Social Responsibility in Architectural Education

2012 American Transactions on Engineering & Applied Sciences

American Transactions on Engineering
& Applied Sciences

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

Social Responsibility in Architectural Education
a*
Kimberly Kramer
a
Faculty of Architecture, Chiang Mai University, THAILAND

ARTICLEINFO A B S T RA C T
Article history: As designers of the built environment, architects have a
Received April 02, 2012
Received in revised form tremendous opportunity to make a positive impact on the lives of the
July 10, 2012 ‘bottom billion’. However, in order to be effective agents of change,
Accepted July 26, 2012 these designers must understand and appreciate the concept of social
Available online July 28, 2012
responsibility in architecture, and learn to implement it in their own
Keywords: work. This study seeks to determine the current state of social
Education in built responsibility training in architectural education by examining the
environment; curriculum requirements set by a number of national architectural
Human and social factors. 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
*Corresponding author (K.Kramer). Tel: +66-5394-2806. Fax: +66-5322-1448. E-mail
address: kimberly.kramer@gmail.com. 2012. American Transactions on Engineering
& Applied Sciences. Volume 1 No.3. ISSN 2229-1652 eISSN 2229-1660 Online 295
Available at http://TuEngr.com/ATEAS/V01/295-317.pdf

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

296 Boonsap Witchayangkoon, and Paulo C.L. Segantine

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
Text of Performance Criteria
Criteria #
The concept is informed by an understanding of the history of architectural thought and
06 traditions of buildings and construction and by relevant current social and
environmental concerns
The impact of the design concept upon the environment and the community is assessed
11
and heeded
Respect for the natural environment and awareness of the issues of sustainability are
13
demonstrated in the conceptual design
The interests of building users, the community and other relevant groups are
21
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
Cultural factors relating to the project are researched and their influence and
86
implications reported
87 Community participation processes are understood and recommendations made
Relevant environmental issues relating to the site and its location are identified and
88
reported
An understanding of professional ethics as they apply to the practice of architecture is
145
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

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
Criteria #
2.3.i Ability to inform action through knowledge of natural systems and built environments
An understanding of issues of ecological sustainability and design for reduction of
2.3.ii
energy use and environmental impact
An understanding of passive systems for thermal comfort, lighting and acoustics and
2.3.iv
their relationship to active systems
2.4.1 An ability to inform action through knowledge of society, clients and users
An understanding of the social context in which built environments are procured and
2.4.iii
responsibilities to clients, the public and users

Table 3: Britain: Social Responsibility Education Requirements for Accreditation
(RIBA, 2010).
Criteria # Text of Criteria
The graduate will have an understanding of the relationship between people and
GC5 buildings, and between buildings and their environment, and the need to relate buildings
and the spaces between them to human needs and scale
The graduate will have an understanding of the impact of buildings on the environment,
GC5.2
and the precepts of sustainable design
The graduate will have an understanding of the way in which buildings fit into their
GC5.3
local context
The graduate will have an understanding of the profession of architecture and the role of
GC6 the architect in society, in particular in preparing briefs that take account of social
factors
The graduate will have an understanding of the nature of professionalism and the duties
GC6.1 and responsibilities of architects to clients, building users, constructors,
co-professionals and the wider society
The graduate will have an understanding of the potential impact of building projects on
GC6.3
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 #
Environmental Conservation: Understanding of the basic principles of ecology and
13 architects' responsibilities with respect to environmental and resource conservation in
architecture and urban design
Ethics and Professional Judgment: Awareness of the ethical issues involved in the
37
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:

‘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
Text of Subject for Examination
Examination
Stage 1 Understanding of Climate and its impact on architectural design, fundamentals of
# 12 climatology and environmental studies
Stage 1
Group subjects of specialisation: B. Eco Architecture
# 18
Stage 2 Sustainability- Principles and methods, Energy conscious design ecological balance
# xv conservation of natural resources, Solar passive architecture, Re-cycling
Stage 2 Use of energy in buildings, Conserving energy, Solar passive and solar active systems,
# xvi wind energy, Biomass energy, Re-cycling
Stage 2 Environmental factors effecting human habitat such as climate, environmental pollutions,
# xx environmental degradation, green cover etc. at the micro and macro scales


