Introduction by the Jury Chairman
The projects submitted for the International Prize for Sustainable Architecture have been sorted by the organisers from the Department of Architecture of the University of Ferrara into different groups based on their intended use, thereby facilitating comparison within each category. The categories are as follows:
– Single-family houses
– Condominiums and multi-family homes
– Buildings with educational and cultural functions
– Administrative buildings
– Production facilities
– Commercial and professional buildings
– Hotels and restaurants
– Landscape and public spaces
– Multi-purpose buildings
– Museums and exhibitions
– Places of sacral buildings
- Buildings for sports
– Special prize from the sponsor Fassa Bortolo
Key differences from previous editions:
- The number of projects submitted this year has increased by 100%, to 200 applications (compared to around 100 in the past).
- The entire work of the Jury had to be conducted digitally via videoconferencing, with the members never coming together physically
The particular situation in which the Jury members found themselves working together, through the interaction of their individual judgements rather than as a collective, at first was not guaranteed. Because of the pandemic, the situation was initially perceived as inevitable and, in its course, rather unpleasant.
Video conferencing from different locations
When conducting Jury meetings via video conferencing, the advantage of a working group in which members interact in direct contact with the project tables is lost, as well as essential aspects of the experience of personal communication (which only took place to a limited extent) such as movement, gesture, language modulation, spontaneous action and reaction, self-regulated individual and collective behaviour and much more.
One thing which the small group of four Jury members lacked was the relaxed way of working that comes from sharing the same space and atmosphere, where consensus and disagreement develop through discussion, and it was lacking especially at a time when their individual daily circumstances might have differed noticeably.
However, the actual impact on the work of this year's Jury was not overly negative. The result of the examination of all the works, carried out separately in the week before the jury members would preselect their favourite projects independently and without external influence, more or less reflected the percentage of previous years: reconciling the individual jury members’ evaluations resulted in around 40 projects, or 20% of what you might call the “longlist”, thereby arriving at a “limited selection” that jury members then went on to examine in depth; the number of projects making it through to the first selection was twice that of previous years.
Overall assessment and comparative approach
In the subsequent videoconference, during the comparison of individual impressions, however, the Jury lacked the necessary synchronised visualisation, the simultaneous perception of the various projects to be compared, which is highly important for broadening and deepening of the debate and the formation of individual opinions within the group.
Over the past decade, the international scope of the projects submitted, and (as a requirement) completed, has steadily grown.
In recent years, participation amounted to around 100 projects from around 30 countries submitted for each edition, both digitally and in hard copy as per the regulations, for the Jury's consideration.
This also enabled the jury to evaluate details of the various projects that represent important elements in terms of expanding architectural culture, relating to individual tasks or the relevant conditions, possibilities, resources. limitations, etc. The Jury takes this into account in order to highlight contributions that are relevant to the objective pursued or to select projects for Honourable Mention.
Once the Jury had consulted on the shortlist thus obtained, containing noteworthy contributions for the realisation of sustainable architecture to serve as examples and a source of guidance, at least in terms of their essential system components and building elements, it was agreed upon to recommend publishing the selected projects this year as well.
Worthy projects on this shortlist were often recognised by an award in the Honourable Mention category in previous years, which also indicates how close these projects came to winning one of the medals. At the same time, the mention in this list of contributions from 12 countries also demonstrates, in the name of presumed objectivity, that the judges did not intend to make a clear distinction between winners and non-winners.
Indeed, all of the selected projects, which represent 10% of the total of 200 contributions submitted, should be considered winners of the 2021 edition of the International Prize for Sustainable Architecture! Not to undermine the medal winners, whose excellence distinguishes them.
Thomas Herzog
La Giuria
Thomas Herzog – Germany (Chairman)
Marianne Burkhalter – Switzerland
Sami Rintala – Norway
Nicola Marzot – Italy (Segretary)
