ABSTRACT
Working off of the prior chapter’s examination of the AIA’s weakness, this essay examines how four other countries’ architectural professional organizations are structured. Applying a set of criteria extracted from the AIA analysis of organizational representation and power —the relationship of the organization to the state, to the employees, to accreditation and licensure, etc.—the different countries reveal highly divergent approaches to not just organizing the architectural profession but determining the definition of “architecture.” As a result, the thought that other countries’ approach to the professional organization might guide changes to the US AIA was undermined as each case was so particular to its nation-states politico-economic ideology. Nevertheless, lessons are learned about the embeddedness of architecture in those ideologies.
