For emerging practices, architectural competitions can seem like a golden ticket — a rare crack in the armour of an industry that too often feels impenetrable. They promise visibility, legitimacy, and the chance to catalyse ambitious projects. Many of today’s architectural heavyweights first made their debut on the competition circuit.

At their best, competitions level the playing field. When judged anonymously, they offer a rare meritocracy — where new voices can challenge the establishment, and ideas are able to rise above reputations. Organisations like Beyond the Box with their ‘People’s Pavilion’ go to great lengths to create a fair process with unbiased judging, compensation for entries and constructive feedback. These are examples we seek to learn from.

But competitions can also be expensive, exhausting, and often exploitative. Too often, they involve hours of unpaid labour, mounting costs and an all-too-familiar feeling of handing over your intellectual property for free, with zero guarantees of success in return.

Join us for the final Accelerate Debate of the year, where leading voices from across the industry will tackle the big question: is there a healthier way to run competitions that makes them worth the risk?

Guests:

– Selasi Setufe – Principal Project Officer at GLA and Co-Founder at Black Females in Architecture
– Rosa Rogina – Associate Director, Place Partnerships at NLA, directing the London Festival of Architecture
– Jonathan Hagos – Architect & Director of Freehaus, Mayors Design Advocate and UCL External Examiner
– Tomi Balogun – Accelerate Alumni, Second-year architecture student at the Bartlett School of Architecture and winner of the 2024 People’s Pavilion
– Chloë Phelps – Director at Grounded & BPTW, Chair of Thanet Design Review Panel and Co-Chair of Camden Design Review Panels

 

Open City Instagram / Open City Website / Open City Twitter / Accelerate Website 

If you have any access requirements, please contact our box office team on 020 7613 7498 or email