Over the past decade and a half the design professions in the United States have come under increasing pressure to open the doors to the international architectural community, allowing anybody, and in their mind everybody, access to practice their trade in the US. At least within the realm of architecture, the requests, and demands, have come in various forms but a common impetus seems to be prevalent in each: the perceived necessity to level the playing field to "market share". Typically, the strategy of attack starts with harsh criticisms of our regulatory process. i.e., it's non-transparent, exclusionary and proprietary, and moves on from there. Most design professions in the United States are regulated by licensing statutes. As we all should be aware, the founding principle of any licensing statute is the protection of the public health, safety and welfare. In general, how the public is to be protected is dictated in the statute by the specific requirements an individual must meet in order to legally practice the profession. Architecture licensing statutes have evolved over time to become both "title" and "practice" statutes. With minor exceptions, no one may engage in acts that constitute the practice of architecture, as defined within the statute, without first being licensed by a state or jurisdictional licensing board. While the global community understands the need to protect the public, this inherent need tends to take a lower priority than access to market share. It would be a lot easier if all architects were educated, trained, and examined in the same manner, but unfortunately this is not the case, and never will be. The concept that every individual who possesses the title "architect" should be globally mobile is simply ill founded. In fact, such mobility isn't guaranteed to US architects in every US jurisdiction. Simply stated, the international design community cannot be privileged to lesser standards and given greater mobility than the standards required and mobility given to domestic practitioners. It is against this backdrop that the challenge to develop any international practice standard begins. Understanding the complexities that surround the development of any international standard first requires an understanding of the starting point - our own US standards.
展开▼
