Update you browser

For the best experience, we recommend you update your browser. Visit our accessibility page for a list of supported browsers. Alternatively, you can continue using your current browser by closing this message.

Institutions are often understood to:

  • operate as a system of interrelated constraints designed to legitimise certain forms of behaviour over others (e.g. through systems of punishment and rehabilitation)
  • assign meaning and value to permitted forms of activity (e.g. by offering qualifications that control access to income)
  • or prescribe acceptable forms of political expression (e.g. by providing limited electoral options)
Leros

Beyond the meta-institutions such as government, the economy, healthcare or education, are nested sub-institutions, such as religion or sexual identity that, when considered in the abstract, reveal the mechanisms through which institutional resistance is most likely to be realised. Institutions are not static symbols of power but are awarded power through routine interactions and collective complicity.

Researchers within this group are, by implication, working across a range of diverse meta and sub institutions. Examples of their work include: an interrogation of architectural education’s gendered pedagogies through the lens of fourth-wave feminist theory and inter-sectionality theory; architecture and urban form in light of contemporary militant institutional analyses, mental healthcare and changing political regimes; the modern Californian, carceral institution beyond its immediate role of confining, reforming and punishing criminals, and as an agent of normalisation active across both the urban and rural domains; and the intersection between international law and urban development at the neighbourhood scale and the impact upon diasporas situated across jurisdictional divides.

Some of the questions addressed by this research group include: Can inequalities within the educational institution be adequately challenged by pedagogic reform and curricula decalcification? Can a spatial, sociological and anthropological understanding of the built environment contest structural inequalities across territorial contexts? Can architecture mount a direct challenge to the cultural logics, representations, and schemata that characterise institutions and, in doing so, address the inequalities that they seem to instigate or perpetuate?

Further information

Beatrice Galilee,  'A Taxonomy of Architecture at The Met'. Supervisors:  Dr Maria Guidici and Dr Mark Campbell

Guillermo Ruiz de Teresa, ‘Remittance Urbanism: On Governing the Spaces for Migrant Labour'. Supervisors: Dr Sam Jacoby and Dr Adrian Lahoud

Paul Priest, 'Internationalising the Professional Standards of the Chartered British Architect: Prototyping a Regulatory Device for Ethical Construction'. Supervisors: Dr Adam Kaasa

David Knight, ‘Making Planning Popular: Popular Agency, Online Discourse and English Public Planning’ (completed 2018). Supervisors: Dr Harriet Harriss and Dr Mark Tewdwr-Jones (Newcastle University)

Yannis Drakoulidis

Dr He Xuefeng (China Rural Governance Research Centre, Wuhan University, China)

Dr Tan Gangyi (Huazhong University of Science and Technology, China)

Dr Tang Yan (Tsinghua University, China)

The Global School, Beijing, China (Beatrice Leanza)

Sam Jacoby, Gangyi Tan and Jingru Cheng, eds., ‘Collective Forms in China: A Contemporary Review’, special issue of Xin Jianzhu/New Architecture, 5 (Oct 2018)

Harriet Harriss and Gem Barton, 'Gendered Tools for Spatial Production", Architecture and Culture, 5.3 (2017), 475–485

Harriet Harriss, James Brown, Ruth Morrow and Janes Soane, A Gendered Profession: The Question of Representation in Place-making (RIBA Publications, 2016) 
Harriet Harriss and Daisy Froud (Eds), Radical Pedagogies: Architectural Education & the British Tradition (RIBA Publications 2015)