CONFRONTING INSTITUTIONAL CORRUPTION IN ARCHITECTURE: THE FIRST STEP IN DEMOCRATIZING ARCHITECTURE

Abstract

Architecture today is at risk of losing its social relevance. Complaints by architects on the profession’s increasingly marginalized role in contemporary public life have become an all-too-familiar refrain. Yet, at the same time, there remain a large number of people with little or no access to the benefits of design innovation that good architecture can bring. Worse still, architecture may have done more harm than good for these people in some cases. For architecture to enjoy a central social significance, it has to connect with a much wider audience.

The dissertation hypothesizes that the first step to take towards an architecture that can better fulfil its purpose of improving the human condition is to address institutional corruption within the profession. It aims to identify and mitigate corrupting influences within architecture education and practice, and in so doing, elicit the moral obligations of the architect towards society. The course of the research develops by addressing the following questions. What is institutional corruption? How does institutional corruption exist in architecture? What does it take to deal with or manage institutional corruption in architecture? In response to these questions, research on institutional corruption is conducted with both an empirical and normative focus. The empirical research project explores whether and when institutional corruption exists through case studies, surveys and interviews, whereas the normative project develops tools to address institutional corruption.

By uncovering and dealing with shortcomings within the institutions of architectural academia and the profession, it is hoped that architects will be in a better capacity to uplift mankind.