toward a future in

which all architectural education programmes produce graduates who are inspired and empowered

to take an active and effective role in helping society to meet the challenges ahead.


315

7. References Architects Accreditation Council of Australia (AACA) and The Royal Australian Institute of

Architects (RAIA). (2006). Australian Architecture Program Accreditation and Recognition Procedure (DOC APARP 01). http://www.architecture.com.au/i-cms_file?page=649/APARP01_AACARAIA_FINAL_JANUARY_2006.pdf.

Belgaumi, Arif. (2008). Architectural Education in Pakistan – Road to Excellence. http://adapk.com/architectural-education-in-pakistan/index.html.

Board of Architects Singapore (BOA). (2010). Educational Qualification. http://www.boa.gov.sg/education.html.

Canadian Architectural Certification Board (CACB). (2005). 2005 CACB Conditions and Procedures for Accreditation. http://www.cacb-ccca.ca/documents/2005_CACB_Conditions_and_Procedures_for_Accreditation.pdf.

Canadian Architectural Certification Board (CACB). (2011). Accreditation. http://www.cacb-ccca.ca/index.cfm?M=1357&Repertoire_No=660386109&Voir=menu.

Canberra Accord on Architectural Education. (2008). Recognition of Substantial Equivalency Between Accreditation/Validation Systems in Architectural Education. http://www.canberraaccord.org/Public_Documents/streamfile.aspx?name=Approved_and_signed_Canberra_Accord.pdf.

Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK). (2010). MArch Study Scheme. CUHK School of Architecture. http://www.arch.cuhk.edu.hk/programme/MAProgramInformation.pdf.

Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK). (2011). MArch Design Studios Overview. CUHK School of Architecture. http://www.arch.cuhk.edu.hk/index-MArchstudio.html.

Commonwealth Association of Architects (CAA). (2007). Qualifications in Architecture Recommended for Recognition by CAA: Procedures and Criteria. Stamford, UK: Commonwealth Association of Architects. http://www.comarchitect.org/pdfs/VALGreenBkProcedures.pdf.

Council of Architecture (COA). (2002). Minimum Standards of Architectural Education Regulations, 1983. New Delhi: Council of Architecture. http://www.coa.gov.in/acts/regulation1983.htm.

Council of Architecture (COA). (2008). Minimum Standards of Architectural Education, 2008. New Delhi: Council of Architecture. http://www.coa.gov.in/Rev.%20Min.%20Std.pdf.

Goldberger, Paul. (2002). ‘Does Architecture Matter? Thoughts on Social Responsibility,


Buildings, and the World After September 11th'. Speech delivered at Baltimore AIA, Baltimore, MD on October 8, 2002. http://www.paulgoldberger.com/lectures/14.

Hong Kong Institute of Architects (HKIA). (2011). HKIA Circular 16/2011. Hong Kong: Hong Kong Institute of Architects. http://www.hkia.net/UserFiles/Image/EDAC/MR_Accreditation_Systems_Arch_Programmes_AACA.pdf.

Hong Kong Institute of Architects (HKIA). (No date available [n.d.]). HKIA Accredited/Recognised School Lists. www.hkia.net/en/doc/PA/School_Lists.doc.

International Union of Architects (UIA). (2008). UIA and Architectural Education Reflections and Recommendations. Paris: International Union of Architects. http://www.aij.or.jp/jpn/aijedu/reflex_eng.pdf.

Korea Architectural Accrediting Board (KAAB). (2005). Conditions & Procedures For Professional Degree Programs in Architecture. Seoul: Korea Architectural Accrediting Board. http://www.kaab.or.kr/download/KAAB-2005%20Conditions.pdf.

Lembaga Arkitek Malaysia (LAM). (2005). Policy and Procedure for Accreditation of Architectural Programmes. http://www.lam.gov.my/accreditation.html.

Lembaga Arkitek Malaysia (LAM). (2005). Policy and Procedure for Accreditation of Architectural Programmes: Appendix A. http://www.lam.gov.my/accreditation3.html.

McRae, Beverley (Chief Executive of the New Zealand Institute of Architects). (2011). Personal communication, 13 June 2011.

National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB). (2004). NAAB Conditions for Accreditation. Washington, DC: The National Architectural Accrediting Board. http://www.naab.org/accreditation/2004_Conditions.aspx.

National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB). (2008). Report of the International/Global Task Group. http://www.naab.org/documents/streamfile.aspx?name=20080321_International%20Global%20Trends%20Report.pdf&path=Public+Documents%5cAccreditation%5c%5cWinter%202008%20Task%20Group%20Reports.

National Architectural Accrediting Board (NAAB). (2009). 2009 Conditions for Accreditation. Washington, DC: The National Architectural Accrediting Board. http://www.naab.org/accreditation/2009_Conditions.aspx.

National University of Singapore (NUS). (2008). BA (Architecture) Course Information for 2008/9 Cohort Onwards. NUS Department of Architecture. http://www.arch.nus.edu.sg/programme/architecture/ba-arch/aki_handbk_0809.pdf.

National University of Singapore (NUS). (No date available [n.d.]). Master of Architecture – Programme Information. NUS Department of Architecture.


317

http://www.arch.nus.edu.sg/programme/architecture/m-arch/master_aki_info.html.

Pakistan Council of Architects & Town Planners (PCATP). (2008). Accreditation Guide. Karachi: Pakistan Council of Architects & Town Planners. http://www.pcatp.org.pk.

Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA). (2003). Criteria for Validation. London: Royal Institute of British Architects. http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBATrust/Education/2007/Validation/CriteriaForValidation.pdf.

Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA). (2010). RIBA Validation Criteria at part 1 and part 2. London: Royal Institute of British Architects. http://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAProfessionalServices/Education/Validation/RIBAValidationCriteriafromSeptember2011Parts1,23.pdf.

South African Council for the Architectural Profession (SACAP). (2007). Guidelines for the Validation of Courses in Architecture. Johannesburg: South African Council for the Architectural Profession. http://www.sacapsa.com/sacap/action/media/downloadFile?media_fileid=100.

UNESCO/UIA Validation Committee for Architectural Education, in collaboration with the UIA Education Commission. (2005). UNESCO/UIA Charter for Architectural Education. Paris: International Union of Architects. http://www.aij.or.jp/jpn/aijedu/chart_ang.pdf.

University of Hong Kong (UHK). (2011). Master of Architecture. UHK Faculty of Architecture. http://fac.arch.hku.hk/index.asp.

Kimberly Kramer is a Foreign Lecturer at Chiang Mai University, Thailand. She holds a BA in Architecture and International Relations from Wellesley College, an M.Phil in Environmental Design from Cambridge University, and an M.Arch from the University of Maryland. Her research focuses on vernacular architecture and social responsibility in architecture.

Peer Review: This article has been internationally peer-reviewed and accepted for publication according to the guidelines given at the journal’s website. Note: This article was accepted and presented at the 2nd International Conference-Workshop on Sustainable Architecture and Urban Design (ICWSAUD) organized by School of Housing, Building & Planning, Universiti Sains Malaysia, Penang, Malaysia from March 3rd -5th, 2012.