A system designed to improve decisions makes things worse
Architects are capable of producing places that all will enjoy, but society does not let them. In practice, there seems to be some conspiracy that prevents the really good project being realised. Competitions were seen as a solution. However, the British have managed to develop a competition system which often makes things worse. How did we do that? The jury is often composed of laymen, with just one or two architects in an advisory role. To be frank, the decisionmakers are not qualified ...
Subscribe to the AJ from £3 per week
GET INSTANT ACCESS
for less than 46p a day
Join thousands of professionals who already subscribe to the Architects' Journal.
You’ll get instant access to read this article - and 50,000 others like it.
- Trusted industry news & analysis, wherever you need itUnlimited online access and weekly magazine delivery – now also available on iPad/iPhone
- Get ideas, get inside buildings and check precedentsBuildings Library – images, drawings and plans for exemplar projects in British architecture
- Planning & regulation – what you need to know Protect your practice - the AJ keeps you up-to-date with changes to regulations and legislation
For less than the cost of a pint you can have the magazine, iPad edition, full access to TheAJ.co.uk and the amazing AJBuildingsLibrary.co.uk. Subscribe now and experience architecture from a British perspective. The AJ - it's your journal.