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).
Relevant conditions
Perspective
(for each condition, the following issues must be addressed)
Registration
Delivering issues of responsibility for the society and ethics
(2.1.3)
Profession Issues in reconciling the conflicts between architects’ obligation to their clients, the
(2.1.4) society, and private enterprise.
The program must promote student understanding in various social, environmental
Society
challenges and foster skills dealing with these issues through proper architectural and
(2.1.5)
urban design resolution
Society
Importance of ethical implications of built environment determinations
(2.1.5)
Society Issues in promoting civic engagement through commitment to professional and public
(2.1.5) 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 #
Understanding of principles and theories of sustainability in designing and making of
(2.2.2) 14
architecture and urban design decisions
Ability of comprehensive architectural design based on collective pieces of information on
(2.2.3) 17
natural, environmental factors and limitations with consideration for sustainability
Understanding of ethical issues and responsibility as an architectural professional serving
(2.2.5) 41
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.


Table 8: Malaysia: Social Responsibility Education Requirements for Accreditation
(LAM, 2005, [Appendix A]).
Learning
Text of Learning Outcome
Outcome #
Knowledge of the principles of building technologies, environmental design and
Part I - 2.1 construction methods, in relation to: human well-being; the welfare of future generations;
the natural world; consideration of a sustainable environment
An awareness of the influences on the contemporary built environment of individual
Part I - 3.1
buildings, the design of cities, past and present societies and wider global issues
Knowledge of the social, political, economic and professional context that guides
Part II – 1.1
building construction
An understanding of briefs and how to critically appraise them to ensure that the design
Part II – 1.2 response is appropriate to site and context, and for reasons such as sustainability and
budget
Knowledge of climatic design and the relationship between climate, built form,
Part II – 2.2
construction, life style, energy consumption and human well-being
Understanding of building technologies, environmental design and construction methods
Part II – 2.3 in relation to: human well-being; the welfare of future generations; the natural world;
consideration of a sustainable environment
Understanding of the influence on the contemporary built environment of individual
Part II – 3.1
buildings, the design of cities, past and present societies and wider global issues
Understanding of the inter-relationship between people, buildings and the environment
Part II – 3.3 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.)


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
Criteria #
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
C
aspirations include: Knowing societal and professional responsibilities; Integrating
community service into the practice of architecture
Human Behavior: Understanding of the relationship between human behavior, the
C.2
natural environment and the design of the built environment.
Client Role in Architecture: Understanding of the responsibility of the architect to elicit,
C.3 understand, and reconcile the needs of the client, owner, user groups, and the public and
community domains
Leadership: Understanding of the techniques and skills architects use to work
C.6 collaboratively in the building design and construction process and on environmental,
social, and aesthetic issues in their communities
Legal Responsibilities: Understanding of the architect’s responsibility to the public and
the client as determined by registration law, building codes and regulations, professional
C.7
service contracts, zoning and subdivision ordinances, environmental regulation, and
historic preservation and accessibility laws
Ethics and Professional Judgment: Understanding of the ethical issues involved in the
C.8 formation of professional judgment regarding social, political and cultural issues in
architectural design and practice
Community and Social Responsibility: Understanding of the architect’s responsibility to
C.9 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


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
Responsibility
Accreditation Civic Engagement/
Country Sustainability to Community/ Ethics
Organization Public Service
Wider Public
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

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.)


Table 11: UNESCO/UIA: Social Responsibility Education Requirements for Accreditation
(UNESCO/UIA, 2005).
General
Text of General Considerations
Considerations
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
#0
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.
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
#2
and improvement to the quality of life of individuals, social groups, communities
and human settlements
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
#7
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
Text of Objectives of Architectural Education
Arch. Education
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
#4
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
Social Studies: Ability to act with knowledge of society, and to work with clients
# 5.B2
and users that represent society’s needs
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
# 5.B3
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.


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_J
ANUARY_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_Accr
editation.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_Program
mes_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%20Glob
al%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.

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/CriteriaForVali
dation.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/RIB
AValidationCriteriafromSeptember2011Parts1,23.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.


Social Responsibility in Architectural Education

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (20)

Similar to Social Responsibility in Architectural Education

Similar to Social Responsibility in Architectural Education (20)

More from drboon

More from drboon (20)

Social Responsibility in Architectural Education